An Open Letter Chapter 2

An Open Letter Chapter 2

Chapter 2: More Historical Anomalies

April 24, 2008
Chapter 2: More Historical Anomalies | An Open Letter to Open-Minded Progressives | Unqualified Reservations by Mencius Moldbug
An Open Letter to Open Minded Progressives - Chapter 2 - More Historical Anomalies - YouTube

Three Questions to Answer:

All 3 anomalies/questions have 3 things in common:

  •  Progressives have uncompelling explanations for all of them.
  •  These weak explanations are widely shared by progressives & conservatives
  •  There is a single anti-progressive hypothesis, which is wrong or incomplete, but can at least be explained well - the "international community" is a fundamentally predatory force
  •   CFR - Council on Foreign Relations
  •   Trilateral Commission
  •   US State Dept
  • Progressives are generally decent, intelligent and well-meaning people.
  •  Check out this litmus test about territorialism for your reaction:
  •   Crazy guy on Las Vegas Blvd. ( the strip) - YouTube
  • Decent, intelligent and well-meaning people are not predatory, are they?
  • The "International Community" is clearly progressive - hence the conundrum

Question 1: What happened to the Third World? Independence.

  • It was conquered / devastated / devoured by the "international community"
  • What is a multilateral declaration of independence?
  •  Replacement of foreign ethnicity government officials by native ethnicity ones.
  •  They're actually dependent on foreign aid - $2.6 trillion since 1960
  •   "not" dependent is kind of excluded when you look at it this way
  •   "He who pays the piper calls the tune"
  • The structures of government in a genuinely independent country should tend to resemble the structures that existed before it was subjugated.
  •  After 1960, did the Third World become more or less Westernized?
  •  Muppet states - post-1945 postcolonial regimes.
  •   Dependent rebellion - like being a teenager but dependent on parents

Four basic structures of government post 1500: 

  • Native rule with private Western trade
  • Native rule under the protection of chartered companies or other monopolies
  •  East India Company; British South African Company
  • Classic nationalized colonialism with indirect rule
  • Post colonial muppet states


  • The non-European entity becomes culturally and politically Westernized
  • More & more westerners are employed in the actual task of governing them
  • Profits accruing to the West from all of this activity dwindle away and are replaced by massive losses. (Resulting in "Aid" being given to the state)

Who benefits from these trends? The "International Community"

  • The "International Community"
  • National Liberation Fronts behind multiple “independence” movements
  •  Always seem to be associated with "Powerful Western Friends"
  • Everyone else loses

Two theories of the "International Community"

  1. It's own theory: depicted as the savior/liberator of the planet, and everyone should get behind the movement and support it.
  •  Hopeful, widely believed.

2.   The Anti-Progressive hypothesis which says the "international community" is a fundamentally predatory force.

  •  Appears counterfactual in some ways - the Anglo-American bureaucrat is not "predatory" by nature.

Question 2: What is Nationalism

Nationalist regimes are:

  • Good when they are organizations trying to become nice multilateral members of the “international community.”
  • Bad when they “defy international opinion” and turn against the "international community"

There has existed an "international community" since the 19th century - it operated out of London.

Unification of Italy: Good or bad?

  • Discussion of historic Naples and the Two Sicilies - which until 1860 was ruled by the Bourbon royal family and was the richest state in all of Europe.
  • In unification, the Northern Italians basically sacked the Two Sicilies and destroyed them economically just as the Union forces did to the Southern States after the first US Civil War (which interestingly was essentially concurrent to this).
  • This is an example of the great struggle between Liberalism and Reaction

Progressives - same archetype of people starting with Lord Byron.

  • Liberals, radicals, thinkers, artists. The "International Community"
  • Always end up involved in "long and bloody struggles"

Question 3: Why is Hitler Considered Worse Than Other Leaders?

Uncomfortable truths (Debunking the Human Rights theory of World War II):

  • The Allies included Joseph Stalin, whose human rights record was at least as bad as Hitler's. (Dekulakisation, Great Famine, The Great Terror/Purge - roughly 9 million deaths due to oppression/political violence alone, not including deaths from the famines)
  • Roosevelt & Churchill had many opportunities to save the Jews, yet did nothing
  • The Allies were just as guilty of bombing civilians as the Axis forces.

The "nominal goal" of WW2 was that Britain wanted to preserve a free Poland - but this didn't happen.

The Allies = The "International Community"

The fascist movement is a competing predator - or is it just a dangerous prey?

  • Fascism as a movement is reactionary in nature.
  • Living in a totalitarian state doesn't much differ regardless of whether it is Communist, Fascist, Buddhist, Scietologist or a Democratic Republic.
  • The myth that fascism is left-wing is debunked.
  • All forms of liberty are suppressed (press, association, reunion) as part of reaction.
  • White is the color of Reaction just as Red is the color of Revolution.
  • If the International Community is a predator, reactionaries are its prey.
  • The Soviets could be seen as a competing predator
  • Fascism is "prey that decided to fight back" and not averse to fighting dirty.
  • Fascism is a short course in what not to do
  • Neomilitarism and fascism are similar. Germany was a society of militarism prior to WWI.
  • Their purpose was set against the international community as they foresaw it as a "killer" ideology.
  • England (ie, the international community) doesn't want a real balance of power. It wants to always be in a position with the help of its allies to have its way with a group of confident, forward-moving nations.

Back to

Master Index
Curtis Yarvin