If by "the movement," you mean Occupy Wall St., one of the things about it as an organization is that it didn't have a mechanism to exclude people really, if I understand correctly. So there was a pretty broad slice of political philosophies united around the common idea "The system that rewards risk-takers for taking risks with other people's money while consolidating the consequences on those who did not consent to the risks is fundamentally flawed."
Oh God. Anyone aligning themselves with Yarvin in anyway is highly highly questionable. He wants to completely destroy US democracy, and is at least partially responsible for the mess the US is currently mired in.
I know what you're referring to, but this one is well-documented. When Tunney and I were last in overlapping circles, she self-described as techno-fascist. It's pretty well-documented (though I apologize for assuming it was common knowledge; since I was there and knew of her to only one or two degrees of separation, it's easy for me to forget she's not necessarily a well-known name).
... also, my intent was not to cast aspersions. When last I heard the name, I had a particular political leaning associated to the name and I was wondering if it had changed.
They’re in the thread, ask them
I don't think it did, she was openly pro-musk during his purges with doge so very recently.
Source, seems pretty relevant. https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/occupy...
As in Curtis Yarvin, Dark Enlightenment techno fascist? Really?
Specifically. https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/123614 - reference page 68.
"Questioned on Twitter about her beliefs, she replied: "Read Mencius Moldbug.""
(Original source of that information, as cited by above paper, is https://thebaffler.com/latest/mouthbreathing-machiavellis ; I don't have a Twitter archive at my fingertips so I cannot pull up the primary source.)
Fascinating. I had no idea.
I feel International coverage, and even academic studies on the movement, missed this completely at the time.
If by "the movement," you mean Occupy Wall St., one of the things about it as an organization is that it didn't have a mechanism to exclude people really, if I understand correctly. So there was a pretty broad slice of political philosophies united around the common idea "The system that rewards risk-takers for taking risks with other people's money while consolidating the consequences on those who did not consent to the risks is fundamentally flawed."
Oh God. Anyone aligning themselves with Yarvin in anyway is highly highly questionable. He wants to completely destroy US democracy, and is at least partially responsible for the mess the US is currently mired in.
[flagged]
I know what you're referring to, but this one is well-documented. When Tunney and I were last in overlapping circles, she self-described as techno-fascist. It's pretty well-documented (though I apologize for assuming it was common knowledge; since I was there and knew of her to only one or two degrees of separation, it's easy for me to forget she's not necessarily a well-known name).
https://www.salon.com/2017/08/19/who-gets-fired-for-being-a-...
Zhang, Zhexi. 2019. "The Aesthetics of Decentralization." p.68
https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/08/libertarians-sometime...
... also, my intent was not to cast aspersions. When last I heard the name, I had a particular political leaning associated to the name and I was wondering if it had changed.