- Messages
- 916
He tried to come up with this very Jewish scheme by which he was gonna basically profiteer off of some shit, selling something or another, I forget the details. And then his code had some weird shit, he came up with like a whole programming language to support it, I forget the details but the logic of it was kinda funky, and he explained his reasoning but it went against how a lot of other code that's out there works.
Anyway, his Wikipedia biography says that he's for totalitarianism, and because there's a clique of established editors trying to keep that article the way it is, and everyone who opposes them probably got banned already, it's basically the cabal vs. a bunch of anons and sockpuppets (such as me), so they win. The same stuff goes on with the Roosh V article, but at least the Roosh V article, even if it's unbalanced, is factual. Curtis Yarvin's bio isn't even factual. I just don't like that they misrepresent his views. Even if the dude is totally Jewish (or half-Jewish anyway), he writes some interesting stuff, which I find insightful sometimes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin
I try to get in touch with him and say, "Hey, can you make a public statement clarifying you're not in favor of totalitarianism, so we can cite that as support for correcting your Wikipedia article" but I think he deliberately makes it hard to find his email address. So maybe he deserves to have an inaccurate bio out there. But, his body of work at least should not be slandered (any more than Hitler's Mein Kampf should be unfairly bashed, although at least the stuff people say about it, e.g. that it's turgid, is subjective; Yarvin's bio is objectively wrong.)
Anyway, his Wikipedia biography says that he's for totalitarianism, and because there's a clique of established editors trying to keep that article the way it is, and everyone who opposes them probably got banned already, it's basically the cabal vs. a bunch of anons and sockpuppets (such as me), so they win. The same stuff goes on with the Roosh V article, but at least the Roosh V article, even if it's unbalanced, is factual. Curtis Yarvin's bio isn't even factual. I just don't like that they misrepresent his views. Even if the dude is totally Jewish (or half-Jewish anyway), he writes some interesting stuff, which I find insightful sometimes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin
I try to get in touch with him and say, "Hey, can you make a public statement clarifying you're not in favor of totalitarianism, so we can cite that as support for correcting your Wikipedia article" but I think he deliberately makes it hard to find his email address. So maybe he deserves to have an inaccurate bio out there. But, his body of work at least should not be slandered (any more than Hitler's Mein Kampf should be unfairly bashed, although at least the stuff people say about it, e.g. that it's turgid, is subjective; Yarvin's bio is objectively wrong.)
Last edited: