There are a few glaring errors in this essay
-
-
while not an error per se I dont think the specific cathedral analogy is necessary for any NRx ideas.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
it isnt necessary for that collaboration to be a religious analogy
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @fides_et_cancri @wcsoto
if progressivism is not a religion then the best approach is to join it and correct it from within.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
its religious character is the central fact of neoreaction.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Yes: but Jackal's point is that neoreaction is a failed project. I'm not sure I disagree (or agree).
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @PorphyCoon @anomalyuk
But I think part of
@fides_et_cancri's point is NRx accepts many if not most of the premises from which Progism emerged@wcsoto5 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
of course it does. That is why I called it "neoreaction". http://anomalyuk.blogspot.co.uk/2011/04/secular-reaction.html …
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
that is why Moldbug wrote for "open-minded progressives".
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Right; and to a degree his work was, well, a "work" as such. But NRx should also advance & commo.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
not sure "foundations" is so important.NRx emerged from secular premises, but secularism not necessary
-
-
I think recognising the religious (or heretical) nature of progressivism is necessary, in contrast.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
also the puritan->prog historical link is not a necessary assumption, though I consider it valid.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.