The real dangers, and the true story, the obsession with the Antichrist Peter Thil

From an early age, Palaver was a peace active, as he was registered as a conscience in 18 years and then organized against nuclear weapons in the college. It was in a chapter on the roots of human violence as it came to study the work of René Gerard – which was unusual theories of a stir in parts of Europe.

Gerard’s basic vision, which Palaver learns, is that all people are imitators, from their desires. “Once their natural needs are satisfied, humans want extensively, but they do not know exactly what they want,” Gerard wrote. So people simulate the aspirations of their most impressive neighbors – “thus ensuring the life of conflict and permanent competition with those who hate them at one time and admire him.”

According to Girard, this “MIMESIS” – these versions are unabated – build it because it wanders in relationships. In groups, everyone begins looking similar while converging in a few models, responding to the same desires, and fiercely competes for the same organisms. The only reason for this “emulatable competition” failing to start to a multi -directional war is that, at some point, it tends to guide everyone’s war against one. Through something called Gerard “a scapegoat mechanism”, everyone corresponds to an unfortunate goal that bears the responsibility of the group’s ills. Gerard wrote that this mechanism is very necessary for cultural cohesion, that the narratives of the ram of redemption are the founding myths of every ancient culture.

But Gerard believes that the arrival of Christianity was a turning point in human consciousness – because, once and for all, it was revealed that the ram of redemption is actually innocent and mob. In the narration of steel, Jesus is killed in an outrageous work of mass violence. But unlike all the legend of the other sacrifice, this It is said from the perspective of a scapegoat, and the public can only understand injustice.

With this diving feast, Gerard wrote that the old rapprochement rituals immediately began to lose their effectiveness, after they were detected and distorted. Humanity no longer gets the same comfort from collective violence. Societies are still a scapegoat all the time, but with less cohesion and less uniformity to show it. What awaits us at the end of history, then, is non -pasture violence, infectious, and ultimately reviewed from simulation competition.

However, the bullish direction of steel narration is that it provides moral redemption for humanity. For Gerard, the conclusion was clear: regardless of the end of the game, one must refuse a fully scapegoat. The tradition remains inevitable, but we can choose our models. The audio path forward, as he saw, is the tradition of Jesus-the only model that will not become a “great competitor”-in the life of the Christian violence.

Gerard’s theory was almost immediately Lodestar for the young man, who realized it as a bridge between the activity of peace and theology. “Gerard, Lafeere, and suddenly you have a perfect tool to criticize all the scapegoat,” says Palaver. The young activist was already some of the ram of the ram of a main scapegoat in his eyes.

In 1983-in the same year, such a first degree on Gerard-Bishop of Innsbruck attempted to prevent Palaver from mobilizing a group of Catholic youth to join the biggest protest against American missiles in Europe. He rejected Palaver’s views as geopolitical naivety, the bishop told him to read a group of German articles called The Illumlications of the Brotherhood: The need for enemies. The book realized, that the book was full of references to an idea – that Karl Schmidt has identified – that politics is based on distinguishing friends from enemies. When reading the book, Palaver realized that it is “more or less against every sentence.”

Thus, as a doctoral candidate, the young Austrian decided to write Cervary Criticism for Shamit. He was using Gerardian theory against a legal architect of the last great disaster in Europe, who was now inspiring the cold warriors who were the following. He explained: “Focus on Schmidt,” for me, I mean to turn into my enemy from my peaceful position. “

By the late 1980s, Palaver became one of the small cadres of Girardian in the faculty at the University of Innsbruck. Gerard’s ideas were picking steam in academic circles elsewhere in Europe. But Gerard himself continued to develop his theories in the relative ambiguity across the Atlantic Ocean, at Stanford University.

Fourth.

When Thil arrived In Stanford in the mid -eighties of the last century, Libertia was a teenager with enthusiasm to combat communism belonging to the Reagan era, hatred of the consensus caused by his time in the preparatory school in South Africa, and a car, as he described it, to win.One competition after another“Soon the role of a classic governor was occupied. Stanford reviewThe publication of a right-wing student-which incurred him in the modern policy of diversity and cultures at a time when the demonstrations of a collective student were flowing against Western law and racist chapter in South Africa.

Therefore, it is not surprising that Thil finds himself attracted to Robert Hamirton Kelly, a minister of a district of Stanford conservative from the theological point of view, who once referred to himself as “shocked by the armed South Africa with fascist education in the school.” Hamirton Kelly has taught lessons on Western civilization, and according to the school newspaper, it was formulated on at least one occasion by the anti -group masses on the campus. According to many people who knew them alike, Thiel came to see Hamiron Kelly as a guide. Through him, Thil Gerard was known personally.

Hamirton Kelly was one of my closest friend Gerard in Stanford and one of the heroes of the theory of tradition in the United States. He also led the Gerardian study group every weekly in A. Jarrar On the campus, and in his call, Thil became a key player in the early nineties. By accepting Thil, his initial attractiveness was simply a simulation simulation. Thil said in 2009: “It was a lot of moods with times,” Thiel said in 2009. interview“So he had a kind of natural appeal to a somewhat rebel university student.” Moreover, the first impression of Thiel was that the simulation theory was “crazy”.