Palladium’s publication frequency has recently been inconsistent, with the most current article in the most recent issue dating back to 2022. Its purpose should be to provide a reliable platform for uniting thinkers and policy innovators from key hubs like San Francisco, Austin, NYC, and the global digital nomad community. These individuals, despite their geographic and cultural differences, share a need for a space to exchange and develop ideas that address the challenges of governance and our situation. If groups begin to splinter due to dissatisfaction, they are unlikely to cooperate and network effectively in the real world.

Readers are eager to engage with new ideas on pressing topics such as H1B visas, industrial policy, literacy rates, and population decline.

Whatever opinions exist about Palladium’s social scene or associated events, infighting only undermines the spread of powerful ideas and the ability to wield real-world power. To fulfill its purpose, Palladium must prioritize its role as a mechanism for connecting diverse thinkers and informing readers.

To address this, Palladium would benefit from a structured editorial and publication schedule to ensure that ideas are shared consistently and remain timely. Additionally, collaboration with other magazines (IM1776, Compact, perhaps even debates with Jacobian writers) and networks with similar missions and social ecosystems could strengthen its ability to drive meaningful change. There is no room for cliques or unnecessary distractions when the mission at hand is serious and carries real-world consequences.

You’re not wrong. Palladium could do much to drive the conversation especially in the new political climate. Palladium has probably gained in influence potential. But ultimately it’s on Samo these days. If you have good ideas, talk to him. If you could do a great job as an editor, talk to Samo and the founders. If no one is able and willing, then what can be done?

Its worth considering the new role and strategy of palladium in the new climate. As i understood it, Palladium was the vanguard of making it possible for far right intellectualism to happen in public with respectable legitimacy, in exchange for being very subtle about this and not rocking the boat, and combining this with quality reporting and aesthetics. That goal has basically been achieved. The vibes in parties in the last couple months (and indeed last year or two) have been electric. The overton window is totally broken. So in that sense, the careful discipline of old Palladium is no longer needed. Time for a new strategy.

One problem with old palladium was it aspired to advise statecraft but it was always really unclear who that audience could possibly be. The system was sclerotic and not listening, and the dynamic thinkers were out of power. Its attempts to give good statecraft advice to people who werent listening or had no power was kindof incoherent. But the implied gamble has also paid off: we now have a regime that is much much closer to dynamic palladium readers being directly in power, and not just in DC. There is a political subject to be advised now, that needs its perspective formed. We are in the early stages of a revolution sweeping the western world, and Palladium is near the front of that. Palladium’s job is to now speak more loudly and clearly and directly to and for the coming regime. Or thats one view.

But there’s a more general question here: how much effort is a magazine worth these days? Magazines are driven by the zeal of editors and writers and the support of patrons. Should i put my sweat or money into making a magazine happen? Here are my reasons for not doing so:

A magazine is way more work than anyone seems to estimate from the outside. Its a hard and constant battle to drive the editorial machine. And expensive. The impact and glory in exchange is very hard to estimate, comes years later if at all. Maybe palladium accomplished its mission, maybe it just predicted the wave. And it takes more than just dedicated editors and patrons, you also need a community of writers willing to pour labor into the cause with the same lack of direct reward. Again people do not appreciate how hard it is to write 4000 words of engaging high quality novel observations. You simply could not pay people enough to do it. It works only when you have a live scene of very smart people who want to spit these things at each other for fun, but its a hard balance to keep the discipline of an editorial strategy and the energy of a scene. In my experience a magazine cannot sustain a scene, only empower it.

So lets back up and look at our goals. We want a platform where the intellectuals of a new regime can form their perspective and ideas against each other in a way thats fun and engaging, has editorial discipline that doesnt get in the way but just curates the best as a sort of value-add post-hoc. It shouldnt require much professional oversight at all, but should make heavy use of the energy of the participants to drive things. It should be the kind of thing people could have fun spending all day engaging with, like social media. Because of its politically sensitive subject matter, it should protect the identity of participants without sacrificing quality. Instead of publishing 4000 words, it should be possible to blast out an entry in half an hour on a phone, more like 4000 characters. It should be the kind of thing that can sustain a scene, like a forum. A forum for curated anonymous discussion of political philosophy. Why does that sound familiar?

Whatever Palladium was or should be in the future won’t be solved publishing articles from 2020, putting e-girls on the frontpage or brining Indians “writers.”

>>2312
OP it sounds like you should write a Palladium article on "pressing topics such as H1B visas, industrial policy, literacy rates, [or] population decline." As >>2315 suggests, these things don't grow on trees, and like any magazine Palladium is bottlenecked by quality submissions. I don't know what cliques and infighting you're referring to, but I'm confident it's less important than good writing about important subjects.

>>2319
I have heard any articles have been submitted but have yet to be reviewed or published. Additionally, a few people I know have offered to contribute by helping edit.

>>2334
*Many articles

>>2315

"combining this with quality reporting and aesthetics"

How is a thrown together WordPress site quality aesthetics?

I liked the idea that someone articulated once that Palladium articles should be written to a young American Napoleon. I liked the idea that this mythical figure was reading exhortations to explore the stars, learning about North Korean ecofascism, and learning from Vo Nguyen Giap. If I had to attempt to sum up the secret to the formula, and describe what set it apart from competitors, it might have been the invitation to philosophize beyond the American ideological spectrum.

I imagine it's hard to match up ideologically-suspect friends with reliable funding for an English-language publication.

>>2339
Yeah palladium tried to do the thing that isnt allowed in the anglosphere, which is give the young prince a truly liberal education, which is to say an education that liberates from prevailing ideology. Its true there isnt a huge amount of money for this. But there isnt none either. The hard part is writing the stuff. There are very few who can do it and it takes a ton of work.

It's now clear that the momentum is no longer at Palladium. Alot of great work was done, but prestigemaxxing got the best of the project in the end. Ultimately it filled it's role as a blueprint for higher energy projects such as IM-1776, New Founding, etc... where I get a sense of a deeper conviction and a willingness to put up a fight.

New times are upon us. We spent a decade refining ideas. It's now time to put them into practice.

>>2342

Anyone here know the IM-1776 guys or have experience working with them? (There seemed to be some weird friction between them and REN a while back that I didn't quite get.)

>>2343
Ive spoken to Mark occasionally. He seems cool. Good editor, hard worker. He did a good job with Avetis’ (Palladium writer) “Virtue of Cruelty”.

There is movement on this.

>>2342

I understand of course that prestige is ultimately a lagging or sometimes even bearish indicator of real intellectual vitality and liveliness so to speak, but I wouldn't be so quick to say that Palladium Mag has lost momentum. Just anecdotally, if you talk to non-leftist Stanford college students at random and namedrop Palladium you'll find that they're already plugged into this sphere - I highly doubt this was the case 12 or 24 months ago.