Editing Neoreactionaryism (section)

==History==
[[File:Nrx.png]] Neoreactionaryism (NRx), also known as the "New Reaction" and [[File:Dark Enlightenment.png]] Dark Enlightenmentis, a political and intellectual movement that emerged in the early 2000s as a response against liberal and democratic norms of modern society. NRx advocates a return to traditional forms of authority, hierarchy, and social organization, rejecting ideals such as equality, mass democracy, and progressive reforms.

The origins of neoreactionary thought can be traced to early internet forums and blogs where groups of thinkers and technocrats began criticizing contemporary democratic systems for what they saw as social decay, cultural decline, and economic inefficiency. Key figures in the movement include authors such as [[File:NickLand.png]] Nick Land, [[File:Curtis Yarvin.png]] Curtis "Mencius Moldbug" Yarvin, and philosopher [[File:Anissimov.png]] Michael Anissimov.

NRx ideology combines elements of [[File:Conservative.png]] [[Conservatism|conservatism]], [[File:TechDeterm.png]] {{PHB|Technological Determinism|technological determinism}}, and dystopian skepticism. Its proponents call for [[File:Elitism.png]] [[Oligarchy|strengthening elite governance]], [[File:AntiDem.png]] {{PCBA|restricting voting rights}}, [[File:Abmon.png]] [[Absolute Monarchism|restoring monarchical]] or [[File:Corp.png]] [[Corporatocracy|corporatocratic forms of rule]], and [[File:Fash.png]] [[Fascism|enhancing social discipline]]. They often appeal to ideas of [[File:Darwinist.png]] [[Social Darwinism|social evolution]] and biological differences among groups of people.

Neoreactionaries criticize [[File:Neoliberal-icon.png ]] [[Neoliberalism|modern liberal societies]] for excessive democratization, which they argue leads to [[File:Liberal Democracy.png]] [[Liberalism#Liberal Democracy|political instability]], [[File:Klep.png]] [[Kleptocracy|corruption]], and [[File:Multicult.png]] [[Multiculturalism|social fragmentation]]. Instead, NRx promotes a "managed society" where power is concentrated in the hands of competent and vetted elites who can maintain order and stability.

The movement has attracted controversy and criticism due to its positions on [[File:Hierarchy.png]] hierarchy, [[File:Economy.png]] economy, [[File:Race.png]] race, [[File:Sexism icon.png]] gender differences, and skepticism towards [[File:HumanRights.png]] modern human rights and [[File:Dem.png]] [[Democracy|democratic institutions]]. Nevertheless, it has influenced certain conservative and tech circles and spawned a variety of forums and publications dedicated to exploring alternative governance and social models.


=== [[File:Curtis_Yarvin.png]] '''Moldbugism''' ===
Curtis Yarvin, better known by his pen name Mencius Moldbug, was born in 1973 and rose to prominence in the late 2000s through his blog ''Unqualified Reservations'', where he articulated a radical critique of modern liberal democracy and proposed an alternative vision of governance rooted in hierarchy, competence, and historical precedent. Trained as a computer programmer and software engineer, Yarvin’s technical background profoundly shaped his political thought. He frequently uses metaphors drawn from software design, modularity, and systems architecture to explain how governments can be restructured for efficiency, stability, and predictability. His work reflects a synthesis of historical analysis, political philosophy, and economic theory, which together frame his critique of contemporary institutions as inherently fragile and inefficient.

In his early writings, often referred to as the “UR Moldbug Era,” Yarvin drew heavily on [[File:AustrianSchool.png]]'''Austrian School economics''', emphasizing the importance of market mechanisms and the dangers of centralized bureaucratic intervention that ignores human incentives. Thinkers like [[File:Burnham.png]]'''James Burnham''' influenced his perception of society as hierarchically organized, where elites naturally accrue power and responsibility. This lens justified his anti-democratic stance, arguing that democratic institutions often devolve into oligarchic factionalism, inefficiency, and instability. [[File:Fishe.png]]'''Hobbesian philosophy''' further reinforced his view that strong centralized authority is necessary to prevent social disorder, and he frequently applied historical examples of successful monarchies and empires to support his claims. For instance, his admiration for [[File:FredricktheGreat.png]]'''Frederick the Great'''  and [[File:Junger.png]]Ernst Junger demonstrates a preference for competent leadership as a stabilizing force, while his embrace of [[File:Carlyle.png]]'''Carlylean heroism''' emphasizes the transformative role of exceptional individuals in shaping political outcomes.

Yarvin also integrates [[File:Neocam.png]]'''neocameralism''', a model that treats the state as a joint-stock corporation where governance is akin to corporate management. This concept reflects both his software-informed rationalism and his critique of diffuse democratic authority, proposing that states function most efficiently when leadership is accountable, concentrated, and incentivized. In parallel, his engagement with [[File:Pareto.png]]'''Paretoism''' and elite theory frames leadership as naturally stratified, suggesting that attempts at enforced equality or broad-based participation often undermine societal productivity. [[File:Unix.png]]'''Unix philosophy''' from programming guides his preference for modular, transparent, and predictable governance structures. Even his brief sympathies with [[File:Hoppef.png]]'''Hoppean thought''' and online figures like [[File:Yiannopoulos.png]]'''Yiannopoulos''' illustrate an ongoing concern with critiquing egalitarian ideologies that, in his view, weaken social cohesion.

In the so-called “GM Moldbug Era,” Yarvin’s thought evolves further toward explicit endorsement of [[File:Abmon.png]]'''absolute monarchism''' and [[File:Auto.png]]'''autocracy''', where he advocates for strong, centralized power as a solution to the inefficiencies and factionalism of contemporary liberal democracies. He proposes [[File:Emon.png]]'''elective monarchism''' as a hybrid solution: allowing some form of choice while retaining the efficiency and accountability of hierarchical authority. Economically, he supports [[File:Authcap.png]]'''authoritarian capitalism''' and [[File:Statecap.png]]'''state capitalism''', arguing that markets function best when overseen by competent central authorities. [[File:Merc.png]]'''Mercantilist policies''' are highlighted as historically effective in consolidating resources and ensuring national stability, showing his reliance on historical precedent to justify modern institutional design. Even his engagement with contemporary politics, such as pragmatic support for [[File:Bidenism.png]]'''Bidenism''' or sympathy toward[[File:Authcap.png]] '''Bukeleism''', reflects his consistent prioritization of executive competence and institutional stability over ideological purity.

Yarvin’s worldview extends beyond governance and economics into social and cultural critiques. He is critical of '''liberal egalitarianism''', which he believes encourages short-term populism over long-term structural planning. While his writings have drawn accusations of '''Alt-Right sympathies''', Yarvin situates his work within a framework of historical and institutional analysis rather than overt identity politics. He emphasizes '''meritocratic selection of leaders''', bureaucratic efficiency, and the integration of technological metaphors in political theory to demonstrate how modern societies could avoid the “catastrophic instability” inherent in pluralist democratic systems. He also integrates nuanced critiques of contemporary culture and governance, touching on '''state decentralization''', '''bureaucratic inefficiency''', and the dangers of incentivizing political actors through populist feedback loops rather than competence.

Throughout his career, Yarvin has demonstrated a consistent pattern: he draws on historical examples, economic theory, philosophical traditions, and technical analogies to argue for governance systems that prioritize efficiency, hierarchical competence, and institutional durability. His anti-democratic stance is not merely reactionary; it is rooted in a belief that contemporary liberal democracy systematically fails to produce competent, accountable leadership. By combining insights from '''Hobbesian theory, Burnhamite analysis, Pareto elite theory, neocameralism, and software modularity''', Yarvin presents a comprehensive framework for thinking about modern governance in terms of stability, predictability, and the preservation of social order.

In sum, Curtis Yarvin represents a unique strand of contemporary political thought, bridging the worlds of technology, history, and political theory. His writings synthesize centuries of philosophical, economic, and historical knowledge to critique liberal democracy and propose alternatives rooted in hierarchy, meritocracy, and centralized authority. Whether through his discussion of '''autocracy, elective monarchy, authoritarian capitalism, state corporatism, neocameral governance, or technocratic oversight''', Yarvin remains a singular voice arguing that competence, rather than popular consent, should be the defining criterion for political authority in the modern era.

=== [[File:Thiel.png]] '''Thielism''' ===
Peter Thiel is an American entrepreneur, venture capitalist, and political thinker whose career and ideology have profoundly influenced Silicon Valley, global finance, and conservative intellectual circles. Born in 1967, Thiel co-founded PayPal, was an early investor in Facebook, and has guided numerous tech companies as a venture capitalist through his firm, Founders Fund. His ideological positions are inseparable from his business practices, reflecting a consistent interplay of technological optimism, contrarianism, and politically charged conservatism.

Thiel’s economic thought is grounded in [[File:Authcapcon.png]]'''Authoritarian Capitalism''' and [[File:MegaCorp.png]]'''Mega Corporatocracy''', with a focus on creating dominant enterprises that leverage technological control to shape markets and society. He has repeatedly advocated for monopolistic or quasi-monopolistic structures in tech, arguing that "competition is for losers"—a statement that captures his philosophy of concentrated power and elite-driven innovation. This links directly to [[File:Hmind_cap.png]]'''Hive-Mind Capitalism''', in which network effects, proprietary data, and control over platforms create a feedback loop of economic and social influence. Companies like Palantir, where Thiel has been a major backer, exemplify this approach: leveraging data analytics for both government and corporate clients, merging commercial success with geopolitical reach.

Thiel’s stance on governance and democracy is deeply contrarian. His support for [[File:AntiDem.png]]'''Anti-Democracy''', [[File:Postlibr.png]]'''Post-Liberalism''', and [[File:ReactPix.png]]'''Reactionary Modernism''' reflects a skepticism toward mass governance, which he sees as inherently inefficient at cultivating innovation and protecting elites. This was most explicitly displayed in his backing of seasteading initiatives and long-term futurist projects, where he advocates experimenting with new governance models detached from conventional democratic constraints. Thiel’s [[File:RightStateLib.png]]'''Right-State Liberalism''' and [[File:Moder_Neocon.png]]'''Soft Neoconservatism''' are evident in his political interventions: from his support for Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign to his funding of candidates and think tanks promoting technocratic and nationalist agendas. He has described political correctness and multiculturalism as threats to free and efficient decision-making, tying into his positions of [[File:Anti-Globalism.png]]'''Anti-Globalism''' and [[File:Antimultcult.png]]'''Anti-Multiculturalism'''.

A critical axis of Thiel’s thought is his engagement with '''transhumanism'''—both [[File:Captrans.png]]'''Capitalist''' and [[File:Contrans.png]]'''Conservative'''. He has personally invested in life-extension technologies, biotech startups, and AI, promoting a vision where technological progress allows select individuals or societies to transcend biological and social limitations. This overlaps with his broader [[File:POSTHUMANISMICON.png]]'''Post-Humanism''' philosophy: a belief in the transformative potential of humans merging with technology to achieve new capabilities, often detached from egalitarian considerations. Projects like the Thiel Fellowship, which encourages young entrepreneurs to leave college and pursue transformative technologies, demonstrate this in practice.

Thiel’s ideological positions on culture, religion, and social norms are equally consistent and provocative. He has expressed [[File:AntiFem.png]]'''Anti-Feminism''' and [[File:AuthHcon.png]]'''Homoconservatism''', criticizing modern social movements and advocating for a meritocratic elite that operates independently of contemporary identity politics. Though accusations of supporting [[File:Apartheidism.png]]'''Apartheid''' or racial segregation have circulated, Thiel has denied any endorsement of such policies; however, his general embrace of [[File:AuthNeoFusionism2.png]]'''National Conservatism''' and [[File:Nazcap-Hat.png]]'''National Capitalism''' reflects a preference for social hierarchies and selective economic inclusion. His [[File:Anticommunism.png]]'''Anti-Communism''', [[File:AntiDengism.png]]'''Anti-Dengism''', and [[File:Right-AnEn.png]]'''Climate Skepticism''' are also evident in both his investments and public statements, supporting ventures that reject state-led economic planning or regulatory intervention in favor of private, profit-driven experimentation.

Philosophically, Thiel draws from [[File:Obj.png]]'''Objectivism''', [[File:Strauss.png]]'''Straussianism''', and libertarian thought, selectively merging them to justify elite governance, concentrated capital, and radical technological projects. He frequently positions himself as a contrarian intellectual, explicitly aligning with thinkers like [[File:Reagan.png]]Ronald Reagan, [[File:RonPaul.png]]Ron Paul, and, more recently, conservative figures such as [[File:Trump-MAGA-icon.png]]Donald Trump and [[File:Vance.png]]J.D. Vance. Thiel’s self-identification with [[File:PostConbert.png]]'''Libertarian Conservatism''' and [[File:ModNeobert.png]]'''Soft Neo-Libertarianism''' reflects this hybrid approach: advocating minimal government interference in economic affairs while simultaneously supporting selective state action to secure elite advantages.

Thiel’s actions—financially, politically, and technologically—demonstrate a consistent application of his ideological framework. From his early PayPal strategies that prioritized monopolistic dominance, to Palantir’s government contracts, to his politically charged philanthropy, Thiel operationalizes a worldview in which technological mastery, elite governance, and contrarian social positioning converge. His thought exemplifies the tension between radical innovation and social hierarchy, merging entrepreneurial risk-taking with strategic cultural and political interventions. Through this lens, Thiel is less an abstract theorist than a practical executor of [[File:PostPaleocon.png]]'''Post-Paleoconservative''', '''Authoritarian''', and '''Technocapitalist''' principles, making his career a living case study in the application of ideology to both commerce and statecraft.