Ok

En poursuivant votre navigation sur ce site, vous acceptez l'utilisation de cookies. Ces derniers assurent le bon fonctionnement de nos services. En savoir plus.

mardi, 26 avril 2016

When Men and Mountains Meet: Spiritual Ascent in the Age of Commodification

When Men and Mountains Meet: Spiritual Ascent in the Age of Commodification

“Great things are done when Men & Mountains meet / This is not Done by Jostling in the Street,” wrote William Blake.

The modern world suffocates the soul of humankind. Matter longs for the embrace of soul, just as the unborn is ensheathed in the mother’s womb; and the soul desires the caress of matter, just as a newborn is cradled in the mother’s arms. Every moment is the nondual experience of gestation and birth of soul into matter, matter into soul. Modern life severs this connection as carelessly as the assembly line obstetrician prematurely severs the umbilical cord that still carries vital nutrients from mother to child. We are weighed upon scales imbalanced by ceaseless activity and insidious apathy, our hearts faint with anxiety and our bodies dead with the weight of indifference.

How do we reconnect with the primordial source in a decentered and displaced world?

The spiritual quest of the higher person is the path that leads one on a journey to reunite with divine nature, and there are few greater paths to accelerate this reunification than the experience of the mountains. Amongst the peaks one transforms from a rank-and-file soldier of modernity into a Grail Knight—a golden embryo shining in the dark cosmic womb of creation.

In Meditations on the Peaks, Julius Evola wrote:

In the struggle against mountain heights, action is finally free from all machines, and from everything that detracts from man’s direct and absolute relationship with things. Up close to the sky and to crevasses—among the still and silent greatness of the peaks; in the impetuous raging winds and snowstorms; among the dazzling brightness of glaciers; or among the fierce, hopeless verticality of rock faces—it is possible to reawaken (through what may at first appear to be the mere employment of the body) the symbol of overcoming, a truly spiritual and virile light, and make contact with primordial forces locked within the body’s limbs. In this way the climber’s struggle will be more than physical and the successful climb may come to represent the achievement of something that is no longer merely human. In ancient mythologies the mountain mountain peaks were regarded as the seats of the gods; this is myth, but it is also the allegorical expression of a real belief that may always come alive again sub specie interioritatis.

3065ca04cea59d21ba7608eba43a46a3.jpg

Meditations on the Peaks (English translation available from Inner Traditions) is a collection of Evola’s writings on the spiritual quest of mountain climbing. While not free of the commodification of the modern sporting life (one only need to look at the resort towns inviting crass hordes of weekend warriors that contaminate the regions for a reminder), the mountains offer potential for the spiritual conquest of self-overcoming. By training the body, purifying the soul and cultivating a reverence for mortality, one may, with iron will and monumental discipline, ascend the peaks in contemplation of their silent, still and divine majesty.

Evola presents mountain climbing as a Yoga of the scholar and the athlete. The modern world has divided the intellectual and athletic pursuits, creating a false dichotomy of “nerds” and “jocks” that predominates the industrialized West. Either the body atrophies for feint intellectual praise and bourgeois academic prestige, or the mind suffers for the pursuit of empty competition and physical achievement. In this dichotomous framing of brains against brawn, both scholar and athlete lose touch with the metaphysical reality that study and training develops. It is among the peaks where this division is erased. Evola wrote:

[A]mong sports, mountain climbing is certainly the one that offers the most accessible opportunity for achieving this union of body and spirit. Truly, the enormity, the silence, and the majesty of the great mountains naturally incline the soul toward that which is greater than human, and thus attract the better people to the point at which the physical aspect of climbing (with all the courage, the self-mastery and the mental lucidity that it requires) and an inner spiritual realization, become the inseparable and complementary parts of one and the same thing.

At the heart of Evola’s study of the peaks is the eleventh century Tibetan Buddhist sage Milarepa. Credited with the revival of metaphysical doctrine within the Mahayana school of Buddhism, Milarepa’s teachings were known in the form of songs describing episodes of his life that remained within the current of oral tradition until modern times.

One day, Milarepa journeyed into the mountains for ascetic retreat. When six months had passed without seeing their teacher, Milarepa’s disciples had assumed that he had fallen victim to a brutal snowstorm, caught without food against the unforgiving elements. In their mourning, his disciples made sacrificial offerings prescribed for the dead. When spring arrived, they went to search for him. During their journey, they were astonished when they saw a snow leopard that transformed into a tiger. As they entered the Cave of the Demons, they heard a singing voice that they immediately recognized as their teacher’s. It was Milarepa who had projected the images of the leopard and the tiger, having sensed his disciples approaching. He told his disciples that although he went a long time without food he did not hunger, for he gained sustenance from the offerings they made for him.

xJCmoLeSyk_5CrMv0p_uSKNjQrk.jpg

Upon returning home, Milarepa explained how he was able to “endure the elements, the icy temperatures, and raging wind, thus overcoming the invisible forces (the ‘demons’) disguised as snow,” thusly singing:

The snowfall was beyond all measure. Snow covered the Whole mountain and even touched the sky, falling through the bushes and weighing down the trees.

In this great disaster I remained in utter solitude. The snow, the wintry blast, and my thin cotton garment fought against each other on the white mountain. The snow, as it fell on me, turned into drizzle. I conquered the raging winds, subduing them to silent rest.

The cotton cloth I wore was like a burning brand. The struggle was of life and death, as when giants wrestle and sabers clash.

I, the competent yogi, was victorious; my power over the vital heat (tumo) and the two channels was thus shown. By observing the Four Ills caused by meditation and keeping to the inner practice, the cold and warm pranas became the essence. This was why the raging wind grew tame and the storm, subdued, lost its power.

Not even the devas’ army could compete with me. This battle, I, the yogi, won.

These are the harsh conditions one must endure on the merciless path of higher spirituality. Abandoning the world in cosmic isolation, the seeker must withstand the chaotic conditions of an unrestrained cosmos through the power of their own inner flame. It is during times of great peril, whether alone atop a physical mountain or abandoned to the darkest predilections of life, when we must light the fire of our crucible and burn away within. One might be left for dead, but will gain sustenance from the offerings of mourners as the unborn child receives nutrients from the mother. For it is in these most rugged and unforgiving of conditions that we return to the cosmic womb of creation, where all dross and detritus burns away and we emerge purified and renewed.

To this day, Evola remains a controversial figure in metaphysical circles. Mention of his name is enough to incite neo-McCarthyist accusations of fascist tendencies or a mistaken sympathy amongst white national racialists. Owing perhaps to the ever widening gulf between spirit and body, it is near impossible nowadays to balance an admiration for a great scholar’s superlative body of work with a reservation of their difficult political views without finding oneself in the snake pit of guilt by association. As the body is further estranged from the spirit, both will descend into a pit of decadent self-pleasure, and find anathema anything which challenges one to greater heights. Evola’s ideas are dangerous. But, like the mountains, so too is the spiritual quest. As the great mountaineer Reinhold Messner said, “The mountains are not fair or unfair, they are just dangerous.”

SongofShambhala.jpg

Messner is one of the best exemplars of the discipline cultivated on the path of higher spirituality. He is the first individual on record, along with Peter Habeler, to ascend Mount Everest without supplemental oxygen. Messner is also the first climber to ascend all fourteen of the eight-thousanders, mountains located in the Himalayan and Karakoram ranges with peaks exceeding 8,000 meters (26,247 ft) above sea level. These are peaks that are well above the “death zone,” altitudes where the amount of oxygen is insufficient to sustain human life. Messner’s records are not the same as the medals won by competing athletes; they are physically intangible totems, cairns left on the path toward mastery. Eschewing the commodification of the modern world, Messner is the paragon of peak physical, mental and spiritual development.

The mountains remain a testament of spiritual initiation in the modern era. Populations will grow and disappear, cultures will spread and vanish, and civilizations will rise and fall, but the mountains will keep still for centuries. The timeless stability of the mountains is what has attracted spiritual seekers to them since the dawn of human culture. In this still and silent wilderness, where the body of man is at the mercy of both nature and the gods, we find the foundation to build the inner sanctum. When in the mountains, an ascetic like Julius Evola or a libertine like Aleister Crowley both find the sanctuary they seek. At these altitudes, it matters not what your opinions are or who they offend, but how well you have conditioned the body and trained the mind.

“The mountain requires purity and simplicity,” Evola wrote, “It requires asceticism… In this context, the mountainous peaks and the spiritual peaks converge in one simple yet powerful reality.

Meditations on the Peaks is published by Inner Traditions and available from their website or from Amazon.com and other booksellers.

Andrei Burke is a poet and critic who currently resides in the Los Angeles area. He holds a B.A. in Film and and M.A. in the Humanities. His work has appeared on Ultraculture and WITCH.
Andrei Burke is a poet and critic who currently resides in the Los Angeles area. He holds a B.A. in Film and and M.A. in the Humanities. His work has appeared on Ultraculture and WITCH.

lundi, 25 avril 2016

Intervento M. Rossi "Julius Evola e il terzo Reich"

Intervento M. Rossi "Julius Evola e il terzo Reich" - RigenerAzionEvola.it

Intervento di M. Rossi "Julius Evola e il terzo Reich: la lotta per la visione del mondo"
al convegno "Ripartire da Evola" organizzato da RigenerAzione Evola (www.rigenerazionevola.it).

Maurizio Rossi, analizza i rapporti tra Evola e il Regime nazionalsocialista. Con il suo intervento ne ha messo in luce le sua trasversalità e capacità di visione d’insieme, nonché il suo lavoro su di un piano più metapolitico. Sono note, infatti, le collaborazioni di Evola con il mondo tedesco dell’epoca, tese a propiziare quell’incontro tra le due aquile, ario-romana l’una, nordico-germanica l’altra, che già nel Medioevo ghibellino forgiarono lo spirito della migliore Europa. Anche queste intese mantenevano un respiro più alto, imperiale, e si concretizzarono con la sua collaborazione con numerose pubblicazioni ed interventi negli ambienti culturali del III Reich per cercare di imporre a concetti come “sangue”, “razza”, “suolo”, “comunità” una direzione ed un carattere spirituali, emancipandoli dal grezzo biologismo, strappandoli alla materialità. Altrettanto note sono le diffidenze con cui alcuni ambienti del Regime hitleriano guardarono al Barone, anche a causa della sua capacità di andare oltre gli steccati nazionalisti di un grezzo pangermanismo. C’è comunque da tenere a mente che nel 1943 c’era anche Evola, e pochi altri fidati, nel Quartier Generale di Hitler, ad attendere Mussolini all’indomani della sua liberazione dalla prigionia sul Gran Sasso. Un Evola, quello svelato da Maurizio Rossi, che fu un vero“homo faber”, non solo del suo destino, ma anche di quello dell’Europa dell’epoca.

Leggi di più per approfondire:
http://www.rigenerazionevola.it/e-ora...

samedi, 30 janvier 2016

Evola. Philosophie et action directe

tumblr_o1b8pzcfPy1rnng97o1_500.jpg

Evola. Philosophie et action directe

par Dominique Venner

Ex: http://zentropa.info

Considéré par certains comme « le plus grand penseur traditionaliste d'Occident », Julius Evola (1898-1974) eut toujours des rapports difficiles avec le MSI tout en exerçant une influence certaine sur les cercles plus radicaux, les FAR en leur temps puis Ordine Nuovo ou Avanguardia Nazionale. Evola s'était tenu en marge du fascisme durant le Ventennio (1922-1943). Malgré ses critiques, il se voulut cependant solidaire de la RSI après 1943. Tenant à la fois de Nietzsche et de Guénon, il cultivait à la façon du premier le mépris de la plèbe et l'éloge du surhomme autoconstruit. Mais il rejoignait René Guénon dans son interprétation de l'histoire comme un processus de décadence et d'involution conduisant, selon la tradition hindoue, au Kali-Yuga, l'âge démoniaque précédant le retour au chaos originel (1). Il était prêt cependant à reconnaître que certaines formes politiques, plus ou moins en accord avec son idée hiératique de la Tradition, pouvaient ralentir le déclin. Telle était son interprétation du fascisme, dans la mesure où celui-ci, par sa tentative de réhabilitation des valeurs héroïques, constituait un défi aux sociétés modernes et à l'homme-masse sans visage.

Aux yeux des militants ou des intellectuels de la jeune génération post-fasciste, Evola présentait l'avantage de procéder à une critique interne vigoureuse du fascisme sans céder à l'antifascisme. Il offrait une « vision du monde » cohérente et sophistiquée, impitoyable pour la modernité, à laquelle il opposait une construction beaucoup plus radicale et absolue que celle du fascisme (2). Condamnait par exemple le nationalisme pour son inspiration « naturaliste », Evola lui opposait « la race de l'esprit » et « l'idée, notre vraie patrie ». Ce qui compte, disait-il, « ce n'est pas d'appartenir à une même terre ou de parler une même langue, c'est de partager la même idée (3) ». Quelle idée ? Celle d'un ordre supérieur, dont la Rome antique, une chevalerie médiévale ou la Prusse avaient été l'expression. Il proposait un style de vie fait de sévérité, de discipline, de dureté, de sacrifice, pratiqué comme une ascèse. Evola n'était pas un pur esprit. Il avait servi dans l'artillerie au cours de la Première Guerre mondiale, et avait été, dans sa jeunesse, un alpiniste émérite, auteur d'admirables Méditations du haut des Cimes. À sa mort, ses cendres furent déposées au sommet du Monte Rosa.

Vers 1950, croyant alors aux chances du MSI, Evola voulut donner une « bible » guerrière aux jeunes militants de ce mouvement : ce fut Les Hommes au milieu des Ruines (*), essai préfacé par le prince Borghese (4). Ses espoirs ayant été déçus, il s'éloigna du MSI et de toute action politique à partir de 1957. Il publia un peu plus tard Chevaucher le Tigre (1961), (**) ouvrage difficile qui contredisait le précédent (5). Il déclarait en substance que dans un monde courant à sa ruine, rien ne valait d'être sauvé, le seul impératif catégorique étant de suivre sa voie intérieure avec un parfait détachement pour tout ce qui nous entoure, mais en assumant ce que la vie offre de tragique et de douloureux. Ce message souleva de vives controverses dans la secte de ceux que l'on qualifiait ironiquement de « Témoins d'Evola ». Les uns le comprirent comme une invitation à se retirer du monde, et les autres comme une incitation à dynamiter la société décadente. C'est cette part du message qu'entendront les adeptes italiens de l'activisme brutal qui se manifestera au cours des « années de plomb ».

Ce qu'exprimait Chevaucher le Tigre reflétait le dégoût que pouvait inspirer aux plus idéalistes le marais de la petite politique parlementaire dans lequel s'enfonçait le MSI. Mais, au-delà, était en cause l'évolution  d'une société italienne et occidentale soumise à l'emprise du consumérisme et du matérialisme.
Au cours des décennies suivantes, la généralisation de la violence et du terrorisme de gauche eut des effets importants au sein de la droite radicale qu'influençait le philosophe. Les deux principales organisations extra-parlementaires, Ordine Nuovo et Avanguardia Nazionale, avaient été dissoutes en 1973, ce qui poussait à l'illégalité. Mais cette stratégie fut brisée net par la répression.

Cependant, une nouvelle génération était à l'oeuvre qui avait fait d'Evola une lecture superficielle. Née après 1950, étrangère à la mémoire historique du fascisme, elle critiquait volontiers les « vieux » du MSI, et tout autant les monstres sacrés de la droite activiste, genre Borghèse, et leur stratégie désuète du coup d'Etat. On proclama avec emphase la fin des idélogies et la primauté de l'action. Pour cette génération de très jeunes militants, devant le vide des anciennes valeurs mortes, subsistait le combat comme valeur existentielle. « Ce n'est pas au pouvoir que nous aspirons, ni à la création d'un ordre nouveau », lit-on en 1980 dans Qex, bulletin de liaison des détenus politiques de la droite radicale. « C'est la lutte qui nous intéresse, c'est l'action en soi, l'affirmation de notre propre nature ». L'influence de Chevaucher le Tigre était évidente. Mais ce qui, chez Evola, devait résulter d'une ascèse intérieure, était réduit ici à sa lettre la plus brutale, par l'identification au mythe simpliste du « guerrier ». cette dérive conduisait à la théorisation sommaire du « spontanéisme armé », autant qu'au retrait dans une tour d'ivoire ésotérique.

Dominique Venner.

1. Julius Evola a rédigé lui-même sa propore biographie intellectuelle, Le Chemin du Cinabre, trad. Philippe Baillet, Arché/ Arktos, 1982.
2. Le principal ouvrage théorique de Julius Evola, Révolte contre le Monde moderne (1934), a fait l'objet d'une traduction par Philippe Baillet, aux Editions de L'Age d'Homme, en 1991.
3. Julius Evola, Orientamenti (1950) (***), Settimo Sigillo, Rome, 1984, p. 42.
4. Julius Evola, Les Hommes au milieu des Ruines (1953), Traduction aux Sept Couleurs par Pierre Pascal en 1972. Nouvelle édition revue par Gérard Boulanger chez Pardès en 1984 et 2005.
5. Julius Evola, Chevaucher le Tigre, traduction par Isabelle Robinet, La Colombe, 1964, et Guy Trédaniel éditeur, 2002.

mardi, 10 novembre 2015

Evola e la critica dell’americanismo

evola1.jpg

Evola e la critica dell’americanismo

Ex: http://www.centrostudilaruna.it

  evola-oltre-il-muro-del-tempo   Dalla casa editrice romana Pagine sono stati pubblicati recentemente (giugno 2015) gli atti di un convegno tenutosi nel 2014 nella capitale e dedicato al tema “Julius Evola oltre il muro del tempo. Ciò che è vivo a quarant’anni dalla morte”. Il volume, dal medesimo titolo, comprende tutte le relazioni presentate all’epoca, cioè quelle di de Turris, Veneziani, Malgieri, Fusaro e Scarabelli. Qui mi occuperò soltanto del testo di Fusaro, avente come oggetto “Evola e Heidegger critici dell’americanismo”, ed esclusivamente della parte riguardante Evola.

     L’impostazione metodologica di Fusaro è indubbiamente condivisibile: “in filosofia il solo modo di rendere onore a un autore consiste nel discuterne criticamente le tesi, a distanza di sicurezza dai due atteggiamenti – apparentemente opposti e, in verità, segretamente complementari – dell’elogio agiografico e della demonizzazione preventiva” (p. 27). Altrettanto condivisibile, anche se per nulla originale, è l’approccio di Fusaro all’esame evoliano dell’americanismo, in quanto prende giustamente le mosse dal celebre scritto del 1929, Americanismo e bolscevismo, uscito sulla rivista “Nuova Antologia”. Ulteriore aspetto da sottolineare è l’insistenza, corretta, sul ‘maggior pericolo’ rappresentato, agli occhi di Evola, dall’America rispetto all’Unione Sovietica. Ma con ciò si esauriscono, a parere di chi scrive, gli spunti positivi presenti nel testo di Fusaro.

     Questo perché, innanzitutto, va criticata l’impostazione generale dello scritto, dato che Fusaro, insistendo sempre e solo sul parallelismo americanismo/bolscevismo, finisce col perdere completamente di vista le analisi ben più ricche e articolate riservate da Evola alla ‘civiltà americana’. Detto altrimenti, dallo scritto di Fusaro vien fuori un Evola che praticamente dagli anni Venti sino alla sua morte avrebbe letto l’americanismo servendosi di un’unica chiave interpretativa, quella appunto della sua equipollenza con il bolscevismo, con l’ovvia conseguenza di dar vita a una lettura in fondo astorica e iperschematica, del tutto avulsa dai cambiamenti economici, politici, sociali, culturali, nel frattempo intervenuti. Fusaro infatti passa sistematicamente sotto silenzio, non si comprende se per scarsa conoscenza delle fonti o per superficialità analitica, tutti gli scritti in cui Evola non solo rivede, seppur parzialmente, il suo giudizio negativo sull’America, ma dimostra anche di seguire con attenzione i nuovi fenomeni che nello scorrere del tempo prendevano piede oltreoceano, dalla Beat Generation alle tesi di Burnham, dalle posizioni politiche di Barry Goldwater e George Wallace ai testi di Kuehnelt-Leddhin, e così via.

     Non solo, perché anche le critiche rivolte a Evola da Fusaro si rivelano, a mio parere, inconsistenti. Nel dettaglio: Fusaro accusa Evola di incoerenza per aver giustificato la scelta del MSI di votare a favore del Patto Atlantico, pur sottolineando, a ragione, che l’accettazione evoliana del Patto non dipendeva da “un mal celato filoatlantismo” (p. 45) ma si spiegava “unicamente in ragione antisovietica” (p. 45). L’incoerenza consisterebbe nel fatto che essendo, per esplicita ammissione dello stesso Evola, più pericoloso e insidioso l’americanismo, sarebbe in ogni caso contraddittorio schierarsi con quest’ultimo contro il bolscevismo. Qui a me pare che Fusaro non tenga minimamente conto del contesto ‘geopolitico’, pur accusando, al contempo, Evola di essere caduto in contraddizione proprio per aver trascurato il medesimo fattore. La posizione evoliana, infatti, se pure criticabile in astratto, assume forza e coerenza una volta inserita nel concreto contesto di quegli anni, quando la minaccia comunista era avvertita non solo come imminente ma soprattutto capace di condurre all’annientamento persino fisico dello schieramento ‘nazionale’. Basti il rimando ad un importante scritto evoliano apparso nel luglio del 1960 su “L’Italiano”, intitolato C’è un “democratico” con una spina dorsale?, in cui si chiedeva la messa al bando del partito comunista e si auspicava un diretto intervento delle “forze sane” del paese in difesa dello Stato minacciato dal comunismo.

     La seconda obiezione mi sembra ancora più infondata. Fusaro (p. 46) cita estesamente un passo evoliano tratto da un articolo del ’57, Difendersi dall’America, apparso su “Il Popolo italiano”[1], dove viene lucidamente adombrata la progressiva americanizzazione cui stava soggiacendo l’intero continente europeo, aggiungendo subito dopo che, alla luce di questa consapevolezza, suonerebbe decisamente contraddittorio l’appellarsi, da parte di Evola, a una possibile reazione ‘antiamericana’ avente l’Italia come centro propulsivo. A sostegno della sua tesi, Fusaro (p. 47) cita due passi evoliani, uno in cui viene detto che la nazione italiana “più di ogni altra è l’anti-Russia e l’anti-America”, l’altro in cui tale ruolo dell’Italia si spiegherebbe grazie alla sua eroica “tradizione mediterranea, ed in ispecie classica e romana”. Per la fonte di entrambe le citazioni, Fusaro rimanda alla pagina 30 della silloge Civiltà americana, ma il punto è che sarebbe fatica sprecata cercarvi tali citazioni e per la semplice ragione che non ci sono. Lo scritto da cui infatti sono tratte le due frasi di Evola è il già ricordato Americanismo e bolscevismo del 1929[2]. Mi sembra pertanto evidente che pensare nel 1929 ad una realistica contrapposizione nei confronti dell’America non avrebbe nulla di contraddittorio rispetto a quanto sostenuto nel 1957, e questo già solo per l’abissale differenza di contesto storico. Non concordo con Fusaro neanche quando afferma che Evola a tale necessaria reazione in senso antiamericano “rimarrà sempre legato” (p. 47), visto che l’idea di tradizione mediterranea verrà abbandonata dallo stesso Evola già nei primissimi anni Trenta, ragion per cui non si comprende davvero come potesse essere ancora considerata, a distanza di decenni, un credibile argine all’americanismo.

     Per chiudere: Fusaro afferma che l’antiamericanismo di Evola andrebbe epurato “dalle inaccettabili sfumature razziste” (p. 48). Però Fusaro dovrebbe sapere che l’indignazione morale avrà pure molti pregi ma di sicuro non quello di accrescere la comprensione di ciò che è oggetto di riprovazione. Pertanto, piuttosto che usare la solita ‘clava morale’ antirazzista, sarebbe stato molto più proficuo, a mio modo di vedere, chiedersi se l’avvento anche in Europa della società multirazziale di stampo statunitense abbia contribuito o meno, e in che eventuale misura, alla sempre più pervasiva americanizzazione del nostro continente.

* * *

ottobre 2015

[1] Fusaro cita dalla silloge evoliana, Civiltà americana. Scritti sugli Stati Uniti 1930-1968, pubblicata, a cura di Alberto Lombardo per i tipi di Controcorrente nel 2010. Lo stesso articolo si può leggere nella raccolta completa dei contributi evoliani usciti su Il Popolo italiano, curata da Giovanni Sessa per la Pagine Editrice nel 2014.

[2] Saggio volutamente non inserito nella silloge Civiltà americana. Per la corretta individuazione delle due citazioni si veda J. Evola, “Americanismo e bolscevismo”, in Id., I saggi della Nuova Antologia, Edizioni di Ar, Padova 1982, p. 53, ora anche in Id., Il ciclo si chiude. Americanismo e bolscevismo 1929-1969, a cura di G. de Turris, Fondazione Evola, Roma 1991.

vendredi, 30 octobre 2015

Le fascisme : un « étymon spirituel » à découvrir ?

ab53796_36260c83ac_b.jpg

Le fascisme: un «étymon spirituel» à découvrir?

Sur le dernier ouvrage de Philippe Baillet

par Daniel COLOGNE

 

Note de la rédaction: Daniel Cologne rend ici hommage à Philippe Baillet qu'il a côtoyé notamment au "Cercle Culture & Liberté", structure qui a précédé la création de la revue évolienne "Totalité" (1977), dirigée ultérieurement par Georges Gondinet. Philippe Baillet, traducteur de Julius Evola, a été par la suite secrétaire de rédaction de "Nouvelle école", avant d'être évincé par le directeur de cette publication, qui pratiquait là son sport favori. L'intérêt du nouveau livre de Baillet réside surtout dans le fait qu'il rend hommage à Giorgio Locchi et poursuit la quête de ce dernier qui a donné à la "nouvelle droite" ses impulsions majeures avant d'être évincé de manière particulièrement inélégante par ce même directeur. 

 

* * *

 

Parmi les rencontres que j’ai faites durant ma période parisienne (1977 – 1983), celle de Philippe Baillet fut pour moi une des plus enrichissantes.

 

Co-fondateur de la revue Totalité, Baillet est l’un des principales artisans de la réception de l’œuvre de Julius Evola dans les pays francophones.

 

Sa maîtrise de l’italien lui permet de lire dans le texte original et de traduire avec fidélité de nombreux auteurs transalpins, dont l’énumération impressionne au chapitre 2 de la première partie de l’ouvrage ici recensé : Le Parti de la Vie. Clercs et guerriers d’Europe et d’Asie.

 

Il s’agit d’un recueil de textes initialement parus dans divers périodiques, dont Rivarol et Écrits de Paris, où j’ai moi-même collaboré entre 1977 et 1979.

 

Je reste reconnaissant à Philippe Baillet de m’avoir accordé son amical soutien, non exempt de critique toujours courtoisie, lors d’une conférence que j’ai prononcé en février 1979 au Cercle Péguy de Lyon. Dans la salle, il y avait une charmante et prometteuse étudiante nommée Chantal Delsol. Cette soirée rhodanienne demeure parmi les plus beaux souvenirs de mon séjour dans l’Hexagone.

 

L’émotion nostalgique s’efface devant la rigueur comptable de l’index, où Evola est cité douze fois, Guénon apparaît à trois reprises et Coomaraswamy ne récolte qu’une seule mention, en note infra-paginale.

 

Revenu à Nietzsche « comme référence essentielle » après « un très long détour (p. 15) » par le « traditionalisme intégral » des trois penseurs susdits, Baillet semble toutefois toujours considérer Evola comme inspirateur incontournable dans la perspective de La Désintégration du Système.

 

L’ouvrage de Giorgio Freda était abondamment commenté vers 1975 dans les milieux nationalistes-révolutionnaires. Il ne contenait rien d’original. Tout y était originel. Présents dans la préface du livre de Freda, les deux adjectifs s’opposent aussi dans la conclusion du recueil de Baillet.

 

Celui-ci évoque la haute figure de Lao-tseu : « Le vrai taoïste, lui, est insouciant de sa propre insouciance, qu’il ne donne pas en spectacle pour paraître “ original ”. Il est bien plutôt tourné vers l’originel (p. 233, c’est Baillet qui souligne). »

 

Quand on se rappelle que Révolte contre le monde moderne s’ouvre sur un extrait du Tao tö king, on peut conclure que l’ombre d’Evola plane sur ce florilège divisé en deux parties inégales, la première (six chapitres) relevant de la littérature et de l’histoire des idées, la seconde (deux chapitres) d’orientation plus nettement philosophique.

 

Le cloisonnement n’est toutefois pas étanche. L’auteur nous remet en mémoire l’œuvre littéraire de Mishima, extraordinaire en regard de sa courte existence : « Près de quarante romans, vingt recueils de nouvelles, dix-huit pièces de théâtre et quelques essais (p. 183). »

 

Parallèlement, quelques-uns des écrivains français analysés dans la première partie ont été attirés par l’Extrême-Orient. Même André Malraux, « un cabotin qui rêvait de s’inscrire dans la lignée des grands esthètes armés (p. 112) », connut une période japonisante, controversée, il est vrai. Rappelons aussi que La Condition humaine se passe en Chine.

 

En Chine : tel est précisément le titre d’un « ouvrage remarquable et devenu très rare (p. 79) » d’Abel Bonnard, dont Philippe Baillet se plaît à exhumer quelques brillantes phrases aux allures de maximes. « La Mort nous cache le regret de quitter le monde dans le bonheur de quitter les hommes (p. 108). »

 

Pierre Drieu connut aussi ce que le Belge Firmin Vandenbosch appelle « la tentation de l’Orient ». À l’auteur du Feu Follet, qui dirigea la Nouvelle revue Française sous l’Occupation, Baillet concède « l’élégance et l’honnêteté du désespoir ». Elles « forcent l’estime, voire l’admiration, que ne mérite sans doute pas l’œuvre, avec son ton trop souvent sentencieux, son style parfois médiocre, ses essais très inégaux, dans lesquels les meilleures intuitions s’arrêtent la plupart du temps au stade de l’esquisse (p. 111) ».

 

Étendues à Gabriele d’Annunzio et Ezra Pound, sommairement négatives en ce qui concerne Louis Aragon, les considérations d’ordre littéraire ne constituent pas l’essentiel du message délivré par Philippe Baillet.

 

Les amateurs de rapprochements inattendus goûteront celui effectué entre Nietzsche et Lao-tseu partageant « une vision biocentrique du monde (p. 202) ». Dans le cadre de cette étonnante parenté entre « deux univers de pensée » et en dépit de leur « éloignement racial, temporel, spatial et civilisationnel (p. 216) », Philippe Baillet redéfinit l’idée tant débattue de « volonté de puissance », « catégorie ontologique suprême (p. 218) », « sens originaire (p. 225) » non réductible au simple vitalisme bergsonien.

 

La « volonté de puissance » est synonyme de la « persévérance dans l’être ». Une filiation philosophique directe relie dès lors Nietzsche et Heidegger, et peut-être, en amont de l’histoire de la pensée européenne, le Wille zur Macht de Nietzsche et le conatus de Spinoza. En tout cas, la « volonté de puissance » s’affranchit de tout rapetissement tel que voudrait lui faire subir une certaine critique guénonienne en la confondant avec le jaillissement de « l’élan vital », avec « la création incessante d’imprévisible nouveauté », avec un vitalisme priapique et éjaculatoire.

 

Ailleurs dans l’ouvrage, certains guénoniens sont implicitement ciblés dans la mesure où ils jugent toute révolution anti-moderne impossible en raison des conditions cosmiques défavorables. Ce point de vue revient à catamorphoser le « traditionalisme intégral » en un mythe démobilisateur. L’Histoire n’est pas un progrès linéaire, mais elle n’est pas davantage une décadence unidirectionnelle. Comme le répétait souvent notre regretté ami Dominique Venner, elle a sa part d’imprévu, même si une véritable « astrologie mondiale », apte à saisir la respiration du mouvement historique, pourrait y introduire une frange de prévisibilité.

 

En l’occurrence, l’important est de ne pas « déserter la lutte pour la défense de la cité en raison du dégoût que celle-ci nous inspire (p. 104) ». Il ne faut pas « attendre que tout s’arrange grâce à la divine Providence (p. 105) », par une sorte de retournement automatique inscrit dans la marbre de la fatalité, par une espèce de choc en retour ou d’effet boomerang contre la pesanteur plurimillénaire de l’Âge Sombre (Kali Yuga).

 

À défaut de compter sur une improbable metanoïa de ce type, vers où convient-il de tourner le regard d’une espérance en une « régénération de l’Histoire (p. 133) », face au « mouvement irréversible » (François Hollande) que veut lui imprimer le finalisme égalitaire ?

 

Ce n’est ni du Front national ni des divers partis « populistes » européens qu’il faut attendre une salutaire réaction contre ceux qui souhaitent suspendre le vol du temps, non pas comme Lamartine sur les rives romantiques du lac du Bourget, mais au bord du bourbier social-démocrate perçu comme « horizon indépassable ».

 

Je partage totalement le point de vue qu’exprime Baillet dans les lignes qui suivent et dans son jugement sur le parti lepéniste.

 

« Je tiens évidemment pour acquis que les lecteurs auxquels je m’adresse ne nourrissent pas l’illusion de penser que les différents mouvements “ populistes ” qui engrangent des succès électoraux dans l’Europe d’aujourd’hui sont une résurgence du phénomène fasciste (p. 161). »

 

Quant au Front national, il « entretient désormais le comble de la confusion » en se présentant comme « le défenseur par excellence du républicanisme et du laïcisme (p. 101) ».

 

Philippe Baillet nous invite à rechercher « l’essence du fascisme », selon l’expression de Giorgio Locchi, dont une conférence est retranscrite (pp. 164 à 182) entre les deux parties du livre. Il s’agit en quelque sorte de trouver pour le fascisme l’équivalent de ce que le grand critique littéraire allemand Leo Spitzer, fondateur de la stylistique, veut faire surgir dans sa lecture des écrivains : un « étymon spirituel ».

 

Philippe Baillet s’interroge à propos d’un « nouveau regard (p. 21) » que la science et la recherche universitaires semblent porter, depuis quelque temps, sur le national-socialisme.

 

Johann Chapoutot affirme que le national-socialisme est porteur d’une Kulturkritik « prolixe et plus argumentée qu’on ne le dit (p. 22) ».

 

Plusieurs expéditions scientifiques en Amazonie, au Libéria et au Tibet, la reconversion de Leni Riefenstahl comme cinéaste du Sud-Soudan : voilà autant de faits avérés qui plaident en faveur d’une ouverture du nazisme au monde non européen. Ces réalités « sont encore largement méconnues dans nos propres rangs, quand elles ne sont pas purement et simplement ignorées (p. 247) ».

 

En revanche, on ne peut que constater l’hostilité de « beaucoup de hauts responsables nationaux-socialistes […] à la postérité d’Abraham, aux serviteurs de la Loi, de la Croix et du Livre, bref à tout l’univers mental du “ sémitisme ” au sens le plus large (p. 29) ».

 

Dans le sillage de Giorgio Locchi, Philippe Baillet diagnostique une « tendance époquale (p. 136) » dont nous subissons les effets pernicieux depuis deux millénaires : un sémitisme lato sensu, un judéo-christiano-islamisme, auquel doit s’opposer une « tendance époquale » surhumaniste.

 

Vie2.jpgRespectivement consacrés à Renzo de Felice et Giorgio Locchi, les chapitres 1 et 6 de la première partie posent les questions les plus fondamentales pour notre famille de pensée. Jusqu’où faire remonter la recherche de notre « moment zéro » (François Bousquet) ? Les étapes de la « tendance époquale » surhumaniste se succèdent-elles de manière continue ? Le fascisme lato sensu (dont le national-socialisme est provisoirement la forme la plus achevée) a-t-il été « prématuré (p. 142) », comme le laissent supposer certains passagers de Nietzsche prophétisant un interrègne nihiliste de deux siècles ?

 

Selon Locchi et Baillet, le « phénomène fasciste » de nature « transnationale et transpolitique (p. 136) » prend racine dans « la seconde moitié du XIXe siècle (p. 137) ». Baillet précise dès sa préface : « la grande réaction antirationaliste de la fin du XIXe siècle (p. 12) » marque l’origine du fascisme en tant qu’essence apte à « détrôner le cogito (p. 221) », cette formule finale soulignant la remarquable cohérence de l’auteur.

 

Mais pourquoi ne pas remonter encore plus loin, par exemple jusqu’à cet équivoque XVIIIe siècle qui préoccupe Renzo De Felice avant qu’il se spécialise dans la période mussolinienne ?

 

Car le siècle des prétendues « Lumières » et de l’Aufklarung ne fut pas seulement celui des philosophes néo-cartésiens instaurant « pour la première fois une culture de masse (p. 146) ». Il fut aussi celui des « illuminés » dont le « mysticisme révolutionnaire (p. 44) » fournit à l’historien l’occasion de réhabiliter « la dignité historiographique de l’irrationnel (p. 47) ». Le propos de De Felice est « d’insérer le “ fait mystique ” dans l’histoire, alors même que, selon lui, des tentatives dans ce sens n’ont été faites que par l’histoire littéraire à propos du Sturm und Drang et du romantisme (p. 44) ». Je rejoins Philippe Baillet dans son appel à compulser plus systématiquement les revues culturelles gravitant dans l’orbite du fascisme (allemand en l’occurrence) pour dévoiler certaines facettes d’un “ sens originaire ” ou d’un “ étymon spirituel ” chez Klinger, Lenz, Schiller, Herder, Hölderlin et Novalis, disait un jour Robert Steuckers cité en page 155. À titre anecdotique, je signale qu’un des plus brillants germanistes que j’ai croisés à l’Université libre de Bruxelles était d’origine togolaise et faisait une thèse de doctorat sur le Sturm und Drang.

 

Sur la « Révolution conservatrice », c’est bien entendu le travail de rassemblement d’Alain de Benoist (cité pages 134 et 155) qu’il faut saluer, tout en insistant sur un thème commun à Locchi et Baillet : la parfaite continuité de ce mouvement et du national-socialisme, même si certains « révolutionnaires-conservateurs (comme Armin Mohler, par exemple) ont « tenté de tourner les difficultés liées à cet incommode voisinage (p. 149) ».

 

Sous la forme du national-socialisme, la « tendance époquale surhumaniste » a-t-elle émergé trop tôt ? On peut le penser dans la mesure où la « tendance époquale » opposée, de nature « sémitique », n’était pas encore en état d’épuisement. Elle refait surface aujourd’hui dans « le panislamisme radicalisé », ses « formes exacerbées de ressentiment culturel » et sa « haine raciale patente (p. 161) ».

 

Le seul passage du livre de Baillet qui puisse laisser le lecteur sur sa faim est celui où l’islamisme est ainsi réduit à l’influence de facteurs psychologiques. Je conseille la lecture de l’analyse plus fine de François Bousquet, cité plus haut, dans la revue Éléments (n° 156, pp. 22 à 24).

 

Selon Bousquet, toute religion est coextensive d’un devenir historico-culturel et un exemple éloquent en est fourni par le Christianisme, qui peut être « interprété comme une métamorphose complexe de l’ancestrale religion païenne (p. 137) ». En l’occurrence, Baillet fait écho aux idées de Wagner, l’un des pôles de la « tendance époquale surhumaniste » (l’autre pôle étant évidemment Nietzsche).

 

Mais la mondialisation post-moderne favorise, par une sorte de mutation génétique, l’émergence de religions d’un type nouveau qui, à l’instar des « frères ennemis » de l’évangélisme et du salafisme, aspirent à renouer avec leur « moment zéro », leur origine immaculée, leur paléo-tradition non encore entachée par les vicissitudes de l’Histoire et les contraintes de ce que Charles Péguy appelle la nécessaire « racination » du spirituel dans le charnel.

 

À la lumière de l’article de Bousquet, le « panislamisme radicalisé » apparaît motivé par quelque chose de bien plus essentiel que la « haine » et le « ressentiment ».

 

Par ailleurs, une question mérite d’être posée : la recherche d’une essence fasciste « transpolitique » et « transnationale » (adjectif également utilisé par Bousquet dans son examen des « religions mutantes ») n’est-elle pas assimilable à la quête du « moment zéro », hors sol, hors temps et antérieur à toute « racination » ?

 

Rechercher l’essence du fascisme revient à découvrir son arché (le principe, l’origine) sans perdre de vue sa coextensivité à une genosis (le devenir).

 

C’est à dessein que j’emploie les termes inauguraux de l’Ancien Testament, car je ne suis convaincu, ni de la corrélation du « sémitisme » et de l’égalitarisme, ni de la désignation des monothéismes sémitiques comme ennemi global et principal.

 

Le mépris des Juifs pour les goyim, l’hostilité des Chrétiens envers les mécréants, l’aversion de l’Islam pour les infidèles sont analogues au dédain que peuvent ressentir les disciples de Nietzsche face aux « derniers hommes » qui se regardent en clignant de l’œil et se flattent d’avoir inventé le bonheur.

 

D’autre part, plutôt que « désigner l’ennemi », ne faut-il pas prioritairement identifier celui qui nous désigne comme ennemi ? À mes yeux, il ne fait pas de doute que c’est le laïcisme stupidement revendiqué par le Front national.

 

Quelle que soit l’étymologie basse-latine (laicus, commun, ordinaire) ou grecque (laos, le peuple, dont le pluriel laoi signifie « les soldats »), le laïcisme est à la fois égalitaire et profanateur.

 

D’un côté, il réduit les êtres humains à ce qu’ils ont de plus ordinaire en commun. De l’autre, il déclare une guerre permanente à tout ce qui relève du spirituel, du métaphysique, du cosmologique et du sacré.

 

René Guénon a très bien vu que l’égalitarisme ne serait qu’une première étape de la modernité. Dans un second temps sont appelées à émerger une « contre-hiérarchie » et une « parodie » de spiritualité. S’il faut éviter les pièges de l’apolitisme et du fatalisme tendus par certains guénoniens, il convient tout autant de garder en mémoire le message d’un maître à penser dont le diagnostic de « chaos social », entre autres analyses prémonitoires, se révèle d’une brûlante actualité.

 

Le mérite de Philippe Baillet est de dire clairement les choses : une révolution anti-moderne ne peut qu’être synonyme de rétablissement des valeurs d’ordre, d’hiérarchie et d’autorité. Je demeure réservé quant à l’adjectif « surhumaniste », trop nettement corollaire de la référence nietzschéenne, alors que la quête du « sens originaire » de la contre-modernité peut nous faire remonter au moins jusqu’au pré-romantisme, pour nous en tenir à l’aire culturelle allemande.

 

Nous autres révoltés contre le monde moderne devons poursuivre le combat contre la « tendance époquale » égalitaire qui est loin d’être épuisée. Mais il nous incombe aussi de nous préparer à l’affrontement décisif entre, d’une part l’élite « transnationale » de clercs et de guerriers tels que nous les présente Philippe Baillet, et d’autres part « l’hyper-classe mondialiste » (Pierre Le Vigan), dont il est encore aujourd’hui difficile de cerner les contours, mais qui incarnera davantage l’aspect profanateur du laïcisme que sa facette égalitaire, si tant est qu’il faille diviser l’action anti-traditionnelle en deux étapes successives. Égalitarisme et « contre-hiérarchie » apparaissent plutôt comme des phénomènes simultanés, dès qu’on y regarde d’un peu plus près.

 

Cet enchevêtrement complexe d’influences négatives rend d’autant plus urgente la tâche de redéfinir un fascisme essentialisé, capable de riposter aux formules lapidaires et diffamatoires – comme « l’islamo-fascisme » de Manuel Valls – qui visent à confondre dans la même brutalité tous les ennemis du Nouvel Ordre Mondial.

 

Mais une essence ne persévère dans l’Être que sous les conditions historiques, culturelles, géographiques, voire ethniques d’une substance qui, dans le livre de Philippe Baillet, hormis les pénétrantes ouvertures vers l’Extrême-Asie, épouse un vaste courant germanique continu : le Sturm und Drang, Nietzsche, Wagner, la « Révolution conservatrice » et le national-socialisme.

 

L’« étymon spirituel » de Leo Spitzer ne perdure qu’en s’incarnant dans « une race, un milieu, un moment », selon la formule d’Hippolyte Taine, qui fut également un grand critique littéraire.

 

À notre époque de désinformation calomnieuse, Philippe Baillet a le courage d’écrire que le national-socialisme est « la seule forme historique de révolte anti-égalitariste que le monde moderne ait connue (p. 15) ».

 

Le cadre limité de la présente recension ne permet pas de mettre au jour toute la richesse du livre de Philippe Baillet.

 

Il faudrait s’attarder davantage sur le chapitre consacré à Bernard Faÿ, dont l’itinéraire « conduit de l’avant-garde artistique et littéraire au pétainisme, des sympathies initiales pour Roosevelt à la collaboration avec des responsables de la SS dans le cadre du combat anti-maçonnique, d’un cosmopolitisme snob à la passion du redressement national (p. 116) ».

 

Il conviendrait de commenter plus en détail les pages remarquables qu’inspire à Philippe Baillet la lecture d’Abel Bonnard, pour qui « l’ordre est le nom social de la beauté (p. 92) ».

 

« Face à l’uniformisation croissante des modes de vie et des cultures, face à la laideur moderne qui s’étend partout, le clerc authentique est appelé à témoigner pour les valeurs de l’esprit, d’abord en se faisant le chantre de l’ordre et de la civilisation (p. 78) ».

 

Baillet décèle chez Bonnard un « penchant pour la poésie de l’ordre, que résumait si bien, au Japon, l’alliance du tranchant du sabre et de la pureté du chrysanthème dans l’âme du guerrier (p. 93) ».

 

La « ligne de force générale » que l’auteur a vu émerger, au fur et à mesure de la relecture et de la ré-écriture augmentée de ses articles initiaux, mériterait d’être approfondie.

 

Cette « ligne de force » ne renvoie « jamais, fondamentalement, à un discours, une spéculation, des concepts, des idéologies, une dialectique, mais à leurs opposés : un mythe, une vision du monde, des images, une esthétique (p. 12) ».

 

Ce culte de la Beauté, qui n’est pas sans rappeler la poésie d’Émile Verhaeren, pourtant compagnon de route du socialisme, cette nécessité de percevoir le Beau même « dans ce qui peut être tragique (p. 19) », cet esthétisme se combine à un « conservatisme vital (p. 199) », à une vigoureuse dénonciation du « caractère absolument suicidaire de toutes les idéologies prétendant faire abstraction des lois de la vie au profit d’un monde artificiel entièrement recomposé dans une perspective où l’homme est la mesure de toutes choses (p. 20) ».

 

La célèbre proposition de Protagoras fut vivement critiquée par Platon, dont La République et Les Lois figurent, comme le De Monarchia de Dante ou l’Arthashâstra indien, parmi les grands textes « qui ignorent superbement les anti-principes démocratiques (p. 85) ».

 

C’est également à ces sources antiques et médiévales que doivent s’abreuver tous les non-conformistes désireux de penser « par delà les clichés (p. 117) », de dépasser les clivages manichéens et de partir en quête d’une fascisme essentialisé, coextensif d’un mouvement historique bien plus ample que celui amorcé par les prétendues « Lumières ».

 

Philippe Baillet nous offre une chatoyante galerie de portraits de clercs et de guerriers dans un livre réunissant la cohésion de la pensée, la brillance de l’écriture et la magistrale organisation du savoir.

 

L’auteur a choisi de nous dévoiler le « versant ensoleillé (p. 24) » de la montagne au sommet de laquelle, sur un équivoque et périlleux chemin de crête, le fascisme a proposé un parcours politique et un itinéraire métapolitique.

 

Les voyageurs de haute altitude s’exposent fatalement à des chutes au fond du précipice, dans l’abîme de l’autre versant.

 

Philippe Baillet ne se voile pas la face lorsqu’il stigmatise, par exemple, « le traitement réservé aux prisonniers russes (p. 28) » par les nazis dans les territoires de l’Est occupés.

 

La caste médiatique aujourd’hui dominante aurait certes préféré d’autres illustrations des excès meurtriers où le fascisme allemand a basculé.

 

Mais ce livre ne s’adresse pas à cette caste experte en victimisation préférentielle.

 

Il interpelle plutôt tous les membres de notre famille de pensée conscients de ne pouvoir se permettre l’économie d’une étape intellectuelle en compagnie des régimes et mouvements anti-égalitaires du XXe siècle.

 

Daniel Cologne

 

• Philippe Baillet, Le Parti de la Vie. Clercs et guerriers d’Europe et d’Asie, Akribeia, Saint-Genis-Laval, 2015, 243 p., 22 € (à commander à Akribeia, 45/3, route de Vourles, 69230 Saint-Genis-Laval).

Article printed from Europe Maxima: http://www.europemaxima.com

URL to article: http://www.europemaxima.com/?p=4563

PhB_1.JPGLe Parti de la vie

 

Clercs et guerriers d’Europe et d’Asie

Philippe Baillet

Le « parti de la vie » est constitué de tous ceux en qui sont encore présents et actifs les éléments originaires du réel occultés par la modernité : la voix de la race et du sang, les instincts élémentaires de légitime défense et de protection des siens, la solidarité ethnoraciale, la grande sagesse impersonnelle du corps, le sens de la beauté conforme aux types. Qu’il s’agisse de réalités méconnues du régime national-socialiste ou de l’anti-intellectualisme fasciste, de l’ordre en tant que « nom social de la beauté » chez Abel Bonnard ou de Giorgio Locchi insistant sur le caractère nécessairement « mythique » du discours surhumaniste, de l’intimité possible de la chair avec les idées selon Mishima ou de la nature « biocentrique » de la vision taoïste du monde, etc. – tout ici renvoie à une esthétique incarnée, radicalement étrangère à la postérité d’Abraham, aux serviteurs de la Loi, de la Croix et du Livre, aux « Trois Imposteurs » (Moïse, Jésus, Mahomet). Apparemment inactuel, ce livre explore donc avec rigueur le « versant ensoleillé » d’une Cause diffamée, enracinant ainsi les convictions dans la dynamique même des lois de la vie.

Contient un texte inédit en français de Giorgio Locchi.

Index.

248 p.

Pour commander:

http://www.akribeia.fr/akribeia/1712-le-parti-de-la-vie.html

mardi, 02 juin 2015

Julius Evola’s Influence on Jobbik and Gabor Vona

gabor-vona-julius-evola.jpg

Julius Evola’s Influence on Jobbik and Gabor Vona

Ex: http://islam-freemasonry.com

The Budapest Times has just published an article on the “esoteric” influence on Gabor Vona, the leader of Hungary’s controversial Jobbik Party, and Tibor Imre Baranyi, Vona’s advisor. Of particular importance to the journalist is the influence of the founder of the school of Traditionalism, Rene Guenon, and, more especially, Julius Evola, one of the more popular yet more frequently criticized of Traditionalist thinkers.

According to the Budapest Times, Baranyi is Vona’s official advisor, and receives a monthly gross salary of HUF 189.878 (if this is correct, that’s about $0.67 USD according to various online currency exchange sites). He is also the owner of Kvintesszencia, a publishing house in Debrecen, which has published some of Evola’s work. The Budapest Times say that,

Evola was in close contact with the SS during World War II and worked for the Study Society for Primordial Intellectual History, German Ancestral Heritage founded by Heinrich Himmler.
By the way, Vona wrote a passionate introduction for the Evola compilation published by Kvintesszencia..

This seems to be an oversimplification. Evola was close to elements in Italy’s Fascist party, and lectured to the SS, though his views were seen as incompatible with Nazi racialism, and his activities in Germany were effectively stopped. Evola saw “race” in spiritual terms, or terms of character and inclination. This may seem unsavory to us today, and while many of Evola’s opinions — such as they were influenced by the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, etc. — may have been wrong, these not unusual for his time, either on the Left or Right.

What’s important, when considering Evola’s influence, is the broad range of material he produced, some of it bad, some of it interesting. Evola’s books have been largely published by Inner Traditions, an occult/New Age publisher, since most of his work concerns spirituality, from Buddhism and Islam to Hermeticism, all of which he speaks about positively.

Without understanding this — and the Budapest Times certainly doesn’t seem to — it is difficult to understand what Evola’s impact may be on Vona. Speaking about Traditionalism, the newspaper says:

The doctrine likes to take examples from Buddhism, Hinduism, Islamic tradition and other directions of religion in order to compare the dilapidation of the Western world against something. The person who combined many different spiritual movements in such a way and is considered as the icon of traditionalists today is the Frenchman René Guénon (1886-1951). Guénon spent his late years as a Muslim Sufi mystic under the name Abdel Wahid Yahia in Cairo, the Egyptian capital becoming the final destination of his spiritual movement.

Vona does not seem to really mind that the traditional school based on the global synthesis of different religious directions and spiritual-cultural tradition contradicts the official Jobbik image of being “Christian and Hungarian”. He himself follows the “metaphysical tradition”. A couple of months ago this is what he told weekly newspaper Heti Válasz: “Every larger global religion has a core truth which is the same as in the other ones and in most cases it’s called God. Everyone has the task to get as close to God as possible in his own cultural circle and within his own faith. As a Hungarian, European and Roman Catholic person I have the same task. However, at the same time I pay attention to, study and understand other cultures and religions too.”

This again mischaracterizes Guenon and Traditionalism. Guenon — who was at one time involved with esoteric Freemasonry, and who later “moved into” Islam — did not “combine” different religions, but perceived that they were all reflections of a spiritual “primordial Tradition,” and thus all contained elements of Truth. Although concerned with both gnosis and how to live authentically rather than with society, we see something similar in anthropology, where aspects of the various religions may be compared.

Moreover, though once an obscure and academic approach, it is now a common belief in the West that all religions are in some way true. Usually this opinion is seen on the Left, as an endorsement of multiculturalism — often in a political sense, of seeing the religions as clients to be represented by a political class that is above believing in a single religion. Vona takes a Traditionalist, or more Right-wing approach, believing that though one can get close to God through any of the major religions, each person has a duty to do this through the culture of their heritage.

Personally, since I grew up in a nominally Christian country, but do not consider myself Christian, I don’t agree with Vona. But I also think these things are worth talking about seriously. Though it’s always interesting to see Traditionalism discussed in the mainstream, it’s a pity the Budapest Times got it so wrong.

 

samedi, 23 mai 2015

Archives de Julius Evola en français (1971)

entretien,traditions,traditionalisme,tradition,julius evola,révolution conservatrice,italie,traditionalisme révolutionnaire

Archives de Julius Evola en français (1971)

Unique interview en intégralité de Julius Evola en français, vieilli, paralysé mais toujours alerte, quelque temps avant sa mort. Sorte de testament biographique, on y trouvera entre autres les thèmes de l'essence de ses ouvrages, sa période artistique dadaïste, ses rapports avec René Guénon, ainsi qu'avec les régimes politiques de l'époque, et bien d'autres explorations métaphysiques.

(Le bruit sourd s'estompera après les premières vingt minutes)

lundi, 18 mai 2015

Evola e Dante. Esoterismo ed Impero

Dante_exile.jpg

Evola e Dante. Esoterismo ed Impero

Autore:

Ex: http://www.centrostudilaruna.it

evola-e-danteTra i molti libri dedicati ad Evola nel 2014, in occasione del quarantennale della scomparsa, vale senz’altro la pena ricordare il volume di Sandro Consolato Evola e Dante. Ghibellinismo ed esoterismo, pubblicato dalle edizioni Arya (per ordini: arya@oicl.it, euro 18,00). Il valore di questo lavoro va colto nella organicità della trattazione, nell’uso accorto delle fonti e dei documenti, nell’elaborazione di tesi esegetiche che non risentono né dei limiti della denigrazione preconcetta, né della semplice esaltazione agiografica. Peraltro, il tema trattato, presenta aspetti di grande rilevanza per la contestualizzazione storico-teoretica dell’opera evoliana. Il saggio è strutturato in quattro densi capitoli preceduti da una premessa e seguiti dalle conclusioni dell’autore e da una   postfazione di Renato Del Ponte.

Consolato rileva come l’interesse mostrato da Evola per Dante, fosse assai diversificato: il tradizionalista si occupò, a più riprese, degli aspetti puramente esoterici del Poeta, di quelli esoterico-politici, ed infine della sua teoria dell’Impero. Per quanto attiene al primo, molti giudizi evoliani sono influenzati dalla sagace capacità interpretativa di Luigi Valli. Questi si distinse, sulla scorta del Pascoli esegeta di Beatrice, nel leggere l’espressione Fedeli d’amore che compare nella Vita Nova, riferita a compagni “dello stesso Dante in una fraternità esoterica ghibellina” (p. 14). A parere di Evola, ricorda l’autore, Valli destrutturò i criteri interpretativi dominanti allora la critica dantesca, quello estetico e quello centrato sulla ortodossia cattolica. Il cuore dell’esoterismo dell’Alighieri sarebbe racchiuso nel mistero della “Donna”, operante non solo nell’opera citata, ma anche nella Commedia, come confermato dalla lezione del Marezkovskij. “Donna-Beatrice” sarebbe figura evocante simbolicamente tre significati a lei consustanziali: La “Sapienza santa”, la dottrina segreta, l’organizzazione detentrice e custode della segretezza della dottrina. Tale Sapienza corrisponde a ciò che Aristotele aveva definito intellectus agens, impersonale e di origine extra-umana. Evola ritiene che amore e donna risveglino ciò che nell’uomo di senso comune è solo in potenza, possibile ma non agente, così come avviene nelle pratiche tantriche “l’elemento shivaico che prima dell’unione con la donna è inerte e inane” (p. 22). Per questo, la “donna” genera un essere nuovo, un essere latore di salus.

Dante-Statue_6537.jpgRispetto all’interesse evoliano per il dato esoterico-politico nell’Alighieri, è opportuno ricordare che la cerca del Poeta è sintonica, e la cosa è accortamente rilevata da Consolato, a quella che maturò negli ambienti graalici in rapporto al problema dell’Impero. Caratterizzata, in particolare, dal continuo riferirsi al motivo dell’imperatore latente, mai morto e per questo atteso e al Regno isterilito, simbolizzato in modo paradigmatico dall’Albero secco che rinverdirà con il rimanifestarsi nella storia dell’Impero, per l’azione del Veltro-Dux. L’Impero, per esser tale, deve far riferimento ad un re-sacerdote il cui modello è Melchisedec, custode della funzione attiva e di quella contemplativa. L’autore suggerisce che in tema di Veltro e relativamente alla sua esegesi storico-politica, Evola si richiama alla lezione di Alfred Bassermann, grazie alla quale egli coglie come Dante, in tema, si sia fermato a metà strada, “la sua concezione dei rapporti tra Chiesa e Impero rimase imperniata su di un dualismo limitatore…tra vita contemplativa e vita attiva” (p. 39). Lo stesso esoterismo dell’Alighieri era legato ad una sorta di via iniziatica platonizzante, non pienamente giunta a rilevare, come accadrà nel puro templarismo, che l’iniziazione regale risolve in sé i due momenti del Principio, contemplazione ed azione. In questo contesto, suggerisce Consolato, deve essere letta la polemica di Cecco d’Ascoli nei confronti dell’Alighieri, attaccato in quanto “deviazionista” rispetto all’iniziazione propriamente regale. In questi termini, Dante è il simbolo più proprio, per Evola, dell’età in cui visse, il medioevo. Età in cui la Tradizione tornò ad affacciarsi ma nei panni spuri e dimidiati del cattolicesimo.

In merito al tema dell’Impero, nonostante i limiti su ricordati, Evola vede in Dante un predecessore, in quanto “il pensiero di Evola è stato…un pensiero fondamentalmente monarchico, perché…egli trasferì l’ideale della sua giovanile ascesi filosofica…nella figura dell’Adepto…e poi pose questo…al centro e al vertice del suo ideale di Impero e di civiltà” (p. 48). Tale idea di Ordnung, si pone ben oltre i suoi surrogati moderni, in quanto espressione di un Potere dall’alto, con-sacrato e mirato a indurre nella comunità una Pace reale e non meramente fittizia. Capace, pertanto, di far sorgere negli uomini di ogni tempo quella spinta anagogica, verso l’Alto, che la tradizione classica, ha detto essere scopo essenziale del Politico. La Dittatura, sintesi delle prospettive filosofico-politiche della modernità maturate lungo la linea speculativa hobbesiano-schmittiana, può placare solo momentaneamente il conflitto, ma resta semplicemente il luogo della contraddizione eternamente riemergente. Ciò non significa che Evola ci inviti a non operare, a non agire. In quanto filosofo della pratica, nelle drammatiche contingenze dei primi anni Quaranta, e la cosa è riportata ancora una volta da Consolato, richiamò “l’ideale che Dante difese, affermando che l’Impero doveva essere cosa dei Romani” (p. 61). Fu la contingenza storica a dettare in quel frangente il necessario riavvicinamento di Italia e Germania, ed Evola “contrariamente a quanto sostenuto nello stesso Terzo Reich dalle correnti più strettamente nazionaliste, razziste e pangermaniste”(p. 62), era convinto che l’idea imperiale fosse l’unica a poter avvicinare i due popoli.

Probabilmente, per capire appieno le ragioni della prossimità di Evola e Dante, è bene far riferimento a Platone, o meglio a un Platone correttamente interpretato come filosofo politico e non come pensatore sic et simpliciter metafisico e pre-cristiano. A questo Platone assomigliava davvero Dante, la cui vocazione realizzativa fu ben colta da Gian Franco Lami quando scrisse “egli si fece carico d’incarnare, di persona, l’uomo classico, conforme alla realtà politica più antica” (Tra utopia e utopismo. Sommario di un percorso ideologico, Il cerchio, Rimini 2008, p. 139, a cura di G. Casale). Tentò, ma non vi riuscì del tutto, come ricordato da Evola e Consolato.

dimanche, 15 mars 2015

JORNADAS EVOLIANAS 2015

JORNADAS EVOLIANAS 2015
 
 
EVOLA Y AMÉRICA
EXPONDRÁN:
MARCOS GHIO (ARGENTINA)
FRANCISCO NÚÑEZ PROAÑO (ECUADOR)

25 de marzo 2015 a las 19 horas
en Uruguay 766, P.B. 4 (Buenos Aires)

Entrada libre y gratuita.

18:24 Publié dans Evénement, Traditions | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : événement, buenos aires, argentine, julius evola | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

vendredi, 13 mars 2015

Unité spirituelle et multipolarité planétaire

Unité spirituelle et multipolarité planétaire

par Georges FELTIN-TRACOL

rg1.jpgLe penseur français René Guénon (1886 – 1957) ne suscite que très rarement l’intérêt de l’université hexagonale. On doit par conséquent se réjouir de la sortie de René Guénon. Une politique de l’esprit par David Bisson. À l’origine travail universitaire, cet ouvrage a été entièrement retravaillé par l’auteur pour des raisons d’attraction éditoriale évidente. C’est une belle réussite aidée par une prose limpide et captivante.

 

René Guénon est le théoricien de la Tradition primordiale. de santé fragile et élevé dans un milieu catholique bourgeois de province à Blois, il fréquente tôt les milieux férus d’ésotérisme et y acquiert une somme de savoirs plus ou moins hétéroclites tout en développant une méfiance tenace à l’égard de certains courants occultistes tels le théosophisme et le spiritisme. Côtoyant tour à tour catholiques, gnostiques et francs-maçons, René Guénon édifie une œuvre qui couvre aussi bien la franc-maçonnerie que le catholicisme traditionnel et l’islam.

 

En effet, dès 1911, René Guénon passe à cette dernière religion et prend le nom arabe d’Abdul Waha-Yaha, « le Serviteur de l’Unique ». Puis, en 1931, il s’installe définitivement au Caire d’où il deviendra, outre une référence spirituelle pour des Européens, un cheikh réputé. David Bisson explique les motifs de cette implication orientale. Guénon est réputé pour sa fine connaissance des doctrines hindoues. La logique aurait voulu qu’il s’installât en Inde et/ou qu’il acceptât l’hindouisme. En quête d’une initiation valide et après avoir frayé avec le gnosticisme et la franc-maçonnerie, l’islam lui paraît la solution la plus sérieuse. Même s’il demande aux Européens de retrouver la voie de la Tradition via l’Église catholique, ses propos en privé incitent au contraire à embrasser la foi musulmane.

 

Réception de la pensée de Guénon

 

Les écrits de René Guénon attirent les Occidentaux qui apprécient leur enseignement clair, rigoureux et méthodique. David Bisson n’a pas que rédigé la biographie intellectuelle de l’auteur de La Crise du monde moderne. Il mentionne aussi son influence auprès de ses contemporains ainsi que son abondante postérité métaphysique. La revue Le Voile d’Isis – qui prendra ensuite pour titre Études Traditionnelles – publie avec régularité les articles du « Maître » qui « constituent […] une sorte de guide grâce auquel les lecteurs peuvent s’orienter dans le foisonnement des traditions ésotériques en évitant les contrefaçons spirituelles (théosophisme, occultisme, etc.) (p. 146) ». Guénon se montre attentif à examiner à l’aune de la Tradition le soufisme, l’hindouisme, le taoïsme, le confucianisme, etc., « ce qui permet […] d’évaluer le caractère régulier de telle ou telle branche religieuse. Ainsi, la doctrine tantrique est-elle déclarée conforme et, donc, “ orthodoxe ” au regard des principes posés par la Tradition. De même, la kabbale est considérée comme le véritable ésotérisme de la religion juive et remonte, à travers les signes et symboles de la langue hébraïque, jusqu’à la source de la tradition primordiale (p. 147) ». Il élabore ainsi une véritable « contre-Encyclopédie » spiritualiste et prévient des risques permanentes de cette « contrefaçon traditionnelle » qu’est la contre-initiation.

 

C’est dans ce corpus métaphysique que puisent les nombreux héritiers, directs ou putatifs, de René Guénon. David Bisson les évoque sans en omettre les divergences avec le maître ou entre eux. Il consacre ainsi de plusieurs pages à l’influence guénonienne sur l’islamologue du chiisme iranien et traducteur de Heidegger, Henry Corbin, sur le sociologue des imaginaires, Gilbert Durand, sur le rénovateur néo-gnostique Raymond Abellio et sur les ébauches maladroites – souvent tendancieuses – de vulgarisation conduites par le duo Louis Pauwels – Jacques Bergier. David Bisson s’attache aussi à quelques cas particuliers comme le Roumain Mircea Eliade.

 

rg2.jpgAu cours de l’Entre-deux-guerres, le futur historien des religions affine sa propre vision du monde. Alimentant sa réflexion d’une immense curiosité pluridisciplinaire, il a lu – impressionné – les écrits de Guénon. D’abord rétif à tout militantisme politique, Eliade se résout sous la pression de ses amis et de son épouse à participer au mouvement politico-mystique de Corneliu Codreanu. Il y devient alors une des principales figures intellectuelles et y rencontre un nommé Cioran. Au sein de cet ordre politico-mystique, Eliade propose un « nationalisme archaïque (p. 252) » qui assigne à la Roumanie une vocation exceptionnelle. Son engagement dans la Garde de Fer ne l’empêche pas de mener une carrière de diplomate qui se déroule en Grande-Bretagne, au Portugal et en Allemagne. Son attrait pour les « mentalités primitives » et les sociétés traditionnelles pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale s’accroît si bien qu’exilé en France après 1945, il jette les premières bases de l’histoire des religions qui le feront bientôt devenir l’universitaire célèbre de Chicago. Si Eliade s’éloigne de Guénon et ne le cite jamais, David Bisson signale cependant qu’il lui expédie ses premiers ouvrages. En retour, ils font l’objet de comptes-rendus précis. Bisson peint finalement le portrait d’un Mircea Eliade louvoyant, désireux de faire connaître et de pérenniser son œuvre.

 

Le syncrétisme ésotérique de Schuon

 

Contrairement à Eliade, la référence à Guénon est ouvertement revendiquée par Frithjof Schuon. Ce Français né en Suisse d’un père allemand et d’une mère alsacienne se convertit à l’islam et adopte le nom d’Aïssa Nour ed-Din. En Algérie, il intègre la tarîqa (confrérie initiatique) du cheikh al-Alawî. Instruit dans le soufisme, Schuon devient vite le cheikh d’une nouvelle confrérie. Dans sa formation intellectuelle, Guénon « apparaît comme un “ maître de doctrine ” (p. 160) ». On a très tôt l’impression que « ce que Guénon a exposé de façon théorique, Schuon le décline de façon pratique (p. 162) ».

 

PFS_couleur.jpgEn étroite correspondance épistolaire avec Guénon, Schuon devient son « fils spirituel ». cela lui permet de recruter de nouveaux membres pour sa confrérie soufie qu’il développe en Europe. D’abord favorable à son islamisation, Schuon devient ensuite plus nuancé, « la forme islamique ne contrevenant, en aucune manière, à la dimension chrétienne de l’Europe. Il essaiera même de fondre les deux perspectives dans une approche universaliste dont l’ésotérisme sera le vecteur (p. 172) ». Cette démarche syncrétiste s’appuie dès l’origine sur son nom musulman signifiant « Jésus, Lumière de la Tradition».

 

Frithjof Schuon défend une sorte d’« islamo-christianisme ». Cette évolution se fait avec prudence, ce qui n’empêche pas parfois des tensions avec l’homme du Caire. Construite sur des « révélations » personnelles a priori mystiques, la méthode de Schuon emprunte « à plusieurs sources. Principalement fondée sur la pratique soufie, elle est irriguée de références à d’autres religions (christianisme, hindouisme, bouddhisme, etc.) et donne ainsi l’impression d’une mise en abîme de l’ésotérisme compris dans son universalité constitutive (p. 203) ». En 1948, dans un texte paru dans Études Traditionnelles, Schuon, désormais fin ecclésiologue, explique que le baptême et les autres sacrements chrétiens sont des initiations valables sans que les chrétiens soient conscients de cette potentialité. Cette thèse qui contredit le discours guénonien, provoque sa mise à l’écart. Dans les décennies suivants, il confirmera son tournant universaliste en faisant adopter par sa tarîqa la figure de la Vierge Marie, en s’expatriant aux États-Unis et en intégrant dans les rites islamo-chrétiens des apports chamaniques amérindiens.

 

Avec René Guénon, Frithjof Schuon et leurs disciples respectifs, on peut estimer que « la pensée de la Tradition semble de façon irrémédiable se conjuguer avec la pratique soufie (p. 175) ». Or, à l’opposé de la voie schuonienne et un temps assez proche de la conception de Mircea Eliade existe en parallèle la vision traditionnelle de l’Italien Julius Evola, présenté comme « le “ fils illégitime ” de la Tradition (p. 220) » tant il est vrai que sa personnalité détonne dans les milieux traditionalistes.

 

Ayant influencé le jeune Eliade polyglotte et en correspondance fréquente avec Guénon, Evola concilie à travers son équation personnelle la connaissance ésotérique de la Tradition et la pensée nietzschéenne. De sensibilité notoirement guerrière (ou activiste), Julius Evola se méfie toutefois des références spirituelles orientales, ne souhaite pas se convertir à l’islam et, contempteur féroce des monothéismes, préfère redécouvrir la tradition spécifique européenne qu’il nomme « aryo-romaine ». Tant Eliade qu’Evola reprennent dans leurs travaux « la définition que Guénon donne du folklore : ce n’est pas seulement une création populaire, mais aussi un réservoir d’anciennes connaissances ésotériques, le creuset d’une mémoire collective bien vivante (p. 269) ». Mais, à la différence du jeune Roumain ou du Cairote, Evola n’hésite pas à s’occuper de politique et d’événements du quotidien (musiques pop-rock, ski…). Quelque peu réticent envers le fascisme officiel, il en souhaite un autre plus aristocratique, espère dans une rectification du national-socialisme allemand, considère les S.S. comme l’esquisse d’un Ordre mystico-politique et collabore parfois aux titres officiels du régime italien en signant des articles polémiques.

 

Tradition et géopolitique

 

Tout au cours de sa vie, Julius Evola verse dans la politique alors que « Guénon n’a cessé de mettre en garde ses lecteurs contre les “ tentations ” de l’engagement politique (p. 219) ». Les prises de position évoliennes disqualifient leur auteur auprès des fidèles guénoniens qui y voient une tentative de subversion moderne de la Tradition… De ce fait, « la plupart des disciples de Guénon ne connaissent pas les ouvrages du penseur italien et, lorsqu’ils les connaissent, cherchent à en minorer la portée (p. 220) ». Néanmoins, entre la réponse musulmane soufie défendue par Guénon et la démarche universaliste de Schuon, la voie évolienne devient pour des Européens soucieux de préserver leur propre identité spirituelle propre l’unique solution digne d’être appliquée. Ce constat ne dénie en rien les mérites de René Guénon dont la réception est parfois inattendue. Ainsi retrouve-t-on sa riche pensée en Russie en la personne du penseur néo-eurasiste russe Alexandre Douguine.

 

Grande figure intellectuelle en Russie, Alexandre Douguine écrit beaucoup, manifestant par là un activisme métapolitique débordant et prolifique. Depuis quelques années, les Éditions Ars Magna offrent au public francophone des traductions du néo-eurasiste russe. Dans l’un de ses derniers titres traduits, Pour une théorie du monde multipolaire, Alexandre Douguine mentionne Orient et Occident et La Grande Triade de Guénon. Il y voit un « élément, propre à organiser la diplomatie inter-civilisationnel dans des circonstances de ce monde multipolaire, [qui] réside dans la philosophie traditionaliste (p. 183) ».

 

Pour une théorie du monde multipolaire est un livre didactique qui expose la vision douguinienne de la multipolarité. Il débute par l’énoncé de la multipolarité avant de passer en revue les principales théories des relations internationales (les écoles réalistes, le libéralisme, les marxismes, les post-positivismes avec des courants originaux tels que la « théorie critique », le post-modernisme, le constructivisme, le féminisme, la « sociologie historique » et le normativisme). Il conclut qu’aucun de ces courants ne défend un système international multipolaire qui prend acte de la fin de l’État-nation.

 

4ptport.jpgMais qu’est-ce que la multipolarité ? Pour Alexandre Douguine, ce phénomène « procède d’un constat : l’inégalité fondamentale entre les États-nations dans le monde moderne, que chacun peut observer empiriquement. En outre, structurellement, cette inégalité est telle que les puissances de deuxième ou de troisième rang ne sont pas en mesure de défendre leur souveraineté face à un défi de la puissance hégémonique, quelle que soit l’alliance de circonstance que l’on envisage. Ce qui signifie que cette souveraineté est aujourd’hui une fiction juridique (pp. 8 – 9) ».  « La multipolarité sous-tend seulement l’affirmation que, dans le processus actuel de mondialisation, le centre incontesté, le noyau du monde moderne (les États-Unis, l’Europe et plus largement le monde occidental) est confronté à de nouveaux concurrents, certains pouvant être prospères voire émerger comme puissances régionales et blocs de pouvoir. On pourrait définir ces derniers comme des “ puissances de second rang ”. En comparant les potentiels respectifs des États-Unis et de l’Europe, d’une part, et ceux des nouvelles puissances montantes (la Chine, l’Inde, la Russie, l’Amérique latine, etc.), d’autre part, de plus en plus nombreux sont ceux qui sont convaincus que la supériorité traditionnelle de l’Occident est toute relative, et qu’il y a lieu de s’interroger sur la logique des processus qui déterminent l’architecture globale des forces à l’échelle planétaire – politique, économie, énergie, démographie, culture, etc. (p. 5) ». Elle « implique l’existence de centres de prise de décision à un niveau relativement élevé (sans toutefois en arriver au cas extrême d’un centre unique, comme c’est aujourd’hui le cas dans les conditions du monde unipolaire). Le système multipolaire postule également la préservation et le renforcement des particularités culturelles de chaque civilisation, ces dernières ne devant pas se dissoudre dans une multiplicité cosmopolite unique (p. 17) ». Le philosophe russe s’inspire de certaines thèses de l’universitaire réaliste étatsunien, Samuel Huntington. Tout en déplorant les visées atlantistes et occidentalistes, l’eurasiste russe salue l’« intuition de Huntington qui, en passant des États-nations aux civilisations, induit un changement qualitatif dans la définition de l’identité des acteurs du nouvel ordre mondial (p. 96) ».

 

Au-delà des États, les civilisations !

 

Alexandre Douguine conçoit les relations internationales sur la notion de civilisation mise en évidence dans un vrai sens identitaire. « L’approche civilisationnelle multipolaire, écrit-il, suppose qu’il existe une unicité absolue de chaque civilisation, et qu’il est impossible de trouver un dénominateur commun entre elles. C’est l’essence même de la multipolarité comme pluriversum (p. 124). » L’influence guénonienne – entre autre – y est notable, tout particulièrement dans cet essai. En effet, Alexandre Douguine dessine « le cadre d’une théorie multipolaire de la paix, qui découpe le monde en plusieurs zones de paix, toujours fondées sur un principe particulier civilisationnel. Ainsi, nous obtenons : Pax Atlantide (composée de la Pax Americana et la Pax Europea), Pax Eurasiatica, Pax Islamica, Pax Sinica, Pax Hindica, Pax Nipponica, Pax Latina, et de façon plus abstraite : Pax Buddhistica et Pax Africana. Ces zones de paix civilisationnelle (caractérisées par une absence de guerre) ainsi qu’une sécurité globale, peuvent être considérées comme les concepts de base du pacifisme multipolaire (p. 130) ».

 

Les civilisations deviennent dès lors les nouveaux acteurs de la scène diplomatique mondiale au-dessus des États nationaux. Cette évolution renforce leur caractère culturel, car, « selon la théorie du monde multipolaire, la communauté de culture est une condition nécessaire pour une intégration réussie dans le “ grand espace ” et, par conséquent, pour la création de pôles au sein du monde multipolaire (p. 127) ». Mais il ne faut pas assimiler les « pôles continentaux » à des super-États naissants. « Dans la civilisation, l’interdépendance des groupes et des couches sociales constituent un jeu complexe d’identités multiples, qui se chevauchent, divergent ou convergent selon les articulations nouvelles. Le code général des civilisations (par exemple, la religion) fixe les conditions – cadres, mais à l’intérieur de ces limites, il peut exister un certain degré de variabilité. Une partie de l’identité peut être fondée sur la tradition, mais une autre peut représenter des constructions innovantes parce que dans la théorie du monde multipolaire, les civilisations sont considérées comme des organismes historiques vivants, immergés dans un processus de transformation constante (p. 131). » Par conséquent, « dans le cadre multipolaire, […] l’humanité est recombinée et regroupée sur une base holistique, que l’on peut désigner sous le vocable d’identité collective (p. 159) ». Ces propos sont véritablement révolutionnaires parce que fondateurs.

 

QhKS4LB+L._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpgPiochant dans toutes les écoles théoriques existantes, le choix multipolaire de Douguine n’est au fond que l’application à un domaine particulier – la géopolitique – de ce qu’il nomme la « Quatrième théorie politique ». Titre d’un ouvrage essentiel, cette nouvelle pensée politique prend acte de la victoire de la première théorie politique, le libéralisme, sur la deuxième, le communisme, et la troisième, le fascisme au sens très large, y compris le national-socialisme.

 

Cette quatrième théorie politique s’appuie sur le fait russe, sur sa spécificité historique et spirituelle, et s’oppose à la marche du monde vers un libéralisme mondialisé dominateur. Elle est « une alternative au post-libéralisme, non pas comme une position par rapport à une autre, mais comme idée opposée à la matière; comme un possible entrant en conflit avec le réel; comme un réel n’existant pas mais attaquant déjà le réel (p. 22) ». Elle provient d’une part d’un prélèvement des principales théories en place et d’autre part de leur dépassement.

 

Une théorie pour l’ère postmoderniste

 

Dans ce cadre conceptuel, le néo-eurasisme se présente comme la manifestation tangible de la quatrième théorie. Discutant là encore des thèses culturalistes du « choc des civilisations » de Samuel Huntington, il dénie à la Russie tout caractère européen. Par sa situation géographique, son histoire et sa spiritualité, « la Russie constitue une civilisation à part entière (p. 167) ». Déjà dans son histoire, « la Russie – Eurasie (civilisation particulière) possédait tant ses propres valeurs distinctes que ses propres intérêts. Ces valeurs se rapportaient à la société traditionnelle avec une importance particulière de la foi orthodoxe et un messianisme russe spécifique (p. 146) ». Et quand il aborde la question des Russes issus du phylum slave – oriental, Alexandre Douguine définit son peuple comme le « peuple du vent et du feu, de l’odeur du foin et des nuits bleu sombre transpercées par les gouffres des étoiles, un peuple portant Dieu dans ses entrailles, tendre comme le pain et le lait, souple comme un magique et musculeux poisson de rivière lavé par les vagues (p. 302) ». C’est un peuple chtonien qui arpente le monde solide comme d’autres naviguent sur toutes les mers du globe. Son essence politique correspond donc à un idéal impérial, héritage cumulatif de Byzance, de l’Empire mongol des steppes et de l’internationalisme prolétarien.

 

Alexandre Douguine fait par conséquent un pari risqué et audacieux : il table sur de gigantesques bouleversements géopolitiques et/ou cataclysmiques qui effaceront les clivages d’hier et d’aujourd’hui pour de nouveaux, intenses et pertinents. Dès à présent, « la lutte contre la métamorphose postmoderniste du libéralisme en postmoderne et un globalisme doit être qualitativement autre, se fonder sur des principes nouveaux et proposer de nouvelles stratégies (p. 22) ».

 

Dans l’évolution politico-intellectuelle en cours, Douguine expose son inévitable conséquence géopolitique déjà évoquée dans Pour une théorie du monde multipolaire : l’idée d’empire ou de « grand espace ». Cette notion est désormais la seule capable de s’opposer à la mondialisation encouragée par le libéralisme et sa dernière manifestation en date, le mondialisme, et à son antithèse, l’éclatement nationalitaire ethno-régionaliste néo-libéral ou post-mondialiste. Dans cette optique, « l’eurasisme se positionne fermement non pas en faveur de l’universalisme, mais en faveur des “ grands espaces ”, non pas en faveur de l’impérialisme, mais pour les “ empires ”, non pas en faveur des intérêts d’un seul pays, mais en faveur des “ droits des peuples ” (p. 207) ».

 

L’auteur ne cache pas toute la sympathie qu’il éprouve pour l’empire au sens évolien/traditionnel du terme. « L’Empire est la société maximale, l’échelle maximale possible de l’Empire. L’Empire incarne la fusion entre le ciel et la terre, la combinaison des différences en une unité, différences qui s’intègrent dans une matrice stratégique commune. L’Empire est la plus haute forme de l’humanité, sa plus haute manifestation. Il n’est rien de plus humain que l’Empire (p. 111). » Il rappelle ensuite que « l’empire constitue une organisation politique territoriale qui combine à la fois une très forte centralisation stratégique (une verticale du pouvoir unique, un modèle centralisé de commandement des forces armées, la présence d’un code juridique civil commun à tous, un système unique de collecte des impôts, un système unique de communication, etc.) avec une large autonomie des formations sociopolitiques régionales, entrant dans la composition de l’empire (la présence d’éléments de droit ethno-confessionnel au niveau local, une composition plurinationale, un système largement développé d’auto-administration locale, la possibilité de cœxistence de différents modèles de pouvoir locaux, de la démocratie tribale aux principautés centralisées, voire aux royaumes) (pp. 210 – 211) ».

 

La démarche douguinienne tend à dépasser de manière anagogique le mondialisme, la Modernité et l’Occident afin de retrouver une pluralité civilisationnelle dynamique à rebours de l’image véhiculée par les relais du Système de l’homme sans racines, uniformisé et « globalitaire ». L’unité spirituelle des peuples envisagée par René Guénon et repris par ses disciples les plus zélés exige dans les faits une multipolarité d’acteurs politiques puissants.

 

Georges Feltin-Tracol

 

• Alexandre Douguine, La Quatrième théorie politique. La Russie et les idées politiques du XXIe siècle, avant-propos d’Alain Soral, Ars Magna, Nantes, 2012, 336, 30 €.

 

• Alexandre Douguine, Pour une théorie du monde multipolaire, Ars Magna, Nantes, 2013, 196 p., 20 €.

 

• David Bisson, René Guénon. Une politique de l’esprit, Pierre-Guillaume de Roux, Paris, 2013, 527 p., 29,90 €.

 

Article printed from Europe Maxima: http://www.europemaxima.com

 

URL to article: http://www.europemaxima.com/?p=4164

mardi, 10 février 2015

Evola? Né eccentrico, né "guru"

Evola? Né eccentrico, né "guru": de Turris racconta gli incontri col filosofo

Ex: http://www.secoloditalia.it

ev1396243984-ipad-416-0.jpg«Julius Evola aveva una personalità multiforme, o almeno un carattere variabile, umorale, o era addirittura lunatico come anche è stato detto? E’ quel che si potrebbe pensare ascoltando le testimonianze di quanti hanno avuto la possibilità di conoscerlo e frequentarlo, dato che ne offrono rappresentazioni diverse, spesso assai diverse e quasi contrastanti fra loro al punto di sembrare o invenzioni o descrizioni di persone differenti. E’ quel che mi è venuto di pensare – scrive Gianfranco de Turris sul Barbadillo.it – ascoltando amici o estranei che mi hanno raccontato i loro incontri con il filosofo e chiedendomi sempre quale fosse invece la mia personale impressione: pur facendo la tara sul tempo trascorso, erano immagini troppo distanti per non cercare una spiegazione. Come ripeto a tutti coloro che mi interpellano a questo proposito, soprattutto chi per l’età non ha potuto conoscere di persona Evola, io l’ho sempre trovato una persona “normale”, senza eccentricità, bizzarrie, a parte il vezzo di prendere dal cassetto della scrivania il monocolo e inforcarlo alla presenza di signore e signorine; nessun atteggiamento di superiorità o da “maestro”, nessuna saccenteria, e questo sin da quando andai a trovarlo per la prima volta accompagnato da Adriano Romualdi, come avveniva per chi era giovane tra la fine degli anni Sessanta e l’inizio degli anni Settanta del Novecento. Di  certo avvenne dopo il 1968 quando avevo parlato di lui sul mensile L’Italiano fondato e diretto da Pino Romualdi e sul quale Adriano mi aveva invitato a collaborare (ed ero anche retribuito!). Con lui si parlava pacatamente di tutto, purtroppo non di alcune questioni cruciali di cui soltanto dopo, approfondendone vita e pensiero, avrei voluto parlare col senno di poi. Questioni un po’ più “profonde” si affrontarono solo verso la fine della sua vita, a dicembre 1973, quando andai a trovarlo con Sebastiano Fusco ed avemmo una lunga conversazione registrata che pubblicai però postuma, dodici anni dopo, in appendice alla seconda edizione di Testimonianze su Evola (Mediterranee, 1985)».

La “scandalosa” intervista concessa a Playmen

«Evidentemente si fece di me una opinione positiva – continua de Turris – anche se non mi disse mai nulla in proposito, ma sta di fatto che acconsentì a rispondere alle mie domande per una serie di interviste (almeno quattro) su vari giornali e riviste, preso ormai dalla mia mania “giornalistica” di divulgarne le opinioni rimaste sempre in ambiti ristretti,  più di quante sino a quel momento gli erano state fatte da altri, e ora raccolte in Omaggio a Julius Evola (Volpe, 1973) pubblicato per i suoi 75 anni. E, sempre per quella mia mania, ne propiziai diverse tra cui quella, clamorosa, che apparve su Playmen (con grande scandalo dei bacchettoni di destra e di sinistra) effettuata nel 1970 da Enrico de Boccard che soltanto molto dopo appresi essere stato uno dei “giovani” vicini a lui negli anni Cinquanta. Opinione positiva sua e di Adriano che ho conosciuto soltanto abbastanza di recente quando furono pubblicati una parte del suo epistolario italiano (Lettere di Julius Evola, a cura di Renato Del Ponte, Arktos, 2005) e le lettere di Adriano al comune e sfortunato amico Emilio Carbone (Lettere ad un amico, a cura di Renato Del Ponte, Arya, 2013), tanto che il filosofo mi propose come collaboratore della rivista che voleva pubblicare il compianto Gaspare Cannizzo nonostante lui lo avesse sconsigliato e che uscì nel 1971 come Vie della Tradizione, e al Cahier de l’Herne dedicato a Gustav Meyrink uscito dopo la sua morte».

 

Appassionato di Tex
 

 

 

julius evola,italie,tradition,traditionalisme«Una persona che parlava di tutto e di tutti, sino al limite del pettegolezzo e raccontando barzellette, come un vecchio amico, senza prosopopea e saccenteria o atteggiamenti da ”guru”. Almeno con me non aveva alcuna cadenza o inflessione “alla romana”, pur essendo nato e cresciuto  nella capitale con qualche viaggio da ragazzino a Cinisi, il paese di origine dei suoi dove ancora esiste la casa avita. Al massimo arrotava “alla siciliana”  la “r” iniziale delle parole essendo vissuto in una famiglia di quelle origini. Insomma, tutt’altro che  il personaggio che emerge da altri ricordi. Ad esempio, un amico, che “evoliano” non è, mi ha raccontato che andando a trovarlo insieme ad un devoto del suo pensiero, questi, entrato nella sua stanza, si prosternò al suolo e quindi assorbì in silenzio i precetti un po’ assurdi e fuori del tempo che Evola gli dettava! Non posso pensare che questo amico si sia inventato tutto. Viceversa, una volta ad altri che erano recati da lui con spirito troppo superficiale, alla fine li congedò, come ha ricordato Renato Del Ponte, regalando oro una copia di Tex, il fumetto western allora (e oggi) il più longevo e diffuso, come dire, secondo me: siete più adatti a questo genere di  letture. A buon intenditor…».

La “Metafisica del sesso”

«Tutto ciò però  si collega a quanto lo stesso Adriano Romualdi mi raccontava allora. Ad esempio, che di fronte a certi che gli si erano presentati dicendo: “Maestro, noi il lunedì ci riuniamo per leggere Cavalcare la tigre, martedì Gli uomini e le rovine, mercoledì Rivolta contro il mondo moderno….”, Evola li interruppe e chiese: “E quando vi decidete a leggere Metafisica del sesso?”. Ad altri infervorati consigliò, per far soldi, di darsi al traffico di armi o, meglio, alla “tratta delle bianche”, come allora si diceva. In una delle sue ultime interviste, mi sembra a Panorama o in quella pubblicata postuma da Il Messaggero, disse che “il popolo bisogna trattarlo con la frusta”…. Cosa vogliano dire queste singolari affermazioni rispetto alla personalità “normale” che io ho conosciuto, ed hanno conosciuto anche altri? Dopo tanto tempo ho tratto alcune conclusioni».

Incontrava tutti, amici e nemici

«Il filosofo accettava di vedere, di parlare con tutti, senza preclusioni pur non conoscendo i suoi interlocutori, magari giovani e meno giovani di altre città che venivano appositamente a Roma per conoscerlo dopo aver letto i suoi libri. Prendevano un appuntamento e si recavano da lui, e quando non era in casa la domestica/governante altoatesina con cui parlava in tedesco, questa andandosene lasciava la chiave dell’ingresso sotto lo stuoino e chi arrivava, preavvertito, la prendeva e apriva la porta (e in teoria avrebbe potuto farlo anche qualche malintenzionato). Nel suo studio Evola accoglieva i visitatori o a letto o seduto alla sua sedia di fronte alla macchina da scrivere. Qui, io penso, si faceva una idea dei nuovi venuti grazie al suo acume psicologico ma soprattutto al suo intuito “sottile”, e si comportava di conseguenza, e quindi usava atteggiamenti, argomenti e soprattutto parole adatte alla bisogna. Oppure non ne usava affatto: come racconta Gaspare Cannizzo in un articolo,  certi suoi incontri consistevano in lunghi silenzi. Ecco il motivo per cui appariva “diverso” o singolare a chi lo andava a trovare, magari soltanto per una volta. Si comportava come un maestro zen o sufi,  un po’ come faceva anche Pio Filippani-Ronconi: diceva cose assurde, usava espressioni paradossali, provocatorie, estreme, quasi, così provocando, voler sondare le reazioni di chi aveva davanti, come a a volerlo saggiare, sondare, osservare le reazioni esteriori, ma anche interiori. I devoti, gli “evolomani” come lui stesso li aveva definiti, prendevano magari alla lettera quanto diceva e se ne facevano una impressione sbagliata. Lo stesso vale per chi andava da lui con atteggiamento troppo superficiale, o per i  facinorosi, che pensavano di essere “uomini di azione” e avevano dopo l’incontro impressioni pessime definendolo addirittura un “frocio”, come si può leggere nel libro-intervista ad un ergastolano “fascista” (Io, l’uomo nero, Marsilio, 2008). Il guaio, se così si può dire, è che il filosofo faceva lo stesso anche con chi non lo conosceva affatto oppure era già prevenuto nei suoi confronti, ad esempio con giornalisti per  nulla amichevoli i quali, anch’essi prendendo le sue parole ed espressioni alla lettera le riportavano pari pari e ne tratteggiavano un profilo oscuro e “maledetto”, quello del “barone nero” appunto, a conferma dei loro teoremi mentali (ricordiamoci che si era in piena “contestazione” e violenza, anche se il vero terrorismo non era ancora nato). Non era, dunque, una personalità multiforme, un carattere variabile, ma il suo essere così aveva un senso perché faceva da riscontro alla personalità e all’animo dei suoi interlocutori, seri o meno seri, preparati o meno preparati, colti o meno colti, ingenui o meno, amici o nemici. Il suo atteggiamento e linguaggio – conclude de Turris – servivano per capire chi fossero quei tanti che volevano vederlo, incontrarlo, parlargli, magari anche per prenderli sottilmente in giro per le loro esagerazioni, pur se non se rendevano conto. Da qui, ma a lui ovviamente non importava, la nascita di alcune leggende metropolitane nei suoi confronti che non sempre gli hanno giovato».

00:05 Publié dans Traditions | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : julius evola, italie, tradition, traditionalisme | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook

lundi, 09 février 2015

The Magical World of the Heroes

The Magical World of the Heroes
 
Ex: http://www.lumineboreali.net
 
mmh61npIUW.jpgI discovered this fascinating little article by Alexander Dugin. I found it particularly interesting because this intriguing and mystical Hermetic work from Renaissance Italy, Il mondo magico de gli heroi – or The Magical World of the Heroes , authored by Cesare della Riviera – is referred to extensively in a couple of books I have had the pleasure to read recently, one for entertainment, the other for serious study: the esoteric author Joscelyn Godwin's curious little novel The Forbidden Book (certainly recommended, despite the portrayal of the radical traditionalist right as villains), and Julius Evola's The Hermetic Tradition. I assume that the latter work would be known to anyone on here claiming an interest in Evola's esotericism.

Let this thread be dedicated to Cesare della Riviera and Il mondo magico de gli heroi. Do not hesitate to share material concerning this, or overlapping topics, such as Evola's The Hermetic Tradition.

Now keep in mind that the article below is worded quite obscurely in symbolic language. As I have not come far in my study of the Hermetic Tradition yet, I cannot comment with great certainty upon the precision or correctness of the following commentary. But it is interesting and brief reading that might inspire the public to investigate this subject further.

There are even some questionable political statements of Dugin in there that are not very central to the subject that is della Riviera's esoteric lineage.


1. An Open Entrance to the Occult text of Cesare della Riviera

"The Magical World of the Heroes" (Il mondo magico de gli heroi), the book by Cesare della Riviera, was published in 1605. Later, in the 20th century, Julius Evola republished it with his comments, asserting that in this hermetic treatise can be found the most open and clear statement of the principles of spiritual alchemy and hermetic art. Rene Guenon notes in his review, however, that the work of della Riviera is far from being as transparent as asserted in Evola's commentary.
And indeed, "The Magical World of the Heroes" is enigmatic to the limit - first, by its literary form, and second, because the concepts with which the author deals are something extremely mysterious in themselves, not clear, and having no equivalent in concrete reality.
But, maybe the difficulties in understanding the given theme arise because the very "heroic principle", the figure of the Hero, is far from the sphere of what is surrounding us today? Perhaps this difficult text is crystal clear for the true heroes and does not require any further decoding?
It is crystal clear and transparent as ice...

2. Cosmogony of Ice

In Evola's books, devoted to the differing problems of tradition and politics, there is always an appeal to the principle of Cold. The theme of Cold emerges here and there, irrespective of if the matter concerns tantra or the existential position of the "solitary man", Zen-Buddhism or knightly mysteries of medieval Europe, modern art or autobiographical notes. "Cold" and "distance" are the two words which, perhaps, are found most often in the "Black Baron's" lexicon.
The hero, by very definition, should be cold. If he will not separate himself from those around him, if he will not freeze the warm energy of daily humanness within himself, he will not be at a level of performing the Impossible, i.e. at the level that marks a hero from the merely human. The hero should leave the people and travel beyond the limit of social cosiness, where penetrating winds of an objective reality, severe and nonhuman, roar. The soil and stones rise against the animal and vegetal worlds. The aggressive vegetation corrodes minerals, and wild animals ruthlessly trample down the obstinate herbs. The elements outside the society show no mercy. The world in itself is a triumphal banquet of substance, whose bottom level merges with the lumps of cosmic ice. The hero is cold, because he is objective, because he accepts the relay race of spontaneous force, furious and unkind, from the world.
The character of all heroes - from Hercules through to Hitler - are identical: they are deeply natural, elemental, abysmally cold and distanced from social compromise. They are the carriers of the abyss of objectivity.
In his strange, hermetic manner Cesare della Riviera thus interprets the word "Angelo" ("angel"):
ANGELO = ANtico GELO, i.e. the "Angel = Ancient Ice".
This is connected with the next phase of the heroic deed, not a voyage toward reality, but an escape from its limits - escape from the ice bonds.
The Alchemy and Cabbala know much about the secret of the "ice stronghold". It is a border separating the "lower waters" of life from the "upper waters" of Spirit. The phrase of della Riviera has a strict theological sense: leaving the sphere of emotional life, the hero becomes a small crystal of ice, a luminous angel, in the glassy sea of Spirit, on which a heavenly throne of Kings is founded. The Snow Queen from Andersen's fairytale has forced the boy Kai to shape pieces of ice into a mysterious angelical word - 'Ewigkeit', but the warm forces of Earth ("Gerda" means 'Earth' in old German) have returned the unfortunate hero to a poor and hopeless life. Instead of an angel, he subsequently becomes a red-faced Scandinavian burger with beer and sausages. Cold is an attribute of a corpse and the initiated one. The bodies of yogi freeze in the process of awakening the sacred snake energy - the higher the Kundalini rises, the more lifeless the corresponding body parts become, until the initiated one turns into a statue of ice, an axis of spiritual constancy.
Each hero necessarily travels to the Pole, into the heart of midnight. There he learns to love that dark and obscure substance, which is called "our Earth" by the alchemists or the "philosophers' magnesia". The urn holding the ashes of Baron Evola is buried in the thickness of an Alpine glacier, on Monte Rosa peak. The mountain was probably named so in honor of the sacral beloved of Friedrich II Hohenstauffen, the one who has not died. La Rosa di Soria. The polar rose.

3. The Voyage of the Polar Nymph

Cyliani, a mysterious 19th century alchemist whose pseudonym was determined only with the help of Pierre Dujols (Magaphon), friend of Fulcanelli and... a secret Valois, wrote that his heroic travel into the "magical world of the heroes" began with a strange visit from the "nymph of the polar star"...
Where do her footsteps lead?
They lead inside. Inside the earth, where a fantastic matter named "sulfuric acid of the
philosophers" is hiding. Visitabis interiora terrae rectificando invenies occultum lapidem. The stone is completely black, as a soul, shrouded in "antimimon pneuma" of the Gnostics. There, from the blackness of personal uncertainty, from undifferentiated "I", slipping away from any name, the magic feat begins. If the hero will not question that which constitutes his apparent essence, he is doomed. Even the divine parents do not give the answer to a problem of an origin of "I".

4. The Secret of the Heavenly Dragon

The search for the nymph is connected to an original problem of the definition of the pole star. The heavenly pole spins around, like "Atalanta fugiens". Once a slender creature was hiding in Ursa Major's fur near Arcturus. She calls herself "Shemol". In 12 thousand years she will say of herself - "I am Vega". But what is this Axis, that the dance of millenia goes round?
Black dot in the northern sky. Dragon coils around it, tempting the steadfast observer, offering doubtful fruits of knowledge. The polar nymph has given to Cyliani the key to victory over this Dragon. Hermeticists consider it a question of the primal matter. Heavenly Dragon, the true north of the ecliptic. He is guarding the boreal heart of black expanses, as a spiral outlining the absent centre.

5. The Second of Betelgeuse

Orion is the most mysterious of all constellations. Time is hiding on his right shoulder. He is the main hero of the subterranean (and not only subterranean!) world. "Betelgeuse" means "hero's shoulder" in Arabic. It is on that very shoulder that is kept the secret of a book which Fulcanelli at first gave to Canseliet, and later withdrew, forbiding its publishing. The matter concerns the "Finis Gloria Mundi", third book by the adept. When Virgo's milk touches the brawny shoulder of the "black god", and he thus loses his hands under ruthless executors' knives, a world fire is coming, the sphere is overturning. The sky falls. It is made of stone, as everybody knows. The heroes are secretly preparing terrible shocks to society. A society which consoles itself with the fact it has banished them from history, but where is the precise border between literary and nuclear range, between a dark corner for meditations and carpet bombardments?
To our information, the agents of Betelgeuse, inhabitants of the "magical world of the heroes", disguised as state officials, have made their way to the engine-room of authority. There is only the certainty of heavenly sequence and processional cycles in their minds. A nuclear fire of the Northern Hemisphere is a way to Olympus, the fire of Hercules for them.
Besides the external Evola had a secret mission...

6. The Forest of Rambouillet

"The forest of Rambouillet is a forest of blood" - Jean Parvulesco hypnotically repeats in his novel. A white deer with its throat cut is found there, then a corpse of a naked woman with identical wounds. The magic wood in which Dante has lost his way. "Philosophers' Forest". On a certain engraving, illustrating the "Tabula Smaragdina" of Hermes Trismegistus, the man with an elk's head is giving the Moon to Eve. Later, if we'll believe Parvulesco, they will meet again in a garden of Rambouillet.
A joyless rendezvous.
"One day Apollo will return, and this time for ever", - says the last prophecy of a Delphian pythoness in IV century A.D.

/Alexander Dugin
Translation: Andrey Bogdanov
 
"One day Apollo will return, and this time for ever",
- says the last prophecy of a Delphian pythoness in IV century A.D.
Apollo is a Hyperborean god, which associates him with the memory of a Golden Age.

dimanche, 08 février 2015

La crisis de la civilización occidental según Julius Evola

evola__article.png

La crisis de la civilización occidental según Julius Evola

Ex: http://www.kosmos-polis.com

En un ensayo sobre el tantrismo la escritora Marguerite Yourcenar[i] reseñaba una de las obras monumentales de Julius Evola titulada Lo Yoga della Potenza. La académica francesa catalogaba al filósofo y orientalista italiano, profesor de las universidades de Florencia y de Milán, como "un erudito genial" ateniéndose a sus obras más ponderadas. Pero aunque el barón Evola fue un erudito genial, ciertamente no fue un erudito inmaculado. Evola tuvo un pasado fascista y fue "uno de esos italianos germanizados con no sé sabe qué clase de obsesiones gibelinas", un hombre "mucho más fascinado por el poder que por el conocimiento o el amor" que estaba poseído por un "titanismo prometeico más o menos espiritualizado"[ii]. Su Rivolta contro il mondo moderno (el título de otro de sus libros), por muy justificada que esa rebelión en parte esté, "acabó arrastrándolo a unos parajes aún más peligrosos que aquellos que creía abandonar". En sus libros asoman un puñado de vicios intelectuales, esperables en alguien con semejante orientación, que enturbian una y otra vez incluso sus trabajos más brillantes. La propia Yourcenar señaló casi todos esos vicios: "el concepto de raza elegida que en la práctica conduce al nazismo"; "una avidez enfermiza por los poderes supranormales, que lo lleva a aceptar sin control los aspectos más materiales de la aventura espiritual"; "el paso lamentable de la noción de poderes intelectuales y místicos a la de poder puro y simple"; "un sueño de dominación aristocrática y sacerdotal que no sabemos si correspondió a una edad de oro del pasado, pero del que en nuestro tiempo hemos visto caricaturas grotescas y atroces"; a lo que habría que añadir un desprecio sumario hacia lo femenino que lo lleva a proclamar la deficiencia interior de la mujer y la incapacidad femenina para la vida humana superior. No obstante, y a pesar de todo esto -que no debe olvidarse nunca cuando uno se acerca a la obra de Evola– también es cierto que sus mejores libros, tomados con las debidas cautelas, aportan abundante materia para la reflexión. Huellas de ellos pueden encontrarse en las obras de no pocos autores contemporáneos que, sin embargo, omiten cuidadosamente la fuente por considerarla innombrable y maldita. Adolfo Morganti, en el ámbito del orientalismo, y Alain de Benoist, en el de la filosofía, fueron los primeros que se atrevieron a remitir a las obras de Evola abiertamente. Como señaló Morganti, "después de años de que el pensamiento evoliano hubiera sido o demonizado grotescamente o ensalzado como un improbable evangelio, había que romper son el muro de las ideologías y proceder al debate de las ideas y a un análisis crítico digno de ese nombre"[iii].

En este sentido Cavalgar el tigre ha sido una de sus obras más interesantes e influyentes[iv]. Su punto de partida es la ciclología de las tradiciones culturales indoeuropeas, que observa un descenso progresivo de la civilización desde una 'edad de oro' primordial hasta una 'edad de hierro' donde se liberan todos los mecanismos disolutorios para dar paso a la liquidación del ciclo. Para esa concepción del tiempo –propia de nuestra cultura clásica y presente todavía hoy en el pensamiento hindú- nuestra época, lejos de ser la culminación de un tiempo lineal de progreso continuo, es el momento final de una era de disolución. En tal contexto temporal Evola señala que hay un cierto tipo humano "que, aun estando comprometido con el mundo actual, no pertenece interiormente a él, no contempla la posibilidad de ceder ante él y se siente, por su esencia, de una clase diferente a la mayor parte de sus contemporáneos". El lugar natural de este tipo humano sería "el mundo de la Tradición", entendiendo por tal cosa las civilizaciones y sociedades regidas por principios transcendentes. Puesto que lo que ha terminado por prevalecer en el mundo actual es la exacta antítesis de eso, Evola observa que los Hombres diferenciados a los que se refiere se hallan "de pie en medio de las ruinas". Para ellos hace una radiografía del mundo actual tan detallada como demoledora.

Evola empieza analizando la disolución del orden moral. El primer capítulo –titulado "En un mundo donde Dios ha muerto"- hace referencia al nihilismo hoy reinante en Occidente y ya anunciado por Nietzsche. "La muerte de Dios", dice Evola, "es una imagen que sirve para caracterizar todo un proceso histórico. Expresa el descreimiento hecho realidad cotidiana", la ruptura con la Tradición que en el Occidente actual tiene el carácter de un hecho consumado y tal vez irreversible. Evola observa que en este proceso de desacralización el hecho primario es una ruptura ontológica: las referencias reales a la Transcendencia han desaparecido de la vida humana. Todos los desarrollos del nihilismo están virtualmente contenidos en este hecho. Primero fue la aparición de la llamada 'moral autónoma', fundada sobre la mera autoridad de la razón independiente de todo criterio transcendente. Al haber perdido sus raíces –el lazo efectivo y original del Hombre con una dimensión supramaterial- esta moral ya no tiene una base invulnerable y la crítica puede destruirla fácilmente. Tras ella aparece, en un segundo momento, la ética utilitaria o social. "Al haber renunciado a todo fundamento absoluto e intrínseco del bien y del mal, se pretende justificar lo que queda de norma moral por lo que recomiendan al individuo su interés y la búsqueda de su tranquilidad material en la vida social". Esta ética ya no tiene carácter interiormente normativo o imperativo y todo se reduce a amoldarse a los códigos de la sociedad, que reemplazan a la ley transcendente derribada. Es un conformismo fundado "sobre el interés, la cobardía, la hipocresía y la inercia". Además, como ya no existe ningún lazo interior, "cualquier acto o comportamiento se vuelven lícitos cuando puede evitarse la sanción exterior, jurídico-social, o cuando uno es indiferente a ella". Hay, por tanto, dos fases. La primera es una rebelión metafísica que tiene consecuencias morales. En la segunda fase "hasta los motivos que habían justificado y alentado la rebelión desaparecen, volviéndose ilusorios para un nuevo tipo de Hombre. Aquí estamos ya en la fase específicamente nihilista, cuyo tema dominante es el sentido de lo absurdo y de la irracionalidad de la condición humana". Es lo que Nietzsche llamó "la miseria del Hombre sin Dios": la existencia parece perder todo significado y toda meta.

Todos los imperativos, todos los valores morales, todos los lazos y los apoyos se desmoronan. "La existencia es abandonada a sí misma en su realidad desnuda sin ningún punto de referencia fuera de ella que pueda darle sentido a los ojos del Hombre".

evola_upright_ll.jpgEvola hace notar que existe una corriente de pensamiento y una historiografía cuya característica es presentar el proceso anterior, al menos en sus primeras fases, como una conquista positiva. "Desde el siglo de las luces y cierto liberalismo", dice, "hasta el historicismo inmanentista, primero idealista, luego materialista y marxista, estas fases de disolución han sido interpretadas y exaltadas como una emancipación del Hombre, un progreso y un verdadero humanismo". En los tiempos en que nosotros vivimos, señala Evola, la ruptura metafísica y moral ha pasado ya al plano existencial. Hoy "una buena parte de la humanidad occidental encuentra normal que la existencia esté desprovista de todo verdadero significado y que no deba ser ligada a ningún principio superior, aunque se las ha arreglado para vivirla de la forma más soportable y menos desagradable posible. Sin embargo, esto tiene como contrapartida inevitable una vida interior cada vez más reducida, inestable y huidiza, así como la desaparición de toda rectitud y fuerza moral". Un sistema de anestésicos y compensaciones (el sexo banalizado, el alcohol, las drogas, las diversiones, el consumismo, los medios de masas) trata de suplir y tapar la falta de significado y de valor de una vida abandonada a sí misma. Sin embargo, cuando dicho entramado se tambalea por alguna razón aparece "la náusea, el asco, el vacío y el absurdo de toda esta nueva civilización materialista impuesta por toda la Tierra". En aquellos cuya sensibilidad es más aguda se constatan diversas formas de traumatismo interior y se ven aparecer estados de degradación y alineación existenciales. Especialmente significativa por lo que tiene de signo de los tiempos es la situación de la juventud 'perdida' o 'quemada' de hoy.

Señala Evola que una de las principales coberturas evasivas, uno de los anestésicos más eficaces del nihilismo occidental es el mito económico-social en sus dos vertientes: el bienestar consumista y el funcionarismo marxista. Capitalismo y marxismo participan del mismo espejismo: "creer en serio que la miseria existencial se reduce a sufrir indigencia material y que, en consecuencia, la primera debe desaparecer automáticamente si se elevan las condiciones materiales de la existencia". Evola considera que la verdad es más bien la opuesta: miseria espiritual y pobreza material carecen de relación y la felicidad y la plenitud humana tienen poco que ver con la abundancia material. Es un hecho que las vidas más profundas son a menudo, si no pobres, sí desde luego austeras (incluso en medio de la riqueza), porque un clima de facilidad debilita la virtud más alta e impide que el Hombre se pruebe y se discipline a sí mismo. "El verdadero significado del mito económico-social, sea cual fuere su variedad", dice Evola, "es el de un medio de anestesia interior tendente no sólo a eludir el problema de una existencia privada de todo sentido, sino a consolidar todas las formas de esta fundamental ausencia de sentido en la vida del Hombre moderno". Para Evola el marxismo y sus derivados 'progresistas' son "el estupefaciente más mortífero de todos los administrados hasta ahora a una humanidad desarraigada", estupefaciente que va acompañado de "una lobotomía psíquica tendente a neutralizar metódicamente, desde la infancia, toda forma de sensibilidad y de intereses superiores y cualquier modo de pensar que no se exprese en términos económico-sociales". En cuanto al sistema consumista, Evola dice que "destruye todo valor superior de la vida y de la personalidad", porque el individuo consumista acaba por considerar absurda cualquier renuncia al bienestar en nombre de valores más altos y se pliega gustoso a los condicionamientos anestesiantes del sistema. Puesto que en Occidente la 'clase obrera' ha entrado con gran fruición en el sistema consumista y en el modo de vida burgués, los derivados marxistas abandonan la revolución anticapitalista y llaman ahora a una suerte de "contestación global", irracional, anarquizante y privada de referentes superiores, en nombre del Tercer Mundo o de toda clase de minorías marginales.

Tanto el sistema como sus antagonistas tienen un carácter nihilista que no hace sino confirmar el nihilismo general de nuestra época.

Dos son los tipos humanos que ha producido el nihilismo contemporáneo. Evola los llama "el Hombre objeto" y el "nihilista activo". El primero -el tipo más frecuente- se pliega a los procesos de disolución en marcha de modo pasivo. O bien se adapta a una vida desprovista de sentido con anestésicos y sucedáneos, agarrándose a las formas supervivientes de convención y seguridad burguesas, o bien se entrega a formas de vida desordenadas y de revuelta anarcoide. El nihilista activo de corte nietzscheano, tipo mucho más restringido, está convencido, sin embargo, de que la actual rebelión contra la Transcendencia es el camino correcto, hace apología de ella y considera que el desastre actual es sólo el resultado de no haber sabido estar a la altura de las nuevas circunstancias sin Dios. Evola analiza entonces el tema de 'la muerte de Dios': para él no es la Divinidad metafísica, es el Dios teísta, lo que ha muerto, el Dios que es una proyección de los valores sociales dominantes o un apoyo para las debilidades humanas. Es el conjunto de conceptos que el cristianismo oficial ha considerado como esenciales e indispensables de toda religión 'verdadera' lo que ha muerto: "el Dios personal del teísmo, cierta ley moral con paraísos e infiernos, la concepción restringida de un orden providencial y de un finalismo moral del mundo y la fe que reposa sobre una base principalmente emotiva, dogmática y anti-intelectual. No es más que el Dios concebido como centro de gravedad de todo este sistema quien ha sido golpeado, un Dios que había terminado por servir de opio o contrapartida a la pequeña moral con que el mundo burgués sustituyó a la gran moral antigua. Pero el núcleo esencial, representado por las doctrinas metafísicas, permanece intacto para quien sepa comprenderlas y vivirlas, inaccesible a todos los procesos nihilistas, a toda disolución". Evola considera que el cristianismo ha facilitado la acción de las fuerzas de disolución en Occidente por haber liquidado todos los intentos metafísicos que dentro de él se han hecho. La irracionalidad de sus dogmas y la falta de un corpus sapiencial superior capaz de contener el derrumbamiento han hecho al cristianismo particularmente vulnerable a los embates de la crítica racional y del libre pensamiento.

Cuando la disolución se ha asentado en el orden moral, la enfermedad sigue con la infección de la persona. Evola distingue entre 'persona' e 'individuo'. La persona es "lo que el Hombre representa concreta y sensiblemente en el mundo y en su circunstancia, pero siempre como una forma de expresión y manifestación de un principio superior que debe ser reconocido como el verdadero centro del ser y sobre el que se sitúa el yo. El Hombre en tanto que persona tiene forma, es él mismo y se pertenece a sí mismo, y en esto se diferencia del individuo". En esto y en que la persona "no está cerrada hacia lo Alto". "La noción de individuo", por contra, "es la de una unidad abstracta, informe, numérica, sin cualidades propias y nada que lo diferencie verdaderamente". El individuo pertenece al reino de la cantidad y es un ego disociado de todo principio transcendente.

Evola vaticina que la crisis de los valores del individuo en el mundo moderno está destinada a ser general e irreversible. El materialismo, el mundo de las masas, las megaurbes modernas, la técnica, la mecanización, las fuerzas elementales despertadas y controladas por procesos objetivos, los efectos existenciales de catástrofes colectivas (las guerras totales o el megaterrorismo con sus frías destrucciones, por ejemplo), todo esto golpea mortalmente al individuo y reduce cada vez más la validez de los valores burgueses. Del individuo se desemboca así en algo todavía más bajo, el tipo de Hombre vacío, repetido en serie, producto multiplicable e insignificante, que corresponde a la vida uniformada actual. Con este tipo de Hombre vacío y serial llega "una nueva barbarie" y un "ideal animal" de vida. Un ideal basado en "el bienestar biológico, la comodidad y la euforia optimista que enfatiza lo que no es más que lozanía, juventud, fuerza física, seguridad y éxito materiales, satisfacción primitiva de los apetitos del vientre y del sexo, vida deportiva... y cuya contrapartida es una atrofia de todas las formas superiores de sensibilidad y de interés intelectual". En esta nueva barbarie y en este ideal animal se incluyen también todos los contestatarios primitivistas que reclaman una 'vuelta a la naturaleza', a la 'Madre Tierra'. Esta supuesta contestación no es sino una forma de regresión. Evola defiende que el Hombre ni es un animal ni ha tenido nunca un estado natural. El Hombre, desde el principio, "ha sido situado en un estado por encima de la naturaleza del que a continuación ha caído", de modo que cuando pretende volverse 'natural' (esto es, animal) en realidad se desnaturaliza.

Disuelta la moral y disuelto el individuo, también se disuelve el conocimiento. Evola se ocupa por extenso de la ciencia positiva y matemático-experimental propia de la modernidad. Esta ciencia no tiene para él valor de conocimiento en el sentido verdadero de ese término, pues se reduce a "una voluntad de poder aplicada a las cosas y a la naturaleza". Para Evola "la ciencia moderna, por una parte conduce a una prodigiosa extensión cuantitativa de los datos relativos a dominios antes inexplorados u olvidados, pero por otra parte no hace penetrar al Hombre en el fondo de la realidad, sino que incluso lo aleja de ella, lo vuelve aún más ajeno a ella". La naturaleza, en su profundidad, permanece cerrada al Hombre y es aún más misteriosa que antes: sus misterios simplemente han sido recubiertos y la mirada humana se ha distraído con las realizaciones espectaculares de los dominios técnicos industriales, dominios "donde no se trata de conocer el mundo, sino de transformarlo conforme al interés de una humanidad convertida exclusivamente en terrestre, como quería Marx". Simultáneamente el conocimiento directo y viviente, la penetración de la intuición intelectual o de la visión mística, "el único conocimiento que importaba a la humanidad no bastardeada", se rechaza hoy por 'no científico'.

Para Evola la concepción del mundo que tiene la ciencia moderna es esencialmente profanadora y ese mundo desacralizado por el saber científico se ha convertido en un elemento existencial constitutivo del Hombre moderno. A través de la instrucción obligatoria se le ha llenado la cabeza de nociones científicas positivistas "no pudiendo adquirir para todo lo que le rodea más que una mirada sin alma que se convierte desde entonces en destructora". El trasfondo efectivo del progreso científico-técnico actual, convertido en la nueva religión de la modernidad, es para el autor el estancamiento y la barbarie interiores. Evola señala que ese progreso "no le reporta nada al Hombre como tal": no le otorga ni conocimiento transcendente, ni potencia interior, ni una norma de acción de más altura moral. En el plano de la acción la ciencia moderna "pone a disposición del Hombre un conjunto prodigioso de medios sin resolver en absoluto el problema de los fines". Además, la ciencia se ha convertido en un proceso autónomo y fragmentado en cada vez más estrechas especializaciones al que "ninguna instancia superior es capaz de imponer un límite y de imprimir dirección, control o freno". Por ello "a menudo se tiene la impresión de que el desarrollo técnico-científico desborda al Hombre y le impone frecuentemente situaciones inesperadas, difíciles y llenas de incógnitas". Las formas de potencia exterior y mecánica de sus bombas, sus cohetes o su revolución tecnológica dejan, en cualquier caso, invariable al Hombre en sí, que sigue tan preso o más que antes de sus debilidades, sus bajas pasiones, su confusión y sus miedos. El Hombre actual no eleva su estatura moral, intelectual o espiritual por ser capaz de ir en cohete hasta la Luna, de producir seres humanos en laboratorio o de matar a miles de criaturas en cinco minutos gracias a la técnica.

La misma degradación que afecta al conocimiento se encuentra hoy, según Evola, en la cultura. La cultura occidental está neutralizada en su influjo, dividida en dominios particulares sin unidad orgánica y se halla privada de todo carácter objetivo, participando de esta forma en los procesos disolutorios de la época. Evola considera que la antítesis decretada entre cultura y política es "una de las manifestaciones más típicas de esa neutralización de la cultura". El contrario normal y fecundo de esta situación no es, para Evola, una cultura al servicio del poder y de la ideología en el sentido degradado de hoy, sino la existencia de una idea axial, de un símbolo elemental y central de una civilización dada, "que manifiesta su fuerza y ejerce una acción paralela y a menudo invisible tanto sobre el plano político (con todos los valores, no sólo materiales, que deberían referirse a un verdadero Estado), como sobre el plano del pensamiento, de la cultura y de las artes". Para Evola esa vieja idea axial hoy perdida es en el caso de la civilización occidental el "ideal del Imperio", ideal que se forjó en el mundo antiguo y medieval y que países como España contribuyeron a mantener en los Siglos de Oro. Evola entiende por tal cosa una gran organización política más allá de particularismos etnicistas y territoriales, organizada con criterios de excelencia y vertebrada por los valores transcendentes característicos de nuestra civilización.

evolaDADA-Evolagross.pngAl analizar la situación del arte moderno, Evola subraya sus tendencias morbosas e intimistas, que dan la espalda al plano sobre el que actúan las grandes fuerzas históricas y políticas y se retiran al mundo de la subjetividad privada del artista no dando valor más que a lo psicológico y a lo formalmente 'interesante'. Joyce, Proust o Gide son, en la literatura, ejemplos acabados de esta tendencia. En ocasiones a esta orientación se asocia la idea del 'arte puro', esto es, del mero formalismo rodeando a un contenido más o menos insignificante. Las innumerables vanguardias e ismos no tienen mucho más valor, afirmación que resulta significativa en la pluma de alguien como Evola, que fue una de las figuras señeras del dadaísmo pictórico italiano. El significado de estas vanguardias "se reduce a una revuelta estéril, reflejo del proceso general de disolución. Reflejan el estado de crisis, pero no aportan nada constructivo, estable o duradero". Su recorrido, además, es corto. Pronto acaban convertidas en un nuevo 'academicismo', una nueva convención, y entran como un producto de consumo más en los circuitos comerciales. En el fondo el arte de hoy, separado de todo contexto orgánico y necesario, se ve reducido al absurdo, convertido en un artículo de lujo para parásitos ociosos. "Si se consideran objetivamente los procesos en curso", observa Evola, "se siente nítidamente que el arte ya no tiene porvenir, que su posición es cada vez más marginal con respecto a la existencia y que su valor se reduce al de un artículo de gran lujo". Al asomarse a la literatura, el panorama no es mejor. "Su fondo constante es el fetichismo de las relaciones humanas, de los problemas sentimentales, sexuales o sociales de individuos sin importancia". Se ha impuesto un realismo inferior, corrosivo y derrotista, denuncia Evola, en el que "directa o indirectamente se mina todo ideal, se hace mofa de todo principio y se reducen los valores estéticos, lo justo, lo verdaderamente noble y digno a simples palabras; y todo ello sin obedecer siquiera a una tendencia declarada". Frente a este realismo inferior Evola postula un realismo positivo que afirma la existencia de valores "que para el tipo humano diferenciado no se reducen a ficciones ni fantasías, sino que tienen el valor de realidades absolutas. Entre éstas figuran el coraje espiritual, el honor, la rectitud, la veracidad o la fidelidad. Una existencia humana que ignora esto no es plenamente real, es infrarreal. Para el Hombre diferenciado, a pesar de la disolución presente, estos valores siguen siendo intocables".

La música tampoco escapa al clima imperante. En el terreno de la música culta la disolución ha seguido dos vías: la tecnicidad fría y cerebral del dodecafonismo y la música serial y una inmersión en lo físico que toma a las cosas y los impulsos elementales como temas inspiradores (iniciada con el impresionismo francés y la música nacionalista). Últimamente se ha llegado ya a una especie de "música glaciar" con composiciones "cuya extrema abstracción formal es análoga a las puras entidades algebraicas de la física más reciente o, en otro terreno, a cierto surrealismo. Son fuerzas sonoras liberadas de las estructuras tradicionales que empujan hacia un meandro tecnicista que sólo el álgebra pura de la composición preserva de una completa disolución en lo amorfo, por ejemplo en la intensidad de los timbres descarnados y atómicamente disociados". Fuera de la música culta, que por otra parte tiene un alcance cada vez más minoritario, la música folclórica ha desaparecido y lo que domina la esfera cotidiana son las diferentes variantes del pop, músicas elementales de diversión o distracción, a menudo vehículos idóneos para la transmisión de toda clase de influencias psíquicas negativas.

Disuelta la moral y el individuo, disueltos el conocimiento, la cultura y las artes, el dominio socio-político estalla igualmente. Entre todos los dominios de la vida moderna es el socio-político "aquel en el cual, por efecto de los procesos generales de disolución, aparece de una manera más manifiesta la ausencia de una estructura que posea el carisma de una verdadera legitimidad para ligarse a significados superiores". Señala Evola que en la época actual "no existe un Estado que pueda, por su propia naturaleza, reivindicar un principio de autoridad verdadera e inalienable" ni que pueda considerarse ajustado a una concepción transcendente de la política. Hoy sólo existen aparatos representativos y administrativos, no Estados que sean la encarnación de un ideal superior. No hay tampoco verdaderos estadistas, la clase dirigente actual no tiene ningún carisma, ninguna virtud superior. "Del mismo modo que ya no existe un verdadero Estado, tampoco existe un partido o un movimiento que se presente como defensor de ideales superiores por los que valga la pena luchar". "A pesar de la variedad de etiquetas", observa Evola, "el mundo actual de los partidos se reduce a un régimen de politicastros que juegan a menudo el papel de hombres de paja al servicio de intereses financieros, industriales o sindicales. Por lo demás la situación general es tal que incluso si existieran partidos o movimientos de otro tipo ya no tendrían ninguna audiencia en las masas desarraigadas, dado que estas masas sólo reaccionan positivamente a favor de quienes le prometen ventajas materiales y 'conquistas sociales'. Hoy en día en política sólo puede actuarse en el plano de las fuerzas pasionales y subintelectuales, fuerzas que por su misma naturaleza carecen de toda estabilidad. Sobre estas fuerzas se apoyan los demagogos, los dirigentes de masas, los fabricantes de mitos y los manipuladores de la opinión pública". Es por esto por lo que aunque hoy aparecieran líderes dignos de ese nombre –personas que apelasen "a fuerzas e intereses de otro tipo, que no prometieran ventajas materiales, que no consintieran en prostituirse o degradarse para asegurarse un poder efímero, precario e informe"-, estos líderes muy probablemente no tendrían ninguna influencia en la situación actual.

Pasando del dominio político al propiamente social, Evola observa que todas las unidades orgánicas de la sociedad se han disuelto o están en vías de hacerlo y lo que existe es esencialmente una masa inestable de individuos aislados contenidos por estructuras exteriores o movida por corrientes colectivas amorfas. Las 'jerarquías' existentes son meramente dinerarias y la excelencia no tiene ya ningún valor en el ordenamiento social. La institución familiar también está en manifiesta crisis, zarandeada entre los intentos de sabotaje por un lado y las reacciones moralizantes vacías y el conformismo burgués, por otro. Desde el punto de vista de Evola todo esto no es de extrañar: "la familia ha cesado desde hace tiempo de tener un significado superior y de estar cimentada por valores vivos de orden transcendente". El carácter orgánico y en cierto sentido heroico que ofrecía su unidad en otros tiempos se ha perdido, al igual que se ha desvanecido el último barniz residual de sacralidad. La familia moderna es para Evola una institución pequeño-burguesa, determinada por valores naturalistas, utilitarios, rutinarios, vulgares y en el mejor de los casos, sentimentales. La función fundamental de la familia, la procreación, se reduce hoy sencilla y groseramente a una continuidad de la sangre, no a la continuidad más esencial de un depósito espiritual e histórico y de una herencia de valores e ideales. "Por otra parte", se pregunta Evola, "¿cómo podría ser de otra forma si su jefe natural, el padre, es hoy en día casi un extraño, incluso físicamente, al estar preso del engranaje de la vida material de esta sociedad absurda? ¿Qué autoridad moral o espiritual puede revestir el padre si hoy es sólo una máquina de fabricar dinero?". Para colmo ahora esto mismo se puede decir también de la madre, convertida en otra máquina de fabricar dinero o en un individuo de vida frívola y mundana, incapaz en ambos casos de mejorar el clima interior de la familia y de ejercer sobre ella una influencia positiva. A la pérdida del prestigio paterno le sigue el distanciamiento o la rebeldía de los hijos y la ruptura, "cada día más nítida y brutal", entre las generaciones mayores y las jóvenes. Este corte de la continuidad espiritual entre las generaciones se ve agravado, además, por un ritmo de vida cada vez más rápido y desordenado.

La misma situación de derrumbamiento que se ve en la institución familiar afecta a la unión de hombre y mujer. Hoy se han hecho frecuentes en Occidente la sucesión frívola y atropellada de emparejamientos y de rupturas hasta el punto de que parece "una especie de prostitución o ayuntamiento libre legalizado". El matrimonio burgués –que tomaba sus bases de la concepción católica y puritana protestante del matrimonio– se ha venido abajo. Desde hace unas décadas esta convención burguesa "se ha estrellado contra la práctica corriente y contestataria del sexo libre" que reivindica la promiscuidad y "la superación de las inhibiciones y los tabúes represivos". Dentro de un marco igualmente naturalista y profano (el Occidente cristiano carece de modelos de matrimonio genuinamente sagrado) el péndulo se ha ido de un extremo a otro: de una visión del sexo pacata y atormentada a otra promiscua y burdelesca. El resultado es una de las características más llamativas de nuestro tiempo: el poder obsesivo y desequilibrado de los asuntos venéreos hasta el punto de que el sexo y cierto de tipo falsificado de mujer son los dos motivos dominantes de la sociedad actual. Como dice Evola, existe una especie de "intoxicación sexual crónica manifestada de mil maneras en la vida pública y las costumbres a través de un erotismo abstracto que lo impregna todo". En este clima se comercializan "espejismos de la sexualidad de masas" en forma de ídolos femeninos que son alimentados por la televisión, el cine, la prensa, las revistas ilustradas y el mundo del espectáculo y la moda. "La mayoría de estas mujeres 'fatales' de rasgos supuestamente fascinantes", señala Evola, "en realidad como personas tienen cualidades sexuales muy mediocres y decadentes, siendo su fondo existencial el de mujeres vulgares y neuróticas".

La pretendida 'liberación' sexual de nuestra época es, para el autor, una vulgar inversión. Señala Evola que habría verdadera liberación si se tomara conciencia de los aspectos auténticamente importantes del sexo, si se reaccionara contra las vulgaridades que obturan sus posibilidades más elevadas y si se tomara posición contra la fetichización de las relaciones interpersonales. Pero eso, evidentemente, no ocurre. Las verdaderas implicaciones de la presente 'liberación sexual' son para el autor muy otras: la entronización del "sexo disociado" que conduce "a una banalización y a un naturalismo de las relaciones entre hombre y mujer, a un materialismo y un inmoralismo expeditivo y fácil en un régimen donde faltan las condiciones más elementales para realizar experiencias sexuales de verdadero valor e intensidad". El sexo se convierte así en un sucedáneo más de los muchos que produce la vida moderna, usado como las drogas "para conseguir sensaciones exasperadas que ayuden a llenar el vacío de la existencia". Y esta conversión del sexo en sucedáneo dentro de una atmósfera de venerización abstracta y colectiva provoca una aguda despolarización de los sexos que convierte a la virilidad y la feminidad en sucedáneos también, descargándolas de la fuerza transcendente de la que cada una de ellas es portadora.

Como es lógico, en este clima general de disolución, la situación de las religiones es considerada igualmente lamentable. Para Evola un fenómeno típico de las fases terminales de una civilización es que "las religiones pierden su dimensión superior, se adormecen, se secularizan y dejan de cumplir su función original". Refiriéndose a la rama católica del cristianismo Evola señalaba en Gli uomini e le rovine, otro de sus libros, la lamentable falta de nivel de la que hoy se puede ser testigo: "el peso de las preocupaciones de carácter social y moralista es mucho mayor que el concedido a la vía sapiencial, la contemplación y la ascesis, puntos clave de toda forma superior de religiosidad. De hecho hoy las principales preocupaciones del catolicismo son un moralismo sexual pequeño-burgués y un paternalismo asistencial". Es entonces, con esta situación decadente de la religión regular, cuando aparece "un neo-espiritualismo evasivo, alienante, de compensación difusa, desarrollado fuera de las tradiciones regulares (incluso contra ellas) y sin la menor repercusión seria sobre la realidad". El uso bastardo que este neo-espiritualismo hace de ciertas doctrinas tradicionales de carácter interno lleva al descrédito de las mismas por la manera "deformada e ilegítima" en que por él son presentadas y propagadas.

Ante este clima general, todo esfuerzo de oposición frontal a las tendencias de la época es considerado inútil. Evola rechaza resueltamente la opción que consistiría en "apoyarse sobre lo que sobrevive del mundo burgués y defenderlo y tomarlo como base frente a las corrientes actuales de disolución y subversión más violentas, tras haber intentado reanimar esos restos con la ayuda de algunos valores más altos". Los valores burgueses, en realidad, son productos decadentes que para Evola no tienen mayor valor. La actitud existencial que preconiza será esa que el viejo adagio oriental denomina cabalgar el tigre. "Cuando un ciclo de civilización toca a su fin", escribe Evola, "es difícil obtener un resultado positivo oponiéndose directamente a las fuerzas en movimiento. La corriente es demasiado fuerte y uno sería arrastrado por ella. Lo esencial es no dejarse impresionar por la aparente omnipotencia de las fuerzas disolutorias de la época. Privadas de lazo con todo principio superior, estas fuerzas tienen, en realidad, un campo de acción limitado. Es preciso, pues, no dejarse hipnotizar por el presente ni por lo que nos rodea y contemplar las condiciones susceptibles de aparecer más tarde. La regla a seguir consistirá en dejar libre curso a las fuerzas de la época, permaneciendo firmes y dispuestos a actuar cuando el tigre, que no puede abalanzarse sobre quien lo cabalga, esté fatigado de correr". Se abandona, por tanto, la acción directa y se retira uno hacia posiciones más interiores.

Frente a la situación actual, sin embargo, no caben para Evola ni la desesperación ni el derrotismo. El Hombre diferenciado sabe que "cuando un ciclo termina, otro comienza, y el punto culminante del proceso disolutorio es también aquel en el cual se origina el enderezamiento en la dirección opuesta". Para un Hombre amante de la Transcendencia, dice Evola, el mundo actual resulta amargo y problemático, pero él sabe que no está aquí ni por un azar despiadado al que ha de resignarse con fe o con fatalismo, ni para librar una carrera de resistencia a fondo perdido. A ese tipo humano le corresponde la misión de velar en medio de la noche, en medio de las ruinas, y conservar la memoria de toda una herencia civilizatoria para que la continuidad con el pasado no se rompa. La vida es para él, en consecuencia, una aventura de importancia capital, cargada de sentido.

Evola señala, en fin, la esterilidad del 'mito de Oriente' en nuestras presentes circunstancias. "Entre quienes han reconocido la crisis del mundo moderno y han renunciado también a considerar a la civilización moderna como la civilización por excelencia, como el apogeo y la medida de cualquier otra, hay quienes han vuelto su mirada a Oriente, ya que allí ven subsistir una orientación tradicional y espiritual que desde hace tiempo ha dejado de ser en Occidente la base de organización efectiva de los diversos dominios de la existencia. Se han preguntado incluso si no podrían encontrar en Oriente puntos de referencia útiles para la reintegración de Occidente". Evola considera que si la mirada occidental al Oriente persigue contactos intelectuales y doctrinales esa búsqueda es legítima, aunque "al menos en parte podríamos encontrar ejemplos y referencias claras en nuestro propio pasado sin necesidad de recurrir a una civilización no occidental". Pero si lo que se persigue es la adopción de un marco existencial oriental "uno no puede hacerse ilusiones: Oriente sigue ahora la senda de degradación que nosotros hemos tardado varios siglos en recorrer. El 'mito de Oriente', fuera de los círculos minoritarios y aislados de quienes cultivan las disciplinas metafísicas, es por tanto falaz. El desierto crece y no hay ninguna otra civilización que pueda servirnos de apoyo. Debemos afrontar solos nuestros problemas".

En realidad, el autor insiste en una posibilidad que justifica el esfuerzo de mantener una perspectiva netamente occidental. Es el hecho de que si la fase final de la edad oscura ha arrancado antes entre nosotros, también podemos ser nosotros los primeros en superarla. Las demás civilizaciones han entrado en esta corriente más tardíamente y podrían hallarse en lo más agudo del proceso disolutorio cuando Occidente rebase el límite negativo y empiece a remontar. Nuestra civilización estaría, en ese caso, "cualificada para una nueva función de guía, muy diferente de la que ha realizado en el pasado con la civilización tecno-industrial y materialista, entonces ya periclitada, y cuyo único resultado ha sido la decadencia espiritual generalizada".

NOTAS
[i] Marguerite Yourcenar: El Tiempo, gran escultor, Madrid, Alfaguara, 1989.
[ii] César Martínez: "Metafísica del sexo de Julius Evola", Axis Mundi II, nº5, 1998.
[iii] Adolfo Morganti: "Julius Evola y el mundo budista italiano", en Julius Evola: La doctrina del despertar. El budismo y su finalidad práctica, Grijalbo, México DF, 1998.
[iv] Julius Evola: Cabalgar el tigre, Barcelona, Nuevo Arte Thor, 1987.

jeudi, 29 janvier 2015

Métaphysique du sexe

andrew_gonzales_032_amore.jpg

Métaphysique du sexe

Ex: http://lagrandetouriste.blogspot.com
 
Né en 1898, mort en 1974, le baron Julius Evola était un penseur traditionnaliste. Qu'est-ce que la Tradition? Dans le monde indo-européen, c'est, entre autres héritages, une organisation sociale selon trois fonctions  ̶  religieuse, guerrière et économique. Mise en évidence par le philologue Georges Dumézil, ce sont, par exemple, les tripartitions Brahmanes/Kshatriyas/Vaisyas en Inde, Clergé/Noblesse/Tiers-État dans la France pré-révolutionnaire. De par sa naissance et sa conformation intérieure, Julius Evola se rattachait à l'ordre des guerriers. En ces temps troublés qui sont les nôtres, ses ouvrages sont donc à ranger dans toute bibliothèque dissidente qui se respecte.

Celui qui nous intéresse aujourd'hui s'intitule "Métaphysique du Sexe". Qu'est-ce que la métaphysique? Evola donne deux acceptions. La première est la définition philosophique courante: on appelle métaphysique la « recherche des principes et des significations ultimes ». La deuxième est étymologique: du grec μετά ("après", "au-delà de"), c'est la « science de ce qui est au-delà du physique ». Au sujet des sexes et des relations entre les sexes, Evola affirme que seule la métaphysique a quelque chose de valable à dire: « Que dans toute expérience intense de l'eros un rythme différent s'établisse, qu'un courant différent investisse et transporte, ou bien suspende, les facultés ordinaires de l'individu humain, que se produisent des ouvertures sur un monde autre   ̶  c'est ce qu'on a su ou pressenti depuis toujours. »
 
« Lorsque nous indiquerons les significations les plus profondes qui se cachent dans l'amour en général et même dans l'acte brutal qui l'exprime et l'accomplit  ̶  cet acte où « se forme un être multiple et monstrueux », où l'on dirait qu'homme et femme « cherchent à humilier, à sacrifier tout ce qu'il y a de beau en eux » (Barbusse), la plupart des lecteurs, peut-être, ne se reconnaîtra pas dans tout cela et pensera qu'il ne s'agit là que d'interprétations toutes personnelles, imaginaires et arbitraires, abstruses et "hermétiques". »

004-resize.jpg

De même que la manipulation des formes géométriques pures permet l'édification d'architectures solides, il ne peut y avoir de science de l'homme sans idée de l'homme: une sexologie fondée sur le darwinisme est donc nulle et non avenue. « A une époque où il parait approprié (…) d'écrire Sélection Naturelle avec la majuscule, comme on le faisait pour le nom de Dieu », Evola affirme au contraire que le supérieur ne peut naître de l'inférieur. L'homme ne dérive pas du singe par évolution; c'est le singe qui dérive de l'homme, par involution. Evola tient pour exact ce qui fut pressenti par certains scientifiques non-alignés (Kohlbrugge, Marconi, Dacqué, etc.), à savoir que les espèces animales seraient des « spécialisations dégénératives de possibilités comprises dans l'homme ». L'ontogénèse ne répète pas la phylogénèse: l'embryon humain passe outre là où plantes et animaux s'arrêtent, parce qu'il est appelé à un développement supérieur. Par conséquent, rien ne saurait être dit sur la sexualité de l'homme qui ne tienne compte de sa destinée particulière: « Nous n'envisagerons pas la sexualité humaine comme un prolongement de la sexualité animale ; nous envisagerons au contraire  ̶  et nous dirons pourquoi  ̶  la sexualité animale  ̶  en elle-même, chez les bêtes et telle qu'elle se présente aussi, éventuellement, chez l'homme  ̶  comme la chute et la régression d'une impulsion qui n'appartient pas à la sphère biologique. »

De sorte que la reproduction, si elle est une conséquence de la sexualité couramment observée, n'en constitue pas pour autant le but. A la suite du poète russe Vladimir Soloviev, Evola remarque que de nombreux organismes se multiplient de manière asexuelle, et que le fait sexuel n'intervient que dans la reproduction des organismes complexes. En outre, « plus nous montons haut dans l'échelle des organismes, plus la puissance de multiplication s'amoindrit, tandis qu'au contraire augmente la force de l'inclination sexuelle… Enfin, chez l'être humain, la multiplication se fait beaucoup moins que dans tout le règne animal, alors que l'amour sexuel atteint l'importance et l'intensité les plus grandes. » (Soloviev) Evola mentionne aussi le baiser, que l'espèce n'exige en rien pour se multiplier, et qui est pourtant érotiquement nécessaire. (Les amants des peuples qui ne connaissent pas le baiser ont d'autres pratiques, comme le fait de se toucher les fronts, qui permettent pareillement le "mélange des souffles".)

ms84b3fdad.jpgLe "principe de plaisir" énoncé par Sigmund Freud, père de la psychanalyse, ne convient pas mieux à une métaphysique du sexe. Misérablement compensé par le "principe de réalité", il est pour Evola symptomatique d'une époque où la sexualité est ravalée au rang d'opium des masses, et où ses potentialités subtiles sont presque systématiquement avortées, faute d'avoir conservé les connaissances traditionnelles qui s'y rapportaient. De quel plaisir est-il question, quand le simple contact mutuel des mains suffit à électriser les amants? "Dans la "normalité" de l'eros, il n'y a pas l'"idée" du plaisir en tant que motivation déterminante ", écrit Evola. "Il y a la pulsion qui, éveillée dans certaines circonstances par la polarité sexuelle en tant que telle, provoque à elle seule un état d'ivresse jusqu'à la crise du "plaisir" ».

Le terme de "polarité sexuelle" est central: il signifie que le masculin et le féminin sont à l'eros ce que le Nord et le Sud sont au champ magnétique terrestre. Selon la philosophie chinoise, il suffit même que deux individus de sexe opposé soit placés l'un à côté de l'autre, sans contact corporel, pour que s'éveille cette énergie spéciale appelée "tsing", dont l'intensité varie en fonction des degrés de "yin" et de "yang" présents en chacun d'eux. En Islam, la très stricte séparation des sexes est réputée porter cette tension à son maximum. De manière générale, pour l'ensemble des tenants de la Tradition, la différence des sexes n'est pas un constat mais un axiome. Une anthropologie fondée sur l'observation est sans valeur, puisque rien d'absolu n'est observable. A celle-ci, Evola oppose non pas la "déconstruction de genre" chère aux progressistes, mais un savoir primordial, fondé sur les principes.

 
Le caractère "fluidique", "magique" de l'attraction des sexes est comme la lettre volée d'Edgar Poe: invisible parce qu'évident. Les écrivains en témoignent mieux que les psychiatres. Evola reprend l'image de la "cristallisation" formulée par Stendhal: comme les branches des arbres se couvrent de cristaux dans les régions salines de Salzbourg, le désir de l'amant cristallise autour de l'aimée comme un halo d'extraordinaireté, propre à induire cet état de fascination qui est le pré-requis du « traumatisme de l'étreinte ». C'est ainsi qu'en toute inconscience, les amants mettent en œuvre des techniques spirituelles. Dans son Liber de arte amandi, daté du XIIème siècle, le clerc André Le Châpelain a défini l'amour comme une « agonie due à une méditation extrême sur une personne de sexe opposé ».

ms-lglg3e3.jpgPour Evola, comme pour Aristophane dans Le Banquet de Platon, l'eros est une vocation divine inscrite à même le corps, qui n'est d'abord sensible que comme dépossession de soi. De cette vocation, le sexe anatomique constitue le signe. A ce titre, l'Androgyne figure à la fois le but et l'obstacle: coïncidence miraculeuse des opposés, point de jonction des parallèles à l'horizon, il est la solution de l'énigme des tristesses post-coïtales. Abaissé au rang d'idéal consumériste, l'Androgyne perd sa signification, mais non pas son pouvoir. Ce n'est certes pas un hasard s'il figurait en bonne place dans la symbolique alchimiste, et sur le sceau du théologien Pierre Abélard, dont la liaison passionnée avec l'abbesse Héloïse d'Argenteuil, au XII siècle également, compte parmi les grandes amours de l'Histoire.

"Métaphysique du sexe" est un ouvrage extrêmement dense, qui éclaire quantité de mythes, de hiérogamies, et de rituels archaïques tels que la prostitution sacrée, les orgies saisonnières, le mariage hétérosexuel. Julius Evola y fait l'exégèse des plus rebattus des lieux communs de l'amour ("Je t'ai dans la peau", etc.) et de ses métaphores les plus persistantes: le cœur, la foudre, la mort. En passant, il évoque une tradition issue de la chevalerie médiévale nommée Amour Courtois, dont la branche ésotérique, qui n'est pas sans lien avec les Templiers, a fourni à la littérature européenne quelques-uns de ses plus magistraux chefs-d'œuvre. Plus près de nous, il n'est pas anodin que l'artiste catholique Jean-Louis Costes, qui se qualifie lui-même de « Christophe Colomb du cul », ait été rattaché à cette tradition par certains commentateurs.

Il y aurait encore beaucoup à dire sur ce livre, et sur ses limites. Nous nous en tiendrons à cette brève introduction, et souhaitons qu'elle contribue à l'effort de guerre...

jeudi, 23 octobre 2014

Paganism & Christianity, Nietzsche & Evola

evola-nietzsche-na-h.png

Paganism & Christianity, Nietzsche & Evola

By Jonathan Bowden 

Ex: http://www.counter-currents.com

Editor’s Note:

This text continues the transcript by V. S. of Jonathan Bowden’s interview at the Union Jack Club in London on Saturday, November 21, 2009, after his lecture/performance on Punch and Judy [2]. The title is editorial. 

Q: When did you decide to convert to paganism and why?

B: Well, I never really converted to paganism. I mean, there are some orthodox pagans, if you can have such a thing, who probably think I am not one. But I’m a Nietzschean and that’s a different system. Somebody made this for me. [Points to odal rune pendant.] And I like Odinic paganism sort of as an objectification of my sort of sensibility. Does one believe the gods objectively exist in another realm? Well, you see, religion is a philosophy about life which is sacristic and has rituals in which you partly act out, therefore it’s more important because it’s made slightly more concrete than ideas or it’s really just based upon ideas. There are relatively simple but powerful ideas at the crux of all the big religious systems. Most people are born in a system and just accept that and go along with it as long as it’s not too onerous or they feel like they live their life through it properly.

I just agree with the ethics of that type of Nordic paganism, which is really how the Vikings lived and how they behaved. I’m less concerned with small groups, which I respect. I like the Odinic Rite, but I personally believe that those sorts of things will only ever activate post-modern minorities and very small ones at that.

I think people should identify with what they think they are and the values that they hold. This symbol really means strength or courage or masculinity or the first man or the first principle of war or the metaphysics of conflict. So, I just think it’s a positive system of value.

I never really was a Christian. Culturally, I have great admiration for elements of Christian art. More so than most people who are pagan who have violently reacted against it. I don’t really share that emotionalism. But I don’t agree with Christian ethics. Deep down, they’ve ruined the West, and we’re in the state that we are because of them.

Q: Just added on to that: How do we create more Nietzscheans? How do we spread Nietzscheanism as a religion, as an idea?

B: You’ve got to get people quite young. I think you’ve got to introduce alternative value systems to them. This is a society that says weakness is good, weakness should be pitied, the ill are weak, the disabled are weak, people who’ve got various things wrong with them (too fat, too thin, bits dropping off) they need help. They may need help. But the value system that lies behind that desire to help worships the fact of weakness and the fact that people are broken. If you worship the idea of strength and tell the weak to become stronger, which is a reverse idea for helping them essentially. You help them in order to get stronger. You totally reverse the energy pattern and you’ve reversed the system of morals that exists in this culture now. You’ve reversed the sort of things that Rowan Williams or his predecessor or his likely successor always says, basically. I think that’s what you have to do.

I personally think it’s a moral revolution, not anything political, that will save the West, because all the technology is here, all the systems of power are here. You only have to change what’s in people’s minds. It’s very difficult though.

Q: So, to a young person watching this video, never heard of you before, where would he go to find out about Nietzscheanism?

B: Just go to the Wikipedia page, surprisingly, although it’s a bit trivial, is actually quite accurate in a tendentious way. Although some of the philosophical debates about him and the genealogy of his works might confuse people because it views it in an academic way. And you don’t need to put his name to it. There’s a cluster of power-moral, individualistic, elitist, partly antinomian, partly gnostic, partly not, partly pagan, vitalist and other ideas which go with that sort of area.

Strength is morality. Weakness is sin. Weakness requires punishment. If you’re weak, if you’re obese, if you’re a drug addict, become less so. Become stronger. Move towards the sun. Become more coherent. Become more articulate. Cast more of a shadow. It’s almost a type of positive behaviorism in some ways. But it’s not somebody wagging their finger and so on, because you’re doing it for yourself. It comes from inside.

Q2: Do you not think though that Nietzscheanism doesn’t have a transcendental element to it?

B: That’s why I’m wearing this [rune pendant], you see, because I probably think there ought to be such a thing. Many people need to go beyond that. If his thinking before he went mad, probably because he had tertiary syphilis, it’s up to sort of 1880, so we’re talking about thinking that’s 130 years old.

I think in some ways he’s an anatomist of Christianity’s decline, because Christianity been declining mentally and in some ways extending out into the Third World where it’s real catchment area now is. I mean, there will be a non-White pope soon. Christianity will begin to wear the face of the south very soon. It’s the ideal religion for the south. It’s pity for those who fail, for those who are weak, for those who are hungry, for those who are broken. Have pity on your children, O Lord. It’s an ideal religion. Don’t take it through violence or fear or aggression. Submit and be thankful for what He will give you in His wisdom.

But it’s ruining us. For centuries we were strong even despite that faith, but of course we made use of it. The part that fits us is the extreme transcendence of Christian doctrine. That’s what Indo-Europeans like about that faith. The enormous vaulting cathedrals, the Gothic idea that you can go up and up and up. It’s that element in it that we like, and we made into ourselves. But we forgot the ethical substratum. We forgot the sort of troll-like ethical element that there is no other value but sympathy, there is no other value than compassion, that love is the basis of all life. And ultimately that is a feminine view of civilization which will lead to its collapse in masculine terms.

Q2: How would you view the works of Julius Evola?

B: Yes, they’re the counter-balance to Nietzsche. There is a lot of religious elements in there of a perennialist sort that a lot of modern minds can’t accept. You see, Nietzsche is a switchblade, and nearly all people in this society are modern even if they think they’re not. Nietzsche is a modern thinker. Nietzsche is a modernist. Nietzsche can reach the modern mind. Nietzsche’s the most Right-wing formulation within the modern mind that people can accept.

My view is that people who accept Evola straight out aren’t living in the modern world. That’s not a criticism. It’s a description of where they are. I think for people to become illiberal they have to become illiberal first within the modern world. Some people would say you have to go outside of it. You know, the culture of the ruins and the revolt against the modern world, per se. But I personally think that we’re in modernity.

But there will be people who go to Nietzsche and Thus Spake Zarathustra, which is really a semi- or pseudo-religious text, is not enough and they’ll want to go beyond that and they’ll want a degree and a tier of religiosity. The dilemma always in the West is what to choose. Back to Christianity or on to paganism? Which system do you choose?

Evola said he was a Catholic pagan, didn’t he? One knows what he means. But I see paganism peeping out of everything. I see paganism peeping out of Protestantism, the most Jewish form of Christianity, through its power-individualism and its extremist individuality (Kierkegaard, Carlyle, Nietzsche). I see paganism saturating Catholicism and peeping out of it at every turn, aesthetically, artistically, the art of the Renaissance, the return of the Greco-Roman sensibility, the humanism of the ancient world. Some of the greatest classicists were Medieval Popes and so on. I see it just looming out. The whole structure of the Catholic Church is a Roman imperial structure, Christianized. So, I see it peeping out.

Our law is Roman. All of our leaders were educated and steeped in the classical world to provide a dialectical corollary to Christianity without them being told that’s what is happening. The decline of the classics is partly because people don’t want to go back there, basically. So, you don’t teach it to anyone apart from tiny little public school elites, which are .2% of the population who read a few authors who no one else even knows exist. You know, big deal.

The difficulty with Evola is that it’s a very great leap for the modern mind. Although in his sensibility, I agree with his sensibility, really. I agree with him going out amidst the bombings, not caring. I agree with that sort of attitude towards life, which is an aristocratic attitude towards life. But we’re living in a junk food, liberal, low middle class society. You’ve got to start where you are. I think Nietzsche is strong enough meat for most people and is far, far, far too strong for 80% now.

Today, the mentally disabled have been allowed into the Paralympics. So, you will have the 100 yard cerebral palsy dash at the next Olympics in London in 2012. This is the world we’re living in. Nietzsche would say that’s ridiculous and so on. And that is a shocking and transgressive and morally ugly attitude from the contemporary news that we see. So, it’s almost as if Nietzsche’s tough enough for this moment.

But I’m interesting in that he said, “God is dead in the minds of men.” That doesn’t necessarily mean, of course, although he was a militant atheist, he’s living open the idea that . . . [God objectively exists—Ed.]. You see, the Christian idea of God was dying around him, mentally, and it has died. I mean, hardly anyone really, deep down, believes that now. Even the people who say that they do don’t in the way that they did 100 years ago or their predecessors did.

So, it has died, but I think there are metaphysically objectivist standards outside life. Whether our civilization can revive without a return to them is very open. It’s very questionable. Where that discourse is to come from is . . . The tragedy would be if Christianity sort of facilitated our greatness, but ended up ruining us, which of course might be the true thesis.

Now we’re getting into deep waters.

Q: What is your view of Abrahamic religions?

B: I think religion is a good thing. The Right always supports the right of religion to exist. Religion does cross ethnic and racial boundaries. Afghanistan was Buddhist once. I prefer people to have some sort of religious viewpoint, even the most tepid sort of thing, but none at all, because at least there is a structure that is in some sense prior.

But, personally, I prefer tribally based religions. I prefer religions that are about blood and genetics and honor and identity and are nominalist and that are specific. But I think people will adopt different systems because they’re physiologically different even within their group. You can see that about certain people. Certain people, Christianity suits them very well and they can be quite patriotic and quite decent people and so on in that system and there we are. But for me? No.

I’m a barbarian in some ways. People can worship what gods they want within the Western tradition, and that’s all right.

 


Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/10/paganism-christianity-nietzsche-evola/

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/NietzscheSeated.jpg

[2] Punch and Judy: http://www.counter-currents.com/2013/03/the-real-meaning-of-punch-and-judy/

samedi, 18 octobre 2014

Julius Evola: The World’s Most Right-Wing Thinker

ev1396243984-ipad-416-0.jpg

Julius Evola:
The World’s Most Right-Wing Thinker

By Jonathan Bowden 

Editor’s Note:

This text is the transcript by V. S. of Jonathan Bowden’s lecture on Evola delivered to the 27th meeting of the New Right in London on June 5, 2010. As usual, I have deleted a few false starts and introduced punctuation and paragraph breaks for maximum clarity. You can listen to it at YouTube here [2]. Three passages are marked unintelligible. If you can make out the words, please post a comment below or contact me at editor@counter-currents.com [3]. 

This is the 27th meeting of the New Right, and we’ve waited quite a long time to discuss one of the most important thinkers of the radical Right and of a Traditional perspective upon mankind and reality, and that is Baron Julius Evola.

Now, Evola is in some respects to the Right of everybody that we’ve ever considered in nearly any of these talks and not in a sort of unprofound or sententious manner. Julius Evola was somebody who rejected purposefully and metaphysically the modern world. Now, what does that mean? It basically means that at the beginning of the last century, Baron Evola, who is a Sicilian baron, decided that there are about four alternatives in relation to modern life for those of heroic spirit.

One was suicide and to make off with one’s self by opening one’s veins in the warm bath like Sicilian Mafiosi and Italian cardinals and Sicilian brigands and ancient Romans.

Another was to become a Nietzschean, which for many people in tradition is a modern version of some, but by no means all, of their ideas, and it’s a way of riding the tiger of modernity and dealing with that which exists around us now. Later, people like Evola and other perennial Traditionalists as we may well call them became increasingly critical of Nietzsche and regard him as a sort of decadent modern and an active nihilist with a bit of spirit and vigor but doesn’t really have the real position.

I make things quite clear. I would be regarded by most people as a Nietzschean, and philosophically that’s the motivation I’ve always had since my beginning. That’s why parties don’t really mean that much to me, because ideas are eternal and ideas and values come back, but movements and the ways and forms that they take and expressions that they have come and go.

evola.jpgNow, moving from the Nietzschean perspective, which of course relates to the great German thinker at the end of the 19th century and his active and quasi-existential and volitional view of man, is the idea of foundational religiosity or primary religious and spiritual purpose. In high philosophy, there are views which dominate everyone around us and modern media and everyone who goes to a tertiary educational college, such as a university, in the Western world. These are modern ideas, which are materialistic and anti-spiritual and aspiritual and anti-religious or antagonistic to prior religious belief so much so that it’s taken as a given that those are the views that one holds. All of the views that convulsed the Western intelligentsia since the Second European Civil War which ended in 1945, ideas like existentialism and behaviorism and structuralism and so on, are all atheistic and material views. They’ve been discussed in other meetings. As one goes back slightly, one has various currents of opinion such as Marxism and Freudianism and behaviorism beginning in the late 19th century and convulsing much of the 20th century.

But these are views that an advanced Evolian type of perspective rejects. These views are anti-metaphysical and often counter the idea that metaphysics doesn’t exist, that it’s the school returning of the late Medieval period, what was called the Medieval schoolmen. In some of his books, Evola talks about Heidegger, Martin Heidegger, of course, who got in trouble in the 1930s for his alleged academic positioning in relation to the most controversial regime of modernity. Heidegger, in my opinion, and I’ve talked about Heidegger before, was a quasi-essentialist to an essentialist thinker. Evola believes he’s an existentialist, but that’s largely by the by.

These anti-metaphysical views are that which surrounds us. All liberalism, all feminism, all quasi-Marxism, all bourgeois Marxism, all cultural Marxism, the extreme Left moderated a bit into the Center, high capitalist economics and the return of old liberalism against the Keynesianism which was the soft Marxism that replaced it earlier in the 20th century . . . All of these ideas are materialistic and atheistic and aspiritual and anti-metaphysical.

You could argue that the heroic Nietzschean dilemma in relation to what is called modernity is a quasi-metaphysical and metaphysically subjectivist view that there are values outside man and outside history that human beings commune with by virtue of the intensity with which they live their own lives. But there is a question mark over (1) the supernatural and (2) whether there is anything beyond, outside man within which those values could be anchored.

So, the idea of permanence, the idea of a metaphysical realm which most prior civilizations are based on—indeed Evola and the Traditionalists would say all prior civilizations are based on—is questioned by the Nietzschean compact. It is ultimately, maybe, the beginnings of a very Right-wing modern view, but it is a modernist view. Take it or leave it.

The sort of viewpoint that Evola moved towards, and there was a progression in his early life and spiritual career and intellectual and writing career, is what we might call metaphysical objectivism. This is called in present day language foundationalism or fundamentalism in relation to religiosity. Fundamentalism, like the far Right, are the two areas of culture that can’t be assimilated in what exists out there in [unintelligible] Street. They’re the two things that are outside and that’s why they can never entirely be drawn in.

Now, metaphysical objectivism is the absolute belief in the supernatural, the absolute belief in other states of reality, the absolute belief in gods and goddesses, the absolute belief in one supreme power (monotheism as against polytheism, for example), the absolute belief that certain iterizations, certain forms of language and spiritual  culture exist outside man: truth, justice, the meaning of law, purposive or teleological information about how a life should be lived. Most people in Western societies now are so dumbed down and so degraded by almost every aspect of life that nearly any philosophical speculation about life is indeterminate and almost completely meaningless. It’s a channel which they never turn on.

 

evola copia (1).jpg

Now, the type of metaphysical objectivism that Evola postulates as being an anchor for meaning in modern life can take many different forms. One of the great problems many Right-wing or re-foundational or primal movements or tribal movements or nationalistic movements of whatever character have is if there is a religion somewhere behind it–as there often is for many but not all of the key people involved in such movements and struggles–what form should that be? Everyone knows that culturally, and this is true of a formulation like GRECE or the New Right in France, as soon as you begin to get people of like-mind together they will split on whether they’re atheist or not, secularist or not, but they are also, on a deeper cultural level, split on whether they’re pagan influenced or Christian. Such divisions always bedevil Right-wing cultural and metapolitical groups.

The way that the Evolian Tradition looks at this is to engage in what is called perennialism. This is the inherent intellectual and ideological and theological idea that there are certain key truths in all of the major faiths. All of those faiths that have survived, that are recorded, that have come down to us, even their pale antecedents, even those dissident, deviant and would-be heretical elements of them that have been removed, in all of them can be seen a shard of the perspectival truth that these particular traditions could be said to manifest. Beneath this, of course, is the ethnic and racial idea that people in different groups within mankind as a body perceive reality differently, experience it differently, have different intellectual and linguistic responses to it, and form different cults, different myths, different religions because they are physically constituted in a manner that leads to such differentiation.

This can lead among certain perennialists to a sort of universalism at times, almost a neo-liberalism occasionally, where all cultures are of value, where all are “interesting,” where all are slightly interchangeable. But given that danger, the advantage for a deeply religious mind of the perennial tradition is to avoid the sectarianism and negative Puritanism which is inevitably part and parcel of building up large religious structures.

As always, a thinker like Evola proceeds from the individual and goes to the individual. This can give thinking of this sort a slightly unreal aspect for many people. Where are the masses? Where is the democratic majority? Where is the BBC vote that decides? The truth is Evola is not concerned with the BBC vote. He’s not concerned with the masses. He regards the masses, and the sort of theorists who go along with him regard the masses, as sacks of potatoes to be moved about. His thinking is completely anti-democratic, Machiavellian to a degree, and even manipulative of the masses as long as it’s down within an order of Tradition within which all have a part.

Evola dates the decline of modernity from, in a sense, the end of the Middle Ages and the beginning of the Renaissance. But many thinkers of a similar sort date the slide at other times. Evola’s a Catholic and once asked about his religious particularism he said, “I’m a Catholic pagan,” which is a deeply truthful remark, dialectically. I am not a Christian, but if you look at it from the outside the core or ur part of Christianity is obviously Roman Catholicism, even though I was technically brought up in the Protestant sort of forcing house of Anglicanism. A wet sheet religion if ever there was one. But Anglicanism, of course, is a syncretic religion. It’s a politically created religion. A bit Catholic, a bit Protestant, but not too much, and with a liberal clerisy at the top that’s partly Protestant-oriented within it and exists to manage the thing.

One of the truthful, although this is en passant, asides that can be made about Anglicanism and the reason why it’s been supported even today through state establishmentarianism when virtually no one attends these churches at all except the odd old lady and immigrants from the Third World, is that it’s a way of damming up some of the extremism that does lurk in religion. Religion is a very dangerous formulation as the modern world is beginning to understand.

evola_card10.jpgI remember Robin Cook, who was a minister who opposed the Iraq War and so on and died on a Scottish mountain, all that obsessive walking when one’s thin and redheaded can lead to undue coronaries, but Cook once said, and he’s a son of the manse like most of these Scottish politicians are, in other words, he comes from a Calvinist background to a degree, he said that in his early life he thought with the general Marxist and Freudian conundrum that religion was over. And now towards the end of his life, this is just before he died, he said, “the dark, clammy, icy hand of religiosity,” in all sorts of systems, “is rising again, and secular Leftists like us,” he’s speaking of himself and those who believe in his viewpoint, “are feeling the winds of this force coming from the side and from behind.” It’s a force that they don’t like.

I personally believe, as with Evola, that people are hardwired for faith. Maybe 1 in 10 have no need for it at all. But for most people it’s a requirement. The depth of the belief, the knowledge that goes into the belief, the system they come out of, is slightly incidental. But man needs emotional truths. George Bernard Shaw once said, “The one man with belief is worth 50 men who don’t have any” and it’s quite true that all of the leaders of great movements and those that imposed their will upon [unintelligible] inside and outside of particular countries have considerable and transcendent beliefs, philosophical, quasi-philosophical, religious, semi-religious, philosophical melded into religious and vice versa. Without the belief that there’s something above you and before you and beyond you and behind you that leads to that which is above you, we seem as a species content to slough down into the lowest common denominator, the lowest possible level.

Evola and those who think like him believe that this is the lowest age that mankind has ever experienced, despite its technological abundance, despite its extraordinary array of technological devices that even in an upper pub room in central west London you can see around you. It is also true, and this is one of the complications with these sorts of beliefs, that some of the methodologies that have led to this plasma screen behind me would actually be denied by elements of some of the religiosity that people like him would put forward, but that’s one of the conundrums about epistemology, about what you mean by meaning, which lurks in these types of theories.

The interesting thing about these beliefs is that they are primal. Turn on the television, turn on the radio, the World Cup is just about to begin. Everywhere there is trivia. Everywhere there is celebration of the majority. Everywhere there is celebration of the desire for us all to embrace and become one world, one world together. As someone recently said, “I don’t want to be English. I don’t want to be British. England’s a puddle,” he said. “I want to step out. I want to be a citizen of the world! I don’t want to have a race. I don’t want to have a kind. I don’t want to have a group . . . even a class! I don’t want to come from anywhere. I want to be on this planet! This planet is my home!” Well, my view is that sort of fake universality . . .  Maybe you should get him one of these dinky rockets and fire himself off into some other firmament, because this is the home that we have and know. And the only reason that we can define it as such is by virtue of the diversity of what exists upon it. But the number of people who wish to maintain that level of diversity and the pregnant meanings within it seem to get smaller and smaller with each generation.

The politicians that we have now are managers of a social system. It’s quite clear that we do not have three ruling parties, but one party with three wings, the nature of which are interchangeable in relation to gender, where you come from in the country, class, background, how you were educated, and whether you arrived in the country as a newcomer in the last 40 to 50 years or not.

Now, Evola’s step back from what has made the modern world leads to certain radical conclusions about it which are spiritually and politically aristocratic. Most people are only aware of the Left-Right split as it relates to a pre-immigration, slightly organic society where social class was the basis for political alignment. Bourgeois center Right: conservatism of some sort. Center Left: Labour, social-democratic, trade unionist, and so on. Now we have a racial intermingling which complicates even that division. The distinction between the aristocratic and upper class attitude and the bourgeois attitude, which is as pronounced as any Left-Right split between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie, is that which Evola advocates.

Evola believes, in some respects, in masters and slaves, or certainly serfs. He believes that the merchant and those who deal purely with economics have to be subordinated to politics, to higher politics, to metapolitics, to military struggle. He believes that the warrior and the religious leader and the farmer and the intellectual/scholar/craftsman/artist are uniquely superior to those that make money, and nearly all of Evola’s views are in some way a form of aristocraticism.

If you look at all of the sports that he favors–fencing, mountaineering–they all involve lone individuals who prepare themselves for a task which is usually dangerous and which can usually result–mountaineering for example and his book Meditations on the Peaks–in annihilation, if you go wrong, but creates an extraordinary and ecstatic sense of self-overbecoming if you conquer K2, the Peruvian mountains, the Eiger, Mount Everest and so on. Even in the more populist forms of mountaineering, the sort of beard and upper middle class Chris Bonington cheery mountaineering as you might call it, there is a streak of aristocratic, devil may care and Byronic license. The bourgeois view is, “Why do that!? It’s dangerous. It’s pitiless. You could be hurt and injured! There’s no profit. It serves no higher reason than itself.” For Evola, the reason and the purpose is the reason to do it. It is the stages that you go through and the mental states you get into as you prepare and you execute a task which is dangerous and the same analogy can be extended to martial combat, the same analogy can be extended to sports like ancient wrestling.

Modern wrestling is a circus, of course, where the outcome is largely decided by the middlemen who negotiate the bouts between clowns, who can still damage each other very severely. But ancient wrestling was a bout that ended very quickly and was essentially religious, which is why the area that they wrestled in was purified with salt in most of the major traditions.

Fencing: Take away the protective gloves and gear and you have gladiatorial combat between people who are virtually on the brink of life and death. It’s only one step removed from Olympic fencing. Notice that in the contemporary Olympics, a movement that was founded in modernity on the Grecian ideal, nearly always founded by aristocrats, all of the early victors in shooting and fencing and all these early sports are aristocrats. Of course, the early Olympics have their funny side. Many of the female athletes that won the early Olympics were transsexuals. Of course, medical checks were instituted to prevent hermaphrodites and people of diverse genders and that sort of thing from competing in these competitions. But the individualistic sports in a mass age have been disprivileged and are largely regarded as strange wonderland sports that the masses only flip channels over in relation to the Olympics.

For a man like Evola and for the sensibility which he represents, things like sport are not a diversion. They are targets for initiation in relation to processes of understanding about self, the other, and life that transcend the moment. So, one bout leads to another, leads to another moment of skill. It is as if these moments, which most people always try to avoid rather than engage upon, are in slow motion. The whole point of Evola’s attitude toward these and other matters is to go beyond that which exists in a manner which is upwards and transcendent in its portending direction.

This is a society which always looks downwards. “What will other people think? What will one’s neighbors think? What will people out there think? What will all this BBC audience think? What do the masses, Left, Right, Center, pressing their buttons on panels and consoles think?” The sort of Evolian response is what they think is of no importance and they ought to think what the aristocrats of the world, in accordance with the traditions, which are largely religious, out of which their social order comes, think. You can understand that this is an attitude which is not endeared, this type of thinking, to contemporary pundits and to the world as it now is.

The_Yoga_of_Power_Cover.jpgIt’s also inevitable that when Evola’s books were published they would enter the English-speaking world via the occult, via mysticism, via various types of initiated and individualistic religiosity. The whole point about the Western occult, whether one believes in the literal formulation that these people spout or whether one believes in it metaphorically and quasi-subjectively, is that it’s an individualistic form of religiosity. In simple terms, mass religion involves a small clerisy or priesthood in the old Catholic sense up there and the laity are down there and it’s in Medieval Latin, it’s slightly mysterious, you partly understand it if you’re grammar school educated, otherwise you don’t, it’s mysterious and semi-initiated, but you don’t really know, the mystery is part of the wonder of the thing, you look up at them and they’ve got their backs to you, and they’re looking up further beyond them towards the divine as they perceive it. Now, that’s a traditional form of mass religiosity, if you like.

But the type of religiosity with which he was concerned was individualistic and voltaic. It was essentially the idea that everyone in a small group is a priest. Sometimes there’s a priest and a warrior combined. One of the many scandals that we have in modernity is crimes that are committed by members of various religious groups and organizations. Many Traditionalist minded people believe that the reporting of these crimes in the mass media is deliberately exaggerated in order to demonize any retrospectively traditional elements of a prior and metaphysically conservative type in the society.

But if one looks at it another way–and one of the things about Evola is the creativeness of the aristocratic mind that looks at essentially Centrist and bourgeois problems in a completely different perspective–he would say about those sorts of scandals, which I won’t belabor people with because everyone knows about them, that it’s the absence of the dialectic between the priest, somebody who believes in something, somebody who believes in a philosophy that isn’t just theirs and therefore relates to a society and relates to a continuing generic tradition out of which they come . . . Most contemporary philosophers are “just my view.” “Just my view as a tiny little atom.” Rather than my view as something that’s concentric and links me to something larger and that therefore can be socially efficacious. But from an Evolian perspective, the absence of the warrior or the martial and soldierly traditions and its interconnection with belief and the individual who believes is the reason for decadence or deconstruction or devilment or decay in these religious organizations. In his way of looking at things, there’s a seamlessness between the poet-artist, the warrior, and the religious believer. They are different formulations of the same sort of thing, because they are always looking upwards and, in a way, are deeply individualistic and egotistical but transcend that, because the concentration on one’s self or one’s own thinking, one’s own feeling, one’s own concerns, one’s own attitude towards this mountain, this woman, this fight, this text is conditioned by that which you come out of and move towards.

Evola doesn’t believe in progress nor does the Tradition that he comes out of. They don’t believe in scientific progress. They don’t believe in evolution. But his anti-evolutionism is strange and interesting. It’s got nothing to do with creationism and, if you like, the Evangelical politics of certain parts of what you might call the Puritan American Right, for example. His attitude is a reverse attitude, which in a strange way is an involuntary and inegalitarian way of looking at the same issue. His view is that the apes are descended from us as we go upwards rather than we are descended from them as we leave them in their simian animalism. So, in a way, it’s actually a reformulation of the same idea but looking upwards and always seeing, if you like, the snobbish, the aristocratic, the prevailing, the over-arching view rather than viewing the thing from a mass, generic, and middling perspective which includes people.

Tony Blair says the worst vice anyone can have is to be intolerant. It’s to be exclusive. It’s to exclude people. “The nature of Britishness is inclusion,” when, of course, the nature of any group identity is exclusion, and who is on the boundary and who can be allowed in and the subtleties and grains of difference that exist between one excluded group and another, where one tendency of man ends and another begins. Evola believes, in a very controversial way, that decline is morphic and spiritual combined. In other words, races of man have a spiritual dimension, have a higher emotional dimension, have a psychological dimension, but never forget that Evola is not a Nietzschean. He is not somebody who believes that it’s all at this level. He believes that the gods speak to man directly and indirectly and the civilizations that we come out of are based essentially on religious premises.

Moderns who sneer at these sorts of attitudes, of course, forget that virtually every civilization that mankind has ever had until relatively recently, and in every civilization there are documents and artifacts which are included in the storehouse of the British Museum just over there in central London, was religiously and theologically based. It’s only really in a post-Enlightenment, Scottish Enlightenment, English Enlightenment, French Enlightenment, 18th century plus sort of a way that the secularization of Western Europe rivals the rest of the planet. Further east in Europe, less of it. Further south in Europe, a bit less of it. Religiosity on most of the other continents of the Earth is still a primary force, but Evola would despise the sort of religiosity that prevails there because he would see in it broken down thinking, syncretism, the people who would say he would be in favor of contemporary Saudi Arabia, for example, would probably be sorely disappointed. He would see under the religious police, under the strict observance of this or that rule, American satellite dishes and modern devices and that which is external, in relation to modernity, and which is being internally accepted. So, Evola was always the critic, if you like, and always on the outside.

Now, his career is quite complicated because when he was a very young man he fought in the First World War on the Italian side. They, of course, fought on the “Western” or Allied side in that war as is often forgotten. There are some extraordinary photos of him on the internet in these goggles and these helmets looking like extraordinarily fascistic, and that movement hadn’t even really been created then. He looks like that in a D’Annunzian-type way, stylistically, even before the gesture itself.

Evola, of course, partly disapproved of Fascism and National Socialism even though he became very heavily implicated and/or involved in both of them, because in his view they weren’t Right-wing enough! They weren’t traditional enough. They weren’t organic enough. They weren’t extreme enough. Evola is probably the only thinker in the 20th century whose written a slim volume criticizing National Socialism from the Right not from any point to the Left. He only aligned with these movements because they forced modernity to question itself and because they were anti-democratic and because they were ferocious and desired morally and semi-theologically–because few, including liberal critics, would deny that there was a semi-theological insistence to most of the radical European movements, even of the Left but certainly of the Right, in the first half of the last century. Evola saw in these movements a chance but no more, which is why he flirted with them, why he wrote a fascist magazine in Italy, why he went to colleges run by Himmler’s SS in Germany, why he was disapproved of by them, why he had sympathizers in the Ernst Jünger-like in the party who protected him, why he was allowed to write with a degree of freedom whilst giving a degree of loyalist obeisance to these structures and yet, at the same time, to remain outside them. The question has to be raised whether Evola’s philosophy is consonant with the creation of a society or whether it will become, if you like, a spirited individualism.

Evola was also involved in the beginning of his career in one of the most radical modernist movements of the 20th century: Dadaism in Italy. He produced Dadaist paintings. Now, this, superficially, looks quite extraordinary. But of course there was a strong interconnection between certain early modernisms and fascistic ideologies. The reason that he became involved in Dadaism is quite interesting, and, of all things, there is a talk on YouTube that lasts four-and-a-half minutes in which Evola is an old man explicating why he was involved. He says the reason we got involved in these movements was to attack the bourgeoisie, was to attack the middle class, and was to attack middle class sensibility and sentimentality. The extraordinary radical anti-system nature of many radical Right ideas, which is hidden in more moderate and populist variants, comes out staring at you full in the face in people like Evola. Many fascistic and radical movements of the Right, of course, were peopled by adventurers and outsiders and quasi-artists and demi-criminals and religious mystics and madmen and people who were outside of the grain of mainstream life, particularly people who were socialized by the Great War, which many of them experienced as a revolution.

Wyndham Lewis who was strongly drawn aesthetically to modernism and politically to various forms of fascism and was a personal friend of Sir Oswald Moseley once said that for us, the First War was a revolution, wasn’t a war. We saw killing on a truly industrial scale. We saw the industrialization of slaughter.

One of the interesting ironies of the Evolian, and in some ways Ernst Jünger’s, position about war is that, although thinkers like them are regarded by pacifists and liberal humanists and feminists, as warmongers, there is a distaste for mass war in Jünger and Evola and the others, because it’s the war of the ants, the war of the masses in blood and dung and soil and gore. There is nothing chivalric about a man being torn to pieces by a helicopter gunship when he doesn’t even have a chance to get his Armalite into the air.

Evola would prefer the doctrine of the champion. You know, when two Medieval armies meet, and one enormous, hulking man comes out of one army, in full regalia trained in martial splendor and arts as a previous speaker discussed in relation to the Norse tradition, and another champion emerges and they fight for a limited objective that leaves civilization intact on either side. But the one that is defeated will obviously pay dues to the other.

Now, this shows the extremely Byronic, individualistic, and aristocratic spirit that lurks in Evola’s formulations. The way that his works have come down to us, of course, is the way that he lived his life and the books that he wrote. It’s interesting that the Anglo-Saxon world has received his literature through translations by mystic and occultistic publishers in the United States: about tantra, about Buddhism, about Japanese warrior castes and traditions, about the Holy Grail, about Greco-Roman, High Christian, pagan, and post-pagan Europeanist and other traditions.

Another radicalism about Evola is his total unstuffiness and absence of prudery in dealings with sex. Evola wrote a book called Metaphysics of Sex. He regards sexuality as a primal biological instantiation through which the races of man are renewed and replaced. But at the same time he regarded it as one of the primary human acts of great energy and force that has to be channeled, has to be made use of, has to be transcended in and of itself. You have this odd commitment to tantra, which is a sort of erotic extremism of occultic sex, and a total opposition to pornography. Why? Because the one involves commercialization of sex, the one involves money interrelated with sexuality. From this purely primal perspective, unless a marriage is arranged between dynastic states or groups for particular statal purposes, which is fine, money has almost nothing to do with these areas of life.

 

tumblr_n6ainxFI5l1rnng97o1_500.jpg

The disprivileging of money as the basis of everything and the belief that the society that we have now is the result of the fact that every politician in all of the parties represented in the major assemblies, including radical Right parties essentially of a populist hue actually, believe in Homo economicus. They believe that man is an economic integer and nothing else matters. Immigration? It’s good for the economy, don’t you know? Mass movements of capital around the world at the flick of a button on a screen in exchanges all around the globe, particularly in the Far East now but also ubiquitously? It’s good for the economy! Everything is based upon the freeing of people from prior forms of alleged servitude due to economic enhancement. The sort of doctrines Evola holds are not neo-Medieval, nor are they a desire for a return to the ancient world with certain modern technologies. In some ways, they are a return to the verities that existed before the modern world was created.

One of the most substantial critiques of this type of thinking is the belief that the modern world is inevitable, that all cultures and races will modernize and are doing so at a great rate of knots, that skyscrapers and enormous megalopolic cities are being thrust up in the Andes and the Far East and even client Chinese-built ones will emerge in Africa and elsewhere and that it would be onwards and upwards forever in relation to what we have now. There are grotesque problems with that, of course, because to give every human on this planet irrespective of race, kinship, clime, and culture a middle American lifestyle you will need 3 planets, 8 planets, 10 planets, or you may need them, in order to give them that middle American feeling. The three satellite dishes, the condominium, the three Chelsea tractors outside in the driveway, the multiple channel TV, and so on. To give every African that we will need many, many planets and many, many times the economic wherewithal that we have even at the moment.

The interesting thing about Evola is that many issues that convulse people today–famine in the Third World, war in the Congo, HIV/AIDS–he would say they’re interesting, of course, because they’re things that are going on, and everything has a meaning even beyond itself. But ultimately they’re unimportant. The number of humans on the Earth doesn’t matter to his type of thinking. Pain and suffering do not matter in accordance with his type of thinking. Indeed, he welcomes them as part of the plenitude of life, because life begins in pain and ends in pain and most people live their entire lives in denial of the fact that life is circular as his philosophical tradition believes the world is and meaning is. There is progression around the circle, but there is decline, and decline and death are part of an endless process of will and becoming.

It is essentially and in a very cardinal way a religious view of life, but also a metaphysically pessimistic and conservative view of life in a profound way that the conservatism of contemporary liberal Tories like Cameron would not even begin to understand. To a man like him, theories of Evola’s sort are lunacy, quite literally, the return to the Dark Ages, the return to the Middle Ages, quasi-justifications of slavery, quasi-justifications of the Waffen SS. This is what Cameron or his colleagues on the front bench and his even more liberal colleagues on the same front bench would say about these sorts of ideas.

1907166939.jpgBut the irony is that 300 to 400 years ago, most civilized structures on Earth were based on these ideas. Even the modern ones that replaced them are based upon the contravention of these sorts of ideas, which means that they realized they were real enough to rebel against in the first instance. It’s also true that even in the high point of modernity, post-modernity, hypermodern reality, all the phrases that are used, when a war occurs, when the planes go into the towers in New York, when the helicopter gunships stream over Arabian sands, you suddenly see a slippage in the liberal verities and in the materialism and in some of the ideas which are used to justify these sorts of things. Not much of a slippage, but you suddenly see a slippage, what occultists and mystics call a “rending of the veil,” a ripping of the veil of illusion between life and death.

What is life really about? Is life really about shopping? Is life really about making more and more money? Is life really about bourgeois status when one already has enough to live on? Is life really about eating yourself to death? These are the sorts of things that Evola’s viewpoint pushes before people, which is why the majority will always push it away.

His political texts are essentially Revolt Against the Modern World, Men Among the Ruins, and Ride the Tiger, which explore the nature of a man who is born now when most of the prior traditions of his culture and his civilization have collapsed.  The decivilization of man, the fact that Western cities have turned into Third World zones, the fact that semi-criminality is endemic, the fact that when you go into a street graffiti is there, rap music blares from a passing car, 20%, 40% of the street has no relationship to you aesthetically or ethnically or racially or culturally. Evola would see this as part of the inevitable climate of decline and spiraling downwards towards matter, which is intentional and volitional.

The most controversial area of Evola is when he begins to unpick and reformulate many classic propositionalisms of what might be called the “Old Right” to determine what has occurred and why. Evola is essentially, although he began in a more subjectivist and changeable mood, a deeply religious and aristocratic man. This means there is always a reason. Liberals believe that everything is a confusion and everything is contingent upon itself and everything is an accident waiting to happen. But like Christ in the New Testament, who believes that when two birds fall to the ground the father is aware, Evola believes that there is always a purpose and a reason. Evola believes that civilizations are collapsing in on themselves and tearing themselves apart internally for reasons that are pushed by elites and by forces which are manifest within them that will that desire. The endless atoms and causal moments in the chains may not know of that which is coming, that which is non-volitional, that which is partly pre-programmed. He believes that these tendencies of mass servitude, mass death, mass proletarianization spiritually, mass plebeianism, mass social welfare, mass social democracy are willed, that the destructivity of prior cultural orders is willed and definite, and certain racial groups are used to facilitate that destruction, and that other groups use them in order to achieve it.

He believes in an aristocracy of man, because he believes everything is hierarchical. There was an interesting moment in a by-election in East London or eastern London just recently when the chairman of the party that I used to be in a while ago was asked by a woman of Afro-Caribbean ancestry, “Are we equal with you?” The media’s there, you know. Twenty cameras are upon this individual, and, therefore, given the logic and the paradigm that he is in he said, “Yes.” He would probably want to say, “Yes, but . . . ,” but the media has gone on because it’s got the required answer. Indeed, lots of media investigation now is asking a politician to affirm their correctness before a prior methodological statement, and woe betide any of them if they show the slightest backsliding on any issue about which they should be progressive.

Who can put words in the mouth of somebody who died a while back, but Evola’s answer, the answer of his type of thinking, would be that that woman is unequal in relation to a black writer like Wole Soyinka, who is a Nigerian from the Yoruba tribe and won the Nobel Prize. Is he worthy of winning the Nobel Prize? Was he given the prize in the 1990s because it was fashionable to do? Rabindranath Tagore, the great Indian writer and Brahmin and higher caste type, won it in 1913. Probably wasn’t too much political correctness then, but there was probably a bit even then. The Evolian answer is that she is not equal in relation Soyinka, and Soyinka is not equal in relation to Chaucer or Defoe or Shakespeare or Voltaire or Dante or Tolstoy or Dostoevsky or Wagner, that everything is unequal and that everything is hierarchical and that there is a hierarchy within an individual and between individuals and between groups of individuals, because everything is looking upwards and everything has a different purpose in life.

This means that those who are at the middle and the bottom of an ethnicity, of a social order, of a gender, of a prior historical dispensation should not be lonely, in his way of looking at things, or afraid or rebellious or full of alienation and fear. Because everyone has a role within a hierarchy and people can move to a degree although his viewpoint is essentially aristocratic and not meritocratic. A man like Nietzsche, who Bertrand Russell once condemned as advocating an aristocracy when he was not born in it or anywhere near it, would be accepted, but never completely accepted by an aristocratic caste. Things that are regarded as hopelessly naïve and snobbish now, Evola regards as just due form.

locandina.jpgWhat is the worst thing in the world at the present time according to Sky News? Probably discrimination. Discrimination of one sort or another. Evola would believe that discrimination is the taxonomy of an aristocratic sensibility. One reaches for a piece of cake, one discriminates. One has an arranged marriage with another member of the Sicilian nobility, one discriminates. One reaches for a sword to do down a bounder that one wishes to beat with the flat of the blade, one discriminates between the weapon and the object of the rage, which is itself indifferent because it sees something beyond even itself. These are views, of course, that the majority of people will find cold, chilling, brutal, [unintelligible] beyond their conception. Almost forms of insanity in actual fact in relation to what is today regarded as normal or moral or even human. They are partly inhuman ideas, in some ways, but they are ideas that most aristocracies and most warrior castes have had for most forms of human history.

Evola’s books are now widely available to those who wish to read them. The great conundrum of his work is, does it portend to an asceticism? In other words, if the era of destruction, which is the Kali Yuga on the ideology which he puts forward, which is the Hindu age of destruction where everything is broken and everything is melded together prior to decomposition which will feed a universal rebirth at a future time, because mankind is seasonal in relation to Spengler’s view of the world where his view of history is compared to plants and botany to give it some sort of methodology, some sort of structure.

Don’t forget, these are 19th century and early 20th century ideas. No history don, or hardly any history don, today believes history has a meaning. Carlyle believed that the sort of deistic nature of history impinged upon the decadence of the French royalist elite and it led to the revolution because they didn’t superintend France properly. He sort of believed in his Protestant, thundering way from the pulpit of his study in the mid-19th century that the French Revolution was an outcome that was partly deserved by a failing aristocracy. In other words, history had a meaning.

It had a purpose. Nobody believes history has a meaning or a purpose. Certain anti-fascists would say Stalingrad had a purpose, but they forget that the Red Army shot 16-18,000 of their own men, and the Commissars stood 18 feet behind the lines. They shot an army of their own men in order to win that battle, just as secret police in the Third World cut off the ears and cut out the tongues of any who retreat in battle before they send them back to their villages.

Would Evola approve of that? He would probably say that if it was done individualistically or as a matter of revenge or of rage it’s dependent upon the circumstances, but to do it in a mass-oriented way–mass camps, mass sirens, the totalitarian response particularly of communism, the reduction of everything to the lowest common denominator so all can be free in a sort of pig-like uniformity–he would consider that really to be death and to be fought against.

Evola is extraordinarily controversial because there is an area in his thinking, particularly in relation to the Islamic world, that leads almost to the justification, as certain liberal critics say, of forms of religious terrorism. He never quite advocates that, but it’s quite clear that his loathing of the modern world is so much and his nuanced appreciation of the Islamic concept of Jihad–where you fight within yourself against doubt and fight externally in a quasi-pagan and masculine way against the enemy that is without you–has a resonance that chimes with certain extremist religious people who basically want to blow the modern world up.

So, Evola is, as I say in my title, one of the world’s most Right-wing, certainly most elitist, thinkers. The interesting thing about him is that everything always looks upwards, even his doctrine of race.

You find in many racialistic movements a sort of socialism. That if you are of my ethnicity you are “all right,” as if possession of a certain melanin skin content or absence of same is all that the thing was about. When Norman Tebbit says that the British National Party is old Labour plus allied racialism, there is always a streak of truth to such viewpoints. Evola doesn’t believe in that.

Evola believes that race is spiritual as well as physical. If a man comes to you and says, “Oh, I’m White! You should be looking after me, mate!” he would say what is your intellect, what is your quality, what is your moral sense, what do you know about your civilization, how far are you prepared to fight for it, what pain can you endure, have you had understanding of death in your family and in life, are you a mature and profound human being or are you part of the limitless universality although you were born in a particular group which I respect and come from myself.? That’s the sort of principle that he would have.

Now, that is an attitude of revolutionary snobbery in a way, but it’s snobbery based upon ideas of character. And in the end as we know, politically, character is a fundamentally important thing. And the absence of it, particularly in quasi-authoritarian movements is poisonous because people once in place cannot be removed except by the most radical of means. So, there is a degree to which leadership is all important.

Look at an army. An army is not a gang of thugs. But it can easily become one. An army can easily become a rabble, but armies are controlled by hierarchies of force, the nature of which is partly impalpable. Each squad has a natural leader. Each squad has its non-commissioned officer. Each squad has an officer above them. In real armies, German, British armies of the past, if one officer goes down somebody replaces them from lower down, assumes immediately the responsibility that goes with that role. Even if all the officers are gone and all non-commissioned officers, the natural leader, one of the 5%–most behavioral anthropologists believe that 1 in 20 of all people have leadership critera–can step forward in a moment of crisis and are looked to by the others, because they provide meaning and order and hierarchy in a moment of stress.

Have you ever noticed that when people undergo disaster or when they’re in difficulties they look for help, but they also look for people to lead them out of it? Leaders are never liked, because it’s sort of lonely at the top, but leadership is probably like the desire to believe in something beyond yourself. It’s inborn. And while the principle of leadership remains, where in even democratic societies leaders are required in order to energize the democratic masses . . .

Don’t forget, most of the Caesarisms of modernity are Red forms of Caesarism, forms of extreme authoritarianism and even pitilessness all in the name of the people. All raised in the name of the masses and their glory and their freedom, their liberty and their equality. When Forbes magazine says that the Castro family’s wealth in communist Cuba is $70 million US dollars, when it calls them communist princes . . . Don’t forget, an ordinary man in Cuba could be in prison for owning his own plumbing business. When you realize that these people are princelings of reversal, you sense that some of the hierarchies, although they wear different names and different forms, are occurring in an entropic phase or in a culture of decay do relate to many of Evola’s ideas even in reversal. He would say this is because these ideas are eternal and are perennial and will out in the end.

The traditional political Right-wing criticism of these sorts of ideas is that they are purely philosophical, they relate to individuals and their lives, they tend to Hermeticism and the ascetic view that a learned spiritual man, a man of some substance, can go off and live by himself and the rest can rot down to nothing and who cares. They say that they feed a sort of post-aristocratic misanthropy.

Look at our own aristocracy. They probably lost power in about 1912. They were never shot like in the Soviet Union, they were never beheaded like in revolutionary France of 200 years before. But they have lost everything in a way because their function has been taken from them, hasn’t it? The reason for those schools, the reason they were bred in the first place, the reason for all their privileges and so on has been taken away. The fascination with the Lord Lucan case in the ’70s, the sort of decline of that class. He listens to Hitler’s speeches at Oxford, beats the nanny to death, not even get the right woman in the basement. This sort of thing. Can’t even get that right! Couldn’t even get the crime right! It’s the decline of a class, isn’t it? Going down, and knowing they’ve gone down as well. It’s sort of Oswald Moseley’s son enjoys being dressed up as a woman and spanked and his son has just died of a heroin overdose. And yet Oswald Moseley is in that family chain. You don’t really need to think that there is a sort of efflorescence there. It’s a bit unfair on that family and so on.

But don’t forget, this was a class that was born to pitilessness and rule. This was a class that identified with eagles. That’s why they put them on their shields and on their ties and on their schools. And now look at them.

 

SR-Evola.jpg

But, of course, they have in a sense joined the rest, haven’t they? They’ve joined the mass. And what they once were no longer matters. Cameron sums it up in a strange sort of way. Traditionally, since the 1960s, the Tories have always elected pushy middle class people with which the mass of their electoral support can identify.

It was always said Douglas-Home would be the last of the old breed. He was premier when I was born. He would be the last of the old breed that would survive and thrive. When asked about unemployment in 1961, Douglas-Home said, “There’s room for a second gamekeeper on my estate.” And people said he was out of touch. Out of touch! And he was out of touch! Let’s face it. But he thought that was a quite commodious and moral answer, you see.

Cameron is strange because all of the ease–the ease before the camera, the ease before people, no notes, look at me, not a trembling lip–all of that ease is part of the genetics of what he partly comes out of. And yet all of his values are bourgeois. All of his values are middling and mercantile. All of his values are this society’s as it now is.

Would Douglas-Home have joined or even given money to United Against Fascism, who he would have regarded as smelly little people on the margins of society who were a Left-wing rabble who probably needed to be beating the grass somewhere? Or in my regiment. You see what I mean? The idea that he would identify with these people because the real enemy represents the seeds of the aristocracy from which one has fled, that wouldn’t occur to him. He was too much what he was, basically, as a form to really consider these lies and this legerdemain and this flight of fancy.

One comes to the most controversial area of Evola’s entire prognosis, and this is the belief that Jewishness is responsible for decline and that they are a distant and another race that pushes upon things and causes things to fall and be destroyed. These are the views, of course, the belief that there is a morphic element in the nature of the decline, that has made him so untouchable and controversial. The interesting thing is that when he was approached about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which is believed by all liberal humanist scholars to be a forgery of the Okhrana secret police based upon an alleged French novel, I think in the 19th century, Evola said, I’m not concerned whether it’s a forgery or not, which is a very interesting response.

Because in Evola’s occultistic and Hermetic view of the world you can indicate something through its reversal, you can indicate something through metaphorization, something can be emotionally true and not completely factually true, a text can be used to exemplify truths deeper than its own surface. This is a religious view of the text, of course, that the text does not end with itself. It’s a Medieval view and is based upon a science of linguistic study called hermeneutics where you would look at every word, you would look at every paragraph, you would look at every piece of syntax to deconstruct for essence rather than deconstruct to find the absence of essence.

In the Western world, if you go to university now and you do any humanities, any arts, any liberal arts, or any social science course you will come across an ideology called deconstruction. Even vaguely, the semi-educated have heard of it. This is a viewpoint that says that any essentialisms (race, class isn’t an essentialism, but it begins to become one in the minds of man, belief in God, gender and so on) lead to the gates of Auschwitz. This is what deconstruction is based on as a theory. Therefore you look at every text, you look at every film, because they’re obsessed with mass culture, you see, looking at what the masses look at and what they’re fed by the capitalist cultural machine. They look at this and say, oh look, dangerous essentialism there. Did you see in that John Wayne film? Did you see the way he spoke to the Red Indian? Sorry, Native American. You see that sort of thing. You look at these things and you break them down and you break them down again and you break down the element of sort of “David Duke” logic that could be said to lie in that particular phrasing and so on.

But the sort of analysis that Evola maintains is what you might call constructionism rather than deconstructionism. And that’s building upon the essences of things and bringing out their discriminatory differences. So, to him the fact that that text may have been put into circulation by the Okhrana, the czarist secret police, as a profound Hermetic, metaphoricization for courses of history which may or may not be occurring, is worthy of study. He again returns to the idea that everything has meaning.

If you want war with the Islamic world, the towers will fall. If you a pacifist and isolationist America to enter the Great War, a particular boat with civilians onboard but weapons underneath, will be torpedoed by the Germans. If you want to get the isolationist boobs of middle America into a global struggle in the early 1940s you allow the prospect of an attack that you know is going to happen to it there and you make sure your aircraft carriers are not there and you blame the middling officers who were there for their incompetence retrospectively because it is the moment to kick start democratic engagement with heroic and Spartan activities.

Who can doubt that there is a streak of the Spartan? When an American Marine goes up a beach on Iwo Jima or when he fights in Fallujah? Some of the modern world has certainly fallen away for that man as he faces oblivion in warriorship against the other, even within the modern. People like Evola and Jünger would realize that. There’s even at times, in the extremity of modern warfare, a return to the individual. What about these American pilots and these other pilots, these Russian pilots, who fly in these planes, and the warrior is part of the plane. You know, they have a computer in their visor and they have all sorts of statistics coming up before them. It’s like a man who is an army fighting on his own, isn’t it? He’s got an amount of force under his wings which is equivalent to an army of centuries ago. So, you have a return to elite individuals trained only for killing and warriorship at the top tier of present Western advanced military metaphysics.

The interesting thing about Evola’s way of thinking is it’s creative. Most Right-wing people are pessimistic introverts who don’t like the world they were born into, but Evola seems to be to me in some ways an extravagant, optimistic aristocrat who always sees, not the best side of everything, but the most heroic side of everything that goes beyond even itself. Even if the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, in accordance with his diction, was a lie and can be proved to be such, the fact that millions were motivated to believe in it, millions to reject its causation, that people fought out the consequences and the consequences of the consequences in relation to even some of those ideas, means that it is of great specificity and import.

 

maxresdefault.jpg

Nietzsche has the idea that a man stands on the edge of a pond, and he skims a pebble into the pond, and it skips across the water. You know when you get it skimming right and it goes and it goes and it goes and wave upon wave moves upon the surface, and you can’t predict the formulation of the wave and the current that it leads into. And that History has unknown consequences.

The Maoist general who was asked by an American sympathizer after the Maoist Long March, itself partly mythological, “What’s your view of the French Revolution?” And he memorably replied, “It’s too early to tell.” Because it’s only two 200 years back. That is the sort of perspective that Evola has.

Although there will be crushing defeats, and men of his sort, aristocrats, for whom the modern world has no time, play polo, waste your money, go to brothels, gamble all the time. There’s no role for you. The world is ruled by machines and money and committees and Barack Obama.

You know, American Rightists call Obama “Obamination” instead of abomination. Is he the signification for everything that is declining in America and isn’t all of these middle class tax revolt type movements which are 100% grassroots American really within the allowed channels of opposition? “He’s a socialist!” “It’s all about tax. It’s not about anything else.” “It’s all within the remit of health care budgetary constraints and views on same.” Etc, etc. “What about the deficit?” Aren’t all of these movements and the rage that they contain elements and spectrums of what he would call anti-modernity or semi-anti-modernity within modernity?

None of us know what the future will hold, but it is quite clear that unless people of advanced type in our group believe in some of the traditions that they come out of again, they will disappear. And in Evola’s view they will have deserved to disappear. So, my view is that whatever one’s view, whatever one’s system of faith . . . and don’t forget that in the Greek world you could disbelieve in the gods and think they were metaphors, you could kneel before a statue of them or you could have a philosophical belief in between the two and all were part of the same culture, all were part of the same city-state, and if called upon as a free citizens to defend it, even Socrates would stand in line with his shield and his spear.

All of Evola’s books are now available on the internet. The most controversial passages about morphology and ethnicity are all available on the internet. Read Julius Evola. Read an aristocrat for the past and the future, and look back to the perennial Traditions that are part and parcel of Western civilization and can fuel the imagination and fire even in those who don’t entirely believe in them.

Thank you very much!

 

 


 

Article printed from Counter-Currents Publishing: http://www.counter-currents.com

 

URL to article: http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/10/julius-evolathe-worlds-most-right-wing-thinker/

 

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: http://www.counter-currents.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/evola_la_genitrice_painting.jpg

[2] here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4YqKf3v2aPs

[3] editor@counter-currents.com: mailto:editor@counter-currents.com

 

jeudi, 16 octobre 2014

Julius Evola e la donna crudele

3038385535_1_3_30xylUmX.jpg

Julius Evola e la donna crudele

Ex: http://romeocastiglione.wordpress.com

Si annida il mistero tra le impalcature dell’imponente opera evoliana Metafisica del sesso. Nei capitoli ammalianti è celato un particolare erotismo evocativo; le tematiche affrontate nel volume brillano di un’immortale e remota luce. L’archetipo femminile è denso di sacralità e spiritualità arcana. La donna è inquadrata in un’ottica tradizionale, ancestrale: è sospesa nella perenne immutabilità ed è legata in modo preponderante alla terra, alla luna, ai ritmi ciclici del mondo. È un libro spiazzante, intrigante, coinvolgente. Le righe si sovrappongono nell’immaginario. Julius Evola esalta l’aspetto segreto della femmina, il lato nero, demoniaco. Secondo l’autore la donna riesce a far coesistere dentro di sé la disposizione alla pietà e quella alla crudeltà. In virtù di ciò egli rielabora alcune convinzioni di Lombroso e Ferreno. Particolarmente pone all’attenzione un prototipo di femmina violenta e spietata; tale modello si esalta nelle rivoluzioni e nei linciaggi. L’autore argomenta le supposizioni e riporta i passaggi più improntati del volume lombrosiano La donna delinquente. Credo che sia di ausilio il lungometraggio Malena: le donne del paese si accaniscono con perfida violenza sulla bellissima protagonista del film. La sfigurano pubblicamente. È un atto di giustizia sommaria. Malena abbatte i tabù. Di conseguenza provoca un’invidia assurda. È l’altra faccia della medaglia; rappresenta l’evasione. E deve essere distrutta.

Le donne crudeli di Tornatore sono simili alla perfida Emma Smael del lungometraggio Johnny Guitar di Nicholas Ray. Come il fuoco Emma Smael avvampa la nuda pelle. Ella sprigiona nell’atmosfera un aroma tragico intriso di dolore; ha un carisma esasperato, uno charme lugubre e impersonale. Porta i segni della rabbia oscura e antisolare. È vestita di nero, non cura il suo corpo. All’apparenza è un essere insignificante e indesiderabile. Ma sotto la scorza alberga un’anima inquieta, crudele, mesta. Luccica di cattiva luce quest’antieroina lunare. Emma fomenta il popolo, aizza le masse. Combatte la crociato contro i diversi, i forestieri, i fuorilegge. È puritana: disprezza le tentazioni dei sensi. Nello stesso tempo desidera ardentemente il bandito Ballerino Kid. Nel suo corpo si affrontano gli istinti contrastanti. Questa donna vorrebbe addirittura uccidere la sua segreta passione per far allontanare i bollenti spiriti. «Desideri Kid, ti vergogni e vorresti vederlo impiccato». Ribecca così Vienna, la nemica acerrima, la rivale assoluta.

Evola tenta di mettere insieme come un puzzle i richiami evocativi. In modo particolare è dedicato alla crudeltà della donna un intero capitolo. Così denocciola una carrellata di aneddoti storici: si sovrappongono le saghe della Tradizione. I persiani intravidero nell’universo femminile una particolare dualità. Fuoco e neve, durezze e dolcezza formano la donna. Ebbene sorge un collegamento tra crudeltà e sessualità: il tipo della baccante e della mènade è un esempio lampante. Nelle pieghe affiora un prototipo femminile afroditico ambiguo. La Dolores di Swinburne, la cosiddetta Nostra signora dello Spasimo è il vessillo del peccato, del piacere, della perdizione, della crudeltà latente. E il filosofo coglie alcune sottili sfumature. Ridisegna l’eroina Mimi della Boheme di Murger in un modo diverso; in sostanza inquadra la ragazza in una dimensione perfino “brutale e selvaggia”.

Ebbene il fascino muliebre è associato alla magia e alla stregoneria. Circe, Calipso e Brunhilde rappresentano l’esasperazione, l’estremizzazione, l’attrazione malefica. Tale tipologia di donna attrae l’uomo come una calamita famelica; la fascinazione è gravida di richiami alla negromanzia, all’occultismo. È la lagnanza della terra, lo spirito del peccato, la rottura. Perfino Ulisse è incantato dalle sirene: ascolta l’eco d’estasi legato a un palo. È una lotta tra il bene e il male. Anche il valoroso Gerardo Satriano nel romanzo L’eredità della priora è sedotto dalle fattucchiere lucane. Smarrisce la concezione del tempo e annulla la sua individualità. Così come perde la cognizione del tempo il giudice salentino protagonista del film Galantuomini di Winspeare. L’uomo prova una strana attrazione nei confronti di una donna legata al mondo della malavita. Per tale ragione perde tutte le certezze e confonde il bene e il male.

La letteratura, la poesia e il cinema hanno esaltato diverse volte le donne crudeli, in altre parole quelle dotate di un fascino antisolare, demoniaco. Per alcune strane similitudini elogio Giulia Venere, la domestica del libro Cristo si è fermato a Eboli di Carlo Levi. Leggo, annoto i passi del racconto. Ed elaboro il pensiero. Penso che sia un accostamento intrigante; tramite poche righe il lettore è catapultato in un anfratto antimoderno. «Giulia era una donna alta e formosa – scrive Levi – doveva aver avuto, nella gioventù una specie di barbara e solenne bellezza. Il viso era ormai rugoso per gli anni e giallo per la malaria, ma restavano i segni dell’antica venusità nella sua struttura severa, come nei muri di un tempio classico, che ha perso i marmi che l’adornavano, ma conserva intatta la forma e le proporzioni. […] Questo viso aveva un fortissimo carattere arcaico, non nel senso del classico greco, né nel romano, ma di una antichità misteriosa e crudele, cresciuta sempre sulla stessa terra senza rapporti e mistioni con gli uomini, ma legata alla zolla e alle eterne divinità animali. Vi si vedevano una fredda sensualità, una oscura ironia, una crudeltà naturale, una protervia impenetrabile e una passività piena di potenza che si legavano in un’espressione insieme severa, intelligente, malvagia». Con molta probabilità anche Levi ha subìto il fascino distruttivo della maga lucana. Emerge un ritratto sensuale, erotico, spietato.

Tale donna è un archetipo, un modello evoliano. Il filosofo della tradizione nella sua Metafisica del sesso rimarca gli oscuri aspetti. E appare con prepotenza la “dimensione fredda” evocata perfino da uno scrittore progressista come Carlo Levi. «È questa la dimensione fredda della donna – scrive Evola – quale incarnazione terrestre della Vergine, di Durgâ e in quanto essere yin. […] Che la donna sia connessa più dell’uomo alla terra, all’elemento cosmico – naturale è cosa dimostrata. […] Ma nell’antichità questa connessione si riferiva piuttosto all’aspetto yin della natura, dal dominio sovrasensibile notturno e inconscio, irrazionale e abissale, delle forze vitali. Di qui, nella donna certe disposizioni veggenti e magiche in senso stretto».

Nella rappresentazione cinematografica del libro Irene Papas veste i panni di Giulia. Avvertiamo nelle pieghe delle scene un velato erotismo colmo di allusioni estatiche. La donna nasconde il suo copro con le vesti. Soltanto i piedi sono scoperti: pertanto codesta forma di pudore primordiale si differenzia da quello delle donne orientali. Le cinesi considerano i piedi l’elemento primitivo da nascondere; le arabe, invece, coprono la bocca. E Giulia cammina scalza fra le macerie derelitte. In uno spezzone lascia intravedere una gamba nuda; la copre subito con un’aria sensuale. Magnetizza così l’uomo. Quest’ultimo è attratto dal gesto insolito della megera, dai movimenti furtivi, dal sensualismo impersonale. Proprio Evola dedica al pudore taluni passaggi coinvolgenti. «Si sa fin troppo bene quanto spesso la donna usa le vesti per produrre un maggior effetto eccitante allusivo alle promesse della sua nudità. Montaigne ebbe a scrivere che ci sono cose che si nascondono per meglio mostrarle».  Giulia Venere si è cristallizzata nelle sembianze di Irene Papas ed è difficile scindere le due figure. Il gesto insolito dell’attrice greca è un frammento penetrante e ipnotico. Con pochissime e calde movenze è riuscita a descrivere i sentieri tracciati nel libro evoliano.

mardi, 14 octobre 2014

L’uomo come potenza

L’uomo come potenza

Ex: http://romeocastiglione.wordpress.com

L'uomo-come-potenza-Evola

Sfoglio con calma le pagine del libro L’uomo come potenza di Julius Evola. Tolgo i petali di una malefica rosa e lascio cadere sul pavimento infiniti aneliti di spasimo. Leggo, rifletto. Dinanzi a me compare una realtà incontaminata: accolgo in silenzio la magia dei Tantra. E soffermo il mio sguardo su un rigo ipnotico. «Evocare una immagine. Fissarvisi, perdersi, per così dire in essa. Bruscamente, sostituirla con un’altra». Chiudo gli occhi e vedo con la mente una ragazza in una stanza. La luce penetra attraverso i buchi delle persiane. È un pomeriggio estivo. Avverto un desiderio di distruzione; l’Inquietudine assale il mio corpo. Così cambio figurazione. Sorge all’improvviso un oceano di ghiaccio. Non si avverte nessun rumore. Il desiderio è atrofizzato. È fuggita la sofferenza.

Resto attonito. Ebbene rileggo il testo altre volte. Sottolineo, scopro. Tra le mani ho un dardo infuocato. E questo idealismo magico è paurosamente meraviglioso: è la vittoria totale dell’individuo. È il superamento dell’idealismo hegeliano. È l’abbraccio mortale del romanticismo tedesco di Novalis e Fichte con il metallico pensiero di Nietzsche. È la negazione della dualità cristiana; conseguenzialmente è il rifiuto del rapporto di dipendenza tra l’Individuo e il Dio trascendente ritenuto fondamentale da Schleiermacher. L’Io è il signore assoluto.

L’uomo come potenza raccoglie nelle pagine l’impetuosa unione della migliore filosofia occidentale con le dottrine orientali. Evola porta all’attenzione del lettore un Oriente remoto e distante dagli stereotipi. Con codesto saggio è stata confutata la distinzione tra i due poli. Non alberga certamente in questo luogo l’Oriente del buddismo arcano e delle primordiali Upanishad. Non occorre fuggire dal mondo; bensì bisogna dominarlo. Proprio per siffatto motivo l’autore ha esaltato il sistema tantrico, in altre parole il sistema orientale con più assonanze con lo spirito del moderno occidente. Nell’età buia, nell’epoca del Kali Yuga non c’è spazio per la conoscenza: soltanto la potenza brutale libera l’individuo.

Quindi è possibile dominare il mondo tramite la potenza liberatrice. L’Io deve diventare un Dio. Propriamente occorre recuperare l’immensa e grandiosa signoria di sé. L’individuo è sovrano ed è una “super monade”. La via dell’azione è salvifica. L’individuo è come un nero cavallo demoniaco libero dai lacci e dalle leggi morali. È il nero cavallo dell’auriga di Platone; è il dionisiaco puledro dalle sembianze tenebrose. È il sole, è la potenza distruttiva. Agire unicamente per l’azione è l’obiettivo. Di conseguenza si oltrepassa la soglia del bene e del male. Non c’è più il bene, non c’è più il male. L’individuo decide ciò che è bene e ciò è male. «Non si tratta cioè – dice Evola – né di violare le leggi, né di conformarvisi, bensì di elevarsi al livello di ciò per cui ogni legge e condizione non ha senso alcuno». Orbene le cupe e ipnotiche parole sembrano vampe immaginifiche. Cerca Dio chi è debole. L’individuo che cerca la libertà diventa Dio.

Proprio con la pratica dei Tantra (precisamente del ҫakti – tantra) l’individuo si libera nel mondo. La potenza divina proietta lungo un avvallamento magico. La naturale realizzazione di sé trova la sua suprema origine nel principio femminile della Shakti. Pertanto lo shaktismo mantiene talune importantissime attinenze con gli antichi culti del mondo mediterraneo pelasgico. Kali è una dea nera e nuda. La sua sagoma sprigiona una mistica sessualità intrisa di disintegrazione; ed è nera anche la Diana d’Efeso. Così come la Madonna Nera del Tindari in Sicilia. Tramite i Tantra è possibile affermare la priorità della potenza sull’esistenza. Al Principio c’è un potere e l’essere è subordinato a esso. Nella scala gerarchica tutti gli esseri vengono dopo e anche Dio viene dopo. Allora la potenza è libera e non è soggetta alle leggi razionali e a quelle morali. In pratica non ha un Dharma, un ordine più su di lei. Con il mondo c’è un rapporto di potenza e la potenza è soltanto la manifestazione. La potenza in azione è la coincidenza del desiderio e della liberazione. Proprio il mondo è il luogo materiale della liberazione. Insomma, bisogna porsi «faccia a faccia con la legge, resisterle e non esserne spezzati ma dominarla e spezzarla; osare di strappar via i veli con la realtà originaria e prudentemente coperta, osare di trascendere la forma per mettersi a contatto con l’atrocità originaria di un mondo in cui bene e male, divino e umano, giusto e ingiusto non hanno alcun senso. […] Ostacoli uno solo: paura. È una lotta terribile. Vi può essere vittoria e vi può essere catastrofe». L’autore individua nei Tantra un titanismo indomito e velato di allusioni nietzschiane. Evola rivendica la possibilità di «poter vivere tragicamente».

Bisogna mantenere la schiena dritta fino al momento di lasciare sé. Per farlo serve la potenza di distrazione, la rinuncia, l’auto crudeltà, la durezza, e la pratica occulta. Per di più bisogna essere coerenti e lineari. Il pentimento è vietato: non esiste alcun rimorso. Una “colpa” voluta non è una reale colpa. È necessario evitare il piacere; in linea di massima la strada maestra è quella della maggior resistenza. Non bisogna giustificare le proprie azioni. Non sussiste la condotta morale: soltanto nel dualismo la morale ha un’importanza. Per il superamento dei paҫa, in altre parole dei legami affettivi è fondamentale mantenere una dura condotta. La pietà, la delusione, il peccato, il disgusto, la famiglia e le convenzioni non hanno alcun valore. È una lotta atroce. Spunta tra i riflessi dell’opera un crepuscolare catastrofismo. Si dipanano le tenebre della perversa realtà. L’Individuo sfida il Dharma, il cosmos. Raccoglie dentro di sé il caos e sprigiona la volontà di potenza. Si arrampica a mani nude sopra una rocciosa parete; il senso di vertigine minaccia la stabilità. Sotto c’è il vuoto. Egli può soltanto andare avanti. Le pietre si sbriciolano intorno a lui. Soltanto in cima c’è la libertà.

In pratica nel volume il tantrismo è spiegato alla stregua di una “scienza positiva”. E l’idealismo magico di Evola è un frullato robusto e ammaliante. Nell’idealismo di Evola, in altre parole nell’idealismo “magico” l’Io si mette in rapporto diretto con le cose. Supera così la conciliazione astratta di spirito e mondo, di soggetto e oggetto figurata da Hegel. Codesto idealismo trae linfa da Novalis: il pensatore romano, in un certo senso, enfatizza ancor di più l’individuo. L’uomo come potenza rientra nel novero delle opere evoliane a carattere filosofico speculativo. L’autore con la successiva Teoria dell’individuo assoluto esaspera ulteriormente la “tragica dimensione dell’esistenza”. Il Superuomo di Nietzsche è oltrepassato sul filo del rasoio. La potentissima “vettura” evoliana percorre una strada stregata. Il singolo sceglie un eccezionalissimo percorso e procede a velocità elevate. Pertanto il poetico “solipsismo” non incute nessun timore. L’individuo assoluto determina ciò che è vero e ciò che è falso. Pare Humpty Dumpty, il personaggio ideato da Lewis Carroll che incontra Alice; Humpty cambia dispoticamente il significato delle parole poiché si sente un padrone. E nell’epoca della dissoluzione, nell’ultima epoca il corpo cerca la sua liberazione. Non è più il tempo della conoscenza. L’ascetismo non alberga fra le righe del libro. Ebbene non subire il fascino distruttivo del volume equivale a non scottarsi i piedi sui carboni ardenti: è impossibile. Di là dai Tantra è possibile scorgere un codice crittografato dal sapore robusto. L’uomo come potenza potrebbe diventare una sorta di nuovo “manuale di sopravvivenza” per gli uomini estranei al proprio tempo. Ma è un manuale algido, rigido, severo. È la vittoria di Dioniso è la consequenziale sconfitta di Apollo; è la vittoria del disordine sull’ordine morale devastatore della potenza dell’individuo. Dopo aver letto L’uomo come potenza il mondo non sarà più lo stesso e i problemi saranno analizzati con distacco. È un libro per pochi eletti. È un libro elegantemente antidemocratico.

E nei nostri giorni esiste l’individuo assoluto. Ad esempio le frange estreme del pianeta ultras corrono lungo una linea invisibile e peccaminosa. Nel cinema ho ritrovato diverse volte tale figura. Il Principe del film Ultrà è un individuo assoluto; così come Jena Plissken di Fuga da New York. È un individuo assoluto Saverio lo skinhead del lungometraggio Teste Rasate. Ebbene anche il generale Kurtz di Apocalypse Now è un individuo assoluto. Chi domina il mondo e chi non riconosce le leggi morali è un Dio. È un Dio chi obbedisce soltanto a sé stesso. Oggi codesti pensieri fanno male. Pesano come frammenti di roccia gravidi di rabbia.

dimanche, 12 octobre 2014

Il sapere tradizionale di Evola e la scienza ermetica di Hegel

evola__article.png

Il sapere tradizionale di Evola e la scienza ermetica di Hegel

Il sapere tradizionale di Evola e la scienza ermetica di Hegel

Giandomenico Casalino

Ex: http://www.ereticamente.net

La comparazione di natura filosofica tra Julius Evola e Giorgio F. G. Hegel, pensatori di natura sapienziale tanto lontani nel tempo e, quindi, apparentemente, così differenti, sia nel lessico da loro adottato che in relazione al contesto storico-culturale in cui hanno vissuto ed operato, impone rigorosamente la ricerca di ciò che realmente abbia significato per gli stessi la Cosa del pensiero, l’oggetto di cui e su cui hanno tematizzato, al di là delle modalità e cioè delle divergenze attraverso le quali, tutto ciò, loro malgrado, si è espresso. Quindi il lavoro deve essere caratterizzato da un approccio di natura ermeneutica, che privilegi non tanto la dimensione filologica quanto quella teoretica che, data la sua natura, abbia l’ambizione di varcare i limiti del tempo e delle stagioni culturali e, per dirla con il Kerenyi, entri in Idea nel cuore del Pensiero, che, nella sua inten­zionalità, li ha guidati nel percorso dello Spirito. Quanto dedotto vuol significare che, come intorno ad Evola il discorso deve superare la “vulgata” del suo preteso “abbandono” della Filosofia, con la co­siddetta “chiusura” del periodo ad essa dedicato e l’ “apertura” nei confronti di ciò che tout court si è definito Tradizione, così per lo Hegel è necessario emendare radicalmente quanto certa critica pigra e conformista ha dedotto sulla sua pretesa modernità e sul concetto di razionale confuso e mistifi­cato con quello cristiano e/o moderno di razionalismo individualistico e quindi astratto. At­tesa la complessa vastità del tema, faremo in modo di esaminare e di indicare sinteticamente alcuni nodi essenziali comuni alla prospettiva sia di Evola che di Hegel, al fine di offrire quelli che, secondo noi, pos­sono essere i percorsi di ricerca e di studio relativi alla quaestio sollevata.

****

L’autentica “svolta” spirituale esperita da Evola alla fine degli anni venti del Novecento non è con­sistita, a ben riflettere, in un “abbandono” della Fi­losofia e del suo orizzonte di ricerca e di visione, del suo oggetto di amore e dei suoi itinerari aristo­telicamente dovuti, ma bensì in un lasciare al suo destino di impotenza gnoseologica e di inefficacia spirituale la Filosofia moderna o meglio il concetto moderno della stessa (che è poi quello cristiano…). La frase di Lagneau sulla Filosofia considerata una sorta di “…riflessione tesa a riconoscere la sua propria insufficienza e la necessità di un’azione assoluta che conduca al di là della medesima…” (Rev. de Met. et de Mor., Mars 1898, p. 127), posta da Evola come “incipit” ai Saggi sull’idealismo ma­gico (1925), in concreto vuol significare che per realizzare il suo logos, la sua ragione, la Filosofia nel momento attuale, deve superare, andare al di là, effettuare un salto di natura ontologica per collo­carsi nel luogo dello spirito che, e qui sta l’autenticità ermeneutica del percorso evoliano, è il luogo di pertinenza da sempre della Filosofia nel suo unico e autentico significato che è quello premo­derno e cioè greco: percorso spirituale, di natura iniziatica, in un télos che è l’omòiosis theò! Ciò è quanto Evola ha compiuto nella sua azione realiz­zativa e di paidéia dei fondamenti della Scienza dello Spirito, sin dalla costituzione del Gruppo di UR, la cui natura, nel significato di essenza e quindi la sua virtus come finalità, è alquanto simile a ciò che è stata l’Accademia Platonica dagli inizi sino a Proclo: palestra rigorosa del Sapere che è ascesi filosofico-rituale e non cerimoniale, la cui finalità, pertanto, è l’assimilazione al Divino. Tutto ciò cosa ha a che fare con il concetto e la prassi moderni della Filo­sofia? Cosa ha a che fare la vera ricerca del sapere che è essere con, al di là di rare eccezioni, un sedicente “insegnamento” di natura sterilmente nozionistica e stupida­mente specialistica, da “dotti ignoranti”, come si esprime lo stesso Evola, vera caricatura mistificante di quanto l’uomo cerca sin dall’alba del suo spirito? Nulla, desolatamente nulla! Tale concetto moderno e quindi degradato di ciò che Aristotele afferma essere l’atteggiamento più naturale per l’uomo, cosa ha in comune con la definizione espressa dallo Hegel sull’essere la Fi­losofia “… la considerazione esoterica di Dio…”? (Enc. Scienze Fil.) e con il principio di Platone che il filosofo è solo colui il quale vede il Tutto, confermato dallo stesso Hegel quando insegna che “il Vero è l’Intero”?Assolutamente niente, ma le affermazioni hegeliane come quella di Platone hanno tutto in comune invece con quanto Evola enuncia in quella autentica e maestosa professione di fede platonica che è l’inizio di Rivolta contro il mondo moderno, quando edifica tutta la sua opera sul Sapere intorno alle due nature del Mondo, la naturale e la sovrannaturale, come medesime dimensioni e dello Spirito e della Phýsis, tanto che, platonicamente, in Evola la Fisica è Teologia in quanto il Mondo “è pieno di Dei!” E la Teologia in quanto Teosofia, Sapere intorno al Divino, è la stessa Logica che ha per oggetto il Nous come intelletto che è il Dio dormiente nell’uomo e quindi nel cosmo: l’intero Logos evoliano ha per fine, in guisa esclusiva, la rimozione attiva di quel “quindi” in quanto impedimento effettuale all’oscuramento dello Spirito; è, pertanto, opera di realizzazione del Sé, perseguita ed indicata come Via iniziatico-solare, di natura platonico­apollinea e non nientificazione orfico-dionisiaca dell’Io che, avendo la natura spirituale del pathèin e non del  mathéin (Aristotele, Perì philosophias, fr. 15), non è conoscenza dell’autentica essenza dello Spirito in quanto realtà Divina trascendentemente immanente che è come dire la realtà dell’Individuo Assoluto, vera sublimazione dell’Io; “…la filosofia ha lo scopo di riconoscere la verità, di conoscere Dio, poiché Dio è la verità assoluta…”, afferma Hegel nelle Lezioni sulla filosofia della religione; (vol. II).  Allora è d’uopo affermare, senza alcun timore, che sia in Evola che in Hegel, riappare, in piena modernità, il senso e il significato greco della Filosofia, stru­mento per il conseguimento del Risveglio, che è la rinascita, dopo la caduta-oblio, in quanto anàmnesi di ciò che si è e lo si è sempre stati pur  non avendone scienza (ignoranza come avidya), quindi riconquista di un Sa­pere che coincide con l’Essere in senso ontologico. Talché la Filosofia, nel suo vero ed unico significato, che è quello platonico-iniziatico (Lettera VII), nocciolo esoterico della stessa esperienza spirituale dei Misteri (Fedone, 69c-d), è quindi  Scienza Sacra in senso eminente e autentica Tradizione, avente ad “oggetto” solo ed esclusivamente il Divino, che è la Verità in quanto essenza e dell’uomo e del Mondo, come Cosmo; è pertanto Sapere per pochi, è gnosi, è Teosofia, conoscenza del Dio che si rivela, nella completezza del percorso rituale-filosofico, come theopoìesis (deificatio) (Platone, Teeteto, 176 b 1; Repubblica, 613 a b; Timeo, 90 d; Leggi, 716 c s; Plotino, Enneadi, I, 2, 6, 25; Proclo, Elementi di Teologia, 127; 112, 31; Corpus Hermeticum, I, 26; 16, 12), significando ciò il rammemo­rare la consapevolezza quale Sapere, aldilà ed oltre sia il Mito che il Simbolo (livelli di conoscenza sa­pientemente riconosciuti, sia da Evola che da Hegel, inefficaci ai fini della Scienza, in relazione allo stato intellettivo-noetico puro che è l’apolli­neo), che il Dio è “oggetto” da superare, da negare,  andando oltre il dualismo soggetto-oggetto per “osare” essere Lui! Tale identificazione, sia in Hegel che in Evola, è la stessa autoconoscenza del Sé quale Assoluto nella sua natura solare, in totale estraneità, pertanto, ad ogni confusione panteistica e ad ogni vedantino acosmismo spirituale. In tale guisa, pertanto, anche se mediante linguaggi diffe­renti e in contesti storico-culturali lontani, Evola ed Hegel dicono il Medesimo e la Filosofia, quindi, nella loro opera non è più quell’insulsa propaggine della teologia dogmatica (cristiana), né quella serva ti­mida delle cosiddette scienze moderne, cioè della concezione parziale, riduttiva e quindi irreale, in quanto galileiana, della natura, ormai desacraliz­zata e ridotta ad oggetto di calcolo matematico e ciò al di là della autentica rivoluzione epistemologica operata nel XX secolo dalla fisica dei quanti e dalla sua meccanica che, invece, ritornando ad una visione platonica del reale (vedi Heisenberg ed il suo concetto della chòra platonica…) non fa che confermare, tutto sommato, il sapere sia di Evola che di Hegel. La Filosofia torna così ad essere ciò che non può non essere, consistendo, secondo Aristotele, nel Destino che gli Dei hanno affidato all’uomo; non “fede”, non “credenza”, ma Sapere che è esposizione del Mondo in quanto Pensiero puro, sono “le idee di Dio prima della “creazione” del mondo e di ogni oggetto finito” (Hegel); è speculazione (da specu­lum) dove il Pensiero si specchia nel Mondo, in senso oggettivo e vede se stesso come Idea e quindi Unità (Hegel); è la realtà dell’Oro ermetico, che è la Cosa più vicina e nel contempo più lontana (Evola), è la certezza sen­sibile, è il concreto esistente che è da sempre Spirito, solo che non lo sa, (medesimo concetto esprime Plotino in riferimento all’esperienza del “toccare”  il Dio [Enneadi, VI, 9, 7]); l’Oro si trova infatti nella più oscura Tenebra o Feccia (Ermetismo) da cui l’uomo fugge, proprio perché non sa che l’Opera deve iniziare da quello stato come riconquista eroica che corporizza lo Spirito e spiritualizza il corpo, ed è la grande fatica del concetto (Hegel). Tutto ciò Evola lo rende manifesto nella sua opera  La Tradizione ermetica che è la summa circolare del viaggio iniziatico (dal Corpo come impietramento del principio Fuoco allo stesso Corpo però rinato come rosso Cinabro, solfuro di mercurio) simile alla circolarità triadica della Scienza della Logica di Hegel: il Logos qui non è una conoscenza astratta e quindi profana cioè falsa ma, come per gli antichi maestri neoplatonici, è l’apertura dell’occhio dello Spirito sul Mondo come è, e quindi come appare, ciò significando che  essenza ed esistenza sono il Medesimo che è l’Essere, nel “momento”, che non è temporale, ma logico cioè ontologico, in quanto riguarda la natura profonda dell’uomo, in cui lo stesso, acquisito il medesimo livello di essere-conoscenza, è nella capacità di vedere, attesa la natura epoptica della filosofia evoliana. La veneranda Tradizione Platonica, a cui appartengono sia Hegel che Evola, è il filone aureo che da Plotino, Proclo ed Eckhart sino a Nicola da Cusa, Giorgio Gemisto Pletone, Marsilio Ficino, Benedetto Spinoza e Jacob Boehme, non è altro che Introduzione alla Scienza dell’ Io, come spirito Universale, come Atto puro, proprio nel significato dell’autoctisi gentiliana che è poi il causa sui di Spinoza, che, nel Sapere Assoluto, che è filosofico, realizza il Sapere del Dio, dove quel “del” è tanto il Sapere che ha il Dio come “oggetto” che il Sapere che appartiene al Dio stesso.

****

Il situarsi sia di Evola che di Hegel nella Tradizione Platonica, ci conduce in immediato nella evidenza relativa ad una fondamentale verità presente nel loro orizzonte sapienziale: la polare identità tra Pensiero ed Essere, intesi in senso cosmico e quindi oggettivo e non certo nel significato individuale e soggettivo che è come dire cartesiano e quindi moderno; identità che è da costruire, con fatica eroica, in quanto cammino catartico (Feno­menologia dello Spirito in Hegel; Rivolta contro il mondo moderno in Evola) per la riacquisita co­scienza che è poi Inizio dell’altro percorso, avente il Fine della identificazione plotiniana, che è il mònos pros mònon, come mutamento della propria natura (metànoia), principio noetico ormai desto, non più e non mai “esterno” all’Io ma Sé autentico che è al contempo (e da sempre) il Lògos del mondo (Tradizione Ermetica in Evola; Scienza della Logica in Hegel). Il Sapere (Nous) che coin­cide anzi è l’Essere (Phýsis) è ciò che, in guisa auro­rale, afferma la sapienza indoeuropea, ad iniziare da Parmenide e dai Veda (Atman è Brahman). Il Mi­stero di tale verità è l’Inesprimibile del Pensiero che si riconosce nel Tutto come i Molti che è visto nell’Istante- exàiphnes come Uno (Platone, Parmenide, 156, c) ed è il fondamento della conoscenza comune sia ad Evola che ad Hegel: ad uno stadio di consape­volezza, che è un “momento” (“temporale” ma che non si svolge nel tempo…) della coscienza e quindi un essere della stessa, in senso ontologico, corri­sponde uno stadio o livello di conoscenza-sapere che è il vivere-essere lo stadio o livello equiva­lente e corrispondente nel Mondo; tale processo spirituale in Evola è da situare in guisa manifesta dopo la catarsi dialettica che certamente coincide con la fase del suo pensiero preparatoria della teoresi dell’Idealismo magico che è il salto nella gnosi platonica. La realtà dello spirito che, come qui appare evidente, è circolare, e va dall’io al mondo e dal mondo all’io vuol significare che si conosce ciò che si è e si è ciò che si conosce e, quindi, si conosce ciò che si diviene, equivalendo ciò al ritorno anamnestico verso l’Inizio, dove si è sempre stati, nella natura in cui si è sempre consistiti ma della quale si è presa coscienza, solo dopo aver perfezionato l’Opera filosofica. Evola ed Hegel, nel solco del platonismo, ci inducono pertanto a meditare sulla dimensione dello Spirito, nel “momento” in cui il Pensiero, pensando il suo “passato” (l’Anima, il suo sonno…), si riconosce tale ed il Mondo, gli Dei (l’oggetto) appare quello che è sempre stato, cioè il Pen­sato, la dimensione dell’Anima, il movimento, la Vita, la dialettica (essere-non essere; vita-morte; dolore-gioia…). Evola lo afferma in tutta la sua opera: se si è forma, si vede la forma, che è sempre, ma anche colui che “ora” la vede lo è sempre stato solo che lo aveva dimenticato. Secondo Evola ed Hegel, ovviamente, non è questione di ideologie o di modi di vedere il mondo, cioè di stati soggettivi, poiché di soggettivo, nel senso di personale o individuale-psicologistico, qui non è dato parlare, ma di stati molteplici, differentemente gerarchici, dell’Essere (sia in senso microcosmico che macrocosmico, cioè quello che ignorantemente chiamiamo ancora tanto “soggetto” quanto “oggetto”)!

Hegel, infatti, nella Scienza della Logica, quando parla di meccanicismo, chimismo, organicismo, non sta enunciando determinate visioni del mondo o punti di vista, ma sta dicendo che una natura, in senso ontologico, meccanicistica conosce solo il meccanicismo o meglio il livello o “momento” meccanicistico del mondo e quindi sta trattando filosoficamente degli stati della coscienza, come li­velli del pensiero a cui corrispondono gli stessi stati della natura poiché questa è il medesimo Pensiero uscito da sè (proodòs plotiniana); essi sono pertanto il percorso del Sapere come Idea a cui corrispondono stati equivalenti della natura poiché la Verità cioè il Divino è l’Intero cioè l’Uno (e questo non è lo stesso principio di corrispondenza magica tra uomo e Metalli-Mondo cioè Astro-Nume-Metallo tanto in senso microcosmico quanto macrocosmico che è il fondamento della Tradizione sia nella forma Er­metica che in quella Platonica?). Evola dice il medesimo quando afferma che Inferno e Paradiso, esotericamente, sono stati della coscienza nei quali e attraverso i quali si conoscono le tenebre infernali o le luminosità celesti che sono livelli o dimensioni dell’Essere dello stesso mondo o dimensioni del Tutto, il chiuso Athanòr, che una natura corrispondente andrà a co­noscere o tenebroso come assenza di Luce o luminoso. Pertanto un essere che è, come spiritualità autentica, o il primo o il se­condo, può conoscere solo o uno o l’altro, cre­dendo, nel momento ingenuo (mitico, secondo Evola), intellettivo-astratto (direbbe Hegel), del percorso di conoscenza, che si tratti di un “altro” mondo a sé medesimo opposto e definito dualisticamente non-Io. Gli Dei non esistono a priori per fede… se non si cono­scono e si conoscono solo esperimentando e quindi essendo lo stato corrispondente. Se in Evola tutto ciò è definito identificazione iniziatico-­solare in cui è manifesto che Io sono Te, ricono­scendo pertanto l’irrealtà dello stato religioso-devozionale, in Hegel è il percorso dello Spirito che supera l’oggettivazione del Sé (Dio), come Altro e, con la semplificazione filosofica ed il suo Sapere apicale, è l’Assoluto che conosce se stesso, “accadendo” come evento logico, cioè fuori dal tempo, “dopo” lo stato-essere spirituale rappresentativo che è il religioso-dualistico. È la realizzazione della conoscenza che il soggetto è l’oggetto, il Pensiero come Atto puro cosmico è l’Essere che è il Dio, e si ritorna ad Aristotele, al Pensiero di Pensiero, al Pensiero che pensa Se stesso ed è poi l’Autarca di Evola! In sostanza ed in termini filosofici, cioè concettuali, è il Risveglio buddistico (vedi La dottrina del risveglio) che in Evola è la realizzazione della vera natura  dell’uomo, rendendo manifesta quella occulta o incosciente (Aristotele, Etica nicomachea, 1177b 33) idea di origine platonica (Timeo, 90c) che è l’athanatìzein di Proclo, cioè il rendersi immortali in quanto si assume piena consapevolezza e quindi Sapere di esserlo sempre stati. Corollario di tale Tradizione gnosica è, in Evola, La Scienza dell’Io che si riconosce, quale atto magico di anamnesi, come Idea eterna del Sé: “…Io alla seconda persona, alter ego celeste dell’uomo: è ancora l’uomo ma nello stesso tempo non è più solo l’uomo…” (Henry Corbin) ed è l’affermazione che la conoscenza del Dio è l’autoconoscenza del Dio come Divino nell’uomo e dell’uomo: il Dio si conosce e si vede nell’uomo, come l’uomo, nel doversi conoscere, conosce Se medesimo quale il Divino stesso. È il sapere di natura apollinea, di cui enigmaticamente parla Platone nell’Alcibiade Maggiore (133 c)…!

*****

In riferimento a tale Sapere Pavel Alexandrovic Florenski ne Le radici universali dell’Idealismo rileva la natura primordiale dello stesso e trae la conclusione che il Platonismo è la Conoscenza originaria presente nelle Tradizioni religiose e sapienziali di tutti i popoli del Mondo, cioè a dire, nella sue essenza metafisica, la Tradizione Unica di tutte le Civiltà, nella forma tanto mitico-religiosa nei primordi delle stesse, quanto magica ed unitivo-sapienziale al tramonto del ciclo.

Pertanto il Sapere, la Gnosi, di cui non solo parlano o scrivono sia Evola che Hegel, ma che sono e realizzano come mutamento della natura, essendo lo stesso Sapere, è in virtù di “qualcosa” di arcaico, di ancestrale, di originario, di non classificabile nelle e con le comuni categorie dello Spirito non solo di questo tempo ma di ogni tempo; “qualcosa” che è una realtà vivente, un fuoco che brucia nella continuità della loro vita, nel loro athanòr, come fiamma che consuma tutti i residui, le scorie, le impurità tanto che “magicamente” loro appaiono quello che sono in quanto Essere come identità di essenza ed esistenza; dai contemporanei sono infatti veduti come autentici maghi, nel significato arcaico e quindi vero del termine, chiarito, quasi nello stesso periodo di tempo, sia da Florenski che da Evola in questi termini: natura attiva dello Spirito nei confronti delle Forze e dei Numi cosmici e tanto intensa da apparire quasi naturale, come innata identificazione con gli stessi, mediante riconoscimento anamnestico!

Allora il Sapere tradizionale, che equivale a dire metafisico e che stiamo tentando di delineare per brevi cenni, è di natura magico-sacrale!

E non può essere diversamente, atteso il fatto che Evola non è lo scrittore, lo studioso o l’erudito, figlio di una sclerotica civilizzazione ma è frutto di una Kultur che, proprio nel senso spengleriano, è qualcosa di vivente che emerge maestosa e luminosa, vasta e complessa nella sua cosmica valenza, da tutta la sua opera che è principalmente ed in guisa essenziale, la sua stessa presenza e la sua vita come Simbolo e Mito. Non si può negare la presenza della Luce di questa forza magico-sacrale, quasi sciamanica, in uomini, in Sapienti Solfurei, autentiche trasparenze della doxa omerica, cioè della gloria del Pensiero, inteso in senso Vivente e Divino, in tutti coloro i quali, con linguaggi diversi ed in tempi storico-culturali oltremodo differenti,  hanno osato dire, vivere ed essere Verità, autenticamente rivoluzionarie e destabilizzanti per tutte le Chiese, i Dogmi e le Istituzioni dominanti, quasi come Vie della mano destra di ogni epoca, Verità che hanno sempre incusso paura, tremore e financo terrore nell’uomo, inducendo e provocando mistificazione del loro Dire, calunnie sul loro Fare, negazione del loro Essere e tentativi, peraltro vani, di oscuramento della Verità da loro eroicamente difesa. È la vicenda, non solo di un Evola, criminalizzato e mistificato o di un Hegel, incompreso e pertanto trasferito tout court, nonostante la geniale intuizione di un Feuerbach sull’essere il sapiente Svevo “…il Proclo tedesco…”, nel positivismo e nel laicismo immanentista o nel soggettivismo postcartesiano, ma è la storia umana anche di Eckhart, di Giorgio Gemisto Pletone, di Boehme, di Spinoza, cioè è il destino comune, la risposta, la reazione di chi, in buona sostanza, rifiuta, ne ha paura e non comprende insegnamenti come questi di Plotino: “…Il compito non è essere virtuosi o buoni ma essere Dei!…”; “…Non devo andare io agli Dei ma gli Dei venire a me…!”; che equivalgono a ciò che dice Eckhart nei Sermoni: “…Dio ed io siamo una cosa sola…!”; a quanto afferma Hegel: “…Si crede usualmente che l’Assoluto debba trovarsi molto al di là mentre è invece proprio ciò che è del tutto presente e che, in quanto pensanti, anche senza averne espressamente coscienza, portiamo sempre con noi…!” o a ciò che rivela Boehme nel De Signatura rerum: “…tra la Nascita Eterna, la Redenzione dalla Caduta e la scoperta della Pietra dei Filosofi non c’è alcuna differenza…!”.

Si tratta, quindi, di un Sapere primordiale, è la Tradizione iniziatica regale, è la originaria via indoeuropea agli Dei, nel senso spirituale e realizzativo del Risveglio del Re che dorme nel profondo dell’anima, ed è, innanzitutto ed essenzialmente il Rito filosofico quotidiano e costante onde realizzare il Katèchon che, difendendo il principio superiore della coscienza e quello animico ad esso orientato, costituisca invalicabili barriere nei confronti delle potenze tenebrose provenienti dal basso; al fine di “ricostruire” eroicamente la natura autentica dell’uomo: la libertà dello Spirito, nella divinificazione che è l’Eghemonicòn stoico, di cui parla Evola, la liberazione dell’uomo dalle catene invisibili con cui egli stesso si è reso prigioniero di sé medesimo! Tale Conoscenza suprema che è di una semplicità fanciullesca (gli antichi Ermetisti parlano di “gioco di bambini”) mai come nella fase presente, di palese e drammatica decadenza spirituale da fine di un ciclo di civiltà, come rivela Aristotele (Metafisica, XII, 8,1074a, 38-b 14), è di straordinaria ed inattuale attualità, poiché, essendo la Conoscenza della maturità avanzata di un epoca, proprio come precisa Aristotele nel passo su citato, è l’ultima àncora di salvezza sia per coloro che vogliono percorrere tale unica ed ineludibile Via dello Spirito, per tornare ad essere, come precisa Evola, quanto meno e come base di partenza, uomini, sia per la conservazione e la trasmissione dei Fondamenti della stessa da “tràdere” cioè consegnare a coloro i quali saranno i protagonisti del ciclo successivo: non altro concetto ha, infatti, espresso lo stesso Hegel quando ha definito la filosofia il Sapere del meriggio che nasce quando s’invola la nottola di Minerva!

Ci chiediamo, alla fine di questa nostra riflessione, la ragione per cui la Tradizione magico-arcaica, la Sapienza antica, il Platonismo come eterno Idealismo, il Logos di Evola come quello di tutti i Sapienti che nei secoli e nei millenni hanno rivelato sempre e soltanto la medesima Cosa, avente ad “oggetto” il Pensiero pensante che è già e da sempre Pensiero pensato e cioè il Divino come Mondo che ritorna ciclicamente e liberamente, in quanto sapientemente, in se stesso, appaiono tanto irrimediabilmente inattuali da essere invece così indiscutibilmente attuali; la risposta a tale domanda risiede nella natura protervamente materialista e quindi antiumana di questa epoca in cui dello Spirito nulla si sa e si deve sapere, dell’Anima non se ne deve parlare  più, affidando il suo semantema residuo ed umbratile a forme di stregonerie e ciarlatanerie definitesi, molto appropriatamente, “psicoanalisi” (vedi J. Evola, L’infezione psicanalista, Quaderni della Fondazione Evola, Napoli 2012); il corpo  è ignorato in quanto “pensato” come un assemblaggio di pezzi meccanici da riparare e, nel caso, da sostituire; epoca in cui, infine, ci si è fatti convincere che l’uomo non sia e non debba essere altro che un “tubo digerente” avente solo una finalità: il disciplinato e silenzioso consumo planetario, in quanto “naturalmente”  privo di idee, sentimenti e passioni,  che pericolosamente abbiano o conservino qualcosa che ricordi l’umano; nessun Discorso, religioso o filosofico contemporaneo, che può pur apparire radicale e liberatorio lo può mai essere, in verità e nella dimensione universale, così come lo è manifestamente e dall’eternità la Luce della Tradizione, per la semplice ragione che tutti i “discorsi” che non appartengono alla sua Verità, appartengono alla Modernità, come categoria dello Spirito; e non si può nemmeno tentare di superare l’effetto coniugandolo con la sua causa!

Solo la Scienza dello Spirito, l’atto supremo ineludibile di Rivolta contro il mondo moderno, può aprire gli occhi,  prima dell’anima e poi dello Spirito, dell’uomo della presente età, sì da fargli riacquistare la stazione eretta che, come insegna Platone, gli consente di guardare il Cielo e quindi gli Dei!

Di una sola cosa, comunque, siamo certi e serenamente consapevoli e quindi convinti: il potere unico della Chiesa dogmatica tecno-finanziaria del capitalismo mondialista, apparentemente trionfante al crepuscolo del presente ciclo, ha di fronte, alle spalle ed intorno a sé medesimo, una sola ed invincibile nonché semplice e luminosa Verità, espressa da Julius Evola nei termini seguenti: “…Tutto si potrà fare sull’uomo e nell’uomo ma mai strappare dal fondo del suo animo la presenza del Divino!…”.

Giandomenico Casalino

 

BIBLIOGRAFIA ESSENZIALE

Albanese L., La tradizione platonica, Roma 1993.

Albert K., Sul concetto di filosofia in Platone, Mi­lano 1991.

Beierwaltes W., Platonismo e idealismo, Bologna 1987.

Boutroux E., Jacob Boehme e l’origine dell’idea­lismo tedesco, Milano 2006.

Casalino G., La prospettiva di Hegel, Lecce 2005.

Casalino G., L’origine. Contributi per la filosofia della spiritualità

indoeuropea,Genova 2009.

Casalino G., La conoscenza suprema. Essere la concretezza luminosa

dell’Idea, Genova 2012.

Casalino G., Sul fondamento. Pensare l’Assoluto come Risultato, Genova 2014.

Carbonara C., Hegel platonico e teologo. Quaderni contemporanei, 6, 1971.

Di Vona P., Metafisica e politica in Evola, Padova 2000, pp. 55 ss.

Evola J., (a cura di), Introduzione alla Magia, Roma 1969, volume I, pp. 56 ss.; 364 ss.

Evola J., La tradizione ermetica, Roma 1998.

Hadot P., Esercizi spirituali e filosofia antica, To­rino 1988.

Hegel G.G.F., Scienza della Logica, Bari 2001.

Hegel G.G.F., Fenomenologia dello spirito, Firenze 1960.

Heidegger M., “Hegel e i greci” in Idem, Segna­via, Milano 1987.

Kramer H., Platone e ifondamenti della metafisica, Milano 1989, pp. 285 ss.

Lugarini L., Hegel e la tradizione arcaica, Il Pen­siero, voI. XXXII, 1992.

Magee G.A., Hegel e la Tradizione Ermetica, Roma 2013.

Plotino, Enneadi, VI, 9,40.

Platone, Lettera VII

Platone, Alcibiade Maggiore.

Ponsetto A., L’anima religiosa della filosofia, Lecce 2000.

Proclo, Teologia Platonica.

Ruggenini M., Il Dio assente. La filosofia è l’espe­rienza del Divino, Milano 1997.

 

The Differentiated Man

The Differentiated Man

Ex: http://aryan-myth-and-metahistory.blogspot.com

10857064-l-39-homme-de-vitruve-sous-les-rayons-x-isole-sur-noir.jpgIn the days when I used to post on white nationalist websites one of the most recurring themes that people would argue about is the declining levels of Aryans vis a vis other races. I argued then as I argue now ratios are not relevant. Lower animals and races of men will breed at a faster rate than higher species or races. Often the reason for this is the higher mortality rate in such species and races. This fact may also be observed amongst the soci-economic classes which are a bastardised and commercialised version of the ancient traditional Aryan caste system (the two are not to be confused or even compared!).  Individuals of lesser education (not merely formal education but general awareness and ability) tend to breed without restraint and with no consideration as to whether they (or the tax payer) can afford such indiscriminate coupling!

Of course I am not here referring to that tiny and select minority of individuals who are spiritually and racially aware who may breed in large numbers with suitable mates for the right reasons. The people I am referring to in the previous paragraph are those who live entirely by instinct and whose days are spent gratifying their every bodily need or desire. Such people are little better than the beasts of the field and I would not expect them to read blogs such as this so forgive me for lecturing to the converted! These belong to von Liebenfels' Affenmenschen (apelings) referred to in his Theozoology. The move from the rural economies of the past to the Industrial Revolution which began in the 18th century in England caused a migration of part of the rural population to the emerging industrial towns and cities to become nothing more than factory wage slaves. The new capitalist bougeoisie needed as many men (and women) as they could find to work in their sweat shops. The same impulse that drove forward the Industrial Revolution was also responsible for the creation of the British Empire which benefitted no one apart from the wealthy (and certainly not the conquered natives!).

The populations of the industrial towns and cities bred like rats but they needed to as the infant mortality rate was extremely high. Their poorly paid labour was needed by the capitalists of the day (nothing much has changed). The problem with having an expanding proletariat is that the individual monetary worth of the worker is reduced proportionately. This is why countries like Britain welcome immigrant labour because their expectations are low and this creates economic competition for British workers. Employers can pick and choose and pay a pittance for a person's toil. For this reason despite the government's protestations they have done abolutely nothing to stem the flow of immigration (legal and otherwise) and indeed the problem has got worse over the last 4 years (if such a thing were possible). Low paid workers and cannon fodder for illegal wars will always be in demand by this corrupt system.

Thus a capitalist economy relies for the production of ever increasing wealth for the 1% on a large mass of labour. Capitalism encourages and fuels population explosions. Babies are born destined to become unimportant cogs in this monstrous and inhuman machine. This and only this is the value of the 'family', much lauded by the government's MPs as women become nothing but battery hens for future workers. Nothing else is of importance. With these thoughts in mind we come to the writings of Julius Evola:

"The differentiated man cannot feel part of a 'society' like the present one, which is formless and has sunk to the level of purely material, economic, 'physical' values, and moreover lives at this level and follows its insane course under the sign of the absurd. Therefore, apoliteia requires the most decided resistance to any social myth. Here it is not just a matter of its extreme, openly collectivist forms, in which the person is not recognised as significant except as a fragment of a class or party or, as in the Marxist-Soviet area, is denied any existence of his own outside the society, so that personal destiny and happiness distinct from those of the collective do not even exist. We must equally reject the more general and bland idea of 'sociability' that today often functions as a slogan even in the so-called free world, after the decline of the ideal of the true state. The differentiated man feels absolutely outside of society, he recognises no moral claim that requires his inclusion in an absurd system; he can understand not only those who are outside, but even those who are against 'society'-meaning against this society." (Ride the Tiger. A Survival Manual for the Aristocrats of the Soul)

dimanche, 10 août 2014

Sao Paulo: IV Encontro Internacional Evoliano

dousor.jpg

dimanche, 20 juillet 2014

The Life & Writings of Julius Evola

MERCURY RISING: THE LIFE & WRITINGS OF JULIUS EVOLA

 

The Life & Writings of Julius Evola

If the industrious man, through taking action,
Does not succeed, he should not be blamed for that –
He still perceives the truth.

                        ~The Sauptikaparvan of the Mahābhārata (2,16)

If we could select a single aspect by which to define Julius Evola, it would have been his desire to transcend the ordinary and the world of the profane. It was characterized by a thirst for the Absolute, which the Germans call mehr als leben – “more than living.” This idea of transcending worldly existence colours not only his ideas and philosophy, it is also evident throughout his life which reads like a litany of successes. During the earlier years Evola excelled at whatever he chose to apply himself to: his talents were evident in the field of literature, for which he would be best remembered, and also in the arts and occult circles.

Born in Rome on the 19th of May in 1898, Giulio Cesare Andrea Evola was the son of an aristocratic Sicilian family, and like many children born in Sicily, he had received a stringent Catholic upbringing. As he recalled in his intellectual autobiography, Il cammino del cinabro [1963, 1972, The Cinnabar's Journey], his favourite pastimes consisted of painting, one of his natural talents, and of visiting the library as often as he could in order to read works by Oscar Wilde, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Otto Weininger.[1]  During his youth he also studied engineering, receiving excellent grades but chose to discontinue his studies prior to the completion of his doctorate, because he "did not wish to be bourgeois, like his fellow students." At the age of nineteen Evola joined the army and participated in World War I as a mountain artillery officer. This experience would serve as an inspiration for his use of mountains as metaphors for solitude and ascension above the chthonic forces of the earth. Evola was also a friend of Mircea Eliade, who kept in correspondence with Evola from 1927 until his death. He was also an associate of the Tibetologist Giuseppe Tucci and the Tantric scholar Sir John Woodroffe (Arthur Avalon).
 
Sir John Woodroffe
During his younger years Evola was briefly involved in art circles, and despite this being only a short lived affair, it was also a time that brought him great rewards. Though he would later denounce Dada as a decadent form of art it was within the field of modern art that Evola first made his name, taking a particular interest in Marinetti and Futurism. His oil painting, Inner Landscape, 10:30 a.m., is hanging today on a wall of the National Gallery of Modern Art in Rome.[2]  He also composed Arte Astratta (Abstract Art) but later, after experiencing a personal crisis, turned to the study of Nietzsche, from which sprang his Teoria dell, individuo assoluto (Theory of the Absolute Individual) in 1925. By 1921 Evola had abandoned the pursuit of art as the means to place his unique mark on the world. The revolutionary attitudes of Marinetti, the Futurist movement and the so-called avant-garde which had once fascinated him, no longer appeared worthwhile to Evola with their juvenile emphasis on shocking the bourgeois. Likewise, despite being a talented poet, Evola (much like another of his inspirations – Arthur Rimbaud) abandoned poetry at the age of twenty four. Evola did not write another poem nor paint another picture for over forty years. Thus, being no longer enamored of the arts, Evola chose instead to pursue another field entirely that he would one day award him even greater acclaim.
 
To this day, the magical workings of the Ur Group and its successor Krur remain as some of the most sophisticated techniques for the practice of esoteric knowledge laid down in the modern Western era. Based on a variety of primary sources, ranging from Hermetic texts to advanced Yogic techniques, Evola occupied a prominent role in both of these groups. He wrote a number of articles for Ur and edited many of the others. These articles were collected in the book Introduction to Magic: Rituals and Practical Techniques for the Magus, which alongside Evola’s articles, are included the works of Arturo Reghini, Giulio Parese, Ercole Quadrelli and Gustave Meyrink. The original title of this work in Italian, Introduzione alla Magia quale scienza dell’lo, literally translates as Introduction to Magic as a Science of the “I”.[3]  In this sense, the 'I' is best interpreted as the ego, or the manipulation of the will – an idea which is also the found in the work of that other famous magician, Aleister Crowley and his notion of Thelema. The original format of Ur was as a monthly publication, of which the first issue was printed in January 1927.[4]
 
Contributors to this publication included Count Giovanni di Caesaro, a Steinerian, Emilio Servadio, a distinguished psychoanalyst, and Guido de Giorgio, a well-known adherent of Rudolph Steiner and an author of works on the Hermetic tradition. It was during this period, that he was introduced to Arturo Reghini, whose ideas would leave a lasting impression on Evola. Arturo Reghini (1878-1946), who was interested in speculative Masonry and the anthroposophy of Rudolf Steiner, introduced Evola to Guénon's writings and invited him to join the Ur group. Ur and its successor, Krur, gathered together a number of people interested in Guénon's exposition of the Hermetic tradition and in Vedanta, Taoism, Buddhism, Tantra, and magic.

Arturo Reghini was to be a major influence on Evola, and himself was a representative of the so-called Italian School (Scuola Italica), a secret order which claimed to have survived the downfall of the Roman Empire, to have re-emerged with Emperor Frederic II, and to have inspired the Florentine poets of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, up to Petrarch. Like Evola, Reghini had also written articles, one of which was entitled "Pagan Imperialism." This appeared in Salamandra in 1914, and in it Reghini summed up his anti-Catholic program for a return to a glorious pagan past. This piece had a profound impact on Evola, and it served as the inspiration for his similarly titled Imperialismo pagano. Imperialismo pagano, chronicling the negative effects of Christianity on the world, appeared in 1928. In the context of this work, Evola is the advocate of an anti-Roman Catholic pagan imperialism. According to Evola, Christianity had destroyed the imperial universality of the Roman Empire by insisting on the separation of the secular and the spiritual. It is from this separation that arose the inherent decadence and inward decay of the modern era. Out of Christianity’s implacable opposition to the healthy paganism of the Mediterranean world arose the secularism, democracy, materialism, scientism, socialism, and the "subtle Bolshevism" that heralded the final age of the current cosmic cycle: the age of "obscurity" the Kali-Yuga.[5]  Imperialismo pagano was to be later revised in a German edition as Heidnischer Imperialismus. The changes that occurred in the text of Evola’s Imperialismo pagano in its translation as Heidnischer Imperialismus five years later were not entirely inconsequential. Although the fundamental concepts that comprised the substance of Evola’s thought remained similar, a number of critical elements were altered that would transform a central point in Evola's thinking. The "Mediterranean tradition" of the earlier text is consistently replaced with the "Nordic-solar tradition" in this translation.[6]  In 1930 Evola founded his own periodical, La Torre (The Tower). La Torre, the heir to Krur, differed from the two earlier publications Ur and Krur in the following way, as was announced in an editorial insert:
"Our Activity in 1930 – To the Readers: Krur is transforming. Having fulfilled the tasks relative to the technical mastery of esotericism we proposed for ourselves three years ago, we have accepted the invitation to transfer our action to a vaster, more visible, more immediate field: the very plane of Western 'culture' and the problems that, in this moment of crisis, afflict both individual and mass consciousness […] for all these reasons Krur will be changed to the title La Torre (The Tower), a work of diverse expressions and one Tradition."[7]
La Torre was attacked by official fascist bodies such as L’Impero and Anti-Europa, and publication of La Torre ceased after only ten issues. Evola also contributed an article entitled Fascism as Will to Imperium and Christianity to the review Critica Fascista, edited by Evola's old friend Giuseppi Bottai. Here again he launches vociferous opposition to Christianity and attests to its negative effects, evident in the rise of a pious, hypocritical, and greedy middle class lacking in all superior solar virtues that Evola attributed to ancient Rome. The article did not pass unnoticed and was vigorously attacked in many Italian periodicals. It was also the subject of a long article in the prestigious Revue Internationale des Sociétés Secrètes (Partie Occultiste) for April 1928, under the title Un Sataniste Italien: Jules Evola.
 
Coupled with the notoriety of Evola's La Torre, was also another, more bizarre incident involving the Ur Group's reputation, and their attempts to form a "magical chain." Although these attempts to exert supernatural influence on others were soon abandoned, a rumour quickly developed that the group had wished to kill Mussolini by these means. Evola describes this event in his autobiography Il Cammino del Cinabro.
"Someone reported this argument [that the death of a head of state might be brought about by magic] and some yarn about our already dissolved 'chain of Ur' may also have been added, all of which led the Duce to think that there was a plot to use magic against him. But when he heard the true facts of the matter, Mussolini ceased all action against us. In reality Mussolini was very open to suggestion and also somewhat superstitious (the reaction of a mentality fundamentally incapable of true spirituality). For example, he had a genuine fear of fortune-tellers and any mention of them was forbidden in his presence."
It was also during this period that Evola also discovered something which was to become a profound influence on many his ideas: the lost science of Hermeticism. Though he undoubtedly came into contact with this branch of mysticism through Reghini and fellow members of Ur, it seems that Evola’s extraordinary knowledge of Hermeticism actually arose from another source. Jacopo da Coreglia writes that it was a priest, Father Francesco Olivia, who had made the most far-reaching progress in Hermetic science and – sensing a prodigious student – granted Evola access to documents that were usually strictly reserved for adepts of the narrow circle. These were concerned primarily with the teachings of the Fraternity of Myriam (Fratellanza Terapeutica Magica di Myriam), founded by Doctor Giuliano Kremmerz, pseudonym of Ciro Formisano (1861-1930). Evola mentions in The Hermetic Tradition that Myriam’s Pamphlet D laid the groundwork for his understanding of the four elements.[8]  Evola’s knowledge of Hermeticism and the alchemical arts was not limited to Western sources either, for he also knew an Indian alchemist by the name of C.S. Narayana Swami Aiyar of Chingleput.[9] During this era of history, Indian alchemy was almost completely unknown to the Western world, and it is only in modern times that it has been studied in relation to the occidental texts.
 
M is for Mussolini (not Murder)
 
In 1926 Evola published an article in Ultra (the newspaper of the Theosophical Lodge in Rome) on the cult of Mithras in which he placed major emphasis on the similarities of these mysteries with Hermeticism.[10] During this period he also wrote Saggi sull’idealismo magico (1925; Essays on Magic Idealism), and L’individuo ed il divenire del mondo (1926; The Individual and the Becoming of the World). This article was to be followed by the publication of his treatise on alchemy, La Tradizione ermetica (The Hermetic Tradition). Such was the scope and depth of this work that Karl Jung even quoted Evola to support his own contention that "the alchemical opus deals in the main not just with chemical experiments as such, but also with something resembling psychic processes expressed in pseudo-chemical language."[11] Unfortunately, the support expressed by Jung was not mutual, for Evola did not accept Jung's hypothesis that alchemy was merely a psychic process.
 
Taking issue with René Guénon's (1886-1951) view that spiritual authority ranks higher than royal power, Evola wrote L’uomo come potenza (Man as power); in the third revised edition (1949), the title was changed to Lo yoga della potenza (The yoga of power).[12] This was Evola's treatise of Hindu Tantra, for which he consulted primary sources on Kaula Tantra, which at the time were largely unknown in the Western world. Decio Calvari, president of the Italian Independent Theosophical League, introduced Evola to the study of Tantrism.[13] Evola was also granted access to authentic Tantric texts directly from the Kaula school of Tantrism via his association with Sir John Woodroofe, who was not only a respected scholar, but was also a Tantric practitioner himself, under the famous pseudonym of Arthur Avalon. A substantial proportion of The Yoga of Power is derived from Sir John Woodroofe's personal notes on Kaula Tantrism. Even today Woodroofe is regarded as a leading pioneer in the early research of Tantrism.
 
Evola's opinion that the royal or Ksatriya path in Tantrism outranks that of the Brahmanic or priestly path, is readily supported by the Tantric texts themselves, in which the Vira or active mode of practice is exalted above that of the priestly mode in Kaula Tantrism. In this regard, the heroic or solar path of Tantrism represented to Evola, a system based not on theory, but on practice – an active path appropriate to be taught in the degenerate epoch of the Hindu Kali Yuga or Dark Age, in which purely intellectual or contemplative paths to divinity have suffered a great decrease in their effectiveness.
 
In the words of Evola himself:
"During the last years of the 1930s I devoted myself to working on two of my most important books on Eastern wisdom: I completely revised L’uomo come potenza (Man As Power), which was given a new title, Lo yoga della potenza (The Yoga of Power), and wrote a systematic work concerning primitive Buddhism entitled La dottrina del risveglio (The Doctrine of Awakening)."[14]
Evola's work on the early history of Buddhism was published in 1943. The central theme of this work is not the common view of Buddhism, as a path of spiritual renunciation – instead it focuses on the Buddha's role as a Ksatriya ascetic, for it was to this caste that he belonged, as is found in early Buddhist records.
 
The historical Siddharta was a prince of the Śakya, a kṣatriya (belonging to the warrior caste), an "ascetic fighter" who opened a path by himself with his own strength. Thus Evola emphasizes the "aristocratic" character of primitive Buddhism, which he defines as having the "presence in it of a virile and warrior strength (the lion's roar is a designation of Buddha’s proclamation) that is applied to a nonmaterial and atemporal plane…since it transcends such a plane, leaving it behind." [15]
 
Siddharta's warrior youth.
 
The book considered by many to be Evola’s masterpiece, Revolt Against the Modern World was published in 1934, and was influenced by Oswald Spengler's Decline of the West (1918) and René Guénon's The Crisis of the Modern World (1927), both of which had been previously translated into Italian by Evola. Spengler's contribution in this regard was the plurality of civilizations, which then fell into patterns of birth, growth and decline. This was combined with Guénon's ideas on the "Dark Age" or Hindu Kali Yuga, which similarly portrays a bleak image of civilizations in decline. The work also draws upon the writings of Bachofen in regards to the construction of a mythological grounding for the history of civilizations. The original version of Julius Evola's The Mystery of the Grail formed an appendix to the first edition of Rivolta contra il mondo moderno, and as such is closely related to this work.[16]  Three years later he reworked that appendix into the present book, which first appeared as part of a series of religious and esoteric studies published by the renowned Laterza Publishers in Italy, whose list included works by Sigmund Freud, Richard Wilhelm, and C. G. Jung, among others. In this book Evola writes three main premises concerning the Grail myths: That the Grail is not a Christian Mystery, but a Hyperborean one, that it is a mystery tradition, and that it deals with a restoration of sacred regality. Evola describes his work on the Grail in the epilogue to the first edition (1937).
"To live and understand the symbol of the Grail in its purity would mean today the awakening of powers that could supply a transcendental point of reference for it, an awakening that could show itself tomorrow, after a great crisis, in the form of an “epoch that goes beyond nations.” It would also mean the release of the so-called world revolution from the false myths that poison it and that make possible its subjugation through dark, collectivistic, and irrational powers. In addition, it would mean understanding the way to a true unity that would be genuinely capable of going beyond not only the materialistic – we could say Luciferian and Titanic – forms of power and control but also the lunar forms of the remnants of religious humility and the current neospiritualistic dissipation."[17]
Another of Evola’s books, Eros and the Mysteries of Love, could almost be seen as a continuation of his experimentation with Tantrism. Indeed, the book does not deal with the erotic principle in the normal of sense of the word, but rather approaches the topic as a highly conceptualized interplay of polarities, adopted from the Traditional use of erotic elements in eastern and western mysticism and philosophy. Thus what is described here is the path to sacred sexuality, and the use of the erotic principle to transcend the normal limitations of consciousness. Evola describes his book in the following passage:
"But in this study, metaphysics will also have a second meaning, one that is not unrelated to the world's origin since 'metaphysics' literally means the science of that which goes beyond the physical. In our research, this 'beyond the physical' will not cover abstract concepts or philosophical ideas, but rather that which may evolve from an experience that is not merely physical, but transpsychological and transphysiological. We shall achieve this through the doctrine of the manifold states of being and through an anthropology that is not restricted to the simple soul-body dichotomy, but is aware of 'subtle' and even transcendental modalities of human consciousness. Although foreign to contemporary thought, knowledge of this kind formed an integral part of ancient learning and of the traditions of varied peoples."[18]
Another of Evola's major works is Meditations Among the Peaks, wherein mountaineering is equated to ascension. This idea is found frequently in a number of Traditions, where mountains are often revered as an intermediary between the forces of heaven and earth. Evola was an accomplished mountaineer and completed some difficult climbs such as the north wall of the Eastern Lyskam in 1927. He also requested in his will that after his death the urn containing his ashes be deposited in a glacial crevasse on Mount Rosa.
 
Evola's main political work was Men Among the Ruins. This was to be the ninth of Evola's books to published in English. Written at the same time as Men Among the Ruins, Evola composed Ride the Tiger which is complementary to this work, even though it was not published until 1961. These books belong together and cannot really be judged separately. Men among the Ruins shows the universal standpoint of ideal politics; Riding the Tiger deals with the practical "existential" perspective for the individual who wants to preserve his "hegomonikon" or inner sovereignty.[19]  Ride the Tiger is essentially a philosophical set of guidelines entwining various strands of his earlier thought into a single work. Underlying the more obvious sources, which Evola cites within the text, such as Nietzsche, Sartre and Heidegger, there are also connections with Hindu thoughts on the collapse of civilization and the Kali Yuga. In many ways, this work is the culmination of Evola's thought on the role of Tradition in the Age of Darkness – that the Traditional approach advocated in the East is to harness the power of the Kali Yuga, by ‘Riding the Tiger’ – which is also a popular Tantric saying. To this extent, it is not an approach of withdrawal from the modern world which Evola advocates, but instead achieving a mastery of the forces of darkness and materialism inherent in the Kali Yuga. Similarly, his attitude to politics alters here from that expressed in Men Among the Ruins, calling instead for a type of individual that is apoliteia.
"[...] this type can only feel disinterested and detached from everything that is 'politics' today. His principle will become apoliteia, as it was called in ancient times. [...] Apoliteia is the distance unassailable by this society and its 'values'; it does not accept being bound by anything spiritual or moral."[20]
In addition to Evola’s main corpus of texts mentioned previously, he also published numerous other works such as The Way of the Samurai, The Path of Enlightenment According to the Mithraic Mysteries, Il Cammino del Cinabro, Taoism: The Magic, The Mysticism and The Bow and the Club. He also translated Oswald Spengler's Decline of the West, as well as the principle works of Bachofen, Guénon, Weininger and Gabriel Marcel.
 
In 1945 Evola was hit by a stray bomb and paralyzed from the waist downwards. He died on June 11, 1974 in Rome. He had asked to be led from his desk to the window from which one could see the Janiculum (the holy hill sacred to Janus, the two-faced god who gazes into this and the other world), to die in an upright position. After his death the body was cremated and his ashes were scattered in a glacier atop Mount Rosa, in accordance with his wishes.


Gwendolyn Taunton is the editor and sole founder of Primordial Traditions. This article is reprinted from Primordial Traditions (second edition).


NOTES

[1] Julius Evola, The Yoga of Power, Shakti, and the Secret Way (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1992) ix
[2] ibid., x
[3] Julius Evola, Introduction to Magic: Rituals and Practical Techniques for the Magus (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2001) ix
[4] ibid., xvii
[5] A. James Gregor, Mussolini's Intellectuals (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 2005)
[6] ibid., 201
[7] Julius Evola, Introduction to Magic: Rituals and Practical Techniques for the Magus (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2001) xxi
[8] Julius Evola, The Hermetic Tradition: Symbols and Teaching of the Royal Art (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1992) ix
[9] ibid., ix
[10] ibid., viii
[11] Julius Evola, The Yoga of Power, Shakti, and the Secret Way (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1992) xii
[12] ibid., xiv
[13] ibid., xiii
[14] Julius Evola, The Doctrine of the Awakening: The Attainment of Self-Mastery According to the Earliest Buddhist Texts (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1992) xi
[15] ibid., xv
[16] Julius Evola, The Mystery of the Grail: Initiation and Magic in the Quest for the Spirit (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1997) vii
[17] ibid., ix
[18] Julius Evola, Eros and the Mysteries of Love: The Metaphysics of Sex (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 1991) 2
[19] Julius Evola, Men Among the Ruins: Post-War Reflections of a Radical Traditionalist (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2003) 89
[20] Julius Evola, Ride the Tiger: A Survival Manual for Aristocrats of the Soul (Vermont: Inner Traditions, 2003) 174-175

jeudi, 10 juillet 2014

Conversación sin complejos con el "Último Gibelino"

Représentation_de_Julius_Evola.jpg

Tradición y Sabiduría Universal

Conversación sin complejos con el "Último Gibelino":

Julius Evola

entrevista de Enrico de Boccard

Ex: http://paginatransversal.wordpress.com

La Página Transversal recoge este texto, publicado en su día por la ya desaparecida, pero siempre recomendable revista de Fernando Márquez, El Zurdo, "El Corazón del Bosque", en su número doble 16/17 (Otoño 97 - Invierno 98), por su indudable interés. Cuestiones tales como: sexo, psicoanálisis, satanismo, contestación y otras, tratadas desde la particular cosmovisión de Julius Evola (1898-1974).

La presente entrevista, rescatada por nuestro colaborador Gianni Donaudi (que también nos ha facilitado unos datos de introducción), se publicó en la revista erótico/intelectual "PLAYMEN" en enero del 70. "PLAYMEN" era propiedad de la edirtora Adelina Tattilo, políticamente cercana al PSI/PSU, quien, apoyándose en el radicalizante Attilio Battistini como director de la publicación, buscó (al menos en el plano cultural) dar amplio espacio a autores de muy diferente tendencia política e ideológica.

Eran los años de la contestación y, tras el espontaneísmo inicial del 68, donde los enemigos principales eran el capitalismo, el consumismo (según la definición de Marcuse y Fromm) y el dominio americano sobre el planeta, se llegó, a través de infiltrados demoliberales (a veces situados por los mismos americanos) a reducir la lucha contestataria en términos exclusivamente "antifascistas", colocando el anticapitalismo en un segundo plano (como lúcidamente analizaban las publicaciones de signo internacionalista y bordiguista). Una estrategia que dura hasta hoy, sobre todo gracias a la obra de la izquierda chic, virtual, políticamente correcta.

A pesar de esto, Adelina Tattilo, en coherencia con su radicalismo extremo, no sólo aceptó la entrevista con Evola sino que se enorgullecía de la misma, por protagonirala alguien que sabía escribir, sin importar su procedencia.

El periodista que entrevistó a Evola fue Enrico de Boccard (1921-1981)quien, también para "PLAYMEN", había escrito una hermosa semblanza sobre Céline. Boccard era un ex-oficial de la Guardia Nacional Republicana (de Saló) y fue autor del libro, en parte autobiográfico, Donne e mitra (reeditado recientemente con el título Le donne non ci vogliono piu bene. Por cierto,Boccard no fue el único vinculado a la República Social Italiana que colaboró con "PLAYMEN". También lo hicieron Giose Rimanelli, autor de Tiro al piccione (obra adaptada al cine en el 61 por el director filosocialista Giuliano Montaldo -autor, entre otros films, de Sacco e Vanzetti y Giordano Bruno-), que en la postguerra se acercaría a los comunistas y más tarde involucionaría a la derecha; y Mario Gandini, autor de La caduta di Varsavia (obra sobre sus recuerdos de guerra en el Este y la RSI).

Por razones de espacio, hemos seleccionado los fragmentos que consideramos más interesantes y válidos según la perspectiva corazonesca, y como toque metalingüístico quasi felliniano (habida cuenta de buena parte de la temática de la entrevista), resulta procedente señalar la publicidad que la acompañaba: un vibrador ("novitá della Svezia" en dos modelos -con una y dos velocidades-), un catálogo ilustrado de productos estimulantes (escribir a la empresa sueca "Ekberg Int.") y unos potingues vigorizantes (incluido el, por entonces, mítico Gerovital de la doctora rumana Aslan, así como polen -también "della Svezia"- ideal para... los males de próstata-).

En el último piso de un viejo edificio del centro de Roma vive su intensa jornada uno de los últimos hombres verdaderamente libres en un tiempo en que la libertad se ha convertido en un lujo que se paga cada día, personal y colectivamente, siempre más caro. Este hombre, que ha sobrepasado no hace mucho los setenta años de una existencia riquísima en experiencias intelectuales, artísticas y personales, marcado contsantemente por el signo del más declarado y valeroso anticonformismo, tiene un nombre de resonancia mundial, pese a que la llamada "cultura oficial" italiana, tanto en el Ventennio fascista como después, siempre ha procurado por todos los medios de sofocarlo con una impenetrable cortina de silencio. Este hombre es el filósofo y escritor Julius Evola, autor de unos treinta libros nada superfluos, "revolucionario conservador" por temperamento y por trayectoria. Julius Evola: un aristócrata del espíritu más que de la sangre, que gusta definirse a sí mismo como "el Último Gibelino".

Pregunta - Es bien conocido que usted concede raramente entrevistas y le agradecemos, en nombre de nuestros lectores, por el privilegio gentilmente concedido. Por otra parte, usted es un escritor, un estudioso dotado de tal doctrina y preparación, y con tal bagaje de experiencias que nos encontramos un poco embarazados en el momento de plantearle preguntas, las cuales son tantas en nuestra mente como vasto es el campo de sus intereses (metafísica, crítica de la política, historia de las religiones, orentalismo, etc.). Trataremos de restringirnos a los argumentos que consideramos puedan interesar más a los lectores de la revista o que presenten un carácter de actualidad. Empecemos con una obra, recientemente reeditada (y también con dos ediciones francesas y otra alemana), sistemática y sugestiva, Metafísica del sexo (hay edición en castellano). Usted precisa, a propósito del título, haber usado el término "metafísica" en un doble sentido. ¿Puede aclararnos esto? Respuesta - El primer sentido es el corriente en filosofía, donde por metafísica se entiende una búsqueda de los principios o significados últimos. Una metafísica del sexo será, por tanto, el estudio de lo que, desde un punto de vista absoluto, significa el eros y la atracción de los sexos. En segundo lugar, por metafísica se puede entender una exploración en el campo de lo que no es físico, de lo que está más allá de lo físico. Es unpunto esencial de mi búsqueda el sacar a la luz lo que el eros y la experiencia del sexo supone de trascendencia de los aspectos físicos, carnales, biológicos y también pasionales o convencionalmente sentimentales o "ideales" del amor. Esta dimensión más profunda fue considerada en otro tiempo, en múltiples tradiciones, y constituye el presupuesto para un posible uso "sacro", místico, mágico y evocatorio del sexo; pero ello también influye en muchos actos del amor profano, revelándose a través de una variedad de signos que yo he tratado de individuar sistemáticamente. En mi libro señalo también cómo hoy, en una inversió quasidemoníaca, cierto psicoanálisis resalta una primordialidad infrapersonal del sexo, y opongo a esta primordialidad otra, de carácter "metafísico" o trascendente, pero no por esto menos real y elemental, de la que la anterior sería la degradación propia de un tipo humano inferior.

P - Usted también ha afrontado el problema del sexo sobre el terreno de la costumbre y de la ética, y siempre de manera anticonformista. ¿Qué piensa, por tanto, de lo que hoy se denomina "revolución sexual"?

R - A mí, qué cosa significa esta "revolución" no lo veo nada claro. Parece que se busca la absoluta libertad sexual, la completa superación de toda represión social sexófoba y de toda inhibición interna. Pero aquí hay un gravísimo malentendido, debido a las instancias llamadas "democráticas". Una libertad semejante no puede reivindicarse para todos: solamente pocos se la pueden permitir, no por privilegio sino porque, para no ser destructiva, hace falta una personalidad bien formada. En particular, el problema debe ser situado en modo distinto para el hombre y para la mujer, insisto, no por prejuicio sino por el distinto significado que la experiencia erótica, la auténtica e intensa, tiene para la mujer. Justamente Nietzsche había indicado que la "corrupción" (aquí, la "libertad sexual") puede ser un argumento sólo para quien no puede permitírsela, por ejemplo, para quienes no pueden hacer suyo el principio de querer sólo las cosas a las cuales también son capaces de renunciar.

La "revolución sexual" en clave democrática comporta, pues, una consecuencia gravísima, hacer del sexo una especie de género corriente, de consumo de masas, lo que significa necesariamente banalizarlo, superficializarlo, acabando en un insípido "naturalismo". En otro libro mío, "L´Arco e la Clava" ("El Arco y la Clava", existe traducción al castellano), he mostrado cómo las nuevas reivindicaciones sexuales son paralelas a una concepción siempre más primitiva de la sensualidad por parte de sus principales teóricos, a partir de Reich. Un caso particular es la falta de pudor femenina, vinculada con similares propuestas antirepresivas. A fuerza de ver mujeres desnudas o casi en espectáculos teatrales y cinematográficos, en locales porno, en top-less, etc, este desnudo acaba por convertirse en una banalidad que poco a poco dejará de producir efecto, al margen de los directamente dictados por el primitivo impulso biológico. Este impudor debería ser despreciado no desde el punto de vista de la "virtud" sino del exactamente opuesto. Por ese camino se puede llegar a un resultado de "naturalidad" e indiferencia sexual mucho mayor al soñado por cualquier sociedad puritana. (...)

P - De su exposición, parece que su juicio sobre el psicoanálisis sea negativo (...)

R - Evidentemente que no puedo profundizar exhaustivamente en esta argumentación. Pero sí señalaré que ante todo ha de relativizarse la idea de que el psicoanálisis descubre por vez primera la dimensión subterránea del Yo, el subconsciente y el inconsciente psíquico. Ya antes de Freud la psicología occidental, conectada con la fenomenología de la hipnosis y del histerismo, había prestado atención sobre este "subsuelo" del alma. Bastante más profundamente, y en muy diversa amplitud, ello estaba considerado en Oriente desde siglos, gracias al Yoga y técnicas análogas. El psicoanálisis puede ser una psicoterapia, y ofrecer resultados singulares en un plano clínico especializado. Pero no más: en su esncia es una concepción absolutamente desviada y mutilada del ser humano. Al colocar la verdadera fuerza motriz del hombre sobre el plano del inconsciente infrapersonal e instintivo, Freud concretamente bajo el signo de la libido, niega la existencia de un superior principio consciente, autónomo y soberano, porque en su lugar pone cualquier cosa del exterior, el llamado SuperYo, que sería una construcción social y el producto de la asunción de formas inhibitorias creadas por el ambiente o las estructuras sociales. Ello equivale a decir que el psicoanálisis niega en el hombre lo que lo hace verdaderamente tal, y su imagen, la cual querría aplicar al hombre de manera genérica, o es una mixtificación o vale únicamente para un tipo humano dividido, neurótico, espiritualmente inconsistente. Es bien posible que el éxito del psicoanálisis sea debido a la gran difusión que en la época moderna ha tenido este tipo. Como praxis y como tendencia, el psicoanálisis propicia esencialmente aperturas hacia abajo y significa una capitulación más o menos explícita de todo lo que es verdadera personalidad. La posible existencia de un "superconsciente", opuesto al "inconsciente", luminoso frente a lo turbio y "elemental" es ignorada por completo. (...)

P - Ha mencionado antes a Wilhelm Reich. Queremos conocer su opinión sobre su persona y su obra. ¿Reich le parece un estudioso serio o un exaltado? ¿Y qué piensa de las aplicaciones de los principios de él y de sus seguidores en el plano sociológico y político/sociológico, de sus denuncias de los sistemas "autoritarios"?

wilhelmreich.jpgR - Reich me parece afectado por una variedad de paranoia. Su mérito es haber intuido que en el sexo existe algo trascendente, más allá de lo individual. Ello concuerda con las enseñanzas de múltiples tradiciones. pero esta intuición está muy desviada. No debe decirse que el sexo es algo trascendente, sino que en ello se manifiesta (potencialmente y en ciertas circunstancias, incluso hoy día) algo trascendente, que como tal no pertenece al plano físico. Este elemento Reich lo concibe en términos materialistas como una energía natural, como la electricidad o algo así, al punto que, como "energía orgónica", ha buscado dotarla (gastando verdaderos capitales) de sustancia física, construyendo finalmente "condensadores" de la misma. Todo esto no son sino divagaciones. A lo que hemos de añadir una "teoría de la salvación", en cuanto que Reich ve en la obstrucción de dicha energía la cuas de todos los males, individuales y sociales (hasta el mismo cáncer) y, en su completa y desenfrenada explicación, el orgasmo sexual integral como una especie de medicina universal, presupuesto para un orden social sin tensiones, armonioso, pacífico.

Es interesante detenernos un momento sobre el presupuesto de esta concepción, porque así podremos comprender las aplicaciones político/sociales de los reichianos. Freud en su madurez había admitido la existencia, junto al impulso de placer, la libido, de un opuesto, el instinto de destrucción (o "de muerte"). Reich niega esta dualidad y deduce el segundo instinto, el destructivo, del impulso único de placer. Cuando este instinto resulta impedido o "bloqueado", nacería una tensión, una angustia y sobre todo una especie de "rabia", de furia destructiva (en caso de no tomar la vía del "principio del nirvana": una evasión, una fuga de la vida). Este impulso destructivo (y agresivo) cuando se vuelve contra sí, da al hombre la orientación masoquista, y cuando se dirige a los otros, al orientación sádica.

De todo ello resulta en primer lugar que sadismo y masoquismo serían fenómenos patológicos, causados por la represión sexual. Lo que es una estupidez: existen ciertamente formas de sadismo y masoquismo vinculadas a la psicopatología sexual (según el concepto normal, no ya psicoanalítico), pero también existe un sadismo (masculino) y un masoquismo (femenino) como elementos constitucionales intrínsecos y en un cierto modo normales en toda experiencia erótica intensa. De hecho, esta experiencia tiene siempre algo de destructivo y autodestructivo (por las relaciones, múltiplemente demostradas, entre voluntad y muerte, entre la divinidad del amor y la divinidad de la muerte); y es en este aspecto que se piensa cuando, en ciertas escuelas, se cree que el clímax adecuadamente conducido puede tener, en su momento "fulgurante", algo que destruye por un momento los límites de la conciencia mortal individual. Pues bien, con la concepción de Reich, toda esta intensidad desaparece, y la consecuencia es una concepción pálida, blandamente dionisíaca, o idílica (como en Marcuse) de la sexualidad: es una de las paradojas de la llamada "revolución sexual".

No menos absurda es, en particular, la deducción de la agresividad por la inhibición del impulso primordial del sexo a cristalizar en un orgasmo completo, según la cual, cuando la obstrucción remite (en el individuo o en una sociedad "permisiva" y no "represiva" o "patriarcal") no habrá más agresividad, guerra, violencia, etc; lo que viene al mismo tiempo a decir que todo lo que hace referencia a actitudes guerreras, de conquista (en la jerga moderna, de "agresión") tendrñia la represión sexual por causa y origen. Ante esto, sólo puedo reír. La actitud agresiva es en primer lugar comprobada en los animales, evidentemente no sometidos a tabúes sexófobos y "patriarcales". En segundo lugar ya el mito ha indicado el perfecto acuerdo entre Marte y Venus, y la historia nos muestra como todos los más grandes conquistadores carecían de complejos de frustración sexual y hacían un libre y amplío uso del sexo. En la práctica, la consecuencia de la teoría de Reich es un ataque contra elementos fundamentales congénitos en todo tipo "viril" de humanidad o ser humano, que son presentados grotescamente en clave de patología sexual.

En cuanto a las conclusiones político/sociales. Proyectada sobre ese plano, la tendencia masoquista daría lugar al tipo del gregario, de aquel que gusta de servir y obedecer, que se pone al servicio de un jefe, con o sin "culto a la personalidad", y está siempre dispuesto a sacrificarse. La tendencia sádica daría lugar al tipo del dominador, de quien ejercita una autoridad, autoridad evidentemente concebida en los exclusivos términos parasexuales de una libido. De la unión de estas dos tendencias nacerían las estructuras "autoritarias" y "fascistas". Una vez más, se deforman grotescamente los datos reales de la conciencia. Del obedecer y del mandar pueden darse desviaciones. Pero, en general, se trata de disposiciones normales: existe una autoridad que tiene por contrapartida una superioridad, como existe una obediencia debida no a un servilismo masoquista sino al orgullo de seguir libremente a gentes a quienes se reconoce una superioridad. Así, mientras por un parte Reich proclama una mística mesiánica del abandono integral al orgasmo, al mismo tiempo ello actúa como preciosas coartadas para un puro anarquismo.

P - En relación con el asesinato de la actriz Sharon Tate y otros se ha hablado de "satanismo" y en los periódicos hoy se insiste en buscar conexiones entre sexo, magia y satanismo. ¿Nos puede aclarar esto?

R - En principio, existen conexiones posibles entre magia y sexo. Considerando la dimensión "trascendente" del sexo, a la que ya me he referido, se recoge en diversas tradiciones que por medio de la unión sexual conducida de determinado modo y con una orientación particular es posible destilar energías y usarlas mágicamente. La continuidad de estas tradiciones hasta un tiempo relativamente reciente es testimoniada, entre otros, en un libro, Magia sexualis de P. B. Randolph. Un ejemplo ulterior lo constituyen las prácticas mágico/sexuales y orgiásticas de Aleister Crowley, figura interesante que, por desgracia, se suele presentar con los colores más "negros" posibles. Pero en este campo se debe distinguir entre las mixtificaciones y lo que tiene un valor auténtico y una realidad. Ante todo ha de verse, por ejemplo, si se hace el amor para hacer magia o si se hace magia (o pseudomagia) para hacer el amor, o sea, si se usa la magia como un pretexto para montar orgías o para darle al acto un aire más excitante. Es cierto también que existe una tercera posibilidad, la de usar medios siríamos "secretos" con el concurso de fuerzas suprasensibles para dar un particular desarrollo paroxístico a la experiencia del coito, sin forzar por ello la naturaleza: esta vía es algo extremadamente peligroso, por razones que no viene al caso indicar ahora.

En cuanto al "satanismo" señalaré que donde predomina un clima "sexófobo" (como en el cristianismo) es fácil calificar de "diabólico" todo lo que suponga potenciar la experiencia sexual. Más genéricamente, es obvio que un "satán" existe sólo en las religiones donde ello es la contraparte "oscura" de un Dios con características "morales"; cuando como vértice del universo, en vez de Dios, se pone una "Potestad" como tal superior y más allá del bien y del mal, evidentemente un "Satán" a la cristiana no es concebible. Hay lugar sólo para la idea de una fuerza cósmica destructora, presente en el mundo y en la vida, en lo sensible y lo suprasensible, al lado de las fuerzas creadoras y conservadoras, como la "otra mitad" del Absoluto. Y existen tradicones sacras -la más característica es la tántrico/shivaica- que tienen por objeto asumir esa fuerza, diversamente concebida. Característica es la llamada "Vía de la Mano Izquierda", donde, por ejemplo, el uso de la mujer, de sustancias embriagadoras y eventualmente de la orgía, se asocia a una moral del "más allá del bien y del mal" que haría palidecer de envidia al "superhombre" Nietzsche. De dicha vía, que algunos timoratos occidentales han calificado como la "peor de las magias negras" he hablado en mi libro Lo Yoga della Potenza. Pero el punto importante es que en sus formas auténticas tales prácticas están concebidas en los mismos términos del Yoga, y no son elementos disociados, como los hippies americanos, quienes pueden permitírselas. Volvemos aquí, pero aumentadas, a poner las mismas reservas que he hecho acerca de la "revolución sexual" y sus reivindicaciones. En las tradiciones la base para darse a estas prácticas está constituida por una disciplina de autodominio profundo similar a la de los ascetas, tras una regular "iniciación".

P - Pasando a un campo distinto pero en parte relacionado, me llama la atención cómo en algunos libros históricos o pseudohistóricos sobre el III Reich hitleriano se habla de un fondo oculto, mágico/tenebroso, del nacionalsocialismo alemán. ¿Puede decime brevemente qué le parece este argumento?

R - Para quien busque los supuestos trasfondos "ocultos" del III Reich, el argumento me llevaría más allá de los límites en los cuales estoy manteniendo esta entrevista. Me limitaré a decir que, como persona que ha tenido oportunidad de conocer bastante de cerca la situación del III Reich, puedo declarar que se trata de puras fantasías, y así se lo dije a Louis Pauwels, quien en su libro El retorno de los brujos ha contribuido a defender tales rumores; él vino una vez a conocerme, hablamos y en ningún momento me presentó dato alguno mínimamente serio que apoyase su tesis. Se puede hablar no de "iniciático" sino de "demoniaco", en un sentido general, en el caso de todo movimiento que en base a una fanatización de las masas creer cualquier cosa cuyo centro será el jefe demagógico que produce esta especie de hipnosis colectiva usando tal o cual mito. Dicho fenómeno no está relacionado con lo "mágico" o con lo "oculto", aunque tenga un fondo tenebroso. Es un fenómeno recurrente en la Historia, por ejemplo, la Revolución Francesa o (en parte) el maoísmo.

P - Usted es autor de una obra considerada como fundamental por cuantos siguen atentamente su actividad, Revuelta contra el mundo moderno. Se afirma por muchos que usted, con este libro (publicado por vez primera en 1934), anticipó en varios lustros las visiones, hoy tan en boga, expresadas por Marcuse. En otras palabras, desde posiciones absolutamente distintas a la del profesor germano/americano, usted habría sido el primero en tomar postura contra "el sistema". ¿Le parece válida esta comparación con Marcuse? Y, de otra parte, ¿dado el papel que Marcuse tiene en las actuales formas de "contestación" juvenil contra el mundo moderno, qué significado y qué imagen tiene para usted este movimiento contestatario?

R - En verdad, como precedentes de Marcuse, y planteando cosas bastante más interesantes, muchos otros autores deberían ser nombrados: un Tocqueville, un John Stuart Mill, un A. Siegfried, el mismo Donoso Cortés, en parte Ortega y Gasset, sobre todo Nietzsche, y aún más el insigne escritor tradicionalista francés René Guenón, especialmente en su Crisis del mundo moderno que yo traduje al italiano en su momento. A finales del siglo pasado Nietzsche había previsto uno de los rasgos destacados de las tesis de Marcuse, con las breves, incisivas frases dedicadas al "último hombre": "próximo está el tiempo del más despreciable de los hombres, que no sabe más que despreciarse a sí mismo", "el último hombre de la raza pululante y tenaz", "nosotros hemos inventado la felicidad, dicen, satisfechos, los últimos hombres", que han abandonado "la región donde la vida es dura". Y esta es la esencia de la "civilización de masas, del consumo y del bienestar" pero también la única que el mismo Marcuse ve como perspectiva en términos positivos, cuando los desarrollos ulteriores de la técnica unidos a una cultura de transposición y sublimación de los instintos habrán sustraído a los hombres de los "condicionamientos" del actual sistema y de su "principio de prestación". La relación con mi libro no es tal porque, en primer lugar, el contenido de éste no corresponde con el título: no es mi obra de naturaleza polémica, sino una "morfología de la civilización", una interpretación general de la Historia en términos no "progresistas", de evolución, sino más bien de involución, indicando sobre estas premisas el nacimiento y el declive del mundo moderno. Sólo por caminos naturales y consecuentes se propone una "revuelta" a los lectores y, más concretamente, tras un estudio comparado de las más diversas civilizaciones, he procurado indicar lo que en diversos dominios de la existencia puede reivindicar un carácter de norma en sentido ascendente: el Estado, la ley, la acción, la concepción de la vida y de la muerte, lo sagrado, las relaciones sociales, la ética, el sexo, la guerra, etc. Esta es la primera diferencia fundamental respecto a las diversas contestaciones de hoy: no se limita a decir "no", sino que indica en nombre de qué debe decirse "no", aquello que puede verdaderamente justificar el "no". Y un "no" auténticamente radical, que no se restrinja a los aspectos últimos del mundo moderno, a la "sociedad de consumo", a la tecnocracia y demás, sino mucho más profundo, denunciando las causas, considerando los procesos que han ejercido desde hace tanto tiempo una acción destructiva sobre todos los valores, ideales y formas de organización superior de la existencia. Todo esto ni Marcuse ni los "contestatarios" en general lo han hecho: no tienen la capacidad ni el coraje. En particular, la sociología de Marcuse es absolutamente rechazable, determinada por un grosero freudismo con tonalidades reichianas. Así, no resulta extraño que sean tan escuálidos e insípidos los ideales que se proponen para la sociedad que siga a la "contestación" y a la superación del llamado "sistema".

Naturalmente, quien comprenda el orden de ideas expuesto en mi libro no puede permitirse el menor optimismo. Por ahora encuentro solamente posible una acción de defensa individual interior. Es así que en otro libro mío, Cabalgar el tigre, he procurado señalar las orientaciones existenciales que debería seguir un tipo humano diferenciado en una época de disolución como la actual. En él, he dado particular relieve al principo de la "conversión del veneno en medicina", según la medida en que, a partir de una cierta orientación interior, de experiencias y procesos mayormente destructivos se puede extraer cierta forma de liberación y autosuperación. Es una vía peligrosa pero posible. (...)

(entrevista: Enrico de Boccard)
(traducción: Fernando Márquez. Página "Linea de Sombra")

Nota de la Página Transversal:
Existen traducciones al castellano de todas las obras mencionadas en el texto.
Evola, Julius. Metafísica del sexo. Col. Sophia Perennis. José J. de Olañeta, Editor. Palma de Mallorca, 1997.
- El arco y la clava. Ediciones Heracles, Buenos Aires, 1999.
-El yoga tántrico. Un camino para la realización del cuerpo y el espíritu. Madrid, Edaf, 1991.
- Rebelión contra el mundo moderno. Ediciones Heracles, Buenos Aires, 1994.
- Cabalgar el tigre. Ediciones Heracles, Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, 1999.
Guenon, René. La crisis del mundo moderno. Ed. Obelisco, Barcelona, 1987
Pauwels, Louis; Bergier, Jacques. El retorno de los brujos. Plaza & Janés, Barcelona, 1971.

dimanche, 01 juin 2014

J. Evola: Metafisica del sesso e idealismo magico

 

samedi, 31 mai 2014

Julius Evola

00:05 Publié dans Evénement | Lien permanent | Commentaires (0) | Tags : événement, italie, julius evola | |  del.icio.us | | Digg! Digg |  Facebook