Toward a Low-Entropy Right
In physics, the concept of entropy describes the state of energy within a system. Specifically, it describes how available a system’s energy is for use. A system whose energy is evenly distributed throughout has high entropy. A system whose energy is concentrated has low entropy.
On the left, the euphemism community organizer describes a person who coordinates leftist action. A community organizer concentrates the energy of leftists into a usable form. As a physical law, entropy in any closed system always increases. Organizers fight against entropy by constantly reorganizing their activists, who are like little packets of energy. The media or other entities agitate the activists from outside the closed system, decreasing the entropy of that system. The left is therefore low-entropy.
The right is extremely high-entropy. It’s something that Curtis Yarvin has long recognized, which is why he consistently advocates a one-time, all-at-once, right-wing “reset” of American politics. The right is a closed system with very little energy coming into it from outside. The rare instances in which it does receive new energy are times like the Trump 2016 campaign, but no one is ever there to concentrate the energy into a usable form.
When Yarvin speaks of winning as doing something to make future wins possible, what he is really saying is that winning is reducing entropy so that you can reduce entropy more in the future. Whenever you use a solar panel to collect the energy of the sun and store it in a battery for later use, for instance, you are reducing entropy.
The side-principal rule is described by Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui in the Chinese military philosophy text Unrestricted Warfare (1999):
In Chinese grammar, there is a basic sentence structure. This structure divides a sentence or phrase into two parts, the modifier and the center word. The relationship between them is that of modifying and being modified, that is, that the former modifies the latter and determines the tendency and features of the latter. Put more clearly, the former constitutes appearance, and the latter constitutes the organism. This structure is a basic mode in Chinese grammar: The side-principal structure.
This structure of having the principal element modified by a side element exists extensively in the Chinese language to the extent that a Chinese speaker will not be able to speak without using it. For, if there are only subject words in a sentence, without directing modification, the sentence will lack clarity because of the absence of such elements as degree, location, and mode which can be grasped in a concrete manner. For example, if the modifiers in such phrases as “good person,” “good thing,” “tall building,” “red flag,” and “slow running” are all removed, then the center words will all become neutral words without specific references. As shown here, in the side-principal structure, the “side” element, as compared with the “principal” element, is in the position of qualitatively determining the sentence or phrase.
In other words, in a certain sense we can use the understanding that in the side-principal structure the center word is the principal entity, with the modifier serving as the directing element, that is, that the “principal” element is the body for the “side” element, while the “side” element is the soul of the “principal” element. With the body established as the premise, the role of the soul is obviously of decisive significance. The relationship of the principal entity's being subordinate to the directing element is the foundation for the existence of the side-principal structure.
The organism, or organization, is the principal element of politics, and the side element is the motivation behind the organization. The Old Glory Club, for example, is principally an organization, and the side element is the intent to organize heritage Americans and to advocate on behalf of American traditions. Qiao and Wang focus primarily on the “side” element or “directing” element as the decisive element, and extend their analogy from language to warfare. For us, extending the language analogy to politics, the Iron Law of Oligarchy tells us that the principal element is organization itself. Right-wingers tend to focus on the “side element” as the primary purpose of what they are doing, but the real purpose of any organization is not the specific element that makes it concrete, but rather to organize, or reduce entropy.
The left survives almost purely on the habit of entropy reduction. The dispute between Gaetano Mosca and Vilfredo Pareto about whether or not the elites believe their political formula or not almost doesn’t matter, because the left has built up the habit of entropy reduction to the point where their goals are pursued automatically. The left has such a low entropy that they can actually spend their saved-up energy on increasing the entropy of the right by breaking up its organizations and by providing fake right-wing organizations to reduce the available energy for genuine organizations.
Forming habits is a great way to reduce entropy because it costs less energy to reduce entropy the more times it is done, until the point where the organizers no longer have to stimulate the activists to continue the habit. Basket weaving is a good example of this, as well as the Old Glory Club’s habit of scheduled meetings and publications. The purpose of any organization is to make further organization easier. Right-wingers ask what must be done, and the answer is: reduce entropy. The side element that motivates how that is done does not require overthinking. For basket weaving, the side element was simply to meet friends. A more ambitious side element can motivate organization as entropy is reduced, and there is more energy available to spend on more ambitious projects. Old Glory Club’s historical battlefield meetups are useful because they make future meetups more likely.
The left is in such a low-entropy state that the side element can dominate — they are free to spend accumulated energy on whatever they want without increasing their entropy by much. The right must allow the side element to be secondary to the principal of organization until the principal has been sufficiently concentrated for decisive action.
Interesting assessment Charles, and obviously I agree. I didn't think to put it in those terms, but I've been pushing for in-person organizing and forming schools, church groups, businesses, etc. specifically for our folk & friends for a couple years now. I think that's the main way regular people can contribute to a better future, simply building healthy, wholesome community.
Love this. I think the “Entropy” analogy is a great way to understand things and why “order” requires “energy”. The Left prefers “disorder” and settling into ways that don’t require “energy” (Like discipline and pro-Nomian ways of living). The Right, if it wants “order” must exert “energy” to create it.
So my take, FWIW, is not that the Left is low entropy, rather they facilitate high entropy. The Left depletes energy, rendering society in a state of disorder. Disorder doesn’t just mean high energy chaos, but means low energy, flat, undynamic.