Guenon, Evola, Nietzsche, and Jünger

[Anonymous No.15217441]

Guenon, Evola, Nietzsche, and Jünger

Prove me wrong.

[Anonymous No.15217447]

I can see the relation between Guenon and Evola, but Nietzsche and Jünger seem out of place.

[Anonymous No.15217468]

Lamar, McMurray, McCarthy

[Anonymous No.15217474]

>>15217447
Evola expresses his admiration for Nietzsche in Pagan Imperialism. He sees him as the precursor for his revival of Nordic-Aryans. Jünger is a sort of traditional-anarchist in a way. Fully understanding the necessity for castes just having enough of despots.

[Anonymous No.15217475]

Foucault, Raspail, Camus, Camus
the list goes on and on

[Anonymous No.15217518]

Is Blavatsky worth reading?

[Anonymous No.15217521]

Jung, Tolkien, Heraclitus

[Anonymous No.15217529]

>>15217518
Worth skimming. Secret doctrine is pretty autistic, dry, long once you get into it. Can't deny it's influence though.

[Anonymous No.15217546]

playboy, hustler, my diary

[Anonymous No.15217554]

>>15217518
Guenon pretty much ripped from her.

[Anonymous No.15217564]

>>15217554
Harry Potter circa 1880

[Anonymous No.15217569]

>>15217441
>I'm a neonazi reactionary edgelord and I will call you a "cuck", a "basedboy" or a "good goy" if you call me out on my bullshit
>Prove me wrong

[Anonymous No.15217578]

>>15217569
I respect your opinion, but you are arguing strawman

[Anonymous No.15217579]

>>15217569
Kek what a cuck

[Anonymous No.15217589]

>>15217441
>Revolt against the modern world
Outdated and irrelevant. This is post-modernity and every revolution against it is itself postmodern.

[Anonymous No.15217610]

>>15217569
basedboy
sóyboy

[Anonymous No.15217657]

>>15217518
no. Guenon wrote "Theosophy : History of a Pseudo Religion" which retrofuted her.

[Anonymous No.15217691]

>>15217657
Guenon is just Blavatsky 2.0

[Anonymous No.15217713]

>>15217578
Yes, but only in advance. What I'd expect, if I'm wrong, is an explanation of why my strawman has no base in reality.

[Anonymous No.15217720]

>>15217610
lol thanks, didn't know there was a filter for this.

[Anonymous No.15217744]

>>15217554
>>15217691
No, they used the same sources. The difference is Guenon actually understood them.

[Anonymous No.15217773]

>>15217744
>H. P. Blavatsky, René Guénon and Julius Evola all shared the belief in the Hyperborean, polar origins of Mankind and a subsequent solidification and devolution.[43]

[Anonymous No.15217785]

>>15217773
And?

[Anonymous No.15217795]

>>15217441
frege, mach, russell and carnap
nice try though

[Anonymous No.15217804]

>>15217785
>The underlying theme among these diverse topics [in Isis Unveiled] is the existence of an ancient wisdom-religion, an ageless occult guide to the cosmos, nature and human life. The many faiths of man are said to derive from a universal religion known to both Plato and the ancient Hindu sages. The wisdom-religion is also identified with Hermetic philosophy as "the only possible key to the Absolute in science and theology" (I, vii). Every religion is based on the same truth or "secret doctrine", which contains "the alpha and omega of universal science" (I, 511). This ancient wisdom-religion will become the religion of the future (I, 613).
aka Proto-Guenon

[Anonymous No.15217829]

>>15217795
>russell
His analysis on definite descriptions is his only decent contribution.

[Anonymous No.15217867]

>>15217773
>>15217829
Blavatsky didn't invent Hyperborea or polar origins you retard. Like I said, they used the same sources.

[Anonymous No.15217922]

>>15217867
why are you upset about the fact that Guenon is a copy-cat? Blavatsky was doing whatever he did decades prior.

>Blavatsky's writings garnered the materials of Neoplatonism, Renaissance magic, Kabbalah, and Freemasonry, together with ancient Egyptian and Greco-Roman mythology and religion, joined by Eastern doctrines taken from Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta to present the idea of an ancient wisdom handed down from prehistoric times.

[Anonymous No.15217944]

Nietzsche, Bataille, Girard, Baudrillard

[Anonymous No.15217955]

>>15217829
cope more christcuck

[Anonymous No.15217979]

>>15217955
lmao what a faggot you are

[Anonymous No.15218041]

Nietzsche, Jung, McKenna, Kaczynski

[Anonymous No.15218469]

>>15217922
You're retarded and missing the point completely, but please keep showing how dense you are by reinforcing your non-existent point and pasting from wikipedia.

[Anonymous No.15218479]

>>15217441
reactionary incel starter pack

[Anonymous No.15218488]

>>15218469
Guenon's a plagiarist, get over it.

[Anonymous No.15218528]

>>15218479
Saying that about Jünger and Nietzsche is unfair desu.

[Anonymous No.15218536]

>>15218488
He admits that none of his ideas are his own, so once more you're showing you're an obtuse retard who hasn't read either but just read wikipedia.

[Anonymous No.15218548]

>>15218536
>He admits that none of his ideas are his own
of course that crypto-theosophist would use this excuse, nothing but pure cope

[Anonymous No.15218568]

>>15217589
Semantic argument. Modernity as Evola defines it has nothing to do with time in a linear timeline sense and it is only through a process of degeneration of the Traditional that we are under the illusion that modernity comes after, he argues they are states that exist a priori. And the traditional does not mean a reverting to the past. The Iron Age was a point of degeneration, according to most ancient cultures and the principles of tradition, he’s not talking about technology, urbanisation and postmodernism. Though they are product of his specified modernity.
>>15217569
>>15218479
Nothing to do with Evola. You’d probably actually enjoy him, it’s a shame he was around in the era he was, he gets stuck with a bad rep and lazy lefties are the exact people who could learn a thing or two from him.

[Anonymous No.15218572]

>>15218548
It's the entire premise of his work retard, please get a life instead of posting this weak bait.

[Anonymous No.15218584]

>>15217518
Theosophists are egalitarian useful idiots.

[Anonymous No.15218614]

[Anonymous No.15218624]

>>15218614
advertising is against the rules, my friend :^)

[Anonymous No.15218631]

>>15218572
still a crypto-theosophist

[Anonymous No.15218648]

>>15218631
>still a crypto-theosophist

[Anonymous No.15218657]

>>15217554
>>15217691
These

I've read Guenon and he's a total fraud, took his whole shtick from Blavatsky et al.

>>15218648
cringe...

[Anonymous No.15218721]

>>15218657
lmao pretending to be someone else to reinforce your non-point isn't going to make it any better, anyone who has read both knows how moronic you sound

[Anonymous No.15218780]

>>15218721
seething guenonian unable to accept the simple fact that Guenon modeled himself after Theosophy

[Anonymous No.15218786]

>>15218780
Based

[Anonymous No.15218851]

>>15217518
If you want to get a sense of traditionalists and where they got their ideas from the yes she is an important writer for that genre

[Anonymous No.15220375]

>>15217441
Grow up

[Anonymous No.15220416]

>>15217441
let me guess. something something slave morality, something something big nose tribe, something something white people smarter, something something white people better, something something white children.
and people think having sex and having children (something that has literally been done forever even by the lowest fucking animal) will mean they have a 'higher spirit' and a greater character.

[Anonymous No.15221035]

>>15217804
>This ancient wisdom-religion will become the religion of the future
This is diametrically opposed to Guénon's views, as is Theosophy's syncretism in general.

[Anonymous No.15221149]

>>15217773
Your own source continues:
>The Frenchmen of the Enlightenment were in no doubt that “Eden” was situated on higher ground. The Germans similarly, who were looking for their Aufklarung, also sought to be free of a history tied to the Mediterranean and Middle East regions. British and German scholars studied ancient Indian (Vedic) civilisation and leant the Sanskrit language. Many believed Sanskrit the original language of the ‘Aryans’.
>Writers such as Jean-Sylvain Bailly (1736-1793), the Rev. Dr. William Warren (1800s), Bal Gangadhar Tilak (1856-1929) and H.S. Spencer (1900s), developed out theories, often borrowing from earlier sources, attempting to prove man’s origins in the Polar region.

[Anonymous No.15221160]

>>15217441
Not a big fan of guenon, Evola is okay junger is a fucking CHAD

[Anonymous No.15221164]

>>15217441
Is Evola a meme or actually good?

[Anonymous No.15221190]

>>15220416
Well you at least proved to everyone you're a fucking retard

[Anonymous No.15222137]

>>15220416

[Anonymous No.15222145]

Evola, Kaczynski, Spengler, Jünger

[Anonymous No.15222189]

>>15217441
Why do you choose thous authors OP? Are Jünger and Evola really that related?

[Anonymous No.15222384]

>>15221164
He’s not a meme but not everyone will get something out of him as an author.

>>15222189
Early Jünger and Evola overlap a bit politically, but late Jünger and Evola don’t really and I don’t see where they overlap otherwise.

[Anonymous No.15222389]

>>15221164
Actually good. Give it a try.

[Anonymous No.15222429]

>>15217441
I assume Nietzsche would have found Guenon too Apollo, Junger too Dionysus, and Evola too neither

[Anonymous No.15222434]

>>15221164
Do you like Mysticism and esoteric stuff, especially hinduism?
Do you think Demacracy is a false idol?
Then you will enjoy the read.
I would start with "Tradition & Reign", its a collection of various texts on a broad spectrum of topics. I like it.

[Anonymous No.15222464]

You are wrong/refuted (retroactively and otherwise).
The end
/thread
;)

[Anonymous No.15222732]

>>15221164
He's genuinely very interesting in my opinion. There's a few spergs on here that'll yell buzzwords incessantly, like "muh /pol/" and "muh edgy incel fascism"-type stuff, but they're mentally deficient so pay them no heed. Form your own opinion.

[Anonymous No.15223184]

>>15222732
Also, I’m highly suspicious if /pol/ types actually read him because if they did they might not find that that they even agree with his politics so much. He’s a very misunderstood and misinterpreted author who goes much deeper than most people are willing to engage with in my opinion.

[Anonymous No.15224218]

>>15223184
>if /pol/ types actually read

[Anonymous No.15224582]

>>15217441
Please don’t treat Nietzsche and Junger like that, they don’t deserve it.

[Anonymous No.15225078]

>>15217441
Yeah

[Anonymous No.15225103]

>>15221164
Actually good but you have to be a bit partial to esoteric stuff. I'd recommend reading enough if him until you can tackle one his big three books(Tiger, Revolt, Ruins) and then see if you want to continue.

[Anonymous No.15225837]

>>15217441
Goethe, Schelling, Fichte, Nietzsche, Klages, Heidegger, Sloterdijk, Me,

Prove me wrong.

[Anonymous No.15225875]

>>15217441
Guenon, Hedegger, Dugin, Deleuze, Land, q/acc.
Prove me wrong

[Anonymous No.15225881]

>>15223184
Im highly suspicious if any lefty types have actually read him either, since most criticisms of Evola ive seen look like this post >>15220416

[Anonymous No.15226317]

>>15217521
got a reading chart for jung

[Anonymous No.15226351]

>>15225837
can't tell if meme or real

[Anonymous No.15226387]

>>15217447
Evola was an outright successor to Guenon, so I'm glad you see the relation between them. Evola was also heavily influenced by Nietzsche and Junger. It should be easy to understand why Junger is appealing to Fascists, but Nietzsche's individualism also has an influence. In an interview, Evola even mentions that Stirner's individualism influenced him.

[Anonymous No.15226417]

>>15226387
I thought Fascist cucks believe that liberal individualism is morally corrupt, are you guys unable to form coherent thoughts or what

[Anonymous No.15226425]

>>15226417
Not all individualism is liberal individualism.

[Anonymous No.15226433]

>>15226417
Evola's thoughts revolved heavily around the individual. It's obvious you haven't read him and have just constructed a strawman of 'Evolian thought'.

[Anonymous No.15226454]

>>15217441
based
I prefer Jung to Junger tho

[Anonymous No.15226457]

>>15217441
Miguel Serrano
Miguel Serrano
Miguel Serrano
Miguel Serrano

[Anonymous No.15226496]

>>15223184
Some of the English translations haven't helped much in that regard, as they tend to come across much drier than the Italian. In the video footage he seems to be a very enthusiastic, animated guy who gets reduced to this humorless rigid stereotype of a Hollywood movie fascist by both supporters and detractors.
>It is not possible to have an icy and purely cerebral awakening. All the rules and possibilities of an initiatic education will not yield fruits without this sense of fire, reawakened in the heart.

>>15226417
The project of the indivual always takes place within a wider framework. The issue is what that framework is, or should be: liberal-economic, fascist-national or traditionalist-metaphysical.

[Anonymous No.15226650]

>>15226425
What is this shitty cope out response

[Anonymous No.15226669]

>>15226433
I don't give a fuck about Evola, but if he is an individualist he must did a really shitty job presenting his ideas given how most of the people liking him tend to be neonazis

[Anonymous No.15226684]

>>15226496
That has nothing to do with individualism, you are changing the topic.

[Anonymous No.15226690]

>>15226669
Yeah, people presenting complex and confusing ideas have never been misrepresented by people with subverting ideologies.

[Anonymous No.15226710]

>>15226684
Because the topic in this instance is a false equivalence you've drawn based on your unfamiliarity with source material you refuse to engage with in good faith.

[Anonymous No.15226728]

>>15226690
Evolas' fans are like 90% neonazis, literally no one else finds him interesting, this is more than just a few people. And isn't he a supporter of enforcing a traditional moral order crushing all individualist aberrations from it? Something tells me Evola wasn't a huge fan of feminism now was he

[Anonymous No.15226746]

>>15226728
NRx are not neonazis

[Anonymous No.15226757]

>>15226728
>feminism is individualist

[Anonymous No.15226766]

>>15226710
You dont understand basic definitions in moral/political philosophy. The fact that individuals always operate within larger frameworks has nothing to do with individualism. Fascism isn't an individualist framework just because it has individuals in it, unlike liberalism. Your point is completely retarded.

[Anonymous No.15226771]

>>15226746
Who the fuck mentioned NRx

[Anonymous No.15226785]

>>15226728
>no one else finds him interesting
Jung and Eliade did, but what do they know?

>>15226766
>Fascism isn't an individualist framework just because it has individuals in it
This. Is. The. Point.

[Anonymous No.15226789]

>>15226757
Feminism is an individualist moral and political philosophy that orients itself against traditional gender norms, that is correct.

[Anonymous No.15226790]

>>15226789
This is what Postmodernists actually believe

[Anonymous No.15226797]

>>15226789
Feminism is literally just Christianity for women. Read Nietzsche dumbass. Postmoderncucks all love Nietzsche until he starts talking about Feminsim

[Anonymous No.15226802]

>>15226790
Make a point already or shut the fuck up, you wouldn't know what postmodernism is if it fucked you in the ass

[Anonymous No.15226813]

>>15226797
Make a point shithead, I don't give a fuck about your shit continental charlatans. I only care about the arguments.

[Anonymous No.15226817]

>>15226802
Nietzsche already did. Literal Slave morality for women. Feminism makes women resent being women.

The only way for women to gain power in society is to use slave morality to guilt trip men into thinking they are doing something "immoral" by subjugating them to patriarchy.

[Anonymous No.15226833]

>>15226817
Do you have a point besides throwing buzzwords around? Slave morality would be for a woman to limit herself to a baby machine because that's what men want out of her.

[Anonymous No.15226834]

>>15226817
is the acceptance of patriarchy not also slave morality?

[Anonymous No.15226895]

>>15226833
>>15226834
Yes and no. If a woman really wanted to be individualistic she would make a conscious decision to not get married and have children, and live her life contemplating Aesthetics and Beauty like Neech thought was a good idea, without regard for what other women choose to do with their lives.

But if your goal is to use slave moralistic morals to change society and make everyone think the same way you do (that patriarchy is inherently immoral, even though it is in accordance with social darwinism) then that is just the same as Christian group think.

Christians did the same thing, their slave morality revolved around convincing people that coveting money, worldly possessions and sex was inherently immoral, even though thats what the most powerful people in society (the noble) thought was good

[Anonymous No.15226945]

>>15226895
That's what feminism is about, letting women doing what they want regardless of societal expectations. And they justifiably view.patriarchy as evil because it is at odds with their liberal moral framework and demands the subjugation of women to the desires of men. Social Darwinism is irrelevant, since feminists don't employ it as their moral framework.

[Anonymous No.15226988]

>>15226945
The problem is that you still view the Patriarchy as inherently immoral, which you cant prove because morality is a spook imposed on you by religion.
And, on a societal level, you cant get out of the patriarchy without appealing to slave moral values, in the same way the Christians did.

Theres nothing stopping you as an individual from making a conscious choice to not be a child bearer, but Feminism is a collective ideology, like Christianity, that wants ALL people, on a societal level, to view the Patriarchy as inherently immoral. Because thats the only possible way for the "weaker" party to gain power over the "stronger" party

[Anonymous No.15227291]

>>15220416
where is the lie?

[Anonymous No.15227479]

Don't forget Weininger

[Anonymous No.15227559]

>>15218780
I’m pretty sure he specifically renounced Theosophy. There’s overlap but it’s definitely not the same and he didn’t just copy Blavatsky.

[Anonymous No.15227626]

>>15227559
why even take the bait? calling Guenon a theosophist is an old meme on this board. Guenon still agreed with a lot of what Blavatsky said, he just didnt like how theosophists tried to change and syncretize other eastern traditions, Guenon wanted people to pick a tradition that already existed, and follow it.
Find one that suits you as a person, he didnt believe that it was practical (or necessary) to synthesise all traditions, on the exoteric level

[Anonymous No.15227660]

>>15227626
>Guenon wanted people to pick a tradition that already existed, and follow it.

But he did this once he moved to Cairo. It was only then did he see the merits of following a tradition. Until then he had been basically a theosophist who is "initiated" into multiple traditions but just lives as a regular secular normie who does opium at night with his mason friends.

Guenon's biggest disciple, Schuon, became a syncretist child molesting hack.

So I don't think it's fair to say Guenon evades the charge of theosophic syncretism when he was "initiated" into Sufism like 30 years before he actually started LARPing as a Muslim.

[Anonymous No.15227798]

>>15222434
Tradition und Herrschaft is a name only given to a collection of evola essays, it doesnt exist in english as such.
>>15217441
Jünger and Evola hardly go together apart from elitism and exhileration of the fight (and even that changes with jüngers diaries of the late second war), they exchanged some letters but nothing more. Jünger doesn't have any connection to the integral tradition.
Nietzsche and Evola is also doubtful, since evola wrote an essay called overcoming the overman. he pondered on nietzsche, but not more than any other thinker of the time, left or right.

[Anonymous No.15227814]

How do I get started on evola

[Anonymous No.15227825]

>>15226833
You dont know what slave morality is

[Anonymous No.15227833]

stop mentioning jünger and nietzsche with those proto-new-age retards

[Anonymous No.15227834]

>>15227814
Read Guenon, then Evola.

[Anonymous No.15228239]

>>15227798
Jünger does prescribe to the traditional philosophy by being an archetypal example of who Evola speaks about. Evola considered Nietzsche as a precursor to the traditional thought.

[Anonymous No.15228302]

>>15227834
Fucking trash website deleted my post before I submitted it

"guénon is right wing".....the state of the decaying world .....As if Evola was a traditionalist..... Read autorité spirituelle et pouvoir temporelle then come back

this thread is pathetic, being politicized is pathetic. all these sentimentalists larping as intellectuals is a joke. we're nearing total dissolution.

[Anonymous No.15228638]

>>15217441
>Nietzsche
gay as fuck bro

[Anonymous No.15228830]

>>15227798
>>15228239
Evola actually wrote an entire book on Jünger (L'Operaio nel pensiero di Ernst Jünger) in 1960, with enough ancillary material to form another essay essay collection a few years ago (Ernst Jünger: Il combattente, l'operaio, l'anarca). It's important here to distinguish, as Evola did, between Jünger's ideas before and after WW2 - the former, especially The Worker, being an influence on Ride the Tiger, the latter being rejected as 'liberal' and 'humanistic' (qv Path of Cinnabar).

[Anonymous No.15228871]

>>15228239
Evola deviated from Guenon and the entirety of his school in this regard and wrote several essays which didn’t speak very highly of Jünger after the war and he wasn’t in agreement with Nietzsche nearly as much as people seem to think. People need to read much more of these authors before they say things.

“Jünger, therefore, should be numbered among those individuals who first subscribed to 'Conservative Revolutionary' ideas but were later, in a way, traumatized by the National Socialist experience, to the point of being led to embrace the kind of sluggishly liberal and humanistic ideas which conformed to the dominant attempt 'to democratically reform' their country; individuals who have proven incapable of distinguishing the positive side of past ideas from the negative, and of remaining true to the former.”

That’s a direct quote.

[Anonymous No.15230039]

>>15220416
>>15227291
>>15226817
Fucking lol. Read a book.

[Anonymous No.15230069]

>>15217441
Is racism cool now?

[Anonymous No.15230076]

>>15227825
>You dont know what slave morality is

[Anonymous No.15230714]

>>15226988
>The problem is that you still view the Patriarchy as inherently immoral, which you cant prove because morality is a spook imposed on you by religion
No. Ethical systems are tools that are.useful which make living with other people actually possible and not a fucking nightmare. Without a shared morality enforced by some centraul authority, we would live in complete anarchy, with mafia mobs calling the shots, which is an undesirable state of affairs. If the argument is that we should drop all morals and have the local asshole push us around because muh slave morality I reject the suggestion as idiotic.
>Theres nothing stopping you as an individual from making a conscious choice to not be a child bearer
There used to be legal barriers and they would still be there if not for the feminist movement. That would certainly be the case when Nietzsche wrote.
>but Feminism is a collective ideology, like Christianity, that wants ALL people, on a societal level, to view the Patriarchy as inherently immoral. Because thats the only possible way for the "weaker" party to gain power over the "stronger" party
All "parties" require a collective adoption of a set a shared values, the patriarchy no less than feminism. An individual has no power with himself, you need to organize with others to get anything actually done.