[This was primarily inspired by Twitter conversations with Patriactionary and Ross Cunningham]
Neoreaction has a media image problem. Of course, many (most?) would say that this doesn't matter; that anti-egalitarianism must be inherent in our very means of expression. Appealing to the plebs is a tacit betrayal of the Dark Enlightenment itself, and thus should be avoided.
I happen to disagree. As elitist and "Inner Party" oriented as we may be, eschewing any deliberate engagement with outside forces is entirely self-defeating. It's nice to bathe in the masturbatory glow of our own intellect every once in a while, but collaborating with and appealing to proto-reactionary Muggles will be necessary at some point for our ideas to gain traction. Neither a majority nor a plurality is needed for our goals to succeed, but a portion of the populace greater than a couple thousand tech-savvy twentysomethings needs to be read in on What Needs To Be Done. Current non-efforts in this regard are not conducive to anything resembling success.
This isn't to say that we should eschew high-level discussions and our familiar style of writing for mass-market appeal, however. Such things are needed to hash out what exactly we stand for, where exactly are our disagreements and schisms, and what our overall plan of action is (if any?) going forward.
What is needed is such: a two-tier public relations platform, with an Inner Party tier for overall strategy and scholarly debates, and an Outer Party tier focused on recruitment, propaganda, and mobilization.
The upper tier is basically us now, and I see no serious modifications to be made (beyond moving some of the more "critical" discussions to secure IRC platforms or private forums). The lower tier has a few good examples that exist now (Auster, Sailer, Jim, Patriareactionary, etc.). I suspect that as this blog develops, it will fall into this Outer Party category as well.
One last thing to comment upon: whether or not Neoreaction runs with a tiered system or not, plebs will discover us and try to make sense of what we are. If this is all the uninitiated can understand, then we'll be written off as a bunch of weird techno-kooks with Carlyle fetishes (not that we aren't). A conscious, regulated appeal to Gentiles makes a lot more sense than purposeful non-appeal.
-Fyrdsman
Neoreaction has a media image problem. Of course, many (most?) would say that this doesn't matter; that anti-egalitarianism must be inherent in our very means of expression. Appealing to the plebs is a tacit betrayal of the Dark Enlightenment itself, and thus should be avoided.
I happen to disagree. As elitist and "Inner Party" oriented as we may be, eschewing any deliberate engagement with outside forces is entirely self-defeating. It's nice to bathe in the masturbatory glow of our own intellect every once in a while, but collaborating with and appealing to proto-reactionary Muggles will be necessary at some point for our ideas to gain traction. Neither a majority nor a plurality is needed for our goals to succeed, but a portion of the populace greater than a couple thousand tech-savvy twentysomethings needs to be read in on What Needs To Be Done. Current non-efforts in this regard are not conducive to anything resembling success.
This isn't to say that we should eschew high-level discussions and our familiar style of writing for mass-market appeal, however. Such things are needed to hash out what exactly we stand for, where exactly are our disagreements and schisms, and what our overall plan of action is (if any?) going forward.
What is needed is such: a two-tier public relations platform, with an Inner Party tier for overall strategy and scholarly debates, and an Outer Party tier focused on recruitment, propaganda, and mobilization.
The upper tier is basically us now, and I see no serious modifications to be made (beyond moving some of the more "critical" discussions to secure IRC platforms or private forums). The lower tier has a few good examples that exist now (Auster, Sailer, Jim, Patriareactionary, etc.). I suspect that as this blog develops, it will fall into this Outer Party category as well.
One last thing to comment upon: whether or not Neoreaction runs with a tiered system or not, plebs will discover us and try to make sense of what we are. If this is all the uninitiated can understand, then we'll be written off as a bunch of weird techno-kooks with Carlyle fetishes (not that we aren't). A conscious, regulated appeal to Gentiles makes a lot more sense than purposeful non-appeal.
-Fyrdsman
Though a regular reactionary of more traditionalist conservative religious bent than a neoreactionary of usually more secular bent, I certainly agree, as regards reaction overall, with this. Though I don't know that 'propaganda' for the 'Outer Party', as you put it a la '1984', as in what is usually meant by the term 'propaganda', may be all that desirable, as that suggests manipulation, whereas I believe what we really would prefer to do is to open people's eyes to the truth; to stimulate thought; surely most of the brightest of those not yet familiar with reaction, those able to be 'deprogrammed' from prog thinking modes, would be able to be reached with simply explanatory material aimed at their level.
ReplyDeleteAfter all, the manosphere has been able to spread 'Red Pill' thinking in such a manner - just putting our perspectives out there, putting out the facts and our analysis of the situation as we see it; in the last four years, the manosphere has exploded in size and scope, in influence, to the point where the mainstream is beginning to take some notice of it, for good and ill.
I do understand, though, about a need for different 'levels', so to speak. I sawthis at Foseti's, and this response; such a set of layers of understanding make sense with children learning about civics, and no doubt with adults, too.
Moreover, one can see things on several levels in manosphere contexts, too; this has been noted with regards to various matters.
DeleteThe rabbit holes go deep...
I do agree that the Inner Party-Outer Party dynamic needs a better description; that turn of phrase was just off the top of my head.
DeleteAlso, Handle's story brings up an interesting point. I feel another blog post coming.
And the Manosphere angle is certainly a good way to look at things from a recruitment and outreach angle. Modeling our outreach after theirs is a starting point worth looking at.
DeleteAnd there's overlap - my group blog Patriactionary is at the intersection of the manosphere and the orthosphere and the reactosphere, really.
DeleteBINGO. Exactly
ReplyDeleteI see a certain NR (MA) is trolling the manosphere. Not sure what that accomplishes, except to alienate potential allies, of course. Hell, many of the NRs have alienated me - I quit Twitter for a reason - so why stop with just me, why not alienate every possible ally?
ReplyDeleteSheesh.