La antropología de Girard, que defiende desde un presunto catolicismo Peter Thiel, considera al hombre no como imago Dei, sino como un ser irracional y envidioso, dispuesto a saquear a su prójimo.
https://lalafrontera.substack.com/p/the-architects-of-chaos?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=2n601f No puedo analizar cómo tu la visión de Thiel desde lo antropológico, pero desde la teología, hay un desconocimiento profundo de Dios y una incorrecta interpretación de las sagradas escrituras. Escribí varios artículos analizando justamente la interpretación errónea del Apocalipsis. Te comparto el enlace del primero por si te interesa léelo. Saludos
Thank you for taking on this topic. I've suspected for awhile that Thiel does not understand Girard or finds him fascinating in a selectively myopic or politically parochial fashion – similar to how Marc Andreesen bizarrely extols Carse's "Finite and Infinite Games" which has no resonance with Andreesen's life choices as far as we know from the outside looking in.
Regarding Girard, I've also read "I See Satan Fall Like Lightning", along with "Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World", and "The Scapegoat", and I don't understand how any of this could be used by any political movement, much less the American (new/alt) Right. Not only is it too academic, but there's nothing here to motivate political action – certainly not collective action! How ironic would that be: to reenact the mythic cycle while citing Girard against this scapegoat called the Antichrist. Could only the Antichrist pull off such an infernal irony? Does Girard ever mention the Antichrist? Looks like he does in Chapter 14 – at the end of ISSFLL. To say the least, upon reading Girard, I am not inspired to found a series of national defense startups that are named after Tolkien artifacts of surveillance and war (e.g. "Palantir" and "Anduril"). What book does Thiel think he is reading?
I might go so far to say that Thiel is diabolically appropriating Girard precisely to undermine the philosopher's deeply Christian wisdom, as the likes of Thiel (and Elon) and many others are clearly in the running for the role of at least a "Vice Antichrist" position in our wacky 21st century eschatology. That all said, I don't disagree with the premise of Thiel's thesis that globalism is at least related to the Antichrist in structure, but the irony of Thiel's arms race with this technocratic feudalism undermines whatever critique he might have of the multinational leviathan: is he not mimicking it through private industry? Lastly, I'd say "The Scapegoat" is probably the most accessible (and perhaps most enjoyable) of those Girard books, and again—nothing about this text demands we rally against the Antichrist, certainly not with "lost seeing stones" or kill drones.
I disagree that Girard's thought can be classed as Christian wisdom. How can one be a Christian and say that the Devil doesn't exist? His presentation is a distortion of Augustine's thought, that the Evil is absence of Good. However, demons have the Good of existence, for they were created as angels and have an angelic nature. The fall didn't make them non-existent.
It's been awhile since I've read City of God (or was evil defined in Confessions?), but I'd wager there is a reconciliation to be written between Augustine and Girard (clearly the latter knew the former).
I thought Girard's essay on John the Baptist was especially insightful, and theologically sound. But am I missing something? I did not catch any claims by Girard that the devil does not exist, rather Satan (and the pagan patterns he animates) plays the mob in this mythic cycle of violence that Jesus ended once and for all. It's the "Death of Tragedy" as George Steiner characterizes The Passion.
Unless I'm missing something big – as a casual but enthusiastic reader of Girard, I tentatively intend on extricating his morally sound works from the ironic grasp of Tolkien-obsessed technocrats! Someone has to rescue Tolkien from Thiel as well, but that might be a lost cause.
Satan is an angel, theferore, Satan exists. I didn't read other books by Girard. (This book is discouraging, though: he even repeats the fake protestant History of witch-hunt being a Middle Ages relevan phenomenon, while it was modern.)
I don't think that Girard's social theory is incompatible with Thiel's project. He values the individual as opposed to the collective action, which is presented as both social and diabolical. It fosters isolation as it fosters an anti-political sentiment. Seeing the individuals, Thiel could see the whole society, which is no more than a collection of individuals.
Absolutely, but how does a fallen angel work his magic in our fallen world? Girard is at the very least offering a sort of phenomenology of Satanic hysteria and catharsis, you could say. Girard distills the "logic of Satan" and describes how Christ renders it irrelevant.
And I can't weigh in on the witch hunt stuff, as I've only read Carlo Ginzberg's "The Night Battles" about the benandanti in 16th century Northern Italy. Seems like there have been witches for awhile, but I do suspect that some of Girard's explorations wander off theological relevance – there were some odd swaths of sexuality analysis in "Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World" that I glazed over because it did not seem pertinent to me. Maybe Thiel found that stuff interesting due to his orientation?
The overarching irony remains though, that Thiel is intent on deterring the globalist Antichrist by preempting it with the same structures albeit organized through private capital (if even, he is subsidized). I mean, look, Gandalf told us to not use the Palantir, enough said HAHA! But it's textually tenuous to claim that Girard is in any way condoning of "Anduril Industries", for example. I maintain my hunch that Thiel is at best confused, or at worst intentionally appropriating Girard for an ironic corruption of his insights. As Girard says, "Satan is always someone" – metaphorically or literally, is he working through Thiel in this case?
Yes, and as Girard illustrates: evil controls its own antithesis to animate dominion (or to justify violence, as riot police collude with provocateurs) – specifically he cites the diametric demoniacs of Gerasene as described in Matthew. Of course, C.S. Lewis independently arrived at the same insight (probably inspired by the Gospel as well) that "the Devil always sends errors into the world in pairs—pairs of opposites." Accordingly, Thiel et al point to globalism and the globalists as an excuse for effectively building the technocratic "Beast" par excellence. Does Thiel know this? Are the demoniacs aware of what possesses them? I'm not sure (if that matters). But from a phenomenological perspective of "the forest for the trees" here, clearly Thiel is into Girard (not to mention Tolkien) for all the wrong reasons, as he is essentially aligning Orthanc (a symbol for academia) to Mordor (a symbol for global socialism) like Saruman in Tolkien's "application" (not allegory, as he famously differentiated). "A palantir is a dangerous tool, Saruman. They are not all accounted for, the lost Seeing-stones. We do not know who else may be watching." Indeed, Gandalf!
To me it seems that if Vance knows the teachings of Girard he is weaponizing them for political gain. I am not looking for an endorsement here but really just conversations around this as I am pretty new to Substack. I speak a little bit about Vance in this peace if there is interest:
https://lalafrontera.substack.com/p/the-architects-of-chaos?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=2n601f No puedo analizar cómo tu la visión de Thiel desde lo antropológico, pero desde la teología, hay un desconocimiento profundo de Dios y una incorrecta interpretación de las sagradas escrituras. Escribí varios artículos analizando justamente la interpretación errónea del Apocalipsis. Te comparto el enlace del primero por si te interesa léelo. Saludos
Thank you for taking on this topic. I've suspected for awhile that Thiel does not understand Girard or finds him fascinating in a selectively myopic or politically parochial fashion – similar to how Marc Andreesen bizarrely extols Carse's "Finite and Infinite Games" which has no resonance with Andreesen's life choices as far as we know from the outside looking in.
Regarding Girard, I've also read "I See Satan Fall Like Lightning", along with "Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World", and "The Scapegoat", and I don't understand how any of this could be used by any political movement, much less the American (new/alt) Right. Not only is it too academic, but there's nothing here to motivate political action – certainly not collective action! How ironic would that be: to reenact the mythic cycle while citing Girard against this scapegoat called the Antichrist. Could only the Antichrist pull off such an infernal irony? Does Girard ever mention the Antichrist? Looks like he does in Chapter 14 – at the end of ISSFLL. To say the least, upon reading Girard, I am not inspired to found a series of national defense startups that are named after Tolkien artifacts of surveillance and war (e.g. "Palantir" and "Anduril"). What book does Thiel think he is reading?
I might go so far to say that Thiel is diabolically appropriating Girard precisely to undermine the philosopher's deeply Christian wisdom, as the likes of Thiel (and Elon) and many others are clearly in the running for the role of at least a "Vice Antichrist" position in our wacky 21st century eschatology. That all said, I don't disagree with the premise of Thiel's thesis that globalism is at least related to the Antichrist in structure, but the irony of Thiel's arms race with this technocratic feudalism undermines whatever critique he might have of the multinational leviathan: is he not mimicking it through private industry? Lastly, I'd say "The Scapegoat" is probably the most accessible (and perhaps most enjoyable) of those Girard books, and again—nothing about this text demands we rally against the Antichrist, certainly not with "lost seeing stones" or kill drones.
I disagree that Girard's thought can be classed as Christian wisdom. How can one be a Christian and say that the Devil doesn't exist? His presentation is a distortion of Augustine's thought, that the Evil is absence of Good. However, demons have the Good of existence, for they were created as angels and have an angelic nature. The fall didn't make them non-existent.
It's been awhile since I've read City of God (or was evil defined in Confessions?), but I'd wager there is a reconciliation to be written between Augustine and Girard (clearly the latter knew the former).
I thought Girard's essay on John the Baptist was especially insightful, and theologically sound. But am I missing something? I did not catch any claims by Girard that the devil does not exist, rather Satan (and the pagan patterns he animates) plays the mob in this mythic cycle of violence that Jesus ended once and for all. It's the "Death of Tragedy" as George Steiner characterizes The Passion.
Unless I'm missing something big – as a casual but enthusiastic reader of Girard, I tentatively intend on extricating his morally sound works from the ironic grasp of Tolkien-obsessed technocrats! Someone has to rescue Tolkien from Thiel as well, but that might be a lost cause.
Satan is an angel, theferore, Satan exists. I didn't read other books by Girard. (This book is discouraging, though: he even repeats the fake protestant History of witch-hunt being a Middle Ages relevan phenomenon, while it was modern.)
I don't think that Girard's social theory is incompatible with Thiel's project. He values the individual as opposed to the collective action, which is presented as both social and diabolical. It fosters isolation as it fosters an anti-political sentiment. Seeing the individuals, Thiel could see the whole society, which is no more than a collection of individuals.
Absolutely, but how does a fallen angel work his magic in our fallen world? Girard is at the very least offering a sort of phenomenology of Satanic hysteria and catharsis, you could say. Girard distills the "logic of Satan" and describes how Christ renders it irrelevant.
And I can't weigh in on the witch hunt stuff, as I've only read Carlo Ginzberg's "The Night Battles" about the benandanti in 16th century Northern Italy. Seems like there have been witches for awhile, but I do suspect that some of Girard's explorations wander off theological relevance – there were some odd swaths of sexuality analysis in "Things Hidden Since the Foundation of the World" that I glazed over because it did not seem pertinent to me. Maybe Thiel found that stuff interesting due to his orientation?
The overarching irony remains though, that Thiel is intent on deterring the globalist Antichrist by preempting it with the same structures albeit organized through private capital (if even, he is subsidized). I mean, look, Gandalf told us to not use the Palantir, enough said HAHA! But it's textually tenuous to claim that Girard is in any way condoning of "Anduril Industries", for example. I maintain my hunch that Thiel is at best confused, or at worst intentionally appropriating Girard for an ironic corruption of his insights. As Girard says, "Satan is always someone" – metaphorically or literally, is he working through Thiel in this case?
https://lalafrontera.substack.com/p/the-architects-of-chaos?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=2n601f
Yes, and as Girard illustrates: evil controls its own antithesis to animate dominion (or to justify violence, as riot police collude with provocateurs) – specifically he cites the diametric demoniacs of Gerasene as described in Matthew. Of course, C.S. Lewis independently arrived at the same insight (probably inspired by the Gospel as well) that "the Devil always sends errors into the world in pairs—pairs of opposites." Accordingly, Thiel et al point to globalism and the globalists as an excuse for effectively building the technocratic "Beast" par excellence. Does Thiel know this? Are the demoniacs aware of what possesses them? I'm not sure (if that matters). But from a phenomenological perspective of "the forest for the trees" here, clearly Thiel is into Girard (not to mention Tolkien) for all the wrong reasons, as he is essentially aligning Orthanc (a symbol for academia) to Mordor (a symbol for global socialism) like Saruman in Tolkien's "application" (not allegory, as he famously differentiated). "A palantir is a dangerous tool, Saruman. They are not all accounted for, the lost Seeing-stones. We do not know who else may be watching." Indeed, Gandalf!
To me it seems that if Vance knows the teachings of Girard he is weaponizing them for political gain. I am not looking for an endorsement here but really just conversations around this as I am pretty new to Substack. I speak a little bit about Vance in this peace if there is interest:
https://kirby15.substack.com/p/babel-and-belonging?r=ey446&utm_medium=ios