/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17297115]

Can I tell normies I read Evola?

[Anonymous No.17297126]

>>17297115
He considers himself “super-fascist”, what do you think anon?

[Anonymous No.17297141]

If you actually read Evola you would know why the answer to your question is "no," and just how obvious it is. Maybe something like 'metaphysics of war,' but frankly you are a moron for even considering this. Just check his wiki page and you will see why normies would react to Evola (and you by proxy) with revulsion.

[Anonymous No.17297155]

>>17297115
No! Specially not women (my friend tried to “redpill” his gf, with predictable consequences: women will always side with the majority status quo opinion. Let’s say she is no longer his gf).

[Anonymous No.17297184]

>>17297141
Yeah I read Metaphysics of War. It's not like I want to bring him up anyway, just feels spineless to pretend I haven't read certain books. Like I'm playing into the insanity of modern morals.

[Anonymous No.17297216]

>>17297184
Is Evola the first philosopher you have read? And I don't mean "oh I picked up aristotle once,". I mean actually sitting down and reading and thinking, or even better, being formally educated on more foundational thinkers. Evola is literally labeled as an "esotericist," that should tell you that he is not someone to start with if you are just getting into philosophy.

I say all this because I have friends who suddenly got into dissident politics and jumped right to Evola. They couldn't tell me anything about any major contributor to Western thought. It was retarded and made him more retarded.

[Anonymous No.17297219]

>>17297155
>>>17297115 (OP)
>No! Specially not women (my friend tried to “redpill” his gf, with predictable consequences: women will always side with the majority status quo opinion. Let’s say she is no longer his gf).


Didn't Nietzsche have unfavourable views on women and their spirituality? Why are some philosophy fine to discuss and others taboo..

[Anonymous No.17297225]

>>17297115
If you tell anyone you read Evola, normie or not, they'll just laugh at you

[Anonymous No.17297237]

>>17297219
Nietzsche didn't argue against society finding rape immoral. Nietzsche has contributed to a wide variety of fields, from historiography to philology. What has Evola contributed to?

[Anonymous No.17297251]

>>17297216
No I didn't just come from /pol, if that's what you're asking.
I like his metaphysics and it's annoying I'm limited to how I discuss it.

[Anonymous No.17297263]

>>17297251
The fact that you entertained the idea of trying to introduce your normalfag friends to Evola really really really makes it seem like you are from pol.

[Anonymous No.17297273]

>>17297115
Normies don't even know who he is.

[Anonymous No.17297287]

>>17297115
Well, you can, but I'm willing to bet that:
1. The majority won't know or care
2. Of those who do know or learn, the vast majority will be weirded out by the esoteric fascism.

[Anonymous No.17297291]

>>17297273
I had a quote from him on a poster when I was in college, I didn't know anything about Evola I just thought the quote was cool. My RA saw it and searched his name. He was pretty mad at me after that.

[Anonymous No.17297298]

>>17297291
What was the quote?

[Anonymous No.17297325]

>>17297141
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola
>During his trial in 1951, Evola denied being a fascist and instead referred to himself as "superfascista" (lit. 'superfascist').
Jesus Christ.

[Anonymous No.17297338]

>>17297298
“Be radical, have principles, be absolute, be that which the bourgeoisie calls an extremist: give yourself without counting or calculating, don't accept what they call ‘the reality of life' and act in such a way that you won't be accepted by that kind of ‘life', never abandon the principle of struggle.”

[Anonymous No.17297340]

>>17297263
Never said I'm trying to introduce him to anyone though.

[Anonymous No.17297341]

Normies don't know what philosophy is so why even care
I remember when my brother's grossly stereotypical girlfriend threw a fit when she saw my copy of RATM on a table

[Anonymous No.17297346]

>>17297325
Hey, at least he wasnt a super Nazi, supposedly his ideal political system was the Roman Empire. Evola knew wignats are retards.

[Anonymous No.17297356]

>>17297340
Aren't you OP? What do you think is implied by
>Can I tell normies I read Evola?

[Anonymous No.17297362]

>>17297115
You can, but he probably wouldn't want you to, unless the normie in question is based.
>>17297184
You don't have to "pretend" anything. Evola criticises those who pretend, but he also criticises those who proselytise.
>>17297237
The reason this guy >>17297141 mentioned his wiki page was precisely to point out the retarded pseud takes that mainstream society has on Evola you stupid faggot. Nowhere does Evola promote muh rape etc.
>What has Evola contributed to?
Radical Traditionalism.
>>17297251
Who do you want to discuss it with? Even those who read Evola misunderstand him in 95% of the time so it's a much better time investment to just read him more rather than discuss him.

[Anonymous No.17297373]

>>17297341
That's funny, what did she say?

[Anonymous No.17297395]

>>17297373
>don't you know this guy is like a Nazi what the hell is wrong with you
I just played dumb and laughed in her face. I have zero respect for these conformist non-conformists

[Anonymous No.17297403]

>>17297362
I am that guy, you double faggot. The point is that it does not matter how much you love Evola or think he is misunderstood. Your normalfag friends will look him up and be disgusted with you. And my answer to your question about Evola versus Nietzsche still stands. In fact, plenty of major mainstream philosophers could be called "misogynistic,". The difference between them and Evola is that those figures have a significantly wider, more culturally impact, corpus.

[Anonymous No.17297404]

>>17297115
Ignore the seething lefties here because it depends. I can talk about him all I want and it should be fine if you are not socially retarded and can defend yourself if need be.

[Anonymous No.17297419]

>Can I tell normies I like a magical fascist?
gee I’m not sure

[Anonymous No.17297420]

>>17297356
retard

[Anonymous No.17297421]

>>17297325
Superfascista literally means "over fascism" as in, he was done flirting with fascism. Besides, he said this during the same trial where he was acquitted. Also, the wikipedia page you posted is extremely biased and pozzed to hell. Here's an older entry that portrays Evola's views much more fairly.

https://web.archive.org/web/20150310125503/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola

[Anonymous No.17297444]

>>17297403
>I am that guy, you double faggot.
Holy fuck, that's embarrassing for you my guy. Lmao.
>Your normalfag friends will look him up and be disgusted with you.
Depends on the normalfag.
>And my answer to your question about Evola versus Nietzsche still stands.
I already told you that he contributed to Radical Traditionalism and has IMO the most interesting formulation of it. That you find his writings "unimpactful" is totally your problem, not mine. The originality and attractiveness of his worldview is certainly a breath of fresh air for those sick of modernism.

[Anonymous No.17297459]

>>17297421
>Superfascista literally means "over fascism" as in, he was done flirting with fascism.
I don't see how you could possibly interpret it in that way. The obvious translation is "beyond fascism" not in the sense of outgrowing it or whatever (he was never in the fascist party) but of occupying a higher and more right wing metaphysical position than the fascist party, which he criticised for its insufficiently radical conduct.

[Anonymous No.17297481]

>>17297444
>Depends on the normalfag.
Obviously, but if you are talking in the colloquial way that term is used what do you think is most appropriate?
>I already told you that he contributed to...
You are not thinking in terms of the original question. You first asked why does Nietzsche have mainstream appeal despite having negative views of women purportedly similar to Evola. I answered with the obvious reasons, to which you got mad over a technicality of. You can get asshurt over that all you want because I slandered your superfascist icon, but that doesn't make me any less right about the question.

[Anonymous No.17297496]

Also what is the problem with 'reading', how is that a problem whatsoever? I've read both Das Kapital and Atlas Shrugged, am I now simultaneously a commie and lolbert?

[Anonymous No.17297512]

>>17297481
From experience most people won't care. Perhaps people you hang out with will but but with normal people even if you say you read Mein Kampf on the weekend just because it seemed interesting no one cares.

[Anonymous No.17297515]

>>17297496
Yes.

[Anonymous No.17297544]

>>17297512
If we are going to talk about different normalfags I think you as an individual can figure it out, unless you're crazy autistic.It depends on how passionate someone is about philosophy/politics etc. versus how into you they are as a friend (or lover). Like I have a best friend with who I can say anything to and they wont care regardless of how nominally repulsive simply because he doesn't care about those things as much as he cares about our relationship.

[Anonymous No.17297562]

>>17297481
>Obviously, but if you are talking in the colloquial way that term is used what do you think is most appropriate?
Again, it depends. If by normie you mean an airhead pussyslayer Chad, sure, you can tell him about Evola. If you are instead referring to some bugman who FUCKING LOVES SCIENCE etc then obviously no.
>>17297481
>You are not thinking in terms of the original question. You first asked why does Nietzsche have mainstream appeal despite having negative views of women purportedly similar to Evola.
That wasn't me. The reason Nietzsche has more mainstream appeal is because he precedes the foundation myth of l*btard civilisation specifically muh fascism etc and Evola doesn't. That's all.
>>17297496
It's different when you're dealing with a racist sexist homophobic transphobic white supremeist fascist nazi, bro.

[Anonymous No.17297566]

>>17297421
>Also, the wikipedia page you posted is extremely biased and pozzed to hell.
That's every wikipedia article on left/right politics.

The left-wing ones cover all the good and utopian aspects while barely covering the criticisms while the right-wing ones are basically "this is all fascism".

[Anonymous No.17297573]

>>17297496
embrace Ultranationalism

[Anonymous No.17297577]

>>17297115
If you’re hot enough

[Anonymous No.17297606]

>>17297544
Nope just anyone in general you can say such stuff to if you just stand behind it. Just throw in some shitty comment people might give a chuckle to. I told a Jew Hitler made some good points in his book but he sometimes could appear a bit radical. No one cares and if someone gets mad just act like he is anti intellectualism. Basic principle of appear confident in what you say and it will all be fine

[Anonymous No.17297641]

>>17297606
What is your height and DL max?

[Anonymous No.17297665]

>>17297562
>That wasn't me
My bad
>The reason Nietzsche has more mainstream appeal is because he precedes the foundation myth of l*btard civilisation specifically muh fascism
This is totally wrong. Nietzsche was, for the longest time, considered an integral philosopher to National Socialism. If that had continued he would be reviled. Fortunately, he was rehabilitated, in academic circles and therefore broader culture, by the work of Kaufmann.

[Anonymous No.17297670]

How does one become a superfascist /lit/?
What are the main tenets of superfascism?

[Anonymous No.17297686]

>>17297641
Well I assume with DL you mean dick length?
So 182 cm long and 18 cm DL

[Anonymous No.17297692]

>>17297686
Can I have it?

[Anonymous No.17297697]

>>17297577
Only correct answer itt

[Anonymous No.17297735]

>>17297692
No I am quite attached to it

[Anonymous No.17297745]

>>17297735

[Anonymous No.17297752]

>>17297735
Please....

[Anonymous No.17297801]

>>17297577
I'm attractive enough to have random girls on the street compliment me on my looks from time to time (happens about every month or so) and I'd be surprised if I could get away with telling girls that I read anything farther right than Scruton.

[Anonymous No.17297814]

>>17297287
Kinda this, unless you are some kind of weird arts type, that one people expect to be into some weird shit every couple of months.

[Anonymous No.17297832]

>>17297126
Another anglo retard can't be bothered to properly translate from italian. "super" doesn't mean "very", it means "above" or "beyond".
also good job reading nothing but the wiki page, you're really smart.

>>17297115
no. don't tell normies you read evola.

[Anonymous No.17297863]

>>17297665
>This is totally wrong. Nietzsche was, for the longest time, considered an integral philosopher to National Socialism. If that had continued he would be reviled. Fortunately, he was rehabilitated, in academic circles and therefore broader culture, by the work of Kaufmann.
Only because of ridiculous postwar moral hysteria on behalf of the Allies - they even burned Clauswitz's books when they took over Germany. Insane people. In reality, Nietzsche could never be properly identified with Nazism as he predated it by a very long time.
>>17297801
Not with that attitude.

[Anonymous No.17298044]

Why talk about books with normalfags at all.
I remember one time my boss and I were talking about fking Marcus Aurelius during some downtime and it threw an sjw coworker into an autistic rage. I didn't even know this person was politically minded before this. You never know what trip wires lay in wait for you, now more than ever. Read Evola etc all you want but know you will probably be alone in the endeavor. If anyone you encounter even knows who they are 95% they will at least provoke an unpleasant conversation, if not try to snitch on you somehow or otherwise inconvenience you.

[Anonymous No.17298151]

>>17297832
>Another anglo retard can't be bothered to properly translate from italian.
Too bad "super" is a Latin prefix, t. Italian.
And if you actually use super in Italian it means exactly what that anon implied unless it has a clear context that allows for other uncommon nuances of the prefix to work.
>https://www.treccani.it/vocabolario/super/
So you're off to a bad start already.
Nevertheless you aren't wrong on that particular meaning either as much as you try to school others without the basis to do so, Evola did in fact imply that by the term Superfascista he was in fact supposedly beyond fascism.
That doesn't mean he actually was in practice though, in fact if you do read any of his stuff it tells a very different story, or really just look at his history with the regime.
And it's no coincidence that he was in fact processed as a neofascist instigator in later years either, nor is a coincidence that the only people who take him seriously are from the far right, because the message of many, if not all of his books is inherently very in tune with fascism, after all he wouldn't have become one of the great fascist luminaries if that wasn't the case.
Even if you want to close your eyes and cover your ears to the simple fact that he was in fact a fascist collaborator and writer for years (inb4 b...but he wasn't an official member of the party!!!) it's fundamentally impossible to say Evola, with the myth of the traditional noble warrior caste ruling society, eternal warfare, "spiritual" racism and several other theories, isn't quintessentially a fascist writer, it's simply not possible, he himself wouldn't have claimed that he a eventually became a "Superfascista" because that inevitably implies he was a fascist to begin with, otherwise he would have had nothing to go above and beyond.

It's fine with you want to peddle Evola nowadays or want to feel special and initiated for reading his tripe and taking it seriously, but at least fucking own it, have the balls to say you're a fascist, or a superfascist if you think that's dandier and more politically acceptable.

[Anonymous No.17298167]

>>17298044
what did they object to with Marcus Aurelius?

[Anonymous No.17298212]

>>17298151
>it's another no one can define fascism episode

[Anonymous No.17298220]

>>17298044
This one right here. Normies won’t be reading anyways, let alone even hear of who Evola is. The most likely chance is they remember the name as a fascist and even that is extremely unlikely.

[Anonymous No.17298235]

>>17298167
Dead white guy presided over massive empire with legal slavery etc, everything must conform to the twitter blue check consensus or get thrown out
I remember he said the word Praxis in the wrong context and then I realized I should just shut up and only focus on making money for the firm

[Anonymous No.17298252]

>>17298151
Good job, you typed a whole paragraph without using the word chud. Gold star.

[Anonymous No.17298255]

>>17298235
Kek

[Anonymous No.17298258]

>>17297115
you can do many things, anon.

[Anonymous No.17298260]

>>17297115
You just did.

[Anonymous No.17298296]

>>17297832
>Another anglo retard can't be bothered to properly translate from italian. "super" doesn't mean "very", it means "above" or "beyond".
>also good job reading nothing but the wiki page, you're really smart.
I've read Evola, if I made myself seem like a normie, I think my advice was good, because that's what normies will think. I am aware that super means beyond, just like with Nietzsche's ubermensch. But normies will not even get to this point, at the first sight of anything beyond the pale, at the first sight of anything even in the overton window's edge, they will be alienated at best and aggressive at worst. Any mention of fascism, traditionalist thought put bluntly, etc.

[Anonymous No.17298305]

>>17297115
Fuck Evola

[Anonymous No.17298450]

>>17297863
>Not with that attitude.
perhaps, but my point was really that you have to be absurdly attractive (and willing to fuck stupid whores) to pull it off

[Anonymous No.17298501]

>>17297115
I wouldn't even tell non normies.

Convoluted blow hard like an original moldbug

[Anonymous No.17298502]

>>17297115
I did years ago in an intro to Phil class and that’s how I made some of my best friends to this day. It filtered the normies out.

[Anonymous No.17298511]

You'd be safer telling people you read introduction to magic or his alchemy book and have them look at you like a schizo than tell them you read Evola.

[Anonymous No.17298520]

>>17297338
Did they see something vaguely alluding to resisting the "bourgeoisie" and assume he was a commie?

[Anonymous No.17298537]

>>17298151
Just asked my Italian butcher and he said you’re talking bullshit and super means the same thing in English.

[Anonymous No.17298543]

>>17297338
Did you construe that as a quote from a Communist to try to get into a radical feminism's pants?

[Anonymous No.17298544]

>>17297115
Reading =\= endorsement. If anyone gets offended by the mere fact of you reading him they are retarded and probably didn't have much to offer you

[Anonymous No.17298547]

>>17298450
>perhaps, but my point was really that you have to be absurdly attractive (and willing to fuck stupid whores) to pull it off
That's none of my concern, my point is that you should have more self-confidence, bro. I believe in your ability to talk dumb whores stupid and then fuck them.

[Anonymous No.17298600]

>>17298151
>That doesn't mean he actually was in practice though, in fact if you do read any of his stuff it tells a very different story, or really just look at his history with the regime.
Yet, he was acquitted anyway. He knew that fascism was intrinsically modern, but he saw there were traditional forms in it that can be steered to turn the movement toward a more Traditionalist direction away from its modernist inclinations, but there was only a chance. Therefore, he wasn't fully committed to the movement and wasn't a card carrying fascist. In fact, he was universally hated in the Fascist party and rumors spread about Evola being a magus that can kill from a distance. That's where Mussolini's comment about the Evil Eye comes from.

As far as the far-right is concerned, if they actually engaged with Evola's ideas, they would renounce him. He thought the concept of whiteness was a degradation of race, thought the soldiers in the fascist regime weren't kshatriyas and were cowardly murderers, he talked shit about his own Italian people, and was pro- Zionist.

Seriously, have you even read Evola?

[Anonymous No.17298644]

>>17298600
>As far as the far-right is concerned, if they actually engaged with Evola's ideas, they would renounce him

He also had no problem with casual sex, for men or women. His life philosophy was basically; meditate, fuck hoes, and have a physical hobby, preferably one with at least a hint of danger). Dude was living the wet path of alchemy to a T.

[Anonymous No.17298660]

>>17298520
>>17298543
Hardly, even then I wasn't so braindead as to think that only communists use the term "bourgeoisie,". I just like(d) the idea of remaining resolute in one's own beliefs regardless of what the status quo is. It is indicative of actual dissidence, rather than the sort of trend-based counter culture that is modern leftism.

[Anonymous No.17298667]

>>17298644
Yeah, the man was pretty based.
>That part in The Sufi of Rome where Evola hits on the author's girlfriend

[Anonymous No.17298716]

>>17298644
That’s not correct at all. Meditate, fuck hoes, and have a physical hobby? What are you even talking about. That’s not anywhere in his books. It’s such a shallow takeaway. This endless cycle of people not reading Evola getting corrected by people who read don’t understand Evola who get corrected by people who read and understand but misinterpret Evola is getting so old...

[Anonymous No.17298719]

Why would you talk to normies about books at all?

[Anonymous No.17298736]

>>17298716
>Meditate, fuck hoes, and have a physical hobby in a context that points you toward the Transcendent.
There, it's fixed. Now, quit your bitching.

[Anonymous No.17298747]

>>17298716
>writes about Hyperborea and Alchemy
>nooo why am I being misinterpreted
you get what you deserve

[Anonymous No.17298748]

>>17297395
Kek

[Anonymous No.17298752]

>>17298600
>In fact, he was universally hated in the Fascist party
Nope, that was just Starace's clique.
>As far as the far-right is concerned, if they actually engaged with Evola's ideas, they would renounce him. He thought the concept of whiteness was a degradation of race, thought the soldiers in the fascist regime weren't kshatriyas and were cowardly murderers, he talked shit about his own Italian people, and was pro- Zionist.
This is bullshit. All of it. Literally all of this is incorrect.

[Anonymous No.17298762]

>>17298752
>This is bullshit. All of it. Literally all of this is incorrect.
He literally did say that. Read The Sufi of Rome.

[Anonymous No.17298772]

>>17298547
Thanks, man, but I swore off whores a while back. pleasures of the flesh only inhibit one's spiritual and intellectual growth, after all.

[Anonymous No.17298778]

>>17298716
>Meditate
Doctrine of awakening, Revolt, introduction to magic, hermetic tradition

>fuck hoes
tiger, ruins, eros, awakening, hermetic tradition(wet path)

>physical hobby
peaks, awakening, pretty much any time he gets hyped about war in any book

Notice how any time the dude actually tells stories about his life it's usually him either him climbing a mountain, or chilling with friends getting shitfaced drunk. Usually in the same evening.

[Anonymous No.17298853]

>>17297115
I reckon so. People who care care and people who don't care don't care.
People who don't care are the people that you should want to be around.
I used to be worried about bringing up houellebecq around other people I knew, but I got over it and no one gave a fuck, they were just interested* to hear what I had to say about him

* I highly doubt many people were actually that interested but who gives a fuck

[Anonymous No.17298873]

>>17298716
What you're not getting about the fuck hoes part is literally a product of you being a permavirgin and not a semi-virgin/volcel like the rest of the board.

Evolas rolling striving bravery is absolutely a quintessential part of the dating game of any Era when you're an ugly or average looking bastard (which Evola was). Having a sort of primal guts to put yourself out there and try to bang the counts daughter or >>17298667 is something a basement dwelling autistic absolutely lacks the vitality and bravery to do. It also completely ties in with his competitive masculine warrior spirit to mogg the other men around him in combat or sport to win the affections of the ladies, something which Jocular types automatically do and you obviously don't. Evolas Philosophy requires raw Chad Conqueror energy and the application of such no matter what. Everyone who's actually gotten laid eventually realized it did really just boil down to "just be confident bro" and being alittle brave. Dating and conquering socio-sexual hierarchies is absolutely meant to be on the table for Evola's way.

Of course this all makes sense if you come from an abundant perspective and realize that when he's talking about promiscuity destroying society he speaks of slaves to lust. Entirely different from the aforementioned man who is more like a King who simply gets pussy thrown his way for being perpetually awesome.

[Anonymous No.17298886]

>>17298600
>he was universally hated in the Fascist party
Ah yes, the usual old story that supposedly, and very curiously, all of the luminars were actually hated by the Fascist party (but they kept working for them even at high levels for some reason, hmmm) so that doesn't really say much, facts speak louder than rumours.
As much as I admit I can sort of personally believe that since the fascist party was an amorphous blobs of intellectually deficient mobsters who were just using whoever they perceived could further their cause, and for Evola the feeling was very mutual, which is why both ultimately crumbled, to no one's surprised.
>As far as the far-right is concerned, if they actually engaged with Evola's ideas, they would renounce him.
That would require the far-right to have an actual ideology that goes beyond cheap tribalism for neanderthals and discount mysticism for midwits, which is honestly offensive and degrading to the historical tradition of the actual Right, it's also why Evola found so much success among them and worked with them, similia cum similibus.
>He thought the concept of whiteness was a degradation of race
Not really, because to him the ideal race was essentially the central european race, so "whites".
His spiritual racism ideals double down on this when he says that even if the body isn't important (it actually was tho) a jew's or nigger's soul in a european's body will still not be as sublime and pure as the "real deal".
On the other hand, Evola was also a notorious goody two shoes charlatan and coward always ready to shift alliances and dance the good dance whenever it suited him and helped his own interests, he was loyal to no one, let alone himself, and you somehow drink all of that and believe he was pro-zionist when he notoriously hated jews so fucking much he refused anything written by jewish authors a priori.
We're talking about the man who, in a preface of an edition of the protocols of the elders of Zion, said that ultimately it didn't matters whether they were true or a forgery, because they proved his theories about the jews right so they had significance that went beyond being true or false, and now you want to convince people that he was pro-zionist all along? Really man?
You should know better than to fall for this basic ideological razzle dazzle, let alone seriously believe in somebody who unironically said and believed that Guelfs and Ghibellines were fighting over the holy grail or some other dumb shit, he endorsed Aleister Crowley for god's sake, might as well believe Tom Cruise drains the life energy out of babies to keep himself young looking.

[Anonymous No.17298901]

>>17298762
>He literally did say that. Read The Sufi of Rome.
Read his fucking books you dumb retard.
>>17298772
>Thanks, man, but I swore off whores a while back. pleasures of the flesh only inhibit one's spiritual and intellectual growth, after all.
based
>>17298886
tl;dr but you need to take your meds
>t. not that anon

[Anonymous No.17298913]

>>17298901
>Read his fucking books you dumb retard.
I did. Everything Gelli said checks out with what Evola said in his books.

[Anonymous No.17298933]

>>17297115
I have a coworker who told me the other day that he wants to read mein kampf
People read all kinds of fucked up shit
The answer is yes anon

[Anonymous No.17298979]

>>17297126
>>17297832
"Supra-fascist" would be the proper English translation.

[Anonymous No.17299211]

>>17298886
>and you somehow drink all of that and believe he was pro-zionist when he notoriously hated jews so fucking much he refused anything written by jewish authors a priori.
Let me be clear. He had respect for Israeli jews because he thought they held to the kshatriya ideals of keeping the claim to your holy land and fighting for it. For the jews who refused to relocate to Israel, they were still a money grubbing bourgeois inferior race. So, your still right on that part. He didn't say your biological race was the sole factor of your caste (though it does contribute) because in the end, it all comes down to the individual.He even said a jew can have an Aryan soul.
>he endorsed Aleister Crowley for god's sake
He later said Crowley was a hack and probably a British spy.
>On the other hand, Evola was also a notorious goody two shoes charlatan and coward always ready to shift alliances and dance the good dance whenever it suited him and helped his own interests, he was loyal to no one, let alone himself
That's because he had no allegiances to anyone and stayed true to his own principles. He was invested in dadaism and called himself a Catholic pagan to shock the bourgeoise. As for being a coward, that's false. He served as an artillary man during WW1.
>That would require the far-right to have an actual ideology that goes beyond cheap tribalism for neanderthals and discount mysticism for midwits, which is honestly offensive and degrading to the historical tradition of the actual Right, it's also why Evola found so much success among them and worked with them, similia cum similibus.
You're strawmaning. Evola was seen as an intellectual for the Right during his time, true, but he didn't advocate for political activism and terrorism because they don't go anywhere and play into the hands of the powers that be. That's why he proposed apoliteia.

Evola's philosophy didn't remain static from pre-WW2 to the post war. No philosopher's views ever remain static.

[Anonymous No.17299586]

>>17299211
There is no use in arguing with close-minded people who haven't even read Evola. There is merit in reading any philosophy, political or otherwise, and forming an opinion yourself. Just because somebody reads Evola doesn't mean they ascribe to everything he believes in. It's retarded to think that way, and it is applied to authors disproportionately. I enjoy reading Evola as much as I liked reading The State and Revolution, or the Bhagavad Gita...
>>17297115
This way this thread has gone should indicate to you that the answer is a resounding no.

[Anonymous No.17299597]

>>17297155
i managed to redpill my gf quite easy. your friends gf must have been low iq or a nigger lover

[Anonymous No.17299613]

>>17297115
No you'll expose yourself as the turbo autist that you are.

[Anonymous No.17299711]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07Ien1qo_qI
Yes.
That is, if you actually understand him and you're not low IQ.

[Anonymous No.17299762]

>>17299586
Of course it's obvious that anon never read Evola, and clearly got many facts wrong and only posted second-hand /lit/ information mixed with /leftypol/ talking points, nor do I give a damn about his opinions. I completely understand if someone finds him to be repulsive, and I don't think most people should read him either. He is a very bitter pill to swallow. Also, I can do without your condescension next time.

[Anonymous No.17299816]

>>17299762
I didn't mean to be condescending towards you, sorry. You made good points. I kind of spill my spaghetti over threads like these.

[Anonymous No.17299818]

>>17299816
It's all good.

[Anonymous No.17300280]

>>17297115
yeah, they've never heard of him

[Anonymous No.17301175]

>>17299711
Why is this video shilled here so much, this guy is pretty based but I always see the same video posted for months now

[Anonymous No.17301366]

>>17297115
Might as well shoot yourself in the foot while you’re at it.

[Anonymous No.17301441]

>>17298736
>>17298747
>>17298778
>>17298873
For the love of God, read these authors. He was not autistic for meditation. It’s a tool he uses. He also even a Buddhist (or a Sufi) like many have tried to claim. These are Westernized notions of what meditation is, what yoga is, etc. Evola goes beyond at. He’s writing about the ancient metaphysical core of these ideas, not the acts in and of themselves. The same with “fuck hoes”. Sex is a symbolic act in his view, something sacred, with the potential to unify the male and the female to a level of divine symphony. His philosophy about mountaineering was that in ancient and pre-ancient times the mountain was a sacred symbol. The gods dwelled on Mt Olympus, for example. Across the world, the mountain was largely only traversed by priests and spiritual pilgrims with few ever reaching the summit. In the Victorian era, mountaineering became all the rage and the more conquerable summits across the world were had thanks to modern techniques and equipment and increasingly so in the modern age all the way to where now conquering Everest, something unfathomably in the Victorian era, is something achievable. Evola felt like the mountain was eternal metaphysical symbol where the real and the unreal blended at certain heights. It represented something higher than mere earthly life and the world of economy and so it was important for his “spiritual aristocrats” to reclaim this from those who sought to commodify or hobbyize the sacred mountain, rather using it as a pre-historic and spiritual tool of self domination. It’s defining aspect is in its towering heights and solar orientation.

All of this is much deeper and much more nuanced than “meditate, fuck hoes, and have a physical hobby”. This is a man who’s absolute concern was the spiritual realm and who thought that reveling in the material body and the cult of physicality was a distortion - in his own words! I genuinely have no idea how any of you could possibly read his books and come away with these ideas because they are simply flat out incorrect.

Nobody seems to actually read or understand this guy and it’s a tragedy.

[Anonymous No.17301451]

>>17301441
I don’t know why tf I’m trying to explain these ideas to people who want to reduce the guy to /pol/ and RedPill dating tropes. It’s such a profane interpretation of an author who was fundamentally opposed to the profane that it’s almost mind boggling.

[Anonymous No.17301503]

>>17301175
really? It's the first time I've posted it and I've never seen it here before.

[Anonymous No.17301976]

>>17301441
>>17301451
You spent half a paragraph talking about his mountain climbing philosophy without mentioning the danger and difficulty aspects.

You are a self righteous autistic bookworm with no real life experience, shut the fuck up.

[Anonymous No.17301987]

>>17301976
You spent several replies talking about “physical hobbies” without ever mentioning the spiritual aspect which is 99% of his thinking. If I’m a self righteous bookworm then you’re just a disingenuous idiot.

[Anonymous No.17302126]

>>17301441
>named most of the reasons why I said "meditate, fuck hoes and have a physical hobby"
>assumed those weren't why I said them

I agree with the other anon, you're either autistic and get mad when every single thing isn't stated perfectly. Or you're a hyper defensive newly graduated basic bitch right winger that is still obsessed with finding intellectual enemies to fight, thus assuming that anyone is trying to talk down about him.

[Anonymous No.17302164]

>>17297237
Nietzsche advocates for slavery, what are you on about

[Anonymous No.17302180]

>>17302126
You agree with him because you also either did not read or did not understand, or you simply got out of it what you wanted to get out of it before you ever even read it. Let’s think about the implication. “Meditate”. Evola wasn’t a fetishist of meditation. Many philosophers wrote about “Meditations”. Marcus Aurelius, René Descartes, Jose Ortega y Gasset, etc. It doesn’t literally mean meditate like we might think. That’s unimportant in his view. The act of hunting to be just as meditative as sitting legs crossed and saying “ohm”. I don’t even think Evola ever outright said “Go meditate” or anything even like that. Same with Yoga. He wasn’t talking about yoga like people in California are doing. “Fuck hoes”. He outright condemned profane sex and casual sex. It’s simply that he wasn’t a prude. He felt that sex was good and spiritual act. It wasn’t something materialistic like getting a lot of girls or anything stupid. His thinking was along the same lines of his thinking on war. It’s an opportunity to experience something above living. That doesn’t mean you go around murdering everyone you come across and similarly you don’t go around having sex with everything that moves. “Physical hobbies”. In his own words he condemned the cult of the body and reveling in the physical. Mere physical hobbies were of absolutely no importance. He had affinities for mountaineering for the metaphysical interpretations and I already made those clear. Simply going to the gym and lifting heavy is not at all what he was talking about and he was not a fan of it.

I don’t really know what else to tell you other than you’re just mistaken and if you’ve actually read his books, you should read them again. I’m quite confident that you approached him from either a /pol/ or a TheRedPill lens like I mentioned and that’s simply a poor way of approaching his work. It’s way to shallow and frankly, just wrong. Evola spoke highly of the Traditional medieval Catholicism. I’m quite certain Medieval Catholics weren’t running around screwing each other just to get some and they weren’t getting swole for no reason.

[Anonymous No.17302198]

>>17301987
I'm not even one of those posters.

You're a fucking pseud virgin shut the fuck up.

[Anonymous No.17302219]

>>17302198
It’s telling how you can’t refute anything I said. I’m just trying to help other anons who are trying to understand this actually very complex author and I’m sorry if that bothers you because your take is actually incorrect.

[Anonymous No.17302229]

>>17302198
Also, this is a literature board, you mental midget. It’s entire purpose is to discuss writers and their writings. Go find some other dummy hangout if that doesn’t interest you.

[Anonymous No.17302237]

>>17297263
nigga why are you so obsessed with /pol/

[Anonymous No.17302269]

>>17302219
>>17302229
I didn't try to refute anything, I just came by and saw you were causing an argument over pseud semantics.

The people who say MUH meditation and MUH fuck hoes are larping, shitposting or paraphrasing.

[Anonymous No.17302270]

>>17302237
dont talk about the youknowhatboard.

[Anonymous No.17302294]

>>17302269
I’m not causing an argument. I corrected something that was simply incorrect. This is a discussion of this author and his ideas after all. The person I responded to was simply asserting something that’s just not true so I responded. Doing so seemed to trigger some people, including yourself. From where I’m standing, you’re the one being argumentative. You don’t even have a point. You would just have me let these “LARPers” throw around nonsense and not challenge them on it for reasons that aren’t even clear.

[Anonymous No.17302297]

as an italian who has never read evola books I just want to tell you that he supported making prostitution a legal job like all others and that he cared about prostitutes bc they were women who were basically sacrificed for the functioning of society.

[Anonymous No.17302312]

>>17299711
Imagine watching that

[Anonymous No.17302328]

>>17302270
god forbid anyone post on the nigger word board

[Anonymous No.17302329]

>>17302294
If you hold your balls in ice for 20 minutes then you will pee out slushy

[Anonymous No.17302354]

>>17302329
fucking based pic anon

[Anonymous No.17302493]

>>17302328
NOOOOOOOO
NOT THE N-WORD
O MA GAWD!½!

[Anonymous No.17302745]

>>17302312
what's wrong with it