No. I thought he was a crank. At some point, I saw an interview where he explain

No. I thought he was a crank. At some point, I saw an interview where he explained himself, and then he made sense: he’s doing what he’s doing by design. And honestly It make me respect him and his approach even if I thought his objective was wrong (a dead end). He’s not like Zizek for example, who is just all bluster and entertainment without any real plan or objective other than attention.

I’ve experimented with a number of ‘positionings and attitudes’ in presenting my work online. Trying to find a ‘voice’. While I’d rather have fun with the over-the-top war-talk that I used from ’14-’18, which comes to me easily, as the alt right movement tool hold. Too much aggression against (suppression of) that positioning has made it impossible to use it.

Recently I’ve switched back to my original position which is conservative libertarian. In part because I have no faith in the online right and so playing to that audience, when you know it’s pointless, is pretty much larping. And partly because it’s just … my natural disposition.

Thanks for the good question.
-Curt

Reply addressees: @chip_haze