/lit/ - Literature

>>16439661
>It glorifies war to such an extent that it was even used as a medium for propaganda during the Third Reich by the Nazis.
Exactly, what's not to like?

>>16439661
And your point is?

It’s a counter-narrative to an obvious immasculine lie.
And Junger was an affiliate of some of those who attempted to assassinate Hitler.

>>16439661
so?

>>16439661
Junger hated Hitler and tried to make him stop propagandizing his work.

>>16439661
Something isnt bad just because you disagree with its message you sniveling woman

>>16439686
He was against the attempt on Hitler’s life.
He wanted Hitler arrested and tried for treason.

>>16439661
Because it's the authentic war account of a soldier who wasn't a weakling or a little bitch.
>>16439686
>>16439690
>>16439701
In the interwar period he used to call him Fuhrer, though.

>>16439707
Because he was the Führer. That's like saying someone at CNN likes Donald Trump because they call him president.

>>16439725
>interwar period
I suppose I should've specific that I was referring to the Weimar era.

>>16439707
It was Goring that really pushed him over the edge. Letting a doped up former pilot run the Wehrmacht was too much for him to bear.

>>16439733
I didn't know that, what's the story on that? Junger didn't like Goering?

>>16439701
>>16439707
Obviously. Being an affiliate doesn't mean he was in favor of it.
I think he'd hate what the Catholics and Socialist-Jews had planned for post-Hitler Germany desu if you look up their preferred military junta-government.

I don't know why people say that it glorifies war, I always thought that it depicted war as something horrible. Lots of nothingness with sudden bursts of violence and disorientation.

>>16439826
Well strictly speaking it doesn't glorify war.
It makes it clear that the then and current narrative "war bad, everything war bad, nothing good ever come out of war, the formative experience of a generation of young men is wholly evil" etc is wrong.
That Remarque, Owen and the selectively-pacifist shysters who justify a "peaceful" robbery of nations are not speaking to a universal experience which is all it takes for it's opponents to consider it a "glorification of war". Pseud pop-historians say the same nonsense when a work of war focuses on a "great person" instead of peasant horrors.

>>16439826
it seemed more like he got a kick out of combat because he was an adrenaline junkie

It does not glorify war, it jusn't hysterical about it.

Schlock for anxious and lost men who find sense of belonging in "might is right" ideologies.

>>16439661
It offers a unique perspective. Junger didn't love war nor did he hate it - he rather viewed it as a transcendental experience. He acknowledged that the war brought out the best in him.

>>16439701
>He wanted Hitler arrested and tried for treason.

But only because of his failures, not because he was opposed to the so-called made-up ""Holocaust"".

>>16441015
>t. never read Junger

>>16439781
he converted to Catholicism in the 90's so I doubt he'd hate Catholics lmao

>>16439661
It's written by a guy who actually went to the Great War. Hardly propaganda and the "glorification" is his opinion.

>>16441015
One of his main breaking points with the Nazis was when they started denouncing Jews that had actually fought in the first war. If I remember correctly a handful of Jews from his unit were kicked out of some kind of veterans' group because it was assumed all Jews were saboteurs, and he quit over it.

>>16439661
Because back then even though it was horrific most lads thought it was a good time, you find this frequently with Vets.

>>16441015
From "A German Officer in Occupied Paris":
>On Rue Royale, I encountered the yellow star for the first time in my life. Three young girls who were walking past arm in arm were wearing it. This badge was distributed yesterday, and those who received it had to part with a point from their clothing ration in return. I then saw the star more frequently that afternoon. I consider things like this, even in my own personal history, a significant date—I was immediately embarrassed to be in uniform.
As >>16442599 pointed out Jünger cut off all association with Hitler and the Nazis after that incident. He wrote On The Marble Cliffs (1939) as a criticism of Hitler and the Nazis; the SS wanted him dead for it and only Hitler's personal intervention saved him.
Fuck off to /pol/ you uninformed piece of shit.

>>16442599
>>16443231

This is clerical stuff, and ultimately, he never denounces the so-called Holocaust.

>>16443242
As I said, kill yourself. This is not /pol.

>>16443242
His criticism of the nazis runs deeper than anyone.

"Since insane people are sterilized and killed the newly-borns with metal disturbances have multiplied. Even with the repression of mendicity poorness has become general. The decimation of Jews has diffused Jewish features in everybody. Killing does not wipe out types, it rather frees them.
Feast for lemurs with the massacre of men, women, and children. The hideous booty is buried. Then other lemurs come to unbury it. They film those chipped, half-rotten trunks with repulsive satisfaction. Then they show each other their films. Curious forms of life fester on carrion.

...

If everything went wrong, conservative forces are to blame. German youth had no instinct. Hitler addressed boys "hard as iron", "resilient as leather", "quick as hounds"... They were his chosen supporters, a breed of men to be eventually mass-produced in foundries and tanneries using animal sperm."

He wouldn't like any of you twitterfags trying to corrupt his work.

>>16443342
That quotation makes absolutely no sense

>>16443349
Why not?

It is worth noting that the Second World War broke Junger. When I read his text "The Peace" I could not even believe it was written by the same man - it was that liberal-humanist.

>>16443433
>the Second World War broke Junger.
The fuck are on about about? Eumeswil, written in 1977, is his greatest philosophical work by far. I suggest you read it. The Glass Bees (1957) is also excellent.

>>16443433
You misunderstood, just like Evola did. he never took anything back.

>>16443231
>On The Marble Cliffs (1939) as a criticism of Hitler and the Nazis
No he didn't, he had denied it himself after Nazis were no longer in power.

>>16443349
>Since insane people are sterilized and killed the newly-borns with metal disturbances have multiplied. Even with the repression of mendicity poorness has become general. The decimation of Jews has diffused Jewish features in everybody. Killing does not wipe out types, it rather frees them.
This is the exact opposite of the causal relation between the things he's bringing together. It's quite possible that during the time of these things a correlation appeared, but the causes are obviously other than those which he's listing. If children are being born with mental disturbances it is assuredly not because the insane are being sterilized. The idea that there is some set amount of Schizos in a population and if you kill some others or even more will become so is literally magical thinking.

>>16443510
He literally named the enemy in the story the Head Forester, which was a title given to Hermann Goring. The types of evil in the story describe the Nazis. If you actually read it, which I know you haven't, you would know this.

>>16443530
Yes.
Kill all the insane, and suddenly new insane pop up.
Kill all the Jews, and suddenly you look around and find Jews in your midst.
Trying to identify and remove a type is foolish, as the type is in all of us. Destroy the most prominent members, and suddenly you will find the behavior in your own, 'safe' people.

>>16443571
This only holds for social niches which people can fit into, like a merchant class. Schizos are not such a niche, you cannot make yourself schizo, if you're genetically predisposed you can exacerbate it by heavy drug use among other things but the idea that newborn babies will start being crazy because you sterilize other schizos is completely ridiculous.

>>16443466
The original man who believed in a transcendent fate and heroism was long gone by then. What was left was a certain mysticism and actualisation remaining from his earlier experiences during the first world war. This loss of personal strength is also why he converted to Catholicism.
>>16443491
He was a dignified man, so I am sure he wouldn't have, but he "moved beyond it" - or rather below it. Have you read "The Peace"? Do you mean to tell me it's a larp or a deceptive trick of some sort?

>>16443539
>the Head Forester, which was a title given to Hermann Goring
Didn't know this, but it was still a fairly obvious analogue. Wouldn't recommend the book. Would, however, recommend retarded teenage nu/pol/ retards to actually read before spouting bullshit. You're not a Holocaust expert because you saw some infographics there and neither are you knowledgeable about anything else.

The last time I went to /pol/ I read that pederasty in ancient Greece is a modern invention. The last time I read an actual ancient Greek he mentioned something homoerotic, and so did the Greek before him, and the one before him, and so on. It would take someone very fucking special not to notice a pattern. I also saw an infographic about count Coudenhove-Kalergi (an actual relic of NSDAP propaganda). So because I'm not a complete retard, I decided to read Evola's interview with the man himself. Which, as short as it was, still completely refuted the main point of the infographic. How many nu/pol/shits even know Evola interviewed him?

Also, I was looking for a print copy of Eumeswil recently and found it oddly expensive even in German or Dutch. How does it rank among his works? Is it worth my time?

>>16443655
>I also saw an infographic about count Coudenhove-Kalergi (an actual relic of NSDAP propaganda). So because I'm not a complete retard, I decided to read Evola's interview with the man himself
They’re not particularly wrong about Kalergi going by his Practical Idealism writings unless the Evola interview veers wildly away from that. He was just more of a philosemitic christcuck who believed in some nonsensical post-racialism as far as I could tell.

>>16439661
It's pacy, well-written and exhilarating. It ignores the boundaries of chickenshit decorum and speaks of feelings women, fags and trannies pointlessly try to stifle.

>>16443753
The /pol/ conception of Kalergi is that of a mastermind who devised a plan to import millions of non-Europeans to create a new race. What Practical Idealism is about surely can't be that? The Kalergi of the interview is one that has just arrived in Rome on the verge of a meeting with Mussolini in 1933. This is of course the Mussolini of the Stresa Front, of Dollfuss over Hitler and of authentic Italian capital 'F' Fascism, but it's still Mussolini. And it's not their first time meeting, either. Kalergi finishes the short interview with
>"It is my firm conviction concerning Fascism's super-national mission that as brought me to Rome."
And the general character it sketches of Kalergi is that of a pan-European aristocrat with elitist and paternalistic tendencies who believes in a unified Europe *against* the new powers (America/the New World and Russia/Asia) rather than the globohomo farce we are proceeding towards. But he does seem soft, and he lays it on a bit too much with his praise for Italy and the Duce for the sake of appearances. In any case, it was good enough for me to consider reading his own writings somewhere in the future.

>>16443349
It makes perfect sense

>>16443616
Retard

>>16443530
If youre a mateerialist you have no reason to read junger

>>16443890
>a mastermind who devised a plan to import millions of non-Europeans to create a new race.
While I don't think it was this crude or simple, I'm fairly sure that actually is what's happening in Europe. It can't be some capitalist plot for cheap labor because half of them don't even work.

I think it's less about 'creating a new race', or 'white genocide' or such memes, and more about creating a fractured population that will never be at risk of going NatSoc again. Whoever the powers that be really are we can agree they were not a fan of the fascist states and worked extremely hard to destroy them and stamp out all future forms of fascism. I think they believe that multi-racial, multicultural country is unlikely to form that kind of mass movement, which is a reasonable assumption.

>>16443242
>Publicly denouncing the Nazi party when they were unilaterally running Germany
>"clerical stuff"
You're fucking retarded

>>16443539
He denied it himself even after Nazis were demonized, who should I trust, a random retard with his gay opinions of the nigga himself?

>>16443242
because he understood it was necessary

>>16439661
filtered

>>16444018
And this, of course, is all a good thing.

>>16440418
Damn senpai who is you

>>16442258
He converted a year before his death, all his life he was agnostic.

>>16439859
You put it better than I ever could, Junger gives the insight of why millions of young men volunteered for a war that is far more engaging than the dismissive narrative that it was all naivety and misguided nationalism.

>>16440418
Post physique

>>16439661


It's fucking great, and it's a great read.

how does it "glorify" anything? its a pretty dry and direct discretion of his time in the war and if anything it lays bear the absolute worst horrors of the war, especially in the chapter "Guillemont"

WAR BAD

>>16445298
For parasitic non-europeans to be sure.
At least in the short term until China or another virile power wins out over the US and they get treated without respect to liberal theology.

>>16443890
Unironically Kalergi's type was BTFO hard by Hitler in his second book and i'm not even fond of ol' Adolf and he draws direct parallels to balkanized states and the unification of Germany under Prussia to do it.
He made a very good argument that those who believe in quantity over quality and in a democratically assembled EU are setting up Europeans to fail as a world power.