≡ Menu

Saturday [Let’s] Review: Some of you are not yet clearpilled – by Curtis Yarvin aka Mencius Moldberg

“Never apply power. Only build power.” Dec 8, 2021

Taken whole from Some of you are not yet clearpilled – by Curtis Yarvin

I always get a lot of flak when I covidpost. This time is no exception.

In general, your attitude toward this covid shitshow predicts a certain kind of political sophistication and detachment, which you can call whatever you like. If you have it, you are going to make it. If not—well, it is my job, isn’t it? To help you try to make it?

Some smart readers ask: sure, in the abstract, a sovereign regime has the abstract sovereign right to emergency biopower, up to and including welding its subjects in their condos to cope with some kind of airborne smallpox-leprosy. But… this regime, these measures, and this virus?

The answer is that right is always abstract. Sovereignty’s rights are always unlimited. This by no means makes all its uses of power right and proper. Especially in the case of our own dear regime—which is really a beaut.

When power is doing the wrong thing

We cannot say the regime is acting rightfully, because rightful emergency measures require a genuine emergency; and the measures must be genuinely effective. There is not a clear case for the efficacy of Western nonpharmaceutical interventions; and those currently driving them seem curiously uninterested in basic measures, such as better masks and more, cheaper rapid tests, that would make them work much better—but do not invoke the tense, avenging joy of collective coercion. And while covid is sort of an emergency, an emergency is an emergency if handling it as an emergency works much better than business as usual—which isn’t completely clear here, either.

So? That’s okay. Honestly, it’s not a great regime. It does weird stuff for weird reasons. Right? But we knew that, didn’t we?

When power is doing the wrong thing for some dumb reason, I hope it’s not too hokey to quote Bruce Lee: “be water.” The wrongfulness of power’s thing makes it rightful to resist. But: is it prudent to resist? Is it necessary to resist? Almost always no.

Your action must not be reactive. Water does not push back. Water lets the enemy expend energy, expending no energy against him. Water does not forget that the enemy is an enemy—nor ever lose sight of its lovely dream of filling his throat.

When you are not following Bruce Lee’s wisdom, you always think you are fighting back. Usually, what you are doing is participating—giving your energy to the enemy.

Power in opposition

The only practical reasons to study political science are to study (a) how to apply power against the current regime, (b) how the next regime should apply its power.

The answer to (a) is very simple. Never apply power. Only build power. In the end, it is quite likely that you will not even need to fight—you will win almost automatically. And once you have enough power to fight, you’ll definitely know it.

This is not an absolute rule. There are no absolute rules in the art of war, which like it or not includes the art of politics. It is not impossible for collective action from a dissident position to be effective.

But any collective action is a military action and must be judged on a military basis. The standards for the prudence of a military action have never changed: a prudent action must be expected to increase your strength relative to the enemy’s strength. The war is won when the enemy has no strength—no power to resist.

We can imagine collective action aimed at a goal, offensive or defensive, that meets this very high standard. Suppose the goal is stopping a new regime measure that will open the borders and give ruling-party memberships and voting rights to everyone who comes in, thus stuffing the ballot box with human beings. The defensive power value of this goal is very high, since failing to achieve it will politically disempower the native population for all time eternal.

Most actions are not like this. If the goal of the defensive action is preventing some abuse of power. assuming there is actually a collective action against this abuse that would be effective, we still need to ask whether the abuse of power is making the regime more powerful.

If not, by opposing the abuse, we are only dissipating our power. Using energy against power, even successfully, does not create more energy. It just uses up energy. The main effect of Brexit was to dissipate the political energy that created Brexit. No power was created either by the symbolic victory or the tangible results.

The worst kind of goals to use power on is entirely symbolic goals. Then, victory is nothing but dissipation—the emptiness of a masturbatory orgasm. When the goal is substantive and good, better—but this does not validate the goal as a target. Only if the goal can be plausibly achieved, and if achieving it improves the balance of power, do we have a prudent political target.

Most abuses of power make bad targets, for the simple reason that most abuses of power tend to discredit the regime. Therefore, ending them—even if it can be done—is actually naive and un-Machiavellian, a luxury no rebel can afford. As Napoleon said: never interrupt the enemy when he’s in the process of destroying himself.

The proper message to the people on how to handle an abuse of power is as follows: this abuse of power is characteristic of this regime, which will never change. If you don’t like this kind of abuse, you need to figure out how to help change the regime. Which will not happen soon in any case—so do figure out how to endure the abuse.

Moreover, these kinds of goals are terribly distracting when we are sitting back in our armchairs and solving problem (b)—what the ideal regime of the future should do about a problem like covid?

You might not think solving this problem would help get us to the ideal regime of the future—but you would be wrong about that, too. Nothing can happen until it becomes plausible; and making it plausible is the job of the intellectual. Plus, it sucks to be in power and have no plan to use it—history has seen more of this than one might think.

It is safest to assume that when you are out of power, your goal is to build power, not use power. True—there are real opportunities for dissident collective action. But your monkey mind wants to see these opportunities so badly that not a hundredth of them are real—as judged by basic, inescapable military logic.

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Tom Hyland December 18, 2021, 11:40 AM

    Dr. Joseph Mercola has issued an article containing an essay and two videos describing a psychological condition of society known as “mass formation psychosis” which births totalitarianism, and he says this is what’s happening right now. There are societal conditions of malaise and confusion, currently in great proliferation, which enables this toxicity to occur. The same conditions were present when Germany evolved into that famous shit show of the 30’s & 40’s. https://tinyurl.com/2p99wvyw

  • Joe December 18, 2021, 12:08 PM

    Great essay. I like the quote “As Napoleon said: never interrupt the enemy when he’s in the process of destroying himself.”

    Hope this is correct because i am not sure what to do.

  • Double on Tundra December 18, 2021, 12:44 PM

    Tempting, but, nope, the “let it flow past you” thing isn’t going to keep kids from getting force-jabbed with poison, for example.
    The comments under the source posting are really worth a read.

  • Bunny December 18, 2021, 1:00 PM

    Better to quote John Stuart Mill than Bruce Lee: “Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing. He is not a good man who, without a protest, allows wrong to be committed in his name, and with the means which he helps to supply, because he will not trouble himself to use his mind on the subject.” Or the Bible: “If you do nothing in a difficult time, your strength is limited. Rescue those being taken off to death, and save those stumbling toward slaughter. If you say, ‘But we didn’t know about this,’ won’t He who weighs hearts consider it? Won’t He who protects your life know? Won’t He repay a person according to his work?” ~Proverbs 24.

    Isn’t it most prudent, as well as right and proper, to produce some kind of resistance when faced with abuse of power and an existential threat? Our passive compliance has most definitely allowed these abuses to already make the regime more powerful. Governments around the world are currently grabbing powers their predecessors could only dream of and where is the evidence that these regimes are the least bit concerned about being discredited? I’m not sure of the best way forward, either, but I doubt intellectuals sitting back in their armchairs will make much difference.

    Sorry if this double posts.

    • Mike Austin December 18, 2021, 3:54 PM

      Passive resistance only works against regimes founded upon Natural Law. There are today none extant upon the earth. One can bring up how Gandhi’s antics worked against the British. Had he attempted his nonsense in Nazi Germany he would have been made into a lampshade. Passive resistance these days gets you a place in a boxcar.

      What we term “intellectuals” these days are little more than maniacal jackasses. Look at their offerings at any university and you will see this with crystal clarity.

  • James ONeil December 18, 2021, 8:36 PM

    This is my first read of anything by Curtis. I like his thoughts and style.

    However I think sometimes rocks work better than water and projectile pushers better than posy pushers.

  • Jack December 19, 2021, 8:51 AM

    When I was a kid I was small and I was no good at sports and in the event I got to play I was chosen last. I was usually banged about and I was always benched first. I got used to it but I didn’t like it so as I aged I turned my interests to other things that I could do without ‘joining’. I hate membership in everything because regardless of what it is, or its intentions might be, it’s always categorized and creates its own hierarchies and is usually managed by some extrovert that should be put down, permanently.

    When I was around 9 or so I was playing ‘cowboys and Indians’ with a group of neighborhood kids, one of whom was a developing thick skulled bully. During a lull in our play, I went inside my home to use the restroom and when I came out 6 or 8 kids were huddled around the bully and all were looking at me. I sensed trouble and the bully began to walk toward me with his menacing look and since I didn’t know how to handle this kid I pulled out a large and heavy cap pistol, grabbed it by its barrel, got ready to swing it and told him to stop. He didn’t stop and I swung that cap gun as hard as I could.

    When it hit his face and the inside of his left eye, blood erupted from his face and mouth and all he could do was scream in surprise and pain. He just stayed in the same spot, almost like he was running in place, with his hands covering his bloody face, crying like the damned pussy thug that he really was.

    My mother heard the commotion, came outside and took a look at him. She told him that I didn’t hit him as nearly as hard as he deserved and she told him to go home. He ran up the street toward his house like a beaten dog. A few hours later his mother called wanting to know why I had beaten up her son…a known and feared neighborhood bully. My mom was mean as a snake and I don’t remember her comments but that ended it forever with that guy.

    Point is…..those who would rule us do so with fear and intimidation. That fact alone should put them squarely in the sights of men and women who will not be ruled or governed by these worthless and damned parasite. All we have to do is collectively say No and then dare them to try to enforce what they want. I’m going to die and I really want to do it by trying my best to kill some of these motherless sons-of-bitches. Make them earn what they desire.