/lit/ - Literature

>>19222566
>>19222581

Homer. You have to understand myth for this.

Aeschylus - Prometheus Bound

Goethe - Architecture
Morphology

Heine - Die schlesischen Weber. Poetry provides something other than the historical or philosophical. One can even say that it renders many works redundant.

Stendhal - The Red and the Black

Hölderlin - Brod und Wein especially, but much of his work is essential to understand Nietzsche, Jünger, and Heidegger

Marx - Fragment on the Machines

Nietzsche - The Gay Science

Weber - Protestant Ethic
Economy and Society

Platonov - The First Socialist Tragedy. Maybe the best essay of all, particularly if one follows Herder's aesthetics of short and beautiful works.
Among Animals and Plants
The Foundation Pit

Spengler - Man and Technics. This is perhaps where generally conservative perspectives take a wrong turn and come closer to materialism/marxism. You will see the difference from Schmitt's thought.

Mumford - Technics and Civilization

Ortega - Man the Technician. Perhaps the only other work on the level of Jünger's Perfektion.
Meditations on Hunting. The other side of perfected technology.
The Sportive Origin of the State. The unknown heir to Nietzsche.

FG Jünger - Die Perfektion der Technik
Maschine und Eigentum. The second book of Perfektion.
Griechische Mythen. Essential if you are going to have any idea what Hölderlin or Ernst Jünger are talking about.

Ernst Niekisch - Regarding Ernst Jünger's "The Worker". This will be better for most people. Without an excellent background you will get filtered by Jünger, and even then...

Ernst Jünger - The Worker
Total Mobilisation
The Machine. Far easier than The Worker as well, but does not get to the essential questions.
The Forest Passage
Maxima-Minima
The Glass Bees
An der Zeitmauer
Eumeswil

Heidegger - The Question Concerning Technology

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rq1-_UPwYSM
https://youtu.be/_YeITW9A8Rk

>>14999013
It is here that we can situate Austrian economics. It is essentially an attempt to return to the romanticism of economics after its defeat, hence its qualities of pure rationalism. Its function is the same, an elimination of the political sphere, and yet somehow it fails to recognise that this was the modern project all along. What Schmitt attempted was a continuation of politics within the modern means of being, after its death, and this contradicts the purely economic position which can only understand politics as a negation. Strangely, it is the economic position that keeps the dead politic alive: it comes to struggle only with death because it has descended into dead territory, and so cannot imagine anything else.

As form the economy eliminates its own sense of itself as shapes and figures, it is an accumulation through destruction - the exchange of only that which can never be exchanged. The communist understands being as the human finding freedom as he is crushed into mathematical shapes by the industrial process. The liberal views this as a necessary distancing effect, as merely the means of its guarantee of its security and liberty for all beings - thus its insistence on economic determination while never questioing the industrial process through which it is mobilised. The world is itself a type to be leveled, and so too the fulcrum that leverages its weights for measure.

It is in this that we see the unifying power of work, even in its tortuous forms. Man eliminates all quality from himself that is not equivalent to the leveling of earth processes. He is his own force measurement, and what resides in the territory of Satanic mills is his defeat of Kantian limits. The entire world is pounded flat beneath the greatest drop forge, welding together what the mills of heaven had taken so long to destroy.

The bourgeois position of economy eliminates this perspective and seeks a return to the political romanticism of dead aesthetics. An impossibility. Thus we see the return of technology as a monstrous form defeating all economic reason and material. The economists appear incapable of reconciling with this shift, turning towards a deep pessimism and irrationality in a desperate attempt to salvage their relation to being.

All that remains is dead labour, but as its metaphysical type: brutalism erased the sacrifices of worker attrition from the face of the earth, and then the bourgeoisie reappeared in its coffers as the war became total. The eyes of the economic mind appear unpainted, as in the minor figures hidden in monuments of ruin.

https://youtu.be/Dn4qjTVT4j8
https://youtu.be/6ys1Tz4albw

The inability to really build, just as the inadequacy for a real economy, is thus closely connected with the variability of means. One must, however, be clear about the fact that this variability does not exist [194] in itself, but that it represents nothing other than a sign of the fact that technology has not yet been brought to stand in an unambiguous relationship of service – or, in other words, that dominion has not yet been realised. However, we called this realisation the final task upon which the technological process is based.

Once this task is fulfilled, then variability shall also be replaced by the permanence of means, that is, revolutionary means become legitimate. Technology is the mobilization of the world by the form of the worker; the first chapter of this mobilization is necessarily of a destructive nature. After the completion of this process, the form of the worker will appear, with respect to constructive activity, as the chief architect. Then it will certainly be possible again to build in monumental styles – and all the more so since the purely quantitative efficiency of means will exceed every historical norm.

What is missing from our buildings is precisely that form, that metaphysics, that true greatness which cannot be enforced through any effort, not by the will to power, nor by the will to faith. We live in one of those strange periods in which dominion both no longer exists, and does not exist yet. Nevertheless, it can still be said that the zero-point has already been surpassed. This suggests {182} that we have entered that chapter of the technological process in which technology makes itself available for large and daring plans. Admittedly, these plans are still variable in themselves, as well as being entangled in an extended competition – we are still far from entering the final, crucial phase. It is important, however, that the plan is not represented in human consciousness as the decisive form, but as a means to an end. In it is expressed a process for which the workshop character of our world is apt. Correspondingly, the presumptuous language of progress is replaced by a new modesty – by [195] the modesty of a generation which has given up the pretence that it is in possession of unassailable values.