So, Scott Alexander sent an email to someone in 2014. In 2021 the person who got that email thought that Scott was not being honest about his relationship to the neoreactionary movement, so they published it.
Although this has been widely available, even people who have read it have often missed what the email is saying. There are some cases of genuine ambiguity, where there can be more than one meaning. There are also cases where there is only one plausible meaning, but that meaning is expressed indirectly, subtly, or by linking to something else. Because what the email is saying can be difficult to understand, it seems like it would be of general interest to publish an explainer that went over these ambiguities and the links.
It has sometimes been said that this email should not be read because it was released without permission. This seems like a bad position.
First, because information is information. We know, due to the circumstances, that this was somewhat i
