Julius Evola

[The_Southern_Leftist]

I wanted to know what you guys think about Julius Evola. While I firmly disagree with his views and hold traditionalism to be an idea not worth striving for I will acknowledge that he was a philosophical genius. His work on cyclical history, racial theory (although he dealt mainly in race of the spirit which is a very in depth and interesting concept), transcendence, and the modern world have shaped the ideas of many people especially modern day nationalists. In order to defeat nationalist ideas we need to know about Evola and we must learn to make points and arguments against him. One way is to bring up that Evola himself admitted his ideas were impossible and thus he suggested to wait out the cycle. However, that argumentation could be flawed because it would be acknowledging his views on cyclical history as correct. Arguing and debating Evolian Traditionalism is certainly hard from a leftist standpoint because it is the anti-thesis of us. It is reactionary, anti egalitarian, and also against materialism. He was certainly an interesting man and I do encourage leftists to read some of his work and attempt to find flaws or points to defeat his ideas in debate. His work has actually seemed to breathe new life into modern day nationalism, especially with the youth.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Of course, if you argue from someone's premises you will not be able to "defeat" them. In any case it's irrelevant. Evola is a footnote in the history of political thought (and much more boring than Junger or Spirito), his only followers a sad bunch of boneheads.

And you don't fight against nationalism by assuming the idealist garbage that nationalists peddle to be true. You fight nationalism by pointing out how it's poisonous to the working class, whether the persons promoting the nationalism are called Evola, Junger, Merkel or Tsipras.

[Atsumari]

Julius Evola is certainly interesting and is someone you can read without having to utilize a hard chair, but a lot of the shit he says sounds like he pulled out of his ass.
And he would be offended if you call him a philosophical genius given that he did not think of himself as a philosopher and seemed to have more disdain for it.
If I had to unfavorably compare him to another person, it would be Jacques Lacan and his likes.

[The_Southern_Leftist]

Of course, if you argue from someone's premises you will not be able to "defeat" them. In any case it's irrelevant. Evola is a footnote in the history of political thought (and much more boring than Junger or Spirito), his only followers a sad bunch of boneheads.

And you don't fight against nationalism by assuming the idealist garbage that nationalists peddle to be true. You fight nationalism by pointing out how it's poisonous to the working class, whether the persons promoting the nationalism are called Evola, Junger, Merkel or Tsipras.

Never did I say to assume that it is true. Also, I believe it is a massive underestimation on your part to claim that his only followers are a bunch of sad boneheads. Most of the youth that are going to nationalism have been divided into two categories, skinheads and traditionalists. Add that to the fact that Benjamin Reynolds (Leader of National Action) is now entertaining evolian ideas. If Evolian Traditionalism existed solely on the internet then we would not have to give much thought to it but as members of the Nordic Resistance Front, Leaders of National Action, as well as the newfounded youth group Nationalist Collective take on Evolian Traditionalism we cannot simply ignore the existence. Nationalism is a real issue. Not just one held by a view boneheads as evidenced by the gains of nationalist parties the world over.