Vedr. [evola_as_he_is] Evola and 'Aryan Christianity'
Do we "really" think that the sun shines and the moon reflects the
light of the sun, that fire is hot and that water is wet, that,
during a storm, if you open all the windows of your house, it will be
flooded with rain and that, intead, if you close all the windows, it
won't be flooded?
In the work of Evola, who was rich in great deeds on the outer plane
as well as on the inner plane and who was familiar with Roman history
in a non scholarly manner, thousands of lines deal with the
description and the definition of the typical features of the Roman
Patrician character : conciseness was one of them, as recalled, for
instance, in 'Heidnischer Imperialismus', a work which, as
acknowledged by himself, was (meant to be) polemical. He would have
certainly be interested in knowing that it was a "nice" book.
What you say about those big-mouthed "racial fanatics" serving in the
Wehrmacht only confirms what a few perspicacious people have
noticed : the Wehrmacht, from staff officers down to privates, was an
army modelled to a large extent on the democratic standards of the
Republic of Weimar when the Nationalist-Socialists inherited it in
1933, and 5 years were not enough to change its mentality, especially
since the National-Socialist leadership didn't cleanse it from its
unworthy elements in due time ; Hitler's deep reverence for that
military institution which represented for him the essence and the
legitimacy of the German State is well-known. As for German SS-men,
their character and their training, which included a racial
education, were far more fit to the tasks which National-Socialist
leadership intended to carry out. They didn't have a reputation for
being cowards and chatterboxes.
Now, the reference you make to Ernst von Solomon allows us to clarify
a point which should already be clear in the mind of post-war
Fascists and National-Socialists who claim to adhere to the ideas of
the 'Konservative Revolution' as a whole : to claim to adhere to the
ideas of the 'Konservative Revolution' as a whole is, at best, a
contradiction in terms and, at worse, a mere pose of young fanatics
filled with contradictions, with the same contradictions which exist
between the world-view of Ernst Jünger and that of Othmar Spann,
between the 'Weltanschauung' of Moeller van den Bruck and that of ...
what's his name again... he had, as did many 'conservative
revolutionaries', marked Bolshevik sympathies and, after WW2, he
worked zealously for the East German secret service... his name is on
the tip of our tongue - and so on. To a large extent, the
expression 'Konservative Revolution' is a hotchpotch, concocted in
the aftermath of the WW II by a young German student, Armin Mohler,
in a work published in 1950 under the title 'Die Konservative
Revolution in Deutschland 1918-1932'. It is a catalogue of the main
currents and hundreds of writers, philosophers, thinkers, poets who
made up the groundswell of anti-democratic thought during the Weimar
Republic and whom he presented collectively as constituting 'The
Conservative Revolution'. The only common denominator between that
myriad of disparate writers was their anti-Weimar, anti-democratic,
anti-Enlightenment orientation as well as the feeling of living in a
transitional period between the old dying Christian European order
and a new order, and the will to overcome that 'interregnum', to
bring about the rebirth of the West (as Ernst Jünger once said (was
this humour?) : "We stand at the turning point of two eras, one of
the same order of significance as the change from the stone-age to
the bronze-age"). Evola used the term 'Conservative Revolution', and
yet with caution ; contrary to many nostalgic extreme-right
intellectuals trapped in an interminable post-war era, he didn't need
Mohler's syncretic mythic project to reassert the values of European
traditional civilisation
In any case, the figures of the so-called 'Konservative Revolution'
he had affinities with were Othmar Spann, Wilhelm Stapel, A.E.
Günther, E. Jünger and Edgar J. Jung.
Religious tolerance existed in the Third Reich, anyone was free to be
either a practising Protestant or a practising Catholic. You were
also free to make yourself ridiculous in public by jumping
cyclothymically from one confession to the other according to your
fancy.
--- In
evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, Widar Wulfarson
<widar_harigastiz@...> wrote:
>
> Swasti!
>
> Wasn't it Evola's motto "poor in words, rich in great
> deeds" or simpy "Mehr Sein als Scheinen?"
> Belicose polemics are nice but rather
> contra-productive.
> It is simply modern and democratic to judge people
> accordind to their words, the traditional way is to
> judge them according to their deeds or, better,
> according to their being.
> My grandfather who served in the Wehrmacht could only
> affirm this: the biggest loud-mouths and excessive
> racial fanatics always stayed behind the lines, when
> it came to a battle.
> The German conservative revolutionaries in early 20th
> accepted every confession. Ernst von Salomon went to
> catholic and protestant masses, celebrated heathen
> rituals and also wanted - but was not allowed - to
> visit a synagogue (--> Die Geaechteten).
> The distinction lines of the modern time are
> hindrances, not pillars as the borders of the
> traditional societies.
>
> And a question to evola_as_he_is:
>
> Do you really think that female teachers turn young
> boys into young girl in contemporary European schools?
> There are neither boys nor girls, but only emencipated
> and equal human beings. Everything else could be a
> severe discrimination in modern European schools.
>
> (...)
> > In a European State worth of the name, any mother
> > would be allowed to
> > go to church with her young son every Sunday,
> > whether to a Catholic
> > Church, to a Protestant church or to an Orthodox
> > church, if it
> > pleased her. What she would be absolutely prevented
> > from doing, by
> > precise legal measures, would be to become, for
> > instance, a teacher
> > and, therefore, to try hard, with all the energies
> > of resentment and
> > of hatred, to turn young boys into young girls ...
>