ITT: Post Your Favorites Quotes From Right-wing intellectual thought

“First of all, as is well-known, Valhalla is the centre of celestial immortality, reserved mainly for heroes fallen on the battlefield. The lord of this place, Odin-Wotan, is presented to us in the Ynglingasaga as having shown to the heroes the path which leads to the place of the gods, where immortal life flourishes. According to this tradition no sacrifice or cult is more appreciated by the supreme god, and none produces richer fruits, than that sacrifice which one offers as one falls fighting on the battlefield. In addition to this, behind the confused popular representation of the Wildes Heer this meaning is hidden: through the warriors, who, falling, offer a sacrifice to Odin the power is increased which this god needs for the ultimate battle against the Ragna-rökkr, that is, the “darkening of the divine”, which has threatened the world since ancient times. This illustrates clearly the Aryan motif of the metaphysical struggle.”

~ Julius Evola, The Metaphysics of War

Other urls found in this thread:

pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/04/03/why-people-with-no-religion-are-projected-to-decline-as-a-share-of-the-worlds-population/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

...

Julius Evola on feminism:


“We can’t ask ourselves if the woman is superior or inferior to man more than we can ask ourselves if water is superior or inferior to fire. Therefore, for each of the sexes the criterion of measurement cannot be given from the opposite sex, but exclusively from the “idea” of their own sex. The only thing that can be done is, in other terms, establish the superiority or the inferiority of a certain woman according to her being more or less near to the female typicity, to the pure or absolute women; and analogous thing also applies to man. The “demands” of modern woman derives, therefore, from wrong ambitions, besides from a complex of inferiority – from the wrong idea that a woman as such, as “only woman”, is inferior to man. Rightfully has been said that feminism has not fighted for the “rights of woman” but rather, without realizing it, for the right of woman to be the same as a man: thing that, even if it were possible outside of the exterior practicistic-intellectual plane just said, would be equivalent for the right of woman to distort herself, to degenerate. The only qualitative criterion is, let us repeat, that of the degree of more or less perfect realization of its own nature. There is no doubt that a woman that is perfectly woman is superior to a man that is imperfectly man, in the same way as a peasant loyal to the land, who performs perfectly his functions, is superior to a king unable to perform his task”.”
—

Giulio Cesare Andrea Evola, Eros and the Mysteries of Love.

...

I think about that Codreanu quote a lot

“I received my first lesson in what the religions of the world have discovered long since, that no man who allows a woman to take any place in his life is capable of doing good work. (Similarly, men may be as foolish over dogs as old maids over cats.) A man who is strong enough to use women as slaves and playthings is all right. Even so, there is always a danger, though it is difficult to avoid it. In fact, I don’t think it should be avoided. I think a man should train himself to master what are commonly called vices, from maidens to morphia. It is undeniable that there are very few such men. Again and again I have had the most promising pupils give up the great work of their lives for the sake of some wretched woman who could have been duplicated in a Ten Cent Store. It doesn’t matter what the work is; if it is worth while doing, it demands one’s whole attention, and a woman is only tolerable in one’s life if she is trained to help the man in his work without the slightest reference to any other interests soever… It is true that if a woman persists long enough in the habit, she will ultimately find herself therein. For woman is a creature of habit, that is, of solidified impulses. She has no individuality. Attached to a strong man who is no longer himself by this work, she may become a more or less reliable mood. Otherwise her moods change with her phantasms. But the most dominant mood of woman will always be motherhood.”
—

Aleister Crowley, The Confessions: An Autohagiography

>odin-wotan
lol, sjw hyphenated name

“After exposing the decadence of modern woman, we must not forget that man is mostly responsible for such a decadence. Just like the plebeian masses would have never been able to make their way into all the domains of social life and of civilization if real kings and real aristocrats would have been in power, likewise in a society run by real men, woman would never have yearned for or even been capable of taking the path she is following today. The periods in which women have reached autonomy and preeminence almost always have coincided with epochs marked by manifest decadence in ancient civilizations. Thus, the best and most authentic reaction against feminism and against every other female aberration should not be aimed at women as such, but at men instead. It should not be expected of women that they return to what they really are and thus reestablish the necessary inner and outer conditions for a reintegration of a superior race, when men themselves retain only the semblance of true virility.”
— Julius Evola

>no sacrifice or cult is more appreciated by the supreme god, and none produces richer fruits, than that sacrifice which one offers as one falls fighting on the battlefield.

Exxon / Mobil feels the same way.

“Liberalism, then democracy, then subsequently socialism, radicalism, and, finally, Communism and Bolshevism, appear in history as no more than degrees of the same evil, stages in which each prepares the next in the totality of the process of downfall. And the beginning of this process stands at the point at which Western man broke his ties to tradition, denying every higher symbol of authority and sovereignty; he claimed for himself as an individual a vain and illusory freedom; he becomes an atom rather than a conscious part of the organic unity and hierarchy of a whole. And the atom, in the end, had to find, opposed to himself, the mass of other atoms, other individuals, and to be involved in the emergence of the reign of quantity, of the pure number, of the materialized masses and not having another God outside of the sovereign economy.”
— Julius Evola, Orientations

Holy shit this.All the guys that were virgin losers in highschool in their 20s married ugly fat cunts that ruled over them.They were no longer permitied to go out,to drink.They waste their money on them and most of these unly fat and dumb cunts dont even want children.
I am 26 myself and have already 3 kids,but i know some couples that are 35-39 and still dont feel like having kids.

“Every enhancement in the type “man” up to this point has been the work of an aristocratic society - and that’s how it will always be, over and over again: a society which believes in a long scale of rank ordering and differences in worth between man and man and which, in some sense or other, requires slavery.”
— Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil

“The Christian nations have come to a sorry pass; their Christianity slumbers and has neglected to develop its myth further in the course of the centuries. Those who gave expression to the dark stirrings of growth in mythic ideas were refused a hearing; Gioacchino da Fiore, Meister Eckhart, Jakob Böhme, and many others have remained obscurantists for the majority. The only ray of light is Pius XII and his dogma. But people do not even know what I am referring to when I say this. They do not realize that a myth is dead if it no longer lives and grows. Our myth has become mute, and gives no answers. The fault lies not in it as it is set down in the Scriptures, but solely in us, who have not developed it further, who, rather, have suppressed any such attempts.”
— Carl Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections

Otan
>glorious to die in battle for the metaphysical Aryan struggle
Jesus
>we're all equal under Jesus, all you need to do is convert, there are no races. Give up all your riches and abandon your families to follow me

Damn dude this Odin is such a SJW kekekekek

Damn Evola was too good for this world

Man was truly a genious. I wish my father had introduced me to philosophy as a child instead of buying me games and taking me to the Cinema.

"In a society that no longer understands the figure of the ascetic and of the warrior; in which the hands of the latest aristocrats seem better fit to hold tennis rackets or shakers for cocktail mixes than swords or scepters; in which the archetype of the virile man is represented by a boxer or by a movie star if not by the dull wimp represented by the intellectual, the college professor, the narcissistic puppet of the artist, or the busy and dirty money-making banker and the politician—in such a society it was only a matter of time before women rose up and claimed for themselves a “personality” and a “freedom” according to the anarchist and individualist meaning usually associated with these words.”
— Julius Evola

“The starting point should be, instead, a firm rejection of the principle formulated by Marxism, which summarizes the entire subversion at work today: ‘The economy is our destiny’. We must declare in an uncompromising way that in a normal civilisation the economy and economic interests - understood as the satisfaction of material needs and their more or less artificial appendices - have always played, and always will play, a subordinated function. We must also uphold that beyond the economic sphere an order of higher political, spiritual, and heroic values has to emerge, an order that neither knows nor tolerates merely economic classes and does not know the division between 'capitalists’ and 'proletarians’; an order solely in terms of which are to be defined the things worth living and dying for.”
— Julius Evola

To libertarians.

Final bump, can't believe Sup Forums will pass this up for drumpy and BCC threads.

Ump

right wing bump

Be grateful you had a father to spend time with, not everyone had that man

I am saving all these quotes.

Dumping and bumping

Bit of a whitepill.

This is something that ought to be said much more. The modern man is a slave to materialism, and as a good slave, is enraged when you point to his chains. It's no wonder hedonism came to be the supreme god of the average man, for it is the natural consequence of materialism, in the same measure that marxist doctrines are the natural progression of so called liberal democracy, for that is the consequence of a society whose central value relates not to a group, such as the family, but to the individual, with all its vices and shortcomings.

...

There is only one Lord of this earth and the only sword he has given us is the sword of truth.

Relevant to all kekistani and MAGA fags.

...

This is actually the beginning of SJWism. Universalism is the cancer. Nothing can make a Persian a Greek, boys.

Thanks, I love this one!

NSLF is not taken lightly by the Reds, the Blacks, or the
System. We are not laughed at. We have taken the al -
ready-formidable reputation of the ANP - built up by Rock -
well at monumental human cost - and ENHANCED IT by
removing all pretenses of conservatism and legalism while
the rest have made laughing stocks of themselves and
their sphere of the Movement. A White Man can take
pride in being part of the NSLF. It is the ONLY place for a
White Revolutionary to be found!
In terms of longevity and resiliency, we have more than
pulled even with the closest runner-up to the old Party,
which had been the NSPA [National Socialist Party of
America, headquartered in Chicago]. The death of our
founder and the most severe tribulations still see us today
in the best shape we have ever been.
Finally, we are NSLF because we want no part of cutand-
dried, hard-and-fast, locked-in bureaucracy like the
others. We see the need for absolute flexibility as we struggle
towards revolution in America. We recognize the need
for a certain formality of concept and effort but until we
have the pool of human resources large enough to draw
selectively from, we REJECT any "rules and regulations"
that would keep us from that pool. The rest will tell you that
they are "It"; we tell you that we are the only ones with the
potential - with your help - of BECOMING "It". We are not
among the "Great Pretenders". We are not part of the Sys -
tem or the Establishment in any way, shape, or form, as
most of the others are with their charters, corporations,
leaglisms, etc. We are REVOLUTIONARY!
-James Mason, SIEGE (Vol. XI)

Why, for example, talk out of the side of your mouth in legalistic
euphemisms appealing to the noble instincts of a
handful of Right Wing types while the bottom line must al -
ways come down to revolution, which scares them off?
Why indeed break your back trying to get up a "mass"
publication when you know damned good and well that
the masses will never see it? A useless ploy directed at a
useless bunch. (Or could it possibly be that the whole
point to this nonsense is some sort of personal thrill or kick
and, if luck is with you, maybe an easy living on the side?)
You can't try to do two contradictory things at once in a
too-little-too-late fashion.
But that's the history of the U.S.
Right Wing of which the Nazis are a part in all but ideol -
ogy. The whole basis of the Right Wing was to try and
"hold", defend a shrinking perimeter, shouting "Never!",
anti-this and anti-that. One can only be shoved over the
brink so many times, or trampled and annihilated up to a
certain point when one must admit that, if it was a defensive
struggle that was being waged, it was lost a little
while ago.
-James Mason, SIEGE
[Vol. IX, #4]

I could pretty much cite the whole book but these are some of my favourite parts.

>Rene Descartes
>picture of Voltaire

Caesar was a progressive of his age. I'm more of a Cato man, myself.

Marxismus delenda est.

Fukken hell Evola is a boss

Excellent point about how the Right needs to focus on men. We build a new virile culture without permission and the women will drop the soyboys and Vibrancy in a heartbeat

How was Plato a Universalist?

kek I know. I didn't make it.

Explain further.

wtf the quote has nothing to do with that

how is a persian being greek related to being understood by the masses?

...

...

“Society is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts for objects of mere occasional interest may be dissolved at pleasure – but the state ought not to be considered as nothing better than a partnership agreement in a trade of pepper and coffee, calico or tobacco, or some other such low concern, to be taken up for a little temporary interest, and to be dissolved by the fancy of the parties. It is to be looked on with other reverence; because it is not a partnership in things subservient only to the gross animal existence of a temporary and perishable nature. It is a partnership in all science; a partnership in all art; a partnership in every virtue, and in all perfection. As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained in many generations, it becomes a partnership not only between those who are living, but between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are to be born.”
Edmund Burke

>How was Plato a universalist?
The Platonism. One Good, Beautiful, and True for the whole universe, independent of national/racial differences.

As for Persians and Greeks I'm pointing out that there is no culture-free standpoint. Thinking that there is is what's kebabing Europe. There's no way to be just to everyone because justice is a mechanism of a people's will to power: we are 'just' to each other so we can better be 'unjust' to the enemy.

What was Aristotle's view on this? Apologies if I'm bugging you, I mean to start reading philosophy but I hardly have the time.

...

During the latter days of the Roman republic Rome was expanding beyond Italian territory. This gave rise to non-republican politics. In other words, people with the ambition to become dictators. This is progressivism: Wanting to change the current system, or to replace it entirely. In the historical context, this is also how Caesar was seen, especially by staunch Republicans such as Cato. There is also the concept of the ruler being seen as a living god, which came from Asiatic cultures, and was the polar opposite of Roman culture. This was something that Caesar's imitators found themselves drawn to, and you are probably familiar with the concept as being defining for the Roman Emperors.

Ironically Augustus understood this interplay between conservatism and progressivism, and he immediately pleased the Roman conservatives with religious reforms.

Wasn’t he a kike?
he WAS!

Couldn't the Etruscans view the Roman republicans as progressives then?

>darkening of the divine
It's called the Twilight of the Gods in English.

...

The Etruscans were long gone by then.

>we're all equal under Jesus, all you need to do is convert, there are no races
Things Jesus never said.
>Give up all your riches and abandon your families to follow me
Like Varg does Odin?

I'm no expert on Greek philosophy, I'm basically ripping off Nietzsche's critique of Socrates from Twilight of the Idols here. It's short! Read it!

I know Aristotle famously argued that only homogenous societies could function. To be fair, I think Plato believed something like this too. He didn't know he was the cancer. But his invention of the 'other world,' the 'true world,' is the beginning of Western self-destruction. We seek phantoms like the good-in-itself intead of our own good.

...

I meant to say, isn't it all a matter of perspective. Wouldn't the republicans be progressives compared to the old Roman monarchy?

Maybe Jesus never said it, but it is a common theme in Christianity
>Galatians 3:28 KJV
>There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

Varg has a family and the riches he needs and he thinks paganism helps the White race proliferate. So, so different from Jesus's call to do everything for the afterlife.

>There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus
Yes we are all one in Christ Jesus, but nowhere does it say that we don’t differ from one another.
I view it asa sort of inferiority-superiority dynamic, whereas God the father is immensely superior to all life, including us. We, as a human species, are all inferior to him and we are equal in that way, but we still differ amongst ourselves

>he thinks paganism helps the White race proliferate
Varg doesn't pay income tax and there is only one religion that helps the white race proliferate.

>Amish birthrate: 7.7 children per woman
>Evangelical Christian birthrate: 3.4 children per woman
>Muslim birthrate: 3.1 children per woman
>Atheist/irreligious: 1.7 children per woman
pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/04/03/why-people-with-no-religion-are-projected-to-decline-as-a-share-of-the-worlds-population/

why don't we have more pol related literature threads.

The beginning of the disintegration of the traditional sociopolitical structures, or at least whatever was left of them in Europe, occurred through liberalism. Following the stormy and demonic period of the French Revolution, the principles espoused by the Revolution first began to act under the guise of liberalism; thus, liberalism is the origin of the various interconnected forms of global subversion.

It is therefore necessary to expose the errors on which this ideology is based and especially those of the "immortal principles" by which it is inspired. This is necessary not only from a doctrinal point of view, but also from a practical one. Nowadays the intellectual confusion has reached such an extent that liberalism, which according to ancient regimes and the Church was synonymous with antitradition and revolution, is portrayed by some as a "right-wing" movement, bent on protecting human dignity, rights, and freedom against Marxism and totalitarianism. The following considerations are aimed at exposing this misconception.

The essence of liberalism is individualism. The basis of its error is to mistake the notion of the person with that of the individual and to claim for the latter, unconditionally and according to egalitarian premises, some values that should rather be attributed solely to the former, and then only conditionally. Because of this transposition, these values are transformed into errors, or into something absurd and harmful.

Let us begin with the egalitarian premise. It is necessary to state from the outset that the "immortal principle" of equality is sheer nonsense. There is no need to comment on the inequality of human beings from a naturalistic point of view. And yet the champions of egalitarianism make equality a matter of principle, claiming that while human beings are not equal de facto, they are so de jure: they are unequal, and yet they should not be.

Inequality is unfair; the merit and the superiority of the liberal idea allegedly consist of not taking it into account, overcoming it, and acknowledging the same dignity in every man. Democracy, too, shares the belief in the "fundamental equality of anything that appears to be human."

I believe these are mere empty words. This is not a "noble ideal" but something that, if taken absolutely, represents a logical absurdity; wherever this view becomes an established trend, it may usher in only regression and decadence.

But it is saying that race and sex do not matter as much as faith in Christ. A white who is atheist is looked at worse compared to a non-white who is a Christian.

>Varg doesn't pay income tax
What is your point? Also, how many of them are non-white births in those statistics?

Concerning the first point, the notion of "many" (i.e., a multiplicity of individual beings) logically contradicts the notion of "many equals." First of all, ontologically speaking, this is due to the so-called "principle of undiscernibles," which is expressed in these terms: "A being that is absolutely identical to another, under every regard, would be one and the same with it." Thus, in the concept of "many" is implicit the concept of their fundamental difference: "many" beings that are equal, completely equal, would not be many, but one. To uphold the equality of the many is a contradiction in terms, unless we refer to a body of soulless mass-produced objects.

Second, the contradiction lies in the "principle of sufficient reason," which is expressed in these terms: "For every thing there must be some reason why it is one thing and not another." Now, a being that is totally equal to another would lack "sufficient reason": it would be just a meaningless duplicate.

From both perspectives, it is rationally well established that the "many" not only cannot be equal, but they also must not be equal: inequality is true de facto only because it is true de jure and it is real only because it is necessary. That which the egalitarian ideology wished to portray as a state of "justice" is in reality a state of injustice, according to a perspective that is higher and beyond the humanitarian and democratic rhetorics. In the past, Cicero and Aristotle argued along these lines.

Perhaps. But what to take away from it is that conservatism and progressivism aren't modern. They're part of the human make-up. More to the point, they aren't always right. Most modern progressives would consider Caesar an arch-conservative. He wanted to become a dictator, after all.

It's not just the political aspect, either. Caesar was the protector of Rome's Jews, for instance. And when he was young, he was accused of dressing in an effeminate manner, which was a progressive fashion statement. And about the results we don't need to be in doubt, either: Caesar destroyed the Roman republic. Not all on his own, of course, but it goes to show that conservative factions who warn of the destruction of something they care about aren't, well... wrong, such as progressives like to claim all the time.

Correct, that’s because the only thing that matters in life under the scope of Christianity is attaining everlasting life in heaven through Christ, which is available to any and all races.
The whole white atheist being looked down upon compared to a non white Christain, I have never encountered that, nor have I ever heard of that outside of Sup Forums