We were not given names, but only forwarded a post, a few posts.
Since you recognised yourself among those individuals we described
as "hypocrits" or as "suffering from inner contradictions", one or
some of those posts are likely to be yours.
In any case, what you say shows that you haven't read carefully the
messages which we have been posting onto this list. First, here it is
not about agreeing or not with the views of a given author on a
sentimental basis which one may call 'intellectual' if that makes one
feel better. It is about adhering to a vision of the world : as
pointed out by Evola himself, it is not by chance that one adheres or
not to given views ; that adherence engages one's whole being ; in
short, it is a matter of elective affinities. By 'vision of the
world', we mean a series of fundamental - living and formative -
ideas, of which, in Evola's case, the existence of a primordial
Nordic tradition. Either one adheres to them and is most welcome to
engage with us in a constructive examination of them, or one doesn't
adhere to them, and, in this case, one has certainly nothing to do
here. As much it is essential to adhere to and, so to speak, to be
enthused by those fundamental – living, concrete and formative -
ideas which form the core of Evola's thought, a thought which, at its
peak, is not `his' but comes from afar, as much it is necessary to
engage in a critical analysis of them in their applications, when
those applications seem to be in contradiction with the principles
they are based on or simply absurd. Even a superficial reading of the
messages we have been posting onto this list for more than one year
should allow any reader to realise that that work of constructive
criticism is carried out, each time it is found necessary, on any of
the subjects tackled by Evola. Other criticisms, made against some of
his debatable or contradictory statements on specific subjects, can
be found on thompkins_cariou.tripod.com
Therefore, those you criticise in your message are not us, but the
distorted image which you have built of us in your imagination, on
which you focus to try to draw attention from the real issue, which
we raised in our previous message.
--- In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "darklittleflame" <ads694@...>
wrote:
>
> Is this is directed at a recent post I made there? If so, I fail to
> see in what way the statements made contradict anything I have ever
> posted here. I am wondering if the issue is not so
> much 'contradiction,' but rather dislike of members who stray from
> some kind of 'party' line that promotes crude anti-semitism, naive
> romanticism of National Socialism and adherence to Evola's, I
believe
> absurd, belief in primordial nordic supermen.
>
> However, before too much offense is generated from this last
> sentence, it should be noted that I nonetheless uphold respect for
> the moderators stance regarding Evola, i.e. presenting all aspects
of
> his work no matter how repugnant they may be for modern palates.
> Needless to say, unlike the moderators, I find myself in
disagreement
> with certain aspects of Evola's work, but regardless of my personal
> assessment of his work I find the moderators stance far more
> preferable than that of Hansen, Godwin & co. who seem intent on
> blunting various aspects of Evola's work in order to make it more
> palatable for modern tastes.
>
> Anyway, I am assuming you wish me to leave so I will bid you
> gentlemen farewell wishing you the best with your translation work
> and leaving with the following quote from Evola that
> no doubt some here would do well to read.
>
> 'This kind of "scholasticism" consists in following passively just
> about every view ever formulated by Guenon, with a pedantic
> attitude, without any true investigation or discrimination...While
> it remains true that "originality" is definitely out of place in
> this domain, the influence of a teacher is truly effective not when
> it generates slavish and stereotypical repetitions, but when it
> generates the impulse for further developments, and, if necessary,
> for revisions, thanks to an abundance of perspectives. While an
> acknowledgment of what is valid and unique in Guenon's work is due,
> this should not prevent the observation of some of his limits, due
> to his "personal equation" and to his forma mentis. It is precisely
> this critical approach that leaves room for potentially fruitful
> work.'
>
>
> --- In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "evola_as_he_is"
> <evola_as_he_is@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > The InterNet is a small world in many respects. Among other
things,
> > it means that, in a given field, and, as far as we are concerned,
> in
> > the field of evolian studies, nothing pass unnoticed in the long
> run,
> > and everything is bound to be known one day or another.
> >
> > A few other e-lists deal, or rather, for some of them, pretend to
> > deal with Evola's work. We are not members of any of those other
e-
> > lists, not even under a nickname. However, what has to come to
our
> > ears always ends up, sooner or later, to come up to our ears.
> >
> > Some members of evola_as_he_is turn out to be at the same time
> > members of some of those other e-lists, and needless to say that
we
> > don't have anything against it. What we do mind is to note that
> some
> > of them have been making on those e-lists statements which are
> > completely contrary to those they have been making on
> evola_as_he_is,
> > in the field of race and in general. Whether they suffer from
inner
> > contradictions or they are merely hypocrits, that's the least of
> our
> > worries. Now, hypocrits and people suffering from inner
> > contradictions are not welcome on evola_as_he_is and, in fact,
have
> > nothing to do on it. Therefore, we ask them to leave
evola_as_he_is.
> >
>