Was he even right-wing?

was he even right-wing?

I'm honestly not sure whether to class fascists as right-wing. It's popular to do so these days, but aren't fascists actually super progressive in important ways, particularly economic and political ways?

Like, I consider de Maistre an example of an arch right-winger. He supports monarchy, he supports the Catholic Church, and he believes in the depravity of mankind. I'm not sure he and Evola occupy the same place on the political spectrum, despite their both being labeled as "right-wing."

>Left-Right wing dichotomy
He would scoff at the very notion, and say they are both one and the same.

I doubt that.

Yes, because he, being an aristocrat, believed in aristocracy and a return to a prior order. He criticized fascism as not going far enough in its repulsion of the modern world.

The left-right dichotomy is a real dichotomy, but like other political dichotomies, the definition of "left" and "right" is dependent on whether one places oneself on the "left" or "right".

Evola was a LARP. Only posers pretend to have gained insight from his politics.

>catholic church as right wing
Oh, how antiquated a view. Depravity of mankind (which you crrectly state as a pillar of the right wing) and its inability to undergo fundamental reform now takes the form of biological determinist agnosticism, not religion, you can thank genetic advances for that.

Yeah sure, but often those who match the description you've provided are culturally Catholic

A radical centrist.

No.

Cracka plz. Which of Evola's works have you read?

Seriously you guys talk about Evola so much tell me what you have read.

I have read Revolt Against the Modern World, Mystery of the Grail, Ride the Tiger, Doctrine of Awakening, Magical Idealism, Men Among the Ruins, Hermetic Tradition, and the Yoga of Power and his articles on Gurdjieff, Crowley, and other occult movements. Badda bing badda boom I know more about Evola than all of you combined you stupid dumb niggers.

in that he was anti-stirner, yes. the split comes from individualism vs traditionalism. evola doesnt just mock modern pseudo-individualism, he thinks nietzsche and stirner had it wrong and that there is something there in hermeticism. in that he;d make fun of modern "right" ovements, yeah i guess hes not right. economically, he has some of the most coherent arguments against materialism i;ve seen

Exactly. Human depravity is historical and not biological in the Judeo-Christian tradition. Man was created good, so refinement or culturing are anathema to God's plan, and if there is evil it is due to human action.

By the American definition, no. But By the European, Extremely.

>economically, he has some of the most coherent arguments against materialism i;ve seen
What are those arguments and where can I find them?

>man was created good
Then why are there bad things? How can human action that is bad come from humans who were created good?

The American definition is retarded,

>muh freedumbs = right wing
>muh govment = left wing

This

But Evola was only a surface level facsist desu, a fellow traveler.

By the American definition I meant

>Ethnocentric Capitalism = right wing
>Internationalist Capitalism = Left Wing
>Everything else = Fascistic Islamo-Communism

It's a shame he's gotten so popular and is name dropped so hard in politics-- it's the opposite of what he wanted to happen. Hopefully, the barrage of criticism it might receive as being "alt-right literature" will lead to a restrengthening of Evolian though in light of more recent philosophical developments.
I'm surprised at those who read Evola but avoid Spengler, Wittgenstein, and even Nietzche
In Revolt Against the Modern World, actually