Destiny, the new psyop, and Straussian Conservatives.

Letters from O'Brien #47

I wanted to write very briefly on a character most should now be familiar with, and that is the streamer Destiny (youtube.com/@destiny). Over the past few months, he has been pushed - artificially - by the conservative establishment. Let’s have a brief look at this disturbing phenomenon and highlight some things I think we all need to be aware of.

Those clued in will be aware of Destiny and his antics; initially a competitive gamer, he began to stream ‘political debates’ in 2016, with a blatantly pro-liberal, pro-regime stance. Since then, he has steadily grown in popularity, although up until this year he was never mainstreamed. I have had the misfortune of hearing his comically ridiculous takes on and off for years now, as he would regularly pop up on debate panels, siding always with the regime-approved messaging. His talking points have consistently been idiotic, unoriginal, and so painfully conformist that his points often contradict themselves. This bottom-of-the-barrel liberal is hated by both those on the socialist far left (namely Hasan Piker) and on the far right (Nick Fuentes) and rightly so; a self-proclaimed genius, following the October 7 attacks he failed to even find Israel on a map, simultaneously speaking as a ‘geopolitical expert’ on the region.

It came as a surprise to me, then, when I noticed that the most prolific online conservative outlets had begun to platform Destiny late last year. Their reasoning? For ‘good debate’, apparently. Over the past few months Destiny has suddenly been invited on the Lex Friedman podcast, he has debated Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, Norman Finkelstein, and even live TV host Piers Morgan.

So, what’s the issue? As noted, Destiny stands out in no way; he neither holds unique or original leftist talking points, nor challenges the neoconservative right. He stands against socialism when it challenges the regime, and he challenges the right for the same reason. In fact, amongst socialists he has become deeply unpopular. He truly is a by-product of the regime. What is interesting, then, is that he has suddenly been platformed so widely, though not amongst leftists.

What I found rather interesting is that during his debates - particularly with Ben Shapiro - Destiny stands unified in regard to particular important ideas. Shapiro and Destiny harshly disagree on topics such as pornography (which Shapiro rightly believes should be banned), and economics (Destiny is in favour of a welfare model, which is not totally wrong either). However, it struck me that there was basically no disagreement on some core concerns. Both Shapiro and Destiny agree on what I would call the Straussian Ideals. That is; that American nationalism is bad, that the role of Christianity in building the west should be downplayed, and that the ideal America (that the founding fathers supposedly intended) is one in which ‘liberty’ refers to freedom to partake in degeneracy if one sees fit. Both also have little issue with demographic changes in America.

I am highlighting Destiny for two reasons; clearly, he’s being backed by someone who wants his influence to increase within the conservative sphere. Whether this be to taint ‘leftists’ (for example, legitimate socialists, who hate him and the regime) as complete idiots, or to plant ideas amongst the mainstream conservative right. Secondly, and more importantly, I believe he exemplifies a growing trend within the mainstream conservative movement to uphold Straussian conservatism by any means necessary, rather than discussing traditional conservatism.

I am hoping to expand on this in a future letter, but to touch on this briefly; it is increasingly clear to me that Straussian philosophy lay at the core of America’s ‘mainstream’ conservative movement. This is important to note, because Straussian philosophy contradicts traditional conservatism; it deliberately downplays the role of Christianity in building the west, it is anti-nationalism, it is in favour of ‘soft’ multiculturalism, and rejects the idea of a religious set of values laying at the centre of society.

To give a taste of how intertwined this is in the modern conservative movement; influential billionaire Peter Thiel is an admitted follower of Leo Strauss. In 2017 ‘conservative intellectual’ Bret Weinstein rises to international prominence after supposedly being ‘cancelled by liberals’ at the campus he lectured at. Bret Weinstein is a Straussian atheist. Bret’s brother Eric Weinstein - another Straussian atheist - was managing director of Thiel Capital, Peter Thiel’s hedge fund. Both Bret and Eric soon became acquainted with other ‘dissident intellectuals’ during this period, the self-proclaimed ‘intellectual dark web’. Among these supposed dissidents were Sam Harris, Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, Dave Rubin, Bari Weiss, Joe Rogan, Heather Heying, Douglas Murray, and Bill Maher, to name a few.

Now in 2018 reports circulated that Bari Weiss had received a not-insignificant amount of funding from Peter Thiel. Why? Well, if this report is true, then likely to promote this new group of intellectuals. Note that in 2018, Bari Weiss publicly promoted this supposed group of ‘dissidents’ in a New York Times article. By 2019 most were familiar with Rubin, the Weinstein brothers, Douglas Murray, and Shapiro. What did all of these ‘conservative dissidents’ (bar Peterson, initially) have in common? They all appear to be Straussians. The same goes for the mainstreamed events and organisations platforming these people; Turning Point USA (run by Charlie Kirk), PragerU (northing needs to be said here).

So what? Well, if the Straussian belief is held by all of these individuals, then logically it is the driving ideology behind mainstream conservatism in America. I am not saying Thiel is some grand villain here, but that many of these prominent thinkers appear to hold similar worldviews to Strauss. This will not fix the country, nor the west.

Yours,

O’Brien

---

Consider supporting Notes From The Past- an attempt to give you an array of historical contexts in video form for you to better understand current events.