Occult & Mystics: Nick Land just about admits to being a Satanist, David Livingstone Accelerationism

Accelerationists argue that technology, particularly computer technology, and capitalism, particularly the most aggressive, global variety, should be massively sped up and intensified — either because this is the best way forward for humanity, or because there is no alternative.

https://ordoabchao.ca/articles/psychedelics-and-fascism-from-mk-ultra-to-esalen-and-silicon-valley

Accelerationists favour automation. They favour the further merging of the digital and the human. They often favour the deregulation of business, and drastically scaled-back government. They believe that people should stop deluding themselves that economic and technological progress can be controlled. They often believe that social and political upheaval has a value in itself.

https://politicsthisweek.gn.apc.org/2025/10/not-the-bcfm-politics-show-presented-by-tony-gosling-260/

Accelerationalism began life as the British cousin of the Californian philosophy of Extropianism, which also began in the early 1990s (as I wrote here). There’s a similar anarcho-libertarian, hyper-capitalist worship of new technology and Millennarian expectation of a sudden leap beyond the human. But this wasn’t California, it was Coventry — and Ccru Accelerationism was much darker and more nihilistic than Californian transhumanism.
https://www.ecstaticintegration.org/p/accelerationism-ai-and-dark-maga

Accelerationism proposes that existing social and technological trends will not be stopped and can only be accelerated. It suggests that thinking time is running out as trends accelerate and decision-making capability declines. While early accelerationism was proposed by Deleuze, Guattari and others to further leftist goals, it is now seen as being inherently linked to capitalism and its self Deleuze, Guattari and others to further leftist goals, it is now seen as being inherently linked to capitalism.

A QUICK-AND-DIRTY INTRODUCTION TO ACCELERATIONISM
Nick Land
May 25, 2017
Anyone trying to work out what they think about accelerationism better do so quickly. That’s the nature of the thing. It was already caught up with trends that seemed too fast to track when it began to become self-aware, decades ago. It has picked up a lot of speed sincethen.Accelerationism is old enough to have arrived in waves, which is to say insistently, or recurrently, and each time the challenge is more urgent. Among its predictions is the expectation that you’ll be too slow to deal with it coherently. Yet if you fumble the question it poses – because rushed – you lose, perhaps very badly. It’s hard. (For our purposes here “you” are standing in as a bearer of “the opinions of mankind”.)Time-pressure, by its very nature, is difficult to think about. Typically, while the opportunity for deliberation is not necessarily presumed, it is at least – with overwhelming likelihood – mistaken for an historical constant, rather than a variable. If there was ever time to think, we think, there still is and will always be. The definite probability that the allotment of time to decision-making is undergoing systematic compression remains a neglected consideration, even among those paying explicit and exceptional attention to the increasing rapidity of change.In philosophical terms, the deep problem of acceleration is transcendental
. It describes an absolute horizon – and one that is closing in. Thinking takes time, and accelerationism suggests we’re running out of time to think that through, if we haven’t already. No contemporary dilemma is being entertained realistically until it is also acknowledged that the opportunity for doing so is fast collapsing.The suspicion has to arrive that if a public conversation about acceleration is beginning, it’s just in time to be too late. The profound institutional crisis that makes the topic ‘hot’ has at its core an implosion of social decision-making capability. Doing anything, at this point, would take too long. So instead, events increasingly just happen. They seem ever more out of control, even to a traumatic extent. Because the basic phenomenon appears to be a brake failure, accelerationism is picked up again.Accelerationism links the implosion of decision-space to the explosion of the world – that is, to modernity. It is important therefore to note that the conceptual opposition between implosion and explosion does nothing to impede their real (mechanical) coupling.
Thermonuclear weapons provide the most vividly illuminating examples. An H-bomb employs an A-bomb as a trigger. A fission reaction sparks a fusion reaction. The fusion mass is crushed into ignition by a blast process. (Modernity is a blast.)This is already to be talking about cybernetics, which also returns insistently, in waves. It amplifies to howl, and then dissipates into the senseless babble of fashion, until the next blast-wave hits...