Last Thursday, Steve Bannon visited Olavo de Carvalho at home. Carvalho’s adherents in Brazil celebrated such visit as an evidence that he is getting close to the White House, because they think that Bannon is very close to Trump.
And last Friday, Carvalho visited Bannon at home. And again Carvalho’s adherents in Brazil celebrated such visit as an evidence that he is getting close to the White House, because they think that Bannon is very close to Trump.
What do both Bannon and Carvalho have in common? Traditionalism. More specifically, the traditionalism of the Islamic occultist René Guénon, admired by Bannon and Carvalho.
Is Carvalho actually getting closer to Trump by getting closer to Bannon? What does Trump have to do with Bannon? According to Trump himself, nothing. Trump said,
Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind. Steve was a staffer who worked for me after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates…
Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn’t as easy as I make it look. Steve had very little to do with our historic victory… Steve doesn’t represent my base—he’s only in it for himself.
Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well. Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books.
This is the official letter of Trump about Bannon published last year. In sum, with his experience Trump defined Bannon as a treacherous opportunist.
With my experience, I can do just as Trump did and also define Carvalho as a treacherous opportunist. There is no other proper definition for Bannon and Carvalho. There is no other proper definition for Guenonians and other occultists.
Even though Carvalho and Bannon portray themselves as “Catholic,” their activities and ideas betray their Catholic appearances. But they do not betray their Guenonian nature.
When Carvalho visited Bannon at home, their dinner began with the traditional Christian prayer “Our Father.” The pictures of the meetings were taken by Josias Teófilo, who in his Twitter account said:
“A great moment in the dinner at the Breitbart Embassy was when Steve Bannon (a Catholic) asked Olavo de Carvalho to say a prayer before the meal, and Olavo began to pray Our Father, which was followed by all. I took this picture of this moment. THIS IS THE NEW AGE.”
Teófilo is so alienated as other Carvalho’s adherents, who think that Bannon is close to Trump. Teófilo thinks that Bannon’s house is still a Breitbart headquarters, which actually was in the past. But after Trump expelled Bannon, Breitbart also got rid of him.
Is the prayer “Our Father” an evidence that Bannon and Carvalho are Christian? Is the prayer “Our Father” a sign that those praying it are Christian? Not in Brazil. Brazil is the largest Catholic nation in the world, and its Catholicism is syncretic. In their syncretism, Brazilian Catholics attend the Catholic Mass at Sunday and attend overtly and not so overtly Satanic rituals at other days.
Brazilian spiritualistic medium “John of God” also often prayed the “Our Father,” as confirmed by one of his sexual victims in the Brazilian newspaper Metropoles in a report titled “John of God prayed Our Father full of evil intentions.” Years ago he was praised by Oprah Winfrey and now he has become a police case as over 500 women, so far, report they were victims of his sex abuses.
He did his spiritualistic operations and sexual abuses in the facilities of his organization, called “Saint Ignatius of Loyola House,” a distinctly Catholic name, just as “John of God” is a Catholic name. So in a syncretic Catholic Brazil, where a spiritualistic medium rapes hundreds of women, Catholic names and the “Our Father” are not evidence of real Christianity. On the contrary, they are evidence that occultists know how to use Catholic names and practices to fool the gullible.
“John of God,” who was praised by two Brazilian presidents and many Brazilian celebrities, knew how to pray the “Our Father” and abuse girls and women at the same time.
Brazilian presidents, who are traditionally Catholic, and Brazilian celebrities traditionally value occultists. All of them have their favorite “Catholic” occultist.
Vulnerability to syncretism is a part of the Brazilian Catholic culture. In fact, it is impossible to understand Brazilian Catholicism without understanding syncretism. Josias Teófilo himself is an adherent of Theosophy, which is a mixture of philosophy and occultism. He produced the movie “The Garden of Afflictions,” whose premier in New York in 2017 did not draw the presence of an American audience. The movie is an effort to offer a cinematographic personality cult to Carvalho.
So when Teófilo said that the dinner of Bannon with Carvalho “is the New Age,” he said exactly what he meant. Theosophy and all kind of occult philosophy are an integral part of the occult movement that came to be known as New Age.
Bannon is not the only adherent of Guénon in America in contact with Carvalho. Wolfgang Smith is another contact. All of them have in common a “Catholic” appearance and they are adherents of Guénon, who had also been a Catholic, but converted to Islamic esotericism.
Therefore, no one more qualified to define their meetings as New Age than Teófilo is.
New Age, with its cloak of traditionalism, is mesmerizing Catholic leaders and hijacking conservative and nationalist movements around the world.
Jair Bolsonaro, the new Brazilian president, is an example. According to the American, Brazilian and Israeli press, his victory was thanks especially to evangelicals — a phenomenon that also happened in Trump’s election. But Bolsonaro is mesmerized. He and his sons have propagandized Carvalho as vital for his election, as only adherents of a cult could do, even though some adherents of Carvalho have publicly admitted that the current conservative wave in Brazil is evangelical.
J.R. Guzzo, a journalist at Veja magazine (the Brazilian counterpart of Time magazine), said on a 13 January 2019 tweet:
“The plain, simple and unadorned fact is this: evangelicals are today the greatest anti-leftist force in Brazil. They are stronger, more numerous and more active than the Army, Air Force and Navy combined. There has never been such force in Brazil. The left has no idea how to defeat it.”
Guzzo is an admirer of Carvalho. But in the cases where admiration is surpassed by blind adherence, all that the adherents can see is Carvalho as “the man who saved Brazil.” This could also have happened in the U.S. with Bannon, but Trump was able to see on time that Bannon was a treacherous opportunist. What hinders Bolsonaro from achieving Trump’s level of insight?
While Bolsonaro and many other Catholics are unable to see the treacherous opportunists who are hijacking conservative and nationalist movements around the world, let us compare some traits that make the adherents of Guénon so treacherous and opportunistic. Specifically, let us compare Bannon, called by Trump as a treacherous opportunist, with Carvalho, to see if they are different.
The book “Devil’s Bargain: Steve Bannon, Donald Trump, and the Storming of the Presidency” (Penguin Publishing Group, 2017), by Joshua Green, may give us some clues.
“Devil’s Bargain” said about Bannon, “Though hardly a moralizing social conservative, he objected bitterly to the secular liberalism encroaching upon the culture.”
Not different from Carvalho, known for his foul mouth, who argues that homosexuality is natural. His “opposition” to the homosexual agenda is a strange idea that just as homosexuality cannot be imposed, so cannot male/female sex.
“Devil’s Bargain” said, “Bannon… brought to Guénon’s Traditionalism a strong dose of Catholic social thought.”
Not different of Carvalho, who has mixed his experience with Guénon’s Traditionalism with a strong dose of Catholic thought.
“Devil’s Bargain” said that Bannon launched “effort to prop up Catholic traditionalists marginalized by the new Pope.”
Not different from Carvalho, who has been successful in drawing to his movement Catholic traditionalists marginalized by Pope Francis.
“Devil’s Bargain” said, “Expounding on this view at the 2014 conference at the Vatican, Bannon knit together Guénon, Evola.”
Not different from Carvalho, who has knit together ideas of Guénon and other traditionalist occultists among traditional Catholics.
“Devil’s Bargain” said, “In the summer of 2016, Bannon described Trump in this publication as a ‘blunt instrument for us.’”
Not different from Carvalho, who has used Bolsonaro and his sons as a blunt instrument for his own movement.
“Devil’s Bargain” said, “Trump also revealed his own nickname for Bannon’s nationalist (and hard-right) ideology: ‘alt-left,’ a riff on the term ‘alt-right.’”
If Trump compared Bannon’s ideology as left-wing, it is not different from Carvalho’s case. Janaína Paschoal, a prominent member of Bolsonaro’s party, voiced concern about extremists among Bolsonaro’s followers, saying, “You do not win an election with a one-sided mindset. And you do not govern a nation with a one-sided mindset.” She had already identified such extremists when she said, “Olavetes are as collective imbeciles as Workers’ Party adherents, Marxists… Wake up!” Olavete is an adherent of Olavo de Carvalho.
“Devil’s Bargain” said, “Bannon represents his own brand of conservative Catholicism.”
Not different from Carvalho, who also represents his own brand of conservative Catholicism.
“Devil’s Bargain” said, “Bannon’s response to the rise of modernity was to set populist, right-wing nationalism against it.”
Not different from Carvalho, who launched his own populist, right-wing nationalism.
Devil’s Bargain” said, “Bannon thrived on the chaos he created and did everything he could to make it spread.”
Not different from Carvalho, who has thrived on the chaos he creates and does everything he can to make it spread.
“Devil’s Bargain” said about Bannon’s fascination with Guénon: “Guénon developed a philosophy often referred to as ‘Traditionalism’ (capital ‘T’), a form of antimodernism with precise connotations. Guénon was a ‘primordial’ Traditionalist, a believer in the idea that certain ancient religions, including the Hindu Vedanta, Sufism, and medieval Catholicism, were repositories of common spiritual truths, revealed in the earliest age of the world, that were being wiped out by the rise of secular modernity in the West.”
Not different from Carvalho, who has similar fascination with Guénon and is an avid advocate of the medieval Catholicism. In fact, he is the most prominent Brazilian advocate of the revisionism of the Inquisition, a hallmark of medieval Catholicism. In this sense, how can Bolsonaro conciliate a pro-Israel administration, to please the mass of his evangelical voters, if the pro-Inquisition stance of his Rasputin is deeply disturbing, dishonest and malicious for Israelis?
While Carvalho obscenely defends the Inquisition by arguing that it “condemned individuals (less than ten a year in two dozen nations) died suffocated in a few minutes, before the flames could touch them,” the father of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu authored a massive book of 1,500 pages proving that innocent Jewish victims by thousands died an excruciating death in the same flames. Israel agrees with Netanyahu. How could Israel agree with a Brazilian lunatic?
“Devil’s Bargain” said about Bannon that he was “a voracious autodidact” and he “embarked upon what he described as ‘a systematic study of the world’s religions,’” adding, “Taking up the Roman Catholic history… he moved on to Christian mysticism and from there to Eastern metaphysics… Bannon’s reading eventually led him to the work of René Guénon, an early-twentieth-century early-twentieth-century French occultist and metaphysician who was raised a Roman Catholic, practiced Freemasonry, and later became a Sufi Muslim.”
Not different from Carvalho, who had the same experiences.
The blatant difference is that while Bannon spent a good part of his life making money in Wall Street and Hollywood, Carvalho spent a good part of his life making money with astrology classes. With large experience writing occult books and giving occult classes, he has spent his last years giving non-accredited “philosophy” classes — where his adherents have studied for 2, 3, 7, 10 and more years, always paying the monthly fee, but with no hope of a degree. They are kept mystified by an unending course, which is actually a worship service to the mind of its creator.
While Bannon was at the White House, a U.S. newspaper had this headline, “The Trump era is turning out to be a golden age for esoteric fascist intellectuals.” This prophecy was never fulfilled because Trump expelled Bannon from the White House.
Yet, some Brazilian newspapers could rightly have this headline, “The Bolsonaro era is turning out to be a golden age for esoteric fascist intellectuals.” Fascist, as far as Carvalho is concerned in his advices to Bolsonaro, is not an improper title. One of the main slogans of fascism was “Mussolini Is Right.” Interestingly, one of the main slogans of Carvalho, tediously repeated by his adherents, is “Olavo Tem Razão” (Olavo Is Right). Incidentally or not, one of the most prominent advisers of Mussolini was Julius Evola, an adherent of Guénon.
I have never seen Trump with a shirt saying: “Steve Bannon Is Right.” But sadly I have seen Bolsonaro with a shirt saying “Olavo Is Right.” An adherent of Guénon has had on Bolsonaro an influence that he has not on Trump.
In his article titled “Steve Bannon Was Never That Smart,” Bill Scher asked, “How could someone so politically reckless get a reputation as a political genius? Bannon had been able to craft that image thanks to this one simple trick: impressing reporters with the fact that he reads books.”
This is the same reality regarding Carvalho.
The Daily Beast said, “Bannon does not identify as libertarian; he self-IDs as a right-wing, anti-globalist ‘nationalist,’ and libertarians widely loathe Bannon. Bannon has, however, once called himself a ‘Leninist,’ in style if not substance or ideology.”
Not different from Carvalho, as far as Lenin is concerned, who said, “Lenin knew that, in politics, he who reviles the most always runs ahead.” Carvalho has used Lenin to justify that his daily dirty comments and foul mouth are just a Lenin’s “strategy.”
There are many apparent contradictions in Bannon: He says that he is a Catholic, but he has a deep fascination with mysticism and Eastern metaphysics. He says that he is against Islamic invasion, but he greatly admires René Guénon, an Islamic occultist. Although he once worked at Goldman Sachs — a powerful capitalist bank —, he also described himself as a “Leninist” who wanted to “destroy the state.” “On the one hand, he critiques capitalism with an almost Marxist fervor; on the other, he’s an advisor to a crony capitalist real estate mogul,” said Jake Romm, of Forward.
Not different from Carvalho, who has similar contradictions, but not in the high-class style of Bannon.
At the same time Bannon praises Guénon and other occultists, he says that he rejects some of their extreme ideas.
Not different from Carvalho, who at the same time he praises Guénon and other occultists, he says that he rejects some of their extreme ideas.
In his article in National Review titled “Who Was Steve Bannon?” author Kevin D. Williamson said that Trump has told “Steve Bannon’s contribution to his rise and his success has been grossly exaggerated. Bannon has posed as many things — media magnate, shrewd political operative, and cold-eyed Svengali to Trump’s undisciplined playboy — but what he actually is is a rich dilettante with a talent for convincing other rich dilettantes that he is a deep-thinking visionary. One of those rich dilettantes was Donald Trump.”
Carvalho has the same contradictions, even though Bannon had an actual academic background, while Carvalho is self-educated.
As far as occult traditionalist connections are involved, Bolsonaro is not far away from Bannon. He has been a propagandist of Carvalho, who has as his source of “traditionalism” and “conservatism” Guénon, who incidentally is also Bannon’s source. In spite of their Guenonian inspiration and involvement, both Bannon and Carvalho equally portray themselves as “traditionalist Catholic.” You could say that Carvalho is a sort of unsophisticated Third World Bannon.
Even though Catholic Bolsonaro has received massive support from evangelicals, who determined his election, he has been unable to disconnect himself from Carvalho’s Guenonian traditionalism, while Trump has fully disconnected himself from Bannon’s Guenonian traditionalism.
A comparison between Bannon and Carvalho is appropriate not only because they are spiritualistically similar, but because both have some connections to Bolsonaro. Carvalho has been extensively recommended by Bolsonaro. And Bannon has been in contact with Eduardo Bolsonaro, son of Jair Bolsonaro.
Even though Carvalho is not known among conservative Catholic and evangelical groups in the United States, he is known among U.S. groups that follow the Traditionalism of René Guénon. In fact, it is under production a documentary, by geocentrist Rick Delano, with traditionalists and Carvalho has already been interviewed for the movie. The other traditionalists interviewed are Wolfgang Smith (like Carvalho, a Catholic adherent of Guénon) and Seyyed Hossein Nasr (an Iranian Muslim adherent of Guénon).
The meeting between Bannon and Carvalho can catapult Carvalho to national fame, in the U.S., among traditionalist and other occultist groups, but not among conservative Christian groups.
Adherents of Guénon see “conservative American evangelicalism as an aberration from historical” Catholicism. Even though Bannon has never voiced openly such disdain for the conservative American evangelicalism, Carvalho has voiced a number of scornful comments against evangelicals, including his latest comment saying: “Evangelical churches have done more harm to Brazil than the entire left.”
Carvalho’s fear is justified: Where evangelicalism is strong, Guenonianism is weak. The strong evangelical influence on Trump was decisive to expel Guenonianism from the White House.
With Trump, a Guenonian almost achieved huge political power, but with Bolsonaro, a Guenonian is achieving it. The last time a traditionalist (another term for a Guenonian) got as close to political power, says author Mark Sedgwick, “it was Evola with Mussolini.”
The best treatment to Guenonians came exactly through Trump’s letter to Bannon. Let us review it.
Trump said, “Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind. Steve was a staffer who worked for me after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates…”
Guenonians just love to exalt themselves, but Trump put Bannon in his due place: He had been just a staffer. And to those, especially Carvalho’s adherents, who love to say that Trump’s victory was thanks to Bannon, Trump’s words are clear: “Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency.” And Trump noticed the obvious about Bannon: “he lost his mind.”
I have pity of any president, especially Bolsonaro, who behaves contrary to Trump by propagandizing Guenonians insinuating that they have everything with him and his presidency. Guenonians have lost minds.
Trump said about Bannon, “Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn’t as easy as I make it look. Steve had very little to do with our historic victory… Steve doesn’t represent my base—he’s only in it for himself.”
Trump is right. Now that Bannon is alone, he is achieving no political progress or victory for himself. Perhaps he hopes that by connecting himself to Carvalho he may do just as Carvalho did: To surf on Carvalho just as Carvalho has been surfing on the massive conservative evangelical wave in Brazil. Trump saw a Guenonian as an opportunist — a surfer who exploits the influence of others. Bolsonaro, as a syncretic Catholic, has had a hard time to discern his own Guenonian, seeming to love to let an opportunist surf on his fame.
Trump said, “Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well. Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books.”
Here very clearly Trump describes Guenonian Bannon as a man who pretends to be at war with the media — just as Carvalho does by attacking the liberal media, but all the time being interviewed and promoted by it. I could say that Carvalho follows Bannon’s approach, but this is not so. Both follow Guenon’s approach of chaos, contradictions and subversion.
Trump said that Bannon “spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well.” While Carvalho’s adherents portray Bannon as an important celebrity in the right-wing movement, Trump portrayed Bannon as a producer of fake news to exalt himself. Guenonians do anything to make themselves seem far more important than they are.
Trump said that Bannon “only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue.” He just perfectly described Guenonians.
So while Carvalho’s adherents in Brazil are praising him as if his meeting with Bannon were a big conservative event because they were misled to believe that Trump became president thanks to Bannon, Trump showed exactly who Bannon is.
Trump has had many kind words to evangelicals, recognized by him as representing his real base that gave him the victory. And Trump made it very clear: “Steve doesn’t represent my base.”
What do I see? Bannon, in his Guenonian ideas and character, is very similar to Carvalho.
About the pictures where Carvalho poses haughtily with Bannon, only a treacherous opportunist could have an arrogant pleasure to be with another treacherous opportunist, especially because Bannon was not only fired from the White House, but he was described, by the U.S. president himself, as a treacherous opportunist. I would have a huge pleasure to pose in a picture with Trump, but no with Bannon.
I would like Bolsonaro to be similar to Trump — without the neocon pressures on him — to identify and expel Guenonians.
Yet, Bolsonaro of Brazil is very different from Trump because while Bolsonaro is mesmerized by a Guenonian, Trump is not. Perhaps Trump could invite Bolsonaro and give him some advice on how to identify an opportunist Guenonian — um redundancy, of course, but not unnecessary, considering how Guenonians are able to fool so many Catholics in Brazil, including Bolsonaro and his sons.
Portuguese version of this article: Steve Bannon e Olavo de Carvalho juntos: dois ocultistas promovendo um “conservadorismo” ocultista
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Barb Wire.