http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactionary
Excerpt needs additional citations:
21st century
|
This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2014) |
A 2013 essay published on the website TechCrunch describes the Neo-reactionary “community of bloggers” as a term applied to, and sometimes a self-description of, an informal group of online political theorists who have been active since the 2000s. The most influential is Curtis Yarvin, a computer industry worker who blogs under the pseudonym Mencius Moldbug. It traces the origin of the term “neo-reactionary” to “libertarian blogger” Arnold Kling, who first used it to describe Moldbug in 2010. A number of other neoreactionaries have technology backgrounds,[9] and a distinguishing feature of neoreaction as opposed to the traditional reactionary thought is an interest in combining technological progress with a return to earlier forms of social organization. The term Dark Enlightenment, coined by Nick Land,[10] has also been used to describe such adherents.[11][12][13][14][15]
Neoreactionaries typically accept at least some of the following principles:
- Modern republics and liberal democracies are not truly better than older monarchical and aristocratic systems. They are believed to be so because a loose coalition of influences propagates the idea of their superiority. The coalition of influences consists chiefly of academia, the civil service, and the liberal press. Moldbug calls it “The Cathedral”.
- The ideology of The Cathedral is Progressivism, which rejects Christ, only taking its ideas (for instance, the universal brotherhood and essential equality of man) from Christianity, shearing them of obvious religious content on the way.
- Egalitarianism is a false idea; people vary in their abilities, and those who are the best, in some sense, should be running things.
- Elected politicians have a variety of interests and motivations, according to which section of the populace is their electoral base, whereas an autocratic leader would be more likely to act towards the security and wealth of the nation as a whole.
Excerpt from Wikipedia link above.

