A Guide, Resource, and Repository of Could-have-been Ideologies for your Alternate History

Cosmisim: Basically Noospheric Communism's religious grandpa who insisted that he could see ghosts. The ideology itself was founded by Nikolai Fyodorov, a philosopher obsessed with physical immortality (i.e. transhumanism) who combined Eastern and Western worldviews by arguing that mankind is an active employee of a larger spiritual cosmos. The philosophy would be later adopted by Bolshevik artists who envisioned a "universal Proletarian" conquering the stars.
An interesting idea here would be that it legitimately believes people aren't actually inhabiting their bodies, they're spirits remotely controlling said bodies. Therefore, logically, any misbehavior is actually the result of a 'bad connection' with the body mangling commands from the spirit.
Crysis Legion by Peter Watts said:
And that was when I decided, enough. I gave the old cunt a choice between the police station and the psych ward. I never saw her again after I got her institutionalized. Not once.

But what really pissed me off was the way people kept making excuses for her.

Nobody saw a monster. All anybody saw was a victim of the disease. That’s why Dad never hit back, It’s not her fault, it’s the dementia. People would visit her in the home and she’d rant and spit and say all these vile things about Dad and everyone would just sadly shake their heads and say, “It’s the Alzheimer’s speaking, how can you cut her off like that, she’s your mother.”

But the thing was, they couldn’t have it both ways. If this was the disease, then it wasn’t my mother at all; my mother had died years ago, she died when the dementia undid all the circuits that made her what she was and rewired her into this vicious twisted body-snatcher thing made out of recycled meat. In which case I owed it nothing. And if she was my mother, well, then my mother was a rabid dog that needed to be put down if you ask me, and I didn’t owe that thing any special breaks, either.

No matter how you looked at it, I was off the hook. Switch the wiring, pimp the neurotransmitters, and mother turns into other. There’s nothing fixed about who or what we are, Roger. Even if it looks the same, it’s not. It’s all just wetware to be wiped, rewritten, rebooted. I learned that when I was just a kid, I learned that without any of your fancy degrees or candy-colored MRI readouts.
Combine with soviet experimentation and pseudoscience and you'll get something very weird, very quickly. I can only assume these gizmos might also make an appearance.
Atomic Orthodoxy: A unique ideology that believes the Orthodox Church and nuclear deterrence are two of the most crucial elements of Russia's national security. Atomic Orthodoxy argues that the preservation of traditional values, technological progress, and the concentration of WMDs are all important to defend Russia (a.k.a Rome 3.0) against demonic hordes and multicultural satanocracies in the coming Armageddon. Despite its oddities, the movement remains somewhat popular amongst nationalist public figures.
Anyone else getting vibes of Liu Cixin's Death's End and making swordholder (the person whose sole authority was controlling the trigger to activate the MAD deterrence which was the only thing keeping humanity safe by ensuring that the enemy would also lose if they tried anything) an elected position, to allow people to vote on just how much they were willing to let the trisolarans get away with before destroying both species?
Ethnocacerism
So basically this thread?
 
Okay, three things:

1) The Accelerationism entry should hopefully be published at some point this week.


3)
We must do both now. Also I've thinking about Southern Nationalism which is essentially an attempt at creating a Confederate States of America 2.0
I'm not sure if you're aware, but you've gained something of a reputation as a confedaboo over in the SufficientVelocity alternate history community. I'm not accusing you of anything, but this post doesn't look great when viewed with that information in mind.
 

Ficboy

Banned
Okay, three things:

1) The Accelerationism entry should hopefully be published at some point this week.


3)

I'm not sure if you're aware, but you've gained something of a reputation as a confedaboo over in the SufficientVelocity alternate history community. I'm not accusing you of anything, but this post doesn't look great when viewed with that information in mind.
No, I'm an apologist at all. Just a neutral observer.
 
Okay, three things:

1) The Accelerationism entry should hopefully be published at some point this week.


3)

I'm not sure if you're aware, but you've gained something of a reputation as a confedaboo over in the SufficientVelocity alternate history community. I'm not accusing you of anything, but this post doesn't look great when viewed with that information in mind.
Oh my god that thread is a gold mine. Not sure why he decided to spread his legs like that when he had very, very clearly wet himself.
 
Screenshot_2020-10-01-21-57-39-37.jpg

Just found this utter gem on a Politigram meme page
 
Okay, so my Accelerationism entry didn't get published last week, but it should be soon - maybe even today, if all goes well.

While I'm still trying to write it all up, though; would you prefer that I actually try to explain some of its own theory, or should I just focus on describing it?
 
Okay, so my Accelerationism entry didn't get published last week, but it should be soon - maybe even today, if all goes well.

While I'm still trying to write it all up, though; would you prefer that I actually try to explain some of its own theory, or should I just focus on describing it?

I'd appreciate trying to explain its own theory as well.
 
Okay, so my Accelerationism entry didn't get published last week, but it should be soon - maybe even today, if all goes well.

While I'm still trying to write it all up, though; would you prefer that I actually try to explain some of its own theory, or should I just focus on describing it?
With something like this, I'm not sure. Whatever you feel is best I suppose.
 

Ficboy

Banned
Okay, so my Accelerationism entry didn't get published last week, but it should be soon - maybe even today, if all goes well.

While I'm still trying to write it all up, though; would you prefer that I actually try to explain some of its own theory, or should I just focus on describing it?
Let us hope you can fully publish it. Accelerationism has far-right and far-left variants.
 
Sorry for not releasing it last week, it's rather difficult to write for and I have stuff going on in my real life. I'm rewriting it again, hopefully for the last time, but I'll release what I did write on here:
Accelerationism emerged in the 90s, specifically in the ‘CCRU’ (Cybernetic Culture Research Unit) of Warwick University. People in the 90s were generally fairly optimistic about the future: the Cold War and the shadow of a potential apocalypse it cast was definitely over, and (free market) capitalism & freedom had seemed to make an ultimately triumph over communism & tyranny; the economy was doing well, and there was all this cool new technology like the internet or (primitive) VR coming out. “Cyber” was the big new thing. The new emerging tech culture was descended from the utopian tradition of the 60s counter culture, leading to the internet often being thought of as a new futuristic, utopian horizon away from mainstream society and all its flaws. Even on the more socialist side of the spectrum, who were dissatisfied with the prevailing neoliberal hegemony, there was a belief that ‘cyberspace’ might prove to be a space beyond the grasp of capitalism. Cyberpunk was even being used as a sort of replacement for social critique/philosophy for a while.

Not everyone was so optimistic, however. The origins of accelerationism in the CCRU were kind of the opposite of the so-called ‘Californian Ideology’ (optimistic Silicon Valley tech-libertarianism), focusing around the more radical and disruptive elements of the emerging “cyber culture”. Initially focused around one Sadie Plant, one of the aforementioned ‘cyperpunk social critics’ who could be considered a predecessor (or even the founder) of the Feminist/Accelerationism school of thought, after she stepped down one Nick Land ended up becoming the CCRU’s leader and he lead it down a… not do good direction. Drug use - already common within the CCRU’s membership - ramped up considerably and became more hardcore, and the group went from just being interested in radical counterculture and weird French philosophy to outright occultism - at one point the group even took up dwelling in the former house of Alesteir Crowley. This rather inevitably led to burn out and the CCRU breaking apart.

To try and wrap-up this little history lesson, the burnt-out Nick Land moved to China where he eventually became re-radicalized through reading the Neo-Reactionary writings of Mencius Moldbug (real name Curtis Yavin) and admiration of China’s state-capitalism and the advancements/developments it had accomplished. His writings would be foundational for Accelerationism as a whole, but specifically for it’s right-wing (Right/Accelerationism, or R/Accel). Meanwhile, back in Britain one of Sadie Plan’s (and Nick Land’s) postgraduate students set up an internet blog called K-Punk, which would take the CCRU’s ideas into a more explicitly Marxist direction - him and his writings would go on to become highly influential in Accelerationism, and help serve as the foundations of the movement’s left-wing (Left/Accelerationism, or L/Accel) alongside Nick Snircek.
Alright, so that’s the background of where Accelerationism emerged from, but what is it actually about? Well, it’s complicated because Accelerationism draws from a variety of highly complex thinkers. However, the most consistent & important influences are, arguably, Marxism and psychoanalysis - specifically they draw on Karl Marx himself, as well as French postmodernist Jean-François Lyotard’s early work (and self-proclaimed “evil book”) Libidinal Economy, as well as French social philosophers Giles Delueze & Felix Guattari’s capitalism and schizophrenia books (Anti-Oedipus & A Thousand Plateaus) which kind of blur the line between Marxism, postmodernism and psychoanalysis. None of that probably means anything to you unless you’re a nerd and/or academic like me, so…

Basically, Accelerationists view the libido/desire as being a productive force - a sort of Nietzschian ‘will-to-power’ source of energy which drives people to incorporate the ‘other’ into themselves - which fuels socioeconomic systems. But libido is also a disruptive force because, for a variety of reasons, desires cannot always be met/satisfied - people will continue to desire despite this, and so when the ‘libidinal energy’ cannot be expended in a productive manner it will instead be expended disruptively. Most socioeconomic systems have historically placed restrictions upon the libido in order to try and avoid these disruptions - think about how medieval Christianity made lust, greed, gluttony… sins - but capitalism is the least restrictive socioeconomic system thus far, and this freeing of desire/the libidinal energy has made capitalism the most productive - but also the most disruptive - socioeconomic system so far in human history.

Note, however, that capitalism is viewed by Accelerationism as disruptive, rather than unstable.
 
Sorry for not releasing it last week, it's rather difficult to write for and I have stuff going on in my real life. I'm rewriting it again, hopefully for the last time, but I'll release what I did write on here:
Accelerationism emerged in the 90s, specifically in the ‘CCRU’ (Cybernetic Culture Research Unit) of Warwick University. People in the 90s were generally fairly optimistic about the future: the Cold War and the shadow of a potential apocalypse it cast was definitely over, and (free market) capitalism & freedom had seemed to make an ultimately triumph over communism & tyranny; the economy was doing well, and there was all this cool new technology like the internet or (primitive) VR coming out. “Cyber” was the big new thing. The new emerging tech culture was descended from the utopian tradition of the 60s counter culture, leading to the internet often being thought of as a new futuristic, utopian horizon away from mainstream society and all its flaws. Even on the more socialist side of the spectrum, who were dissatisfied with the prevailing neoliberal hegemony, there was a belief that ‘cyberspace’ might prove to be a space beyond the grasp of capitalism. Cyberpunk was even being used as a sort of replacement for social critique/philosophy for a while.

Not everyone was so optimistic, however. The origins of accelerationism in the CCRU were kind of the opposite of the so-called ‘Californian Ideology’ (optimistic Silicon Valley tech-libertarianism), focusing around the more radical and disruptive elements of the emerging “cyber culture”. Initially focused around one Sadie Plant, one of the aforementioned ‘cyperpunk social critics’ who could be considered a predecessor (or even the founder) of the Feminist/Accelerationism school of thought, after she stepped down one Nick Land ended up becoming the CCRU’s leader and he lead it down a… not do good direction. Drug use - already common within the CCRU’s membership - ramped up considerably and became more hardcore, and the group went from just being interested in radical counterculture and weird French philosophy to outright occultism - at one point the group even took up dwelling in the former house of Alesteir Crowley. This rather inevitably led to burn out and the CCRU breaking apart.

To try and wrap-up this little history lesson, the burnt-out Nick Land moved to China where he eventually became re-radicalized through reading the Neo-Reactionary writings of Mencius Moldbug (real name Curtis Yavin) and admiration of China’s state-capitalism and the advancements/developments it had accomplished. His writings would be foundational for Accelerationism as a whole, but specifically for it’s right-wing (Right/Accelerationism, or R/Accel). Meanwhile, back in Britain one of Sadie Plan’s (and Nick Land’s) postgraduate students set up an internet blog called K-Punk, which would take the CCRU’s ideas into a more explicitly Marxist direction - him and his writings would go on to become highly influential in Accelerationism, and help serve as the foundations of the movement’s left-wing (Left/Accelerationism, or L/Accel) alongside Nick Snircek.
Alright, so that’s the background of where Accelerationism emerged from, but what is it actually about? Well, it’s complicated because Accelerationism draws from a variety of highly complex thinkers. However, the most consistent & important influences are, arguably, Marxism and psychoanalysis - specifically they draw on Karl Marx himself, as well as French postmodernist Jean-François Lyotard’s early work (and self-proclaimed “evil book”) Libidinal Economy, as well as French social philosophers Giles Delueze & Felix Guattari’s capitalism and schizophrenia books (Anti-Oedipus & A Thousand Plateaus) which kind of blur the line between Marxism, postmodernism and psychoanalysis. None of that probably means anything to you unless you’re a nerd and/or academic like me, so…

Basically, Accelerationists view the libido/desire as being a productive force - a sort of Nietzschian ‘will-to-power’ source of energy which drives people to incorporate the ‘other’ into themselves - which fuels socioeconomic systems. But libido is also a disruptive force because, for a variety of reasons, desires cannot always be met/satisfied - people will continue to desire despite this, and so when the ‘libidinal energy’ cannot be expended in a productive manner it will instead be expended disruptively. Most socioeconomic systems have historically placed restrictions upon the libido in order to try and avoid these disruptions - think about how medieval Christianity made lust, greed, gluttony… sins - but capitalism is the least restrictive socioeconomic system thus far, and this freeing of desire/the libidinal energy has made capitalism the most productive - but also the most disruptive - socioeconomic system so far in human history.

Note, however, that capitalism is viewed by Accelerationism as disruptive, rather than unstable.
I'm looking forward to this!
 
Sorry for not releasing it last week, it's rather difficult to write for and I have stuff going on in my real life. I'm rewriting it again, hopefully for the last time, but I'll release what I did write on here:
Accelerationism emerged in the 90s, specifically in the ‘CCRU’ (Cybernetic Culture Research Unit) of Warwick University. People in the 90s were generally fairly optimistic about the future: the Cold War and the shadow of a potential apocalypse it cast was definitely over, and (free market) capitalism & freedom had seemed to make an ultimately triumph over communism & tyranny; the economy was doing well, and there was all this cool new technology like the internet or (primitive) VR coming out. “Cyber” was the big new thing. The new emerging tech culture was descended from the utopian tradition of the 60s counter culture, leading to the internet often being thought of as a new futuristic, utopian horizon away from mainstream society and all its flaws. Even on the more socialist side of the spectrum, who were dissatisfied with the prevailing neoliberal hegemony, there was a belief that ‘cyberspace’ might prove to be a space beyond the grasp of capitalism. Cyberpunk was even being used as a sort of replacement for social critique/philosophy for a while.

Not everyone was so optimistic, however. The origins of accelerationism in the CCRU were kind of the opposite of the so-called ‘Californian Ideology’ (optimistic Silicon Valley tech-libertarianism), focusing around the more radical and disruptive elements of the emerging “cyber culture”. Initially focused around one Sadie Plant, one of the aforementioned ‘cyperpunk social critics’ who could be considered a predecessor (or even the founder) of the Feminist/Accelerationism school of thought, after she stepped down one Nick Land ended up becoming the CCRU’s leader and he lead it down a… not do good direction. Drug use - already common within the CCRU’s membership - ramped up considerably and became more hardcore, and the group went from just being interested in radical counterculture and weird French philosophy to outright occultism - at one point the group even took up dwelling in the former house of Alesteir Crowley. This rather inevitably led to burn out and the CCRU breaking apart.

To try and wrap-up this little history lesson, the burnt-out Nick Land moved to China where he eventually became re-radicalized through reading the Neo-Reactionary writings of Mencius Moldbug (real name Curtis Yavin) and admiration of China’s state-capitalism and the advancements/developments it had accomplished. His writings would be foundational for Accelerationism as a whole, but specifically for it’s right-wing (Right/Accelerationism, or R/Accel). Meanwhile, back in Britain one of Sadie Plan’s (and Nick Land’s) postgraduate students set up an internet blog called K-Punk, which would take the CCRU’s ideas into a more explicitly Marxist direction - him and his writings would go on to become highly influential in Accelerationism, and help serve as the foundations of the movement’s left-wing (Left/Accelerationism, or L/Accel) alongside Nick Snircek.
Alright, so that’s the background of where Accelerationism emerged from, but what is it actually about? Well, it’s complicated because Accelerationism draws from a variety of highly complex thinkers. However, the most consistent & important influences are, arguably, Marxism and psychoanalysis - specifically they draw on Karl Marx himself, as well as French postmodernist Jean-François Lyotard’s early work (and self-proclaimed “evil book”) Libidinal Economy, as well as French social philosophers Giles Delueze & Felix Guattari’s capitalism and schizophrenia books (Anti-Oedipus & A Thousand Plateaus) which kind of blur the line between Marxism, postmodernism and psychoanalysis. None of that probably means anything to you unless you’re a nerd and/or academic like me, so…

Basically, Accelerationists view the libido/desire as being a productive force - a sort of Nietzschian ‘will-to-power’ source of energy which drives people to incorporate the ‘other’ into themselves - which fuels socioeconomic systems. But libido is also a disruptive force because, for a variety of reasons, desires cannot always be met/satisfied - people will continue to desire despite this, and so when the ‘libidinal energy’ cannot be expended in a productive manner it will instead be expended disruptively. Most socioeconomic systems have historically placed restrictions upon the libido in order to try and avoid these disruptions - think about how medieval Christianity made lust, greed, gluttony… sins - but capitalism is the least restrictive socioeconomic system thus far, and this freeing of desire/the libidinal energy has made capitalism the most productive - but also the most disruptive - socioeconomic system so far in human history.

Note, however, that capitalism is viewed by Accelerationism as disruptive, rather than unstable.
Take all the time you need.
 
Top