A good Dugin post draws on this old book, and the description on z-library is pretty bold
In the introduction it says just because the Republic has been regarded as his greatest work in the past century doesn’t mean much in a 2500 year context where the Timaeus and Parmenides were regarded as thus instead.
The gears start to turn in my head about how the Timaeus can be spoken of in an off the reservation sort of way and then I wonder, what good is that for me? I need to get out of here. Pretty much only demons read this site anyway. You aren’t READY to understand the Timaeus, and you probably never will be. I see why people don’t even bother with philosophy and go right for Mammon. I trust my readers as much as I trust a Jew, and that’s “not at all”. At least sticking with philosophy for so many of my most impressionable years has given me that perception. I feel like I set up a glass booth in hell and I’ve been talking to all the fallen gremlins there. I wish I was crazy, that’s just my experience, take it how you will. The Timaeus was written with those very gremlins in mind actually. This is Plato’s most exoteric dialogue. If there’s too much higher-order thinking there is a dissipation of a person’s subjectivity. That can easily occur if the right roads are taken in the Republic or Laws for instance. I’m always taking those roads here.
I think this needs to happen for some of you people
Proclus had a vision of the goddess Athena who instructed him to leave rhetoric and law and pursue the study of philosophy
“Why, so we can be lonely and poor like you, you idiot?” Someone had to try, try to put forward the idea of a real institution that isn’t secretly merely based on rhetoric and “law”. They see that you lose your “rights” as a human if you do not speak in terms of rhetoric and law, so there is no enthusiasm in being affiliated in creating such an institution. The alternative is to be a submissive mediocrity, so I guess they’re more enthusiastic about that. Nope, there’s only woe to be found in this life, alone in the wilderness. It’s like the Truman Show for me in the sense that I feel like I’m being watched, though it’s different in that I feel like I’m being watched by people who want me to die. Philosophy+internet has been an odd thing to experience. Bagley’s Spinoza study can tell you a lot. The main way to detect a shill (in our particular historical context) is that they will never mention anything about Jews–unless it’s to praise them–they will consistently say good things about POC and bad things about whites, and of course women are always portrayed as flawless, unless of course they’re being distinctively a “white woman” in some way. Anyone who exposes their game they pretty much just want dead. I think you’re on the side of people who aren’t very upstanding citizens if you’re like that. What does that say about you? You’re a gremlin with no morals, and “morality” is probably an empty concept to you. Your self is nothing of substance, it’s an energy that only pretends to be a human. All of them like to join in the delusion together that they aren’t pretending. “Society” doesn’t have to be that way, that’s not a timeless structure. With a philosophy institution that could change. I don’t think there’s a demand for it because too many people are gremlins. I.e. feel personally attacked by this post. Nice, then you see why I perceive a futility in writing here at all. I don’t want to be in a glass booth talking to you in hell forever do I?