EVOLA AS HE IS is a Restricted Group with 185 members.

We will inquire about Capparelli.

Have you read http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/07/the-colored-world-revolution-part-1/ ; http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/07/the-colored-world-revolution-part-2/ ? (the whole book is available at http://aryanism.net/downloads/books/oswald-spengler/hour-of-decision.pdf)

As 'The Decline of the West' is not precisely our bedside book, we must say we did not look further – until someone drew our attention to these two chapters of ‘The Hour of Decision’. The first testifies to a profound understanding of racial issues, of the racial balance of power, in the modern world, while the second, cluttered as it is with a mix of caricatural, stereotyped generalisations on National-Socialist and explicit or implicit references to Judeo-Christian values and praxis, reflects doctrinal blindness.

Spengler would have agreed with J. Evola that racism and anti-Semitism are “currently characterised by the lack of a truly general standpoint,” that weakness and confusion is what characterises the main ideas advanced by current racists and anti-Semites ; by evolian standards, however, Spengler fell into the same category.

Spengler threw the baby out with the bathwater. First, not all racists in Europe had a Darwinist, materialistic, zoologist, vision of race ; even in Academia, aboveboard, perspicuous investigators are now able to recognise this: “Although the Nordicist ideologues Madison Grant and Lothrop Stoddard were eagerly adopted by [National-Socialist] racist writers, [National-Socialist] Psychology was coming at race from a fundamentally different direction from the psychometric empiricism of today's 'race and IQ' research and inter-war US race Psychology. While underpinned by a version of ‘Scientific Racism’, this had acquired a rather distinct character of its own compared to the positivist empiricist Galton/Pearson variety. Nothing in current Psychology… remotely resembles the doctrines” of L. Clauss, H.F.K Günther, E.R. Jaensch, G. Pfahler, B. Petermann, etc. (G. Richards, Race, Racism and Psychology: Towards a Reflexive History, p. 177-78).

Then, to state that “Race purity is a grotesque word in view of the fact that for centuries all stocks and species have been mixed” is tantamount to saying that health is a grotesque word in view of the fact that most people end up being somewhat ill or prone to illness.

Since “warlike — that is, healthy — generations with a future before them have from time immemorial always welcomed a stranger into the family if he had ‘race,’ to whatever race it was he belonged”, what was Spengler doing from 1916 to 1922, writing ‘The Decline of the West’ ?

Instead of saying that « Those who talk too much about race no longer have it in them”, we would rather say that those who never talk about race have never had it in them, while, among those who talk a lot about it, some still have it in them, while others – the word ‘race’, as recalled by J. Evola, was suddenly no longer out off the lips of some Fascists as soon as racial laws were promulgated in 1938 in Italy - do it by opportunism ; in still others, whose race is suffocated by phenotypic detritus of a more or less diverse, heterogeneous origin, this verbal incantation may be the instinctive expression, no matter how clumsy, of, precisely, this race .

We are told that « What is needed is not a pure race, but a strong one”. In fact, when it comes to race, these two terms, far from being opposed, are almost synonyms. As a matter of fact, there is no strength without unity and homogeneity. It is not clear from A. Hitler’s writings and speeches whether his goal was to make the whole German people racially pure ; what is clear is that he was perfectly aware that the German people was not a pure race, as he stated that “The Aryan renounced purity of his own blood… He sank, overwhelmed in the mixing of races, and by degrees lost for ever his capacity for civilization until he began to resemble

the subjected aboriginal race more than his fathers had done, BOTH IN MIND AND BODY.” (the stress is ours) From the publications of the SS, it is also clear that their leaders acknowledged this racial mixing, and that their views on race were anything but materialistic: “The Nordic racial body represents for us the ideal of beauty: there is nothing more natural. But this takes on its real and deep meaning only because we find in it the expression and symbol of the Nordic soul. Without this Nordic soul, the Nordic body would be nothing, but an object of study for natural sciences, as is the physical shape of any other human or animal race.” (https://archive.org/stream/LordreSsthiqueEtIdologie/Ordre-Thibaut_djvu.txt) Such distinctions were not made in mass circulation newspapers, or in the publications for the general public. Was the National-Socialist leadership possessed with the foolish idea that the whole German people could regain its racial purity, a racial purity which, from A. Hitler’s own writings, it is quite clear he never assumed it ever possessed ? What is certain is that he was aware that the German nation was made up of various peoples, and that not all of them had the same dignity. Did he intend to turn the Slavic members of the German nation, on whom he did not pass a particularly positive judgment from a racial standpoint, into pure Nordics ? Nothing could be less certain. All of which is to say that the notion of “purity of blood” in the Third Reich was most probably more an “idée-force”, an ideological tool meant to strengthen and galvanise the sense of belonging of its various ethnic groups, than an actual prophylactic goal expected to be reached by all of these. 

To Spengler, as well as to most of the American eugenists he excoriated, and to almost all current nationalists, the strength of a race “manifests itself above all in self-evident elemental fecundity, in an abundance of children. This agressive natalist creed is consonant with one of the most important commandments of the Jewish ideology: “Be fruitful and multiply. Fill the earth and govern it.” (Genesis 1:28). Actually, this commandment marked the beginning of the reign of quantity.

“Now, … in demography, J. Evola stressed, we cannot limit ourselves to the purely quantitative criterion of giving birth to as many children as possible, but we must also consider quality, that is, we must ask what sort of children this prolific nation will have. The mere simple, and indiscriminate multiplication of the number without any knowledge of the state of the racial whole of a nation can favour an invasion of the elements determined by the inferior race, if, through various circumstances, they are more prolific.” Besides, it is a hard fact that the most prolific races are the coloured ones.

Besides « an inexhaustible birth-rate », the strength of a race would also manifest in the “severe selection process” which it is subjected to ; now, these two criterions are contradictory, since selection implies quality and, conversely, quantity is the sure indication of a lack of selection, of discrimination. As much Spengler’s  overview of the damaging results of modern ‘medicine’ is fully justified, as much his blindness to the fact that ‘medicine’ is the only way of boosting the fecundity of a moderately fecund race such as the White is total.

Once again, with Spengler as with Stoddard and many other Anglo-Saxon XXth century racialists, we are faced with a powerful reactionary ‘racist’ thought which feels the effect of alien influences.