Gonzalo Lira: Astute Observer, Psychopathic Windbag... or?

Zzartemis

Jedi Council Member
"Gonzalo Lira: Astute Observer, Psychopathic Windbag..."

I wasn't aware of GL, ever, until recently. Watched the earlier Red Pill Coach videos, again nothing that would be on my radar to inform. Game for sexual (or life) conquest...Yeah the pattern of a psychopath....and young men following that advice? What a impoverished life it would take to even consider. I never understood games between the sexs or manipulation to get ahead. His language and belittlement of ppl is indicative of a psycho, in these early vids.

Anyway, life of a psychopath...
In youth, they're all full of bravo, bluster, and deceit, causing damage wherever they lay eyes upon. As they age, their deceit turns to more hidden ways and often used to get others to support them, feel sorry for them....I noticed, after his so called kidnapping, he brought up the subject of being a victim...But, "Oh no, that wasn't him!"....But you see, he put that into people's minds, didn't he?

@BHelmet is correct, one should hone their skills at identifying psychos....Trust me on that...I was actually kidnapped, beaten and tortured by one...And I still bear the effects of that.
 

seek10

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
It seems he is definitely someone to be wary of.

In the video below GL claims that he gave documents ‘to the two Alexes of The Duran and other ‘online people’ proving he had been taken into custody by the SBU. He says they can vouch for him.

I watched his telegram account daily before he was arrested by Uki's. He himself expressed those fears ( of arrested, tortured and killed) many times before that. There was lot of activism to spread the news ( or networking) in very few telegram channels that was exposing Uki-Nazi grotesque treatment of innocent people ( cutting throat in closeup with knife, burning Nazi symbols on people's back etc.) that contributed to the fear of him subjected to the same and silencing whatever few voices. Many felt sense of relief when he was released.

Listening to Lira in the above video is disturbing. He comes out like a arrogant, thankless narcissist. I didn't understand why so many people (who follow alternate news) watch his video hours at a stretch. For me, whatever he is saying is nothing new, though I felt he is one of few dared to say it from danger location (Kharkhov).

It looks to me that, all this drama Lira creating seems to intend to split the voice of alternate community. Instead, I like the Patrick Lancaster video's (showing hard video truth of horrors, no imposing of any version of the story, asking innocent questions, sharing the food/other items in whatever small way he can, help moving few people to safety so on). No doubt he asks for subscribe to his channel, every body does that. I don't mean to bring Patrick into this controversy.

The question is why so many people likes Lira's opinions and like to watch his video's. His content seems to be addressing to certain "tastes" of alternate viewers?
 

Alejo

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Why is it all important exactly? He's just another voice on some mether. You listen to him or not. It is us who filter things and ideas for ourselves. Not for someone else and we should not exspect someone else to do it for ourselves. Lira has some good ideas, and some bad. No need to love or hate him, just to listen to him with critical thinking turned on.
Yeah, that's kind of my take on it as well.. I disagree with his views on a few matters, but I agree with a few of his others. He can be useful or what he has to say valuable, and still remain a disgusting person, or just a person that I disagree with.

It's part of life to learn to discern people, who to keep and who to let go of, and parts of these very same people. It's not a black and white situation, it never has been. We have all met people who are lovely but who we couldn't trust, or trustworthy individuals who we couldn't associate with on a general basis. Such is life me thinks.

This conversation about Lira reminded me of something Laura wrote in The Wave about people who would be dragged out drunk from a bar to come and stop the bleeding on someone, and how that meant that good positive qualities of character do not necessarily mean abilities or viceversa. Or like taking your car to get repaired at the mechanic who can be obnoxious.

Lira is indeed not someone I would want to call a friend, but maybe an acquaintance. Mostly because he does have valuable views on a topic of interest to me.

No, your relationship is not based on 'game', but it sure can help to understand yourself, the other person, and to focus on more important matters because you're no longer fooling yourself by being oblivious to subconscious drives. It's also possible to use 'game' in a loving relationship. Yes, the REAL connection is deeper, emotional, and even spiritual; But if you have an understanding of your own machine and your partner's machine, why wouldn't you also use that to bond?
And not to mention playing, in a serious relationship there is a factor of negotiating I think, but the purpose of "the game" shifts from self serving, to a win win goal...hopefully. But playing with someone you trust, or playfully acting to explore those very same drives is probably one of the healthiest ways to bring them under conscious awareness.
 

Bluegazer

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
The question is why so many people likes Lira's opinions and like to watch his video's. His content seems to be addressing to certain "tastes" of alternate viewers?

Rebellion. The way in which Lira expresses herself is that of a person who, at first glance, is one of those who do not hold back any opinion. That is to say, a person without filters is attractive to those who do not have the strength to express what they feel or think.
 

Ryan

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
And as a preemptive handling, he shared with others what the "exposed facts" could be. Not going to mention all 3 (you can check the video, it begins at the proper point), but will mention only the first fact. He said that the doxxing may expose his years long and close ties with Richard Spencer. As if Lira is some "alt-right secret agent". And in the video he explicitly admits that the close ties fact is true. Also here's an archived screenshot from Twitter when he and Lira played some game in 2013.
John Carter, in his excellent Substack blog, "Postcards from Barsoom", wrote two very interesting posts that are a sort of "potted history of the alt-right". The following quote is from the first:

Each of the communities that contributed to what came to be known as the alternative right had originated around an obsession with a certain inconsistency or injustice in the prevailing order - each had formed like a callus around one of the many splinters in the collective mind. For the paleoconservatives, it was the abandonment of national interests in favour of the imperatives of global capital. For the white nationalists, it was the demonization of Europeans and European solidarity, expressed in the invasion of European countries by mass migration, as well as the hypocritical attitude towards white vs. Jewish power. For the libertarians, it was the progressive infringement on liberty by the regulatory apparatus of the managerial state and the prudish speech codes of an increasingly unforgiving political correctness. For the manosphere, it was the broken social technologies of courtship, the falsehoods propagated about sexual relations, and the overreach of a feminism that had morphed from an advocacy for women to an all-out assault on everything male.
Regarding Lira's history in the "manosphere", the Daily Beast did a hit-piece on him as a "Putin shill" which nonetheless contains some interesting information:

But until just months before this conflict started, he didn’t appear to present himself as a citizen journalist, nor a Ukraine expert, nor a foreign policy buff, nor a war nerd. He was a “medium-sized manosphere YouTuber,” according to Manoel Horta Ribeiro, a researcher at Switzerland's École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne who studies that digital space—a loose constellation of blogs, forums, and social-media accounts inhabited by pick-up artists, men’s rights activists, and incels. [..]

Under the name Coach Red Pill, Lira made videos and hosted digital seminars in which he offered dating, life, and relationship advice. [..]

Some of Lira’s content offered reasonable, run-of-the-mill tips on things like financial literacy,
according to George Michael, a professor of criminal justice at Westfield State University and an expert on far-right groups who’s been watching Coach Red Pill videos for years. But, Ribeiro added, most of his content was steeped in old and reductive views on gender and society, as well as outright vile misogyny, often defended using “questionable interpretations of evolutionary psychology.”

“Never date a woman in her 30s,” Lira, who’s in his 50s, said in one video created in 2020. He also argued that, “irrespective of what they claim they want,” all women only truly desire money, a house, and kids, as childrearing is the one thing that will biologically validate them. [..]

Lira’s rapid transformation from a self-styled relationship expert to a small but prominent peddler of pro-Putin hot takes and conspiracies may seem bizarre. But according to experts on both the manosphere and Russian misinformation, such a pivot makes sense. It speaks to long-simmering trends in both worlds, which kicked into high gear when the Ukraine conflict started.

Lira declined to respond to questions The Daily Beast sent him about his decision to shift away from his manosphere-centric content and towards dedicated Ukraine conflict commentary. Or about the information he chooses to share, where he finds it, and how he assesses and frames it. Or any of the other topics discussed in this article.

Instead, he posted The Daily Beast’s communications with him on his social-media channels. He claimed in one post that he did so to entertain his followers and that they should thank The Daily Beast “for the lulz.” He also created a 22-minute-long video preemptively warning his followers not to trust anything The Daily Beast writes, concocting a fantastical narrative in which every journalist secretly knows he and his ilk are right about the things they say but chooses to print lies because “everybody who works at the mainstream media is by definition a piece of shit.” He added that he is better than the mainstream media because he can “say the truth,” and suggested this article was developed at least in part because The Daily Beast writers envy and resent his freedom.

This attitude toward the press, and Lira’s affinity for pro-Putin views, is far from shocking, given the environment in which he’s operated for years now.

The manosphere is a murky and chaotic space, riven by internal divisions about the exact nature of masculinity or the ideal approach to relationships (Lira has in the past indicated that he dislikes incels, even as he thrived in the larger subculture that they inhabit.) But most of its diverse factions are united in their distaste for Western values, and policies on gender equality connected to them, because they believe those norms ultimately hurt men, experts on this world told The Daily Beast. Members of the manosphere also tend to be skeptical of the mainstream media, often viewing it as a source of propaganda created to slander them and bolster supposedly harmful and incorrect ideas—like feminism.

Meanwhile, over the last decade, Putin’s regime has aggressively promoted “the importance of traditional gender roles to Russia,” explained Hrycak. It’s done so in part by elevating groups and commentators who decry the supposed horrors of Western feminism, and of gender and sexual freedoms and rights. Russia has also attempted to appeal to and build ties with “anti-woke” communities in the West, like the manosphere, as part of its ongoing efforts to sow division and discord within its rivals’ borders, added Rhys Crilly, a scholar at the University of Glasgow who studies the nation’s communications strategies.

In recent years, the manosphere has grown increasingly intertwined with far-right networks and influencers, soaking up this radical fringe’s resonant but distinct ideas about the evils of the West and adoration for Putin and his strongman politics as well. This escalating entanglement, Ribeiro and other researchers have shown, is turning the manosphere into an ever-more conspiratorial and radical environment—and a pipeline sending often young, disaffected men towards deeper rabbit–holes of extremism.
These last few paragraphs are clearly the US intelligence/establishment take on the "manosphere" and its relationship to "Western values" and Russia. This article by Covert Action Magazine gives a much more balanced view:

On the 20th of March, 2022, the Daily Beast posted this article, one of the first major media mentions of Lira during this war. This paper’s ownership and executive staff have some rather suspicious backgrounds.

The paper has some ties to the Clinton administration, and its CEO, Heather Dietrick, comes from the law firm of Goodwin Procter, LLP, which has employed multiple CIA directors and high-ranking spies.

This would likely explain why it seems to have an agenda, using Mr. Lira’s participation in a loathed subculture as a framing device to discredit claims about things such as American bioweapons labs in Ukraine. These claims, while perhaps exaggerated by Mr. Lira, are indisputably true.


It illuminates Mr. Lira’s background as a right-winger in great depth and detail, but there is one seemingly insignificant section that sadly would become quite relevant on April 15th. To quote the article:

“Lira has claimed that the Zelensky administration sent men to his home in Kharkiv to disappear him, but that he miraculously avoided them and was at least recently hiding out in an undisclosed location in the city. The Ukrainian government did not respond to a request for comment, but many experts doubt the veracity of this account, and question whether he’s really still in Kharkiv as well.”

While this is written off as the ravings of a paranoid maniac in the article, it turns out that Mr. Lira was correct.

I will stop here to say that I do not believe that Mark Hay, the author of the Daily Beast article, had any nefarious intent. Mr. Hay appears to be a prolific and hardworking journalist, covering a huge variety of topics for many outlets. He was simply doing his due diligence by reaching out for a comment that may have tipped off the SBU to Mr. Lira’s whereabouts.

Don't know if this was posted on another thread, but when the video came up, I took a look at the comments and saw a comment from Ritter's wife. Here it is:

Here are some more thoughts. As far as I know (and I could be wrong), political detainees do not usually need to sign a non-disclosure document. But it could be necessary in cases of some other investigation. Either crime related or espionage. And if it is indeed political, people usually tend to disappear afterwards or don't talk about the subject that much. Perhaps SBU are feeling particularly generous, or there are indeed some strings attached. Or some sort of agreement was reached.

But considering his ties, and this is a mere speculation, perhaps he was indeed helped, and there was indeed some pressure to keep and release him safe and sound. But maybe it didn't come from the diplomatic sources, but actually the alt-right ones. Who knows. Another interesting thing to consider, that some on the internet say and provide proof that Spencer is actually "a controlled opposition". If so, maybe Lira's attempt to ridicule the doxxing by saying that he may be an alt-right secret agent isn't so ridiculous. We simply don't know. But my spidey senses are being activated on this one, go figure.

If those concerns have merit, I feel for the Duran guys. I think they genuinely believe everything Lira is saying. And it actually fits with the pattern mentioned by the author of the "International Man of Contradiction" video. He mentioned how Lira always made sure to associate with bigger names/bloggers/channels, and this way provide more credibility or support for himself.
Indeed. Given Professor Steven Keen's impeccable public record and profile, it appears that Lira is a crass opportunist - basically an online grifter looking to create sensational content to bilk easily-"gamed" people out of their hard-earned money. The fact that he was/is in Ukraine seems to be a set of circumstances that he has been attempting to turn to his advantage, however his "playing both sides" and narcissistic self-promotion now appears to be creating some difficulties for him, as Mrs. Ritter has astutely perceived imo.

On the subject of Richard Spencer, he is actually the ex-husband of the brilliant blogger/historian Nina Kouprianova, who made a crowdfunding plea several years ago for financial help to divorce Spencer against pressure from his right-wing family. Spencer seems like a garden-variety narcissist at the very least, so regarding his connections with Lira, "birds of a feather" as they say...

Also, thanks @BHelmet for the thought-provoking thread. Nice sleuthing!
 

Evan

Jedi Master
As for doubting he’s actually in Ukraine, he did a live cast from his favorite Lviv chocolate shop in Karkov, so no question he’s there. He stated that the purpose of his CRP videos were to provide life lessons for his son in the event he’s not there to provide fathering as the child grows into manhood. Is he a bit of a pig? I admit he occasionally makes me cringe when he talks about picking up women. I also grew up in the neighborhood just next to his, and sadly that is the way “dudes” in that area talk about “chicks”. He seriously reminds me of my brother, who could literally be his kindred spirit. My brother similarly makes me cringe when he talks that way. I’ve also read his novels which are of the CIA renegade wet team type. They are pretty good if you go for that stuff. I personally think he’s genuine. Whether he’s likable as a person is a separate matter. He’s certainly what my wife would call a creep, and I don’t disagree with her. But horses for courses. My two cents anyway.
 

aragorn

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
If those concerns have merit, I feel for the Duran guys. I think they genuinely believe everything Lira is saying. And it actually fits with the pattern mentioned by the author of the "International Man of Contradiction" video. He mentioned how Lira always made sure to associate with bigger names/bloggers/channels, and this way provide more credibility or support for himself. But we will see how it goes.
Agree. As I see it, this is exactly why it's of value to post observations of 'influencers' who suddenly pop up on the scene inserting themselves (or being invited) to numerous interviews. Moreover, I think that through Laura's work and multiple discussions (+ literature) on this forum, we've become decently good in spotting the red flags indicating pathological tendences in certain individuals. Maybe I'm interpreting it wrong, but I'm a bit surprised by some of the comments here of "why bother pointing out the red flags, just stop watching his videos" – isn't it a useful activity we can do, as members of a research forum, to point out the red flags we observe so that e.g. the Duran guys might avoid being dragged in to some kind of 'setup'? Isn't this a useful activity to try and stop (not through manipulation but by providing information), or at least slow down, the ponerogenic process through grifters who infect and manipulate people's minds, as was alluded to by Cosmos below?

That brings me to another point Łobaczewski talked about: Certain people seem to have a talent (I think he called them schizoids or something) to massively oversimplify human nature and reality and then put that oversimplified view into writing or speech while normal non-pathological people don't notice how it "infects" their minds. I think Lobajewski also warned that people like that often create very oversimplify political movements and slogans which discard the complexity of human nature, humanity and reality itself.
 

ziutek

Jedi Master
Well, I know a lot of people with whom I share information and we really agree on the general assessment of who is who in the conflict in Ukraine.
Although I can observe narcissistic traits or more severe schizoid cases among some of them.
Maybe it stems from the fact that they feel others are "better" and want to show off their alternative knowledge.

Well I was surprised by Gonzalo's obsession with toilet paper and bidets. :-D

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
 

Scottie

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
Yeah, that's kind of my take on it as well.. I disagree with his views on a few matters, but I agree with a few of his others. He can be useful or what he has to say valuable, and still remain a disgusting person, or just a person that I disagree with.

Exactly. It's not very useful to "Trumpify" a person simply because you or I find them disgusting. And you might think that enough people learned from the divisions caused by Trump's presidency, but alas no... Because next up was the Covid debacle that literally split families down the middle - again!

So, one of my 'rules' is that the minute I don't want to listen to someone for 1 second longer because I don't like what they're saying or who I think they are, I stop and re-evaluate - again and again - until I can listen to them without reacting emotionally one way or another. In doing this, I think I've probably learned more about myself than about the other people.

And not to mention playing, in a serious relationship there is a factor of negotiating I think, but the purpose of "the game" shifts from self serving, to a win win goal...hopefully. But playing with someone you trust, or playfully acting to explore those very same drives is probably one of the healthiest ways to bring them under conscious awareness.

Pretty much!
 

SOTTREADER

The Living Force
I have been wondering what is the damage in listening to Gonzalo if it turns out he was a spook or charlatan for example. What he says seems to be quite congruent with what we hear elsewhere so it's not like he's bringing something new to the table - at least nothing I can decipher. His most valuable attributes appear to be his ability to articulate thoughts and be engaging whilst doing so. He seems relatable both from his looks (regular looking guy) and ability to build rapport with the listener. He definitely hits the high notes to resonate with the pro- Russia alt-right Western crowd.

The only thing I can think off if he was indeed a charlatan or spook - he's part of a cadre of "alt speakers" who through their collective voice amplify certain untruths or anchor the interpretation of "yet to happen" events towards a certain narrative "stream" which they are seeding now.

I think it's wise to consider CIA etc would have upped their game and actually either bought or inserted certain voices within the alt-space in such a way that they are very subtle but can a) take control of narratives b) anchor them towards a desired direction c) plant seeds for how future events may be interpreted or consumed.

I'm quite curious in particular about the narrative building up around Poland, it's role and possible future actions.

In any case, I doubt it's wise to take things at face value in this atmosphere.
 

luc

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Why is it all important exactly? He's just another voice on some mether. You listen to him or not. It is us who filter things and ideas for ourselves. Not for someone else and we should not exspect someone else to do it for ourselves. Lira has some good ideas, and some bad. No need to love or hate him, just to listen to him with critical thinking turned on.

So, one of my 'rules' is that the minute I don't want to listen to someone for 1 second longer because I don't like what they're saying or who I think they are, I stop and re-evaluate - again and again - until I can listen to them without reacting emotionally one way or another. In doing this, I think I've probably learned more about myself than about the other people.

Yes, that's my take on it as well. You know, I'm kind of tired of these endless discussions of whether someone is "100% on our team" vs. "he's a scammer/controlled opposition shill/horrible human being"... How often have we been there? At the end of the day, people are complex, and they have their issues, pressures, blind spots, agendas (unconscious or not) etc. Including each of us. So yes, it's useful to dig into people's past, to discern what's going on, but no need to slap a label on them because of our own emotional reactions, and no need to get up in arms about it all.

As for Gonzalo, just going by his Ukraine stuff, he feels a bit sleazy to me, but that is also why he can be entertaining. His take was valuable in the beginning, partly because of his punchy style bordering on bad taste (it was a relief having someone say it as it is in very stark terms). Judging by his appearances on the Duran, I think he doesn't have to add much anymore, and he seems to get things wrong at times, so I pretty much ignore him at this point. But at least on the Duran shows, he doesn't come across as too sleazy anymore (IMO), maybe he changed his ways somewhat or the vibe of the others lift him up, I don't know.
 

SOTTREADER

The Living Force
As much as I love Russia, Putin and what they are standing against, it is worth remembering that there are many layers to events. Remember for example, Iran worked with the US to assassinate that General - a deal was struck where interests aligned and for a brief moment, enemies ceased to be enemies.

I find it helpful to recognise that to a certain degree we are "an audience" and we're having a "show" play out in front of us. Yes, to a certain degree we may or will become active participants or feel the effects (e.g. higher fuel costs) of the show but this doesn't negate that the dynamics of audience/show will be playing out underneath. We have heroes, villains, suspense you name it. All these things ultimately could influence us in unconscious ways if we don't at least notice their presence. So it's useful to remain watchful and aware of possible different layers to events. Where it's all going is anyone's guess...
 

Bluegazer

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I think it's wise to consider CIA etc would have upped their game and actually either bought or inserted certain voices within the alt-space in such a way that they are very subtle but can a) take control of narratives b) anchor them towards a desired direction c) plant seeds for how future events may be interpreted or consumed.

Polarization. The manosphere movement and its association with the "alt-right" in my view is the result of the other extreme, radical feminism and progressivism / left / woke.

What I can interpret is that it is either the result of a natural mechanism that seeks balance where this polarization is similar to the accumulation of electric charges that are then discharged causing a lightning strike. Or that this same natural phenomenon is being artificially produced. I believe it is the latter.

Because in the discharge, everything in between is electrocuted. And if you see what's in the middle, it's a lot of people, it's humanity.
 

Alejo

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
I have been wondering what is the damage in listening to Gonzalo if it turns out he was a spook or charlatan for example. What he says seems to be quite congruent with what we hear elsewhere so it's not like he's bringing something new to the table - at least nothing I can decipher. His most valuable attributes appear to be his ability to articulate thoughts and be engaging whilst doing so. He seems relatable both from his looks (regular looking guy) and ability to build rapport with the listener. He definitely hits the high notes to resonate with the pro- Russia alt-right Western crowd.
I think if you're aware of him and of yourself, there should be no damage coming from listening to him. I was thinking about this today and I feel it's like, taking advice from a "gym bro" you're not going to adopt their life philosophy, but they may help you reach proper form while working out, and so... there's useful information coming from someone with whom you probably have very little in common, and that's life.

So, one of my 'rules' is that the minute I don't want to listen to someone for 1 second longer because I don't like what they're saying or who I think they are, I stop and re-evaluate - again and again - until I can listen to them without reacting emotionally one way or another. In doing this, I think I've probably learned more about myself than about the other people.
Yes, and it works, I was reminded, for instance, of me finding useful information from Pablo Escobar (the big drug lord) of all people, about drug addiction, or addiction in general, go figure. And of JBP when he said that everyone has something they can teach you, some people have more some only have the one thing, but everyone's got something they know that you don't that you could use.
 
Top Bottom