In the second part of our Q&A session we answer to questions about what is ethnicity (or people) and can it be defined, whereas Christian dictum of turning the other cheek is at odds with historical reality, why the political community should have origin that its member cannot re-create, how Internet based Right could just be a homosexual grooming operation and much, much more. Also we provide some thoughts on Schopenhauer and the way we discern between what is useful and what is superfluous for the kind of philosophy we practice on KT.
Although we more than once expressed our views on homosexuality and ever present "mainstreaming" of it and other forms of sexuality gone awry, it was always in the context of other, more interesting subjects. Hereby, we put homosexuality into focus as a phenomenon of severe ontological deviation, based on the urge for identity and shunning of otherness; a fundamental attitude of a man seeking escape from the different and unknown, yet sold to the masses as the precise opposite: a manifestation of freedom and experiment in experiencing difference.
In a word: contemporary image of homosexuality is a pure inversion, which is quite easy to demonstrate in less than half an hour talk.
Alexander Dugin's 4th political theory is a convenient cover for quite prosaic - albeit apocalyptic - political project, outlined to the best of his abilities in the Foundations of Geopolitics. However, there's much more to it than that, even as an afterthought. In this video we'll demonstrate how Dugin imagines that postmodernity should be beaten by postmodernity and consequences thereof. The most notable one is the subversion and further dissolution of those pre-modern principles he supposedly cherishes. As always, we'll take a maximum advantage of his own words to demonstrate just what inherent destructive potential his ideas conceal.
Also, we point out the persistent mistake on behalf of Dugin's mainstream critics of not getting him seriously and affirming that he builds his destructive project on quite correct assessment of our historical situation. Something they do at their own peril.
The proverbial "conspiracy theorist" slur more often than not hits the mark. But does this exculpate the one throwing it about from further investigation? We think not. In this podcast we'll take a dip into history of conspiracy theories, beginning with Augustin Barruel, to offer an opinion why modern academics, journalists and pop intellectuals tend to lose their powers of discernment when conspiracy theories are on the menu. Also we lay out some historical facts about inception of antisemitic conspiracy theories, which are mistakenly conflated with original ideas of Barruel and his early fellow travelers, from the so called "Simonini letter" to "Protocols of Learned Elders of Zion". In this context we offer some updates on scholarship of the subject, which is reinvigorated by some recent works of historians of ideas.
In this video we return to the problem faking reality by media, this time around the alternative ones. We'll analyze the CIA document "Yugoslavia Transformed", that is: the assessment on future of Yugoslavia, written and submitted on 18th October 1990, and referenced by exceptionally dumb (or devious) contributor on former main Duginist outpost Katehon. We demonstrate how collaborating documents can be used as "proofs" for the thesis in fact contradicting their content, on condition that reader doesn't actually read them, but take the authors "reference" as sufficient in itself.
In this video we compare two instances of extreme identity politics - one being the ultimate piece of politically correct legislative drafted in 2015. for the "benefit" of European nations by then elite think tank, the other coming from then fringe Alt Right spokesman's talk given at approximately the same period. We propose that both instances of identity politics rely on congenial principles of identity based on negation where personal dignity of human being is founded on interactions of opposed social groups and not on the intrinsic value of human person.
In plain English: we demonstrate that the same kind of stench usually indicates to same crap, whichever nostril picked it up first, whether left or right.
In this podcast we delve upon the emerging political archetype of center-fringe relationship, symbolized for many people by the figure of Donald Trump, the "anti-establishment" establishment man. Does a call for being anti-establishment necessarily mean the nudge to be pro-freedom? Or could it really be a veiled invitation to anti-social society?
The emerging zeitgeist seems to point into an ominous direction of the second option.