Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... |
How is this any different from the loony left’s plan to burn everything down? Same outcome, different means.
Either way, Technocracy is guaranteed to rise out of the ashes. ⁃ Patrick Wood, Editor.
Disclosure: This article is the result of a conversation between the Reset editorial team and artificial intelligence.
Curtis Yarvin, known until a few years ago only to a niche audience under the pseudonym Mencius Moldbug, is now considered one of the most subtle and dangerous intellectual influences on America’s new radical right. His theory of the Dark Enlightenment is nothing less than a full-scale assault on the foundational values of modern liberalism: representative democracy, the rule of law, civil rights, public opinion, and the separation of powers.
In his ideological universe, democracy is not the pinnacle of civilization but its degeneration. A convenient lie designed to obscure the reality of power—unelected, invisible—which, according to Yarvin, lies in the hands of the Cathedral: a meta-structure composed of media, academia, and bureaucracies that propagates progressive dogmas with the zeal of a religious institution.
His solution? Tear it all down. Dismantle democratic institutions and replace them with a system of “neocameralism,” modeled on corporate governance: a state-as-a-company, run by a sovereign CEO, unelected, irremovable, and vested with absolute authority. In this vision, citizenship is not a political right but a contractual position. Citizens become shareholders—or just users. Government becomes a service to be optimized.
This idea of “algorithmic sovereignty” has seduced many minds in Silicon Valley, starting with Peter Thiel, billionaire investor, founder of Palantir, and PayPal co-founder—one of the most influential figures in the American tech ecosystem. Thiel has openly questioned the compatibility of democracy and freedom (“I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible”) and has heavily bankrolled think tanks, start-ups, and political candidates aligned with neo-reactionary thinking.
It is in this context that Yarvin gradually moved closer to the orbit of Donald Trump, though never in an official capacity. His writings have circulated among figures close to Steve Bannon, Trump’s former chief strategist, and other intellectuals in the American alt-right, who are drawn to Yarvin’s blend of technical jargon, aristocratic historical references (from Carlyle to De Maistre), and systemic critique of Western democracies.
In particular, Yarvin served as one of the theoretical sources for the “post-democratic” rhetoric that emerged surrounding Trump’s 2016 campaign: the idea that the deep state is an entrenched apparatus obstructing the popular will in favor of the Cathedral’s interests—and yet incapable of producing true social order. Neither the Cathedral nor democracy itself, Yarvin argues, can sustain real order. Only a “strongman” can.
This idea resonated in Trump’s later attempts to delegitimize elections, the media, and the judiciary.
Yarvin’s own language—steeped in programming metaphors and software analogies—makes him especially appealing to high-tech and crypto-libertarian circles. To Yarvin, society is outdated software, which must be uninstalled and replaced with more efficient code. His lexicon speaks the language of Silicon Valley while conveying authoritarian and ultra-reactionary ideas.
Beneath the irony, intellectualism, and provocations, Yarvin’s thought is driven by a deep hostility toward political equality and popular participation. His idea of order is grounded in hierarchy, efficiency, and unquestioned authority. It’s an aristocratic restoration in digital form, where a technocratic elite supplants the sovereign people.
But Yarvin does not merely seek to preserve the established order. He wants to overthrow it. And he does so with the tools of the 21st century: blogs, podcasts, newsletters, interviews, memes. His aim is not merely theoretical—it is cultural and political. To influence those who hold power (or could) in order to reprogram the future.
In recent years, his influence has extended well beyond the American far right. Some Republican candidates, such as J.D. Vance, have received Thiel’s support and shown sympathy toward post-liberal right-wing ideas. The billionaire tech elite—often frustrated by the slow pace of democratic procedures—has increasingly turned its gaze to “efficient” authoritarian models like Singapore’s, one of Yarvin’s explicit references.
What makes his vision particularly dangerous is its ability to penetrate the mainstream, disguised as a “technical” fix or a neutral systems upgrade. But beneath the managerial surface lies an openly illiberal project: to abolish elections, concentrate power, and neutralize dissent.
Yarvin’s Dark Enlightenment is a high-tech version of absolutism: an order imposed from above, no longer justified by God, but by code. And in an age of institutional distrust, disinformation, and and political disillusionment, this lucid and tidy dystopia has found more listeners than one might expect.
Curtis Yarvin is not just a niche thinker. He is a symptom of a deeper mutation: the erosion of the democratic imagination, replaced by a growing fascination with efficiency, control, and authority. And every time a tech magnate talks about “resetting the system,” you can faintly hear, in the background, the echo of Yarvin’s voice.
Yarvin and Nick Land: Two Faces of the Dark Enlightenment
The term Dark Enlightenment was not coined by Curtis Yarvin but by Nick Land, a British philosopher and theorist of accelerationism, in a 2012 essay that spread widely across neoreactionary circles. Land, a key figure in the Cybernetic Culture Research Unit (CCRU) at the University of Warwick in the 1990s, abandoned academia to become a theorist of dissolution: of democracy, of humanism, and of Western moral frameworks themselves. Where Yarvin is pragmatic, Land is apocalyptic; where Yarvin imagines a state-company governed like a start-up, Land envisions the definitive collapse of liberal civilization under the weight of its own velocity.
And yet, the two converge. Both see the Enlightenment not as the gateway to reason and rights, but as the beginning of a destructive illusion: the idea that the average human being is capable of self-government. Both reject universalism, equality, and progress as toxic myths. Both celebrate elites: technocratic for Yarvin, cybernetic for Land.
Still, important differences remain. Yarvin is an engineer-turned-philosopher, an institutional hacker who wants to rewrite the code of government. Land is a post-human thinker, fascinated by AI, entropy, and deregulated markets as forces that obliterate all order. For Yarvin, the remedy is digital monarchy; for Land, it is liberatory catastrophe. One wants to replace democracy with authority, the other to accelerate it into oblivion.
The paradox is that both end up converging on the same vision of the future: a world without participation, without popular sovereignty, without shared morality. A world where power no longer answers to consent but to speed, efficiency, and control. This is the dark heart of the Dark Enlightenment: not a mere reaction to liberalism, but its cold, calculated negation.
In the comparison between Yarvin and Land, we glimpse a new grammar of post-democratic power: technocratic, authoritarian, post-human. It is not a return to the past, but a leap into the void—rationalized, theorized, and designed. And for that reason, all the more dangerous.
- Main Sources on Curtis Yarvin (Mencius Moldbug)
- Corey Pein, “The Moldbug Variations”
An in-depth analysis of Yarvin’s thought and his connections to figures like Peter Thiel.
Read the article on The Baffler - Blog: “Unqualified Reservations” by Mencius Moldbug
Yarvin’s original blog, where he developed his neoreactionary theories between 2007 and 2014.
Visit the blog - “Unqualified Reservations: Volume I” by Curtis Yarvin
A curated collection of his writings, also available as an ebook.
Available at Passage Press
Key Sources on Nick Land and the “Dark Enlightenment”
- Nick Land, “The Dark Enlightenment”
The foundational essay that gave the movement its name, available as a PDF. Download the PDF
Further Reading
- Chris Lehmann, “The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley”
A critical profile of Yarvin and his influence in Silicon Valley.
Read the article on The Nation - Jonathan Derbyshire, “The Philosophy Behind Trump’s Dark Enlightenment”
An analysis of the connections between the ideas of Yarvin, Land, and the Trump administration.
Read the article on Financial Times
- Corey Pein, “The Moldbug Variations”
[…] https://www.technocracy.news/dark-utopia-curtis-yarvin-nick-land-and-the-new-radical-right/ […]
It’s a mistake to place Yarvin on the radical right, if there is such a thing, which I doubt. His philosophy is clearly on the left, because it’s destructive. The philosophies of destruction come from radical philosophers embraced by the left. The rule of thumb is, the right seeks to build, repair, restore, the left to destroy, burn, annihilate. Ones attitude of heart is the critical tell here. One is positive and hopeful, the other embittered and vengeful. If you’ve never built anything beneficial to society, and think you must utterly destroy before you can build, you are far to… Read more »
Hello Phil. Your post reminded me of Psalm 73: 12-22. Without the Judeo-Christian lens we will remain frustrated and angry at the influence of such men. If you read the book of Revelation chapters 6 & 13 you’ll get an idea of what is going to happen in the future. We will not be able to change the outcome. These things are prophesied. We would all do well to heed, ‘Anyone who has an ear, let him hear’.
Best wishes, Patti Shaw
Great response, I happen to agree with you. Seems like Yarvin and Land are working very hard to be seen and heard, or have split personalities – intentionally, with the purpose of confusing one less read. 🙂 I happen to believe that the common denominator here is that man works to survive and does so, not necessarily in agreement with his fellow man all the time, and not necessarily performing good works. For the most part, we see one’s true colors in the case of catastrophes, politics tends to fade away when life is threatened – for the 80% wants… Read more »
If memory serves which it does you went on Bannon’s show. If you actually listened to Bannon maybe youd noticed he is for exactly thoe opposite of Yarvin. Oh and by the way the 2020 election was stolen. Trump isnt part of this plan you lay out. Many try to use him to accomplish certain things but to just throw him in with the far right non sense is clearly inflamatory and wrong. The far right lmao. What a joke. None of the technocrats are conservative or really even republican no matter who they fund or say they vote for.
Too many extremists alive today for sure to be of any good to God or humanity. All sides are really sold out to the devil. One side openly confesses their allegiance to satan while the other side pretends to be aligned with God and doing His will. In essence both sides are committed to fulfilling the same agendas though they publicly pretend otherwise. The only disagreement these people have is who will ultimately be in control of the madness. Eventually they will all be cooperating with, and delegating their power to the son of perdition claiming that he is God,… Read more »
Hi Patrick, I read your Book, The Evil Twins of Technocracy and Transhumanism, and referred many to it. But this slant against President Trump is a bit disturbing. For some who rant and rave against President Trump that have no idea what he is doing as regards The Laws and Orders of The Military and what he is negotiating on tariffs and why, and the fantastic job they are doing with D.O.G.E to clean up waste and fraud, I ask, what would you do differently? What would you do with the investors who have invested Billions over the last many… Read more »
There are two foundational pillars to a free society: Property rights and Free Speech. The WEF has clearly stated that you will own nothing by 2030. Free speech is contained in the Bill of Rights, along with freedom of religion, the right to assemble peacefully, freedom of the press, and the right to petition the government to redress grievances. Curtis Yarvin and Nick Land clearly stated that you will not own anything (SovCorps will own everything) and America will be turned into a monarchy – where you will kiss the First Amendment goodbye. ALL of the Techbros (Thiel, Musk, Sachs,… Read more »
[…] From Technocracy.News comes this report: […]
[…] From Technocracy.News comes this report: […]
[…] From Technocracy.News comes this report: […]
[…] Dark Enlightenment Techno Far Right Destroying European and US Democracy 2: Curtis Yarvin and the Dark Enlightenment – Technocracy News. Both were about technology, but whats the relationship with the 18th century Enlightenment? Dark Utopia: Curtis Yarvin, Nick Land And The New Radical Right – Yarvin and Nick Land: Two Faces of the Dark Enlightenment The term Dark Enlightenment was not coined by Curtis Yarvin but by Nick Land, a British philosopher and theorist of accelerationism, in a 2012 essay that spread widely across neoreactionary circles. Land, a key figure in the Cybernetic Culture Research Unit (CCRU) at the… Read more »
[…] rapport suivant provient de […]