This article will be open-ended as I hope that others will be able to comment or write their own articles in response.
Is Julius Evola an Aryanist? Is Traditionalism, as espoused by Evola, Aryanism? Should Evola’s works be incorporated into Aryanism?
These questions are hard to answer in a definite manner because, although overall Evola’s Traditionalism is similar, there are many omissions and contradictions on Evola’s part if he were describing the common forms of Aryanism.
Aryanism is usually expressed in a form of Socialism with a dismissive attitude towards the caste system or to any ?traditionalist? form of social hierarchy. In Revolt Against the Modern World, Evola presents the caste system, particularly the ascetic, virile and warrior upper caste, to be the fundamental aspect of creating and maintaining a Traditionalist society. An obvious comparison to a commonly accepted form of Aryanism would be the Schutzstaffel and Waffen-SS as an almost exact emulation of this warrior caste.
Another belief held amongst Aryanists, particularly those of the past, is that there once existed a pure Aryan race and civilisation, which after numerous disasters was destroyed and dispersed, with the race losing its purity by intermingling with the peoples of the earth. This belief is identical to Evola’s, except that Evola does not explicitly use the word Aryan. He also explains the various ages (Doctrines of the Four Ages) associated with the fall of this civilisation and the popular myths associated with them, most notable of which is Atlantis.
Increasingly it appears that Evola is an Aryanist who calls himself a Traditionalist, or perhaps vice-versa.
Modern Aryanists also take liberalised views on common ideological issues of which include: women; culture; nationalism; economics; science; and the masses. It is common to see an unwillingness to discuss such uncomfortable topics in depth. This is where Traditionalism and Aryanism have far-reaching contradictions. Evola, in Revolt Against the Modern World, dictates the Traditionalist stance on most of the above-mentioned. However, Aryanism does not know what it believes and thus the inclusion of Julius Evola into Aryanism becomes very much a matter of personal opinion.
Therefore, our own various opinions should be discarded while we dictate the Aryanist perspective on particularly women, culture and economics. Without at least a general idea of what Aryanism is in terms of such common place concerns, Aryanists will not be able to determine what is or is not part of this Weltanschauung.
Well, if somebody consider the system of the 3. Reich as an aryan one, then Evola doesn´t help to understand aryanism. A lot of works have been censor in Germany at this time, because the SS consider this ideas as “dangerous”. Because he for example had different ideas on race, that can be considered as “dangerous”.
Can somebody answer this questions…
What does “race” mean in aryanism?
Have it spiritual, philosophical fundamentals or natural, blood based fundamentals?
There is a relation, but what does it really means?
Some jews describe Evolas ideas as a tool to destroy or confuse concepts of national socialist.
A text in spanish: http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=323429
Frai:
The reason the SS did not accept Evola’s works is because it did not stress the physical aspects of race.
Race in Aryanism is physical and spiritual.
I think it is safe to say that Aryanists believe “Sit mens sana in corpore sano”.
I don’t think he was a racist the way we use the word today. From what I’ve read he thought of race as a spiritual state, and was trying to get the Nazis and others to change their views on the subject. Anyway, glad to see someone is posting about the Baron!
Amillay:
This article was intended to discover whether Evola can be integrated into Aryanism or if he is an Aryanist - nothing to do with “racism” in its modern sense or its popular traditional sense.
Evola was believed in the concept of race and he addresses predominantly the spiritual concept of race.
However, this is identical to the theories of Aryanism. I was more interested as to whether or not his “Traditionalism” is not opposed to Arya and Aryanism.
Quite simply, Aryanism is an extension of Traditionalism. One can have Traditionalism without Aryanism, but one cannot have Aryanism without Traditionalism.
“Aryanism”, as it is used on this site (regardless of the historical and linguistic connotations of the term ‘Aryan’) is a type of Traditionalism suited specifically toward Germanic peoples, who have historically favored semi-egalitarian, semi-democratic meritocracy over the strict caste system and monarchy of other Aryan cultures.
Here are some thoughts I wrote in another forum debating about Evola.
http://thephora.net/forum/showthread.php?t=65003
(Please comment or criticize dear fellow Aryanists).
The ancient ideas can be just as erroneous as the new ideas. Traditionalist argumentum ad antiquitatem is just as silly as modernist argumentum ad novitatem. All ideas and systems of ideas must be exposed to critical scrutiny. If ancient pagans had all the right answers they wouldn’t end up hoodwinked by Christianity, and if the more respectable Christians of the Middle Ages had all the right answers they would not have degraded into modernity. To reject any new author only because he has something new to say means to deny the heroic-pagan, the radical, the Promethean essence to ourselves. We don’t need the tradition as the heavy stone tied around our necks but rather as the wings to search the new and the old Radical solutions - instead to remain enslaved by Christian and Conservative status quo.
“An Aryan mind has too much respect for other people, and its sense of its own dignity is too pronounced to allow it to impose its own ideas upon others, even when it knows that its ideas are correct.” (Julius Evola, The Doctrine of Awakening)
For this reason I fear that the dogmatic, evangelizing, gospel-preaching, convert-seeking, one-truth/one-tradition spirit of Christianity (as basically a reflection of the older, intolerant, tribal-Levantine creed) will always be at odds with dangerous, free, Promethean spirit of the ancient Hellenes or the Faustian spirit of European West (or what has remained of it in circumstances of the anti-philosophic, liberal-socialist single-mindedness of modernity).
I am not interested to follow ideas only on account of someones authorship (even if Evola is in question). If I were to reasoned otherwise than I would not have taken any ideas subscribed to Jesus even into consideration - non quis sed quid!
The search for the geographic location of the ancient racial source of the higher mankind is of secondary importance. It’s the spiritual, not materialistic quest, like the quest for the Holy Grail. The higher races often materialize in forms resembling Nordic. But they do not necessary be called Nordic. Peoples of the high ideas often choose beautiful or otherwise noble people as partners. This is how they materialize their ideas of beauty (and other virtues) into the physical race.
The development in the Third Reich prove that revival of Paganism as a religion is possible. TRISTAN Heydrich was successful in suppressing the disobedient clergy as well as Freemasonry. In few generations Christianity, Bible, Freemasonry and jew problem would have appeared to our children only as a bad dream, as the thing of the past, as the relic of the judean Dark Ages.
The most common cynical answer you get whenever you approach Christian Pharisees with some idea foreign to their tradition and mindset is: “Why don’t you write the new Bible than?”. Indeed, we need a new Aryanist, NS-like Empire to write down the new/old myth so that their children can equally question the sanity and benevolence of anyone who questions the new Aryanist religion written down by the authorities of the new SS-like elite.
(…)
I like the idea of “Christism” in opposition to Christianity. I judge the person of Christ as I believe some philosophic-minded, aristocratic pagan of antiquity would. I doubt that civilized, aristocratic, cosmopolitan, philosophic-minded pagans such as Marcus Aurelius were bloody-minded satanic barbarians who would have mocked the sufferings of an innocent man but they certainly weren’t idiots to regard Jesus as God on account of his torments. Perhaps as virtuous man and a martyr against jewish tribalism.
As jews exposed Jesus to torments so does the Christians expose Pagans and pagan-minded Christists to torments and spiritual slavery. Christianity is the enemy, and Christians are “neo”, they are the “new religion”, they are the new agers. If Evola in some phase decided to go easy on Christianity than he contradicted to what he wrote in ‘Imperialismo pagano’.
Do we understand our history correctly, accurately? if we do not than Traditionalism becomes as if we look upon our reflection in a smashed mirror.
In my view Evola was a Platonist who understood reality as a static stasis of eternal frozen perfection. Our Aryanist tradtion introduces into this abstract world a racial dynamis, seeking to conquer time rather than merely to deny it.
Our heritage is sometimes described as a racial tradition in which a distant Golden Age inspires us towards another even greater Golden Age. An ancient godlike super-race was corrupted by miscegenation with inferior races and spiritual transgressions and therefore we seek a divine renewal in which an eternal spring of growth and development overcomes the samsaric cycles of mere change. We strive to be heroes against time.
Aryanists/Esoteric Hitlerists are part of what has been called “the meristem” of eternal youth by Goethe and the “string of light” by Spanish romantics. My take on the Pagan/Christian interaction is that the historic Christianity of Constantine, Charlemagne, the Ottonian Emperors, Frederick Barbarossa, Frederick II, the greater Habsburgs, Napoleon and the Fuhrer could well be described as a universalist Higher European Paganism. The best of the ancient pagans embraced historic Christianity because the divine elite of Emperors Augustus and Tiberius gave their Imperial Patronage to Lucifer Kristos (aka Jesus Christ) who in turn brilliantly constructed an amalgam of all the best of the paganism of the Augustan Golden Age.
Christianity has, mostly since ’45, been transformed by an evil sorcery into Judaism. Our spiritual task in the new milenium is to form a Higher Christianity or, if one prefers, an Uber-Paganism that can lift our fallen world up into a Greater Golden Age and Fourth Reich. From the best of ancient Paganism through a noble universalist Christianity into a transcendent Christic Uber-Paganism that will open the paths to the stars and Heaven above!
If it seems altogether too fantastic to conceive of historic Christianity as Pagan, then reflect carefully: for some two thousand years both the judaics and the Muslims were generally red-faced screeching at the top of their lungs that the Catholics/Christians were PAGANS. They eagerly waged vast wars and slaughtered millions upon millions of Europeans because of their absolute certainty that this was unquestionably true. What if their error was not in their acute observation but rather in their thinking there were something wrong with this? What if for many centuries on end they were not blind but simply malicious?
Just how Pagan is the Triune God(s) of historic Christianity? Ask any Juden!! They will with total conviction assure you that they will hate and butcher Christians forever because Christians are PAGANS. Perhaps you haven’t studied and observed historic Christianity with enough attentiveness yet. Existing Christianity is Judaism, no way around that. But was it always so?
Do you really think the Fuhrer would have regularly attended Mass and have received the Catholic sacraments, not to mention given generous patronage to the Churches throughout the war, if he had thought that the Christianity of his time were Judaism? Nicht.
Please note I appreciate that I’m quibbling about vocabulary, not facts. I’m not disagreeing at all about existing Christianity and what must be done with it. I’m only arguing that our New Religion (what Miguel Serrano has named Kristianity) should learn from Lucifer Kristos and his Augustan Golden Age and therefore form itself with all the best elements of our heritage, including Paganism proper, Protestantism and Catholicism. I’m arguing that in a larger context all of these would be accurately recognized as spiritual siblings by any Talmudist. Let us not fail to see the forest for the trees.