Third World Bore: How by Being Offline You Can Prevent the World War
It’s happening! Third World War is at hand! Well … just as long as your internet connection is stable. In this podcast we delve into further depths of fringe internet movements and peculiar personal qualities their adherents develop; qualities that are seemingly a reiteration of old radicalism, but are in fact something quite novel.
- the apology to all of you following this site because of hiatus in the regular run of Kali Tribune, and heartfelt thanks to all those who supported us in the last few weeks;
- the fact that, due to a hectic week, I noticed only yesterday that we are again on the brink of the Judgement Day, i.e. nuclear exchange (can’t seem to recall, even from the late Seventies, the moment that something like this wasn’t “imminent” and “just around the corner”) and conclusions stemming thereof;
- crisis as media (virtual) event and peculiar behavior of “truth movement/alt media” personalities (also virtual by now);
- the virtual substance revolutionaries need to gain their metaphysical footing – in this case: Syrian people as ens perfectissimus of alt media – with some historical examples;
- schisms in alt media as an indicator of peculiar personal degradation inflicting their adherents, not entirely reducible to their own moral failings
- reasons why people follow alt media – loneliness and need for reality
- defense from the attack by young doberman at the end of the podcast (he was just playful, but he was a doberman nonetheless)
(If for some reason the Mixcloud presents you with problems, the podcasts are available on Kali Tribune’s Youtube channel. Podcasts can be downloaded via this link )
Echomaniacs: Alternative Media as Postmodern Propaganda pt.1
Kali Tribune runs on reader’s support. If you found the above informative and/or enlightening, consider supporting us.
I hope that dog had a driving license.
Would you class Spengler as alt-right?
Richard Spencer and a few others borrow somes terms such as ‘Faustian man’ from him but it seems to me they have only skim-read his work. I spent three months reading him and am returning to re-read it after a few years listening and reading the alt-media and the contrast is stark. Spengler is old-school with an education in the classics and condenses much knowledge into a very poetic prose filled with flashes of insight.
There’s a distinct shallowness evident when one turns to the alt-right which may be, as you say, to do with the virtual media.
Be interesting to hear your take on Spengler if you are familiar with his work.
By the way I read your work on The Soul of the East site. Party for Scorpions and A Perfect Murder are written with admirable style to say the least. A joy to read.
I certainly wouldn’t classify Spengler as Alt Right. It has been quite long since I’ve read him, but I agree that he’s not exactly what those people make him to be: kinda like a proto-Nazi, something that actual Nazis thought also, but he distanced himself although Hitler personally approached him.
For one thing, Henry Miller was one of his lifelong admirers, if only because of his masterful writing style, and you can hardly call Henry a Nazi or alt righter.
Unfortunately, right now I don’t have time to go through “Untergang” once again, but I will note that a good evaluation of Spengler’s character and significance can be found in Thomas Mann’s novel “Doctor Faustus” – privat-dozent von Biersaccher is in fact Spengler. Needles to say, Mann’s take on his character and mannerism is less than flattering.
I read “The Decline of the West” a month ago. I would not consider Spengler as a part of the right. Spenlgers view of any civilization as a plant that some day must die out is above any political dichotomy. For Spengler the Western (Faustian) civilization is not better or worse than any other civilization. In that way Spengler is much closer to contemporary deconstructivists.
Spengler stands alone, we can argue is he above or bellow the right-left dichotomy.
But I really enjoy reading him.
It’s a very rich book. Filled with intuitive flashes. There is a neocon who cites him as a major influence. And there is an alt right guy who sets forth the idea that the liberal democratic hegemon is the imperium that Spengler predicted. That’s why I began to re-read it.
So, why is West so keen on Russia, after all? There is no communism anymore for long time, there is capitalism, they have obviously democracy, arguably not much better or worse then in most other countries, Western or otherwise.
Is it because of “Duginism”? Because West doesnt like “dicstators”? What really bothers them so much that they tried to hinder its course for more than 100 years in all possible ways.
It’s even just common sense sufficient to ask such question – there must be something, some irritating factor around Russian question.
Ignoring that leads only to shallow analysis, not much different than some mainstream variation on the same tune – West is the Best, get over here and we’ll do the rest… only some poor deluded barbaric regime would not like to join etc etc. we can see that reiterated more or less in same form in pamphlets such stupid as this:
He’s criticizing alt media personalities and their influence, especially in the sense of them “metaphysicizing” political events, as if their opinions on matters totally outside of their knowledge and control can affect their existential state of being.
Branco does not comment about the situation in Syria with regards of who’s right or wrong, and which side’s claims are closer to the truth. I don’t think he has made his opinion clear on the events in Syria, in the same way he has made for the Balkans crisis for instance, and from what I understand the question doesn’t seem to interest him. I think it is obvious to any rational thinking person, that even in the informational fog, certain incontrovertible facts about the Syrian situation don’t fit the mold of either geopolitical party’s narrative. It really comes down to the interests and decisions of the nation to which one belongs. For example, if my government, as unlikely as it would sound, decides to join in on a war against Syria or Russia, then I would have no choice but to support them in this endeavor, no matter how unconvincing I would find its justifications for that to be. This is the inescapable fact of politics, at the end of the day, we are dragged into matters far outside our means of influence by virtue of us being a part of the society that deigns to act on our behalf. There is no right or wrong in it as far as I can tell.
I think the real issue being brought to light here is the question of identifying as something vs. actual being. If the USA or Russia or whatever decides to one day drop bombs on my town then I don’t think my established opinion of them on the internet would count for much in securing my survival.