/lit/ - Literature

>>14920084
Not sure, but he deals with /lit/core stuff from time to time. I only came across him recently and it seems pretty comfy. He's an Irish nationalist but seems pretty familiar with Marxism and utilizes some of its critique in his framing of Nation State vs Internationalism. He focuses on deconstructing modern conservatism and wants to see a more genuine right (and left).
He has some interesting perennialist metaphysics, but is intelligent enough to not be an Evolian tard. I like how he seems to always engage things on very foundational levels, and he has an interesting taxonomy of 'Materialist worldview' vs. 'Organic worldview'. But his understanding of these categories iz interesting, since, for instance, he categorizes Christianity as an inherently materialist worldview.
this vid is pretty comfy: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t4K5ECtSn6Y

>>14920114
It's an interesting patter, but I actually think he got a lot wrong in regards to Nietzsche, and I think Berdyaev is more on the mark
>Nietzsche opposes to the distinction between good and evil, which he regards as a sign of decadence, the distinction between the noble and the low. The noble, the fine, is a higher type of life, aristocratic, strong, beautiful, well-bred. The conception of "fitness" is ontological while that of goodness is moralistic. This leads not a-moralism which is a misleading conception, but to subordination of moral categories to the ontological. It means that the important thing is not to fulfill the moral law but to perfect one's nature, i.e. to attain transfiguration and enlightenment. From this point of view the saint must be described as "fine" and not as "good", for he has a lofty, beautiful nature penetrated but divine light through and through. (...)