Quarkism

Self Insert "People can really believe anything these days!" - Ismism This page is meant to represent Quark's political views. Please do not make any major edits without their permission.

Quarkism / Q/acc
My goal, you say? I have no goal, for i am powerless, but i think it'd be damn funny if modernity got squeezed into oblivion by both reaction and disillusion.
Basic Information
Aliases	Metaphysical Georgism Corporate Nihilism Cosmic Libertarianism Inhuman Individualism Austro-Cyberneticism Machinic Reactionaryism Rhizomatic Darwinism Add your own stuff if you wish Neo-Kakistocracy Neoreactionary Corporatocratic Nihilism Technocapital Transcendental Nihilist Moldbuggian Cultism Me maybe if I was more neoreactionary Quark-Chan Discord Nihilist Authoritarian Pseudo-Meta-Neocameralism Esoteric S̶̗̘͇̭͚͂ọ̴͕̣͆́m̷̩̻̥̏̊̚͝͝ͅe̶̯̭͎̜͗̑̈̐͠t̷̳̏h̶̭͔͖̘͊ī̴̖̬͚̳͐̏̈́n̴͈̅g̸̻̅̅̽ Mr. House if he were a virgin Cybercapitalist Accelerationism Average Post-Modern Neoreactionary Quarky-boo True edgy one wacky technophile/the mf who just doesn't like me? My Political Godfather
Alignments	Right Unity Georgists Monarchists Individualists Reactionary Globalists Nihilists Queer 30% 70% 100% 60% 40% 90% 80% 85%
Ideological Influences
Influenced by	Accelerationism Antinatalism Austrian School Cosmicism Cosmopolitanism Counter-Economics Cybernetics Deleuzoguattarianism Georgism Hoppeanism Humeanism Individualism Materialism Neocameralism Neoreactionaryism Occult Post-Humanism Patchwork Pigouvianism Piratism Postgenderism Post-Marxism Post-Modernism Post-Structuralism Social Darwinism Speculative Realism
Ideological Information
Notable Theorists	Renaud "Quark" Beaulieu (2003-), Québec
Character Information
Song	uamee - CAR GO VROOM

" Capital is but a form of labor, and its distinction from labor is in reality but a subdivision, just as the division of labor into skilled and unskilled would be."

- Henry George, Progress and Poverty

"Note that, before the coming of nationalist democracy, it was actually not a problem at all for wealthy, high-IQ people to live in the same society as poor, low-IQ people. It worked just fine. The latter served the former. They got paid. No one starved. If the mob wanted to riot, there were more than enough Swiss Guards to handle them."

- Curtis Yarvin, Why I am not a white nationalist

" Rationality, during the enlightenment, had to fight religion; and they fought religion with the most up-to-date science: physics. They fought it with the necessity of physical laws. The problem— Hume saw this, he saw it very well—is that the necessity of laws is not something you can demonstrate, but only something you can believe in: so it's a belief against another belief. And in fact I think the belief in the necessity of laws is necessarily a belief in God, because you believe in what you cannot demonstrate, you believe in an order that guarantees laws. In fact, you may not believe in god any more, but you believe in the divine solidity of laws."

- Quentin Meillassoux, After Finitude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency

"To absorb even the slightest fraction of [diversity] and to conclude, in the only way possible, that it is either nothing at all, or a 'social construct' and index of oppression, is sheer Gnostic delirium: a commitment beyond all evidence to the existence of a true and good world veiled by appearances. People are not equal, they do not develop equally, their goals and achievements are not equal, and nothing can make them equal. Substantial equality has no relation to reality, except as its systematic negation. Violence on a genocidal scale is required to even approximate to a practical egalitarian program, and if anything less ambitious is attempted, people get around it (some more competently than others)."

- Nick Land, The Dark Enlightenment Part 4b: Obnoxious observations

Funni quotes.

You may have noticed i'm too lazy and haven't added much yet to this page. That is factual. Accordingly, please refrain from adding me to your relations until i actually put what i believe in here, understood?

Now, i know most people who got here would like a quick way to know whether they must call me evil or not, and my influences section isn't all that helping if you're not into wacky stuff, probably. If you really really really don't want to read the page, just consider i want asexual CEOs to be able to defend their city-states with nuclear bombs, i believe nothing can or should be done to stop capitalism from eradicating humans, and i don't think god is real. These takes are extreme enough that you should be able to judge me now. You may laugh/seethe/not give a damn. You're welcome.

If you want to add me to your relationships, i stongly encourage you to put your own chosen icons (If you use them) to describe me as you see me, but if you're not original, take these:

[[File:Quarkism.png]] [[Quarkism]] ([[File:Neocameralism.png|link=Neocameralism]]/[[File:Accelerationism.png|link=phil:Accelerationism]]/[[File:Cosmo.png|link=Cosmopolitanism]]/[[File:Darwinist.png|link=Social_Darwinism]]/[[File:Postgenderism.png|link=Postgenderism]])

Which will look like this: Quarkism (////)

So, let's get to it.

• Accelerationism
  • Base Materialism
  • Anti-Humanism
  • Cosmic Nihilism
  • Speculative Realism
  • Rhizomes
  • Knowledge-Power
  • Hyperréalité
  • Gestell
  • Cybernetics
  • Capital As AI
  • Anti-Praxis

• Neoreactionaryism
  • Anti-Enlightenment
  • Obscurantism
  • Darwinism
  • Elitism
  • Monarchy
  • Individualism
  • Anti-Idpol
  • Exit-Oriented Politics
  • Patchwork
  • Classical International Law
  • Formalism
  • Revenue Maximization
  • Austrian School
  • Crypto-Governance

• Market Nihilism
  • Georgism
  • Pigouvianism
  • Copyleft
  • Gig Economy
  • Counter-Economics
  • Corporate Identity
  • Neural Networking
  • Morphological Freedom
  • Hyper-Racism
  • Antinatalism

Accelerationism

Accelerationism, understood here in what i deem its true meaning (i.e. neither "hurr durr push the system to its breaking point" nor "when technology go faster", and certainly not whatever bs these neonazis hallucinated during their gang rapes), pertains to the ensemble of mindsets, frameworks, critical theory tools, concepts and other philosophies carried and developed by CCRU authors such as the infamous forerunner Nick Land, the suicidal Mark Fisher, the brilliant Sarah Jane Plant and the, well, irrelevant Benjamin Noys, all influenced by an extremely wide array of poststructuralist, postmodernist, posthumanist and variously interesting thinkers. Posterior content, from u/acc founder Matt Colquhoun, later works by Nick Land as well as some sparse elements from z/acc founder James De Llis is also to be included, though Srnicek and Wolfendale will be entirely left out because they're really oblivious morons and i hate them and their ideas.

Neoreactionaryism

The following beliefs of mine are all taken from various neoreactionary texts, mostly from Curtis Yarvin/Mencius Moldbug (On Unqualified Reservations) and Nick Land (In The Dark Enlightenment) and sometimes other blog posts and essays which mostly relate to technology, platforming and governmental finance.

Market Nihilism

Georgism

I've heard it confuses people as to why georgism out of all things is such a central element to my opinions, grounded in the belief that georgism is before all an egalitarian and radically liberal doctrine applied to the economy for the common good. I'd argue that this is a severe misconception of the ideas that Henry George attempted to further back in his 19th century America. Indeed, the issues of the day were appertaining to crippling cronyism, the recurring populist calls for high tariffs on trade (The US in the 1800's were surprisingly demagogic when you look into it), and the apparent lack of increase in personal wealth of commoners despite the incredibly fast growth of productive abilities, suggesting reasons as to why this correlation wasn't occuring as expected, Progress and Poverty's name not being a coincidence. From there, it should not be surprising at all to find out that georgism not only inspired a major part of the Austrian school of economics, due to its focus on laissez-faire and individuality, but also led to the creation of neoliberalism, many proponents of which defend deregulation of the economy, acclaim soft power through global market dominance and even went as far as to claim the LVT to be the only fair tax. While both of these are obviously liberal ideologies, it's easy to see that, far from being some kind of collectivist movement, georgism and its heirs clearly lean on the side of ruthless capitalism.

Yet this is not even the main reason why georgism is so great. Theorists within the tradition came up with insightful economic ontologies to concretely advise policy towards both utilitarian and deontological optimisation. Specifically, the division of resources in three precisely cut categories, which all fit oddly well with my materialism and inhumanism. They are:

• Land, anything available in limited supply and which cannot be produced (Oil, air and radio frequencies fall into this group, for example)
• Capital, anything available in limited supply yet can be produced (Machinery, individuals and infrastructure all count)
• Information, anything available in unlimited supply and that can be produced (Patents, copyrights and trademarks, you get the idea)

This manner of grouping existing and potential resources together according to their availability and origin gives a clear direction for property norms to be established. The georgist stance on how to handle these is rather straightforward.

Land, both limited and impossible to manufacture, ought to be public property, as allowing anyone to arbitrarily claim it (As in any system relying on the Lockean proviso, the homestead principle or similar land rent-based norms) would effectively block economic opportunity from flourishing, as one could own empty plots of land indefinitely at no cost, wait for nearby investors to develop the region, thus increasing land value, then sell back the ground at a far higher price, both preventing development and capitalizing on no work at all. Since land values are socially created, the problem with land ownership lies in the fact that landlords have the ability to earn wealth from the plot itself, and thus the solution is to allow such ownership at the condition that all rent earned from location value alone (Such as how near it is from infrastructure, commerces and workplaces, how good-looking it is, how safe the neighborhood is, etc.) be socially refunded at a rate of 100%, what is commonly called the LVT, the Land Value Tax, effectively giving back to the creators of the value through state funds. Be it that someone lays claims on a plot and refuses to abdicate the captured rent, and the claim would be rendered useless, defaulted to public property, as the state has no reason to partake in expenditures to defend the property of an owner who doesn't pay the tax. Everything related to natural resources and the like would also be subjected to similar policy, detailed further in the Pigouvianism section.