Curtis Yarvin

This is a lot of people are like the NPR class. They are not bad people, evil people who want to like. But the thing is, They're human beings. We're all human beings. And like human beings can support bad regimes.

This is a lot of people are like the NPR class. They are not bad people, evil people who want to like. But the thing is, They're human beings. We're all human beings. And like human beings can support bad regimes.

But he's also an intellectual and he contains within him intellectual.

But he's also an intellectual and he contains within him intellectual.

Is your rhetorical tone different in a setting like this? You're looking for different, my thinking is definitely not shifted and you're finding different emphases. Let me, you know, it's like when I talk about rage, for example, you know, both my parents worked for the federal government. They were career, you know, federal employees.

Is your rhetorical tone different in a setting like this? You're looking for different, my thinking is definitely not shifted and you're finding different emphases. Let me, you know, it's like when I talk about rage, for example, you know, both my parents worked for the federal government. They were career, you know, federal employees.

It is, it is. But the thing is, basically, when you look at the way, when you look at those, the way to treat those institutions, I'm just like treat it like a company that goes out of business, but sort of more so because these people having had power have to actually be treated even more delicately and with even more respect. And winning means these are your people now.

It is, it is. But the thing is, basically, when you look at the way, when you look at those, the way to treat those institutions, I'm just like treat it like a company that goes out of business, but sort of more so because these people having had power have to actually be treated even more delicately and with even more respect. And winning means these are your people now.

And so the thing is, when you understand the perspective of the new regime with respect to the American aristocracy, their perspective has can't be this sort of anti aristocratic thing of like, we're going to like bayonet all the professors and like, you know, throw them in ditches or whatever.

And so the thing is, when you understand the perspective of the new regime with respect to the American aristocracy, their perspective has can't be this sort of anti aristocratic thing of like, we're going to like bayonet all the professors and like, you know, throw them in ditches or whatever.

Their perspective has to be that, like, you were a normal person serving a regime that did this, like, really weird and crazy stuff.

Their perspective has to be that, like, you were a normal person serving a regime that did this, like, really weird and crazy stuff.

It depends what you mean by democracy. I mean, I think that the problem is basically when people equate democracy with good government, when you use that word, you're using a very tricky word. I would say that what someone like I'm on very safe ground, despite not knowing him well at all, that someone like J.D. Vance believes essentially in the common good.

It depends what you mean by democracy. I mean, I think that the problem is basically when people equate democracy with good government, when you use that word, you're using a very tricky word. I would say that what someone like I'm on very safe ground, despite not knowing him well at all, that someone like J.D. Vance believes essentially in the common good.

And, you know, the idea that government should serve the common good. And I think that people like J.D. and people in the sort of the broader intellectual scene around him, which is very varied intellectual scene, would all agree on that principle. Now, if that principle, I don't know what you mean by democracy in this context.

And, you know, the idea that government should serve the common good. And I think that people like J.D. and people in the sort of the broader intellectual scene around him, which is very varied intellectual scene, would all agree on that principle. Now, if that principle, I don't know what you mean by democracy in this context.

What I do know is that if democracy is against the common good, it's bad. And if it's for the common good, it's good.

What I do know is that if democracy is against the common good, it's bad. And if it's for the common good, it's good.

What would fully enlightened for me generally means fully disenchanted. When I look at basically what the kinds of people that I know not really that well in Silicon Valley think, I'm basically like, you know, have people like this been exposed to my ideas? Yes. Do they agree that America should be a monarchy? I doubt it, but I have no idea.

What would fully enlightened for me generally means fully disenchanted. When I look at basically what the kinds of people that I know not really that well in Silicon Valley think, I'm basically like, you know, have people like this been exposed to my ideas? Yes. Do they agree that America should be a monarchy? I doubt it, but I have no idea.