The Dark Enlightenment: Origins and Core Beliefs
The Dark Enlightenment, also known as the neoreactionary (NRx) movement, is a far-right ideological current that emerged in the late 2000s. It is explicitly anti-democratic and anti-egalitarian, rejecting the idea that history inevitably progresses toward liberal democracy (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). The term “Dark Enlightenment” was coined by philosopher Nick Land as a counter to the Age of Enlightenment, suggesting a return to pre-Enlightenment forms of governance. At its core, the Dark Enlightenment calls for a reversal of modern democratic values in favor of older, more hierarchical systems of authority (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). Key beliefs of this movement include:
Rejection of Democracy and Equality: Neoreactionaries argue that democracy is a flawed system. They believe modern egalitarian ideals have produced decay rather than progress. Instead, they advocate for authoritarian government, even absolute monarchism or CEO-like rulers, as superior to democratic governance (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia) (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). As Nick Land put it, “Democracy tends to fascism,” claiming freedom is incompatible with democracy (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia).
“The Cathedral” and Elite Control: Dark Enlightenment thinkers claim Western institutions (universities, media, and the bureaucratic state) form an omnipresent elite ideological force dubbed “the Cathedral.” According to this view (pioneered by Curtis Yarvin, see below), academia, the press, and government bureaucracies work in unison to impose a progressive orthodoxy and suppress dissent (PLATFORM: NRx: A Brief Guide for the Perplexed). They see these institutions as self-serving and manipulative, maintaining power by controlling information and moral norms.
Neocameralism and Patchwork: A popular neoreactionary proposal is “neocameralism,” inspired by economists like Hans-Hermann Hoppe. In this model, nations would be reorganized as “GovCorps,” run like corporations by CEOs or monarchs, with citizens as customers rather than voters (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). Rather than having a voice through voting, people would exercise freedom through “exit” – meaning they could leave for another mini-state if dissatisfied (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). Yarvin envisions a global “patchwork” of many small sovereign city-states or territories, each governed autocratically and competing for residents, somewhat akin to an array of corporate city-states (a vision likened to idealized medieval fiefdoms or modern Singapore) (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia).
Elitism and Technocracy: The Dark Enlightenment is often described as a form of post-libertarian futurism (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). Early adherents were libertarians disillusioned with democracy’s inability to shrink government. They pivoted to favoring a technocratic elite that could rule unencumbered by mass voting. Advocates admire “strongman” executives or an “American Caesar” who would centralize power and “get things done” efficiently (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times). This entails a CEO-style governance where leaders have unchecked authority like a corporate boss, justified by the belief that competent elites could manage society better than electoral masses.
Anti-Progressive and Reactionary Outlook: As a reactionary movement, the Dark Enlightenment looks to traditional social orders for inspiration. Thinkers like Thomas Carlyle and Julius Evola (who defended authoritarian and aristocratic principles) are cited influences (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). NRx adherents explicitly reject the liberal belief in equality and individual rights from the Enlightenment era. They often express nostalgia for strict hierarchies, strong law-and-order, and even historical monarchies. In practice, this can manifest as support for patriarchy, skepticism of universal suffrage, and a desire to undo reforms of the modern civil rights era (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia).
Overall, the Dark Enlightenment’s vision of society is deeply at odds with modern democratic values. Even mainstream commentators have described it as essentially neo-fascist or “alt-right” in nature (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). A 2016 profile in New York Magazine summarized that neoreaction is about realizing libertarian ideals by abandoning democracy entirely in favor of authoritarianism (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). In their ideal world, a handful of enlightened rulers or technocrats would have total control, and the populace would relinquish political voice in exchange for the promise of competent management and the ability to “vote with their feet.” This dark, antidemocratic philosophy remained fringe for years, but it has increasingly seeped into Silicon Valley and right-wing political circles, influencing several notable figures today.
Curtis Yarvin (Mencius Moldbug) and His Influence
Curtis Yarvin, who wrote under the pseudonym Mencius Moldbug, is the key originator of Dark Enlightenment ideas. Yarvin, a software engineer, began blogging his neoreactionary manifesto “Unqualified Reservations” in 2007–2008, and is considered the founding voice of the movement (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). He resurrected long-dormant reactionary concepts—openly advocating for monarchy, arguing that democracy should be replaced by absolutism—at a time when such views were virtually absent from mainstream discourse (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation) (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation). Philosopher Nick Land later coined the term “Dark Enlightenment” in 2012, building on Yarvin’s writings (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia).
Yarvin’s contributions include a rich set of provocative ideas and terminology. He famously labeled the intertwined liberal institutions of modern society as “the Cathedral,” depicting academia, media, and the bureaucracy as a unified propaganda machine enforcing progressive ideology (PLATFORM: NRx: A Brief Guide for the Perplexed). In Yarvin’s view, this Cathedral perpetuates a deceitful consensus of equality and democracy, masking its own grip on power (PLATFORM: NRx: A Brief Guide for the Perplexed). To liberate society, Yarvin argues, one must break the Cathedral’s hold – meaning disempowering the permanent bureaucracy, tenured academia, and influential media that shape public opinion. Accordingly, he has called himself a “royalist” or “monarchist”, and urged Americans to overcome their “dictator phobia” – essentially to accept the idea of a benevolent dictator as a reformer (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas).
Figure: Curtis Yarvin (a.k.a. Mencius Moldbug) – Yarvin is the intellectual linchpin of the Dark Enlightenment. Through his blog Unqualified Reservations, he spent years critiquing democracy and “the Cathedral,” advocating a return to autocratic governance. His writings, while fringe, attracted a dedicated following in tech and far-right circles (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia) (PLATFORM: NRx: A Brief Guide for the Perplexed). (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation) (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation)
Yarvin did not shy away from extreme conclusions. In one notorious 2008 post, he discussed what to do with populations he deemed unproductive or “undesirable.” In a shockingly macabre thought experiment, Yarvin joked that one could “convert them into biodiesel” to fuel city buses – before retracting that as impractical and proposing a “more humane” solution (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas). His “humane alternative,” disturbingly, was to imprison such people in permanent solitary confinement but hook them to a virtual reality system so they could live in a fantasy world indefinitely (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas). Though he framed it as solving social problems without genocide, the idea of effectively warehousing human beings in VR prisons illustrates the inhuman extremes of Yarvin’s techno-authoritarian logic. This kind of writing earned Yarvin a reputation for “disturbing manifestos” that nonetheless intrigued a subset of readers in tech and libertarian communities (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas).
Over the years, Yarvin’s work has had an outsize influence on political discourse at the fringes of the right – and increasingly in the mainstream right. He became an unexpected “guru” to several tech entrepreneurs and Republican strategists. Notably, billionaire investor Peter Thiel has described Yarvin as his “most important intellectual connection,” essentially making Yarvin a house philosopher within Thiel’s circle (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia) (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas). Thiel even financially backed Yarvin’s tech startup in 2013 (a computing project called Tlön/Urbit) (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas). Another admirer was Trump’s former White House strategist Steve Bannon, who reportedly read Yarvin’s work closely (Yarvin claims they never communicated directly) (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). In 2021, Yarvin’s increasing prominence led to an appearance on Fox News’ Tucker Carlson Today to expound his idea of the Cathedral and critique U.S. policy (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia).
Perhaps most striking, politicians have begun echoing Yarvin’s ideas. Venture capitalist and current Ohio Senator J.D. Vance has openly cited Yarvin as an influence and even floated Yarvin’s proposals in policy discussions (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia) (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation). According to Politico, Yarvin was even an “informal guest of honor” at an inaugural gala for President Trump in January 2025, a sign of the respect he’s garnered in Trumpian circles for his ideological contributions (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). In short, what started as Yarvin’s obscure blog posts a decade ago has evolved into a coherent ideological thread running through parts of the new American right.
Peter Thiel’s Involvement and Support for Neoreactionary Ideas
Peter Thiel, the billionaire co-founder of PayPal and Palantir, has emerged as a key patron and promoter of Dark Enlightenment-aligned ideas. Thiel’s political philosophy has always skewed libertarian and contrarian, but in the last decade he moved further toward the neoreactionary critique of democracy. In a 2009 essay, Thiel famously wrote: “I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible.” (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia) This sentiment – that democratic governance inherently conflicts with true liberty – mirrors Nick Land’s and Yarvin’s worldview. Thiel, like the NRx thinkers, argues that democracy’s failures (such as excessive regulation and stifling of innovation) may require more authoritarian leadership to fix (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia).
Thiel has cultivated relationships with key Dark Enlightenment figures. He befriended Curtis Yarvin in Silicon Valley and became Yarvin’s most prominent benefactor. In 2013, Thiel invested in Yarvin’s startup (a project developing the Urbit decentralized computing platform) (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas). According to Max Chafkin’s biography of Thiel, Yarvin essentially served as the “house political philosopher” in Thiel’s milieu (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas). Thiel would host salons or discussions in which Yarvin and other like-minded thinkers elaborated on neoreactionary ideas. By funding and amplifying Yarvin, Thiel helped translate fringe NRx theory into a network of real people and projects (sometimes dubbed the “Thielverse” by insiders) (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas).
Politically, Thiel put these ideas into action by bankrolling candidates and causes that align with his worldview. He was nearly alone among tech moguls in openly supporting Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential bid – donating over $1 million and even speaking at the Republican National Convention. When Trump scored a surprise victory, Thiel celebrated it as a blow to the establishment (reportedly toasting Trump’s win with Yarvin and others on election night 2016) (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas). More recently, Thiel poured tens of millions into the 2022 Senate campaigns of J.D. Vance (Ohio) and Blake Masters (Arizona), both of whom had ties to Yarvin’s ideas. In fact, Masters and Vance explicitly cited Yarvin’s proposals during their campaigns, such as endorsing the plan to “Retire All Government Employees” (RAGE) as a solution to bureaucracy (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation). This indicates that Thiel isn’t simply funding generic Republicans – he is elevating a new breed of Republicans who share the Dark Enlightenment’s antipathy to the administrative state and liberal institutions.
Thiel’s financial activities also reflect a critique of “multiculturalism” and egalitarianism that dovetails with NRx thought. As a Stanford student in the 1990s, Thiel co-authored The Diversity Myth, a book arguing that political correctness and diversity initiatives were undermining meritocracy on campus. He claimed “multiculturalism” was a smokescreen to stifle intellectual dissent (The Diversity Myth: Multiculturalism and Political Intolerance on ...) (The Diversity Myth: Books: The Independent Institute). This skepticism of diversity and equality – essentially a belief that enforcing equality harms excellence – is consonant with neoreactionaries’ hierarchical, elitist bent. While Thiel doesn’t overtly advocate race theories, he has aligned himself with figures who do flirt with “race realism” (for instance, hosting controversial authors at his events and funding projects like the Machine Intelligence Research Institute, whose associates included neoreactionaries). His focus, however, is on the political means: Thiel wants to weaken the dominance of what he sees as a corrupt liberal establishment, even if that means subverting democratic norms. By heavily funding campaigns and institutions on the far-right, Thiel has become a bridge connecting the ivory-tower extremism of Dark Enlightenment bloggers to real-world power.
J.D. Vance’s Alignment with Dark Enlightenment Ideology
J.D. Vance – known first as the author of Hillbilly Elegy and now a Republican Senator from Ohio – is a prominent politician who has drifted into the orbit of Dark Enlightenment ideas. Though Vance’s public persona began as a relatively moderate voice on the struggles of working-class Americans, by the time he ran for office in 2022 he had fully embraced the nationalist-populist right, with some explicitly neoreactionary influences. This shift is not coincidental: Vance was mentored and funded by Peter Thiel, which introduced him to thinkers like Curtis Yarvin. Vance even spent time in San Francisco working in tech (at a Thiel-funded venture fund), connecting him directly to the “Thielverse” culture (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas).
Since entering politics, Vance has openly praised Yarvin and parroted his ideas. He has cited Yarvin’s concept of the Cathedral – essentially agreeing that a leftist elite dominates American institutions – and has proposed implementing Yarvin’s drastic solutions. For example, Vance suggested that if Donald Trump regained the presidency, he should “fire every single federal bureaucrat” in Washington – a notion drawn straight from Yarvin’s RAGE plan to Retire All Government Employees (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation). Both Vance and Blake Masters touted RAGE during their 2022 campaigns, lending mainstream credibility to what was once a fringe “strongman” idea (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation). Vance’s championing of such plans shows how Dark Enlightenment thinking (normally packaged in dense blogs) is being simplified into populist rallying cries (“drain the swamp” on steroids) within the GOP. Indeed, observers note that Vance “favorably cited a key plank” of Yarvin’s post-democracy overhaul, signaling that he sees merit in a dictatorial reboot of the federal government (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation).
Politically and financially, Vance owes much to Thiel and thus to this intellectual lineage. Thiel seeded $10 million into Vance’s Senate bid, effectively launching his political career. In turn, Vance has taken up causes that resonate with neoreactionary and far-right nationalist audiences. One key area is immigration and demographics: Vance has repeatedly invoked the “Great Replacement” theory, a racist conspiracy notion claiming that elites are deliberately replacing white American voters with immigrants. During his 2022 campaign, Vance accused Democrats of bringing immigrants to “replace Republican voters,” earning rebukes for echoing white-nationalist talking points (JD Vance Has Embraced “Replacement” Theory Conspiracies Throughout His Campaign - America's Voice). (He denied being racist, noting his own mixed-race family, but continued to push these ideas.) In 2024, Vance even amplified a baseless, xenophobic rumor that Haitian migrants in Ohio were “killing and eating pets” – a claim quickly debunked but one he did not retract (Springfield pet-eating hoax - Wikipedia). Spreading such inflammatory myths about immigrant communities aligns with the NRx tendency to view diversity as dangerous and to stoke fear to justify authoritarian responses.
Now a U.S. Senator and reportedly even a vice-presidential contender in Trump’s circle, Vance serves as a political conduit for Dark Enlightenment ideology. He takes Yarvin’s academic-sounding theories about dismantling the modern state and repackages them as populist fare (“purge the deep state,” “stop the invasion,” etc.). This is a striking evolution: an idea formulated by an obscure blogger is now championed by an elected official. It exemplifies how the boundaries between fringe internet extremism and Republican policymaking have blurred.
Elon Musk: Connections to Thiel and Ideological Overlaps
Elon Musk, the world’s richest man and owner of Twitter (rebranded X), is not a core theorist of the Dark Enlightenment, but he shares personal connections and some ideological sympathies with its proponents. Musk and Peter Thiel are longtime associates – they were co-founders of PayPal in 1999 and part of the famous “PayPal Mafia” of tech elites. While they reportedly had differences in the past, Musk in recent years has found common ground with Thiel’s anti-establishment, anti-“woke” stance. Both men are billionaire tech entrepreneurs who have increasingly involved themselves in right-wing politics, critiquing liberal institutions and aligning with populist or authoritarian-leaning figures.
Musk’s ideological overlaps with Dark Enlightenment ideas are reflected in his public commentary and actions on social media. Like many in the NRx camp, Musk often expresses contempt for mainstream media and academia, accusing them of bias. In one notable instance, Musk claimed that “the media” and elite schools are “racist against white and Asian people” (Elon Musk accuses media of racism after newspapers drop 'Dilbert' cartoon | Reuters). He made that comment in defense of a cartoonist (Scott Adams of Dilbert) who launched into a racist tirade against Black Americans. Musk’s framing – that mainstream institutions unfairly favor some groups (implying non-whites) and propagate a “false narrative” – mirrors the Dark Enlightenment’s narrative of a dominant progressive orthodoxy (the Cathedral) that distorts reality. Musk even tweeted to his followers to “take the red pill” (an internet slang for awakening to hidden truths often used by reactionaries), which was gleefully received by Ivanka Trump among others. These signals suggest Musk shares the new right’s antipathy toward progressive social norms and believes in some suppressed “truths” that the establishment hides – a mindset common in Yarvin’s readership.
Importantly, Musk’s takeover of Twitter in 2022 and his approach to content moderation align with neoreactionary preferences for unfettered speech from the right. Musk cast himself as a free speech absolutist intent on reversing what he saw as Twitter’s left-leaning censorship. After acquiring the platform, he reinstated numerous accounts that had been banned for hate speech or disinformation, including far-right influencers. This created a more permissive space for the “hierarchy and order” crowd – voices that Dark Enlightenment types felt were silenced by the liberal tech elite. While Musk framed it as restoring balance, civil rights groups noted a rise in hate speech under his ownership (Elon Musk accuses media of racism after newspapers drop 'Dilbert' cartoon | Reuters). Musk has also shown willingness to weaponize the platform against critics (suspending some journalists, for example), reflecting a view that the powerful should not be constrained by traditional norms – again, resonant with an autocratic ethos.
Musk’s direct ties to Dark Enlightenment figures are mostly through Thiel and shared circles. He has reportedly interacted with or followed some figures adjacent to NRx on Twitter. And according to a report by The New Republic, both Thiel and Musk – as tech “plutocrats” – see the current political moment as one where they can translate their wealth into political power. They “already have money. Now they want power” by influencing government more directly (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas). Indeed, Musk has become overtly political, endorsing Republican candidates and even engaging with the idea of influencing government agencies. In early 2025, whistleblowers alleged that Musk was working behind the scenes in the new Trump administration to hollow out federal agencies and centralize control in line with Yarvin’s neo-monarchist vision (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times) (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times). While Musk’s own beliefs might spring more from libertarian tech culture than from Yarvin’s philosophy, the practical effect is that he’s empowering many of the same goals – weakening traditional democratic checks and empowering a new elite (himself included) to run things. This convergence of a powerful billionaire with a fringe authoritarian ideology is a major point of concern for democracy watchdogs.
The RAGE Plan: “Retire All Government Employees”
A central idea in Dark Enlightenment political strategy is often summarized by the acronym RAGE, which stands for “Retire All Government Employees.” This concept was articulated by Curtis Yarvin around 2012 as a proposed first step to “reboot” the American government (PLATFORM: NRx: A Brief Guide for the Perplexed). RAGE essentially calls for a mass purge of the federal civil service – firing or forcibly retiring the vast majority of career bureaucrats, administrators, and government professionals. The rationale is that the permanent bureaucracy (what some call the “deep state”) is inherently loyal to the old democratic, liberal order – in Yarvin’s terms, loyal to the Cathedral. Therefore, to install a new authoritarian system (“GovCorp” or monarchy), the existing personnel of the state must be completely swept away.
Yarvin describes RAGE as a necessary “great purge of the old operating system” to pave the way for a new regime run by “a more enlightened race of technocrats” (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation). In plainer terms, he wants to wipe out the entrenched institutional memory and expert class in government so that a strongman leader (or CEO) can rebuild a new government from scratch with loyalists. Under RAGE, agencies as we know them would effectively cease to function until reconstituted under new management; all the “Old Guard” public servants are shown the door. This is obviously an incredibly radical proposal – it amounts to terminating the employment of possibly millions of people and destroying decades of institutional knowledge overnight. But neoreactionaries see it as the only way to truly break the power of “the Cathedral,” since they view the civil service as a bastion of progressive influence and inertia.
Both J.D. Vance and Blake Masters lent credence to RAGE during their campaigns, which brought the idea into the public spotlight (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation). Vance suggested Trump should “fire the bureaucrats” en masse, and Masters spoke of dramatically shrinking government agencies. This mainstreaming of RAGE is notable because it closely parallels real policy proposals on the right. For instance, the Heritage Foundation’s 2024 Project 2025 (a conservative blueprint for the next Republican administration) explicitly calls for sweeping out tens of thousands of federal workers to let a new president assert control (He's anti-democracy and pro-Trump - The Guardian) (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian ...). Commentators have noted that Project 2025 “captures perfectly” Yarvin’s RAGE principle (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian ...). Even Steve Bannon’s infamous vow in 2017 to “deconstruct the administrative state” aligns with the spirit of RAGE – i.e. massively downsizing bureaucracy and regulatory agencies (An antidemocratic philosophy called 'neoreaction' is creeping into ...).
Ideologically, RAGE underlines the Dark Enlightenment’s rejection of gradual reform. It’s a revolutionary (some might say chaos-inducing) approach: rather than work within the system, they prefer to burn it down and build anew. Yarvin and his followers believe any halfway measures would be sabotaged by the existing system’s personnel, so total liquidation is required. Critics warn that executing RAGE would cripple essential government functions – from national security to social services – and plunge the country into crisis. But to neoreactionaries, that interim chaos is acceptable if it means eradicating the “infected” democratic apparatus. RAGE is a stark illustration of just how far Dark Enlightenment adherents are willing to go to implement their vision of an authoritarian reboot. It is literal regime change at the deepest administrative level.
Trumpism and the Dark Enlightenment’s Goals
The rise of Donald Trump to the presidency in 2016 was seen by many on the far right – including neoreactionaries – as a golden opportunity to advance their anti-establishment goals. While Trump himself is not a theorist, his instincts and actions in office often aligned with what the Dark Enlightenment crowd desires: the disruption and weakening of liberal democratic norms and institutions. Indeed, Curtis Yarvin and others hoped Trump could be an American strongman who might “clear out” the old order. As Yarvin provocatively phrased it, if voters elect Trump with a mandate to take over the government “as completely as the Allies took over Germany in 1945,” he should delegate to a competent CEO-like figure to run the country – essentially making Trump a figurehead “chairman” above an installed technocrat leader (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times). Yarvin doubted Trump’s discipline for this role (“Trump is no Caesar,” he quipped) (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times), but nonetheless saw Trump as a useful “vessel” for the neoreactionary movement’s aims (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times).
In practice, Trump’s first term (2017–2021) furthered several Dark Enlightenment-aligned objectives:
Undermining the Civil Service: Trump’s administration – guided by advisors like Steve Bannon – sought to “deconstruct the administrative state.” They worked to gut many agencies via budget cuts, deregulation, and leaving key posts unfilled (“Deconstruction of the Administrative State” Means We Lose). Toward the end of his term, Trump signed an executive order (Schedule F) to strip job protections from tens of thousands of federal employees, making them easier to fire en masse (an idea clearly resonant with RAGE). Although Schedule F was not implemented before he left office, it signaled an intent to purge bureaucrats deemed disloyal. This approach directly mirrors Yarvin’s prescription to purge the bureaucracy and concentrate power in the executive’s hands (He's anti-democracy and pro-Trump - The Guardian).
Delegitimizing Democratic Institutions: Trump consistently attacked pillars of the liberal democratic system. He branded the mainstream press as “the enemy of the people” and spread the notion of a corrupt “Deep State” undermining him – effectively his own version of Yarvin’s Cathedral concept. By telling his supporters that the FBI, the Justice Department, the courts, and the election system were biased or rigged, Trump eroded public trust in those institutions. This sowing of distrust is crucial for the Dark Enlightenment, which wants people to lose faith in democracy’s legitimacy. Yarvin’s followers cheered Trump’s complaints about the “Fake News” media and unaccountable bureaucrats, seeing it as validation of their worldview that a clandestine elite runs the show. Trump’s relentless norm-breaking (from balking at congressional oversight to defying subpoenas) also set precedents that weaken institutional checks on executive power.
Authoritarian Style and “Strongman” Governance: President Trump exhibited a governing style that neoreactionaries found encouraging – if not in competence, at least in temperament. He openly admired dictators like Putin, Xi, and Kim, and mused about doing things like “president for life.” He installed family members in advisory positions (a quasi-monarchical touch) and demanded personal loyalty from officials (often firing those who contradicted him). Former Defense Secretary Jim Mattis even said Trump had the understanding of “a fifth or sixth grader” about government and seemed to want to run the U.S. like a personal business. This is very much in line with the Dark Enlightenment ideal of a CEO government where one man’s will is law. While Trump did face resistance and didn’t achieve nearly what Yarvinites dreamed (for example, he never fully purged the civil service), he shifted the Overton window. Suddenly, openly musing about defying court orders or jailing political opponents – things considered unthinkable in modern American politics – became part of the conversation.
Policy that Reflects “Tradition” and Hierarchy: On the policy front, many Trump-era actions resonated with reactionary preferences. Trump’s hardline immigration policies (travel bans on Muslim-majority countries, aggressive ICE enforcement, reducing refugee admissions) reflected an effort to preserve what his base saw as traditional American identity – which, implicitly or explicitly, meant a whiter and more Christian nation. This aligns with the Dark Enlightenment’s skepticism of multiculturalism. His administration also rolled back civil rights protections (for transgender people, for example) and celebrated the Supreme Court’s rightward shift, including the reversal of Roe v. Wade – moves that restore older societal hierarchies and norms. Internationally, Trump’s “America First” ethos meant hostility toward global institutions and alliances, favoring brute power and deal-making over multilateral consensus. Yarvin and company, who detest the post-WWII liberal order, welcomed this nationalist, unilateral stance (From democracy to technocracy: The rise of the dark enlightenment - Oman Observer) (From democracy to technocracy: The rise of the dark enlightenment - Oman Observer) as a step away from global liberal governance.
Even after leaving office, Trump continued to further neoreactionary goals by convincing a large segment of Americans that the 2020 election was illegitimate. The resulting January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol – though not orchestrated by Dark Enlightenment thinkers – was seen by Yarvin as “the last lame breath of mobocracy”, essentially the death spasm of faith in mass democracy (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times). Yarvin actually derided the rioters (preferring elitist coups to populist revolts), but the event still undermined the aura of peaceful democratic transition.
Looking ahead, plans for a potential second Trump term (as outlined in the Heritage Project 2025 and by Trump’s inner circle) read like a wish list of neoreactionary ideas. They include reassigning or firing tens of thousands of civil servants, expanding presidential power over independent agencies, and using the Department of Justice to punish opponents – all steps consistent with installing a more authoritarian regime (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian ...). It is no wonder that Curtis Yarvin – despite mocking Trump’s flaws – ultimately endorsed Trump as an instrument, saying Trump could be a tool to bring a new technocratic elite to power (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times). In sum, the Trump movement and the Dark Enlightenment have found a common cause: both seek to demolish the existing liberal order. Trump provides the populist muscle and mass following; the neoreactionaries provide the intellectual justification and perhaps a blueprint for what comes after the fall of democracy.
Racial Beliefs and Critiques of the Movement
A major area of concern about the Dark Enlightenment and its associated figures is their stance on race and equality. Neoreactionary thought often entails what adherents call “race realism” – essentially the belief that inherent racial differences (in IQ, temperament, etc.) mean a hierarchy among races is natural (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). They euphemistically dub this “human biodiversity” (HBD) to give it a scientific veneer (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). In practice, this outlook has led Dark Enlightenment writers to promote or endorse ideas considered white supremacist or racist. For example, Nick Land wrote about “hyperracism,” suggesting that a purely meritocratic, techno-capitalist future would end up predominantly white and Asian because those groups would out-compete others (though he claims this would be due to socio-economic selection, not explicit racial policy) (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). Such theories echo discredited eugenicist thinking and are widely criticized by mainstream scientists and ethicists.
Curtis Yarvin’s own record on race is overtly troubling. While he insists “I am not a white nationalist,” Yarvin has openly said he is “not exactly allergic to the stuff” (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia) (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation). In his blog writings, Yarvin repeatedly engaged with and amplified white nationalist arguments. He would link to white-nationalist blogs and even praised one blogger who advocated deporting Muslims and shutting down mosques as “the most imaginative and interesting right-wing writer on the planet” (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation). Yarvin has also endorsed arguments for Black racial inferiority, claiming that evidence of lower average IQ or achievement among Black people is real but suppressed by institutions like the Ivy League, The New York Times, and Hollywood (his “Cathedral”) (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). In one instance, Yarvin wrote favorably about 19th-century American slavery, suggesting it had merits and that abolition might have been a mistake (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas). Such comments place Yarvin and his followers in direct opposition to modern values of racial equality – they are essentially reviving long-refuted racist ideologies under the guise of intellectual contrarianism.
Peter Thiel has not been as publicly race-preoccupied as Yarvin, but he has courted controversy with statements about multiculturalism and even gender equality that hint at a reactionary worldview. In The Diversity Myth, Thiel argued that the celebration of racial diversity at universities was eroding academic standards and authentic freedom of thought (The Diversity Myth: Multiculturalism and Political Intolerance on ...). He and his co-author dismissed many claims of racism or sexism on campus as “political correctness,” effectively downplaying the experiences of minority students. Thiel also once wrote that women’s suffrage negatively impacted capitalism, implying that granting women the vote made democratic governments too welfare-oriented – a statement for which he was widely rebuked. While Thiel has integrated into a diverse Silicon Valley environment in business, his political leanings suggest skepticism toward egalitarianism in society. The candidates he funds (Vance, Masters, etc.) have all taken hard-line stances against affirmative action and immigration – positions that disproportionately affect people of color. Thiel’s commitment to a form of libertarian elitism means he often finds himself aligned with those who believe racial disparities are due to inherent differences or cultural failings rather than historical injustice.
J.D. Vance, despite having an interracial family, has trafficked in racialized fear-mongering as part of his political persona. As mentioned, he elevated the “Great Replacement” theory, which is rooted in the white supremacist fear that white Americans will be “replaced” by non-white immigrants. This theory is not only false, but dangerous – it directly inspired multiple racist massacres (the Christchurch, NZ shooting and the Buffalo, NY supermarket shooting in 2022, among others) where gunmen believed they were defending the white race (JD Vance Has Embraced “Replacement” Theory Conspiracies Throughout His Campaign - America's Voice). Vance’s willingness to use this trope in campaign rhetoric drew sharp criticism, including from his Senate opponent who pointed out that such ideas have motivated terrorist violence (JD Vance Has Embraced “Replacement” Theory Conspiracies Throughout His Campaign - America's Voice). Additionally, Vance’s repetition of the hoax about Haitian migrants “eating pets” in Ohio played on vile stereotypes of Haitian (and by extension Black immigrant) barbarism (Springfield pet-eating hoax - Wikipedia). Even after fact-checks proved it false, Vance defended his remarks, thereby lending legitimacy to a racist urban myth. These actions suggest that Vance either shares, or is willing to exploit, racist and nativist sentiments to advance the broader agenda of the new right. This has alarmed observers who note that someone influenced by Yarvin’s extremism is now a heartbeat away from the presidency (as Trump’s running mate, hypothetically) and seems comfortable fanning racial animosities.
Elon Musk has also drawn scrutiny for his views on race. Musk grew up in apartheid-era South Africa, though he doesn’t publicly defend that system. However, in the U.S. he has echoed notions of “reverse racism” popular in far-right circles. As noted, Musk tweeted that media organizations are “racist against whites & Asians” (Elon Musk accuses media of racism after newspapers drop 'Dilbert' cartoon | Reuters), essentially suggesting that efforts to address bias against Black people have gone too far and now it’s white people who are discriminated against. This is a common refrain in alt-right and Dark Enlightenment circles—that contemporary America unfairly demonizes white men. Musk’s actions at Twitter further worried civil rights advocates: under his leadership, Twitter restored accounts banned for racist content (including neo-Nazis and Klansmen), and reportedly saw a surge in slurs and hate speech as moderation was scaled back (Elon Musk accuses media of racism after newspapers drop 'Dilbert' cartoon | Reuters). Musk has publicly sparred with organizations like the NAACP and ADL who accused him of turning Twitter into a haven for hate; Musk in turn accuses them of trying to stifle free speech. While Musk might frame it as ideological or political rather than racial, the practical effect of his stance is that racist voices have been emboldened on one of the world’s largest social platforms. Musk’s own tweet history also includes him joking with or amplifying some figures who espouse racist ideas (for example, interacting positively with hard-right pundits who have promoted “white genocide” conspiracies, etc.). All of this suggests that Musk, at best, is insensitive to racial justice concerns, and at worst, is giving oxygen to dangerous racial ideologies under the banner of combating “wokeness.”
Broader Critiques and Concerns
Critics of the Dark Enlightenment and its associated network of elites point out that their vision amounts to a form of neo-fascism dressed up in tech jargon (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia). The movement’s opposition to democracy and equality directly contradicts the core values of modern open societies. If implemented, Dark Enlightenment ideas would likely entrench a tyrannical oligarchy – essentially government by a small, self-proclaimed “superior” elite, with no accountability to the public. This raises obvious concerns of massive human rights violations, repression of dissent, and the end of the rule of law. Even some who agree democracy has problems are horrified by the solutions NRx offers, noting that authoritarian regimes historically lead to less freedom, not more.
The racial component is another major alarm bell. By advocating “race realism” and undermining the ideal of equality, Dark Enlightenment thinkers provide an intellectual cover for racism and segregationist policy. Their ideas dovetail with those of white nationalist groups – indeed, white supremacists online have warmly embraced Yarvin and Land’s writings. The fear is that neoreactionary ideology could serve as a gateway to overt racial hatred, especially among young, disaffected tech-savvy males (a key demographic of the movement). Already, we’ve seen overlaps between NRx forums and alt-right or neo-Nazi forums in terms of shared content and memes. The attempts by Yarvin or Land to sanitize their racial views as “scientific” are widely rejected by geneticists and sociologists, who label it scientific racism. As a journalist in The Nation put it, Yarvin and his Silicon Valley acolytes have left an “ugly trail of race-baiting trollery” that betrays the essentially racist subtext of their project (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation).
Furthermore, observers worry about the influence of billionaires like Thiel and Musk in pushing these ideas into the mainstream. It represents a confluence of wealth, technology, and extremism that could be uniquely destabilizing. These men have the resources to fund think tanks, candidates, and platforms to disseminate anti-democratic ideology. For instance, Musk’s control of Twitter and Thiel’s funding of political campaigns give them a direct pipeline to shape public opinion and policy. It is telling that former President Obama, in a 2017 speech, warned about “strongman politics” returning and the danger of people who “call for the end of democracy” – remarks seen as referencing the growing fascination with authoritarianism in some elite circles (though not named, the description fits the Dark Enlightenment crew). If the trend continues, scholars warn of a possible “techno-oligarchic takeover” where elections become a facade and real power rests with a handful of unelected elites manipulating government behind the scenes (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times) (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times). The Byline Times in 2025 reported whistleblowers’ claims that Elon Musk was effectively hijacking the Republican apparatus to install Silicon Valley technocrats in a ‘hollowed-out’ government, calling it a “frontal assault” on American democracy (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times) (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times).
In summary, the Dark Enlightenment and its fellow travelers (Yarvin, Thiel, Vance, Musk, etc.) present a radical challenge to liberal democracy on multiple fronts. They question whether “all men are created equal” – implicitly saying no – and whether the consent of the governed matters – again, no. They are willing to countenance extreme measures (like RAGE or disenfranchising populations) to achieve their ends. While this movement remains somewhat on the fringes, its ideas have increasingly infiltrated mainstream politics and discourse, especially through the influence of wealthy advocates. This has prompted strong pushback from both left and right defenders of democracy, who argue that however imperfect our current system is, the Dark Enlightenment’s cure would be far worse than the disease. As one conservative critic noted, it is a “terrible idea” to toss aside democracy and the rule of law, because history shows that what fills the void is usually repression and violence (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia) (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times). The specter of high-tech absolutism – a blend of Big Tech power and autocratic governance – is enough to keep many commentators and citizens vigilant against this ideology’s spread.
Sources:
Wikipedia: “Dark Enlightenment” (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia) (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia), “Curtis Yarvin” (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia) (overview of the movement’s philosophy and key figures)
Beckett, Andy – The Guardian (describing NRx goal of replacing democracy with authoritarian city-states) (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia)
Pinto, Ana Teixeira – e-flux (analysis of neocameralism as privatized government) (Dark Enlightenment - Wikipedia)
Chafkin, Max – The Contrarian (book on Peter Thiel, quoting Thiel on Yarvin as his key connection) (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas)
Lehmann, Chris – The Nation (profile “The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley” on Yarvin, RAGE, and racial views) (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation) (The Reactionary Prophet of Silicon Valley | The Nation)
Duran, Gil – The New Republic (article “Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas,” detailing Yarvin’s proposals, Thiel’s backing, and Vance’s role) (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas) (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian Ideas)
Reuters (report on Elon Musk accusing the media of being racist against white and Asian people) (Elon Musk accuses media of racism after newspapers drop 'Dilbert' cartoon | Reuters)
America’s Voice / NBC News (on J.D. Vance embracing “Great Replacement” rhetoric in his campaign) (JD Vance Has Embraced “Replacement” Theory Conspiracies Throughout His Campaign - America's Voice)
Platform (analysis “NRx: A Brief Guide for the Perplexed,” explaining RAGE and GovCorp) (PLATFORM: NRx: A Brief Guide for the Perplexed)
Byline Times (Nafeez Ahmed, investigative piece on Musk and Yarvin’s influence in politics) (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times) (Silicon Valley Whistleblowers Warn Elon Musk ‘Hijacking’ Republicans to Control Entire US Government – Byline Times)
Various news sources and academic references on the Trump administration’s policies (“deconstruction of the administrative state,” Project 2025, etc.) (“Deconstruction of the Administrative State” Means We Lose) (Where J.D. Vance Gets His Weird, Terrifying Techno-Authoritarian ...)