Yarvin On Trump And His Henchmen
The introduction to this series should be read first. It has the index to all posts in this series.
Yarvin has written several substack posts on Trump and his henchmen since the inauguration. In Barbarians and Mandarins (BM) he reacts to the first six weeks. In Actually You Shouldn’t Van People (Van) he says it’s a mistake to pick up non-citizens on the street and throw them in vans. He criticizes Trump’s tariff/trade actions here (M1) and here (M2), calling these policies “mercantilism”. He just thinks they’re being done wrong,
There’s a sense of unease in all of them, a sense that things aren’t happening as he expected. That seems to be one aspect of this WaPo piece.
Grading Trump’s administration
BM is about 6K words. My first step was to chop out the repetition, the “jokes”, the snotty remarks about “libs”, and the other irrelevant material. That left me with about 2K words, and I was being generous. He starts by awarding Trump a C-. He says the new administration has two types of people: Barbarians, people who have no experience in DC, and Mandarins who do.
The Bs want to destroy, the Ms want to run things, but neither has the capacity to make the hard decisions about what should be done. Lacking a plan to guide them, they become grifters. Mandarins, he says
… have no strategy: no plan and no endgame. Since action without strategy is ineffective and ineffective action is a grift, the Mandarins are the most convincing grifters of all.
He explains why this is so, perhaps hoping to help them see the Yarvin way.
He approves of Trump’s use of laws and agencies in ways they were not intended
Second, existing infrastructure cannot be relied upon to work or even be controlled. Generally the right first assumption is that it needs to be hacked—made to operate in an unusual way that its designers, its previous operators, or both, did not expect. (The metamorphosis of USDS into DOGE will be the gold standard here for many years.)
I note that this is what Trump and his henchmen have been doing with the tariff law, the Alien Enemy Act, and other laws. Also, courts mostly hold that this is permitted by law and the Constitution.
He uses the assault on government support for science as an example. He says that scientists want power first, and that good science is their secondary goal. The new team, both the Bs and the Ms, are slashing around wildly with no regard to what the new ideology wants.
He says this violates his theory of how kings rule. Slashing funding for scientists makes them angry and makes them hate the new ideology he ascribes to the administration. He says scientists are not happy about the way science funding is managed. The goal should be to make them happy by restructuring that funding. Then they will see that the new king loves and protects them, and they will respond with love. He doesn’t explain how this overcomes their personal demand for power.
Van
In BM, written on March 7, there’s a passing mention of the great work the new administration is doing on the immigration front, but he says it’s not enough, and then inserts his concerns about having state governments, apparently because he doesn’t like federalism. In Van, written April 2, he addresses the reality of ICE tactics:
I refer to the recent news of surprise visa revocations, immigration detention, etc, for a few immigrant grad students, professors, etc, clearly low human capital individuals, who have committed various retarded, if hardly unusual, misdeeds—like writing a pro-Hamas column (probably plagiarized, certainly banal) in the lame student newspaper.
He thinks these tactics are bad. He has no moral or principled objection to any of ICE’s tactics. He just thinks they will backfire on the whole project, create enemies, and destroy support. I stopped reading Van at the point where he explains that Hitler had a theory behind the Holocaust, a theory that is utterly wrong and revolting.
Mercantilism
M1 and M2 are generally supportive of tariffs, but not the way they’re being used. He blames this on the Bs and the Ms. This is from M2:
Trump always has the right reflexes. But a reflex is not a plan. It is not his job, but the job of his administration, to translate reflexes into plans. While executing with great energy and enthusiasm, the administration has had a rocky start in this translation.
These two posts are absurdly long, so I didn’t read them to the end.
Discussion
1. What the hell did Yarvin think would happen when Trump took power? Was he not paying attention during the last Trump presidency? Did he not notice Trump’s insatiable greed, his indifference to policy, his willingness to walk along with anyone who flattered him adequately? Didn’t he notice that Trump doesn’t like competent people, that he ignores them or fires them? Did he think Trump would suddenly take an interest in policy when every reporter and his own staffers said Trump wasn’t willing to read anything?
Is Yarvin that naive? That credulous? That desperate?
2. Yarvin is supposed to be some kind of computer genius. Has he never watched a large enterprise change its computer system? You don’t rip out the old system and then build a new one. You don’t tear out an old system and put in a new on overnight. You run them side by side long enough to be sure there aren’t any glitches that will poison your employees and customers. Or, you test and retest, and then replace little sections one or two at a time. There’s a plan, there’s testing, and there’s careful attention to outcomes.
Now he’s concerned that people who took his advice to burn everything to the ground are making big mistakes?
3. I think there are problems with our current structure. Yarvin writes about some of them, but never in any sensible context, or with an actual idea about an effective change. For a reasonably sensible discussion see this by Jonathan Chait in The Atlantic. There’s a lot to think about in this article, even for lefties. Among other things, Chait complains about delays caused by citizen activists. He does not point out that the rich and their corporations use the same tactics to delay or overturn rules preventing toxic discharges and other horrors. These delay and destroy tactics have hamstrung government action on almost every front.
4. I’m done with Yarvin. Apparently he thought the Trump team had a plan for remaking the United States in ways that would be better as Yarvin understands better. His lack of contact with reality is unbearable.
Ed – thank you for undertaking a thankless task (and please ignore the contradiction there), bringing back the news from the land of the dead. I’ve yet to see anywhere a detailed look at his “debate” with a genuine intellectual, but am not holding out much hope that it will make much sense, be enlightening, etc. Thanks again. I like your tackling interesting subjects, and the way you go about it.
“[Yarvin’s] lack of contact with reality is unbearable.”
Amen. Thanks, Ed.
Plus, Yarvin’s a tedious asshole. I wouldn’t have gotten past his use of childishly dismissive words (retarded, banal, plagiarized) in regards to ICE detainees.
Ed, I’ve learned a lot from your series. I wish for your sake you hadn’t had to do this work–that Yarvin had never gained the prominence he has. This phenomenon speaks very poorly for the level of intellectual acumen and integrity on the far right.
It is almost as if Yarvin and Musk got a whiff of the hard work it would take to put their principles into action on a large scale and decided to call it a day.
Yarvin follows the right wing thinking that there is an axis of power (government bureaucrats, universities, and the media) that needs to be broken. The mistake is thinking that the power is coercive and coerced. The power derives from the freedom of the governed to choose. Yarvin, Musk, and others would eliminate that freedom to achieve an end state that achieves their goal of efficiency by sacrificing freedom of the governed. Thus spake totalitarians in every historic era.
Yarvin and Musk believed if their ideas were only put into practice the results would be instant and inevitably what they predicted/imagined. When this failed to happen, rather than consider why they simply abandon the effort. Incompetent minions , betrayal, stabbed in the back by enemies at home, whatever. Yarvinsim cannot fail, it can only be failed. Musk is a genius, everyone around him and his bank account tell him so. It must be the fault of others.
The only recognizable genius in the world now is capitalistic. If you are rich, you must be brilliant. The binary logic in society has gone off the rails.
Seriously? There’s no recognizable genius which isn’t capitalistic?
You may have intended to be snarky with your comment but its composition lacks clarity.
Welcome to emptywheel.
Well said, RitaRita. They have no theory of human nature. It hasn’t dawned on any of them that people don’t like kings, because they don’t like to be bossed around.
Ah yes, the immortal playground chant, fondly remembered: “You’re not the boss of me!” – which inscribes the fact of “bossness” in the same instant it decries it.
I think most humans are instinctive anarchist / democrats, from birth.
The yearning to be free from restraints starts early. The understanding of why some restraints are necessary if one chooses to remain in a community comes later. (We’ve both started out more coherently than Yarvin.)
Replying to RitaRita, May 29 at 5:34 pm
There’s a quote right on point about restraints, which I have a family connection to, to boot. I got to attend the dedication of the plaque referred to in this excerpt from https://thealephmag.com/2011/05/02/those-wise-restraints-that-make-men-free/.
I think it may be more about a person’s personality traits. My brother was someone who almost always followed the lead of adults and did not question authority. He was a conformist. I was always the opposite — I questioned everything. My parents said I never even believed in Santa Claus. I wasn’t a rebel I just didn’t automatically conform unless it made sense.
Psychological research on infants and young children show that these kinds of personality traits are inherited. They can be modified by experience but they are natural tendencies. The tendency to conform varies from child to child.
Guys like Yarvin, et al. always figure they’re going to be either the guy on top, or in with the in-crowd, and will always be, and will never be the poor shmuck under someone’s thumb. You never see them running off to join an established authoritarian regime as a prole. He may be a math wiz, but has lots of screws loose.
I think you are giving Yarvin too much credit. He never thought of himself as someone who would overthrow anything. He just wants to complain about stuff in a highly entertaining way. He is, he was, he has always been clickbait.
I think other people are interested in him because he turns out to be able to turn a phrase pretty well. Empty, but clever.
Yarvin’s way with words is vastly overstated.
Chait’s article in the Atlantic that you reference is simply awful. If you remove advocacy groups and regulations, we could all be rich (have abundance). Oh my, if only leftists were that powerful./s His anecdotes are cherry-picked to support his thesis.
The only anecdote that needs to be refuted is the affordable housing shortage, reframed as a housing shortage. The problem is a lack of political will combined with rentier capitalism and Nimbyism, not regulation.
First, I don’t think that’s quite the point of the article. As I point out, the problem is that the same delay tactics used by private groups are used by the pig rich to screw up rules the rest of us need. This is an actual problem.
Second, a big part of the housing crisis is that there is insufficient housing at a price most families can afford. That is not the same as a housing shortage.
A goodly problem with American housing is that private equity owns at least a third of available rentals. Also, that Libertarian and so-called Democrat, Gov. Jared Polis, just vetoed a Colorado bill that would have banned algorithmic price fixing. That might be related to his being worth at least $125 million.
Price fixing on a universal scale has been going on for decades. See Harlan Crow’s RealPage scandal.
But all the neoliberals here in My Less and Less Fair City assure me that if we just get rid of all the rules, the free market will provide affordable housing as far as the eye can see, with rents too cheap to meter. I tend to trust the answer I heard at a talk on housing at The Boston Foundation a few months ago. The question was whether the proposal they were discussing to change the building code and thereby reduce costs without, they claimed, reducing safety for the inhabitants would reduce prices (rents or sales prices, as the case may be). The response was “capitalists will remain capitalists.”
In my city I don’t think it’s the zoning that’s the problem. Builders are going big on both small homes on small lots as well as apartments. However almost all are expensive, luxury units for the affluent over 55 crowd.
“Yarvin is supposed to be some kind of computer genius. Has he never watched a large enterprise change its computer system? You don’t rip out the old system and then build a new one. You don’t tear out an old system and put in a new on overnight”
In most large enterprises, yes. But Yarvin is from Silicon Valley, where ripping the whole system out and replacing it is actually more common than gradual replacement; it generally leads to programmers at the bottom getting fired, but the guys like Yarvin simply move from company to company. They never suffer, so why not use the “rip it down and build over the ashes” strategy EVERYWHERE?
And then they wonder why those companies fail.
I don’t think they wonder why the companies fail. They just move on to the next project hoping to attract investors with big bucks.
Even in Silicon Valley, the big players don’t rip out their infrastructure and then replace it. They do that with their products, but not with the systems that run their companies. Apple the company doesn’t run on Apple software or hardware; they run on stuff like SAP or Oracle that can handle thousands of transactions per second, keep track of every detail of myriad global supply chains, and all that. No one rips out a system like that and builds on its ashes.
Might be a tell that Trump-Musk-DOGE had nothing to do with improving USG IT systems, and everything to do with invading and trashing them, making even their recovery problematic. Pretty much what the GOP does in every administration, leaving the fixing things to the Dems, except that this time it’s on steroids.
Well, it works brilliantly on the ignorant masses. If the limp dems (and they are limp, for the most part) are transfixed on fixing what the idiots broke, it becomes oh-so-easy to paint them as useless, doesn’t it? The system is failing in real time.
I fear words will not fix it.
First, “limp dems” is a function of lousy media coverage and leadership lacking adequate party discipline to keep all Democratic members of Congress on message.
Secondly, voters who vote blue standing around doing absolutely dick to help their state and local Democratic Party aren’t helping matters. It’s so much easier to sit in the peanut gallery and whine about the “limp dems” instead of actually being upright and taking action.
Words will not fix it, on that we will agree. Neither will sitting at the keyboard whining about it at somebody else’s website.
Exactly. You’d have to ask, what were they trying to accomplish if not their pretext of rewriting the system to better root out fraud? Disabling functionality, identifying key system administrators, taking copies of data and programs, and inserting malicious software are all possibilities. And to what end…
Curtis Yarvin is certainly not a computer genius. He’s an undisciplined hack (not a hacker). He bamboozled a credulous software development community (we software developers are some of the most credulous people around) until his vile “political” ideas alienated most developers.
Ed,
Thank you for the Yarvin series. I, perhaps among others, asked you to do this and while I cannot generally comment at the levels of you and others here that is revealing and worthwhile I am able to follow along and did learn a lot.
Now to a gentle reminder – and one you have “declined ;-) – for you (or someone else with the intellectual capacity) take a peek at Richard Wolff. He has propped up on my YouTube timeline recently – among others including Buffett – regarding the USA End of an Empire. It might be delicate to decode a Marxian Economist with all the word association baggage. And I am not unaware that YouTube and social media are very good at feeding users garbage suggestions. I may be permitting myself to be a suggestion “victim”, but instead of over reacting….
Too dark a topic indeed.
Beware white guys with an engineering bent thinking seriously about politics. Most times you end up with fascism or its antecedents. Since human behavior and human life have nothing to do with engineering you end up with nonsense. Literally non sense.
A large part of it is the assumption that ‘we’, and it’s always we with these guys, some collective we that the Yarvin’s lobby for, are fulfilling some grand destiny involving the entire universe. Or God but I doubt Yarvin does the Jesus thing. This white guy obsession with playing some part in the destiny of the universe or guiding it is a problem. It’s not out of the range of possibility it will kill almost everybody.
Living as I do at the MIT end of My Less and Less Fair City, and with Harvard also still turning out lots of young men who fancy themselves Masters of the Universe, I am all too familiar with this phenomenon. I am beyond grateful that Black residents have started banding together to provide an alternative analysis that seems much more grounded in the reality we’re living.
Ugly picture of a really ugly man. It’s triggering.
No honor, no empathy, no truth, no love, no charity, fake logic, all aspects of the cult of the cheating lying used condom. Once one catches them in one lie distrust is a given for everything they say. I am finding it difficult to critisize specific behavior without indirectly attacking character.
I see CNN caught up with Yarvin — and of course this piece is subscriber-only (no wonder their market share is dropping).
https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/30/politics/curtis-yarvin-wants-to-replace-american-democracy-with-a-form-of-monarchy-led-by-a-ceo
ADDER: This could explain the influx of borderline to trollish comments today. Hmm. O_o
Jeez-Louise, I just read that article. How anyone can take this guy seriously is beyond me:
0. “You need to concentrate that power in a single individual and then just hope somehow that this is the right individual, or close to the right individual,” Yarvin says.
“And Then Just Hope Somehow…” Now that’s what I call a plan. Wile E. Coyote is better prepared than that.
1. “You have to maximize the benefit of society,” Yarvin said, noting “snap decisions” must be made about whether to fire a weapon or detain a person. “In order to create overall order, those decisions have to be made quickly, in a way that is often erroneous.”
I wonder if Mr. Laissez-Faire would submit his precious self to such treatment for the sake of “overall order”.
2. Yarvin said. “My goal is for people to just live in, to live in the real world.”
Yes, he should try it sometime.
God, the whole article is full of stupid shit like this. Nothing sophisticated at all. The man is obviously a total sociopathic crackpot. As I said upthread, these guys must assume none of their crack-brained ideas will apply to them.
I’d really like a journalist with a solid tech background and good chops at interviewing to corner Yarvin about open source software and the underlying premise that “given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow“, and then reel him in about governance.
Our democracy with powers separate across three branches at federal level and some powers reserved to states is a continuous open source environment. Is it fast? Not most of the time, but it can be at times, and the lack of speed can prohibit abuses. Is it profitable? It’s not supposed to be; the benefit to individuals is the freedom to contribute and/or participate, yielding benefits widely to stakeholders.
The democracy-as-open-source-project is a great analogy, and very apt (no pun intended). Open source projects of any quality encourage bug reports, whereas closed-source projects generally don’t. I only wish the bug-reporting system for the US government was as effective as those for large open-source projects. I’ve gotten very quick responses from big projects like LibreOffice, and FreeCAD, for instance.
Your analogy opens up myriad topics, like system-design of governments, the necessity of a free press as an integral part of a democracy (the all-seeing-eye, in my mind) forming a regular tetrahedron with the three branches, making a very stable structure.
It will be very interesting to see what can be done to prevent some of the failure modes we are now seeing in our government. Are there designs that are more resistant to corruption? Money in politics seems the most corrosive problem for democracy, along with the weakening of the press because of revenue loss, and who owns the presses.
Luckily, we still have sites like emptywheel.net to help keep that all-seeing-eye open for us all.
Here is my taken on Yarvin. I believe he is a kind of velvet gloved panderer for rich dudes in Silicon Valley. I think he plays a role like Virgil for Augustus or like the white Russian Ivan Ilyin pandered to Mussolini in Italy and created a Catholic and Russian-Orthodox intersection with fascist Inquisition and Stalinistic purge. Yarvin promotes a new heroism for Palo Alto billionaires based on mimetic crisis and rivalry settled by nihilistic, fascist social change. Individuality is overcome and the purgative power over history is techno-utopian and genocidally inquisitive. Control of political existence is lordship over the social production of information.
Yarvin is disgusted they are “off plan” because he thinks there is a “plan”, because he is pseudo-Hegelian, but there isn’t a dept. of reality. Reality is reality. Yarvin has a kind of mania like bipolar that he and Musk positively reinforce each other in this, I suspect, like snake handling anabaptists. Thank you for the yeoman’s work, Ed.