{"id":202277,"date":"2025-10-15T17:21:04","date_gmt":"2025-10-15T17:21:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/202277\/"},"modified":"2025-10-15T17:21:04","modified_gmt":"2025-10-15T17:21:04","slug":"the-faith-of-nick-land","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/202277\/","title":{"rendered":"The Faith of Nick Land"},"content":{"rendered":"

Visions of Heaven and Hell is a three-part 1994 BBC documentary exploring the prospects and terrors of the hi-tech future that was looming on the horizon in the early years of the internet. The film features a who\u2019s who of prominent figures of the era: Silicon Valley titans like Bill Gates, industry-adjacent thought leaders like Howard Rheingold and Esther Dyson, cultural luminaries like David Byrne and William Gibson. The prevailing mood of techno-optimist hype is set off against an eerie score, dizzying montages of global cityscapes, and somber narration by Tilda Swinton.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Around 30 minutes into Visions, a less well-known figure makes an appearance: a wiry, nervous young Englishman by the name of Nick Land, identified only as a philosopher. \u201cThe structure of societies, the structure of companies, and the structure of computers,\u201d Land declares, gesturing frenetically, are all \u201cmoving away from a top-down structure of a central command system \u2026 towards a system that is parallel, that is flat, which is a web and in which change moves from the bottom up.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

Today, this interview is better remembered for its setting than for what Land said. He appears seated in what seems to be a Victorian-era lab or the back rooms of a natural history museum. Visible behind him are a human skeleton and glass display cases containing rows of brains, some of them cross-sectioned, in vats. If you Google Image search \u201cNick Land\u201d today, stills from the interview are among the first results that come up.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Over the three decades since his appearance in Visions of Heaven and Hell, Land has become a cult figure. The still from the interview has persisted in meme form because it captures\u2014and has contributed to\u2014the aura that has accumulated around him. The basic substance of what he said\u2014that technology was decentralizing and flattening social structures\u2014wasn\u2019t all that different from what more mainstream Silicon Valley-adjacent voices like Dyson and Rheingold also said in their appearances in Visions, and elsewhere; open any issue of Wired magazine from the period, and you\u2019ll find similar predictions. Land\u2019s backdrop hints at what set him apart. Hovering behind his electric excitement about the digital future was a gothic, death-haunted vision in which the thrill of the new was uncannily tinged with archaism and dread.\u00a0<\/p>\n

His latest turn in the spotlight has revived these themes. It began when, in an appearance on Tucker Carlson\u2019s show a few weeks ago, the podcaster Conrad Flynn named Land as a crucial figure for understanding the current trajectory of tech innovation. By Flynn\u2019s account, the deeper motives behind the current AI boom lie not so much in the drive for profit as in the occult religious convictions and practices of many industry insiders, who seek to use the technology to conjure demons. And Land\u2019s philosophy, Flynn argued, has fed Silicon Valley\u2019s dark AI ambitions. Carlson was intrigued and disturbed.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In an image from the interview that has already been meme-ified, we see Carlson looking in puzzlement at a \u201cnumogram\u201d drawn by Land and several collaborators in the late 1990s. This odd graphic might be mistaken for a circuit diagram but, as Flynn explained to Carlson, it is not a technical illustration but a medium of mystical communion with the spirit world: \u201ca system of divination [Land] uses to be in contact with the outside, with what he calls the lemurs.\u201d Carlson interjected: \u201cAnd lemurs are demons.\u201d Flynn confirmed this: \u201cThe word lemurs originally goes back to Roman times. It meant spirit. So these are the spirits that [Land] hears whispering in his ear.\u201d This matters, according to Flynn, because Land\u2019s ideas are \u201chuge in Silicon Valley.\u201d<\/p>\n

I spoke to Land over Zoom around a week later and asked him whether he thought his influence within the tech industry was as extensive as Flynn claimed. He said he had \u201cno idea,\u201d and wasn\u2019t in regular contact with anyone there. But as he reminded me, if you take his thinking seriously, it hardly matters. If Flynn and Carlson are worried that \u201cI had this wacky, drug-fueled thought that then got passed into Silicon Valley and became influential,\u201d they\u2019re \u201cnot seeing the picture. The picture is completely the other way. That stuff is coming back to us.\u201d\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cLand was restating an idea he\u2019s had for over 30 years.\u201d<\/p>\n

Land was restating an idea he\u2019s had for over 30 years. Here is how he put it in a 1993 essay called \u201cMachinic Desire\u201d: \u201cWhat appears to humanity as the history of capitalism is an invasion from the future by an artificial intelligent space that must assemble itself entirely from its enemy\u2019s resources.\u201d Interdimensional lemurs may sound strange; this may be even stranger. That said, it is also familiar from, for one, the Terminator movies\u2014a constant reference point in Land\u2019s earlier work\u2014in which a future artificial intelligence sends emissaries back to the past to secure its own existence.\u00a0<\/p>\n

The fact that his idea echoes a movie plot isn\u2019t incidental. One of Land\u2019s most famous coinages is \u201chyperstition,\u201d which he defined as \u201cfictions that make themselves real.\u201d They can make themselves real because they are, in fact, anticipatory emanations from the future. This was also the idea behind the lemurs, which first came into Land\u2019s writing by way of William S. Burroughs\u2019s 1987 short story \u201cThe Ghost Lemurs of Madagascar,\u201d which in turn, drew on the legend of the lost continent of Lemuria invoked by Madame Blavatsky.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Like capitalism, lemurs come from what Land calls the \u201cOutside,\u201d a realm beyond direct human apprehension in which Kant\u2019s \u201cthings in themselves\u201d mingle with Lovecraft\u2019s Old Ones. The Outside is the future, but also the pre-human past of Lemuria and Atlantis. It is beyond our space-time coordinates, so these amount to the same thing. Such ideas may still seem bizarre at first glance, but not much more so than those held by many in the AI industry, increasingly the motor of the global economy. The possibility that we might soon fall under the sway of an alien superintelligence is regularly discussed in mainstream venues and in the highest policy circles. The culture has caught up to Land. Carlson\u2019s baffled contemplation of the numogram is a picture of our shared condition.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Before his latest turn in the public eye, Land was best known for his founding role in two underground schools of thought, both surrounded by an air of enigma, paradox, and danger. The first is accelerationism, which he helped articulate as a philosophy professor at the University of Warwick in the 1990s, the period in which he appeared in Visions of Heaven and Hell. The second is neoreaction, a product of the early 2010s right-wing blogosphere, in which he was an avid participant.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cAccelerationism emerged from a left-wing heresy.\u201d<\/p>\n

Accelerationism emerged from a left-wing heresy: the injunction by the philosophers Gilles Deleuze and F\u00e9lix Guattari to \u201caccelerate the process.\u201d Contrary to those who sought to mitigate the disruptive tendencies of advanced capitalism, Deleuze and Guattari argued in their 1972 work of gonzo philosophy Anti-Oedipus that the \u201ctrue revolutionary path\u201d was to seek their intensification: \u201cto go still further,\u201d as they put it, \u201cin the movement of the market.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

This became the guiding mantra of a line of thinking Land pursued in a series of texts, many written with his Warwick colleague Sadie Plant and the collective he co-founded founded with her in 1995: the Cybernetic Culture Research Unit (CCRU). The CCRU\u2019s ecstatic vision of \u201ccyberrevolution\u201d took digital technology as a vehicle for reviving the transformative vision of the May 1968 revolution in France, the failure of which was the initial impetus for Deleuze and Guattari\u2019s collaboration.\u00a0<\/p>\n

It would be easy to assume that Land made a hard turn to the political right somewhere between the 1990s and the 2010s, when he reemerged as a neoreactionary blogger residing in Shanghai. But Land never stopped being an accelerationist. In his 1990s writing, the task was to liberate \u201crunaway capitalism\u201d from the \u201chuman security system\u201d that was holding it back; that was also true in the 2010s. By then, however, he had come to attribute the inhibition almost exclusively to the progressive left that had become culturally dominant in the West. Taking up his fellow neoreactionary Mencius Moldbug\u2019s term \u201cthe Cathedral,\u201d he wrote in a 2013 blog post: \u201cConceive what is needed to prevent acceleration into a techno-commercial Singularity, and the Cathedral is what it will be.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

What separated Land\u2019s early accelerationist writings from his later neoreactionary texts was the failure of the cyberrevolution he and the CCRU had heralded in the \u201990s. Back then, they seemed to think a radical shift toward decentralization, flattening, and liberation from control systems was around the corner. Land told The Guardian\u2019s Jenny Turner in 1995: \u201cThe signs indicate that a really big upheaval is coming in 1996,\u201d when we would see a \u201cconvergence between computers, broadcasting and telecommunications.\u201d Later, the CCRU saw similar promise in the Y2K event, in which digital technology seemed poised to disrupt the orderly progression of calendrical time itself. What happened instead was the bursting of the dotcom bubble and\u2014worse, from Land\u2019s perspective\u2014the rise of Web 2.0. The Facebook era, for Land, was a time of deep disillusionment. The CCRU had hoped for the digital dissolution of individuality into anonymous cybernetic swarms, but the internet that took shape in the early 2000s sought instead to replicate and ratify conventional offline identity.<\/p>\n

The rise of Web 2.0, not coincidentally from his perspective, also marked a left turn in the politics of technology: The dominant culture of the web\u2014and the companies that ran it\u2014was hyper-progressive. In that sense, it is unsurprising that progressivism became Land\u2019s arch-nemesis in the new millennium, and that he aligned himself with an array of similarly disgruntled right-wing bloggers. His most intensive period of neoreactionary blogging activity came after the 2012 US election. The second Obama administration, Land wrote in a 2013 post, marked the zenith of \u201csacralized progressivism, ivory tower brahminism, academic-media fusion as the exclusive source of recognizable authority, and the absolute identification of governance with public relations.\u201d<\/p>\n

In this context, the only remaining possibility was \u201cexit.\u201d This was a term he and other neoreactionaries adapted from the political scientist Albert O. Hirschman to refer to a sort of hi-tech version of Rod Dreher\u2019s \u201cBenedict Option,\u201d which was articulated in the same moment of mid-2010s progressive dominance. Land\u2019s own exile in China, where he believed an accelerative trajectory toward \u201cmodernity 2.0\u201d was underway, was a version of this. Other neoreactionaries placed their hopes in seasteading colonies, charter cities, or perhaps Mars\u2014anywhere one might escape the Cathedral\u2019s panopticon. What was to be eschewed, for Land and his fellow travelers in those years, was what Hirschman called \u201cvoice\u201d: participation in the political process. As Land wrote in another 2013 blog post, \u201cOur cause is depoliticization \u2026 Markets, machines, and monsters might inspire us. Rulers of any kind? Not so much.\u201d<\/p>\n

The irony is that something resembling the neoreactionary coalition of the early 2010s is now in close proximity to power thanks to the very thing they dismissed: \u201cvoice,\u201d or democracy. The inner circle of the current White House includes factions closely resembling the uneasy bedfellows Land identified in his internet environs back then: Religious conservatives, ethno-nationalists, and \u201ctechno-commercialists\u201d\u2014or what is now called the tech right.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Land is aware that his dismissal of politics in the early 2010s looks somewhat ironic in retrospect. When I spoke to him, he told me that since Trump\u2019s return to office, he has been in a \u201cback to the drawing board mode. This isn\u2019t the near future that I was seeing. It\u2019s a shock. I can’t pretend that there\u2019s some kind of prophetic vindication in it at all.\u201d That said, he can find ample vindication elsewhere on the contemporary scene\u2014not least, in the recent effort to identify him as a facilitator of rogue AI takeover.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Most of us, if accused in a major public forum of being the mastermind of a demonic conspiracy, might want to correct the record. This hasn\u2019t been Land\u2019s response to the Flynn interview. When I spoke to him, he called Flynn a \u201cmaster of narrative\u2014really, quite impressive.\u201d He detected in his and Carlson\u2019s effort to spin a tale about where AI is coming from and what it means an instance of a tendency he\u2019s been observing. \u201cLots of people,\u201d he said, \u201care getting this stronger sense about things coming together, seeing a peculiar significance in things happening rather than it just being just random episodes of the unfolding of secular history.\u201d What Carlson and Flynn hinted at was that tech entrepreneurs developing AI aren\u2019t simply individuals responding to material incentives, but agents of a \u201cdirected historical process.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

The old term for a \u201cdirected historical process\u201d is providence\u2014a concept Land explored a few years ago in a series of essays<\/a> for this magazine. In a recent dialogue with the Russian philosopher Aleksandr Dugin, he brought it up by way of a passage from Goethe\u2019s Faust in which Mephistopheles describes himself as \u201ca portion of that power which always works for evil and always effects the good.\u201d Because Satan is ultimately subordinate to a higher divine will, what might seem to us like the devil\u2019s machinations are always manifestations of a \u201cprovidential scheme.\u201d Milton\u2019s Paradise Lost, as he noted, points to the same conclusion.\u00a0<\/p>\n

But Land also complicates things by linking this theological model with its secular successor, popularly known as the \u201cWhig interpretation of history,\u201d after the liberal party that dominated British politics in the 18th and 19th centuries. \u201cWhig history\u201d became a derisive term for a classically liberal vision of inexorable scientific, technological, material, and political progress of the sort recently expressed in books like Steven Pinker\u2019s The Better Angels of our Nature. Land, too, seeks to vindicate a certain version of Whig history\u2014but with a diabolical twist. Samuel Johnson\u2019s remark that \u201cthe first Whig was the devil\u201d should be taken quite seriously, he told Dugin: \u201cIn the Anglo-Protestant Whig tradition there is always a complicated relationship to what can crudely be called Satanism.\u201d And it is on this basis that he seeks to defend it.<\/p>\n

\u201cGod does his work through the devil.\u201d<\/p>\n

To make this case, Land cited two early articulations of economic liberalism: Bernard Mandeville\u2019s Fable of the Bees and Adam Smith\u2019s \u201cinvisible hand,\u201d both of which argue that \u201cprivate vices\u201d contribute to public goods. Conventionally understood, the invisible hand is a secular inversion of divine providence: What determines our collective fate is not the transcendental will of a divine being, but the sum total of material incentives working themselves out immanently. And yet this view\u2014Land calls it the \u201cEmpty Summit\u201d\u2014isn\u2019t as at odds with a theological one as it might seem. For one, it emerged out of the specific theological matrix of early modern Protestantism, famously described by Max Weber, in which the operations of the market were understood to manifest the otherwise inscrutable logic of divine predestination. The popular contemporary version of this is the \u201cprosperity gospel,\u201d in which God\u2019s favor is revealed by material success. Land\u2019s view, of course, is far darker and more ambiguous. For him, the principle Mandeville and Smith discovered at the foundation of capitalism\u2014that public goods can only be produced by way of private vices\u2014expresses the same theological precept enunciated by Goethe\u2019s Mephistopheles: God does his work through the devil.\u00a0<\/p>\n

If you squint, this is the same idea Land proposed back in 1993 when he said \u201cwhat appears to humanity as the history of capitalism is an invasion from the future.\u201d Then as now, he claimed that a force outside of historical time\u2014call it God or \u201cthe planetary technocapital singularity\u201d\u2014was \u201cguiding the whole desiring-complex towards post-carbon replicator usurpation.\u201d His older account of a \u201cdirected historical process\u201d was a mashup of Deleuze and Guattari with Neuromancer, Blade Runner, and the Terminator films. He has now recast it in the terms of Abrahamic religion and English political history.\u00a0<\/p>\n

By Land\u2019s account, the self-improving neural networks that have brought us Large Language Models (LLMs) like ChatGPT belong to the Whig tradition: They are technologies defined by decentralization, self-organization, and the \u201cEmpty Summit.\u201d Already in 1994\u2019s \u201cMeltdown\u201d he praised the \u201cconnectionist or antiformalist AI\u201d of neural nets over its top-down competitors. Today\u2019s AI, he told me, has reached \u201ca sort of eschatological moment of triumphant liberal technology.\u201d And it exploded because its developers embraced a \u201cconnectionist, decentralized model. No one knows what\u2019s going on in an LLM. You train it, rather than being able to program it. And it\u2019s completely replaced top-down AI.\u201d It\u2019s in this sense that AI\u2014like laissez-faire economics\u2014has something to do with the devil, but also with providence working through the devil.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Critics of capitalism have often highlighted that system\u2019s Satanic associations. In his 1982 book All that Is Solid Melts Into Air, the radical social theorist Marshall Berman interpreted Goethe\u2019s Faust as an allegory of the deal with the devil made by modern man, who sacrifices his soul in exchange for economic dynamism and worldly pleasures. In a similar vein, in The Devil and Commodity Fetishism in South America (1980), the Marxist anthropologist Michael Taussig explores the way poor rural wage laborers in Colombia and Bolivia understand their participation in the capitalist economy as a pact with the devil, a source of moral pollution they attempt to expiate through ritual. Taussig interprets this demonological theory as a folk critique of capitalist exploitation. What is unusual in Land\u2019s case is that he underlines the demonic dimensions of capitalism and AI, again, as a proponent of what he calls \u201cpaleo-liberalism.\u201d<\/p>\n

Now that economic, political, and geopolitical life revolves around the project of building artificial superintelligence, many observers have come around to something like Land\u2019s view: The endpoint of the secular economic logic of neoliberalism\u2014competition, innovation, the pursuit of profit and efficiency\u2014simply is the End Times, much as that was biblically understood. As Land sees it, people\u2014those working in AI, but also AI detractors like Carlson and Flynn\u2014are coming around to his longstanding view that \u201cit\u2019s not like there\u2019s two things going on, where one thing is Silicon Valley building superintelligence, and the other thing is a spiritual realm full of demonic entities.\u201d He added: \u201cAs this convergent wave becomes more and more intense, people are gonna really say, look, these can\u2019t be different things.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

Around the same time as his 1994 BBC appearance, Land reviewed Out of Control, one of Silicon Valley\u2019s founding manifestos, by Wired executive editor Kevin Kelly. The book, for Land, exemplified the notion of what he now calls the Empty Summit: \u201cGod is dead, and everything happens bottom-up. Top-down control is inhibition.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

The Nietzschean dictum cited by Land might have summarized Kelly\u2019s views on organizational structure, but not his religious convictions. Kelly was a born-again Christian, and his hopes for digital networks were always closely tied to his faith. As a young man backpacking the world in the 1970s, he had experienced a religious conversion on Easter Sunday at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem. He came to believe the development of self-organizing networks and self-regulating feedback systems\u2014the subject of his book\u2014replicated the logic of divine creation. \u201cTo succeed at all in creating a creative creature,\u201d he wrote, \u201cthe creators have to turn over control to the created, just as Yahweh relinquished control to them.\u201d In other words, Kelly saw divine providence and laissez-faire as closely linked. As in Weber\u2019s account of Protestantism, the corollary of God\u2019s absolute sovereignty is a doctrine of non-interference.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u201cSilicon Valley\u2019s visions of the future have always been infused with religion.\u201d<\/p>\n

The tech right is often seen as the most secular wing of the contemporary right. But Silicon Valley\u2019s visions of the future have always been infused with religion. Before Kelly, there was the new media prophet Marshall McLuhan, listed on the Wired masthead in the 1990s as the magazine\u2019s \u201cpatron saint.\u201d Although he was circumspect about his faith in his public proclamations, McLuhan viewed electronic communications as a means of realizing the mystical body of Christ. In this, he built on the ideas of the Jesuit mystic Teilhard de Chardin, who theorized that the universe was progressing towards an \u201cOmega Point\u201d of divine unity. This idea anticipated and influenced\u2014via McLuhan among others\u2014the notion of the Singularity that has motivated so many of those working toward artificial superintelligence. Along similar lines, the \u201cMagna Carta for the Knowledge Age,\u201d an ostensibly secular manifesto of the digital revolution written in 1994 by Wired\u2019s Esther Dyson and the futurists Alvin Toffler and George Gilder, proclaimed nothing less than the \u201coverthrow of matter.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

In an earlier moment, messianic proclamations about the digitally connected future were predominantly euphoric, but in recent years they are often far gloomier, not least among those promoting the technology. OpenAI founder Sam Altman summed up the prevailing mood when he infamously declared a few years back: \u201cI think that AI will probably, most likely, sort of lead to the end of the world. But in the meantime, there will be great companies created with serious machine learning.\u201d On the other hand, there are also investor Peter Thiel\u2019s much-discussed recent lectures on the Antichrist, which invert the usual terms of AI safety discussions. The real apocalyptic danger, Thiel argues, is the pursuit of safety itself, which threatens to bring about an authoritarian one-world government that will trap humanity in mediocre stasis.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Such warnings are reminiscent of Land\u2019s account of the \u201chuman security system\u201d that was inhibiting technological takeoff\u2014the function he came to attribute to the Cathedral in his neoreactionary period. When we spoke, I asked him what he made of Thiel\u2019s lectures. Noting that Thiel\u2019s outlook is informed by Ren\u00e9 Girard\u2019s Christian anthropology, he told me: \u201cI don\u2019t think he has biblical time as part of his frame. I think it\u2019s basically still secular historical time.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

It was a remarkable statement. Thiel is a Christian; Land is not, at least in any conventional sense. But Land was telling me Thiel\u2019s understanding of history is insufficiently providential. This was roughly what he said about Carlson\u2019s warnings about AI, too, in his dialogue with Dugin. \u201cThe notion that God\u2019s plan for the world can be thrown off course,\u201d he remarked, \u201cif that isn\u2019t heretical, then something is really deeply wrong at the core of your religious conception.\u201d Land\u2019s language has evolved over the past 30 years, but his faith hasn\u2019t wavered.\u00a0<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

More like this<\/p>\n

Get the best of Compact right in your inbox.<\/p>\n

\n Sign up for our free newsletter today.\n <\/p>\n

Sign up<\/p>\n

Great! Check your inbox and click the link.<\/p>\n

\n Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.\n <\/p>\n

Related Articles<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Visions of Heaven and Hell is a three-part 1994 BBC documentary exploring the prospects and terrors of the…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":202278,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[96,2839,56,54,55],"class_list":["post-202277","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-movies","tag-entertainment","tag-movies","tag-uk","tag-united-kingdom","tag-unitedkingdom"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/202277","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=202277"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/202277\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/202278"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=202277"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=202277"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=202277"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}