I can't really comment on a debate I didn't attend, but I'm familiar with other their works.
As far as I can tell neither really has any kind of plan for bringing about a better world. Hanania is a little more specific on some issues, but also gets so many big things wrong.
The examples they use, say the Gulf Monarchies, have differing context that make them essentially useless as guidebook for achieving any kind of realistic outcomes in the west.
Hananaia is disastoursly wrong on Open Borders and Foreign Interventionism, but Yarvin got one of the biggest questions of our age (COVID) wrong.
Tim Cook ruling America is not "dreaming big" and it is also not the "original sense" of monarchy. Monarchs were traditionally warrior kings. Think Alexander the Great and his generals. Yarvin putting forth "Tim Cook" as a monarch is a perverse distortion of that historical institution.
“I think it confuses more than clarifies” — I agree. He is an obscurantist, intentionally deceptive for the purposes of titillation rather than clarity. Tim Cook monarchy isn’t fascism, and I’m not excited by it.
I can't really comment on a debate I didn't attend, but I'm familiar with other their works.
As far as I can tell neither really has any kind of plan for bringing about a better world. Hanania is a little more specific on some issues, but also gets so many big things wrong.
The examples they use, say the Gulf Monarchies, have differing context that make them essentially useless as guidebook for achieving any kind of realistic outcomes in the west.
Hananaia is disastoursly wrong on Open Borders and Foreign Interventionism, but Yarvin got one of the biggest questions of our age (COVID) wrong.
I'm so envious you got to see this! Do you know if it will ever appear online? I heard it was filmed...
Tim Cook ruling America is not "dreaming big" and it is also not the "original sense" of monarchy. Monarchs were traditionally warrior kings. Think Alexander the Great and his generals. Yarvin putting forth "Tim Cook" as a monarch is a perverse distortion of that historical institution.
Monarchy literally means the rule of one, and this is the way Yarvin uses the term.
That is true in a shallow semantic sense. I prefer a deeper understanding of history, tradition, class, psychology.
“I think it confuses more than clarifies” — I agree. He is an obscurantist, intentionally deceptive for the purposes of titillation rather than clarity. Tim Cook monarchy isn’t fascism, and I’m not excited by it.