The strategy that rarely speaks its name: accelerationism
To understand the information behind the information in global politics, accelerationism is an essential key.
Translated from Icaros’ Chronique for Essentiel.news
Several recent articles have attempted to provide information understanding of information behind information. For example, we have spoken of Kayfabe, or the scripted character of political news; We have also described modern psychological warfare techniques, whose confusion and ridicule are skilfully planned components; We have also repeatedly explained the esoteric, occult and apocalyptic dimension of the secret religion of the powerful, which constitutes an essential red thread to elucidate the march of recent history.
Today, we are tackling a theme that has so far been lacking, although it is completely essential. This is accelerationism, this political strategy which postulates that the best way to impose a change is to promote and accentuate its opposite, so as to obtain a premeditated pendulum.
Accelerationism in brief
As indicated, the idea that underlies accelerationism is that it is possible to create radical changes by "accelerating" a given system such that its collapse is caused.
Its origin dates back to Friedrich Nietzsche, whose famous following quotation is the best known illustration: "The leveling of European man is the great process that we cannot hinder: we should even accelerate it".
What the German philosopher means by this is that the mediocrity and the homogeneity which he laments should not be combated or contradicted; On the contrary, they must be encouraged and accelerated, so as to provoke a faster social and spiritual crisis, so that a rebirth of the übermensch (superman) then becomes possible.
On its base, accelerationism is based on the Reductio ad absurdum principle, also called demonstration by contradiction; Rather than trying to directly prove the truth of a hypothesis, we postulate its opposite, and it is demonstrated that this logically leads to a contradiction or an absurdity.
These last three decades, this principle has mainly been adopted by Marxist theorists who, after the fall of the Soviet Union, have decided that to destroy "capitalism", the best way was in fact to encourage its most aggressive variants; The goal is to provoke so much suffering and misery that people would eventually reject it and adopt its apparent anti-thesis.
As such, accelerationism is therefore based on the Hegelian principle of problem, reaction, solution. Destroy to better rebuild (Ordo Ab Chao); Or according to the alchemist formula, dissolve to better coagulate (Solve and Coagula).
By paying attention, there are now many examples of this strategy at work. We can certainly speak of controlled demolition, subversion, provocation or even actprop, but these terms do not make explicit what comes after destruction: reconstruction according to new standards. Indeed, one cannot "build back better" (as Klaus Schwab would say) if we have not destroyed beforehand.
Here are some of the most obvious examples of such destruction. The silent majority do not adhere to these nonsense; And the goal is not really to convince her. On the contrary, it is at least a question of humiliating the most conformist, and of provoking cynicism, revolt and rejection in others.
What is the best way to destroy science and reason? Qualifying reasonable and scientists the most grotesque concepts as the idea that being a man or a woman is a question of subjective preference.
What is the best way to destroy tolerance and inclusion? As if they were represented by organizations and extremist behaviors, such as the caricatural Black Lives Matter and the destruction it advocates.
What is the best way to destroy beauty, talent and art? Present as the embodiment of beauty, talent and art of things like Duchamp's urinal or the 4’33 ”by John Cage.
What is the best way to destroy economic freedom? Qualify as "liberals" the most obviously corporatist, mercantilist and interventionist practices.
What is the best way to destroy democracy and the rule of law? By putting the power of so openly corrupt leaders that people are starting to support extremist positions and more authoritarian forms of government.
CLOWARD-PIVENT strategy
The CLOWARD-PIVEN strategy is a notorious accelerationist proposal on the best way to establish a basic minimum income.
Instead of advocating a direct and open implementation, the two sociologists suggest in their radical paper in 1966 to force the change through chaos. In essence, it is a question of generalizing social assistance to the point that it becomes impossible to finance, which would cause a political and social implosion; The resulting crisis would then achieve the final goal.
What this proposal has remarkable is that she is completely candid and honest in her cynicism. From the introduction of their document, the authors write: "If this strategy was implemented, it would result in a political crisis which could lead to legislation in favor of a guaranteed annual income and, therefore, at the end of poverty".
Below is a main extract of the paper in question:
Large -scale campaigns aimed at registering the poor eligible for social assistance and helping current beneficiaries to obtain all of their services would lead to bureaucratic disturbances in social assistance organizations and tax disturbances in local communities and states.
These disturbances would cause serious political tensions and aggravate the existing divisions between the elements of the democratic coalition of major cities: the remaining white middle class, ethnic groups of the white working class and the poor minorities more and more numerous. To avoid a new weakening of this historic coalition, a national democratic administration would be forced to propose a federal solution to poverty which would be over the local social aid, local class and race conflicts and local dilemmas in terms of revenue.
The internal disruption of local bureaucratic practices, the outcry aroused by poverty in public services and the collapse of current financing mechanisms can generate powerful forces in favor of major economic reforms at the national level.
It is important to note that this proposal is not a absurd idea proposed by two obscure sociologists. Indeed, the American teachers Richard Cloward and Frances Piven still benefit today from a huge credit for their innovative strategy, and many political analysts explain for example how the promotion of mass immigration must be understood in this context.
Almost all of the social policy innovations since the 1960s have been progressive stages in the Cloward-Piven plan aimed at putting America into bankruptcy by creating "rights" that a fair and fair tax system could never support. Finally, when the government could no longer face its payments, the poor would rise and require a change, whether by violence or by vote, in what Cloward and Piven describe as "a deep financial and political crisis".
It is easy to see how the organized influx of illegal immigrants through caravans is a manifest attempt to overwhelm the American security net and impose massive changes in social policy, including the "universal basic income" so much desired. - Frank Miele in Realclearpolitics, 2019.
Accelerationism and coronacircus
In an article dated May 2021, while COVID injections were barely began to be distributed, and thanks to this understanding that accelerationism plays in modern political ideology, this author explained their true underlying objective:
With this in mind, Coronacircus becomes clear: it is part of an accelerationist policy aimed at destroying the nation states, by undergoing our confidence in institutions. Faced with economic depression and such a level of incompetence and corruption, the peoples will eventually accuse their leaders and take out the guillotines.
In this sense, it is very likely that "vaccines" will have debilitating side effects, but not because central planners need this to poison people (they already have flu vaccines, vaccination calendar, they poison food, air and water, etc.). If these injections hurt, sterilize or kill millions of people, it would only be a "bonus", or the means of achieving a more subversive and subtle goal.
The provocation of Coronacircus, as we have pointed out, is the culmination of a subversion program launched decades ago and intended to destroy the West. […]
The inept character of Coronacircus was therefore not a bug, and was not the simple incompetence of the central planners. It was a deliberate and calculated approach aimed in particular to cause a crisis of confidence and therefore accelerate the change by causing a pendulum return.
This is also confirmed by the "Pandemic Spars scenario", organized in 2017 by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security whose main financiers are the Rockefeller Foundation, the WHO (World Organization for United Nations), the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the American government.
At the end of this 2017 "simulation", which scripted a coronavirus pandemic, and whose premonitory dimension is particularly astonishing, the following prediction was read in its final report (pages 73-75):
The group [of risk communication advisers] vigorously debated the question of whether it was appropriate that the president recognizes the sacrifice that vaccinated people had made for the community or that he consoles them in their pain.
As the pandemic decreased, several influential politicians and representatives of agencies found themselves in the fire of criticism for having made sensationalism about the gravity of the event in order to draw a political benefit.
Detractors [of the president] within the Republican Party seized the opportunity to publicly denigrate the president and the response of his administration to the pandemic […]. A vast movement on social media, carried out mainly by parents of affected children [by the vaccine] who are expressed openly, associated with a widespread mistrust with regard to "Big Pharma", supported the idea that the development of vaccines was not necessary and that it was made by some individuals looking for profits.
Conspiracy theories have also proliferated on social media, suggesting that the virus had been created on purpose and introduced into the population by pharmaceutical societies or that it had escaped a government laboratory secretly testing biological weapons.
Thus, the return of the pendulum that is observed at the moment, which is caused by a growing disgust with regard to the existing order, and whose most recent culmination was the election of Donald Trump in the United States, would probably be part of a completely scripted accelerationist strategy.
Alexandre Douguine's accelerationism
Alexandre Douguine is a Russian political philosopher whose ideas represent the anti-thesis of the consensus of Washington and the Atlanticist "Neoliberal" by post-war period, and who largely inspire the "new right".
His Magnum Opus, which is called The Fourth Political Theory (the fourth political theory), whose edition in English is prefaced by Alain Soral, is openly accelerationist.
In two words, Douguine argues that the now obvious excesses of "postmodernism" constitute an ideal breeding ground for the formation of a new traditionalist and neofedal political paradigm, which is neither fascist nor communist, but which represents a syncretism between the two.
In the first chapter of his book, we find for example the following passage:
It is now possible to securely establish a political program which was once prohibited by modernity. It no longer appears as insane and doomed to failure as before, because everything in postmodernity seems insane and doomed to failure, including its most "glamorous" aspects.
It is no coincidence that the heroes of postmodernity are "freaks" and "monsters", "transvestites" and "degenerate" - it is the law of style. Faced with the clowns of the world, nothing and no one can seem "too archaic", not even the people of the tradition who ignore the imperatives of modern life.
In the same chapter, we also read:
Liberalism has developed flawless weapons to implement its simple alternatives, which was the foundation of its victory. But it is precisely this victory that takes the greatest risk to liberalism. Just locate these new weaknesses in the global system and decrypt your passwords to hack it. At the very least, you have to try to do it. The events of September 11, 2001 in New York have shown that it is technologically possible. The Internet company can be useful, even for those who are fiercely opposed to it. Anyway, we must above all understand the postmodernity and our new situation as deeply as Marx understood the structure of industrial capitalism.
The fourth political theory must draw its "black inspiration" from postmodernity, from the liquidation of the light program, in the advent of the Société des Simulacres, by interpreting it as an incentive to combat rather than a destiny.
The idea here is to be inspired by postmodernity itself, and to welcome its most caricatured expression, so as to better return the logic and the tools of the system against itself.
The principle is therefore that described above: it is neither a question of openly and directly advocating the system that is favored, nor of seeking to gradually reform the current paradigm. On the contrary, it is a question of strengthening its contradictions, accelerating its decline, promoting its destruction, of strategically exploiting chaos, and discreetly preparing an alternative which must emerge from the ashes
Accelerationism and "Dark Enlightenment"
Essentiel News briefly described "dark enlightenment" in a recent article. It is a school of political thought advocating the abolition of Enlightenment ideas, which it considers archaic. It is very popular among the "New Right" and the technocratic elite.
Once again, this school of thought relies on accelerationism as an essential vector for implementing its ambitions. Rejecting both progressive ideals and traditional conservatism, it advocates a strategy of accelerating the existing system rather than fighting it, thereby hastening its collapse and thus giving rise to a new neo-aristocratic paradigm.
In the book The Dark Enlightenment, by Nick Land, nicknamed "the grandfather of accelerationism," we find passages like this:
If, as a result of the irremediable political incorrectness of reality, economies and populations were to collapse together, at least our souls would not suffer. Oh democracy! Dying, saccharine-sweetened fool, do you think the zombie hordes will care about your soul?
Or again:
Ultimately, systematic social collapse teaches the lesson that chronic failure and progressive deterioration have been unable to communicate. (This is Social Darwinism on a grand scale for dummies, and this is how civilizations end.)
Thus, for Nick Land, only collapse can effectively teach the lesson he deems indispensable. Further on, when the author considers three scenarios for the future, here is how he describes his favorite:
Western Renaissance. To be reborn, one must first die, so the more difficult the "powerful reboot," the better. A global crisis and disintegration offer the best chances.
Beyond these explicit examples, what is important to remember is that these neoreactionary principles are not confined to some obscure publication: they underlie the modern political antithesis, of which Donald Trump and his entourage now embody the most blatant example in the West.
In Summary
It is certainly useful to familiarize oneself with Alexander Dugin, Nick Land, Frances Piven, and their various varieties of accelerationism; but ultimately, what are we to make of all this? How does understanding these ideas shed light on current global politics?
One initial conclusion is immediately obvious: just because a system is irremediably corrupt does not mean its direct opposite is necessarily preferable. To completely abandon the Enlightenment would be tantamount to throwing the baby out with the bathwater; it would mean abandoning the principles of equality before the law, the inalienable right to life, democracy in the true sense, and individual liberty.
Worse, we understand that such a rejection is probably the desired objective; central planners invest considerable resources into understanding human psychology, and they know that one of the best ways to gain acceptance for an idea, however obscurantist, is to feign the caricatured promotion of its opposite.
If we observe, for example, that the rule of law is no longer respected, the solution is not techno-feudalism. If we consider science to be corrupted, the solution is not primitivism and the rejection of all reason. If we observe that humanity is decadent, the solution is not the extermination of the decadent. If we reject mass immigration, the solution is not the persecution of immigrants.
The second conclusion is to realize that sometimes conspiracy theories can be part of the conspiracy. It's possible that the planners want us to know that the magic passports of September 11, 2001, are a fantasy; that we reject Klaus Schwab and the corona circus; that we don't really consider transvestites to be women. These are provocations, and this clearly means that the goal is to provoke action, that is, to induce a revolution (which, incidentally, means going full circle and returning to the starting point).
The third conclusion is that the antithesis emerging in the world, of which Donald Trump is only the most grotesque embodiment, but which will likely be succeeded by something similar in Europe, is not the solution to the problem sought. On the contrary, it is a pseudo-alternative sewn from scratch.
Fourth, it is likely that the "new world order," which has been promised to us at least since Bush Sr.'s famous speech on September 11, 1990, is not the caricature that many "conspiracy theorists" have in mind; thus, Klaus Schwab would be a mere scarecrow (in a James Bond cast, missing only the white cat), and the new order could actually end up being a reaction to this caricature, embodied by some providential hero, and greeted with thunderous applause.
Ultimately, it is necessary to maintain, despite all provocations and legitimate reasons for anger, an independence and a lofty spirit; to resist the comfort of certainties; to reject the eschatological narrative that underlies all modern political obscurantism, including the one just mentioned.
When we do this, we discern the absurdity of the belief systems promulgated on both sides, and sometimes we elucidate certain contradictions; the latest, and not without wanting to end on a humorous note, we present Benjamin Netanyahu, the new adversary of the "deep state", as Elon Musk confirms to us.
Numerous links in reference in the original article .