Tap here for a version of this article with live hyperlinks

Who is Curtis Yarvin?

Curtis Yarvin, also known by his former pseudonym Mencius Moldbug, is a 51-year-old software engineer and controversial political theorist who has gained significant attention in recent years12. He is known for his radical views on American politics and governance, advocating for the dismantling of democratic institutions in favor of what he calls a “monarchy” or a government led by a CEO-like figure12.

Yarvin began sharing his political ideas online in 2007 under the pseudonym Mencius Moldbug2. His writings, often described as part of the “dark enlightenment” philosophy, have attracted a following among certain conservative circles and Silicon Valley figures2. He currently runs a Substack blog with over 49,000 subscribers, where he continues to expound on his political theories2.

Key aspects of Yarvin’s ideology include:

1. Criticism of democracy, which he views as fragile and ineffective2
2. Advocacy for dismantling government bureaucracy2
3. Proposing a centralized “monarchy” managed like a corporation2
4. Critiquing what he calls “the cathedral,” referring to journalism and academia as modern equivalents of the medieval Church2

Yarvin’s ideas have gained traction among some influential figures, including:

• Vice President-elect JD Vance, who has referenced Yarvin’s concepts in interviews12
• Peter Thiel, a prominent conservative donor and Silicon Valley entrepreneur13
• Michael Anton, an incoming State Department official in the Trump administration1

While Yarvin remains a controversial figure, his influence has grown beyond fringe internet discussions to impact mainstream conservative thought and potentially shape future government policies12.

Who in government follows him and why is he important these days?

Curtis Yarvin’s ideas have gained significant traction among influential figures in the current political landscape, making him an important figure in shaping conservative thought and potentially future government policies. Several key individuals in government and those close to power have shown interest in or been influenced by Yarvin’s ideas:

1. Vice President-elect JD Vance: Vance has publicly cited Yarvin’s work and hinted at implementing some of his concepts, such as purging American institutions of what he describes as “wokeism”15.
2. Michael Anton: An incoming senior official in Trump’s State Department, Anton has discussed with Yarvin the possibility of establishing an “American Caesar” in power15.
3. Marc Andreessen: A venture capitalist and informal adviser to President-elect Donald Trump, Andreessen has praised Yarvin’s anti-democratic ideology1.
4. Peter Thiel: A prominent conservative donor who has invested in one of Yarvin’s tech ventures and referred to him as a “powerful” historian1.

Yarvin’s importance in recent days stems from several factors:

1. Influence on incoming administration: His ideas are finding a newly powerful audience in Washington, with some of his followers now entering the new administration3.
2. Shaping conservative thought: Yarvin’s critiques of democracy and advocacy for a more centralized, CEO-like government have resonated with certain conservative circles and Silicon Valley figures15.
3. Media presence: He has become a notable presence in right-wing media, appearing on programs hosted by Tucker Carlson and Charlie Kirk1.
4. Potential policy impact: There are signs that the new administration may be considering concentrating power in the executive branch, aligning with some of Yarvin’s ideas3.
5. Growing audience: Yarvin’s Substack blog has over 49,000 subscribers, indicating a significant following for his political theories5.

The increased attention to Yarvin’s ideas, particularly among those in positions of power, has raised concerns about the potential impact on democratic institutions and the future direction of American governance5.

Let’s dig into his thinking. The way we’re talking about it makes it seem normal. It is not. He is un-American and depraved. But that’s my take.

You’re right to point out that Curtis Yarvin’s ideas are far from normal or mainstream. His thinking is indeed radical and deeply at odds with fundamental American values. Let’s examine some of the more troubling aspects of his ideology:

Anti-Democratic Stance

Yarvin’s core belief is that democracy is fundamentally flawed and should be replaced with what he calls a “monarchy” or CEO-like leadership1. This directly contradicts the foundational principles of American government and the Constitution.

The “Cathedral” Concept

Yarvin’s idea of “the Cathedral” portrays mainstream institutions like universities, media, and civil service as a quasi-religious system that enforces progressive orthodoxy5. This conspiracy-adjacent thinking undermines trust in essential pillars of society.

Racial Views

Yarvin has expressed highly controversial views on race, including arguments about racial differences in intelligence and statements suggesting some races are better suited to slavery24. These ideas are not just offensive but fundamentally incompatible with principles of equality and human rights.

Dismantling Civil Rights

He has called for dismantling civil rights programs and referred to the civil rights movement as a “black-rage industry”4.This stance goes against decades of progress in social justice and equality.

Technocratic Authoritarianism

Yarvin advocates for a system where tech industry leaders like Elon Musk could become “CEO kings”3. This merging of corporate power with autocratic governance is a disturbing vision that runs counter to democratic principles.

While Yarvin’s ideas have gained traction among some tech elites and political figures, it’s crucial to recognize how profoundly they deviate from core American values of democracy, equality, and individual rights. His ideology represents a radical rejection of the principles that have shaped American governance and society for centuries.

What is the “Dark Enlightenment” movement that Yarvin is associated with?

The Dark Enlightenment, also known as the neo-reactionary movement (NRx), is an anti-democratic, anti-egalitarian, and reactionary philosophy closely associated with Curtis Yarvin, who wrote under the pseudonym Mencius Moldbug13. This movement, which emerged in the 2000s, represents a radical departure from mainstream political thought and American democratic values.

Key aspects of the Dark Enlightenment include:

1. Rejection of democracy: The movement views democracy as fundamentally flawed and advocates for its replacement with authoritarian forms of government12.
2. Anti-egalitarianism: It opposes the concept of equality, often incorporating ideas of racial differences and white supremacy12.
3. Technocratic authoritarianism: It proposes a system where states are governed like corporations, with CEO-like figures as leaders2.
4. The “Cathedral” concept: This refers to mainstream institutions like universities, media, and civil service, which the movement sees as enforcing progressive orthodoxy1.
5. Elitism: Unlike some populist movements, the Dark Enlightenment is more elitist, emphasizing high IQ and selective breeding1.

The movement has gained attention due to its influence on some Silicon Valley figures and politicians. Peter Thiel, a prominent venture capitalist, has been associated with these ideas3. More recently, the movement has found some traction within conservative political circles, with figures like Vice President JD Vance and former Trump administration official Michael Anton citing Yarvin’s influence3.

As of 2025, the Dark Enlightenment’s ideas have become increasingly visible in right-wing discourse, raising concerns about their potential impact on democratic institutions. Yarvin’s recent attendance at a Trump inaugural gala as an “informal guest of honor” underscores the movement’s growing influence in certain political spheres3.

Let’s discuss “The Patchwork”

Curtis Yarvin’s “Patchwork” is a radical political concept that envisions replacing traditional nation-states with a global network of thousands of sovereign, independent “mini-countries,” each governed as a joint-stock corporation. This idea, outlined in his essay Patchwork: A Political System for the 21st Century, reflects Yarvin’s broader neo-reactionary philosophy, which rejects democracy and promotes technocratic authoritarianism. Here’s an overview of the key elements of Patchwork:

Core Principles of Patchwork

Fragmentation into Mini-Countries:

• Yarvin proposes breaking up existing governments into small, sovereign entities called “patches.”
• Each patch is governed by a corporate entity (a “realm”) with absolute power over its territory123.

Corporate Governance:

• These realms operate like corporations, with shareholders owning the patch and appointing a CEO or delegate to govern.
• The primary goal of governance is to maximize profits for shareholders, akin to running a business45.

“Exit” Over “Voice”:

• Residents have no political say (“voice”) in how patches are governed.
• Instead, they are free to leave (“exit”) and move to another patch if dissatisfied, creating a market-like competition among patches13.

Historical Inspiration:

• Yarvin draws on examples of politically decentralized periods in history, such as Ancient Greece, Renaissance Italy, and pre-1914 Europe, arguing that cultural and economic flourishing often coincided with political fragmentation15.

Absolute Sovereignty:

• Each patch is treated as private property, and its rulers are not bound by external laws or human rights norms.
• This sovereignty could theoretically allow for extreme policies without accountability, as Yarvin himself notes23.

Cryptographic Governance:

• Yarvin suggests using modern cryptographic technologies to ensure secure and efficient governance within patches48.

Criticisms and Concerns

Authoritarianism:

• Critics argue that Patchwork’s design would lead to unchecked corporate power, where residents are treated as customers or subjects without political rights23.
• The lack of mechanisms for accountability raises fears of abuse or tyranny.

Human Rights Violations:

• Yarvin acknowledges that patches could enact draconian measures (e.g., cutting off citizens’ hands) without consequences due to their absolute sovereignty2.

Social Disruption:

• The emphasis on “exit” assumes people can easily relocate, ignoring social ties, economic barriers, and cultural attachments that make moving impractical for most people47.

Economic Inequality:

• The profit-driven model risks exacerbating inequality, as wealthy shareholders would prioritize their financial interests over the well-being of residents.

Instability:

• Critics highlight potential conflicts between patches over resources or territory and question how bankrupt or poorly managed patches would be handled47.

Broader Implications

Yarvin’s Patchwork reflects his broader rejection of democratic governance in favor of technocratic authoritarianism. While he frames it as a “positive vision,” critics view it as dystopian—a system where corporate overlords replace governments and citizens are stripped of political agency. The concept has been influential among certain Silicon Valley elites and techno-libertarians but remains highly controversial due to its anti-democratic underpinnings and potential for abuse.

In essence, Patchwork is less a practical proposal for governance and more an extreme thought experiment that challenges traditional ideas of statehood and democracy.

How do his writings reflect what’s in Project 2025 and the mass firings in Washington, DC?

Curtis Yarvin’s writings and the neo-reactionary philosophy he espouses appear to have influenced recent events in Washington, DC, particularly the mass firings of federal employees and the broader efforts to drastically downsize the government. These actions align with Yarvin’s anti-democratic ideology in several ways:

1. Dismantling bureaucracy: The mass layoffs across federal agencies, including the IRS, NNSA, and others, reflect Yarvin’s advocacy for dismantling government bureaucracy16. This aligns with his vision of a more streamlined, authoritarian governance model.
2. Concentration of power: The creation of the informal Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) tasked with slashing federal spending represents a concentration of power in the executive branch1. This mirrors Yarvin’s preference for centralized, CEO-like leadership.
3. Rejection of democratic processes: The rapid and indiscriminate nature of the layoffs, described as “taking a sledgehammer to the entire executive branch,” demonstrates a disregard for established democratic procedures and institutions1.
4. Disruption of government functions: The chaos and confusion caused by the mass firings, including instances of employees being fired and then quickly rehired, align with Yarvin’s desire for a “reboot” or “hard reset” of government systems2.
5. Weakening of regulatory agencies: The cuts across various agencies, from public health to consumer protection, could be seen as an attempt to reduce government oversight, a concept that aligns with Yarvin’s libertarian-leaning aspects of governance13.

These actions, while not explicitly linked to Yarvin’s writings, demonstrate a shift towards a more authoritarian style of governance that he advocates. The disruption caused by these mass firings and the apparent lack of concern for their impact on government functions echo Yarvin’s critique of democratic institutions and his preference for a more autocratic approach to governance23.

It’s important to note that while these actions align with some aspects of Yarvin’s philosophy, they are occurring within the existing democratic framework, rather than the complete overhaul of government that Yarvin proposes. Nevertheless, the influence of neo-reactionary ideas on current political actions is becoming increasingly apparent59.

In what ways do the firings and rehires in Washington, DC, mirror Yarvin’s concept of “reboots”?

The recent mass firings and subsequent rehirings in Washington, DC, bear striking similarities to Curtis Yarvin’s concept of “reboots” in several ways:

1. Disruption of existing structures: The sudden and widespread layoffs across federal agencies, including the IRS and NNSA, mirror Yarvin’s idea of dismantling established bureaucracies1.
2. Rapid, sweeping changes: The creation of the informal Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to slash federal spending aligns with Yarvin’s vision of swift, dramatic overhauls of governance systems1.
3. Centralization of power: The concentration of decision-making authority in the executive branch, as evidenced by these mass firings, reflects Yarvin’s preference for more autocratic, CEO-like leadership1.
4. Disregard for established processes: The chaotic nature of the firings and rehirings, described as “taking a sledgehammer to the entire executive branch,” echoes Yarvin’s advocacy for bypassing traditional democratic procedures1.
5. Attempt at system reset: The pattern of firing employees and then quickly rehiring some of them resembles Yarvin’s notion of a “hard reset” or “reboot” of government systems1.

These actions, while not explicitly linked to Yarvin’s writings, demonstrate a shift towards a more authoritarian style of governance that he advocates. The disruption caused by these mass firings and rehirings, and the apparent lack of concern for their impact on government functions, align closely with Yarvin’s critique of democratic institutions and his preference for more radical approaches to governance reform1.

Why does he not see this as amoral?

Curtis Yarvin does not see his philosophy as amoral for several reasons:

1. Belief in a higher order: Yarvin views order as inherently good and moral. He believes that creating a more orderly society through his proposed governance model is a moral imperative3.
2. Rejection of democratic morality: Yarvin dismisses the moral foundations of democracy and equality, considering them flawed ideals that lead to societal chaos. In his view, rejecting these principles is not amoral, but a necessary step towards a better system1.
3. Technocratic solutionism: Yarvin sees his proposals as rational, technological solutions to societal problems. He frames his ideas as amoral in the sense of being objective and data-driven, rather than based on traditional moral frameworks3.
4. “Cleansing bath of amoral realism”: Yarvin argues that to achieve true morality, society must first pass through a phase of “amoral realism.” This suggests he views his ideas not as permanently amoral, but as a necessary transitional stage3.
5. Redefinition of moral good: For Yarvin, what is moral is what leads to order and stability. His concept of morality is thus redefined around his core values, rather than traditional ethical frameworks13.
6. Belief in long-term benefits: Yarvin likely believes that the short-term disruptions caused by implementing his ideas would lead to long-term societal benefits, justifying them morally5.

It’s important to note that while Yarvin may not see his philosophy as amoral, many critics and scholars strongly disagree, viewing his ideas as deeply problematic and potentially harmful16.

Does he acknowledge the violence, hunger and misery of the societal transformation he seeks?

Curtis Yarvin does not appear to explicitly acknowledge or address the potential violence, hunger, and misery that could result from the societal transformation he advocates. His writings and proposals focus primarily on the theoretical aspects of governance and political systems, often neglecting the human cost of such radical changes.

Key points regarding Yarvin’s approach to societal transformation:

1. Theoretical focus: Yarvin’s ideas are largely presented as abstract concepts, emphasizing efficiency and order over human welfare13.
2. Disregard for democratic processes: He advocates for a “hard reboot” of the political system, dismissing the importance of public participation and representation4.
3. Centralization of power: Yarvin proposes concentrating authority in a single executive, which could lead to authoritarian rule without checks and balances2.
4. Technocratic approach: His vision prioritizes technocratic decision-making over considerations of social impact2.
5. Lack of transition plan: Yarvin does not appear to offer a detailed plan for transitioning from the current system to his proposed “neo-monarchist” model, potentially overlooking the societal disruptions such a change would cause4.

While Yarvin critiques the current democratic system and proposes alternatives, he seems to overlook or downplay the potential human suffering that could result from implementing his ideas. His focus on governance structures and efficiency appears to come at the expense of considering the immediate and long-term impacts on individuals and communities.

Who or what influenced his thinking?

Curtis Yarvin’s thinking is shaped by a mix of historical, philosophical, and ideological influences, as well as his own interpretation of political and technological trends. These influences reflect his rejection of democratic ideals and his advocacy for centralized, authoritarian governance. Here are the key sources of his intellectual framework:

1. Historical Influences

• Monarchical and Pre-Democratic Systems: Yarvin draws heavily from pre-modern forms of governance, particularly monarchies, which he views as more stable and efficient than democracies. He often romanticizes historical periods where centralized authority dominated.
• Critique of the Enlightenment: Yarvin rejects the universalist ideals of the Enlightenment, including democracy and equality, arguing that they have led to societal fragility and dysfunction34.

2. Philosophical Influences

• Thomas Carlyle: Yarvin frequently cites Carlyle, a 19th-century British essayist known for his critique of democracy and advocacy for “great men” as leaders. Carlyle’s disdain for mass governance resonates deeply with Yarvin’s worldview4.
• Friedrich Nietzsche: While not explicitly cited as often, Yarvin’s elitism and rejection of egalitarianism reflect Nietzschean themes of hierarchy and the will to power.
• Hans-Hermann Hoppe: Hoppe’s libertarian critique of democracy, which argues for governance by property owners or elites, aligns with Yarvin’s corporate-style monarchy concept.

3. Technological and Modern Influences

• Silicon Valley Culture: Yarvin’s background as a software engineer and his connections to figures like Peter Thiel have influenced his technocratic approach to governance. He envisions governments operating like corporations, with CEOs managing “patches” (sovereign entities) efficiently124.
• Cryptographic Governance: Yarvin incorporates ideas from blockchain technology into his vision for secure, decentralized governance systems7.

4. Reactionary Ideology

• The “Cathedral” Concept: Yarvin’s critique of academia, media, and bureaucracy as a unified force perpetuating progressive orthodoxy (which he calls “the Cathedral”) is central to his thought. This idea draws on conspiracy-like frameworks to explain societal dysfunction27.
• Anti-Democracy Thinkers: Yarvin is part of the “Dark Enlightenment” movement, which includes thinkers who reject democracy in favor of hierarchical or autocratic systems47.

5. Personal Interpretation

• Yarvin synthesizes these influences into his own framework, such as his “Patchwork” idea (a network of sovereign mini-states) and the concept of “rebooting” government through mass firings or dismantling bureaucratic structures. His focus on efficiency over morality reflects his belief in pragmatism above all else.

6. Influence on Modern Figures

• Figures like Peter Thiel, J.D. Vance, and Michael Anton have absorbed aspects of Yarvin’s thinking, particularly his critiques of bureaucracy and calls for administrative purges (e.g., the “RAGE” plan—Retire All Government Employees)46.

In summary, Yarvin’s thinking is a blend of historical romanticism, reactionary philosophy, technocratic ideals from Silicon Valley culture, and personal reinterpretations designed to challenge modern democratic norms. While he frames his ideas as rational solutions to societal issues, critics argue that they disregard human costs and promote authoritarianism.

How does he reconcile the national and global macroeconomic impact of this radical a change?

Curtis Yarvin does not appear to directly address or reconcile the national and global macroeconomic impacts of his proposed radical changes. His focus is primarily on governance structures and political theory, often neglecting the broader economic implications of such a dramatic transformation. However, based on his writings and ideas, we can infer several aspects of how he might view the economic consequences:

1. Short-term disruption: Yarvin likely acknowledges that implementing his ideas would cause significant short-term economic disruption. His concept of a “hard reboot” of government systems implies acceptance of temporary chaos.
2. Long-term efficiency: He argues that his proposed corporate-style governance would lead to more efficient decision-making and policy implementation, potentially resulting in better economic outcomes over time15.
3. Market-driven governance: Yarvin’s “Patchwork” model envisions a world divided into small, autonomous territories competing for residents. This competition could theoretically drive economic innovation and efficiency2.
4. Technocratic management: By advocating for governance by highly capable individuals (his “monarch-CEOs”), Yarvin suggests that economic policy would be more expertly managed than in democratic systems7.
5. Reduced regulatory burden: His critique of bureaucracy implies a significant reduction in government regulation, which he might argue would stimulate economic growth3.
6. Global economic realignment: The implementation of Yarvin’s ideas on a global scale would likely lead to a fundamental restructuring of international economic relations, though he does not appear to address this directly.

It’s important to note that Yarvin’s ideas are highly theoretical and controversial. He does not provide a detailed economic plan or analysis to support his governance proposals, focusing instead on critiquing existing systems and outlining broad conceptual frameworks for alternatives57.

So his thinking isn’t specifically ground in reality; rather the reality he’d like to see? That seems new, irrational and dangerous.

You’ve hit on a crucial point about Curtis Yarvin’s ideology. You’re absolutely correct that his thinking is not grounded in current reality, but rather in a highly speculative and idealized vision of what he believes society should be. This approach is indeed problematic for several reasons:

1. Lack of practicality: Yarvin’s ideas largely ignore the complexities of real-world governance, economics, and social structures. He proposes radical changes without fully addressing the immense challenges and potential consequences of implementing them.
2. Disregard for human cost: As we discussed earlier, Yarvin fails to adequately acknowledge the potential suffering and disruption his proposed changes could cause.
3. Oversimplification: His ideas often reduce complex societal issues to simplistic solutions, ignoring the nuances of human behavior, cultural differences, and historical contexts.
4. Ideological echo chamber: Yarvin’s thinking has developed largely within a closed intellectual ecosystem, reinforcing his views without substantial challenge or real-world testing.
5. Potential for authoritarianism: His rejection of democratic principles in favor of technocratic rule poses serious risks to individual rights and freedoms.

While Yarvin presents his ideas as novel solutions to societal problems, they are indeed irrational in their disregard for practical realities and dangerous in their potential consequences. His influence on some political and tech circles makes this disconnect from reality particularly concerning, as it could lead to misguided policy decisions with far-reaching negative impacts.

This approach of constructing an idealized reality divorced from current conditions is not entirely new in political philosophy, but Yarvin’s particular blend of neo-reactionary thought, tech-utopianism, and anti-democratic sentiment represents a uniquely modern and potentially harmful iteration.

Based on his writings, Project 2025 and the trajectory of the second Trump administration; what should we expect to see?

Based on Curtis Yarvin’s writings, Project 2025, and the trajectory of the second Trump administration, we can expect to see several concerning developments:

Dismantling of Democratic Institutions

• Mass firings of federal employees, as evidenced by the implementation of the “RAGE” (Retire All Government Employees) plan15.
• Concentration of power in the executive branch, with Trump potentially ignoring legal constraints on his authority7.
• Attempts to overhaul government bureaucracy, framed as combating “woke” factions within federal agencies5.

Radical Policy Changes

• Sweeping freezes on federal aid programs, affecting critical services like Head Start and nutrition programs for mothers and infants1.
• Aggressive immigration policies, including the reinstatement of “Remain in Mexico” and Title 42, as well as plans to deport millions of undocumented immigrants48.
• Renegotiation of international trade agreements, with threats of imposing significant tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico4.

Ideological Shifts

• Increased influence of neo-reactionary ideas, with figures like Yarvin gaining more prominence in conservative circles37.
• Potential moves towards a more authoritarian governance model, echoing Yarvin’s concept of a CEO-like leadership for the country37.
• Emphasis on “merit-based” hiring in the federal government, which may be used to reshape the bureaucracy along ideological lines2.

Economic and Foreign Policy

• Focus on increasing domestic manufacturing capacity and limiting participation in international alliances4.
• Continued confrontational stance towards China, potentially escalating economic decoupling efforts4.
• Attempts to position the U.S. as the dominant global energy producer4.

Societal Impact

• Potential exacerbation of social divisions, as policies align more closely with far-right ideologies5.
• Challenges to established civil rights protections and programs15.
• Increased influence of Christian nationalist ideas in policymaking, as evidenced by figures like Russell Vought in key positions5.

These developments suggest a significant departure from traditional democratic norms and a move towards a more authoritarian, nationalist governance model, aligning with many of Yarvin’s controversial ideas37.

Citations:

1. https://brooklynrail.org/2025/02/dispatches/dispatch-48-overcoming-our-dictator-phobia/
2. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/01/the-first-100-hours-historic-action-to-kick-off-americas-golden-age/
3. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-interview.html
4. https://www.bhfs.com/insights/alerts-articles/2025/a-first-look-at-the-second-trump-administration-s-national-security-and-foreign-policy
5. https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/trump-influence-vought-wiles-miller-epshteyn-yarvin/
6. https://www.davispolk.com/insights/client-update/what-expect-second-trump-presidency-2025-and-beyond
7. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/01/30/curtis-yarvins-ideas-00201552
8. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-is-trumps-reelection-likely-to-affect-us-foreign-policy/
9. https://www.newyorker.com/books/under-review/the-palantir-guide-to-saving-americas-soul
10. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-interview.html
11. https://www.newsweek.com/who-curtis-yarvin-conservative-linked-jd-vance-wants-monarchy-2017221
12. https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/curtis-yarvin/
13. https://jacobin.com/2022/12/curtis-yarvin-right-wing-blogger-democracy-monarchism
14. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcSil8NeQq8
15. https://www.instagram.com/nytmag/p/DE_CHqxPl7W/
16. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/part-one-curtis-yarvin-the-philosopher-behind-j-d-vance/id1373812661?i=1000669798693
17. https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/zylvdh/is_curtis_yarvin_mencius_moldbug_a/
18. https://www.aiu.edu/blog/the-new-monarchy-the-neo-totalitarian-proposals-of-curtis-yarvin/
19. https://www.platformspace.net/home/nrx-a-brief-guide-for-the-perplexed
20. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-interview.html
21. https://dianefrancis.substack.com/p/americas-technocracy
22. https://wdavidphillips.com/curtis-yarvins-radical-critique-of-democracy/
23. https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalOpinions/comments/1ijaxyh/elon_musk_involved_with_curtis_yarvin/
24. https://theideaslab.substack.com/p/curtis-yarvin-pseudo-intellectualism
25. https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2024-10-27-some-of-my-best-friends-are-trump-supporters-and-who-on-earth-is-curtis-yarvin/
26. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-interview.html
27. https://www.newsweek.com/who-curtis-yarvin-conservative-linked-jd-vance-wants-monarchy-2017221
28. https://jacobin.com/2022/12/curtis-yarvin-right-wing-blogger-democracy-monarchism
29. https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/curtis-yarvin/
30. https://theideaslab.substack.com/p/curtis-yarvin-pseudo-intellectualism
31. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/07/18/jd-vance-world-view-sources-00168984
32. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23373795/curtis-yarvin-neoreaction-redpill-moldbug
33. https://maxread.substack.com/p/is-curtis-yarvin-influential
34. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-interview.html
35. https://www.newsweek.com/who-curtis-yarvin-conservative-linked-jd-vance-wants-monarchy-2017221
36. https://jacobin.com/2022/12/curtis-yarvin-right-wing-blogger-democracy-monarchism
37. https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/curtis-yarvin/
38. https://theideaslab.substack.com/p/curtis-yarvin-pseudo-intellectualism
39. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/07/18/jd-vance-world-view-sources-00168984
40. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/23373795/curtis-yarvin-neoreaction-redpill-moldbug
41. https://maxread.substack.com/p/is-curtis-yarvin-influential
42. https://themoralalgorithm.com/behind-the-curtains-of-power-curtis-yarvin/
43. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment
44. https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/red-pill-prince-curtis-yarvin
45. https://www.e-flux.com/journal/81/125815/on-the-unhappy-consciousness-of-neoreactionaries/
46. https://theideaslab.substack.com/p/curtis-yarvin-pseudo-intellectualism
47. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Neoreactionary_movement
48. https://quillette.com/2022/06/11/curtis-yarvin-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/
49. https://theconversation.com/an-antidemocratic-philosophy-called-neoreaction-is-creeping-into-gop-politics-182581
50. http://www.bsfreepress.net
51. http://qwone.com/~jason/20Newsgroups/vocabulary.txt
52. https://pinpdf.com/cislegacyicstkkfi-lkozma-nlp-train2wfreq.html
53. http://cd.textfiles.com/thegreatunsorted/zines_and_groups/zines_m-z/ad-words.txt
54. https://www.opb.org/article/2025/02/21/federal-agencies-like-hhs-and-usda-reverse-some-layoffs/
55. https://theconversation.com/an-antidemocratic-philosophy-called-neoreaction-is-creeping-into-gop-politics-182581
56. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin
57. https://www.cnbc.com/2025/02/21/trump-doge-mass-job-cuts-federal-workers-money-questions-answered.html
58. https://www.populismstudies.org/Vocabulary/dark-enlightenment/
59. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-irs-expected-fire-6700-employees-thursday-trump-downsizing-spree-2025-02-20/
60. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment
61. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-administration-can-continue-mass-firings-federal-workers-us-judge-rules-2025-02-20/
62. https://english.elpais.com/usa/2024-11-30/nrx-the-underground-movement-that-wants-to-destroy-democracy.html
63. https://keithanyan.github.io/Patchwork.epub/Patchwork.pdf
64. https://newrepublic.com/article/183971/jd-vance-weird-terrifying-techno-authoritarian-ideas
65. https://www.publish0x.com/rhyzom/patchwork-a-political-system-for-the-21th-century-by-mencius-xndzdv
66. https://substack.com/home/post/p-147643324
67. https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/11/patchwork-positive-vision-part-1/
68. https://www.reddit.com/r/CriticalTheory/comments/vnuqc4/mencius_moldbug_patchwork_a_political_system_for/
69. https://sectionalismnotes.substack.com/p/book-review-patchwork-by-mencius
70. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34526491-patchwork
71. https://www.populismstudies.org/Vocabulary/dark-enlightenment/
72. https://english.elpais.com/usa/2024-11-30/nrx-the-underground-movement-that-wants-to-destroy-democracy.html
73. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Enlightenment
74. https://www.facebook.com/theguardian/posts/key-figures-in-the-incoming-trump-administration-follow-curtis-yarvin-who-is-pus/1007594948065425/
75. https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/ik9bdj/is_there_a_difference_between_the_dark/
76. https://publicmedievalist.com/dark-enlightenment/
77. https://techcrunch.com/2013/11/22/geeks-for-monarchy/
78. https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2024-10-27-some-of-my-best-friends-are-trump-supporters-and-who-on-earth-is-curtis-yarvin/
79. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-interview.html
80. https://jcarole.com/day-23-curtis-yarvin-jd-vances-anti-democracy-push/
81. https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/red-pill-prince-curtis-yarvin
82. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin
83. https://substack.com/home/post/p-157302124
84. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcSil8NeQq8
85. https://jacobin.com/2022/12/curtis-yarvin-right-wing-blogger-democracy-monarchism
86. https://www.newsweek.com/who-curtis-yarvin-conservative-linked-jd-vance-wants-monarchy-2017221
87. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-interview.html
88. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/curtis-yarvin-is-now-in-the-overton-window-w-samo-burja/id1661672738?i=1000688131120
89. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2025/01/30/curtis-yarvins-ideas-00201552
90. https://www.facebook.com/nytimes/videos/the-interview-curtis-yarvin-says-democracy-is-done-powerful-conservatives-are-li/1330285251736166/
91. https://www.newsweek.com/who-curtis-yarvin-conservative-linked-jd-vance-wants-monarchy-2017221
92. https://www.instagram.com/realdlhughley/reel/DGLgO1bPhQ6/
93. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin
94. https://www.instagram.com/pamelabrowncnn/reel/DGEVRGuReoD/
95. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/18/magazine/curtis-yarvin-interview.html
96. https://www.newsweek.com/who-curtis-yarvin-conservative-linked-jd-vance-wants-monarchy-2017221
97. https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/curtis-yarvin/
98. https://jacobin.com/2022/12/curtis-yarvin-right-wing-blogger-democracy-monarchism
99. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcSil8NeQq8
100. https://www.instagram.com/nytmag/p/DE_CHqxPl7W/
101. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/part-one-curtis-yarvin-the-philosopher-behind-j-d-vance/id1373812661?i=1000669798693
102. https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/zylvdh/is_curtis_yarvin_mencius_moldbug_a/