So Curtis Yarvin is a fool, so it will not surprise you that 'executive' is not, in fact, a 'literal synonym' of 'monarchy.'
Executive is just "that which carries out" from Latin exsequor, 'to follow to completion.' There is no etymological reason the executive needs to be a single person.
Executive is just "that which carries out" from Latin exsequor, 'to follow to completion.' There is no etymological reason the executive needs to be a single person.
Always funny to me that Yarvin is held up as the great intellect of the New Right and then when he argues for stuff it's this - here's some etymology for a synonym of a word you're using, so we gotta have a tyrant -- checkmate libs. Behold the philosopher.
Comments
Paul Dans, the author of project 2025 provided a text by invitation for the latest issue of the Economist.
I was thinking of outlining the contradictions, errors and logical fallacies in it but boy.. I don't know where to start..
Those are different words with different meanings Curtis
1) You should deplore his ideas, not the way he looks. His ideas would not be better if delivered by Brad Pitt in tweed.
2) You forgot to put alt-text on the image, it should read, 'potato-faced man dressed like an accident in a golf pro-shop winces in constipation.'
Focus on his advocacy not his appearance. If you can't separate them, fix your heart.
And needs to be made more that way as well.
This is exactly what the president should be.
Executor
Executioner
…the action is “to execute”.
Not “to dictate”. Not “divine authority [literally Why Monarch?]”.
We don’t even need to go back to the Latin to liquidate Yarvin’s prose in the Disposall™️. We simply execute on the simple task of using our English vocabulary skills.
FML
*even if you probably shouldn't
A good medieval king was better than any modern style CEO. In Western and Central Europe during the Middle ages, the king of a given land was typically one of two things restraining lords from fully enslaving the peasants, the other being the church
The below is not a parody (or at least, it wasn't supposed to be one).
Also, 'monarchy' is not 'one regime' but rather μόνος + ἀρχης "single ruler," which is not the same as 'autocratic,' (from αὐτοκράτωρ) in fact.
A monarch need not be absolute, but an autokrator is.
But these ain't them, chief.
Yarvin's ideas didn't catch on among the Musks and Vances of the world because they're smart, but because they worship power.
They very rarely are.
For years, I’ve been amused by parallels between our system - late-stage fossil capitalism, for want of a better term - and the endgame of the Soviet communism.
Like a dominant ideology so obviously bankrupt it repulses original thinkers and promotes cynicism among the rest of us.
We can see this everywhere: the leading lights of Finnish conservative ideology are _extremely_ dim.
And these vapid arguments find purchase there.
It has the causality between ideas and social conditions backwards.
If I see madman shouting that AIDS was created by the CIA, that doesn't cause me to question the discipline of medicine.
can’t say that
Herodotus thought northern Europe was inhabited by one-eyed monsters & the Romans considered Yarvin's ancestors fit only for the mines or castration & buggery in brothels.
Arguments from etymology are shit, from false etymology more so.
same with a non-partisan military. for the same plus a few other minor reasons.
we don't swap all those people out cuz we got a new leader. well, didn't use to.
Your fans are clamouring to hear about your apolitical political system and how special they are, you just let the muse take you.
Language is a tool that humans use. It is noises in the air, and scratches on paper. We made it. And it shall not, ever, be used as a tool against us.