Why do people claim that Evola was a Fascist philosopher, when he was opposed to it and criticized it

Why do people claim that Evola was a Fascist philosopher, when he was opposed to it and criticized it.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicherheitsdienst
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola#Fascism
juliusevola.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/9-fascism-viewed-from-the-right.pdf
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola#The_Third_Reich
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Evola was the first Transgender Socialist

He was the most right wing you can get, and for most people fascists are the most right wing.

Fascism is confusing, I don't think I know what Fascism even is, first it was Futurism mixed with national syndicalism with lot of left-wing policies, then it was more right-wing Musollini stile Socialism and state worship, then it was Hitler's aryan worship and people instead of state, then it was Belgian monarchist Rexism, then Mosley reformed democracy kind of Fascism. I don't understand how can all those ideologies be called Fascism and why did all of them call themselves that?

It is confusing because people call Nazism and Mussolini's Italy "fascist" (as well as everything else remotely elitist and anti-democratic). This is because political discourse is so low-level today. NAzism and Italian Fascism were fundamentally different because the former was based on the Volk and the latter on the State--they are almost opposites in this respect (whether the State reflects the masses or moulds them).

>expecting people who use Fascist as a meaningless epithet to understand anything about philosophy
They don't even understand Marx or Deleuze or the people they claim to represent.

Yeah, but all of them were different and they themselves said they were Fascism, Mosley consider himself Fascist, Leon Degralle too even though Mosely was for freedom of speech and wanted to reform democracy instead of abolishing it, Degralle was just a monarchist. it seems like even Italian Fascism went through different styles and evolution, lot of people abandoned Fascism later, like Futurist Marinetti. it's not just what people call it today, it was still confusing back then.

No, even on Sup Forums, people who identify as Fascist call Evola a Fascist.

>No, even on Sup Forums, people who identify as Fascist
These people are likely as retarded as the Leftists, if less delusional

This guy is a delusion retard, just like the people who like him. Have you actually read him? Maybe you just like him because he was the first to be spiritual, and not religious. Lol

He was sometimes being a retard, but I don't think he overall was. still irrelevant to my point.

Most political ideologies vary a lot in practice and fascism is painted with a vague brush.

Fairs enough. what would you say is core of Fascism, what united all of these ideologies the most?

He criticized Italian Fascism as he considered it was not extreme enough and lacked racial beliefs. He ended up throwing his lot in with Germany. He was arrested years later, was put before a caught and accused of being a Fascist, he emphatically denied being a Fascist and instead refereed to himself as a "super Fascist".

So technically you're correct, he wasn't a Fascist, he was Super Fascist

He talks about how special it is to drunkenly walk on frozen ice, wow so deep. Maybe horse show theory is actually true, and people on the far right are actually as dumb as those on the far left. Who are all these faggots that think they're so important that they can enforce their opinions on me? I'm eating tendies rn

But far-right is ultimate NEET ideology, you can be a NEET aristocrat.

Sources, now.

I know Evola and this sounds like complete bullshit, especially "he ended up throwing his lot in with Germany".

>was not extreme enough and lacked racial beliefs. He ended up throwing his lot in with Germany.

Not really. He constantly and stridently criticised Nazi racial beliefs and was closer to Mussolini in this regard than the National Socialists.

Generally speaking he thought that the doctrine of Italian fascism was superior to National Socialism, but that the Germans had much better material to build on than the Italians, who lacked the same foundations. He thought both were still too plebeian and mass-orientated, and particularly disliked the plebeian materialist orientation of the National Socialists--he was more drawn to the thinkers of the German Revolutionary movement than to Nazis.

t. retarded Mutt pleb.

Nothing is more retarded than the Americanist ideology of "muh freedom", which is utterly monomaniacal, philistine, and liable to manipulation by corrupt and downward-pressing influences.

It is bullshit.

Read A Squire's Trial by Iron March. Fascism isnt a type of government, its a worldview that Italy, Germany, and others used to build a type of government.

You obviously have no idea and have barely read up on him, much like OP.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola

>Finding Italian fascism too compromising, Evola began to seek recognition in Nazi Germany.

>During his trial in 1951, Evola denied being a fascist and instead referred to himself as a "superfascist".

>Evola spent World War II working for the Sicherheitsdienst

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicherheitsdienst

>
Wrong, he only criticized there biological materialism, he still was a "racist" who followed the principle of Aryans being the masterrace.

see

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola#Fascism

>Evola's first published political work was an anti-fascist piece in 1925. In this work, Evola called Italy's fascist movement a "laughable revolution," based on empty sentiment and materialistic concerns. He applauded Mussolini's anti-bourgeois orientation and his goal of making Italian citizens into hardened warriors, but criticized Fascist populism, party politics, and elements of leftism that he saw in the fascist regime. Evola saw Mussolini's Fascist Party as possessing no cultural or spiritual foundation. He was passionate about infusing it with these elements in order to make it suitable for his ideal conception of Übermensch culture which, in Evola's view, characterized the imperial grandeur of pre-Christian Europe.[4] He expressed anti-nationalist sentiment, stating that to become “truly human,” one would have to “overcome brotherly contamination” and “purge oneself” of the feeling that one is united with others “because of blood, affections, country or human destiny.” He also opposed the futurism that Italian fascism was aligned with, along with the "plebeian" nature of the movement.[16]:86 Accordingly, Evola launched the journal La Torre (The Tower), to voice his concerns and advocate for a more elitist fascism.[7] Evola's ideas were poorly received by the fascist mainstream as it stood at the time of his writing.[18]

>In May, 1951, Evola was arrested and charged with promoting the revival of the Fascist Party, and of glorifying Fascism. Defending himself at trial, Evola stated that his work belonged to a long tradition of anti-democratic writers who certainly could be linked to fascism—at least fascism interpreted according to certain Evolian criteria—but who certainly could not be identified with the Fascist regime under Mussolini. Evola then declared that he was not a Fascist but a ‘superfascist’. He was acquitted.[8]

juliusevola.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/9-fascism-viewed-from-the-right.pdf

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola#The_Third_Reich

>Evola took issue with Nazi populism and biological materialism. SS authorities initially rejected Evola's ideas as supranational and aristocratic though he was better received by members of the conservative revolutionary movement.[10] The Nazi Ahnenerbe reported that many considered his ideas to be pure “fantasy” which ignored “historical facts.”[7]. Evola admired Heinrich Himmler, whom he knew personally,[7] but he had reservations about Adolf Hitler because of Hitler's reliance on Völkisch nationalism.[5] Himmler's Schutzstaffel ("SS") kept a dossier on Evola—dossier document AR-126 described his plans for a "Roman-Germanic Imperium" as "utopian" and described him as a "reactionary Roman," whose goal was an "insurrection of the old aristocracy against the modern world." The document recommended that the SS "stop his effectiveness in Germany" and provide him with no support, particularly because of his desire to create a "secret international order".[5][48][49]

Mussolini did talk with Evola and I think he was planning to move closer to his ideas though.

>"he ended up throwing his lot in with Germany".
Evola fled Italy and went to Germany out of necessity when the Italian fascist government fell. He went to work for the Ahnenerbe at some desk job. He returned to Rome when the Germans liberated.

That said, he was rejected by Mussolini to turn 'his' fascist movement into something more traditional. So indeed in Evola's view Italian fascism was 'compromising'. Evola always saw it as stepping stone and not an endpoint.

>along with the "plebeian" nature of the movement
EVOLA IS LITERALLY INCOMPATIBLE WITH ANY MASS MOVEMENT BY DEFINITION

PLEBS CAN NEVER BE ARISTOCRATS, HE AN ABSOLUTIST ELITIST PURIST, DISDAIN FOR APPROXIMATIONS

Futurism is really retarded, Ideas are terrible and the art is terrible too, it looks like ugly soviet art, Musscuck should have purged Futurists.

but Evola was a "heretic" himself, I don't think he would approve of that.

The real mutts will be the new royal children

Evola was kinda close to Mussolini. Mussolini praised Evola's "Synthesis of the Doctrine of Race" and invited Evola to talk. Later, Evola launched a jornal with Mussolini backing. When Mussolini was freed from prison Evola was one of the first persons on greet him. He also followed Benito to the Saló Republic more by Mussolini's friendship than to any kind of "loyalty" to fascism.

So if even people as crazy as the Ahnenerbe thought Evola was total fantasy, what does that say about those who like him? You're not better than anybody, you're just a conceited closet homosexual

>the amerishit critizing Evola
You have to be 18+ to post here.

Instead of trying to convince me you merely drop insults and post a quote you agree with, made me laugh irl. I thought a fascist would be stronger that. I guess you're not as powerful as you say, which is why you embrace a failed ideology spewing the same nonsense as the Marxists when criticized

Nice meme flag btw

I thought it was pretty funny how "Heathen Imperialism" wasn't taken in full by Mussolini but he did use it to threaten the pope. I think there's something very special about Evola's writings, and his works were more than a little bit ahead of his time. I think the spiritual devolution necessary for a true return had not yet taken place and his influence won't be seen quite possibly for another century.

>Ahnenerbe thought Evola was total fantasy
And? Explain to me how that is even an argument.
>you're just a conceited closet homosexual
There aren't an argument here either.
>a fascist
Wrong.
>Instead of trying to convince me
I don't have to, especially when you aren't trying to convince me either.

Then don't be a 'mass movement' in the sense that the leader is part of the mass. He even states himself in his works that the spiritual elites will always rise from, and lead, the masses, and that this is how aristocracies have always formed.

He wouldn't, the filename is retarded. The "aristocracy" during medieval times had already been degenerated through some elements of the Christian ideals which had been absorbed into them, and the presence of papal supremacy.

Well duh, just here for a laugh. Evola was an autist, just like you
And his teachings already reach their peak popularity, all of whose allies died with Pinochet

If Evola were alive today, he'd reject the Alt-Right and embrace Neo-reaction.

Evola wasn't a fascist, he perceived fascism as a step in the right direction, but also thought people like Hitler, Mussolini etc. still had a long way to go before the world of Tradition could emerge.

Oh, and that's before he became disillusioned with both movements, though I'd argue he probably perceived Himmler's Wewelsburg stuff as legit. Given he ended the war in Vienna, he was probably still pro-Nazi, at least a little bit.

Hes pro nazi in so much as they were able to threaten the modern world. His end game was an international cabal of aristocrats to emerge

evola had some good points but overall i cant stand his cucky monarchist view-points and his stupid catholicuck philosophy.
its exactly stupid monarchists that turned the people against the state because they were out of touch with reality and the real problems of the people were never their concern. monarchists are the lowest scumm together with papist scum. Evola was also inconsistant in his world views and i never took him seriously. fuck monarchists and fuck papist scum.

>muh wikipedia

Try reading his "Notes on the Third Reich": there was a tonne he criticised about Nazi Germany; you haven't got a clue what you're babbling about.

>he only criticized there biological materialism, he still was a "racist" who followed the principle of Aryans being the masterrace

That is a complete contradiction. Their "master race" Germanicism and Nordicism WAS their "biological materialism"--his entire conception of Aryan included Poles, whose treatment by Nazis he denigrated (and their attitude to the people to the East of them in general), and was more of a spiritual rather than biological concept. He basically thought Hitler was a pleb in his mentality and approach, which he often likened to the primitive tribe worshipping the totem.

Definitely sounds like "throwing his lot in with Germany /s

As I said, it was the Germany Revolutionary intellectual movement that he had his close affinities with, not the National Socialists, who he saw as a possible useful tool, at best

This.

Autism is our strength. you have revealed yourself to be a filthy normie, kys.

He also despised Nazi centralisation, which he thought undermined the organic structure of a culture/people that still had one.

He was pro-Nazi in that he preferred the Axis powers to the Allied powers by a considerable margin. He saw them only as a means, not an end.

>cucky monarchist view-points
As far as I know, Evola thought that modern kings were bourgeois kings and consequently decadent and untraditional. That made him conclude monarchy wasn't an option to solve the current state of affairs.

>his stupid catholicuck philosophy.
Guénon thought Catholicism could work, Evola was strongly against that idea. Evola said that medieval Catholicism were traditional due to its pagan influence but eventually lost it's pagan characteristics and turn in christcuckery AKA modern christianity. He said that degradation was irreversible and people should go ahead without that.

>he'd reject the Alt-Right
Of course
>and embrace Neo-reaction
No.