What does any of this have to do with Cathedrals

As the palace is the symbol of monarchy, the Cathedral is the symbol of theocracy, the union of Church and state – as are Brahmins. The Brahmins of India managed your Karma, our Brahmin’s your carbon credits. If you want to build a house in Hawaii, chances are that somewhere on your land are some rocks that have been piled on top of each other by Hawaiian natives. A Brahmin will decide on the significance of these rocks, and to what extent you must accommodate and respect their significance. These are quite obviously religious functions, hence “Brahmin”, and “Cathedral”. Soon this highly successful Hawaiian program will extend to all America, with each and every house being federally evaluated for its environmental responsibility, again a priestly function.

Lodge would be much better. The movement you are describing resembles Masonry, both in methods and in goals

When the in crowd get together to assign each other grants, then they are indeed behaving much like the Masons, but the Masons never sought the kind of hegemony over men’s minds that the Cathedral does. Masonry often had a substantial quasi religious element, but the religion was for insiders, to prove you were an insider, a secret religion, that was revealed only to the enlightened few. When you followed the Masonic rituals you signaled to your fellow elites that you were one of the elite. Whereas Masonic religion was for the elite, Cathedral religion is for the inferior castes. You, being of lower caste, shall conserve carbon, so that Al Gore can fly places in his private jet to tell you to conserve carbon. You, being of lower caste, shall genuflect to a crude stone wall that some Hawaiian farmer built to protect his pawpaw trees from his pigs.

You and Moldbug are, consciously or not, trying to draw on Anglospheric anti-Catholicism

I don’t know what Moldbug is doing, but I am drawing on Anglospheric disestablishmentarianism, Anglospheric hostility to high Church Anglicanism. To me, it is the Archbishop of Canterbury and Canterbury Cathedral that I am using as a symbol. In addition, I am using the Cathedral as metaphor for central planning, for the attempt to shape human flesh like wood and clay, echoing the famous essay “The Cathedral and the Bazaar”, which is a standard metaphor for human relationships and organization among geeks.

Lodge would be much better. The movement you are describing resembles Masonry, both in methods and in goals, much more than it resembles the Catholic Church. In fact, Masonry is very obviously a component part of the movement you and Moldbug are describing. It’s an oddity of Moldbug’s blog that Masonry comes up so infrequently. Both the proponents and the opponents of what he calls the Modern Structure thought Masonry important. It is obviously important in US history, and the US is the apotheosis of the Modern Structure.

Libertarians tend to like the Masons, of course, and Moldbug’s obvious sympathies for libertarians presumably have something to do with this weird omission. Not that this sympathy makes any sense at all in the context of his larger argument.

You and Moldbug are, consciously or not, trying to draw on Anglospheric anti-Catholicism with this idiotically inaccurate choice of terminology. Which is, again, weird given Moldbug likes the Stuarts who were a bunch of Catholic princes.

The Cathedral is more a consensus, a climate of opinion. It takes a long time for doctrine to become part of the line that all must accept. It contains lots and lots of little conspiracies, but these little conspiracies are not well coordinated, and to the extent that they are coordinated, they are in large part coordinated through the not at all secret pages of the New York Times.