The whole problem with Land is that he tries to revive teleology, that we are somehow moving towards direction, of course his teleology, teleoplexy to use his language, formalizes capitalism as a demon parasite that latched itself onto us through formulating itself, thus the whole idea of capitalism as AI (this is all Land is philosophically), hence you get the idea of neo-China arises from the future. Capitalism latched itself onto China steering into it into its grip. The problem is that history is cyclical but it does not flow by metaphorical demons in the economy that are ontological, things are determined by environment and biology. Landian thought seeks capitalism as far greater than it really is in the same manner Fisher does, Fisher is enamoured by his own communist realism, that is seeing things through Marxist, specifically New Left ways of capitalism to really escape out of it, its why the New Left are such failures, new left thinkers don't look at this to see that they should abandon socialism or communism for something else and will just think, oh we need new strategies! We need communization! When the simplest thing could very well be a different more organic system instead. Land is only really interesting to learn about, to believe it wholeheartedly is stupid. Also I agree with Schullenberger when he said Land has changed his view 3 times as he ended up seeing his predictions turn out wrong, this is very much true. If you check his recent tweets he is far more reactionary in a normal sense than NRx now, probably because he knows the movement is dead and has became a boomer conservative politically.
![[ಒಂಬತ್ತು]](/data/avatars/l/0/379.jpg?1787770438){kind=avatar}
