▬>”Now, (according to G) Trump’s a rogue bastion alpha who fought the “globalist Cathedral” alone against all odds.”
I have nowhere said this. I have always viewed Trump as a bit of a joke, it takes a joker to know one, so to speak. Can´t say he´s very subtle, but it works. He´s of course hired by the Deep State, like any other American main presidential candidate.
Only the pre-approved get coverage by the so-called Mainstream Media. Not just anyone can become one of the two, red and blue, who attract the energies—fears and hopes—of the people, for the cathartic pseudo-democratic play & ploy, which is done to keep the tax-payers “happily” paying for the Military-Industrial Complex, feeling like they are “free”.
Our dear little Irish friend here, lost himself to wrath and fabrication, after I both questioned his purported Catholicism and a candidate (Trump) he had gotten hopeful about, the poor laddie. The Catholicism he only declared to me recently, he was a Hitlerist before that. I know, because I was once a Hitlerist too, and we discussed those things. In our discussions I seem to know more Catholic doctrine than him, surely an embarrassment for him, indeed in any case he seems to be unable to intellectually discuss it — as with anything really!, when pressed — he´ll get defensive, & passive aggressive or simply aggressive — opening himself up to being toyed with, like a kid bullied in school.
I´ve never seen him refer to Jesus, and he states he is anti-clerical (after being pressed). I am rather sure he is just claiming to be Catholic now to appear more National & “Right-wing.” He is Irish after all. He can fool even himself.
He contacted me 10 years ago, and he hasn´t really changed one bit since then. He´s still as dense and slow-moving, and prone to fabricate facts about his interests.
The difference between me and him, at least one difference, among many, is that I will readily admit any fabrication I have done as a joke or as hyperstition, while he will defend even disproven things—tooth and nail. And while I at times exaggerate to amuse myself and others, he does so seriously. Like, say, “Nobody likes you! :(“, “You have done nothing!”, “Everybody hates you!”, “You don´t know nothing!”, “No, it was you who said this!”. Le enfant, no?
Then he will defend his exaggerations, instead of lightly stating that they were but that for effect. Typical prole.
I include often figures in his life (his “psychological world”), because I find them, along with him, to be amusing characters, and y´all can see the effect it has on him. I often include him in e-mails I am sending to others, because I know it moves him.
I admit to having sympathy for him, and that I am also trying to shock him out of his psychological & intellectual inertia. The poor man is ridden by ideas he only understands at a surface level. He´s been sending me virtually the same e-mail for a decade, it´s like a spirit underneath crying for to be released from the gnomic mechanical responses from idées fixe that tie him to lesser forms.
Usually, his answers are quite different if others are included, he is so embarrassed (often about nothing really) — as he has a communal soul — poor boy. But that is a part of my shock treatment. Do not think though, that I am ruining his soul. I assure you, it was beriddled before. I can only lead men to temptation, they will have to walk into it themselves.
Best it be said that I didn´t start this spat between us. As I remember it started years ago through an instant messenger application, wherein I asked him to not send me news of money Jews — then his pathos burst forth. Apparently he´d been building up hopes and fears about me for some time — I had been leading a project I invited him to participate in before this, which he did OK in. Albeit quite passively.
The funny thing is, that he´s living a double-life, of this pseudonymous Internet presence, so why is he so embarrassed? You would think I was living a double-life too, but I am not doing so. I am quite honest and open. In fact, hundreds know I have the interests I am known for, under my real name and person. People tell me things like I am the smartest person they know, to be honest and quite frank, if not self-congratulating.
Race, history, spirituality, philosophy, biology.
I´ve even mentioned the obscure Italian author a few times.
“The Right-wing”, so-called, has been a bit of a joke, inadvertently or not, since losing horribly in WW2, and losing to Communists at that! So why not mess with an Irish dolt who is intellectually dense and stagnant, a liar, a thief, and a pseudonymous coward.
He sure as hell resented the fact that Skorzeny had worked for Israel, after WW2. He stated, like he knew it, that Skorzeny had been assassinated. He had no special knowledge of it.
Perhaps I will finally be inspired to collect the errors of his into one document. They are very amusing, especially his understanding of Evola´s concept of ‘riding the tiger’ (oooh!).
Shortly said, the laddie has a tendency to replace fact with his hopes, or fears, as is common for the soul somewhere on the blurred field of proletarian-bourgeois psychology.
Last thing I remember, aside from this Trump fiasco, is that he fabricated into Evola´s body of work, that the latter had “regretted”! his usage of drugs. I don´t recall Evola ever expressing any regrets. The laddie too, I informed of that Guénon had smoked cannabis, which he seemed to be unable, to integrate this fact, into his memory. I did this after he called me a pothead, which I would think would only apply if I´d smoke pot at least a few times a week, which I don´t. Normally potheads have a great effect on their daily life from the usage.
Worst thing is, the idiot he is, has been jealous of me for a long time. And parroting me. I´m fine with it. It can´t be good for his daily life though, but if it wasn´t me, it would be somebody else.
It only takes for me to use a term in an e-mail, for him to use it for the next couple of weeks. “Schizophrenic” is the latest one, altho I´m not sure he realizes that I was using it, the first time I used it in conversation with him, in the same way that Deleuze and Guattari use it, to mean, as it does, etymologically, ‘split-minded’.
Hopes and fears, boys, hopes and fears… it can split a man´s psyche into two.
And so the lower classes are ever ridden, easily manipulated or beaten down. They´ll grab at anything to describe what they feel they resent. Knowing this is what makes it so easy to play with them.
Don´t blame me.
When [the clever combatant] utilizes combined energy, his fighting men become
as it were like unto rolling logs or stones. For it is the nature of a
log or stone to remain motionless on level ground, and to move when on
a slope; if four-cornered, to come to a standstill, but if round-shaped,
to go rolling down.”