"Peter Thiel summarized the trend bluntly: “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible.”
The dread of democracy by libertarians and classical liberals is
justified. Libertarianism really is incompatible with democracy. Most
libertarians have made it clear which of the two they prefer. The only
question that remains to be settled is why anyone should pay attention
to libertarians
Increasingly, however, libertarians have ceased to care whether anyone is ‘pay[ing them] attention’ – they have been looking for something else entirely: an exit.
For the hardcore neo-reactionaries, democracy is not merely doomed, it
is doom itself. Fleeing it approaches an ultimate imperative.
Civilization, as a process, is indistinguishable from diminishing
time-preference (or declining concern for the present in comparison to
the future). Democracy, which both in theory and evident historical fact
accentuates time-preference to the point of convulsive feeding-frenzy,
is thus as close to a precise negation of civilization as anything could
be, short of instantaneous social collapse into murderous barbarism or
zombie apocalypse (which it eventually leads to).
… libertarians cannot present a realistic picture of a world in
which their battle gets won and stays won. They wind up looking for ways
to push a world in which the State’s natural downhill path is to grow,
back up the hill. This prospect is Sisyphean, and it’s understandable
why it attracts so few supporters.
The state isn’t going anywhere because — to those who run it — it’s worth far too much to give up, and as the concentrated instantiation of sovereignty in society, nobody can make it do anything. If the state cannot be eliminated, Moldbug argues, at least it can be cured of democracy (or systematic and degenerative bad government), and the way to do that is to formalize it. This is an approach he calls ‘neo-cameralism’. (Running government as a business.)
The
21st-century nondemocratic tradition can be seen in lost fragments of
the British Empire: Hong Kong, Singapore and Dubai. These
states appear to provide a very high quality of service to their
citizens, with no meaningful democracy at all. They have minimal crime
and high levels of personal and economic freedom. They tend to be quite
prosperous. They are weak only in political freedom, and political
freedom is unimportant by definition when government is stable and
effective.
Democracy is fundamentally non-productive in relation to material progress. Democracy consumes progress. When perceived from the perspective of the dark enlightenment, the appropriate mode of analysis for studying the democratic phenomenon is general parasitology."
No comments:
Post a Comment