A Guide, Resource, and Repository of Could-have-been Ideologies for your Alternate History

Respectfully disagree, as someone on the left and aware of twitter discourse, how much influence does Maupin(whom I kinda alluded to on the post) even have? The gist I get from tankie-land on twitter and elsewhere is that Maupin and Hinkle and Haz are totally hated by other tankies for their excess chauvinism, reactionary politics, and positive view of western/American civilization. The only similarity is the “support or downplay the crimes of all against America regardless of how fucked up they are”.
Twitter Tankies hate them, but that's about it. Utlimately they have the largest Tankie communities (more of a shared community) in the west so are very reflective of that, even though there are Tankies who do hate them.
You may have a point with Eastern Europe tankies like KKE and especially the KPRF(latter I suspect is where Maupin got his ideas from apart from Dugin), but western tankies, maybe I did overexaggerate on that point, are at least socially moderate by 2000s and 2010s standards and are open to social progressivism. And I think the more reactionary western tankie parties are fringier than the progressive ones(ie: in UK the socially moderate CPB is more bigger than the reactionary CPGB-ML)
The CPB has major social progressive issues too.https://mobile.twitter.com/fiadhaich_/status/1325856494894583809

If anything, I've found way more fellow LGBT+ people finding Tankie groups totally hostile in general, not just here in the UK.
 
Twitter Tankies hate them, but that's about it. Utlimately they have the largest Tankie communities (more of a shared community) in the west so are very reflective of that, even though there are Tankies who do hate them.

The CPB has major social progressive issues too.https://mobile.twitter.com/fiadhaich_/status/1325856494894583809

If anything, I've found way more fellow LGBT+ people finding Tankie groups totally hostile in general, not just here in the UK.
Oh shit, yeah sorry. If it continues I'll post there
I posted a more comprehensive response there.
 
Better to discuss for chat but bascically they’re Nazbols and IRL ordosocialists
How popular is Infrared anyway? They mostly come off like raging debate-bro assholes with a weird fetish for "patriotism" and "tradition" that Marx would probably be less than approving of ("Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things").
 
How popular is Infrared anyway? They mostly come off like raging debate-bro assholes with a weird fetish for "patriotism" and "tradition" that Marx would probably be less than approving of ("Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things").
They’re purely a terminally online phenomenon and has overall less followers than the major figures connected to the more progressive “new tankie” tendency like Hakim, Luna, and Second Thought(only Jackson Hinkle comes close to matching their follower count on twitter)
 
They’re purely a terminally online phenomenon and has overall less followers than the major figures connected to the more progressive “new tankie” tendency like Hakim, Luna, and Second Thought(only Jackson Hinkle comes close to matching their follower count on twitter)
TBH I feel like describing literally any of these people as "major figures" is a very big stretch.
 
How popular is Infrared anyway? They mostly come off like raging debate-bro assholes with a weird fetish for "patriotism" and "tradition" that Marx would probably be less than approving of ("Communists everywhere support every revolutionary movement against the existing social and political order of things").
forgetting the turanism:
(loud and NSFW audio warning)
 
TBH I feel like describing literally any of these people as "major figures" is a very big stretch.
Major figures specifically in the online sphere and maybe the various tankie parties or more niche activist circles. They’re a major figure in the sense some big video game streamer is—big on the internet but irrelevent in real life
 
A while back this thread had several posts on Nick Land and different schools of accelerationism written by @Crying. I would like to now add onto it with this succinct and yet hilarious one sentence explanation of Land's philosophy.
1655878280566.png
 
Last edited:
This post from about an in-universe ideology from a Sufficient Velocity quest is informative, since it - and the entire setting - is based on the extrapolation of real-life trends.
Humanism is liberal because it draws from the same well of ideals as John Locke, an Enlightenment-era thinker who was foundational to liberalism, and in fact, it actually hews closer today to those ideals than liberalism does. Humanism is idealist not because it promises that things could be better maybe if we just work hard enough, but because it forms its ideas without regard to the material conditions and then imposes those ideas on physical reality, rather than extracting principles observed from the material world. This stands in contrast to historical materialism & physicalism, which assert that material conditions shape our minds rather than the other way around.

If you're wondering how it took on the fascistic connotations it does in Tyrants, well, the fascism was in the House liberalism all along. Humanism has a fundamentally anthropocentric, universalizing character to it, defining rights as a thing that is fundamental strictly to humans. Since at least the Enlightenment, if not earlier, "human" meant the straight, white, cis, landowning male, and universalized outward from that narrow definition. This generalization has always been conditional on approved behavior, and is swiftly retracted when you become inconvenient. It's rarely ever spelled out so plainly, but it's not enough that you must act white, act straight-passing, go stealth to avoid being dehumanized, you must also dehumanize the brown, queer, the non-binary yourself to reinforce your position in the hierarchy and show that you're truly integrated into the humanist kyriarchy. But that's today's humanist liberal order. What about the future?

Tyrants asks the question, "What if people took the prescriptions Francis Fukuyama laid out in Our Posthuman Future and got militant about it?" Fukuyama asserts that anything and everything not fully human, whether that be posthumans, AGI, uplifts, or cyborgs, can and should be treated as subhuman, enslaved, tortured, exploited, and abused as necessary to provide humans with better living. Where Fukuyama prescribes this as a solution to preserve the neoliberal order and the end of history, (post-Meltdown) Nick Land observes that what he calls hyper-racism will happen anyways as a consequence of the accelerating feedback mechanisms in society reacting to augmentation and furthering the siloing between humans and the variously augmented. The end result of this siloing and increasing militancy is fascism, crushing the "degenerate" and the subhuman augment out of the fear of their slow loss of power and the projection that the Enemy will commit the same oppressions, the same horrors on the Humanists as soon as the Other gains power.

The trends that will create this fascistic Humanism are already visible in today's strains of Humanism.

The animal liberation movement and the voluntary human extinction movements both start from humanist morals, extending the definition of "human" to animals, which necessitates coming up with tests of "humanness" to assert that these particular animals and not others are worthy of receiving extended human rights, typically taking some measure of sentience and sapience. But there can be no measure of sentience and sapience that includes all humans and excludes livestock, or even successfully excludes all flora. If humans cannot survive fully extending the umbrella of human rights to animals, the voluntary human extinction movement asserts that thus humans are the problem and must die for nature to live.

Transhumanism is humanism, simplified. It extends human rights to the transhuman, but the moment you look into the discourse around transhumanism, it is rife with arguments over who and what qualifies as properly transhuman versus the inhuman. If we do not exclude the inhuman, transhumanists say, they in their alien mindsets will visit upon us such horrors that have never been seen by white man, only perpetrated by him. Yudkowsky's own assertion in the linked article, that removing exceptions and limitations can only be a good thing, eventually led him down the rabbit hole of trying to formalize human morality and founding a cult of rationality. Without exceptions and limitations, he had no means of checking whether his moral assertions actually made any sense, because he rejected intuition right alongside them.

We can also see the flipside of these in TERFs and the GOP today. Where transhumanists and animal liberationists seek to extend the umbrella of human rights, they seek its retraction, dehumanizing trans*, queer, and brown people, and as with all fascists, Jewish people as well. The European groups also actively dehumanize Roma, but that's never particularly been particularly prominent in the American ones. If the umbrella of human rights is retracted, they can secure their place in the racial hierarchy at the low, low cost of the lives of the millions of people they've already made into monsters in their minds.

Centering (the cis, white, heterosexual, landowning conception of) the human has always been the fatal flaw of humanism. It asserts the human as good, and all others can only exist in relation to the "human," either by conditional acceptance or by contrast as monsters. Yet throughout history it's always been the human who is responsible for the great depravities, dehumanizing the other as a means of making it easier to steal from them, kill them, and grind them under your boot. Much as in Mary Shelly's Frankenstein, it's not the Creature who is the monster, but Victor Frankenstein himself. The monsters are innocent, and humanity, proclaiming its innocence, the monster.

So why should I apologize for being a monster? Society has never apologized for making me into one.
Also very relevant to stuff I discussed in my Accelerationism entries.
 
Last edited:
What's that part of SV, and what's the thread like?
The one I told you about before, where a quest thread writer got harassed and accused of horrible things so much that they quit writing quests. The author of the linked thread was one of the main instigators of this.
 
Last edited:
More than informative I find it very WTF but that's just my assessment. It is confusing to try to distinguish which part is the real ideology and which part is the derivations extrapolated by the author.

Especially considering that he quotes Yudkovsky as if he were a serious author...

(I had to leave his work on The Methods of Rationality precisely because of how unbelievable I found his portrayal of "rationalism" as some kind of hyper-militant religious sect based on in being a conceited pedant who brays nonsense that nobody understands while calling it "science")
 
Last edited:
The one I told you about before, where a quest thread writer got harassed and accused of horrible things so much that they quit writing quests. The author of the linked thread was one of the main instigators of this.
Are we talking about the Victoria Falls QM who got harrassed and slandered?
 
Top