Dark Enlightenment

​What if the next revolution isn’t about freedom — but about abandoning it entirely? A world ruled by fear clings to control, while a world ruled by wisdom learns to let go.

Power despises uncertainty. It craves permanence, hierarchy, and control. The Dark Enlightenment movement is an attempt to grant exactly that — a version of a world where democracy is abandoned, governance is streamlined into autocratic rule, and the messy unpredictability of human freedom is replaced with rigid order and the unshakable rule of anointed elites.

Since the return of the orange man, I’ve been seeing a lot more Dark Enlightenment rhetoric seeping into my news feed. Its influence on political discourse, tech elitism, and reactionary online spaces is becoming more brazen by the day.

So, after spending a stupid amount of time digging into this topic (most of it lost in the labyrinth of Curtis Yarvin’s deliberately opaque writing) — here's a rundown of what the Dark Enlightenment is, why I believe its misaligned ideals serve only to further illusion and suffering, and how it stands in direct contradiction to the Zen perspective on governance, suffering, and the futility of clinging to control.

The Cult of Order & Collapse

The Dark Enlightenment is a neo-reactionary political movement that emerged in Silicon Valley sometime in the early 2010s. It's a movement that rejects democracy, egalitarianism, and classical Enlightenment ideals like individual rights and social progress.

Instead, the Dark Enlightenment embraces authoritarianism, technocapitalism, and genetic determinism.

It suggests that Karl Marx and his followers had the right diagnosis (that capitalism is inherently unstable) — but drew the wrong conclusions, believing its abolition would lead to an egalitarian, classless society. The Dark Enlightenment, by contrast, sees capitalism’s chaos as inevitable and argues that order can only be restored through strict hierarchy and authoritarian rule.

While other traditional leftists (such as social democrats) try to control capitalism through government intervention and social welfare programs to limit its harms on humanity, the Dark Enlightenment embraces this harm. It suggests that the inevitable crash and burn will have a net positive impact on society by forcing its collapse and allowing us to create something radically new from the rubble.

This acceleration of capitalism will exacerbate suffering until it reaches a breaking point — at which point a new order ruled by a technological elite will emerge.

The idea is that in order for things to get better, they need to get a lot, LOT worse.

The Dark Enlightenment movement is largely based on the ideas of Nick Land — a former professor and philosopher at the University of Warwick. Land is known for his provocative and nihilistic views on capitalism and technology.

Land is also the founder of accelerationist theory, a closely related topic we'll explore next that involves pushing technological advancement to the extreme to reach a "singularity" — regardless of its risk to society.

Accelerationism

“The more you grasp, the less you hold.” — Old Zen Proverb.

Accelerationism is a response to the perceived stagnation or decline of society and the belief that only radical change can overcome it. It's the idea that pushing capitalism and technology to their limits will either create a singularity that transforms society or force a necessary collapse and rebirth.

While some might argue that accelerationism could be a maneuver to maximize actions taken that provide the greatest overall good for humanity, rather than prioritizing personal interest, this idealized version rarely plays out in reality.

Accelerationism has become an excuse to justify reckless progress without consideration for the harm caused along the way.

I see accelerationism as a modern form of samsara — it's an endless, insatiable cycle of craving and dissatisfaction. At what point will we reach the desired state of advancement and decide, "Hey, we did it. Now let's all just quit our jobs, kick back with a cold beer, and enjoy our utopia!"

The very nature of accelerationism is to crave and push for more and more without end.

Even if the end goal of such a movement is some sort of "perfect society" wherein all members are treated fairly and equally — have access to healthy food, personalized education, free healthcare, housing, and opportunity — it's based entirely on illusion and ultimately relies on the perpetuation, even acceleration, of suffering to sustain itself.

From a Zen perspective, the path forward is not to obsess about advancement and accelerate progress at all costs — but to strive for a steady, effortless flow with the natural rhythm of change and existence.

Technocapitalism & The Loss of the Self

“It’s not that we’ve lost control of our data. It’s that we’ve lost control of ourselves.” — Shoshana Zuboff

A truly capitalistic system reduces the individual to a cog in a machine. Under technocapitalism, the self becomes less important than the system it operates within. Our individuality, emotions, and autonomy are all set aside to serve the greater mechanism of the market.

In Zen, this loss of individuality is not inherently negative — it resonates with the idea that we are all part of an interconnected whole. However, where Zen teaches that liberation arises through the mindful dissolution of the ego, technocapitalism co-opts this loss of self for its own ends.

The self is not something to be manipulated and exploited by external forces. True freedom lies in non-attachment to any system — capitalist, technocratic, or otherwise.

The CEO State

“Govern a great nation as you would cook a small fish. Do not overdo it.” — Lao Tzu

One of the core ideas of the Dark Enlightenment movement is that democracy is both inefficient and chaotic. Instead, followers promote the emergence of an authoritarian "CEO state" — in which governance is centralized under a technocratic elite.

Curtis Yarvin even imagines a transition toward corporate-style city-states, in which each polity is ruled by a sovereign CEO who maintains total authoritarian rule. Citizens would have the freedom to decide which city-state best aligns with their ideals. If a leader fails, the "customers" (citizens) can leave — but they have no say in shaping policy. He even goes as far as to suggest that the now-decimated city of Gaza should be the first location for these new monarchical city-states.

The whole concept of the CEO state contradicts the Zen understanding that true freedom arises when we let go of attachment to form. Freedom is not something that can be granted or taken by external systems — it’s an internal liberation state achieved through non-attachment and non-striving.

Utopia: The Trap of Endless Striving

“The finger pointing at the moon is not the moon.” — Zen Proverb

Not all forms of accelerationism embrace collapse and control.

For example, left accelerationism — as championed by thinkers like Sam Altman, Aaron Bastani, Nick Srnicek, and Alex Williams — envisions a future where technology serves human freedom and well-being. Rather than racing toward authoritarianism and the collapse of society, it seeks to accelerate progress to expand human flourishing. This is achieved (in theory) by using automation to reduce working hours (thus providing us with more leisure time), implementing universal basic income (for greater financial security), and improving healthcare, education, and housing for all.

The goal of left accelerationism is to free people from unnecessary toil and scarcity by harnessing technology to create a more equitable society for all. It’s a vision of abundance rather than dominance, aiming for liberation from the economic structures that constrain human potential.

However, even this optimistic vision is a trap. The idea of a perfect society — a technological utopia — remains just that: an illusion. From a Zen perspective, striving for utopia — whether through technological liberation or authoritarian control — is rooted in attachment, desire, and illusion.

No matter how noble the goal, acceleration driven by fear and craving only deepens suffering. True freedom lies not in speeding toward some imagined perfect society, but in learning to live in the present moment, unattached to outcomes or illusions of control.

To believe that suffering can be eliminated through progress alone is to misunderstand the nature of suffering itself. As long as we seek to escape the present by chasing an imagined future, we remain trapped — no matter how advanced or automated the world around us becomes.

Fear, Control, & The Search For True Freedom

“We are very afraid of being powerless. But we have the power to look deeply at our fears, and then fear cannot control us.” — Thich Nhat Hanh

The Dark Enlightenment is a manifestation of fear — fear of chaos, fear of loss, and fear of weakness.

Its response is to control, subjugate, dominate, and push the acceleration of technology beyond the point of no return — driving society toward total collapse.

Even if the intent is altruistic — that an even greater, more equitable society will emerge from the ashes — this belief rests on an illusion. Destruction does not guarantee rebirth, and control does not guarantee liberation.

Depending on where your perspective stands, some of this could be seen as either altruistic or reckless — but from a Zen perspective, this whole approach is missing the mark entirely. The harder we push to force change, the more tangled we become in the very suffering we seek to escape.

We break free not by forcing change — but by letting go and moving with the flow.

---

---