The Path to the Dark Reformation Part F2: The Anti-Cathedral.

A proposal for building a “Anti-Cathedral” by drawing upon the resources within Moldbug’s work that will help lay the foundations for the Antiversity.)

Overview:

A proposal for a project that will seek to accomplish numerous secondary objectives, but the primary objective is to create and nurture the conditions – men, materials, experience and money – that can help build the Antiversity. The proposal calls for the creation of something that, while having many precedents and influences, has never really existed before in history.

Part A will present the proposal in schematic form. Part B, will lay out the proposal in more detail.

Contents:

1: List of objectives.

2: The short version of the proposal. (Part A.)

3: The long version of the proposal. (Part B.)

Objectives.

Ultimate Objective:

By acquiring experienced personnel, a centralised stock of information, readers, sympathisers, investors and backers, the Antiversity can be more easily created, with a ready-made stock of information and personnel to hand.

Proximate Objectives:

A: A centralised core of information that documents the errors, lies and deceptions of the Cathedral and contrasts this with accurate information; secondly, to create a database and NETWORK profile of all people in the Cathedral (Universities, and the media.) i.e mapping them like a criminal organisation. (Information.)

B: A propaganda weapon that seeks to undermine the faith, confidence and trust in the Cathedral. (Persuasion.)

C: A system that is designed to attract, recruit, train and utilise ALL critics, sceptics and opposition to the Cathedral (and the Modern Structure more generally); furthermore, a system that is designed for MASSIVE memetic virulence and EXPANSION.  (Expansion.)

D: A System that is designed to COORDINATE, at higher and higher hierarchical levels, members of the neoreaction, the broader right, and disaffected regime dissidents more generally, into a BODY or a MACHINE that can be DIRECTED. (Operations.)

E: The coordinated system of men, materials and memes will be directed to “attack” various Cathedral actors via argument, fisking and intellectual humiliation. Secondly, the system or Agency (below, in Part 2, I call it “Doomsday”) will, by providing activities and purpose, maintain morale and cohesion among members. ( Psychological.)

F: Gain the attention of prominent right-wing intellectuals, actors, backers (funding) via the information goods and intellectual/dialectical services that the Agency provides and thus secure funding and backing for the Antiversity project. (Funding.)

G: Become known and read among more and more people of the general public who desire accurate perception of political and social reality. (Reputation.)

The Short Version of the Proposal.

0: We are creating “an argument”, a “meme-bomb” a “machine”, an” intelligence agency”: the Agency.

A darkly reformed, black bureau of intelligence:

“…..Lippmann was convinced, lay in relating the disciplines to their subject matter with just the right degrees of intimacy and autonomy. In consequence he recommended that each executive department of government have attached to it an ‘intelligence bureau’ (a ‘body of research and information’) to ‘assemble knowledge’ for decision makers. The expert employed therein would ‘translate, simplify, generalize’ (Lippmann, 1922: p. 381).”

The Lippmann plan for a series of semiautonomous analytical units attached to departments throughout government to guarantee the omnipresence of reasoned policy analysis bears some similarity to the network of institutions typified by RAND and the Urban Institute that arose after World War II. The main mission of Lippmann’s intelligence bureaus was to improve the decisions of policy makers. 

https://culturalapparatus.wordpress.com/walter-lippmann/walter-lippmann-2/

The Theoretical or Descriptive Aspect of the Agency.

1: An Anti-Cathedral wiki-style (maybe the computer tech guys can come up with a different web design?)  webpage that constantly updates, showcasing academic papers, news reports, op-eds and interviews that demonstrate the lies, obfuscations, errors and omissions of Cathedral propaganda. Furthermore, a constantly updated list of people who have been purged, arrested or harassed for thought-crime. (Social Matter does this already; however, here it will be expanded and updated regularly.)

In short, a one stop shop for all the propaganda of the Cathedral. (This is the informational aspect.

2: Under each indexed report, a link exists to pages, written by the Agency, or quoting from external people, which provide the truth, or the alternative. (So far, so Wikipedia like.)

3: A timeline or numerous pages of before” and “after” showing not only the consistency but the GROWTH of the lies, distortions, repressions, etc. This is calculated to induce psychological shock and disgust, and the feeling of dread in readers because it will only get worse. Furthermore, it is designed to become addictive to readers (and users I should say). (Now, this is new, this is the propaganda aspect.)  ( I expand more on this in Part B.)

4: A network profile of all members of the Cathedral. Prominent, and not so prominent, Brahmins and their colleagues, teachers, professors, students, bosses, friends etc. We build up an entire profile of all the Brahmins in the Cathedral. (Now, this is new. This is the intelligence agency side of things. For example, see this:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/

The Practical side of the Agency.

5: Incorporate Moldbug’ idea of Duelnode.  However, the “duel” is not one on one, but the Coordinated Agency against individual Brahmins. (See 9).

See:

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.co.uk/2007/10/duelnode-another-free-startup-idea.html

(I know how to flesh out Moldbug’s idea in the form of argument trees. I have studied logic and have, incidentally, been working on something similar before reading Moldbug.

See here for an example of the logical layout of duelnode:

http://writing2.richmond.edu/writing/wweb/toulminexercise.html

A visualisation is provided here:

https://web.cn.edu/kwheeler/documents/Toulmin.pdf

You can watch a video here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-YPPQztuOY )

To explain the idea here better, I am going to quote and comment on Moldbug.

Moldbug on Duelnode:

But a true duel is a contest of two. And one alone may claim triumph. Our aim at Duelnode is to crown a new generation of young heroes, the iron, eagle-crowned champions of Web 2.0, the strong and silent gods of the late-night Dew-and-Domino’s dorm-room bull session.

(My “Dark Reformulation” however, is not “one on one” (except for Grand Contests) but Agency v individual Brahmin. In short, “swarming tactics.” (See below.)

As in Uberfact, the purpose of the Duelnode is to discover the truth. But by sharpening this process of discovery to a pure conflict of two wills, we reduce the struggle of ideas to its essence: the fight for power.

A duel is not a debate. It is not a discussion. It is not a conversation. It is certainly not a collaboration, except perhaps in the French sense of the word. It is a battle of enemies. There are only two outcomes: vindication and humiliation.

(Intellectual “humiliation” is very important.)

But I’m getting ahead of myself. Duels at the Duelnode are not fought, of course, with axes. They are fought by typing. We are not building the monomachial equivalent of Internet hunting.

(Actually, we are building the internet equivalent of “hunting”. Head hunting Brahmins.)

A duel is simply a contest of words, an argument, a flamewar, such as has infested the electrons since Usenet was a little boy.

What’s new about the Duelnode is that it, or any other dueldrome, is a place where people can hold structured arguments. They don’t just rant past each other for pages and pages, like we do at UR. They actually have to construct a logically sound rhetorical structure, however stupid each of its points may be.

A Duelnode duel always has two participants: a challenger and a defender. Typically the defender is older, wiser and more respected, and the challenger is younger, smarter and more annoying. This may be inverted, of course, but under any circumstance the challenger is the party who demands satisfaction, and the defender the party who accepts.

Together, challenger and defender enter the Duelagon – the ancient chamber of honor, whose name evokes the Greek words for “two” and “pain.” They shake hands (virtually, of course), bow to the north and south, salute the east and west winds, and then begin the duel. Typically there is no time limit. Battle is simply to the finish. However, arbitrary rules may be devised and mutually accepted, ideally by the combatants’ seconds – it is ungentlemanly for the duelers themselves to bandy words over the terms of honor.

The challenger begins the duel by asserting a proposition. A proposition is a clear and unambiguous statement of fact, morality, aesthetics, or any mix of the three. “George W. Bush is a tyrant” is a proposition. “Eric Clapton is a better guitarist than Yngwie J. Malmsteen” is a proposition. “The Maine was blown up by a secret team of al-Qaeda frogmen sent back in time by Nikola Tesla’s three-way time machine” is a proposition.

A proposition must be supported by an argument
. An argument is a combinatoric statement that depends on a number of subpropositions, using the familiar AND and OR operators. So, for example, we might argue that Eric Clapton is a better guitarist than Yngwie J. Malmsteen, because either (a) Clapton is God, OR (b.1) Clapton has actual soul, AND (b.2) Yngwie’s frantic shredding sounds like a rabid weasel with its claws stuck in an autoharp. (Of course there should be an actual graphical UI on this, so that it’s not utterly and completely geek-o-rama.)

The defender then responds to the challenger’s argument, for each proposition either (a) conceding it; (b) dismissing it contemptuously, as unworthy of serious consideration; (c) equating it to some other proposition stated by the defender, or negation of some proposition stated by the challenger (ie, putting a symbolic link in the argument tree); or (d) responding with a counterargument.

Arguments may depend on supporting documentation. All supporting references must be in publicly available and freely redistributable form. No reference to any information that is either behind a subscriber firewall, or available only on paper, is honorable. Ideally, supporting documents should be uploaded to Duelnode itself, but if copyright permissions prohibit this they must be hosted on a site with a stable archive policy. Furthermore, Duelnode does not attempt to distinguish between trustworthy and untrustworthy sources.

(The Agency goes one better here. Because all the supporting information will be housed on the website. So, in any duel, the Agency members will have these resources at their finger-tips.)

The process of argument construction continues until the tree is fully populated. In other words, until each dueler has given the other complete and final satisfaction. The resulting duel is saved permanently – disk space being cheap.

(Again, we can go one better. Every Duel will be housed on the Website. In the Hall of “shame”, or the “trophy room.” (See below.)

Moldbug on the key “propaganda” point:

The whole point of the duel is to humiliate your enemy in public, to ride him, to make him your pwny.

To maximize the quality of the duel, and ensure that as many arguments as possible are aired and expressed, our duelers may be assisted by the public at large, acting as kibitzers. Kibitzers are just commenters. 

(My idea, on the contrary, is to expand the “duel” to a war. Thus, there are no kibitzers, there are teams, battalions, regiments and armies. The ideal would be to overwhelm an individual or small group of disorganised Brahmins, with a concentrated, coordinated, disciplined team of attackers. Think of it as Napoleonic “intellectual” warfare. )

While their comments are not in any way official and need not be responded to, they may weigh in on either side of any proposition, offering friendly and helpful advice to our sweating, roaring gladiators.

(In my version, however, you might have a lead “attacker”, who is assisted by a “neutral” questioner and a third attacker who is satirical, bombastic and mocking; however, these three are assisted by a team of observers who can feed information, or suggest attack lines, or hunt up information on the fly. Internet technology provides all the means and mechanisms to accomplish this task.)

6: Thus, in time, the Agency carries out intellectual “hits” on Brahmins. The goal is to intellectually humiliate them. Create a hall of shame, or a “trophy” room of “scalped” Brahmins. (This will provide us with the “psychological juice” to attract and thus expand by growing new members.)

(This is the argumentative or practical side of things. Now, the Agency starts to become truly unique, but it is not finished yet.)

The Coordinating, “Machine-Building” Aspect of the Agency.

7: To accomplish 1-6 it requires building a “team” or Network, or Agency.

8: The Agency will have a hierarchy. The goal is to recruit, retain and build people up into experts in their “fiefdom” of intellectual expertise. Thus, preparing men, materials and structure for the actual AV. Now, the project becomes truly unique.

9: The Agency Structure:

A: The Eyes.

The Eyes or informants supply information (links and other sources to the Agency).

(This is easy, anyone can do it. However, we can have different grades of Eyes. Furthermore, we can also direct individuals and even teams of Eyes to look for or at certain things.

(For example, consider what Wikileaks did. They stated that information in the “leaks” had not all been processed and reviewed. Thus, any individual could read through them and issue reports. This is leveraging the “collective intelligence” of the internet.)

(Consider Ryan Landry as an example with this: http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/16/how-hillary-clinton-learned-to-love-the-muslim-brotherhood/ )

B: The Checkers.

Checkers “check” the incoming information as either useful and or true and thus accept it or not.

(Checkers are “inside” the Agency. They have been accepted into it; Eyes, meanwhile, can simply be third parties who simply pass along information.

C: The Judges.

Judges write a brief one or two sentence or short paragraph explaining the errors etc. and linking to other reports (which contain links) and debunking sources.

(These people will, with practice, begin to acquire the basic skills and eventual expertise needed for the AV.)

D: The Barons.

Barons run a particular intellectual “fief” i.e., “Feminist” Blank Slate Gender nonsense or economic quackery.

The Barons are tasked with overseeing Judges, Checkers, and Eyes within their patch.

Barons should also select and train their team.

Barons could also write up detailed quarterly and or annual detailed reports on the current situation as pertains to their Fief. (For example: “This month saw a new lie emerge from the Cathedral regarding Islamic terror. According to the New York Times reporter X, quoting Harvard academic Y, Muslims engage in Jihad because their mothers have “insufficient economic opportunities.” Thus, Muslim men internalise “structural oppression.”)

Finally, Barons should be the “point-men” or leaders in leading “duels” (see 6 and 7).  (Barons could be the origins of future “professors” of the AV.)

E: The Lords.

The Lords oversee a complete fief such as science (HBD and Climate science say); other major areas are domestic security; economics; education; foreign policy etc. etc.

(Lords may be our future department heads. These people will be the most experienced, trustworthy and competent.)

F: The King:  the overall head of the Agency. (The Executive or Director who will direct and supervises the entire Agency.)

See also:

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.co.uk/2007/08/uberfact-ultimate-social-verifier.html

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.co.uk/2008/01/revipedia-how-to-defeat-us-government.html

Why this is not Another Wikipedia.

10: With time, experience and reputation, the Agency can mount coordinated “swarm attacks” against Brahmin intellectuals. (As Mencius Moldbug used to do this, and still apparently does. For example:

http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3167

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.co.uk/2008/02/theory-of-ruling-underclass.html (see the first couple of paragraphs and links.

In another example, consider that NickbSteves appears on various comment sections responding to various articles. See here:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/behind-the-internets-dark-anti-democracy-movement/516243/

So, imagine what Moldbug or NbS does, but times 10x or 100x with a leader, a team, a target, a plan and a website that permanently records and showcases the encounter as a “trophy”.)

These “hits” become “notches” which create “team spirit” and a sense of victory and accomplishment. Different teams, and individuals will compete under a “ranking system” for who is the most “bad ass” in taking down Brahmins – how many “hits” they have performed, how many “notches” they have racked up. You could have “league tables”, you could have “medals”, you could have “honorary” names.

(This is the psychological aspect – the morale – of the Agency. This is an absolutely crucial aspect, and must never be overlooked.  The Agency will build this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asabiyyah

And, of course, this:

For our purposes, we will define a Mannerbund as a group of men organized in an organic hierarchy that springs from the male competitive instinct. The Mannerbund forms quickly and naturally between any group of men because it is predicated on the male competitive instinct. Men, far from being epicene, atomized “individuals” with strictly “rational” tastes and preferences, have an easily roused and conspicuous instinct towards competition and – more importantly – hierarchy realized through competition.

(The Agency is “hierarchy realised through competition” “TO-A-T….. It is competition in the inner and outer sense. Inner, because “teams” under different Lords and Barons will compete to be the most “hard-core” in taking down Brahmins. Outer, because it is in competition with Brahmins of the Cathedral.)

http://www.socialmatter.net/2016/02/23/mannerbund-101/

(I expand upon the psychological aspect in Part B)

11: All perfectly legal. The “attack” model is similar, though not quite the same, as Anonymous. Anonymous hack and troll and it is “opt in.” The Agency, however, will be coordinated, working as a team, and will use perfectly legitimate means – intellectual argument.)

Furthermore, we operate on the same policy as Scientology. If someone or some newsgroup “attacks”, we record it and attack back; then, we place them under observation and tracking. And we keep hitting, or wait for something to hit them with. It never stops. We follow and attack them forever. Note, this policy is similar, but not the same, as Scientology. See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology_controversies#.22Attack_the_Attacker.22_policy

We also do “Human flesh searches.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_flesh_search_engine

Thus, you build a fearsome reputation which will attract people. This is the memetic virulence and Expansionary aspect of the Agency.)

12: The Agency can either operate in related way to Neoreaction,   or it can operate without any reference to Nrx and its terminology. Why? To attract people from the broader right, and other dissidents without getting bogged down in the “constructive” stuff. The (proximate) goal here is simply to degrade, demoralise and destroy the Cathedral and the Brahmins within it.

Thus, the Agency  should not propose any positive or practical goals or aims – it is simply about documenting the lies, errors and misdeeds of the Cathedral, and the Brahmins within it. It can either operate externally with code-names or simply operate as one anonymous, monolithic collective for purposes of “mystery” and “intimidation.”

13: The purpose, organisationally, is to create an actual “machine”. To recruit, retain and train people up. However, by building something that grows day by day, and “attacking” the Brahmins intellectually it keeps people “psychologically engaged”. If it succeeds, if it acquires a reputation for truth, then it can attract investors and backers in order for us to build the AV.

14: In short, we are creating the machine, the early “Brain” of the AV. Think of it as creating a kind of AI, and then with “evolution”, it grows and becomes more complex. The materials we collect, will, of course, serve us in creating the content of the AV.

15: The Agency, however, is, in one sense, one tool in the broader toolbox of getting to the AV. In truth, it is not necessary – only useful, but possibly very useful – and it is certainly not sufficient.  So, the task of actually creating a body of work that describes Good Government Statecraft will still need to be done.

Analogy: It is the sceptical, destructive “bad cop” to the constructive “good cop” of creating positive knowledge regarding Statecraft.

Summary:

1: This proposal is the bridge, the path, the pre-cursor, to the Antiversity.

2: The Agency aims to centralise and coordinate men, materials and memes (intellectual resources).

3: The Agency aims to recruit, train and retain members who will serve as the basis for the AV.

4: The Agency, by carrying out two tasks, the first which is collecting, sorting, judging, commenting and indexing information from the Cathedral and linking to the truth; secondly, once an index has been sufficiently built, and the team sufficiently coordinated, the Agency will go on the attack “duelnode” style, and will thus be able to create Asabiyyah. It is through “fighting” a common enemy, that men make the Mannbund.

This is how we create it, how we strengthen it, how we sharpen it, how we wield it, and this is how we win – by creating a system of information that destroys the enemies “kernel”, and persuades people to “tune in” to our “repeater.”

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.co.uk/2007/05/two-kinds-of-repeaters.html

5: Nothing quite like what I am proposing exists – but one day it will, because someone will eventually build it. The Agency, it is true, is built from a number of different sources influences (which I have alluded to here, but I will talk more about the inspiration in Part B).

Concluding Remarks:

Part of the reason I came up with this idea is because I believe many neoreactionaries become disillusioned and disheartened and then quit. For example, how many blogs have been deleted?  How many bloggers have quit, or gone silent? I can say that there is not a moment every day, more and more, that I do not feel the soul crushing feeling of life under the boot of the Modern Structure. The feeling of “helplessness” of psychological “despair” and the feeling of “impotence” must be overcome. Anger must be channelled to productive ends. Even if, in the grand scheme of things, each person’s contribution does not mean much, it is the psychological feeling of “doing something” that is important (proximately speaking).

My Agency idea will provide for that – that and the fact that it will serve our long term ultimate objectives.

I will finish with an anecdote about morale, and the psychology of “doing something” from John Keegan’s Mask of Command. It is an anecdote about General Grant in the Civil War, who understood the importance of morale:

Far more characteristic was his decision at Vicksburg to indulge his troops’ desire to assault rather than besiege the enemy’s fortifications. He knew they were misguided. ‘But the first consideration of all was – the troops believed they could carry the works in their front.’ He let them have their heads. ‘The attack was gallant and portions of each of the three corps succeeded in getting up to the very parapets of the enemy and in planting their battle flags upon them; but in no place were we able to enter . . . This last attack only served to increase our casualties without giving any benefit whatsoever.’ Grant, who was physically revolted by the sight of blood, bitterly regretted the loss. But his hard-headed understanding of the character of his citizen army told him that his soldiers ‘would not [afterwards] have worked so patiently in the trenches’ – work which inexorably advanced the victory he sought – ‘if they had not been allowed to try’. By this ultimate readiness to command by consent rather than diktat Grant discloses the populist touch that made him a master of people’s war.”

The Mask Of Command.

The proposal outlined here, however, will not be without “benefit.” Quite the contrary, as it will make use of the basic principles of strategy, in particular principles 1,2,3,6,8 and 9:

  1. Objective (Direct every military operation towards a clearly defined, decisive, and attainable objective)
  2. Offensive (Seize, retain, and exploit the initiative)
  3. Mass (Concentrate combat power at the decisive place and time)
  4. Economy of Force (Allocate minimum essential combat power to secondary efforts)
  5. Maneuver (Place the enemy in a disadvantageous position through the flexible application of combat power)
  6. Unity of Command (For every objective, ensure unity of effort under one responsible commander)
  7. Security (Never permit the enemy to acquire an unexpected advantage)
  8. Surprise (Strike the enemy at a time, at a place, or in a manner for which he is unprepared)
  9. Simplicity (Prepare clear, uncomplicated plans and clear, concise orders to ensure thorough understanding)

In Part B, I will say a little more about the Agency, in which I originally called the “Doomsday Book.”

 

 

Advertisements
Standard

4 thoughts on “The Path to the Dark Reformation Part F2: The Anti-Cathedral.

  1. Pingback: The Path to the Dark Reformation Part F2: The Anti-Cathedral. | Reaction Times

  2. Pingback: This Week In Reaction (2017/05/14) - Social Matter

  3. Pingback: The Very Best of Last Week in Reaction (2017/05/14) – The Reactivity Place

  4. Pingback: The Path to the Dark Reformation X: The Restoration of England. | "The Horror! The Horror!"

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s