Virgin Primitivist vs. Chad Transhumanist

A couple of memes that you can only find in the most autistically glorious corners of /pol/.


If we view history as an evolutionary competition between societies and ideas, it seems obvious that primitivism would be the most self-defeating – and consequently, self-refuting – ideology on the planet. While transhumanism is accelerationism maxed, the most competitive and adaptive ideology.


Thing is, both of them are transhumanist. It’s just that the Half Life stalker is the sort of transhumanism you’d get when your society is run by bugmen. Whereas the overman belongs to the Gold caste of the Red Rising trilogy, a product of a technologically stagnant archaeo-futurist space empire. More aesthetically pleasing than the bugman, to be sure, but either would be crushed by the Chad transhumanist.

Anatoly Karlin is a transhumanist interested in psychometrics, life extension, UBI, crypto/network states, X risks, and ushering in the Biosingularity.


Inventor of Idiot’s Limbo, the Katechon Hypothesis, and Elite Human Capital.


Apart from writing booksreviewstravel writing, and sundry blogging, I Tweet at @powerfultakes and run a Substack newsletter.


  1. German_reader says

    is the sort of transhumanism you’d get when your society is run by bugmen.

    Bugmen…what exactly are bugmen? (sorry, I don’t keep up with that lingo)
    Chad overman seems like a dream…but you’d prefer the partly cybernetical Chad transhumanist because that one would be more adaptive in a Darwinian struggle? Oh well.
    Anyway, at least those memes are pretty amusing, which is rare enough these days..thanks.

  2. German_reader says

    Ok, so if I understand correctly bugmen are consumerist, liberal (in a pc sense) drones:

  3. Virgin Primitivist vs. Chad Transhumanist

    The key word is virgin here, I would be interested to know that if they did a survey of /pol/ how many of them were not virgins.

  4. I’d estimate Varg as being responsible for 95% of far-right primitivism

  5. Third world nationalist says

    Too much credit to Varg. I think unabomber 40 percent, varg 40 percent, pol pot 20 percent. Pol pot being more of a fusion of Nazbol and primitivism.

  6. Nice crayon drawings.
    Everyone who watches the “alt-right movement” understands it is creation of teenage boys interested in sex, sex, sex and sex and not a political movement of any importance, but thanks for reminding us.

    Ok, so if I understand correctly bugmen are consumerist, liberal (in a pc sense) drones:

    In other words, the perfect capitalist worker and consumer, but why call him “leftist”? How is the city “leftist” spending all money on newest and shiniest fashion and electronic gizmos different from rural “rightist” spending all money on newest and shiniest tactical gear, guns and ammo?

  7. advancedatheist says

    People laugh at transhumanists now.

    But wait until an enhanced woman goes into the mountains, creates an ice castle with her superpowers and plunges the world into endless winter . . .

  8. advancedatheist says

    I happen to know a plausible Chad Transhumanist, the philosopher and cryonicist Max More, Ph.D.

    Even in his 50’s, below the neck his body looks like Bane’s from The Dark Knight Rises.

  9. The Big Red Scary says

    From my personal observations, I would sa that the particular transhumanist fantasy that you describe is most of all attractive to precocious five year old girls who are tired of putting up with the pointless rules imposed by their intellectually inferior parents.

    People study AI risk. Does anybody study angry-five-year-old girls-with-transhuman-powers risk?

  10. Daniil Adamov says

    “If we view history as an evolutionary competition between societies and ideas” then why are all the ideas you dislike (progressivism, Islamism, even Christian fundamentalism in some quarters) consistently doing so well? 😛 Or is that just a temporary glitch, bound to go away when the Rapture I mean the Singularity occurs?

    I think some form of moderate primitivism is going to be very successful for a long time, regardless of its actual merits, simply because it is inherently more appealing to normal human beings, who are naturally conservative and not particularly interested in any radical transformation unless forced into it by some unimaginably drastic circumstances.

  11. anonymous coward says

    why are all the ideas you dislike (progressivism, Islamism, even Christian fundamentalism in some quarters) consistently doing so well?

    Because we live in a dark age of ignorance and decay, and our ancestors knew a hundred times more about why the world works the way it does compared to us. The truth stings, but it’s the truth.

  12. So far, transhumanism is more theory than reality, unlike Progressivism, Islamism and Christian fundamentalism.

  13. Wasn’t there some science fiction/fantasy series from the 80s in which God-like children were created by the wealthy, and they collectively decided to eliminate the older generations, creating a fairy-tale world that they were familiar with through childrens’ stories?

  14. Transhumanism is not entirely the same thing as adopting other technologies. We are biological beings, and our personalities, decisions, what we are, is totally dependent on us staying biological. A simple example is hormone levels in your blood.

    For example if you feel you won an argument online, your serum testosterone level will go up. You will instinctively know that any success, however meager it is (and winning an online argument is, well, not the greatest of successes), will lead to such an increase. On the other hand, losing an argument (or any other kind of failure, however small) will lead to a decrease in your T-levels.

    This will actually motivate you to try your best to strive to achieve “success” and avoid failures. (However small.) By the way, this won’t work on females so much: this is one of the reasons males’ behavior is so different from females.

    Now if you upload yourself to a computer right after death (or if half your brain is already a computer before death), you won’t have any hormones any more affecting your decisions. This will outright change your personality. Even if hormones could (and would) be totally simulated, you (or at least some of the people uploading themselves) will eventually change yourself in some ways. For example even biologically we use drugs which change our behavior. Why won’t we use something (enhancements etc.) which change our behavior once we’re effectively computer programs? These computer programs will then further change themselves. Then the already changed programs will decide to change themselves even further. At one point it won’t resemble the original biological being at all – even assuming the simulation and upload were both perfect to begin with, which is a question. (And even assuming the uploaded program will be you in a philosophical sense – my instinct says it would only be a copy and not me myself.)

    Now you are quite correct probably that those super-enhanced computer software things could easily turn out to be much more efficient at conquering and ruling the world than biological humans. The question is, in what sense could those transhuman beings be considered humans at all? My suggestion is they won’t be humans at all. Not only that: they won’t have anything in common with biological humans, or any biological beings at all. Please remember that we have a lot in common with apes, so the statement “well, the change from human to transhuman will just be the same as ape to human” is definitely false.

    In other words, “transhumans” (especially the versions uploaded to a computer to there live forever) will essentially be cyborgs or T-800s or AIs which will be stronger and smarter than us. Endorsing it as “well, they’re more efficient” is stupid: the same stupid as inviting extraterrestrials to the Earth with the slogan “they’re better, so they deserve Earth more than us”. We don’t know what they’ll be up to, but they will have the ability to destroy us, and it’s foolish to expect these… things to be benevolent. Over time, they (some of them, at any rate – and probably those will be the strongest and smartest ones) could change beyond anything we can imagine, and might decide to get rid of us.

    Why is this in our interest to encourage this? AIs (if possible to create them) might eventually destroy us anyway, why hasten the process?

  15. Third world nationalist says

    The key is being a moderate primitivist, with certain amount of technology. Most primitivists advocate going back to hunting gathering but that is impractical because it has been too long since we left that lifestyle and our biology has already evolved away from that. A farming/herding life would be more suitable for our biology.

    In the short/medium term primitivism does seem more appealing but in the long term transhumanism offers promise that exceeds primitivism.

  16. Even most biological transhumanism looks a bit dangerous to me, but I can accept it as a way to the future: genetically modifying humans to become healthier, smarter, etc. The laws of thermodynamics allow humans to live forever in their biological bodies (like Egyptian gods, who could be killed, but wouldn’t die of old age or illness), our aging is genetically programmed (and so should be possible to modify). It must be possible to edit genes even in adult organisms using some technologies like designer retroviruses, so theoretically it must be possible to make live humans smarter or healthier. These overman beings will still be humans.

    Of course, the problem with transhumanism is that it might be unavoidable. But at least don’t cheer for this as if it was a good thing.

  17. I would be interested to know that if they did a survey of /pol/ how many of them were not virgins.

    All of the men, and none of the women.

    Oh, wait… that survey was taken in 1965.

  18. Third world nationalist says

    I think a big part of which ideology i choose depends on whether space colonization will be possible. If it was not possible then i would stick to primitivism. Then we can at least have a proven way to a stable and a happy life till the sun burns out on itself and destorys the earth. its a wiser choice rather then risk the dangers of transumanism.

    If it were proven that we were able to colonise other planets. Then i would be more supportive of the transhumanist route.

  19. Very amusing.

    Of course it’s really a tautology.

    Transhumanism is primitivism – all our primitive biological urges are glorified in Transhumanism.

    The epitome of something is always superior to an earlier version of it, by definition.

    So it’s not saying much, although it’s a mildly amusing joke.

  20. Greasy William says

    Do you like this joke?

    A guy is golfing and on the 18th hole he is about 150 yards away from the green. He asks his caddy, “What club do you think I should use here?” His caddy suggest that he use his 5 iron.

    The golfer takes his advice and takes his shot, but the 5 iron was too much club so the ball sailed over the green and hit the head of his wife who was waiting in the parking lot, killing her on the spot.

    10 years later, the same golfer is playing at the same course and he finds himself in the exact same position he had been in on the 18th hole. He still has the same caddy and he asks him again, “What club do you think I should use?” His caddy thinks and then says, “your 5 iron”.

    The golfer just stares at him in disbelief and goes, “Are you crazy? 10 years ago I was in this same spot on this same hole and that was the club you recommended and that time I ended up missing the green completely!”

  21. Genes that influence embryo development and later growth into adulthood could only be altered at the right time and not after the fact. So even if that becomes possible that’s already a very limitating factor.

    As for your previous comment, I agree that there definitely something misanthropic to some of these utopias.

  22. German_reader says

    I’m not sure I really get the joke. But a guy rich enough to be into golfing probably would eventually replace his wife with a younger one anyway, so I guess losing one to such an accident isn’t that bad?
    Anyway, I’m with reiner tor on the transhumanist issue…personally I’m interested in increasing human life span, but all this talk about cybernetics, uploading one’s conscience on some computer etc. is really strange to me. Abolition of humanity as a biological species doesn’t appeal to me.

  23. That’s true, but that only means that it’d be way more difficult to achieve it. If we feed the system enough energy, in theory, anything is possible. For example werewolfism: it’s not totally impossible to create a mammal (a wolf) from another mammal (a human), at least not inherently more difficult than creating a butterfly from a worm. (Okay, I know, the cells of the butterfly are already inside the worm. But still. You could create those cells, or change existing cells, etc.)

    But yes, the technology to improve babies of 100 IQ parents to 150 IQ will arrive way earlier than the technology to improve 100 IQ people to 150 IQ points. But the latter is still not impossible.

  24. As a kid I used to read vulgarization magazines, when they dealt with nano-machines they’d imagine new ways in which matter could be manipulated, making possible in theory almost anything. That almost amounted to magical thinking couched in ‘modern’ terms.

    I suggest we welcome innovations as they come and assess them on a case by case basis. Entertainaing ourselves with sci-fi, why not, but by all means I’d rather avoid weaving them in utopian thoughts or worse even, ideologies…

  25. Of course. We’re talking about things like singularity or the uploading of the human mind onto computers, which are in themselves quite sci-fi sounding ideas.

    In general, I’m more open to overman-type modifications than machine transhumanist modifications, but that’s just me. Also, most currently available artificial enhancements (like artificial testosterone, or cholesterol-lowering statins, or cocaine, etc.) have way too many side effects, so are preferably avoided altogether. Even when we add a machine somehow (like smartphones), they don’t seem to make us really smarter, and in general restricting their use (like carrying a book, and reading it instead of your smartphone) is a sound advice. So far, though it probably won’t stay like that forever. But a late adapter approach could easily prove superior over being an early adapter in such matters.

  26. advancedatheist says

    Yeah, the survivalist magazines marketed to anxious rural white people puzzle me. They send conflicting messages about prepping, because they combine product reviews with DIY articles. You’d think survivalists would want to know how to make the things they need from scratch instead of buying them off the shelf; but those articles don’t sell advertising.

    One of them, about surviving “off-grid,” even offers an ebook version of the periodical – which makes you wonder whether the people who publish this stuff believe their own propaganda about the impending failure of modern technology and the collapse of civilization.

  27. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg admits on video, that he is not human (13 seconds)

  28. Of course “survivalism” is not about survival, it is about selling Rambo fantasy, just like rap music is selling “gangsta” fantasy.

    If “survivalist” movement was about survival, survivalist sites and magazines would be full of articles about experiences of ordinary people from Syria, Iraq, Lybia, Yemen, Ukraine and other places where S really HTF. There are lesson of survival, but these will not sell much adverts, as you said.

  29. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg admits on video, that he is not human

  30. John Gruskos says

    Say what you will about primitives, they were drawing much better pictures on cave walls 30,000 years ago than the advocates for trans-humanism seem capable of.

  31. Its a term Bronze Age Pervert uses (a lot) in those valuable free moments when he is not translating Curtis Yarvin thoughts from Steve Bannon, or finding photographs of young men in exotic locations:

  32. On Poland’s new Jewish Prime Minister, and Putin’s Chabad friends –

    Poland’s new prime minister is a Jewish banker, Mateusz Jakub Morawiecki, formerly Chairman of the Management Board of Bank Zachodni WBK Group (part of banking giant Santander), with an academic background both in Poland and the USA

    Personally of Christian affiliation, Morawiecki in his first speech as Prime Minister, spoke of his “Jewish brothers”, of the Żegota Polish resistance group that helped Jews during World War II, and of Solidarity in which his father was involved

    Perhaps Morawiecki will spark enhanced Polish-Russian relations, as Morawiecki will be able to link closely with Vladimir Putin’s good friends at Chabad, such as ‘Putin’s rabbi’, the also-US-educated Berel Lazar

    The Jewish Telegraph Agency on their compatriot in Warsaw now leading the Polish government –

  33. Jewish Prime Minister
    Jewish brothers
    Putin’s rabbi

    There is something I always wondered about: why people, who believe that Jews rule the world and control everything, do not convert to Judaism to infiltrate the conspiracy and join the winning side?

    /conspiracy mode on
    Maybe they did? Maybe in the world ruling Jewish conspiracy is all made of gentile paranoics with no Jews at all?
    /conspiracy mode off

  34. why people, who believe that Jews rule the world and control everything, do not convert to Judaism to infiltrate the conspiracy and join the winning side?

    1) You notice that Jews keep popping up in influential places. Who is the Hungarian or Swedish adviser to Putin? Where is the half-Bulgarian Polish prime minister? or the half-Italian one? What about the US Fed chairs? Which third of US billionaires (and seventh of all billionaires) is of French extraction?
    It’s almost like… Jews really are influential. Of course it’s not a “conspiracy”, which was a straw man by you.

    2) Those who notice this pattern, especially in our current cultural climate (anti-anti-Semitism, Holocaustianity and whatnot), are usually more tribal (which seems like a requirement for being more group-aware), and so are less inclined to betray their own.

    3) In fact, there are many people who “join the winning side”, like Joe Biden, who recently praised Jews for their role in bringing the wonders of liberalism and Civil Rights to the US. They are usually regarded as traitors, because it almost seems like they are.

    4) One of the points of so-called anti-Semites is that it’s quite difficult to join Jews. While Jews regard all other Jews of Jewish ancestry as Jews (except some of them as “crazy hicks”, some others as “not real Jews for not keeping the Law”, etc.), if you convert into – say – Reform Judaism, you won’t be regarded as Jewish by the Orthodox. (While they’ll keep regarding other Reform Jews as Jews, for example they’ll try to convert them but not you.) Theoretically, conversion to an Orthodox sect makes all (or most) sects recognize you as Jewish, but you probably won’t really be regarded as really Jewish by secular Jews, who often happen to be the most powerful of them. Oh, and of course conversion is difficult, most Orthodox sects require circumcision without anesthesia, and it’s just the most physically painful difficulty. It’s also a humiliating process, and you have to pretend you really like them or at least their religion, which is probably beyond the acting abilities of most people except professional actors.

    So joining Jews to reap the benefits of being Jewish is simply impossible.

  35. Who is the Hungarian or Swedish adviser to Putin?

    The number of Swedes and Hungarians with citizenship of Russia is negligible. But Putin has German advisors

  36. German_reader says

    But Putin has German advisors

    Are those ethnic Germans from Russia or Germans from Germany? And what does he have them for? Analyzing Germany? Good luck with that, this demented joke country will be hard to figure out.

  37. German_reader says

    Thanks. Weird stuff.

  38. Are those ethnic Germans from Russia or Germans from Germany? And what does he have them for? Analyzing Germany?

    Of course it’s the Russian Germans (Herman Gref the head of Sberbank, Alexei Miller, head of Gazprom, Victor Kress, the head of the Tomsk region, etc.). As far as I know these people are irrelevant to Russian-German relations .

  39. Yes, one difference is that there are enough (like 0.1-2%) Jews in basically all major white countries to occupy at least some influential positions in most of those countries.

    Another difference is ethnic consciousness. I bet you German Gref doesn’t care much about Germany one way or another. I’m not sure about Putin’s Jewish advisers regarding Israel, but I’d bet you they care on some level. For example they might not oppose Putin supporting Syria/Iran, but they might lean towards somewhat more understanding towards Israel.

  40. There’s Schröder, paid for for his services while chancellor. LOL

    To be honest, whatever he did, was/is probably way less detrimental to Germany’s interests than what Merkel and her gang has been doing. Or what Tony Blair did to the UK.

  41. German_reader says

    Another difference is ethnic consciousness. I bet you German Gref doesn’t care much about Germany one way or another.

    I agree…for whatever reason, Germans abroad seem to be easily absorbed into their host countries, e.g. there’s no “German lobby” in the US (and little pro-German sentiment), despite the massive numbers of Americans with some German ancestry. Germany also seems to be pretty bad at cultivating the ties that still exist nowadays.

  42. German_reader says

    I couldn’t stand Schröder and hated his government, but at least he was right about the Iraq war, I’ll always respect him for that.
    Merkel has just been disastrous all around…nothing good to be said about her at all.

  43. at least he was right about the Iraq war

    Or at the very least he told the peasants some nice and true things about it. He kept collaborating with the Americans, though.

  44. Hungarian ancestry is usually valid for at most one generation. Jewish ancestry is often valid longer. Not infinitely – a Hungarian prime minister in the late 1930s was famous for his anti-Semitic policies. He was forced out of office when the Regent learned that he had a Jewish great-grandmother. But it was probably treated as a dirty secret in his family, and not as something to be proud of. I’ve met some quarter-Jews in my life, and they were all quite a bit proud of their ancestry, and at least two of them showed some extra concern and sympathy for Israel when the topic came up.

  45. Joe Eszterhas:

    “Eszterhas learned at age 45 that his father had concealed his collaboration in the Hungarian Nazi government. After this discovery, he cut his father out of his life entirely, never reconciling before his father’s death.”

    He said contradictory things about Hungary:

    “I wrote a film in 2006 about the Hungarian Revolution of 1956. Think about it: Hungarians went up against Russian tanks with stones and Molotov cocktails and, for a short while at least, defeated the mighty Red Army. There is no action in world history more heroic than that.” In spite of this, another time he said that “If you see a Hungarian on the street, go up to him and slap him. He will know why.”

    He seems ambivalent about his Hungarian ancestry.

    On the other hand, the Ashkenazi Jewish Edward Teller was always respected and liked in Hungary, because he usually spoke fondly of Hungary (despite him being Jewish, and so having some reasons to remember less than fondly of the country of his birth). I guess he also probably liked Israel more than your average gentile, which is understandable.

  46. German_reader says

    True, and to some extent he may just have done it because it was useful for securing his re-election (which proved disastrous insofar as it paved the way for Merkel winning in 2005). But at least he didn’t send German troops to die in Iraq which is more than can be said for some other European governments.

  47. Roderick Spode says

    That figure is far too high, but then again your remark only makes sense as a joke.

    Speaking of sense, for a psychopath Varg Vikernes often makes a lot more of it than the sleepy dads and seminary students lurking here on Unz.

    Also, if transhumanist-level tech is an attainable goal, it’s more likely than not that we are simulated minds created by it rather than actual people.