Yarvin, Rufo, and Endless Factual Sediment

Facts are not prescriptive, narratives are. Applied Biofoundationalism.

This is essay is part of Applied Biofoundationalism. All chapters are linked at the end. Enjoy.

There was a debate between Curtis Yarvin and Christopher F. Rufo recently. It was entertaining and fun, they threw lots of stories at each other, both sounded well-reasoned and compelling. This is to say, it was not particularly useful.

A lack of utility in that I think good exchanges should be productive. That isn’t to say it was uniquely unproductive, just garden-variety political-dialogue wheel spinning. You may infer from these statements that I find political discourse to be less than useful; this inference would be accurate.

This exchange, while seemingly erudite and intellectually inclined, perfectly exemplifies the futility of political discourse. Both men are verbally adroit, so we got a lot of clever dunks and witticisms. And they both masterfully curated sets of facts that concocted narratives for conclusions they long ago decided were true. Political debates can almost entirely be summarized as competing moral frameworks talking past each other.

The TL;DR of the debate, from the lens of a Biofoundationalist:

"Wow, you actually were unaware of this FACT? Also you failed to mention this FACT and another FACT that undermines your whole world view. Read a book!"

"Aha foolish you are for completely ignoring these little-known FACTS over here. Which when viewed in conjunction with this FACT, shows you to be nothing more than a chimp in shoes!"

Intelligent people with high verbal IQs are more adept at obfuscating their moral imperatives with carefully arranged facts that craft their narratives. This makes their conclusions seem more correct or informed to the uninitiated. Politically “educated” simply means an expert recall of factoids that make a narrative appear superior.

There are many facts. Endless facts even. Which ones do you emphasize and highlight? Only the good and true ones? Ah, don’t we all…

The articulate often dominate political domains because they’re the most compelling advocates of their moral foundations, and attract support from those with similar temperaments as a result.

This debate is what happens when you put two different temperaments with sharp tongues in a room: a lot of spectacle and little true systematizing that’s focused on problems and their eradication. Just endless FACT dunking about whose selective, hand-crafted version of history is right/wrong (to his credit, Yarvin does systematize some things, but he relies heavily on bombarding you with stories and esoteric factoids).

Facts are tools, they are not prescriptive. Narratives are prescriptive. Facts are used to form narratives, and narratives are in service of moral foundations.

Moral foundations are a product of temperament, and temperaments are biologically imposed. That biological remark is defended and explained here.

Here are the moral foundations that act as the substrate of all political thought. The ones you prioritize are a result of your temperament. Your temperament is a result of biochemistry and brain activity; which is to say, you’re born with it.

From Jon Haidt’s The Righteous Mind

Intelligent people have a lot of factual sediment to wade through to get to what they're actually advocating for: their moral foundations, manifesting as political policy.

---

An Analysis of Yarvin’s and Rufo’s Moral Foundations:

Curtis Yarvin scores very high on Authority/Subversion

Yarvin is a monarchist. He views rigid, absolute authority as the path to rectifying structural issues. Almost all of his work is centered around placing utmost emphasis on the moral foundation of respecting authority, and he's well-read in his promotion and history of it. How do you think he came to be so singularly focused on this moral foundation? Must have been all the books...

—

Chris Rufo emphasizes Sanctity/Degradation, with secondary focus on Fairness/Cheating

Rufo's hyperfocus is on DEI: which directly undermines values he holds sacred regarding merit and notions of fair treatment. Leftist race communism compromises these ethics, so he believes eradicating it is paramount to achieving fairness (DEI is cheating by advantaging some races over others). He sees the continued degradation of these sacred ideals as a core culprit for US decline.

Side note: what’s interesting is fairness/cheating is typically a liberal moral foundation.

---

Why Deconstruct Political Dialogue This Way

This way you can understand:

1. Why does one guy keep focusing on certain FACTS and not others? What narrative is he creating?

2. What moral values is this narrative in service of?

   1. Remember, political beliefs and morality are synonymous; they cannot be disentangled. Morals inform political stances.

3. Once you ascertain which moral framework is dominant for each party, try to figure out which has greater utility in the current environment.

   1. To see what I mean by “utility”, read this.

All of the moral foundations are useful, but the degree to which they are depends on economic circumstances. Where there are growing political extremes, there are almost always underlying economic extremes: this is not a coincidence.

I have Yarvin sympathies due to a mindset that’s more structural in its diagnosis of issues. I think Rufo is excellent, but that his actions will ultimately produce pyrrhic, symbolic victories: as they focus more on superficial symptoms, rather than distal solutions.

Subscribes and shares are very much appreciated. If you enjoyed the essay, give it a like.

You can show your appreciation by becoming a paid subscriber or by donating here: 0x9C828E8EeCe7a339bBe90A44bB096b20a4F1BE2B

I’m building something interesting, visit Salutary.io

Biofoundationalism chapters:

• Biofoundationalism I: Moral Foundations Utility Theory & Hypermoralization

• Biofoundationalism II: The Moral Genotype

• Biofoundationalism III: Verbal Intelligence and Factual Sediment

• Biofoundationalism IV: Masculine Because You Have To, Feminine Because You Get To

• Biofoundationalism V: Power Acts, Beauty Is

Applied Biofoundationalism essays:

• Moral Algorithms

• We'll Give You Things > We'll Leave You Alone

• War Is How a Nation Eats

• Gain Dependents, Gain Power

• Bezos and Following the Trend

• Chevron and The Hawaiian Judge Dominant Strategy

• Pleasant-Sounding Beliefs and 2nd-Order Effects

• Patterns of Comfort

• Yarvin, Rufo, and Endless Factual Sediment

• Entwined

• Capitalism, Lions, and the Way of the Beaver

• Astrology, Darwinian Truths, and Biochemistry in the Womb