Leveling up Agency

1,508 words

“Whether you think you can, or you think you can’t—you’re right.”

—Henry Ford

Agency is the ability to take meaningful action. Essentially, is one more of a subject or an object. There are three types of people according to their level of agency: non-player characters (NPCs), player characters (PCs), and dungeon masters (DMs). Life and art imitate one another, and these terms are known to anyone familiar with old school tabletop games like Dungeons & Dragons. DMs run the game, while PCs play the game and interact with NPCs.

The vast majority of humanity, even in white societies during the best of times, are NPCs. Their historical and geographical horizons are small. They are reactive and passive in nature. Their opinions are generally from other people, rather than from their own analysis and convictions. At best, they can pick from a pre-approved selection of options, such as Democrat or Republican. Most importantly, even if they develop strong convictions, they rarely act upon them. Many struggle even to take meaningful action within their private affairs, let alone public matters. The better NPCs can improve their private fortunes, such as by obtaining a raise, investing, or taking care of their health. But when they affect society, it is more often by accident than intent.

This isn’t necessarily bad. It is how things have always been, and most people being NPCs used to work well. In fact, too many people having too much agency might have caused chaos. We need people who blissfully go about daily life. NPCs are not a problem unless they sink into fellahdom, a term Oswald Spengler uses for the masses left behind by a calcified civilization. Generic NPCs still participate indirectly in politics and history through interaction with PCs and DMs. They still have higher reference points even if others provide them. In contrast, fellaheen are a radical nullity and completely outside of history. They are happy to be brutalized and passed around as booty by conquerors. Materialism is their highest virtue. India is a terrifying example of fellahdom.

You can order Greg Johnson’s Loving Our Own here

Another way that NPCs can become a problem is when mass liberal democracy empowers them because they are passive and vulnerable to manipulation. I need not belabor the point that shady individuals and entities could essentially buy votes for their preapproved puppet candidates by buying media. This led to all manner of mischief. It was only with the advent of the internet that the previous arrangement was challenged.

Player Characters are those who have agency. They can independently think for themselves. But most importantly, they can identify and accomplish tasks to change society. PCs can range from volunteers, activists, community leaders, etc. up to authors, artists, some politicians, philanthropists, and many others. What separates PCs from NPCs is that they can consciously improve society or at least actively maintain previous improvements.

Unlike NPCs, PCs can also grow and “level up” in real life. They can use their agency to obtain even more agency. The easy and early “quests” serve as stepping stones for greater quests. Some of this is the acquiring of external things, but it also goes beyond that to inner character development. For example, it is easy to rise within the movement if you are a good PC because others will ask you to assume greater responsibility.

One thing that PCs and NPCs still have in common though is that both most work within the rules of “the game” even if they find them odious. They must confront things like the US’s two-party electoral system, censorship, anarcho-tyranny, human frailty, deplatforming, fundraising, credentialism, prevailing Gramscian hegemons, and all manner of other risks and challenges. We PCs can eventually change these things, but gradually and through communal effort. Like a power gamer we must study the rules, read up on our enemies, and then select the best, or least bad, course of action. Our costs and risks can not be removed, only managed. It’s not a question of if but when we get hurt, and how badly. But nothing risked or lost would mean nothing gained.

Dungeon Masters are those who can fundamentally change the rules and nature of reality, and mostly by themselves. Elon Musk (who interestingly was a Dungeons & Dragons DM in his youth) is a prime example. By transforming Twitter into X, Elon heavily modified the rule of online censorship, even if he did not abolish it. He turned a fact of life into a fact of history.

Others include Henry Ford, who along with launching America’s car culture through mass production of the Model T, abolished the previous “meta” of ruthless employer exploitation by showing that paying employees well could be profitable. While he ultimately failed to prevent America’s descent into slavish philosemitism, his struggles are bearing fruit decades latter.

Should great political and military leaders be classified as PCs or DMs? I would classify most of them as high level PCs, unless they fundamentally changed the rules of the game. For example, Alexander the Great was clearly a DM because his innovations changed warfare and because he spread Hellenistic culture across the ancient world.

But the line is often blurry. One on hand, it could be argued that Napoleon was an epic level PC because was simply playing the game well, understood the rules, identified opportunities, and acted. He was helped by being endowed with high attributes, luck, and the historical processes of history. But he also saved France from imploding into the entropy of a proto-Bolshevik revolution and almost succeeded in permanently reordering the continent. He certainly showed that mass levies could equal or even surpass professional armies if motivated by patriotism. In fact, the other powers had to rewrite the rules with the Concert of Europe in response. The entire age revolved around him and reacted to his moves. Thus, I would classify Napoleon as a DM.

Despite my admiration, I would classify Scipio Africanus as a PC. He correctly identified that offense rather than defense was the best action within the preexisting framework of classical warfare to defeat Carthage. The battle of Zama was brilliant, but it did not change the nature of warfare. He was philhellenic, but did not change Roman culture. He was unable to politically capitalize on his military victories, and was so snubbed by Rome that he requested to be buried outside of the city.

Does one master the preexisting rules of the game or alter them in some form? That is what separates an accomplished PC from a DM.

One should be careful about assuming that wealth, power, success, or status correlate with agency, or at least political agency. In fact, some of the richest people have little agency because they are timid. In contrast, how many great artists like H.P. Lovecraft and Friedrich Nietzsche die in poverty or relatively unknown? Yet such men shaped the world.

This contradiction leads us to a problem. We’re slouching towards a cyberpunk dystopia because some of “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.” Too many of the people currently seeking to influence the world are evil or stupid. We need more PCs, and especially DMs, to counter them.

Thus, we should seek to maximize people’s agency within all three categories. We should encourage NPCs to do their part to fight the Great Replacement as if we’re heroes rallying villagers. We should seek to increase our own agency and that of other PCs. Most importantly, we want all but the most stupid to become a category higher, and especially PCs becoming DMs. But that’s easier said than done.

With higher agency comes higher risks, to the point that many risks need to be written off as inevitable costs. It also comes with responsibility, which can be terrifying. One goes from worrying about running errands after work to saving the white race against highly entrenched interests. And perhaps from saving the white race to saving the world. Knowledge tends to reveal even more terrifying problems rather than solutions. It can be overwhelming, and especially for smart people who tend to think a little too much and act too little. As my instructor said as basic training “You’re so smart, you’re stupid. Solve for X.” He was right. There are methods of confronting the difficulties. You can confront the problems one at a time, like starting with remigration and saving Artificial Intelligence and hoeflation for afterwards. And with patience, the costs one pays to rewrite the rules can easily be surpassed by the benefits of rewriting them to your benefit.

We need more and better DMs. Donald Trump is undeniably a DM because the entire world has revolved around him since 2016, he shattered the stranglehold of fake news, and because he showed that running against immigration is a winning strategy. But Trump is a bad DM because he is arbitrary, capricious, and beholden to Israel.

We need Dungeon Masters who will overhaul the rules of the game in accordance with an affirmative vision.