This is Yarvin writing about the revolution he himself brought into existence:
The best populist ideas seldom prevail—nor do the best populist candidates. Populism does not work. Its accuracy
rate is not zero, but nor is it quite at nuclear-safety levels. And it is not strong enough. It can win symbolic victories, but not take and hold power. It quickly tires out, gets hungry, goes home and grills. Its main effect is just to scare progressivism
and keep it in fighting shape, while arguably sometimes slowing it down. Or at least, damming it up to burst forth later.
Another fascinating thought in the book is how, without any authoritarian regime or dictatorship, we have an extraordinary uniformity of opinion across all Western and Western wannabe societies. Moreover, when we collectively change our minds, we do it extremely fast and in absolute unison. Overnight, we all turn the page and tacitly agree that the page on which we all were not an hour ago was shameful and terrible.
One example (mine, not Yarvin’s) is gay marriage. One day, Obama couldn’t get elected without condemning the idea. Then, in a dramatic reversal, he couldn’t get elected without passionately supporting it.
Yarvin asks, who presses the button that triggers this global turning of the page? Are we certain they know what they were doing? Are we completely confident that they should have that power?

Leave a comment