TheDark Enlightenment, also called theNeo-Reactionary movement (abbreviated toNRx), is ananti-democratic,anti-egalitarian,[1] andreactionary philosophical and political movement.[2] A reaction againstEnlightenment values,[3][4][5] it favors a return to traditional societal constructs and forms of government such asabsolute monarchism andcameralism.[3] The movement advocates forauthoritarian capitalistcity-states which compete for citizens. Neoreactionaries refer to contemporary liberal society and institutions which they oppose as “the Cathedral”, associating them with thePuritan church, and their goals of egalitarianism and democracy as "the Synopsis". They say that the Cathedral influences public discourse to promote progressivism andpolitical correctness,[6][7] which they view as a threat toWestern civilization.[8][2] The movement also espousesscientific racism, a view which they say is suppressed by the Cathedral.[6][7][9][10]
Curtis Yarvin began constructing the basis of the ideology in the late 2000s,[11][12] withNick Land elaborating and coining the term "Dark Enlightenment". The movement has also had contributions from figures such as venture capitalistPeter Thiel. Despite criticism, the movement has gained traction with parts ofSilicon Valley as well as several political figures associated withUnited States PresidentDonald Trump, including political strategistSteve Bannon, Vice PresidentJD Vance, andMichael Anton.
The Dark Enlightenment has been described as part of thealt-right, as its theoretical branch,[13][14] and asneo-fascist.[13][15][16][17] It has been described as the most significantpolitical theory within the alt-right,[2] as "key to understanding" the alt-right political ideology,[2] and as providing a philosophical basis for considerable amounts of alt-right political activity.[18]University of Chichester professorBenjamin Noys described it as "an acceleration ofcapitalism to a fascist point". Land disputes the similarity between his ideas andfascism, saying that "Fascism is a massanti-capitalist movement", whereas he prefers that "capitalist corporate power should become the organizing force in society".[13] Historians Angela Dimitrakaki and Harry Weeks link the Dark Enlightenment to neofascism via Land's "capitalist eschatology" which they argue is grounded in the supremacist theories of fascism.[19] Neoreactionary ideas have also been described as "feudalist"[6] and "techno-feudalist".[20][4]
Neo-reactionaries are an informal community of bloggers and political theorists who have been active since the 2000s.Steve Sailer andHans-Hermann Hoppe are contemporary forerunners of the ideology, which is also heavily influenced by the political thought ofThomas Hobbes,Thomas Carlyle, andJulius Evola.[20][7][21]: 1 In 2007 and 2008, software engineer Curtis Yarvin, writing under thepen name Mencius Moldbug, articulated what would develop into Dark Enlightenment thinking. Yarvin's theories were elaborated and expanded by philosopher Nick Land, who first coined the term "Dark Enlightenment" in his essay of the same name.[7][22][23][21]
By mid-2017, NRx had moved to forums such as the Social Matter online forum, the Hestia Society, and Thermidor Magazine. In 2021, Yarvin appeared on Fox News'Tucker Carlson Today, where he discussed the United States'withdrawal from Afghanistan and his concept of the 'Cathedral', which he says is the current aggregation of political power and influential institutions that is controlling the country.[24] Emerson Brooking, an expert in online extremism, said that “Yarvin escaped the fringe blogosphere because he wrapped deeply anti-American, totalitarian ideas in the language of U.S. start-up culture.”[25]
Several prominentSilicon Valley investors andRepublican politicians have been associated with the philosophy.Steve Bannon has read and admired Yarvin's work, and there have been allegations that he has communicated with Yarvin which Yarvin has denied.[26][6][9] Bannon would later consider Yarvin an enemy, which Yarvin did not reciprocate.[27]Michael Anton, theState DepartmentDirector of Policy Planning duringTrump's second presidency, has also discussed Yarvin's ideas,[28] and Yarvin has claimed to have given staffing recommendations to him.[27] In January 2025, Yarvin attended a Trump inaugural gala in Washington;Politico reported he was "an informal guest of honor" due to his "outsize influence over theTrumpian right."[27]Marc Andreessen has quoted Yarvin and referred to him as a "friend",[4] also investing in his startup Tlon and urging people to read him.[5]
According to historian of conservatism Joshua Tait, "Moldbug's relationship with the investor-entrepreneurThiel is his most important connection."[29] Max Chafkin described Yarvin as the "house political philosopher" for Thiel's circle of influence (or "Thielverse"),[30][31] including people such asBlake Masters, and Yarvin has referred to Thiel as "fully enlightened".[30][5]Vanity Fair noted that both have been influential in theNew Right and theNational Conservatism Conference.[30] Thiel had also invested in Yarvin's Tlon.[5]
U.S. Vice PresidentJD Vance has cited Yarvin as an influence[32][33][34] and has connections to Thiel.[31][30] Prior to his election to theVice Presidency, JD Vance cited inhis 2022 Senate Campaign Yarvin's "strongman plan to 'retire all government employees,' which goes by the jaunty mnemonic 'RAGE.'"[35] In a 2021 interview, "Vance said Trump should 'fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, everycivil servant in the administrative state, and replace them with our people. And when the courts stop you, stand before the country and say,The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.’”[36] Yarvin has praised Vance, stating "in almost every way, JD is perfect", but also considered his relationship with Vance overstated by the media, as they've rarely communicated. He also praised Trump for breaking from Republican practices of trying to "play ball and help the system work" and instead "trying to move all of the levers of this machine that he can move", though also stating "what he’s doing is not at all what I would do with an opportunity like this. But I think that what I would do is probably not possible."[27]
It has been suggested that theDepartment of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, bears resemblance toRAGE, as advocated for by Yarvin.[36][4] Land, when asked by theFinancial Times if he approved of DOGE, said "the answer is definitely yes", having also endorsed Steve Bannon's goal of "deconstruction of the administrative state".[37] In a report byThe Washington Post, two DOGE advisors described Yarvin as an "intellectual beacon" for the department, with one saying, "It's an open secret that everyone in policymaking roles has read Yarvin."[25] The report said that Yarvin, initially approving of theTrump administration, had become critical of DOGE. He cited its handling of theNational Science Foundation andNational Institutes of Health, stating "Instead of fighting against these people because they’re an enemy class who votes for theDemocrats, you [should be] saying, 'Oooh, we have cookies for you.'"[25] However, Tait said that Yarvin bears some responsibility for DOGE, saying, "It would have been created, probably, regardless. But he spent a good chunk of time creating a justifying framework for it."[25] Political philosopher Danielle Allen said that DOGE is clearly based on Yarvin's work, and the outcome was the natural result of the shortcomings in Yarvin's views.[25]
CNN notes that Thiel, Andreessen, Vance and Anton don't deny that they are listening to Yarvin, but they have indicated that they do not accept all of Yarvin theories:
An advisor to Vance denied the vice president has a close relationship with Yarvin, saying the two have met 'like once.' Thiel, who did not respond to a request for comment, toldThe Atlantic in 2023 he didn't think Yarvin's ideas would 'work' but found him to be an 'interesting and powerful' historian. And earlier this year [2025], Andreessen, who also did not respond to a request for comment, posted onX that one can read 'Yarvin without becoming a monarchist.'[38]
Central to neoreactionarism's ideas is a belief infreedom's incompatibility withdemocracy,[8] with Land having stated "Democracy tends to fascism".[6] Yarvin and Land drew inspiration from libertarians such as Thiel.[6][39][8] Thiel had stated that, "I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible", although he opined that trying to radically alter the current U.S. government was unrealistic. He also suggested that Yarvin's methods would lead to Xi's China or Putin's Russia.[40]Yuk Hui notes that neoreactionaries consider the Enlightenment values of democracy and equality to be degenerative and limiting, respectively.[8] Tait considers Yarvin to have "a complex relationship" with Enlightenment values, as he adopts asecular andrationalist view of reality while rejecting its key political ideals of equality and democracy.[41] Sergio C. Fanjul contrasts the movement's far-right critique of the Enlightenment with theFrankfurt School's critique of the Enlightenment as aEurocentric prelude tocolonialism and war.[20]
Yarvin toldVanity Fair "The fundamental premise ofliberalism is that there is this inexorable march toward progress. I disagree with that premise."[30] A 2016 article inNew York magazine notes that "Neoreaction has a number of different strains, but perhaps the most important is a form of post-libertarian futurism that, realizing that libertarians aren't likely to win any elections, argues against democracy in favor ofauthoritarian forms of government."[18]
JournalistAndrew Sullivan writes that neoreaction's pessimistic appraisal of democracy dismisses many advances that have been made and that global manufacturing patterns also limit the economic independence that sovereign states can have from one another.[42]
Yarvin supportsauthoritarianism onright-libertarian grounds, saying that the division of political sovereignty expands the scope of the state, whereas strong governments with clear hierarchies remain minimal and narrowly focused.[43] Yarvin's "A Formalist Manifesto" advocates for a form of "neocameralism" in which small, authoritarian "gov-corps" coexist and compete with each other, an idea anticipated byHans-Hermann Hoppe.[44][6][7][37] Academic Jonathan Ratcliffe describes the model as "a network of hyper-capitalist city states ruled by authoritarian CEO monarchs."[45] Yarvin claims freedom under the system, known as the "Patchwork",[46][31] would be guaranteed by the ability to "vote with your feet", whereby residents could leave for another gov-corp if they felt it would provide a higher quality of life, thus forcing competition. Land reiterates this with the political idea "No Voice, Free Exit", taken fromAlbert Hirschman'sExit, Voice, and Loyalty model in which voice is democratic and exit is departure to another society:[6][47]
"If gov-corp doesn’t deliver acceptable value for its taxes (sovereign rent), [citizens] can notify its customer service function, and if necessary take their custom elsewhere. Gov-corp would concentrate upon running an efficient, attractive, vital, clean, and secure country, of a kind that is able to draw customers."[39]
Yarvin has advocated for a "dictator-president" or "nationalCEO".[48] He has described himself as aroyalist,monarchist, andJacobite;[6][45] and has praisedcameralism,Frederick the Great,[9][8][3] andThomas Carlyle.[20] He is also influenced byAustrian economics,[20][6][5] particularly Hoppe,[7][20][6]Ludwig von Mises,Murray Rothbard,[6] andFriedrich Hayek.[20] Ava Kofman credits Hoppe'sDemocracy: The God That Failed with pushing Yarvin away from standard libertarian thought, with authoritarianism scholar Julian Waller saying "it's not copy-and-pasted, but it is such a direct influence that it's kind of obscene".[5] Yarvin admires Chinese leaderDeng Xiaoping for his pragmatic and market-oriented authoritarianism, and the city-state ofSingapore as an example of a successful authoritarian regime. He sees the US as soft on crime, dominated by economic and democratic delusions.[43] He additionally citesDubai andHong Kong as providing a high quality of life without democracy, stating "as Dubai in particular shows, a government (like any corporation) can deliver excellent customer service without either owning or being owned by its customers."[46]
Andy Beckett stated that NRx supporters "believe in the replacement of modern nation-states, democracy and government bureaucracies by authoritarian city states, which on neoreaction blogs sound as much like idealised medieval kingdoms as they do modern enclaves such as Singapore."[49] Ana Teixeira Pinto describes the political ideology of the gov-corp model as a form of classical libertarianism, stating "they do not want to limit the power of the state, they want to privatise it."[50] According to criminal justice professorGeorge Michael, neoreaction seeks to perform a "hard reset" or "reboot" on democracy rather than gradual reform.[51] Neoreactionary ideas have also been referred to as "feudalist"[6] and "techno-feudalist".[20][4] Yarvin's proposals are not fully detailed beyond philosophy and general principles,[45] and the economic ability to leave and the willingness of other locations to accept immigrants are not generally considered.[2] Andrew Jones criticized his arguments as "vaguely defined and often factually incorrect".[2]
Yarvin describes his proposals as a modern version ofmonarchy[45] and advocates for an American monarch dissolving elite academic institutions and media outlets within the first few months of their reign,[52] stating "if Americans want to change their government, they're going to have to get over their dictator phobia."[31]Time notes that Yarvin's proposal for a "Butterfly Revolution" envisions an internalcoup to replace democracy with aprivatized executive authority, which includes his RAGE proposal to "retire all government employees" in favor of loyalists.[4] While conceding that it may not be possible, he stated that, were he in Trump's position, he would take executive control of government institutions such as theFederal Reserve, keeping those "that have a very clear role and are not politicized in any way" while disposing of others such as theState Department. He advocates constitutionally challenging laws such asimpoundment control,birthright citizenship, andMarbury v. Madison, potentially defying the courts if it were necessary and "unifying". However, he also stated "if you’re doing that in a situation where the vibe is like, 'This is going to be the first shot in the civil war between red America and blue America' [...] I think it’s bad", considering Trump and America "unready for that level of change".[27]
He suggested in a January 2025New York Times interview that there was historical precedent to support his reasoning, asserting that in his first inaugural address,Franklin Delano Roosevelt "essentially says, Hey,Congress, give me absolute power, or I'll take it anyway. So did FDR actually take that level of power? Yeah, he did." The interviewer,David Marchese, remarked that "Yarvin relies on what those sympathetic to his views might see as a helpful serving of historical references — and what others see as a highly distorting mix of gross oversimplification, cherry-picking and personal interpretation presented as fact."[53] Scholars have described Yarvin's arguments as misrepresenting the historical record, and said that the historicalautocracies he praises were considered deeply oppressive by their subjects.[25]
Neoreactionaries refer to contemporary liberal society and institutions which they oppose as the 'Cathedral', considering them the descendant of thePuritan church, and their goals of egalitarianism and democracy as "the Synopsis". They say that the Cathedral influences public discourse to promoteprogressivism andpolitical correctness.[6][7] According to neoreactionaries, the Cathedral's adoption ofliberal humanism is the primary reason for an allegeddecline of Western civilization.[8][2] A neoreactionary online dictionary defines the Cathedral as "the self-organizing consensus of Progressives and Progressive ideology represented by theuniversities, themedia, and thecivil service", with an agenda that includes "women’s suffrage,prohibition,abolition,federal income tax, democratic election of senators,labor laws,desegregation, popularization ofdrugs, destruction of traditional sexual norms,ethnic studies courses in colleges,decolonization, andgay marriage."[54][6] Yarvin views it as an oligarchy of educated elites competing for status[30] and has accusedIvy League schools,The New York Times, andHollywood of being members.[9][10]
Land and others argue that enforcement of political correctness by these institutions means that they are a religious entity, hence the term 'Cathedral'.[55] Yarvin, described byEl País as a former progressive,[20] describes these institutions as a "twentieth-century version of the established church",[54] with theeducational system as a method for indoctrinating people into the Cathedral, enforcing compliance with progressive ideology and preventing them from thinking for themselves.[54] Yarvin defines a church as "an organization or movement which tells people how to think", and includesschools as churches.[2]
The concept of the Cathedral has been described as "fundamental to thealt-right's understanding of the humanities".[2] Academic Andrew Woods describes the Cathedral as one of one of two central ideas that enable the alt-right to dismiss criticism, the other beingcultural Marxism.[54] He writes that both ideas function to pre-emptively neutralize attempts at refutation, and that they are especially used to delegitimizecritical theory. The Cathedral allegedly "seeks to delude the American public" while amassing power and influence, and critical theory is portrayed as the ideological justification for the pursuit of power. Progressive thought is seen as a disguise for power-seeking, and Woods says that Yarvin takes advantage of the inability to prove the unconscious desires of others to argue that "everyone's primary motivation in life is their craving for greater power."[54]El País compared the concept toQAnon and its claims of adeep state.[20]
Neoreactionaries endorsescientific racism, apseudoscientific view which they refer to as "human biodiversity". Land coined the term "hyperracism" to refer to his views on race; he believes thatsocioeconomic status is "a strong proxy forIQ" rather than race specifically (though he acknowledges a correlation between race and socioeconomic status), and thatmeritocracy, particularlyspace colonization, will "function as a highly-selective genetic filter" that propagates mostly (but not strictly) Whites and Asians.[6][7] Roger Burrows, writing forThe Sociological Review, stated "In Land’s schema, the consumers ‘exiting’ from competing gov-corps quickly form themselves into, often racially based, microstates. Capitalistdeterritorialization combines with ongoing genetic separation between global elites and the rest of the population resulting in complex new forms of ‘Human Bio-diversity’. He described Land's views aseugenicist and compared them to those ofThe Bell Curve.[47]
According to Land, the concepts ofhate speech andhate crimes are simply methods to suppress ideas that contradict the Cathedral’s dogma. He says that statements described as "hate speech" are not related to hatred but are simply a type of defiance of the Cathedral's religious orthodoxy. The suppression is carried out by the "Media-Academic Complex" because the ideas are seen as reflecting a "heretical intention".[54]
Yarvin has stated "Although I am not awhite nationalist, I am not exactly allergic to the stuff", believing it to simply be an ineffective tool for "the very real problems about which it complains."[56] Yarvin has endorsed arguments for black racial inferiority and says they are being suppressed by the Cathedral.[9][10] He has said that some races are more suited toslavery than others[57] and has been described as a modern-day supporter of slavery, a description he disputes.[58][57]
One of Land's goals with neoreactionarism is to driveaccelerationism, viewingcapitalism and technology as a way to destabilize existing systems and create radical change. Roger Burrows stated of Land's interpretation of Yarvin, "The Dark Enlightenment itself might be best thought of as the application of Land’s accelerationist framework to Moldbug’s neocameralism."[47] Land views democratic and egalitarian policies as only slowing down acceleration and atechnocapitalsingularity, stating "Beside thespeed machine, or industrial capitalism, there is an ever more perfectly weighted decelerator [...] comically, the fabrication of this braking mechanism is proclaimed asprogress. It is the Great Work of the Left."[10][6] Vincent Le states "If Land is attracted to Moldbug’s political system, it is because a neocameralist state would be free to pursue long-term technological innovation without the democratic politician’s need to appease short-sighted public opinion to be re-elected every few years."[59]Vox attributed such views to Land living inChina's "techno-authoritarian political system" and his admiration forDeng Xiaoping andSingapore'sLee Kuan Yew.[10] Land has referred to Lee as an "autocratic enabler of freedom", and Yarvin has also praised Lee.[60]Yuk Hui considerssinofuturism to be a model for the movement's pursuit of technological progress which results from a perceived decline of the West. According to Hui, political fatigue leads people such as Land to look towards Asian cities such asShanghai,Hong Kong, and Singapore as examples of "depoliticized techno-commercial utopia". China is viewed as smoothly importing Western science and technology while Western innovation is constantly limited by the progressivism of the Cathedral. Hui considers this to be "simply a detached observation of these places that projects onto them a common will to sacrifice politics for productivity".[8] Land has advocated for accelerationists to support the neoreactionary movement, though many have distanced themselves from him in response to his views on race.[49]
In the inaugural article published onUnqualified Reservations in 2007, entitled "A Formalist Manifesto", Yarvin used the term "formalism" for his ideas, advocating for the formal recognition of the realities of existing power by aligningproperty rights with current political power as a solution to violence.[61][62] Courtney Hodrick, writing forTelos, stated "in his view,all politics are individual property relationships and thesocial contract is an agreement between citizen-consumers and governor-owners. Your consent to an agreement such as 'I won’t kill anyone on the street,' he explains, is 'just your agreement with whoever owns the street.' This agreement means that the owner of the street may use violence to enforce this agreement, just as individuals may use violence to defend their own property. His concern [...] is deciding who has the monopoly on the legitimate use of violence. But rather than concern himself with justifying legitimacy politically ormetaphysically, Moldbug calls for a naturalization of existing property relations."[46] Yarvin describes the U.S. as "an big [sic] old company that holds a huge pile of assets, has no clear idea of what it’s trying to do with them, and is thrashing around like a ten-gallon shark in a five-gallon bucket",[45] advocating formalism as a solution:
"To a formalist, the way to fix the US is to dispense with the ancient mystical horseradish, the corporate prayers and war chants, figure out who owns this monstrosity, and let them decide what in the heck they are going to do with it. I don't think it's too crazy to say that all options—including restructuring and liquidation—should be on the table."[63]
He rejects democracy as "ineffective and destructive" and attributes the successes of the post-WWII democratic system to its actually being "a mediocre implementation of formalism". He describes democratic politics as "a sort of symbolic violence, like deciding who wins the battle by how many troops they brought".[63] Rejectingpacifism for what he perceives as a tendency to advocate for the rectification of injustices instead of seeking an end toarmed conflict, Yarvin promotes the adoption of classical approaches tointernational law and the idea of "formalising the military status quo"[64] as the most direct path to peace. He identifies the form of pacifism which prioritises "righteousness" instead of peace with theCalvinist doctrine ofprovidence, and "ultracalvinism" as the ideological/theological basis for contemporaryAmerican interventionism.[65][66]
Prominent figures in the neoreactionary movement have connections toseasteading, the creation of sovereign city-states ininternational waters, which has been characterized as a way to execute the movement's ideas. Yarvin has connections toPatri Friedman, founder ofThe Seasteading Institute and grandson ofMilton Friedman, and Thiel was once its main investor.[6][20][47] Thiel has also advocated the use ofcyberspace,outer space, and theoceans to outstrip traditional politics via capitalism in order to realize libertarianism.[8] Land has quoted Friedman in stating that "free exit is so important that…it [is] the only Universal Human Right".[47]
Balaji Srinivasan has proposedthe Network State, a plan for technology executives and investors to remove themselves from democracy and create their own sovereign states.[67] Journalists have noted similarities of the Network State to Yarvin's ideas,[68][30] describing Srinivasan as a leader of the neoreactionary movement[67] and a friend of Yarvin.[5] Srinivasan had also messaged Yarvin suggesting potentially using the Dark Enlightenment audience todox reporters.[69][5] Comparisons have also been made to Galt's Gulch fromAtlas Shrugged[68][70] and Donald Trump's proposed "Freedom Cities".[71][72] Supporters includeMarc Andreessen,[67][70][73][74][68]Garry Tan,[67][73]Peter Thiel,[70][73][74][75]Michael Moritz,[73]Patrick Collison,[73]Patri Friedman,[74][75]Roger Ver,[74]Naval Ravikant,[74][68]Joe Lonsdale,[75]Bryan Johnson,[75] theWinklevoss twins,[74][75]Sam Bankman-Fried,[74]Sam Altman,[70][76]Shervin Pishevar,[68]Brian Armstrong,[68] andVitalik Buterin.[68] Proposed cities alleged to be examples of the Network State includeCalifornia Forever,[73]Praxis,[73][74]Telosa,[73]Neom,[75]Liberland,[70] and Elon Musk's Starbase City.[77] Established cities alleged to be part of the Network state includePróspera inHonduras[74] andItana inNigeria.[74] Other locations of interest includeGreenland,[78]French Polynesia,[75]Palau,[75][68]South Asia,[75]Ghana,[79] theMarshall Islands,[79]Panama,[79]the Bahamas,[68]Montenegro,[68]Costa Rica,[68] andRhode Island.[80]
Cryptocurrency andWeb3 are central components of the project.[75] Its legal framework also involvesspecial economic zones,[75] and foreign investors have usedInvestor–state dispute settlement (ISDS) in the case of Próspera.[81] The movement has been compared toTrumpism, with common ideologies including a belief inStrauss–Howe generational theory and hostility toleft-wing politics, thenews media and theadministrative state.[75]
Critics have described these projects as a form ofneocolonialism,[75][70][82]corporatemonarchy[70] orwhite saviorism.[82]
The Highland Rim Project, located inTennessee andKentucky, is aChristian nationalist community influenced by the Network State and was proposed by New Founding, a Christian venture capital firm that received funding from Andreessen and is connected to the Network State venture capital firmPronomos Capital.[83][84]The Guardian has noted the community's ties to far-right groups andwhite nationalism.[85]
Mother Jones citesClearview AI and its founder Hoan Ton-That (who were in connection with Thiel and Yarvin) as an example of the Dark Enlightenment or neoreactionary thinking's influence on the development of surveillance technology.[86] A 2025 anonymous letter of a group of self-described former followers of the neoreactionary movement warned that the movement advocated for "techno-monarchism" in which its ruler would use "data systems, artificial intelligence, and advanced algorithms to manage the state, monitor citizens, and implement policies." It further warned thatElon Musk, in the context of his actions at the Department of Government Efficiency, was working "for his own power and the broader neo-reactionary agenda."[87]
Yarvin has outlined a vision for San Francisco where public safety would be enforced by constant monitoring of residents and visitors viaRFID,genotyping, iris scanning,security cameras, and transportation which would track its location and passengers, reporting all of it to the authorities.The New Republic described the proposed surveillance system as "Orwellian".[31]
The Dark Enlightenment has been described by journalists and commentators as part of thealt-right, specifically as its theoretical branch.[13][14] Journalist and punditJames Kirchick states that "although neo-reactionary thinkers disdain the masses and claim to despisepopulism and people more generally, what ties them to the rest of the alt-right is their unapologeticallyracist element, their sharedmisanthropy and their resentment of mismanagement by the ruling elites".[88]
Scholar Andrew Jones wrote in 2019 that the Dark Enlightenment is the most significantpolitical theory within the alt-right, and that it is "key to understanding" the alt-right political ideology.[2] "The use ofaffect theory,postmodern critiques ofmodernity, and a fixation on critiquingregimes of truth", Jones remarked, "are fundamental to NeoReaction (NRx) and what separates it from otherFar-Right theory".[2] Moreover, Jones argues that Dark Enlightenment's fixation on aesthetics, history, and philosophy, as opposed to the traditional empirical approach, distinguishes it from related far-right ideologies.[2]
Historian Joe Mulhall, writing forThe Guardian, described Land as "propagating very far-right ideas."[89] Despite neoreaction's limited online audience, Mulhall considers the ideology to have "acted as both a tributary into the alt-right and as a key constituent part [of the alt-right]."[89] Journalist Park MacDougald described neoreactionarism as providing a philosophical basis for considerable amounts of alt-right political activity.[18][90]
The term "accelerationism", originally referring to Land's technocapitalist ideas, has been re-interpreted by some into the use ofracial conflict to causesocietal collapse and the building ofwhite ethnostates, which has been linked to severalwhite nationalist terrorist attacks such as the2019 Christchurch mosque massacres.Vox described Land's shift towards neoreactionarism, along with neoreactionarism crossing paths with the alt-right as another fringe right wing internet movement, as the likely connection point between far-right racial accelerationism and the otherwise unrelated technocapitalist term. They cited a 2018Southern Poverty Law Center investigation which found users on theneo-Nazi blogThe Right Stuff who cited neoreactionarism as an influence.[10] Land himself has called the neoreactionary movement "a prophetic warning about the rise of the Alt-Right".[6]
Journalists and academics have described the Dark Enlightenment asneo-fascist.[13][15][16][17]University of Chichester professorBenjamin Noys described it as "an acceleration ofcapitalism to a fascist point". Land disputes the similarity between his ideas andfascism, saying that "Fascism is a massanti-capitalist movement", whereas he prefers that "capitalist corporate power should become the organizing force in society".[13] Historians Angela Dimitrakaki and Harry Weeks tie the Dark Enlightenment to neofascism via Land's "capitalist eschatology" which they describe as supported by the supremacist theories of fascism. Dimitrakaki and Weeks say that Land'sDark Enlightenment was "infusing theoretical jargon into Yarvin/Moldbug's blog 'Unqualified Reservations'".[19]
InThe Sociological Review, Roger Burrows examined neoreaction's core tenets and described the ideology as "hyper-neoliberal,technologically deterministic, anti-democratic, anti-egalitarian,pro-eugenicist, racist and, likely, fascist", and describes the entire accelerationist framework as a faulty attempt at "mainstreaming ...misogynist, racist and fascist discourses".[47] He criticizes neoreaction's racial principles and its brazen "disavowal of anydiscourses" advocating for socio-economic equality and, accordingly, considers it a "eugenic philosophy" in favor of what Nick Land deems "hyper-racism".[47] Graham B. Slater wrote that neoreaction "aim[s] to solve the problems purportedly created by democracy through what ultimately amount to neo-fascist solutions."[17]
Land himself became interested in theAtomwaffen-affiliatedtheistic Satanist organizationOrder of Nine Angles (ONA) which adheres to the ideology of Neo-Nazi terrorist accelerationism, describing the ONA's works as "highly-recommended" in a blog post.[91][92]
In the contemporary art world, art historian Sven Lütticken says that the popularity of Land's concepts has made certain art centers inNew York andLondon hospitable to trendy fascism.[93]
American thinkers affiliated with the so-called 'Dark Enlightenment' or 'neo-reactionary movement' are more straightforward in arguing against egalitarianism and democracy. Curtis Yarvin, one such thinker, has called for an American monarchy that would be run by a dictator-president, a figure sometimes referred to more politely as a 'national CEO'.
Shut down elite media and academic institutions: Now, recall that, according to Yarvin's theories, true power is held by the 'Cathedral', so they have to go, too. The new monarch/dictator should order them dissolved. 'You can't continue to have a Harvard or a New York Times past the start of April,' he told Anton. After that, he says, people should be allowed to form new associations and institutions if they want, but the existing Cathedral power bases must be torn down.
Yarvin's online writings, many under his pseudonym Mencius Moldbug, convey blatantly racist views. He expresses the belief that white people are genetically endowed with higher IQs than black people. He has suggested race may determine whether individuals are better suited for slavery, and his writing has been interpreted as supportive of the institution of slavery. ... Yarvin disputes that he agrees with the institution of slavery, but many interpret his writings as screeds supportive of bondage of black people. He writes in an email toInc., 'I don't know if we can say *biologically* that part of the genius of the African-American people is the talent they showed in enduring slavery. But this is certainly true in a cultural and literary sense. In any case, it is easiest to admire a talent when one lacks it, as I do.' ... In Yarvin's Medium blog post, he wrote that while he disagrees with the concept that 'all races are equally smart,' he is not racist because he rejects what he refers to as 'IQism.'
A programming conference in Boulder this May has become surrounded by controversy after organizers decided to let Curtis Yarvin — a programmer who has blogged under the pseudonym Mencius Moldbug about his views that white people are genetically smarter than black people — remain a speaker at the event. ... But Yarvin's views, which some have alleged are racist and endorse the institution of slavery, already have led to him being kicked out of a conference in 2015, and there has been pressure on LambdaConf to do the same. ... 'I am not an "outspoken advocate for slavery," a racist, a sexist or a fascist,' he wrote. 'I don't equate anatomical traits (whether sprinting speed or problem-solving efficiency) with moral superiority. ... '
