- Last September, we had the opportunity to attend the 23rd New Right meeting in London, where we listened to an inspiring talk given by Jonathan Bowden on '1984', which, unlike many of the talks he has delivered here and there, is unfortunately not available on line. On the other hand, his speech on J. Evola, given at the 27th New Right meeting which was held last July, is, at :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSzqDVPVKyE&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0gu2KY46Nw&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wahfjwLeTtQ&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OxR-HB7kpyw&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L45s5JidQhM&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ta-jsmWH-Kg&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTp79h92hfs&feature=player_embedded
http://www.jonathanbowden.co.uk/interview.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Bowden
Despite a few inaccuracies, some of which are gross (for
instance, J. Evola was not a Catholic and never said he was "a Catholic pagan", far from it), this is an excellent and lively introduction to J. Evola's world-view. - Would it happen to be this speech?
We also had the opportunity to hear Bowden speak a few years ago, shortly before his death. We were impressed by his prodigious rhetorical force, but thought that, in general, in his speeches and articles too much attention and energy was dissipated on literary criticism and analyses of popular entertainment.
Among some errors in his speech on Evola, notable among them being his identification of 'metaphysical objectivism' with 'monotheism' (against 'polytheism'), and also with fundamentalism, there is a very serious one that ought be addressed: 'Evola doesn’t believe in progress nor does the Tradition that he comes out of. They don’t believe in scientific progress. They don’t believe in evolution. But his anti-evolutionism is strange and interesting. It’s got nothing to do with creationism and, if you like, the Evangelical politics of certain parts of what you might call the Puritan American Right, for example. His attitude is a reverse attitude, which in a strange way is an involuntary and inegalitarian way of looking at the same issue. His view is that the apes are descended from us as we go upwards rather than we are descended from them as we leave them in their simian animalism. So, in a way, it’s actually a reformulation of the same idea but looking upwards and always seeing, if you like, the snobbish, the aristocratic, the prevailing, the over-arching view rather than viewing the thing from a mass, generic, and middling perspective which includes people.' (from a transcript of the above speech, http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/10/julius-evolathe-worlds-most-right-wing-thinker/ )
The claim that Evola's perspective is merely some kind of 'snobbish' imaginative interpretation of the same proposed process of transformation of species proposed by Darwinism - a 'reformulation of the same idea', as he says - is a grave misinterpretation. His anti-evolutionism, in fact, does have something in common with that of the 'Puritan American Right'. No matter how confused or even subversive that movement has been, it has been producing, here and there, fairly strong arguments against the evolutionist fallacy. Evola mentions one of them in Revolt against the Modern World: Douglas Dewar's The Transformist Illusion. Like them, Evola makes it clear that he understands that man does not descend from the ape, although he does so in a much more compelling manner *.
Adding to the confusion perhaps are several remarks against 'Creationism' in in Evola's works, however in the context of those passages the term is referring not to anti-evolutionism, but specifically to the Abrahamic concept of creation ex nihilo by an anthropomorphic god.
We will start a discussion on this topic soon.
*His more detailed writings on evolutionism (from Introduzione alla Magia vol. III) are available in translation here:
http://www.gornahoor.net/?p=6261
http://www.gornahoor.net/?p=6287
http://www.gornahoor.net/?p=6301
- Wow amazing... i've been searching for Introduction to Magic By the UR GROUP (Any volume beyond 1)... .as 1 is the only one available in English.
Is there anywhere I can obtain the further volumes in English?
Can someone translate them?
Thank youOn Thursday, September 1, 2016 7:46 AM, "timotheus.lutz@... [evola_as_he_is]" <evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com> wrote:We also had the opportunity to hear Bowden speak a few years ago, shortly before his death. We were impressed by his prodigious rhetorical force, but thought that, in general, in his speeches and articles too much attention and energy was dissipated on literary criticism and analyses of popular entertainment.Among some errors in his speech on Evola, notable among them being his identification of 'metaphysical objectivism' with 'monotheism' (against 'polytheism'), and also with fundamentalism, there is a very serious one that ought be addressed: 'Evola doesn’t believe in progress nor does the Tradition that he comes out of. They don’t believe in scientific progress. They don’t believe in evolution. But his anti-evolutionism is strange and interesting. It’s got nothing to do withcreationism and, if you like, the Evangelical politics of certain parts of what you might call the Puritan American Right, for example. His attitude is a reverse attitude, which in a strange way is an involuntary and inegalitarian way of looking at the same issue. His view is that the apes are descended from us as we go upwards rather than we are descended from them as we leave them in their simian animalism. So, in a way, it’s actually a reformulation of the same idea but looking upwards and always seeing, if you like, the snobbish, the aristocratic, the prevailing, the over-arching view rather than viewing the thing from a mass, generic, and middling perspective which includes people.' (from a transcript of the above speech, http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/10/julius-evolathe-worlds-most-right-wing-thinker/ )The claim that Evola's perspective is merely some kind of 'snobbish' imaginative interpretation of the same proposed process of transformation of species proposed by Darwinism - a 'reformulation of the same idea', as he says - is a grave misinterpretation. His anti-evolutionism, in fact, does have something in common with that of the 'Puritan American Right'. No matter how confused or even subversive that movement has been, it has been producing, here and there, fairly strong arguments against the evolutionist fallacy. Evola mentions one of them in Revolt against the Modern World: Douglas Dewar's The Transformist Illusion. Like them, Evola makes it clear that he understands that man does not descend from the ape, although he does so in a much more compelling manner *.Adding to the confusion perhaps are several remarks against 'Creationism' in in Evola's works, however in the context of those passages the term is referring not to anti-evolutionism, but specifically to the Abrahamic concept of creation ex nihilo by an anthropomorphic god.We will start a discussion on this topic soon.*His more detailed writings on evolutionism (from Introduzione alla Magia vol. III) are available in translation here: - A minor correction: Douglas Dewar was a British Christian evangelical, not an American one.
---In evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com, <timotheus.lutz@...> wrote :We also had the opportunity to hear Bowden speak a few years ago, shortly before his death. We were impressed by his prodigious rhetorical force, but thought that, in general, in his speeches and articles too much attention and energy was dissipated on literary criticism and analyses of popular entertainment.
Among some errors in his speech on Evola, notable among them being his identification of 'metaphysical objectivism' with 'monotheism' (against 'polytheism'), and also with fundamentalism, there is a very serious one that ought be addressed: 'Evola doesn’t believe in progress nor does the Tradition that he comes out of. They don’t believe in scientific progress. They don’t believe in evolution. But his anti-evolutionism is strange and interesting. It’s got nothing to do with creationism and, if you like, the Evangelical politics of certain parts of what you might call the Puritan American Right, for example. His attitude is a reverse attitude, which in a strange way is an involuntary and inegalitarian way of looking at the same issue. His view is that the apes are descended from us as we go upwards rather than we are descended from them as we leave them in their simian animalism. So, in a way, it’s actually a reformulation of the same idea but looking upwards and always seeing, if you like, the snobbish, the aristocratic, the prevailing, the over-arching view rather than viewing the thing from a mass, generic, and middling perspective which includes people.' (from a transcript of the above speech, http://www.counter-currents.com/2014/10/julius-evolathe-worlds-most-right-wing-thinker/ )
The claim that Evola's perspective is merely some kind of 'snobbish' imaginative interpretation of the same proposed process of transformation of species proposed by Darwinism - a 'reformulation of the same idea', as he says - is a grave misinterpretation. His anti-evolutionism, in fact, does have something in common with that of the 'Puritan American Right'. No matter how confused or even subversive that movement has been, it has been producing, here and there, fairly strong arguments against the evolutionist fallacy. Evola mentions one of them in Revolt against the Modern World: Douglas Dewar's The Transformist Illusion. Like them, Evola makes it clear that he understands that man does not descend from the ape, although he does so in a much more compelling manner *.
Adding to the confusion perhaps are several remarks against 'Creationism' in in Evola's works, however in the context of those passages the term is referring not to anti-evolutionism, but specifically to the Abrahamic concept of creation ex nihilo by an anthropomorphic god.
We will start a discussion on this topic soon.
*His more detailed writings on evolutionism (from Introduzione alla Magia vol. III) are available in translation here:
http://www.gornahoor.net/?p=6261
http://www.gornahoor.net/?p=6287
http://www.gornahoor.net/?p=6301
- Someone can, and has actually started to, years ago, with 'The Limits of Initiatory Regularity' and
'The Concept of Initiation', which shall be published again at
Ideally, the next unpublished text from 'Ur and Krur' should be that which deals with a critique of Jung's views. - why not actual sex magick rituals/etc.... or did the ur group never publish anything publicly on this.
nagowska served evola correct?
top secret monographsOn Saturday, September 10, 2016 9:02 AM, "evola_as_he_is@... [evola_as_he_is]" <evola_as_he_is@yahoogroups.com> wrote:Someone can, and has actually started to, years ago, with 'The Limits of Initiatory Regularity' and
'The Concept of Initiation', which shall be published again at
Ideally, the next unpublished text from 'Ur and Krur' should be that which deals with a critique of Jung's views.
Attention: Starting December 14, 2019 Yahoo
Groups will no longer host user created content on its sites. New
content can no longer be uploaded after October 28, 2019.
Sending/Receiving email functionality is not going away, you can
continue to communicate via any email client with your group members. Learn More
evola_as_he_is@{{emailDomain}}