Davidmerfield, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons / ReasonTV, CC BY 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons, Cropped by Resist the Mainstream

Chris Rufo, the conservative activist best known for popularizing criticism of “critical race theory” and investigating the alleged plagiarism of former Harvard President Claudine Gay, recently engaged in a contentious debate with Curtis Yarvin, a controversial monarchist political philosopher.

The two right-wing firebrands engaged in a war of letters, published by the magazine IM-1776 on Thursday. The conversation quickly became more hostile after Rufo reacted to Yarvin's perceived condescension.

Yarvin first became prominent in political theory under the pen name “Mencius Moldbug,” which he attached to his blog Unqualified Reservations in the late aughts. Though relatively obscure at the time, the blog has become increasingly influential with time. Yarvin has been cited by numerous influential figures, including Peter Theil, J.D. Vance, and Blake Masters. He is also the founder of Urbit, a tech company emphasizing decentralized computing models.

“I am not a conservative. I am a radical – a radical monarchist. I believe there are no rails – and never were any. America has no manifest destiny. Her constitution was not divinely inspired. No special providence was involved in her founding, nor has she discovered any unique principle of human governance. Nor can any theory of historical determinism, whether liberal, Marxist or libertarian, explain, predict or guarantee her future – which, like all future history, is a contingent and unwritten blank page in the hands of men only,” Yarvin said in his opening remarks.

“And while she is indeed plunging into a ravine, every realistic way to save her starts with centralizing all sovereign power in a single person – or at most a small team,” Yarvin adds, defining the core tenets of his political philosophy. “This historically normal political structure is the appropriate way to terminate a failed experiment in political science, which appeared to work only because it started off with an amazing population in an empty continent on the threshold of an industrial revolution.”

Chris Rufo then responded to Yarvin's precise words, attempting to articulate their differences of worldview.

“First, we have different objectives. Your goal seems to be accelerating the cycle of regimes from democracy to monarchy. My goal is to halt and reverse political decomposition and return to the beginnings of the republic — counter-revolution,” Rufo began in his response.

“We also have a deep disagreement over the nature of history,” Rufo continued. “You argue that there are no rails, no destiny, no divinity, and nothing beyond human contingency. This nihilistic argument creates considerable problems for you because it eliminates all possibility of making normative judgments. What is the ground of your convictions? What is the telos of your political system? And, if America is ordinary, contingent, and accidental, why care about its future at all?”

Yarvin responded by minimizing the real importance of Rufo's political successes, arguing that measures such as the Claudine Gay plagiarism takedown would result in little foundational institutional change.

“What we see with these 'victories' is that, since they are victories only in name, all they do is make the enemy change its name – like James O’Keefe’s  'victory' over ACORN,” Yarvin opined in his characteristically long-winded response. “Question: is there anyone who you got fired who is actually, right now, looking for work? You could check…”

“I reiterate that it is all in vain, and it will have exactly the same long-term impact as Ward Connerly’s crusade against affirmative action or Anita Bryant’s war on gays. For every faceless drone you fire, you activate and energize the equivalent of ten more. You are just pruning the forest,” he added.

Rufo gave the final word in the debate, describing his steadfast belief that the American system contains potential for its own reform and accusing Yarvin of defeatist, self-serving attitudes.

“Some things are rotten in our republic, yes, but there is always nobility in constructive action. My work has not only shifted perceptions, but shifted the “direct experience of the world” for many people – and I am committed to making sure it continues to do so. I don’t know what you’re committed to, and, sadly, I don’t think you do either. Ultimately, we offer two paths. Our readers must decide: step into the opium den with Curtis Yarvin, or into the arena with other men,” Rufo concluded.