A True Imperialism, a Higher Race

Original Translation of Unpublished (in English) Source, compliments of Gornahoor

"There are other neo-pagan misunderstandings in regard to political matters. Paganism is often made the synonym for the exclusive sovereignty of a simply temporal power. Things were the exact opposite, as we emphasized, in the ancient states: where the synthesis of the two powers did not mean statolatry, but on the contrary, a basis for spiritualizing politics itself, whereas in the new paganism, the only result, along the same lines as gallicanism, would be that of the politicization of spirituality and even religion. The fundamental need of the renewal movements of today is totally inverted, understood as assuming a spiritual vision of the world as its basis.

What should we think of certain circles – such as that of the noted general Ludendorff, and his wife, being truly responsible for similar aberrations – that consider Judaism, Romanity, the Church, Freemasonry, communism all one, because their premise is different from that of the nation-race? The nation-race, equally, threatens to lead us in the dark in which all the cows are black and no distinction is any longer possible. Thus they lost every feeling for the Aryan hierarchy of values and for not knowing how to go beyond the paralyzing antitheses constituted by a destructive internationalism and a particularistic nationalism, while the traditional conception of the Empire, or Reich, stands beyond both the one and the other: it is connected to the idea of a “super-race”, capable of creating and directing a higher hierarchical unity, in which the particular unities, ethnically and nationally defined, are not dissipated in their specific characterstics and in their relative autonomy, but lead to participation at a higher spiritual level. After all, making similar false turns, those circles, which are only German, went as far as to spread the accusation against the better aspects of their earlier traditions, considering Charlemagne, the Hohenstaufens, and the Habsburgs, in their “Romanity”, little less than traitors to the race-nation. Naturally, the force of circumstances and the new European development of Germany are responsible for getting rid of such eccentricities.

As for what finally concerns the nuances of “tragic heroism” and of the “love of fate”, that some among these paganizing circles would want to claim as characteristics of the Nordic vision of the world, it does not at all truly correspond to the original Nordic-Aryan spirituality, but it is only a reflection (it was altered aesthetically to be unrecognizable) of the twilight phase, of the collapse, of one of the races of Hyperborean origin. And this is the true meaning of the Ragnarok, a term of Nordic mythology, translated romantically as the “twilight of the gods”, but meaning rather the “obscuring of the divine”, alluding to the end of a cycle. Far from being about something that can give the tone to a vision of the world, here it is about a simple episode resumed in a somewhat wider occurrence, to be understood according to the traditional teaching of the so-called “law of cycles”.

And here falls the saying, even just in passing, that nothing will be understood of the true Nordic traditions, of their superior primordial heroic and Olympic content, that in the end is common to us, that all the art of Wagner represents the worse falsification and humanistic parody of it, up to a point, to be asked, if that happened only by accident. And the same must be thought of “romanticism”, of all that is wooly, “Niebelungic”, badly infinite, testifying to the surpassing of sentimentality of confused impulses over every higher faculty that many Germanic circles came to attribute to their own tradition, showing thus their sensitivity only for its crepuscular aspects, the relative aspects, precisely in the period of the “obscuring of the divine”, thus of every sinister confusion. And it is so that anyone, who only are considered “germanist”, as, for example, Guido Manacorda, were led to invent the myth of “forest and temple”, [Selva e del Tempio] (http://www.mirorenzaglia.org/2009/08/romolo-la-selva-il-fuoco-lascia-il-lupo/ ) and to suppose a unilateral and fatal antithesis in every Aryan consciousness between the Germanic ideal and the true Roman ideal that, otherwise, that such and author understands as little as much as the German circles understand theirs.

But a fatal confusion also to be denounced, because it can be regarded more directly, is that of a “paganism” that exalts in the forms of Humanism and of the Renaissance, again, on the basis of banal themes of immanentism, the “affirmation of life”, the “rediscovery of the sacred in the body and in beauty”, the surpassing of “theological despotism”, and other such commonplaces not even worth of a Masonic lodge. Elsewhere, in Revolt against the modern world, we made precise what one must think about it from the perspective of Tradition. This “humanistic” view is only a deconsecrated paganism, resuming the most exterior and inferior aspects of the ancient world. While he thinks he is complete, the humanistic type is that of a mutilated humanity, of a humanity that, as Guenon expressed so well, is diverted from heaven with the excuse of conquering the earth. It is the immediate antecedent, in the direction of process of decline, of the individualistic type, in which the destruction already present, but in less visible form, had in the first place to certainly become evident. The universalistic and humanistic leveling, a standardized and faceless civilization, the prostration of the internal race and the blunting of family and national traditions, a deconsecrated conception of the world, a judaization to the end of culture, and so on, are the themes of the fatal epilog of the development started with the bright fires of the artifice of Humanism and the Renaissance. It is worth saying that, according to such dilettantish interpretations of history, it would have been a sort of recovering “paganism and of the triumph of life. And we could continue at length along this line.

Now, all that is in truth “paganism”, in the negative sense desired and supposed by ancient and modern Christian militant apologetics. It reveals, beyond a worrisome lack of preparation, a completely erroneous sense of life that, possibly, for positive action, some racialist currents could beat. Instead of transcending, of surpassing while rising, when it is like that that one fights, one actually descends and is just by luck that the adversary usually does not know how to extract from that all possible advantage.

To repeat, these considerations turned on a pure plane of principles, with the goal of preventing confusions and also to clarify, in the face of them, some values of ancient Aryan spirituality. We therefore do not believe we are showing some particular solution to them, among the new currents of renewal, that come or go in search of new forms of spirituality, nor to make precise the relationship between such forms and Christianity. We only want to emphasize that, whatever are such solutions, it should remain firm in the condition of staying at least at the same level of the tradition that the West, through a variety of circumstances, not all fortunate, had as its own: to not lose attitude, spiritually. To limit ourselves to a single aspect, the same Catholic dogmatism fulfils, essentially, a useful function as a barrier: it prevents the mysticism of imminence and analogous false encroachments from below from moving beyond a certain limit; it puts a rigid limit where it is in force, or, at least, should be in force, to a transcendent consciousness and the truly supernatural and non-human element. Now, we will be able to also advance a criticism in the way with which, in Christianity, such a knowledge and transcendence, not without relation a non-Aryan racial influences (e.g., conceiving the supernatural exclusively as revelation is a typical trait of the “desert” soul as Clauss called it), was often assumed and will be able to extend a rectification of it, taking the movements from heroic and Olympic view of a typically Aryan-Nordic type. But one cannot move on to profane criticism, one cannot challenge this or that expedient polemic and to stray into a presumed arianity of immanentism, pantheism, or the “cult of nature”, or of “Life” without ending up on an actually inferior plane and, by and large, not in the world of origins, as according to the true aspiration of the doctrine of race, but in that of the anti-tradition pure and simple. This would be in truth the only way to induce even anyone who may have nourished the best “pagan” intentions to become suddenly a practicing and hardcore Catholic.

These are considerations that probably will please few, both among pagan and Christian racialists, since we, in this regard, have followed only the cause of impartial truth, after having gathered the fruit of ours and other’s experiences. So that, in order to avoid misunderstanding in spite of how much we have already explicitly declared, let us repeat again: we have not wanted to assert that racialism, and especially Italian racialism, must begin with revisions of the mentioned type; we have instead emphasized that it will be difficult for racialism at the moment to develop all its potentiality as a spiritually revolutionary idea, nor to the point to also posit the problem of the vision of the world. And when that is verified, it is necessary to stay attentive in order to not fall into the misunderstandings and the errors that we here have mentioned, which, basically, would only serve to play the game of common adversaries. In such an eventuality, it is necessary to be capable of putting oneself on a plane, in which doctrinal confusion is not admitted, in which every dilettantism and every arbitrary intellectual practice is to be excluded, in which every submersion into confused, passional impulses and to polemic animosity is energetically combatted, in which, finally and above all, only the strict, precise, and objective consciousness of the spirit of the primordial traditions must be decisive." - Julius Evola

Universalism

"Against Badiou and Zizek, who want to use Paul to defend a generic “universalism” that can become homogenization, John Caputo (St. Paul among the Philosophers (Indiana Series in the Philosophy of Religion)) argues that the universalism of Paul is more paradoxical, more Kierkegaardian (because Kierkegaard was Pauline): It is a “universalism of conversion to something quite concrete (grafting), not the formalism of a philosophical universal (subtraction), like the principle of causality, or a mathematical universal, like the Pythagorean theorem.”

He goes on to suggest that “it is not that all differences or distinctions are abolished, but that one difference or distinction in particular, the Jewish difference, is transformed and in being transformed proves to be transcendent, or better self-transcendent, in Christ Jesus, in whom it is able to break out of the particularity of the first form it took in the law and to trump and assimilate other differences, both its own early Jewish form and the Greek difference.”

That’s well said. I have more trouble with Caputo’s further claim that “Christ fulfills a Jewish promise, not a Greek one,” a claim based on the notion that events can only be recognized as events within a context and “the Christ-event is an event only in the context of the Jewish promise.” As central as Jewish particularity is, it doesn’t seem correct to say that “The crucifixion and resurrection of Christ is not an event for the Greeks.” The gospel is to the Jew and the to Greek, and it seems that Paul argues for some form of Gentile preparation for the coming of the gospel of the Jewish Jesus."

While it is good that Leithart is stepping back some from earlier statements on "a third way" of humanity = Christianity, and while few people wrestle with the issue at any deeper level, the problem remains within modern Christianity that ethnicity/kinship is a taboo subject which Christians are ill-equipped to handle & which they attempt to efface, just as they do in real life. Pre-committed as we are in our political religion to negating ethnicity, it is hardly virtuous or necessarily Christian to presuppose that such is something to enhance. It might be more productive to consider how Supernature transforms Nature & perfects it, and what this means for ethnicity. Also, how and why might this have implications for larger categories, like "whiteness"?

Spengler (Asia Times Online) declares he has no love for the "stench of the barbarian tribes". To which I would ask, have you seen an inner city ghetto in America lately? Or a nursing home? It's still with us, it's just out of sight, out of mind...this rhetoric begs the question most at stake ~ is there anything of value we have lost during our "evolution" out of tribes? The standard American political religion answer is No, ethnicity has no value whatsoever, or if it does, only in an individual context (miscegenation to create someone of "higher" qualities with another race). (One notable exception, of course.) But isn't this intermarriage just another race? How does this solve anything? It looks a lot (suspiciously a lot) like Hegelian synthesis (which I already reject, for reasons stated elsewhere, and violently). Inbreeding and outbreeding are both qualities of humanity which are valuable; after all, it's good to limit (inbreed) to the species. And Christ came to transform & perfect. Which implies that the nations will exist at the End of Times. Which is exactly what we find in Revelation. St. James warns those who would neglect their kith & kin. As GP Grant might say, our particular good (race/tribe) is not the Ideal, but without roots in the local particular, can we ever be nourished enough to begin the ascent to the Ideal?

The answer, naturally, is No. American political religion is a heresy, a Hegelian superstition and legalism, which is addicted to Idealism in the ideal, but which actually possesses immense hatred for all of the concrete realities it pretends to understand.

And Liberalism has weird connections to Fascism which I don't understand, or think anyone else does either. State control/coercion of economy, culture & religion is pretty close to "Fascist", and we are pretty close to the former, here in America, although much conformity is semi-voluntary (for now).