My excuses for the delay, here is my translation of a passage from a memorial book of Joris van Severen, which deals with his Idea of the Empire or "Reichsgedanke" and the place of the Netherlands therein. Joris Van Severen, leader of VerDiNaSo (In Dutch: 'Verenigde Dietsche Nationaal-Solidaristen' -> United Dutch National-Solidarists) envisioned an unification of todays Holland, Belgium and Luxemburg (the original 17 provinces of the Netherlands) and was known for his aristocratic style and his emphasize on discipline.
Ideologically his movement was strongly anti-democratic and hierarchical, but had more in common with the thinkers of the Conservative Revolution (more specifically the "Junge Konservative")and the French movement Action Francaise than with German national-socialism. The Catholic faith was common within the movement and VerDiNaSo's economical viewpoints were also based on Catholic scriptures, favouring more or less a form of corporatism.
Aside from some corresponding points of view of Van Severen and Evola explained in the article below, I've seen being expressed the opinion that van Severen had a similar lifestyle as that of Evola and Drieu de la Rochelle, probably in that Van Severen was both a 'dandy' and an elitist. Having indeed seen references to the young Evola where he is described as a dandy (of Drieu de la Rochelle I'm quite ignorant), I can say that this claim is interesting, but I lack in depth information about both men to verify anything of this.
---
The Dutch Empire and Order
By Ward Kennes; from the memorial book Joris van Severen
"The Dutch idea of the Empire is prompted by the concern, to realize the Dutch re- resurrection through realistic ways, to give it to the peoples whereon we make an appeal for ourselves, and for the European order. Because the construction of the Dutch empire is the only serious contribution for European peace, that we can offer." Thus described Lode Claes the Dutch idea of the empire in a nutshell.
Above was already pointed out that there exists a fundamental difference between empire and nation. The essence of the empire is an idea or principle and not some material factor as the territory, the language, "natural borders" or ethnicity.
Therethrough it distinguishes itself from the nation. For the nation folk and state coincide (or should coincide). Nationalism strives to closed and oppossed communities and is not frightened to force the citizens into a harnass of myths, dogmas, slogans and lies. It restrains his rise to citizen of a commonwealth. The empire on the contrary is no mechanic unity, but a organic unity that lies in an idea or the principial that it incarnates.
"With other words, the principle of the empire strives to reconcile the one and the many, between the particular and the universal. Its general law is that of autonomy and of the respect for diversity. The empire strives to unify on a higher plane, without supressing the diversity of cultures, of peoples and ethnicities. It is a whole whose parts are atonomous in proportion to the solidity of what unites them. These parts remain differentiated and organic." (de Benoist) The empire thus tries to unify peoples in a community bound by fate, without modelling them into a homogene mass in an uniform way. In this sense the idea of the empire closely links up with the classic image of the universitas, while the national states are in line with the unitarian and centralised societas.
A person continually belongs in an intermediary way to the empire. The intermediary structures like the families, the provinces, the occupational groups and the guilds fullfill therein an integrating function.
During the interbellum a Christian European idea of the empire revives within the "young-conservative" wing of the conservative revolution. In Germany it is supported by among others Arthur Mahraum and Edgar Jung, in Austria by Othmar Spann and in the Netherlands by Odiel Spruytte and ofcourse Joris van Severen. National Socialism has brutally clashed this dream.
One remains having difficulty with the evolutional thought of Van Severen on the political plane. Above all those who can not live without nicely drawn stateborders, are confused by the Whole-Netherlandic thought. Nevertheless it's a characteristic of the empire, (as it manifested itself in historical examples: the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, the Ottamn, the Habsburg of the Austrian-Hungarian double-monarchy, ...) that it is not an enclosed whole. "It's frontiers are naturally fluid and provisional, which reinforces its organic character." (de Benoist) Through the way whereby the idea of the empire has taken shape in the past, Luc Pauwels draws three policy lines for the concrete state politics. They are:
1) the organic, non-egalitarian federalism
2) the complementary principle
3) the subsidiarity principle
Van Severen is more citizen of the idea than of the state. "The idea and only the idea can be the true fatherland. (...) Not the fact that one belongs to the same nationality, speaks the same language or is of the same blood, but the fact that one belongs to the same idea, should be the deciding factor that unite or divides." (Evola) This idea could be for him nothing other than: ORDER.
In the slogan "the Dutch Empire and Order" exists an intrinsic connection between both components. It can thus never be the intention on the one hand to give the Dutch Empire shape and on the other hand to strive for order. The empire where Van Severen dreams of, is born in the order, through the order and for the order. "The Dutch Empire and Order, because in the Netherlands the order CAN impossibly be realized outside of the establishment of the Dutch empire, and likely impossible can the Dutch empire be established outside of the National-solidaristic order." Joris van Severen conceives the empire not as territory, but as Order.
The idea of the Empire is imperial, but not imperialistic. The empire applies its power to strive for inner stability and harmony, not because of expansion of power. In a speech for students Van Severen lets no doubt exist about the finality of the Empire that he has in mind: "The Dutch national-solidaristic Empire of the Netherlands will however not strive for power for the sake of power. No! It will strive for power to the extent that that power is necessary to lift up the life of the Empire and in the Imperium to the highest possibillities of a truly decent civilization, culminating in the clear acknowledgement and respect for the indisputable value of the human person, in his immortal integrity."
--- In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "evola_as_he_is" <evola_as_he_is@...> wrote:
>
>
> What have you been waiting for?
>
> It would be most surprising if these two representatives of the
> pre-WW2 far-right didn't have anything in common, at least in some
> respects.
>
>
> --- In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "lordofthespear"
> <hailtocryptogram@> wrote:
> >
> > Speaking about Evola and the European Movements: is there anybody
> > familiar with the Flemish national-solidarist Joris van Severen which
> > views seem to correspond in some aspects to that of Evola and able to
> > shed some light on this?
> > I can translate some quotes from a Dutch article which deal with this
> > subject if anyone's interested.
> >
> > --- In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "evola_as_he_is"
> > <evola_as_he_is@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > As the parasitical and trisomic creature called E.U., conceived by a
> > > few American Jews and willingly 'delivered' by a few of their goyim
> > > henchmen in the aftermath of WW2, is eating Europe from the inside, it
> > > is a good idea to recall two of the European movements which,
> under the
> > > leadership of the Third Reich, were about to re-build a civilisation
> > > torn out by centuries of fratricidal wars caused essentially by the
> > > inner divisions which arose in the European soul and spirit as a
> result
> > > of the observance of the religious form which had come to prevail in
> > > the West and which is intrinsically foreign to the Aryan spirit :
> > > namely, the Arrow Cross and the Ustashe, whose respective ideology
> was
> > > based on anti-capitalism, anti-Communism, and anti-Semitism.
> > >
> > > If Evola never travelled to Croatia, as you know, he travelled to
> > > Hungary in the 1930's to give a few lectures in Buda at the invitation
> > > of some aristocratic circles ; yet, to the best of our knowledge, he
> > > never mentioned the Arrow Cross in his work.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "aegishjalmar"
> > > <heiliges_blut@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Greetings All,
> > > >
> > > > We've heard much about Evola's views on the positive and negative
> > > > aspects of the Fascist and National-Socialist regimes. I'm very
> > > > curious as to whether his thoughts were recorded on some of the
> other
> > > > contemporaneous national and patriotic movements, such as the
> > > Croatian
> > > > Ustase and the Hungarian Arrow Cross? I'd be particularly
> interested
> > > > to know what he thought of the Ustase given that their ideology had
> > > > clear apparent similarities to that of the Romanian Iron Guard,
> which
> > > > we know Evola respected highly.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Piers.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
--- In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "evola_as_he_is" <evola_as_he_is@...> wrote:
>
>
> What have you been waiting for?
>
> It would be most surprising if these two representatives of the
> pre-WW2 far-right didn't have anything in common, at least in some
> respects.
>
>
> --- In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "lordofthespear"
> hailtocryptogram@ wrote:
> >
> > Speaking about Evola and the European Movements: is there anybody
> > familiar with the Flemish national-solidarist Joris van Severen which
> > views seem to correspond in some aspects to that of Evola and able to
> > shed some light on this?
> > I can translate some quotes from a Dutch article which deal with this
> > subject if anyone's interested.
> >
> > --- In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "evola_as_he_is"
> > <evola_as_he_is@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > As the parasitical and trisomic creature called E.U., conceived by a
> > > few American Jews and willingly 'delivered' by a few of their goyim
> > > henchmen in the aftermath of WW2, is eating Europe from the inside, it
> > > is a good idea to recall two of the European movements which,
> under the
> > > leadership of the Third Reich, were about to re-build a civilisation
> > > torn out by centuries of fratricidal wars caused essentially by the
> > > inner divisions which arose in the European soul and spirit as a
> result
> > > of the observance of the religious form which had come to prevail in
> > > the West and which is intrinsically foreign to the Aryan spirit :
> > > namely, the Arrow Cross and the Ustashe, whose respective ideology
> was
> > > based on anti-capitalism, anti-Communism, and anti-Semitism.
> > >
> > > If Evola never travelled to Croatia, as you know, he travelled to
> > > Hungary in the 1930's to give a few lectures in Buda at the invitation
> > > of some aristocratic circles ; yet, to the best of our knowledge, he
> > > never mentioned the Arrow Cross in his work.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, "aegishjalmar"
> > > <heiliges_blut@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Greetings All,
> > > >
> > > > We've heard much about Evola's views on the positive and negative
> > > > aspects of the Fascist and National-Socialist regimes. I'm very
> > > > curious as to whether his thoughts were recorded on some of the
> other
> > > > contemporaneous national and patriotic movements, such as the
> > > Croatian
> > > > Ustase and the Hungarian Arrow Cross? I'd be particularly
> interested
> > > > to know what he thought of the Ustase given that their ideology had
> > > > clear apparent similarities to that of the Romanian Iron Guard,
> which
> > > > we know Evola respected highly.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Piers.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>