Hello,
In due time, we shall post a systematic study of the main differences
between René Guénon's work and Julius Evola's, with respect to the
question of initiation, of Masonry, of what the former called
spiritual authority and temporal power, and so on. In the meantime,
your considerations allow us to point out a difference between them
as far as form is concerned: the fact that, when setting out this or
that idea or teaching, the former never missed an opportunity
to remind us that this or that teaching or idea is part
of 'Tradition' does not mean in any way that, because the latter
did not always resort to arguments of authority, the teachings
and the principles he set out are born of his own speculations, on
the contrary.
To go back over the question of race, there is an opposite mistake to
the one which consists in focusing only on the 'race of the body'
while forgetting about or even denying the existence of the 'race of
the soul' and of the 'race of the spirit'. Everyone should see what
this opposite mistake is. Evola never fell into that trap. Instead,
he insisted on the necessity of racial prophylaxis, from a point of
view which we can discuss if you are kind enough to post a review of
the sixth chapter of 'The Elements of Racial Education'.
Thompkins&Cariou
--- In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "Tony Ciopa"
<hyperborean@b...> wrote:
> Thank you for this important clarification. It goes without saying
that a
> Traditionalist thinker like Evola would not be interested in
introducing
> novelties.
>
>
>
> I think that we can agree that biological race is necessary for
racial
> consciousness – after all, this is precisely where "individual life
> communicates with a life more than individual". Yet, on the other
hand, it
> is not sufficient, and that is the point of this chapter.
>
>
>
>