Excerpts from a Morganian diatribe. Emphasis added.
Of the major (and even several of the minor) European languages, the Traditionalist school of philosophy – that articulated by René Guénon and Julius Evola…
One of the most fascinating things about Type I nitwits is the juxtaposition of their fervent man-crush on Evola – which equals if not exceeds that which Roissy has for Trump – and their visceral disdain for Evola’s ethny. The cognitive dissonance must be extreme.
…and their offshoots – was a latecomer in the Anglophone world. After the better part of a century of near-total obscurity, it was only thanks to the hard work of publishers such as Sophia Perennis, Inner Traditions, and World Wisdom (not to mention Counter-Currents!) that most of the writings of the Traditionalist school finally appeared in English and became known – in certain circles, at least – in recent decades.
To our detriment.
While this has been a major step forward…
Off a cliff.
…there is still a dearth of original, secondary works pertaining to the Traditionalist perspective in English. And most of what has been produced in English has focused exclusively on esotericism (particularly of the Islamic variety). What has been conspicuously absent have been works dealing with history, social issues, and politics from a Traditionalist point of view.
Compared to Rightist works dealing with those issues from a Futurist point of view, the mass of Traditionalist scribblings are akin to the grains of sands on a beach.
It’s not difficult to understand why, however, given that for a long time, Traditionalists have been operating under the guise of being purely concerned with religion and mysticism, remaining silent about the fact that Traditionalism in its complete form is one of the most – if not the most – reactionary current of thought that exists in the postmodern world.
So, we want to promote and identify with a “reactionary current of thought?’’ You think you are going to inspire revolutionary activism and a reordering of society to your liking based upon backwards-gazing reactionary “traditionalism?”
This is of course a consequence of the fact that most Traditionalist thinkers today have opted for the safety of academic careers (something which Evola noted already in the 1950s and for which he expressed his contempt)…
A contempt not quite as intense as that of Der Movement for Evola’s ancestry.
…and thus want to avoid being called fascists. Their cover has been somewhat blown, however, as a result of Steve Bannon’s claim that Guénon was a crucial influence on him…
The anti-racist, anti-WN, civic nationalist Bannon.
…which has in turn led to some superficial and ill-informed propaganda from journalists using Traditionalism as a branding iron with which to mark both Bannon and Trump (by association) as fascists, by bringing attention to the connection between Evola and Guénon. (And Evola had the audacity to call himself a “superfascist,” so by the logic of the average half-witted journalist of today…
As opposed to the average quarter-witted “movement activist” of today.
…that makes Bannon and Trump really fascist!) It remains to be seen what the long-term consequences of this will be in terms of Traditionalism’s reception in the mainstream, although I’ve noticed that it’s become harder to find Evola and Guénon’s books on bookstore shelves these days. It may have the beneficial effect of forcing Traditionalists out of the realm of pure scholasticism and into putting their beliefs into practice, if academia ultimately becomes a hostile environment for them – which it inevitably will, if present trends continue. Time will tell.
Put your beliefs into practice! Snug in your hobbit hole!
Dr. Wolfheze is not content to merely sit on the sidelines while his civilization is destroyed, justifying it by whining about “muh Kali Yuga.”
Like Greg Johnson?
The book’s Preface is titled “Childhood’s End,” and in it Dr. Wolfheze briefly discusses the Arthur C. Clarke science fiction novel of the same name as being symptomatic of the post-war (in this case meaning the Second World War) mentality: namely, that the rapid and dramatic progression of science and technology are leading us towards an apocalypse that we cannot yet identify, but which still fills us with a sense of dread.
Science and technology - BAD, BAD, BAD! Being snug in your hobbit hole – with de facto anarchy in the provinces of course – GOOD, GOOD, GOOD! Let’s leave dat dere scientific mumbo jumbo to the Chinese, we'll get out in dem dere woods and munch on some twigs and branches. That’ll work out well – about as well as Evola “pondering his fate” during a Soviet artillery barrage and ending up in a wheelchair for the rest of his life. Traditionalism!
Spoilers ahead; if you haven’t yet read the book but think that you might, skip to the next paragraph.) In that book, a near-future humanity is visited by an extraterrestrial civilization which helps to solve all of humanity’s problems, bringing about Utopia. The problem, as humanity soon learns, is that it turns out that it was the struggle to deal with those problems that gave their lives meaning, and having everything handed to them eventually leads to stagnation. It turns out that all of human history was merely a process leading us towards humanity’s real end, for which the aliens have come to act as midwives: evolving into a species of plain, anonymous children, all identical and part of a collective with no more distinguishing features than ants, but endowed with what we would consider to be superpowers. Ultimately, these children combine their forces and transform themselves into a non-corporeal being, destroying the Earth in the process and incidentally all of those unevolved humans such as ourselves – those who haven’t already committed suicide, that is.
This is a science fiction book – and one that promotes race-mixing by the way – not a reflection of reality. But I suppose that to those who believe that The Lord of the Rings constitutes a viable blueprint for a future society, the membrane separating fact from fiction is thin indeed.
As an allegory of the modern world, the parallels to the Right-wing and Traditionalist view of the modern world is clear, even if Traditionalists would deny that “progress” is leading us towards anything higher, collectively or otherwise.
OK – you’ll have your hobbit hole and the Chinese will have their nuclear-tipped ICBMs and we’ll see which vision is triumphant.
We, too, are fighting against the transformation of the world into a giant supermarket, where everyone is identical and meaning is to be found solely through the acquisition of material possessions.
Lack of self-awareness alert: How about raging against a “movement” in which everyone is ideologically “identical” and “meaning” is found solely through the mindless chanting of retarded dogma?
In the second decade of the 21st Century it is clear, even to the most simple-minded…
Thus, even to Type I "activists."
But one thing about this new audience is certain: it will not include the old audience. The old audience will cling to its complementary comforts of infotainment consumption and academic snobbery…
Counter-Currents complaining about “academic snobbery?” The pot calling the kettle black, indeed.
For Dr. Wolfheze, the end of the Traditional world should not be seen as a cause for mourning, but rather the mark of a need for a new maturity, a desire to be a “man among the ruins,” to use Evola’s phrase…
Or, to be, like Evola himself, a swarthoid subhuman among the supermen?
And indeed, this book, while extremely interesting, is certainly not for everyone – but then Traditionalism has always been an elitist doctrine.
No “academic snobbery” there!
Engagement with history has always been a weak point in Traditionalism; the Traditionalist authors will make occasional reference to certain historical events as being indicative of the metaphysical trends they see at work in the world, but to my knowledge there has never before been a sustained analysis of modern history from a sacred, Traditional perspective, which has always seemed to me to be a major flaw in their work since it neglects to show how the forces which have produced the modern world have been at work in material and tangible ways.
Congratulations to Morgan for writing a champion run-on sentence.
I intend to write a more in-depth review of The Sunset of Tradition at a later time – my primary purpose in writing this brief announcement…
More than 2000 words is a “brief announcement.” More run-on sentences to come, have no fear!
Speaking of “traditionalism,” we see Der Movement is obsessed with The Lord of the Rings once again. Someone needs do an ethnological study of that work’s relationship to Der Movement. Is the obsessive appeal biological – to Celto-Germanic NW European-derived people – or more ideological – to Type I traditionalists independent of ethnic origin? That would be a productive analysis to better understand the traditionalist memetic virus infecting the “movement” – to better understand it and how to combat it.
Delenda Est Traditionalism!