- Have Evola's views on race been compared to those of Steiner? Or to better yet to ask, if there's anything positive at all to be found in Steiner's writings on the subject?
- The other day we read some sensible passages on blood by Steiner, but combined with troublesome idea's about clairvoyance. Needless to go into the issue of "root-races".
From: g.vdheide@...
To: evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 04:33:29 -0700
Subject: [evola_as_he_is] Evola and Steiner
Have Evola's views on race been compared to those of Steiner? Or to better yet to ask, if there's anything positive at all to be found in Steiner's writings on the subject? To the best of our knowledge, there has not been any comparative study between the racial doctrine of J. Evola and R. Steiner’s views on race. Race is a subject Anthroposophists prefer to ignore, while J. Evola’s racial doctrine has hardly been examined outside Italy ; with the exception, to some extent, of the Italian writer of the latest edition of ‘Il Mito del sangue” (SeAr, 1995), Alfonso De Filippi, Evola’s racial work has not been subjected to a comparative study. As far as we are concerned, what we know of Steiner’s views on race has not precisely encouraged us to put time and energy into such a task (the fuzziness of M. Serrano’s led us to give up along the way a similar study). What would be those « sensible passages on blood by Steiner » ?
Meanwhile, these two writings turn out to be quite interesting, especially when compared : http://www.skepticreport.com/sr/?p=480 is by an anti-racist who intends to prove that Steiner was a racist, whereas http://www.defendingsteiner.com/refutations/ps01/Anthroposophy%20and%20Ecofascism.pdf, far more researched and documented, is by an anti-racist whose aim is to refute his thesis.
To the best of our knowledge, there has not been any comparative study between the racial doctrine of J. Evola and R. Steiner’s views on race. Race is a subject Anthroposophists prefer to ignore, while J. Evola’s racial doctrine has hardly been examined outside Italy ; with the exception, to some extent, of the Italian writer of the latest edition of ‘Il Mito del sangue” (SeAr, 1995), Alfonso De Filippi, Evola’s racial work has not been subjected to a comparative study in any respect. As far as we are concerned, what we know of Steiner’s views on race has not precisely encouraged us to put time and energy into such a task (the fuzziness of M. Serrano’s once led us to give up along the way a similar study). What would be those « sensible passages on blood by Steiner » ?
Meanwhile, these two writings turn out to be quite interesting, especially when compared : http://www.skepticreport.com/sr/?p=480 is by an anti-racist who intends to prove that Steiner was a racist, while http://www.defendingsteiner.com/refutations/ps01/Anthroposophy%20and%20Ecofascism.pdf, far more researched and documented, is by an anti-racist whose aim is to refute his thesis.
- The few texts written on the subject by Steiner we've read worked very discouraging. The content of "The occult significance of blood" (http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/OccBld_index.html) is equally confusing. And one has to ask what 20th century author of some importance didn't write about the meaning of blood, at some point?
From: evola_as_he_is@...
To: evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 06:59:34 -0700
Subject: [evola_as_he_is] RE: Evola and Steiner
To the best of our knowledge, there has not been any comparative study between the racial doctrine of J. Evola and R. Steiner’s views on race. Race is a subject Anthroposophists prefer to ignore, while J. Evola’s racial doctrine has hardly been examined outside Italy ; with the exception, to some extent, of the Italian writer of the latest edition of ‘Il Mito del sangue” (SeAr, 1995), Alfonso De Filippi, Evola’s racial work has not been subjected to a comparative study. As far as we are concerned, what we know of Steiner’s views on race has not precisely encouraged us to put time and energy into such a task (the fuzziness of M. Serrano’s led us to give up along the way a similar study). What would be those « sensible passages on blood by Steiner » ?Meanwhile, these two writings turn out to be quite interesting, especially when compared : http://www.skepticreport.com/sr/?p=480 is by an anti-racist who intends to prove that Steiner was a racist, whereas http://www.defendingsteiner.com/refutations/ps01/Anthroposophy%20and%20Ecofascism.pdf, far more researched and documented, is by an anti-racist whose aim is to refute his thesis.
- Another possibility would be to compare Evola's racial writings to 19th and 20th century studies in physiognomy and characterology.
Insofar as there are similarities.
By the way, the leader of a Swiss trans-European nationalist movement has an antroposophic background and apparently holds an interest in Evola's work. However, he still hasn't made his writings on the subject available. Curiously enough, that same organisation chooses to use the BLUE and the YELLOW in it's flag.
From: g.vdheide@...
To: evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 17:13:03 +0200
Subject: RE: [evola_as_he_is] RE: Evola and Steiner
The few texts written on the subject by Steiner we've read worked very discouraging. The content of "The occult significance of blood" (http://wn.rsarchive.org/Lectures/OccBld_index.html) is equally confusing. And one has to ask what 20th century author of some importance didn't write about the meaning of blood, at some point?
From: evola_as_he_is@...
To: evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 06:59:34 -0700
Subject: [evola_as_he_is] RE: Evola and Steiner
To the best of our knowledge, there has not been any comparative study between the racial doctrine of J. Evola and R. Steiner’s views on race. Race is a subject Anthroposophists prefer to ignore, while J. Evola’s racial doctrine has hardly been examined outside Italy ; with the exception, to some extent, of the Italian writer of the latest edition of ‘Il Mito del sangue” (SeAr, 1995), Alfonso De Filippi, Evola’s racial work has not been subjected to a comparative study. As far as we are concerned, what we know of Steiner’s views on race has not precisely encouraged us to put time and energy into such a task (the fuzziness of M. Serrano’s led us to give up along the way a similar study). What would be those « sensible passages on blood by Steiner » ?Meanwhile, these two writings turn out to be quite interesting, especially when compared : http://www.skepticreport.com/sr/?p=480 is by an anti-racist who intends to prove that Steiner was a racist, whereas http://www.defendingsteiner.com/refutations/ps01/Anthroposophy%20and%20Ecofascism.pdf, far more researched and documented, is by an anti-racist whose aim is to refute his thesis.
evola_as_he_is@{{emailDomain}}