from Hacker News

Curtis Yarvin's Plot Against America

by bitsavers on 6/4/25, 7:04 PM with 425 comments

  • by kragen on 6/4/25, 7:16 PM

  • by eikenberry on 6/4/25, 8:13 PM

    Didn't have time to make it through the entire (long winded) article, but is it wrong to boil down his thinking to the simple idea that a benevolent, competent dictator is the best form of government? I ask as this seems like a very simplistic and obvious idea. The problem isn't that this is necessarily incorrect, it is how do you find this mythical figurehead? History has shown that we have never discovered a system that did this reliably and I didn't see any indication that he had solved this problem. How do you ensure you get a Sun King and not.. something else.
  • by legitster on 6/4/25, 7:34 PM

    Growing up, one of my criticisms of Orson Scott Card's "Enderverse" was how unrealistic it seemed that children could literally rise to power simply through posting theories and arguments on the internet.

    How wrong I was.

  • by rubyfan on 6/4/25, 7:22 PM

    Why are big media outlets suddenly sharing this guys ideas?
  • by A_D_E_P_T on 6/4/25, 7:24 PM

    I mentioned this previously, but I frequently think back to Gibson's "Jackpot" -- a cross-lashed, polycausal catastrophe: Lots of bad little things accumulating, building up a certain momentum.

    I think that even as far back as 2009, an astute observer would have noticed that society is beginning to burn through its seed corn.

    In some places, things are now getting extremely acute: https://www.neilobrien.co.uk/p/the-confluence?r=h8x

    There's no way out but through, which means that politics are going to get extremely weird. Moldbug/Yarvin is one manifestation of this, and quite a benign and even harmless one. He's foppish and playful more than he is scary.

  • by AnimalMuppet on 6/4/25, 9:21 PM

    1. Yarvin's system may work well if you put perfect people in place, and keep perfect people in place. Well, that's true of a lot of systems. Yarvin finds flaws in democracy with imperfect people, but his system needs perfect people in order to work. That's... not an improvement.

    2. Even if you have these perfect people, they're going to be rare. Who's going to put them in power? The mass of non-perfect people? Why are they going to do that?

    3. Yarvin fails his own test. He's looking for people whose blogs create no negative reactions? Yarvin stands self-condemned; he's not worthy to say how things should be run.

  • by skrebbel on 6/4/25, 7:45 PM

    I'll never understand why this man gets so much attention.
  • by tptacek on 6/4/25, 9:07 PM

    My favorite observation about this was made on Twitter, of all places, when someone said that for all Yarvin's efforts to become the heir to Ezra Pound, the true 21st Century Pound is Kanye West.
  • by ivraatiems on 6/4/25, 7:57 PM

    The key driver behind Yarvin's ideology seems to be arrogance, covering perceived self-weakness. I think that's what makes it appealing to so many Silicon Valley "nerd king" type figures, and also why it has the form it does.

    Yarvin comes off - not just here, but through his writing and his work - as absolutely obsessed with proving himself and being smarter than everyone. He admits he has the gifted child need to prove yourself drive, but he doesn't seem to have invested time in figuring out how to move past it or use it productively.

    You can completely discard Yarvin's ideology - or even agree with it - and still see this in the way he works. His company, Urbit (not the name of the company but the name of its "product") is a ham-handed, hyper-complex "re-imagining" of pretty much every wheel in computing, from the OS to networking to programming languages. It has effectively no useful user-facing features, but a whole lot of design philosophy and programming language design. It creates lots of problems while solving almost none, but it looks impressive.

    ...which is to say it maybe actually isn't all that far off from his ideological and political writing, in the end.

  • by thrance on 6/4/25, 7:29 PM

    His tenets would be at home in the mind of a 16th century european king, and yet they now make up the core of American politics.

    There is no way America shakes this insanity off easily, it will require a long time and (lots of) suffering.

  • by senkora on 6/4/25, 7:18 PM

    Scott Alexander also recently had a take on Curtis Yarvin’s recent actions: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/moldbug-sold-out

    The gist of it is that he had interesting ideas on political systems in the past, but that his current ideas are nonsense, and in fact his old work explains exactly why his new work is nonsense.

  • by defen on 6/4/25, 7:55 PM

    Question for 'dang - is it possible to dig up the oldest post on this website that links to somewhere on "unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com" and has some amount of comments? It would be interesting to see how people were reacting to his ideas when he first posted them.
  • by esseph on 6/4/25, 10:19 PM

    Flagged, get the fuck out of here.

    The fact that it's flagged means someone wants it hidden.

    If you don't want to read the post you don't have to, nobody is making you.

  • by mmustapic on 6/4/25, 8:13 PM

    The most amazing thing about Yarvis ideas, and the article itself, is that they clearly say that CEOs are antidemocratic autocrats. Why should this be accepted in a democratic society?
  • by exizt88 on 6/4/25, 7:51 PM

    One of my favorite things about Curtis Yarvin is that one of his main ideas is laughably easy to prove wrong. He says that whenever we go into the past, the previous generation seems to be more "right-wing" than the current one. Which is almost comically wrong. For example, you get Victorian Era being much more conservative than its predecessor, Georgian Era. Same goes for Christian Roman Empire vs Pagan Roman Empire, Nazi Germany vs Weimar Germany, etc etc. There are literally dozens of examples. It seems that Yarvin genuinely doesn't know any of these high school-level facts.
  • by Apocryphon on 6/4/25, 8:40 PM

    How far we've come since a dozen years ago, when TechCrunch was the first mainstream outlet to observe Moldbug and his ideological currents:

    Geeks for Monarchy: The Rise of the Neoreactionaries (techcrunch.com) 54 points by davidgerard on Nov 23, 2013 | 109 comments

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6785801

  • by rukuu001 on 6/4/25, 10:42 PM

    From a recent submission[1]:

    > The term itself [stupidity], he said, wasn’t a description of intellectual acuity, but of social responsibility

    1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44112265

  • by Hikikomori on 6/4/25, 7:21 PM

    The society of Snow Crash is a dystopia, not something we should want to implement.
  • by monksy on 6/4/25, 8:42 PM

    This is amazing how this guy became a challenging individual to a poltical bias in tech to a evil guy on a national scale pretty quickly.
  • by cempaka on 6/4/25, 7:35 PM

    From a 2014 email from Yarvin to Thiel: “One of our hidden advantages is that these people wouldn’t believe in a conspiracy if it hit them over the head (this is perhaps the best measure of the decline of the Left).”

    On that, he's not wrong!

  • by mountainriver on 6/4/25, 7:32 PM

    His actual answer to preventing a Hitler or Stalin arising from autocracy is that he would hopes it doesn’t happen.

    What an absolute joke

  • by 2OEH8eoCRo0 on 6/4/25, 9:02 PM

    What a surprise, the guy who thinks CEOs should rule the country is popular among CEOs.
  • by arp242 on 6/5/25, 12:48 AM

    > The eternal political problems of legitimacy, accountability, and succession would be solved by a secret board with the power to select and recall the otherwise all-powerful C.E.O. of each sovereign corporation, or SovCorp.

    If the prize is being "all-powerful", then you can just assassinate your way to king-CEO, after which you're immune. This system is incredibly easy to hack, and has happened countless of times throughout history.

    Giving people cryptographic keys to disarm weapons is not going to change much about that and is just hand-waving with extra steps. Try disarming my knife with your cryptography. Oh no, I repeatedly stabbed you in the chest before you could enter your passphrase. Too bad.

    This is like communists: "yeah sure, in the past it ended in spectacular failure, but this time we'll get it right!" (if they're not outright denying things such as Stalin's purges from ever happening that is).

    What strikes me is just how incredibly naïve, dumb, and unsophisticated all of this is.

    Yarvin seems to have convinced himself that he's always the smartest person in the room, always acts fully rational, and that everything he says is a singularity of pure logic. It's easy to end up with some very curious ideas that way, especially if you combine that with his psychological ... issues.

    Once you start dismissing people that disagree as "too dumb to understand the ideas" or consider giving them "Voight-Kampff test" to prove they're not "NPCs" you know you're off the deep end.

    If nothing else, all of this is useful to read as a cautionary tale: how you too, as a smart person, can believe some really dumb stuff (to say nothing on the morality of it all).

  • by tehjoker on 6/4/25, 8:31 PM

    It's crazy how insane right wingers get so much puff from the media, and socialists get very very little despite having pro-social ideas instead of anti-social ones.
  • by LAC-Tech on 6/5/25, 4:04 AM

    I always thought Yarvin was an interesting writer. Like a lot of people on the political fringe (and I've seen this from libertarians and socialists as well) he's fantastic and diagnosing problems and making us look at our own system with new eyes, but rather fumbles when it comes to workable solutions.

    He also seems to lose all biting insight and critique when it comes to one certain state he has a legal right to be a citizen of. I'll leave this for readers to find out which one.

    I've never made much of his apparent association to JD Vance. Maybe this is the sort of street cred stuff vance liked to surround himself with, much as Obama did with his Bill Ayers association, but I doubt it affected either men much in practice.

  • by archagon on 6/4/25, 8:09 PM

    On the subject of Yarvin, I really appreciate FrankWilhoit's take[1]:

    > Yarvin is only another horribly damaged person, squealing in pain in a pseudointellectual vocabulary. He has neither knowledge nor insight, but a gift for miming these things. The questions are, first, how might we stop so many children from being psychically tortured so that their minds become piles of bloody shred like this, and then second, why does anybody take it at face value when, rarely, one of them learns to scream in sounds that mimic high discourse?

    [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43459055

  • by TSiege on 6/4/25, 9:21 PM

    Why is this post being flagged?
  • by hexator on 6/4/25, 7:14 PM

  • by 1vuio0pswjnm7 on 6/4/25, 10:36 PM

    https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/red-pill-pr...

    Another dropout; never finished his PhD:

    "At 15, Yarvin entered college as part of Johns Hopkins' longitudinal Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth. A year later, he transferred to Brown University in Rhode Island as a legacy admission to the Ivy League liberal arts college, where his parents had met in the mid-'60s. After graduating, it was on to a computer science Ph.D. program at Berkeley. He dropped out after a year and a half to take a tech job at the height of the go-go '90s dot-com era."

    Without the Silicon Valley and the internet, he and his theories have no life. Neither can stand on its own without computers.

    He cannot turn off the computer. Without the computer, he becomes irrelevant.

    Not suprising if he provides entertainment for so-called "tech" company investors and employees.

  • by disambiguation on 6/5/25, 7:09 AM

    I've never read moldbug but I know people who know people in certain circles - and I can't tell if his ideas genuinely captivate the imagination of the elite, or if he's a kind of Judas goat, because the non-elite are definitely captivated by his ideas. I feel like his work came at a time when the Right lost its core conservative values. Libertarianism was poised as the successor but was defeated, leaving a vacuum for something new. I think yarvin's ideas also satisfies the right's need for something intellectual to stand up to left wing ideology, but there's the possibility that its simply an intellectual trap - consistent and elaborate, but untrue due to false assumptions. Strange times.
  • by ianbicking on 6/4/25, 11:55 PM

    Seeing him back in the news made me think more about Urbit, his decentralized computing project. For a bit of a discussion of the technical parts of Urbit this is decent: https://wejn.org/2021/02/urbit-good-bad-insane/

    I have this feeling that Nock, effectively the bytecode of Urbit, is inspired by Paul Graham's Hundred-Year Language essay: https://paulgraham.com/hundred.html – for instance Nock only defines minimal math operations, as proposed in the essay.

    The thing is, Paul's ideas in that essay were quite bad, based on a mathematical aesthetic that is both inefficient and aesthetically a poor fit for computing. That's fine for an essay, you throw some ideas out there and maybe they work or maybe they don't.

    Then in Urbit Yarvin actually built the thing. And it's _terrible_. Hilariously bad. Some of the worst architecture you'll ever see. As a minor example they have a hexadecimal integer type... I understand i32, i64, etc., but a hexadecimal type is something you come up with if you don't understand how numbers work. There's literally a hundred other things just as embarrassing as that in the design.

    It's fine to take a bad idea and explore it. But he didn't just try out the idea, he got people to invest, to develop the system, emotionally commit to this thing. Seeing community posts is sad, it's naive folks hoping to find a home and seeing some phrases that connect with them, and they don't know enough to see Urbit for the fraud that it is. The obscurantist terminology helps maintain the fraud, since people think there must be something there if only they could understand it... but there isn't, and most of them will never understand it. Every cool demo is just a regular web frontend with a half-assed Urbit backend.

    All of which is to say, I think this is Yarvin's schtick: grab onto some ideas, explore them in a way that is so confusing that it hids how moronic the ideas are, while successfully appealing to some latent desire in the audience.

  • by antisthenes on 6/4/25, 7:22 PM

    It's pretty sad that loonies like this get a platform at all.

    The ultimate irony is that New Yorker in this case is writing an article about him, mocking his views...yet legitimizing them at the same time by associating their name with this kind of person at all.

    How is this guy different from any other of the thousands moderately-successful tech people with an obscure hobby project (Urbit). Just because of his far-out-there views?

    The only fascinating thing here is the phenomenon that no matter what nonsense you come up with, someone on the Internet will agree with you, think it's a good thing, and maybe even form a fan club.

  • by twiddling on 6/4/25, 7:13 PM

    [flagged]
  • by antithesizer on 6/4/25, 7:21 PM

    They're really scraping the bottom of the barrel for weird right-wing gurus/boogie men these days.

    Nick Land where have you gone? Your house is in disarray.

  • by indoordin0saur on 6/4/25, 8:54 PM

    For what it's worth his writing is very thought provoking and novel. I'd recommend anyone bored of mainstream groupthink take a look at it.