“Ars longa, vita brevis”

Archive for the tag “social relations”

The Value of Everything: Dissecting Charlottesville and “Alt” Politics

VoE 130

The absurd spectacle of late capitalism.

I join my frequent podcast partner Charles Owen, once again, to discuss the recent clash in Charlottesville, Virginia between various segments of the so-called alt-right and antifa on The Value of Everything. We also touch on Enlightenment values, economic forecasting, and council communist theory.

Direct download
YouTube stream

Council Communism vs. Anarcho-Capitalism Debate: Property and Exploitation


Is private property defensible? Can stateless capitalism be exploitative?

The first part of my debate with Charles Owen was recently released on The Value of Everything podcast, and has since been edited by my comrades at the Friedrich Engels Institute for Scientific Socialist Research. Before beginning this episode, however, I recommend listening to our preliminary discussion, wherein Charles and I briefly outline our respective political philosophies.

In this part of the series, we debate the legitimacy of private property and discuss whether or not wage labor is an exploitative practice. The second part of our series will be recorded in the coming weeks and released sometime thereafter.

If this exchange should elicit any questions you’d like to put forward, please feel free to comment below and I’ll do my utmost to provide a swift reply.

Click here to download or stream the recording via SoundCloud.

Extinguishing Popular Support for Political Racialism via Immanent Critique


Manufacturing race is feasible in the 21st century.

Those who follow my work realize I’m a critic of identity politics, not because I’m of the opinion self-identifications (be they racial, ethnic, sexual, religious, or cultural) are somehow illegitimate, but rather due to the fact they impede the struggle for proletarian emancipation.[1] One form of identity politics, however, makes little sense even on its own terms and can thus be countered by those presented with propaganda featuring it with relative ease.

If cleverly communicated, ethnonationalism—a linchpin of the increasingly trendy “alt-right” movement—is still capable of garnering public sympathy due to the fact homo sapiens regularly employ phenotypes as a means by which to form alliances. As inherently neutral mediums, identifications on an ethnic or racial basis can be either pernicious or benign, contingent upon how they’re instrumentalized. Among those of Caucasian descent who are involved in racial politics, in particular, paranoia regarding a precipitous decline in European and North American birthrates has, in recent decades, led to utter hysteria about a “white genocide” claimed to be transpiring. It is precisely this notion I wish to briefly challenge in this entry.

Now, setting aside the obvious hyperbole of framing sub-replacement fertility as a “genocide,” and the contentious matter of whether or not the statistical figures cited by exponents of this view are accurate, there is a rather elementary solution to the predicament these individuals allege: artificial insemination.

One could conceivably stipulate all of the dubious claims white nationalists regularly advance, e.g., that northwestern European genes alone are the source of epochal ingenuity and, indeed, civilization itself, and nevertheless experience no great impetus to join their class collaborationist crusade. Why? Because contained within the scrotal sac of nearly every Caucasian male throughout the course of his life are literally billions of potentially viable offspring. Hence, even absent fertile European females to reproduce with, the Caucasian race could, in principle, be scientifically engineered back into existence on a large scale within approximately four generations of repeated reproduction with any genotypically disparate human population. Consequently, should the hereditarians’ disputable theories on intelligence and behavior one day be empirically vindicated, illiberal governmental measures and (currently nonexistent) methods of gene therapy will remain unnecessary for humanity to continue to progress; that’s how far-reaching the implications behind this technology are. It’s a scandal sensationalizing, fear-mongering philistines like David Duke and Jared Taylor maintain an audience.

Many of the Marxists of yesteryear who were proponents of positive eugenics referred to this practice as ‘eutelegenesis.’ In short, these theoreticians recommended that socialist societies establish sperm banks consisting of samples from eminent men, who females could then choose to be artificially inseminated by, if they so desired, therewith contributing to a gradual increase in the population’s mean intelligence.[2] To be clear, I do not subscribe to the hereditarian hypotheses communists of this orientation espoused, but that’s besides the point—recall that this is an immanent critique.

At any rate, the next time you’re admonished by a white nationalist, alt-rightist, or neoreactionary (they’re ubiquitous online, I assure you) as being a “race traitor” for either not expressing grave concern with the “white genocide” they bemoan, or for failing to accept the methodologically flawed IQ studies and police reports they routinely cite, instruct the insecure little man berating you to pay a visit to his local sperm bank and submit a donation in your name.

[1] This is the theme of a forthcoming paper I’m writing on intersectionality.
[2] The history and logic of this concept is explored in another of my forthcoming papers.

The Value of Everything: The Logic of Cybernetic Anarcho-Capitalism


A modern libertarian vision.

Charles Owen and I switch roles in episode 103 of The Value of Everything, and I conduct an interview with him examining his political philosophy. Charles is a proponent of a capitalistic stateless society, socially organized along voluntaryist ethics (chiefly the non-aggression principle) and economically grounded in a decentralized blockchain network. Those critical of propertarianism can still learn much from his arguments, as the mode of production he advocates differs considerably from conventional models of anarcho-capitalism.

In a forthcoming episode, Charles and I will debate our respective political philosophies, but we hope to continue our dialogue on other topics into the future.

Click here to download episode #103.

The Value of Everything: Understanding Council Communism

VOE 102

One man’s conception of the movement for, and realization of, proletarian emancipation.

In part 2 of our ongoing dialogue, Charles Owen provides me with an opportunity to elaborate to listeners of The Value of Everything on how I envisage council communism coming into existence and functioning via his aplication of the ever illuminating Socratic method. The preponderance of this lengthy interview (over 3 hours!) therefore centers on revolutionary theory and political economy, but Charles and I also spend a considerable amount of time discussing the recent Dallas shootings, religion, the national question, criminal justice, the philosophy of education, transhumanism, the sociology of the family, and even the Zeitgeist movement. In other words, there’s something for everyone in this episode.

(Pardon the occasional delays on my side of the recording, as my internet connection was rather sporadic during part of the interview.)

Click here to play episode #102.

Post Navigation