See this first for conext: I Am a Barbarian
If Manfold is correct, then does Manifold’s argument stand as either or both an anomaly and refutation of Moldbug’s thesis regarding the Modern Structure and what Trump and Bannon call the “Swamp”? That is, that America is an overly centralised, bureaucratic and bloated, crisis ridden empire whose citizens have become decadent and despondent, while the Ruling Elite have become effete."The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." America (most of Anglosphere) is a first rate nation because it is a nation of civilized barbarians. It is a nation of people who respect their King, but if he threatens their Rights, they may alternatively: force him to sign a treaty, chop his head off, or tell him to sod off. In most cases, the result of the "revolution" is best described as reform. Monarchy (I'm not a monarchist) isn't a solution to a grand problem, it's a replacement strategy. The barbarians need a civilization strategy to remove or subvert Cathedral-USG. (The chief critique of the Conservatives (cuckservatism) is that they are neither Barbarian nor Civilized. The cucks do not fight like Barbarians (the Alt-Right does), while the cucks also aren't civilized enough to occupy USG (have government careers, take over the Deep State, wield state power for Barbarian aims). Instead of harnessing the tension of the contradictions, they are broken by it. A Midwest small businessman is a perfectly fine politician for a state dominated by Barbarians because he won't bother the Barbarians. Left alone, they will accept their fate or not, as dictated by their own actions. And they will expand outward like the East India Company or Crimson Permanent Assurance or maybe ExxonBlackwater Africa Division. But against a civilized threat he loses because on the one hand he doesn't escalate (as a Barbarian would), but he also can't out "civilize" his enemies.
So, how do neoreactionaries respond this this question? How do we account for this anomaly?
Is America a barbarian nation?
If so, does this refute or undermine the neoreactionary critique?
The key claims of Manifold that could refute the critique (or not) are (2) and (10) while (4), (5) and (6) are potential underminers.
We disagree with Manifold’s analysis, but it did help us refine our description of the problem of the Modern Structure. However, we will comment on (1) – it is irrelevant. China sees more internal traffic than America during “Golden Week” (Chinese New Year) and China is not a “barbarian nation”.
Of course, neoreactionaries have a decisive argument against (2) – does everyone know what it is?
Stay Foxy people!
The American Revolution was wrong, it contained the seeds of its own destruction, and yet it was the American thing to do. America must constantly be reborn because it cannot balance liberty and equality. Barbarians cannot stomach being chained by civilization. We are a frontier nation, we need a frontier. (Space is the place.) We are also reaching the end of the equality line. Liberty cannot survive as the successful hack by European communists reaches its end game. It formalized equality into state policy instead of leaving it as mostly informal (and still very powerful culturally) with the formalized concept of equality under the law. (The average American Revolutionary would look a lot like an SJW, not physically of course.)
USG is therefore the wrong government for America. It has been wrong since at least 1860. From 1860 to about 1945, the increase in centralized power funneled and concentrated American power. It put a man on the Moon. Since then, rising centralization running a foreign ideological system has choked the people, America's greatest asset. America will always be a global superpower because it sits alone on the North America landmass like a stationary bandit, but the people are mobile bandits all over the globe. America is a nation of colonists and capitalists, tax evaders and pirates. (When critics say the Cathedral is importing a new people to replace the Americans, this is a literal description of policy. It is dangerous to be a ruling elite hostile to the Barbarian natives.)
An example from the latest mania. The American government could be unleashing cryptocurrencies on the world because it is one of the few major governments that won't be threatened by it. Cryptocurrencies would put global finance more firmly into the hands of Americans, or at least wrest it from all state control. But because USG centralized monetary control into the Federal Reserve (civilized the credit system?), and because it controls this centralized system, and because crytpocurrencies threaten it, it takes on an adversarial relationship. Barbarians love cryptocurrencies (and wildcat banking). A monarch of the Barbarians would love cryptocurrencies because as the people grow wealthy, so does their monarch. But if the monarch is a predator on his people and cryptocurrencies represent an existential threat (cause he's dangerously close to the "sod off" part of the story), then he's going to crack down. If he realizes his global dollar system is on the verge of collapse and he'll have to enter into a multipolar system with China and Russia, he'd still love cryptos because instead of sharing power, everyone loses power to the Barbarians. And if you're the head of the largest Barbarian nation...