Other points from the previous post are real Reactionary beliefs and make it in here as well. Even more confusingly, sometimes the same people seem to switch among the three without giving any indication they are aware that they are doing so.
I tried to give a more complete summary of its beliefs in Reactionary Philosophy In An Enormous, Planet Sized Nutshell.
0.1.1: Will this FAQ be a rebuttal the arguments in that summary? I worry I may have done too good a job of steelmanning Reactionary positions in that post, emphasizing what I thought were strong arguments, sometimes even correct arguments, but not really the arguments Reactionaries believed or considered most important.
Part 2 of this FAQ mostly draws from Michael’s feudal perspective and Part 4 is entirely based on Moldbug’s corporation-based ideas.
0.3: Are you going to treat Reaction and Progressivism as real things? One of the problems in exercises like this is how much to take political labels seriously.
Progressivism is supposed to be a worldwide movement, stronger than the vagaries of local politics.