/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15071624]

>The Anarch is the positive counterpart of the anarchist.

>I am an anarch – not because I despise authority, but because I need it. Likewise, I am not a nonbeliever, but a man who demands something worth believing in.

>The Anarch is to the anarchist, what the monarch is to the monarchist.

What did he mean by this?

[Anonymous No.15071636]

>>15071624
What would a modern day Junger do with his life in 2020? Would he join the army if he was about to graduate college?

[Anonymous No.15071661]

>>15071636
I don't think he would find modern military life that interesting. He described WW2 as a huge traffic jam.

[Anonymous No.15071689]

>>15071661
I agree. So what would he do then? I see him heralded as often as someone who remained and flourished a noble aristocrat during modernity, but I'm not sure how he would do it now.

Maybe Eumeswil has the answers to this. I haven't read it. Maybe some anon can chime in about it.

[Anonymous No.15071723]

>>15071689
His father was rich. He would've probably been an adventurer-explorer-writer.

[Anonymous No.15071748]

>>15071723

[Anonymous No.15071780]

>>15071748
t. doesn't know anything about adventuring

[Anonymous No.15071789]

>>15071780
Who the fuck "adventures" in 2020? What's left to explore?

[Anonymous No.15071801]

>>15071624
/M8UpmE7

[Anonymous No.15071838]

>>15071789
Or are you retarded? All that vast land untouched by either civilization or tourists in Africa and South America and you say "there's not a single place to explore".

[Anonymous No.15071856]

>>15071789
>What's left to explore?
your suburban small-souled narrow-mindedness is showing

[Anonymous No.15071866]

>>15071636
He would be a NEET who sits in his room and plays touhou all day
That’s what all the modern day aristocrats of the soul do

[Anonymous No.15071880]

>>15071838
>All that vast land untouched by either civilization or tourists in Africa and South America and you say "there's not a single place to explore".
Who are the people who do this? How do I get in contact with them? Books on this topic?

[Anonymous No.15071898]

>>15071838
>All that vast land untouched by either civilization or tourists in Africa and South America
does not exist.

[Anonymous No.15071958]

>The Anarch is to the anarchist, what the monarch is to the monarchist.
I don't get it. Does he mean the ideal that an anarchist strives for? The leader of an anarchist movement/society? Another anarchist? A practicing anarchist? The anarchist collective?

[Anonymous No.15071968]

>>15071856

[Anonymous No.15071989]

>>15071636
>What would a modern day Junger do with his life in 2020?
Not join the military. There is not a single nation in the west who has maintained a degree of respectability. Armies are not longer the safekeeper of their citizens and monarchs but the safekeepers of the oligarchs and their interests. If there ever was a difference in the object of the military, neoliberalism utterly annihilated it

[Anonymous No.15072056]

>>15071989
So is he a NEET in 2020?

[Anonymous No.15072069]

>>15071880
>>15071898
There are places, but generally as soon as they are found out they get posted on social media and then hipsters swarm them.
I'm assuming all the adventure bros have never actually gone on big hiking trips. It's basically ruined now with digital hipsters.

[Anonymous No.15072082]

>>15072069
What about exploring the underworld of cities, the globalist elite? BAP says this is the next frontier

[Anonymous No.15072247]

>>15072082
As in the criminal element, or metaphysically speaking? Psychogeography is a fairly old idea, and strangely enough has only been kept alive by leftist elements. There is an incredible shift happening in cities now, particularly in areas of abandonment, decay, and displacement. Of course, I don't think a leftist could write the Arcades Project of this decay.

As for criminality, it is interesting, and perhaps the only place where the ancien regime was not defeated. In some ways the mafia and similar groups maintain the old economy, an economy of law. However, this has largely been undermined with the police targeting organised crime. Other races have taken over without any sense of noble criminality, and it is an undignified place. Although still much more interesting than the facade of the contemporary city.

I don't think the elites can even be called as such anymore, they are simply players who win the poker table due to an endless pile of chips. No names really need to be mentioned, pick one randomly and they are almost certainly less dignified than the criminal. It's a plastic world and our age couldn't have any Titanics.

That will seem overly pessimistic on the surface, but I think it is a matter of transition. This world is coming to an end, not in the sense of capitalism or liberalism, but the very sense of being that leads to modern laws. I mean this in the sense that Junger and Schmitt spoke of an opposition to the founding of the New World. This has already happened and we are seeing its effects.

[Anonymous No.15072295]

>>15071958
His ideas are development of Max Stirner. Anarchism for him is a personal ontological position and not a social ideal.

[Anonymous No.15072309]

>>15071624
This is one of several archetypes that Jünger developed and strove to embody at various points in his life.

“ Whereas the anarchist wants to abolish power, the Anarch is content to break all ties to it. The Anarch is not the enemy of power or authority, but he does not seek them, because he does not need them to become who he is. The Anarch is sovereign of himself—which amounts to saying that he shows the distance that exists between sovereignty, which does not require power, and power, which never confers sovereignty.

“The Anarch,” Jünger writes, “is not the partner of the monarch, but his antipode, the man that power cannot grasp but is also dangerous to it. He is not the adversary of the monarch, but his opposite.” A true chameleon, the Anarch adapts to all things, because nothing reaches him. He is in service of history while being beyond it. He lives in all times at once, present, past, and future. Having crossed “the wall of time,” he is in the position of the pole star, which remains fixed while the whole starry vault turns around it, the central axis or hub, the “center of the wheel where time is abolished.” Thus, he can watch over the “clearing” which represents the place and occasion for the return of the gods.”

I think this is Junger’s most important insight.

[Anonymous No.15072346]

>>15071898
based retard

[Anonymous No.15072361]

>>15071989
I don't know anon. Junger joined the army as, more or less, an idealistic young man, and found being an unambitious member of the officer class personally agreeable when the state and world of his youth ceased to exist.

I know actually quite a few men who joined to fight the WAR ON TERRORISM then became disillusioned, gave up on their youthful fantasies of both heroism and power, and found obscure niches to finish out their careers where serious demands wouldn't be made of them. None of them have Junger's literary talents, at least as far as I know, but it wouldn't be a bad life for such a person.

[Anonymous No.15072374]

>>15072247
What are some books on this?

[Anonymous No.15072379]

>>15071636
Many people would say no, but I would say possibly, yes. Jünger effectively advocated that the youth become warrior-worker-scholars and developed these archetypes of the front soldier, the worker, the rebel, and the anarch in his works. The idea is that Jünger embodied these archetypes at various phases throughout his life, and I would agree although I don’t agree with the idea that these are clearly demarcated and separate. I think Jünger more or less advocated embodying all of these archetypes to varying degrees simultaneously and the anarch can be seen as more of a synthesis of the first three than a distinct and separate antithesis, perhaps even making the first thing a requirement. I think what Jünger is referring to in the archetype of the front soldier, for example, is more of a categorical idea of one who embodies the principles of fighting. That is, fighting out of a sense of duty, honor, and most importantly, a love of fighting for fighting’s sake. The front soldier is who who he is and always will be because he serves a principle not a specific cause or material ends. I think Jünger probably would’ve had a distaste for modern war and military life and it’s quite clear from his life that even peace time military of his life wasn’t for him, however, given the modern state of affairs I think Jünger would’ve held in high esteem the idea of the individual who strives to live out the archetype of the front soldier, regardless of his national cause, his leader, or state of democratic politics at large simply because he stood for an ideal.

[Anonymous No.15072393]

>>15071958
See my reply here
>>15072309

[Anonymous No.15072500]

>What did he mean by this?
He's saying he's differently enabled.

[Anonymous No.15072519]

Which aspect specifically? It is mostly from my own experience and reading applied to Junger's thought.
I'm looking for a quote on freedom and dignity, where basically he says that man is primarily concerned with the element of freedom but this becomes secondary when his dignity is threatened. I think he even says that a return to criminality is justified at this point.
This is the conflict of power, and rather than a turn towards liberalism, as many accuse Junger of, his figures should be seen as a survival of human types of power within the victory of telluric forces. A totality where it would otherwise be impossible. The conflict of the Forest Rebel and Anarch are thus a means of freedom, when totalitarianism threatens man's freedom, when the forest rebel figure is no longer possible. At the moment his dignity is threatened, however, a descent into criminality may be the only escape.
For Nietzsche the criminal is something of a strong man without other means.

[Anonymous No.15072578]

>>15071968

[Anonymous No.15072611]

>>15072578
>reenactment

[Anonymous No.15072610]

>>15072247
give me some reading material because I'm intrigued

[Anonymous No.15072621]

>>15072611
here's the original

[Anonymous No.15072708]

>>15072610
>>15072519
Same question as this, what part specifically?
I attempted to answer something related here
>>/lit/thread/S15007755#p15008632
Give me some time and I may be able to say more, or at least the same thing more clearly.
As a preliminary, I will say that where Schmitt says we are left to become 'our own priest, our own poet, philosopher, king, master builder in the cathedral of the personality' this will instead be forced upon us. The liberal/bourgeois reaction is no longer a possibility for us, and the death of the landscape precludes anything like the anarch or rebel figures.
If anything the forest rebel would have to be taken almost literally. Otherwise, we might say that a combination of the death of these figures and Schmitt's own figure is the only possibility left. This would explain the mass return to the forests along with the lingering sense of emptiness and failure which has opened up theological questions. That is, at least, my preliminary answer, although many do not like it for political reasons, or the need for immediate answers.

[Anonymous No.15072717]

What he means is that most anarchists built their position out of resentment.

[Anonymous No.15072732]

>>15072374
>>15072519

[Anonymous No.15072740]

>>15072309
Sounds like Stirner.

[Anonymous No.15072751]

>>15072732
I don't see any book titles there

[Anonymous No.15072769]

>>15072751
Never mind, The Forrest Passage was it

[Anonymous No.15072790]

>>15071689
I tried Eumswil and found it horrible and couldnt get passed the first 25 pages (and its practically a pamphlet). I am someone who only finishes ~40% of books I start.

I deeply admire Jünger, love Storm of Steel, and will probably give The Glass Bees a try sometime.

[Anonymous No.15072813]

>>15072309
sounds like self indulgent prattle

[Anonymous No.15072828]

To attempt to answer the original question first, one might say that the anarch is opposed to society for power. He is not opposed to power in itself, but rather the form it has taken on. This is effectively the position a good adviser must take on to effect both power and his loyalty to the monarch.
Similarly, the monarch does place his own concerns foremost: 'he who wears the crown does not rest lightly.' The monarchist tends to focus on the monarch, the worldly power represented within the monarchy - order and law. The monarch must understand sovereignty, that is, power which will reign even in his absence.
The anarch is thus the final dominion of power in a society that has desecrated its form. The impossibility of Antigone to even pursue burial rites. Prometheus can warn Zeus what is to come, but a mortal may not take the same path.

The anarchist, in contrast, is opposed to power in itself. This takes on an absurdity once one realises that the modern form is already opposed to state power. Tilting at windmills. Whereas the anarch understands that he must wait and seize power when it appears, or even preserve power as form even if it dies with him. Cato.

[Anonymous No.15072837]

What does current-day neoliberal coronacene total mobilization look like?

[Anonymous No.15072844]

>>15072751
Yeah, I was wondering which aspect specifically you wanted books on. I drew a pretty wide path that touched on a lot of ideas.

[Anonymous No.15072849]

>>15072828
>Whereas the anarch understands that he must wait and seize power when it appears, or even preserve power as form even if it dies with him. Cato.
So, we are left to just wait in the shadows, preparing while we bide our time? This only works if form a whole new separate community like the early Christians did. Doesn't work if you become a Kazynskian hermit.

[Anonymous No.15072863]

>>15072844
I'd be more interested specifically in the nitty gritty of underground life in cities today. But I know that's rarely written on, so I'd take any recommendations. You have interesting posts and I'm sure you got some interesting recommendations too.

[Anonymous No.15072923]

>>15072309
Sounds like the archetypal Ronin

[Anonymous No.15072949]

>>15072849
It's an unfortunate relation of time and fate. In some ages there can be no great men, one can only preserve what is vital and prepare the next generation.
Even gods can be reduced to peasant figures. Isn't this the law of our time? Even preserving minor aspects of our identity comes at great risk, Liten Kersti left to survival rather than being elevated to nobility.
https://youtu.be/DLGlRQn0JuE

[Anonymous No.15072972]

>>15072740
Yeah, he was inspired by Stirner though I’m not sure he was in full agreement.

[Anonymous No.15072987]

>>15072863
Ah, unfortunately my knowledge on that only comes from being around such people. A long time ago...
The only book I can remember reading on this was one on the Hell's Angels and an undercover cop. I'll see if I can find it.
I haven't even read A Dangerous Encounter yet, but maybe in the next few weeks I can get to it and perhaps post more thoughts. I've been meaning to read up on crime.
Hopefully someone else has recommendations.

[Anonymous No.15073110]

>>15072247
>That will seem overly pessimistic on the surface, but I think it is a matter of transition. This world is coming to an end, not in the sense of capitalism or liberalism, but the very sense of being that leads to modern laws. I mean this in the sense that Junger and Schmitt spoke of an opposition to the founding of the New World. This has already happened and we are seeing its effects.
link to this?

[Anonymous No.15073208]

>>15072082
I’ve never read BAP but I’ve heard that he admired Mad Mike Hoare and I actually think that’s pertinent here.

[Anonymous No.15073244]

>>15072082
What about space? I really believe at the moment that the most forward thinking people in humankind are the ones who will travel to Mars.

[Anonymous No.15073320]

>>15073110
I will have to look for the quotes, I need to get better at saving and organising them.
Basically the idea is that the being of our age would have to be equal to that force present in the founding of the New World, the shift of the Nomos from its European center to the telluric qualities dispersed throughout the New World and its oceans.
It would be interesting to set their two quotes side by side, but my reading is basically a theological one and that we have experienced this shift already.

[Anonymous No.15073359]

>>15072247
>economy of law
wtf does that mean?

[Anonymous No.15073511]

>>15073359
Currency as a mark of wealth and dominion of the state, not a separate power of its own laws. The Owl of Athens on the gold coin; a contract of honour in which only wealth is changed hands, as in skilled work which is a mark of giving and inheritance.
Electrum is perhaps even more valuable than gold, a fasces quality in the metal representative of the state's inseparability from work and property. All work together to combine wealth and sovereignty of all classes. Their division and conflict suggest that the currency has been debased along with wealth.
The black market, particularly in the mafia, exists as something of a death cult of this, preserving some aspect of honourable wealth - an economy upheld by violence in law. The method of exchange is linked to the old families and world, so it is an economy in time and total opposition to the new world. Breaking these societies apart was significant, the leveled criminal rackets of the 'underworld', the racial gangs, and class gangs are much less of a threat. They maintain no opposition to the new society, they are its rightful form of criminality.

[Anonymous No.15073514]

>>15072972
more so by Nietzsche than by Stirner I would say

[Anonymous No.15073519]

>>15073244
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanocallaghan/2019/02/11/goodbye-mars-one-the-fake-mission-to-mars-that-fooled-the-world/

[Anonymous No.15073530]

>>15073511
The Gorgon as an even better herald within the coin: a currency aware of the dangers of sacrifice. All exchange must be fruitful.

[Anonymous No.15073537]

>>15073514
He’s mentioned Stirner by name in a German interview he gave one, but he was inspired by Nietzsche as well of course.

[Anonymous No.15073541]

>>15073519
The last thing I heard about this is that humans would have to be genetically modified to resist radiation just to get there.

[Anonymous No.15073546]

>>15073511
What is the source of this thinking? Did you develop these ideas? I find this very interesting.

[Anonymous No.15073580]

>>15073541
It was a cash grab that went bankrupt as are all of these “to Mars” endeavors. The fantasy of humans colonizing mars, is just that, a fantasy. It will not happen in the not-very-distant future. We have failed to colonize even some of the more remote parts of earth. Even if it were going to happen, you’re talking about basically an enterprise that requires obscene amounts of technology and capital to the point where the human element is almost non-existent and also somewhat pointless as the goal would not merely be to thrive and conquer but merely survive against an onslaught of physical nothingness as well as non-physical, which we already have.

[Anonymous No.15073591]

>>15073110
Here's a Schmitt quote:
"The traditional Eurocentric order of International law is foundering today, as is the old nomos of the earth. This order arose from a legendary and unforeseen discovery of a new world, from an unrepeatable historical event. Only in fantastic parallels can one imagine a modern recurrence, such as men on their way to the moon discovering a new and hitherto unknown planet that could be exploited freely and utilized effectively to relieve their struggles on earth. The question of a new nomos of the earth will not be answered with such fantasies, any more than it will be with further scientific discoveries. Human thinking again must be directed to the elemental orders of its terrestrial being here and now. We seek to understand the normative order of the earth. That is the hazardous undertaking of this book and the fervent hope of our work."

[Anonymous No.15073597]

I've really wanted to read this. It's so fucking expensive in English though

[Anonymous No.15073609]

I just wanna talk

[Anonymous No.15073618]

>>15073244
Humanity will never explore space, it’s technophile fiction

[Anonymous No.15073641]

>>15073546
Much of it is my own development, and I've been reading FG Junger which has been very helpful. His comments on wealth are incredible and simple, particularly in the division of wealth as a being and having:
"But what are riches? If we want to get to the bottom of the thing, this question must be asked. The notions on this point are full of confusion, owing to jumbled concepts. Riches, by definition, are either a being or a having. If I conceive of them as a being, it is obvious that I am rich not because I have much – rather, all having is dependent upon the riches of my nature. So conceived, riches are not something which alight upon man or fly away from him; they are an endowment of nature, subject to neither will nor effort. They are original wealth, an added measure of freedom which blossoms forth in certain human beings. For riches and freedom are inseparably joined together, so intimately that riches of any kind can be appraised by the measure of freedom they contain. Riches in this sense may even be identical with poverty; a rich being is consistent with a not-having, with a lack of material possessions. Homer means just this when he calls the beggar a king. Only such riches as are mine by nature can I fully command and enjoy. Where riches consist in having, the capacity for enjoying them does not necessarily go with them. It may be lacking – a frequent case."

[Anonymous No.15073652]

>>15073618

[Anonymous No.15073668]

>>15073641
And of course, the worker as a being and form rather than a class and type. That is the only understanding that can take us away from both marxist and liberal conceptions of wealth.

[Anonymous No.15073698]

>>15073652
Fuck off, femoid

[femoid No.15073724]

>>15073698
I'll wear that name with pride

[Anonymous No.15074058]

>>15073641
>>15073668
There is also the old quote which is of a similar line of thought: "Wealth consists not in having great possessions, but in having few wants."
And in Hesiod, I always found it interesting that there was great admiration for work, but at the same time idleness should be treasured in times of plenty. Very contradictory to how we view the world, a mechanistic form of work which cannot even sense wealth. The Golden Age should be our ideal, but in a manner opposed to marxism and the modern theology of economy.

[Anonymous No.15074207]

>>15072069
This. Rather than going to "a place" or landmark, journeys are the best. All I want to do is spend the rest of my life hiking across the world like Arthur Rimbaud.

[Anonymous No.15074326]

He lost me at:

>Manslaughter is anarchic, murder is not

Not justifiable. He claims to be truly free, the sovereign individual; if true there should be no limits - especially not sentimental moralising ones like "murder is bad, waa"

Fight me Ernst

[Anonymous No.15074495]

I must say I find him very cringe for saying that

[Anonymous No.15074518]

>>15071624
discord . gg/M8UpmE7

[Anonymous No.15074958]

>>15071624
Read Breakfast with the dirt cult. You'll love, it if you liked storm of steel, it's basically the 21st military experience, Almost made consider the idea of joining, emphasis in almost.

[Anonymous No.15075437]

>>15074326
You are aware that he killed many people?

[Anonymous No.15075472]

>>15075437
Presumably he performed some serious mental gymnastics to convince himself that what he did wasn't murder, otherwise why would he write that?

[Anonymous No.15075551]

>>15075472
As long as you kill someone out of passion/necessity and not out of malice it is legally manslaughter and not murder.

[Anonymous No.15075588]

>>15075551
I'm not sure what exactly he had in mind with that quotation, but I can't imagine he was referring to a legal distinction

Perhaps he did mean passion/necessity as you say, but if so I still take issue with it. A truly sovereign individual should have no problem with killing for sport if that is what he wills.

[Anonymous No.15075838]

>>15075588
>Manslaughter is anarchic, murder is not
I think you are missing his point with this. He is drawing something of an outline of the form, the chaotic that wells up in an individual and overwhelms him. It is not a moral statement, rather that the anarchist denies this freedom and instead focuses on the form of chaos which is a political order.
In regards to murder, it s a matter of planning, and ordered and laid out form of killing. And this is not necessarily even opposed to manslaughter, as he says he is not addressing opposites but degrees.

[Anonymous No.15075851]

>>15071624
He means political authority should justify it's existence to those it asks obedience from, like him.

[Anonymous No.15075959]

>>15071624
An anarch is basically a gamma male, like Ted K.

[Anonymous No.15075983]

>>15075959
Women were basically throwing themselves at him ad crying in despair if he rejected them.

[Anonymous No.15076166]

>>15075588
What even is your argument? Are you saying that you have to condone/advocate murder in order to be sovereign over yourself?

[Anonymous No.15076655]

>>15072247
I said I'd write something more clear, although this may be less so. I'll share it anyways, maybe someone can take something from it.

Another way of putting this, if romanticism is the law of the formless being in the modern world then a catastrophic return will follow the collapse of the normative order. Rather than the onset of winter, its persistence - the cold spring which destroys the planting season. The post-war period can be seen as a wasting of the seed stores, and now we are lost to barren civilised lands.
We would like to imagine a return to romanticism, a Nietzschean politics, yet all that has survived is a place of juncture, the interstitial. This is opposed to the law of strata, the earth formations from which figures arise. We have already seen this in the defeat of rationalism, the material reformed as the Irrlicht. Líf and Lífþrasir must survive by light of the bog. Even the forests have been defeated.

The fascination of the iridescent, which intrigued Junger and yet kept him from romanticism, will lead us into ever more dangerous territory. The beautiful will form into the monstrous just as we think we have found safety. Folk mysteries in lands that have turned foreign, exiled by the earth itself.
The return of the great plague is hidden within the collapse of being. There is no place for it even in the natural order, the technician spirit has been overwhelmed and all that can remain for being is a continuing sense of movement. If this seems vague, uncertain, then it is intentional - Actaeon in metamorphosis first loses his tongue.
"I am used to going astray: every path leads to its destination." The survival of the species has no need of being, the fateful return of the plague is only a question of time. Our laws will persist, even in the grave. Every mobilisation depends on this turning of nature to death.

Without any natural law - that is the defeat of romanticism. Death is often ridiculous: the hurdy-gurdy man barefoot on the ice. And this era speaks also of the return of Germany, from the death-strata of romanticism and nationalism. The left given its formative victory, and now the right must play the dance of death.

In die tiefsten Felsengründe
lockte mich ein Irrlicht hin:
Wie ich einen Ausgang finde,
liegt nicht schwer mir in dem Sinn.

Bin gewohnt das Irregehen,
‘s führt ja jeder Weg zum Ziel:
Unsre Freuden, unsre Wehen,
alles eines Irrlichts Spiel!

Durch des Bergstroms trock’ne Rinnen
wind’ ich ruhig mich hinab,
jeder Strom wird’s Meer gewinnen,
jedes Leiden auch ein Grab.

https://youtu.be/5bzsF13dCok

[Anonymous No.15078097]

>>15076655
More clear? Definitely not. Still very interesting? Yes, definitely.

[Anonymous No.15079029]

>>15076655
Based Schizo

[Anonymous No.15079709]

>>15076166
No, you are of course free to make your own choice as to whether you think murder is justifiable or not; that's not what he did. He made a blanket statement saying, in essence, that murder is wrong.

>>15075838
I'll be honest with you, my midwit mind can't really grasp what you're conveying here. I'd really appreciate it if you tried again to explain it?

[Anonymous No.15080568]

>>15079709
It's schizo nonsense. Ignore him.

[Anonymous No.15080606]

>>15079709
A person might be overwhelmed with emotion and thus, commit manslaughter. Manslaughter in this way is anarchic in Junger’s view because it’s imposed on the person by the emotional chaos which wells up inside the person. The chaos creates the imperative which drives the person to commit manslaughter and thus, he is not sovereign over himself. He is compelled to manslaughter by the welling up of the emotion, the chaos, which imposes its power over him. Thus, he is anarchic but not truly free. In as simplest terms as I could put it, I think that’s what he’s trying to say.

[Anonymous No.15080736]

>>15074326
>waaaaaaaah mommy mommy being free means there shouldn’t be any rules waaaaaaaaaaah
you aren’t equipped to read Ernst. start with the greeks and don’t return until you’ve understood something

[Anonymous No.15080782]

>>15080568
>>15080736
We have a good Junger thread for once, try not to ruin it.

[Anonymous No.15081512]

>>15080782
No schizos allowed here, schizo

[Anonymous No.15081671]

>>15081512
What's schizo about what I said?

[Anonymous No.15081699]

>>15071636
get arrested for being a monarchist

[Anonymous No.15081736]

I remember a quote from Junger's diary (?) about how anyone who doesn't remember Europe before 1914 will never be able to grasp what was lost but I haven't been able to find it.

[Anonymous No.15082792]

>>15081671

shut up schizo

[Anonymous No.15082857]

>>15079709
I'll do my best, although I may just out myself as a terrible teacher.
Here's the entire quote so that we have it:

"They found no mischief in me. I remained normal, however deeply they probed. And also straight as an arrow. To be sure, normality seldom coincides with straightness. Normalcy is the human constitution; straightness is logical reasoning. With its help, I could answer satisfactorily. In contrast, the human element is at once so general and so intricately encoded that they fail to perceive it, like the air that they breathe. Thus they were unable to penetrate my fundamental structure, which is anarchic.

That sounds complicated, but it is simple, for everyone is anarchic; this is precisely what is normal about us. Of course, the anarch is hemmed in from the first day by father and mother, by state and society. Those are prunings, tappings of the primordial strength, and nobody escapes them. One has to resign oneself. But the anarchic remains, at the very bottom, as a mystery, usually unknown even to its bearer. It can erupt from him as lava, can destroy him, liberate him. Distinctions must be made here: love is anarchic, marriage is not. The warrior is anarchic, the soldier is not. Manslaughter is anarchic, murder is not. Christ is anarchic, Saint Paul is not. Since, of course, the anarchic is normal, it is also present in Saint Paul, and sometimes it erupts mightily from him. Those are not antitheses but degrees. The history of the world is moved by anarchy. In sum: the free human being is anarchic, the anarchist is not.”

A good quote explaining the Anarch in his own words:
>>15072309
And your original posts:
>>15074326
>>15075588

[Anonymous No.15082866]

>>15082857
When we read the first paragraph of this it becomes clear that he is not taking aim at murder, nor even the sovereign individual. The essence of what he is discussing here is the human element, that which drives him towards freedom, the inner force which may even be in conflict with the will. Specifically, this is directed to his own character, or Venator's anarchic spirit. Sovereignty is only a concern, at least in this passage, in its distancing of power from the will.

Important to keep in mind is the difficulty we have today in placing the essence, our manner of thought tends to ignore it, we even obscure it through rationalisation processes (this is quite the opposite of what we tend to think of with obscurantism). This is partly what is difficult in reading Junger, he uses the modern style, all of its language, yet he retains the ancient quality of thought. I have a quote from his brother that explains this perfectly well, I'll post it below.

Continuing on with his idea here, he says that "Normalcy is the human constitution" and it is reasoning which gives order to this, allows him to contain his freedom and effectively remain as anarch without any suspicion regarding his behaviour. This allows him to get closer to power without being affected by it, but also what allows him to be an even greater threat. He does not simply allow the anarchic element to overwhelm him, he is instead sovereign over it, controls it in time so that it may be released with greater force when the time is right. Otherwise, he will control this force to prevent catastrophe. For example, the assassin who kills without any concern for consequences: his aim may be to end a corrupt state power, yet his very act may return a sense of urgency to the state, thus strengthening its defenses. In other words, the will destroys itself, it is brought to ruin through the blindness of moral will.

There is a specific quality formed within the individual through his being civilised - his family life and education specifically. And it is this quality which is in conflict with his anarchic elements, the entirely metaphysical aspect of the will. How one is raised, the extent to which one is given free access to become his spirit, can act as a barrier to the anarchic element or even increase the force through which it is released. Suicide can be a result of this, the forceful element takes sovereignty over the will and all that remains is a powerlessness - the element must find its end.

[Anonymous No.15082872]

>>15082866
The ancient maxim "Know Thyself" speaks to this, the duality of being and the overwhelming power of knowing one's fate. At times one must "resign oneself" to the moral will, yet the primordial strength remains within him, unknown. This has a freeing element, one is swept away by time and the form which has become sovereign within a territory. The manslaughter is thus an event, whereas the murderer is responsible for a controlled form of killing - he threatens power against sovereignty, an order that may sweep across the land as a war state. Elsewhere he discusses the death penalty and its relation to murder, the great weight attached to decisions of law and justice. "The blood must not remain in the country." Murder can sweep across the land like a plague, and this may be the reason for homo sacer: the murderer has established his own law and right to sovereignty, a state of exception within the man. The only response is to try and keep this opposed territory as minor as possible - he is left to the gods or sacrifice. Either way, murder will not spread.

It is worth stating again that murder is not the intended focus of Junger's comments, I simply rely on it as a way of reframing what drew your attention. Junger's thinking is not moralistic, and as he says, 'these distinctions are not antitheses but degrees.' In this sense, murder and manslaughter may be understood as types within the form of killing - the element at the core of a man's being shifts from the unknown, the anarchic, into the known. Their essence never changes, however the way they are exerted through the moral will may cause greater dangers and conflicts with power and sovereignty.

The other distinctions include love and marriage, the latter understood as the law upholding the sovereignty of the family; and the warrior and soldier, perhaps no better example of the former exists than the Bacchanalian drunken charge in which death is forgotten. The anarchist denies his anarchic freedom, he turns revolt into a reasoned figure of himself. It is an ordered form of freedom, hence the hardened manner in which he will throw himself at the state, destroying nothing other than himself. A moral will of rebellion which acts as a form of sovereignty which refuses its own power.

I hope that makes more sense.

[Anonymous No.15082911]

>>15082872
And to be clear, there is a difficulty in this considering the final turn, that the anarchist is not anarchic, is counter-intuitive. It is all perfectly reasonable logically, but then the form does not work with the anarchist, what Venator says of degrees does not seem to apply to him.
There is a Schmitt quote that may help in regards to this, the age of the formless in which being must abandon that which it struggles for.
I'll try to find it.

[Anonymous No.15082935]

>>15082911
It's the one I posted as a thread before:
"To a great extent, all ecclesiastical and state institutions and forms, all legal concepts and arguments, everything that is official, and even democracy itself since the time it assumed a constitutional form are perceived as empty and deceptive disguises, as a veil, a façade, a fake, or a decoration. The words, both refined and crude, in which this is encompassed are more numerous and forceful than most of the corresponding idioms of other times; for example, the references to "simulacra" that the political literature of the seventeenth century employs as its characteristic shibboleth. Today the "backstage" that conceals the real movement of reality is constructed everywhere. This betrays the insecurity of the time and its profound sense of being deceived. An era that produces no great form and no representation based on its own presuppositions must succumb to such states of mind and regard everything that is formal and official as a fraud. This is because no era lives without form, regardless of the extent to which it comports itself in an economic fashion. If it does not succeed in finding its own form, then it grasps for thousands of surrogates in the genuine forms of other times and other peoples, only to immediately repudiate the surrogate as a sham."

Just search if you want the full paragraph.

[Anonymous No.15082952]

>>15071898
Of course it does, but not all untouched land is interesting, most is just endless empty shit that is not worth a damn picture.

[Anonymous No.15082984]

>>15082935
And FG's discussion of technical rationalism:
"The significance of reforms in this direction must not be underestimated. They constitute a direct attack against the idea of a "rounded education" (encyclios disciplina) that prevailed in classical and medieval times. The consequences of this attack do not, obviously, consist alone in the decline of the role of grammar in education, in the retreat of astronomy and music, in the disappearance of dialects and rhetoric. This slashing, whereby of the seven classical "free arts" only arithmetic and geometry have survived, is by no means all. The technical science which comes to a position of supremacy is both empirical and causal. Its inroads into education mean the victory of factual knowledge over integrated knowledge. The study of ancient languages is pushed into the background, but with them there vanish also the means to understand a culture in its entirety. The logical capacity of the student, his capacity to master the form of knowledge is weakened. Factual knowledge is empirical and thereby as infinite as are the endless rows of causes and effects whereby it is described. We often meet with a pride in the boundless accumulation of factual knowledge, which has been likened to an ocean on which the ship of civilization proudly sails. But this ocean is a mare tenebrosum ("a dark sea"); for a knowledge that has become boundless has become also formless. If to the human mind all things are equally worth knowing, then knowledge loses all value. Therefore, it may be concluded that this factual knowledge will eventually drown itself in the ocean of its facts. Today the most valiant human efforts are swamped by the rising tide of facts. It would not be surprising if we were to become as weary from this vastness of knowledge as from a crushing weight which burdens our back."

I think much of what Junger was trying to do was penetrate back into this dark sea, to give form and sense to the monstrous storm. This should be kept in mind when reading his arguments, they are like a navigational instrument rather than an industrial machine.
https://youtu.be/5YzEA_uQBg4

[Anonymous No.15083013]

>>15078097
>>15079029
If you really want to see some shit:
>>/lit/thread/S15055503#p15056575

[Anonymous No.15084149]

>>15083013
>>>/lit/thread/S15055503#p15056575
Fuck off

[Anonymous No.15084199]

Anarchism is liberalism.

[Anonymous No.15084818]

>>15084149
>>15080568
Damn, creightonfag. Glad to see you've learned so much the past few months.

[Anonymous No.15084862]

>>15072309
Reminds me of the Tao Te Ching

[Anonymous No.15084876]

>>15084818
Dude, by complete chance I'm the guy you usually call "Creightonfag" and I haven't even read this thread. I am just browsing the front page now and saw this post. Are you still obsessing over me because I had the temerity to go look at the German critical edition of Storm of Stee, ending a minor dispute between us and proving you're a retard in about five seconds, like six months ago? I didn't know I had this much of an effect on you.

I see you're still posting sophomoric essays nobody reads and samefagging. See you in another six months, you sad gay. Keep seeing shadows of me in every thread because of the simple fact that I know German and you don't. You could have learned German by now. It's not hard.

[Anonymous No.15085013]

>>15072082
Please elaborate

[Anonymous No.15085020]

>>15072361
Maybe he would have joined in 2005, there's no way he would go into the military in 2020.

[Anonymous No.15085262]

>>15082857
>>15082866
>>15082872
>>15082911
>>15082935
>>15082984
Thank you for the write up, it has certainly helped. I don't fully understand but I think I'm getting there. I get the feeling that I lack some prerequisite knowledge, so I'll hit the books and hope it comes to me. Thanks again.

[Anonymous No.15085516]

>>15084876
Lmao who's the schizo now?

[Anonymous No.15085588]

>>15085262
No problem. What have you read so far? Someone may be able to suggest a few readings if your main focus is to understand the figure of the anarch.
Here's another quote:
"HERVIER: In a 1951 essay, you proposed another figure rebelling against the established laws of society, the Waldganger [forest stroller], who saves himself by returning to the forests, according to an ancient Icelandic tradition.

JUNGER: I agree that I took a further step with the anarch. The latter can turn into a Waldganger, but he can also live tranquilly, sheltered by an obscure job. Despite everything, he's an anarch. Society demands certain forms, certain ruses; but basically, it cannot penetrate a man's innermost core. And if society becomes unbearable, then I become a Waldganger; and of course, I can just as readily be one in a skyscraper. For the symbol of freedom reigns everywhere.

HERVIER: Would you describes Solzhenytsin and other Russian dissidents as Waldgangers?

JUNGER: Yes, but of course, tyranny reaches levels that prevent me from showing myself. If I do so anyhow, I am forced to slip away very quickly; otherwise, I'd be promptly killed. Whereas the anarch .... The difference between the anarchist and the anarch also resides in the fact that the anarchist needs society, because he wants to improve it, which the anarch does not seek to do. Solzhenytsin is actually more of an anarchist than an anarch."

[Anonymous No.15086535]

>>15085262
>>15085516
shut up schizos

[Anonymous No.15087830]

b

[Anonymous No.15087974]

>>15071661
he shouldve foughten on the eastern front then.

[Anonymous No.15088028]

>>15071624
the anarch is "the pendant of the monarch", equal to him but sovereign purely of himself
Guts is the anarch, Griffith is the monarch. Kentaro Miura is a great reader of Junger

[Anonymous No.15088065]

>>15088028
Like intestinal guts? Lame symbol

[Anonymous No.15088207]

>>15085588
link to the interview?

[Anonymous No.15089814]

>>15088207
It's a book interview called "The Details of Time"