Question: how many evola/mishima/junger threads would we see if there was no cross pollination between Veeky Forums and...

mostly true for Evola. he’s a patchwork of other great ~reactionary~ intellectuals: nietzsche, guénon, ortega, leoninev etc. he dilutes them a lor, commodified for a lazy reader. /lit is more intellectually oriented than what evola has to offer, which is mostly self help for the depressed high IQ but not cultured western person.

We would see lots of Mishima because he's a major author, lots of Pound, less of the others but probably some Junger. Anyway stop contributing to their memetic association with /pol/. You'd be surprised how much little attention they get paid apart from Mishima posing like a faggot being posted in "aesthetic" threads or whatever. Can't really hold it against them.

*leont’ev wtf iphone

Who's between Spengler and I think Conrad?

true. they’ve read almost zero, they’re just smart at pretending thanks to their pattern recognition ability, mimicking instinctively the right opionions that are supposed to be held by their movement

Alain de Benoist.

So what would an intellectually cultured westerner read

I enjoy Evola and I am not a young white male.

whatever he wants

evola is a school teacher, in the ranks of anthology summaries

Bless you.
Hilarious, Pajeet.

???

I mean you say he is self help for high Iq but low culture westerners.

So what does a high Iq high culture westerner read then?

an intelligent, cultured person is more than a set of requirements to adhere to and qualifiers for something

the uncultured uses devices like evola, for a speed access to the inputs he’s in the need

You're trying to trick me into giving something away. It won't work.

nobody in /pol/ has read Evola, or pretty much anything for that matter, so i'd guess the same amount

>he dilutes them a lor, commodified for a lazy reader.
have you actually read Evola? he writing is way more dense than Guenon, even if Guenon is obviously more attuned to traditional values, and the projects from Nietzsche and Evola don't have much in common beyond addressing similar people

i wouldn't say his writing is commodified at all, it's really dense and full of references if you want to expand from there, and while he obviously introduces his meme views he is way more respectful in the traditions he writes about in trying to transmit them in their own terms instead of just using them as tools like most modernists do

>thinking this much of yourself
>couldn't write a single chapter as well as Evola

you’re implying i consider myself an intellectual and a better one than evola, that’s not the case

>half baked, pseudo-reactionary, meme-derived worldview to be vindicated?
The classic. O I am laffin

I don't know, but this board would be better if we banned all these right wing authors regardless.

What's with the leftist tendency for pissy passive aggressiveness? These people aren't really men.

We just don't like rightists invading our spaces. Literature belongs to us and we don't want it to be ruined by people who don't know what they're talking about.

I consider myself left (leaning) and engage in Land threads and make Junger threads. I don't care for - or dislike - Evola, Spengler and Guenon. I'll probably look into Mishima.

If you are left leaning why do you make Jünger threads?

/pol/ is where you go once you've completed the full Veeky Forums canon

Who is 'us'? POC aspirationalists?
I don't think everyone hates whites as much as you think they do.

>Oh no, white western cis Christian men are going to invade the thing they created

>implying artist doesn't lean to the left

Mishima and Junger are great, objectively.

Evola had one idea, which wasn't even his own. He wouldn't be here at all.

>bifurcates all facets off life through the lens of American politics

human trash

This has always been a type of interest group long before /pol/.

Mishima and Junger are fine but Ebola is horseshit.

Wrong, /pol/.

How dare you imply /pol/ reads Junger, Maurras, Benoist, Pound. And even Spengler beyond a wiki definition.

Don't give a shit about Evola or Mishima, /pol/ can claim them!

I remember reading an Evola thread with one really great user that answered questions and knew a lot about him and hid ideas. That certaintly the exception, despite there being enough threads on the guy to warrant a fucking Evola general

Maybe because he's interested in Junger's literature and/or life retard.

Mishima, confessions of a mask is great lads.
You're missing out.
The far right stuff is, in my opinion barely there until his later career.

But then again, I don't think very much of DFW...

> confessions of a mask is great lads
Is it though? The only thing that stuck with me was armpit hair and jerking it to st sebastian.

Why not? Nietzsche is claimed by both sides of the political spectrum too, I don't see how Junger should be any different. And maybe I'm not 'technically' left then but most values on the left still reasonate better with me than most of those on the right.

I dislike Steven Pinker for his pathological optimism but his latest video on political correctness reasonated with me.

>Is it though?

It is. It's a great representation of us in society. The many masks one wears throughout their lives etc.

Unless something went tits up in the English translation, it's great. (I'm Spanish).

For what it's worth Mishima was supposed to win the Noble Prize, but took himself out of the running to favour of Kawabata, his mentor.

I'm not trying to trick anyone into anything, I know you're indian, dickhead.
After illuminism, yes.

Mishima was covered in above posts, with that out of the way, Spengler manages to be an influence on Adorno (see his Spengler after the Downfall). As for Evola, the earliest memory I have of seeing the guy mentioned in a Veeky Forums post was ages before /pol/, about his writings on magic and occultism, and it was not on /x/.

There are also Carl Schmitt who influenced Foucault and Agamben, and of course Heidegger who is all over later continental philosophy. Fusaro reminds everybody that Lenin praised Giovanni Gentile's studies on Marx as some of the best by a non-marxist.

I do not think you need the involvement of /pol/ to discuss any particular author, as political opponents read each other, and all manner of poets and thinkers happened to write an infinity of things that are not agreeable by 21st century university policy on coastal states anyway.

Also Pound is in Bloom's Canon, specifically Personae: Collected Poems, The Cantos and Literary Essays

And I could swear I saw way more Savitri Devi before the 2016 election.

>not including D'Annunzio
why? why so many plebs?

>Mentioning Diego Fuffaro

I wouldn't have, were I able to read Russian and find the sauce on my own, or if other scholars of Gentile existed.

Pound is great, sure, but I'm pretty sure anyone with half a brain doesn't care about Bloom.

All of them would be even more popular here if /pol/ didn't exist. But contrarianism demands that Veeky Forums shits on authors in proportion to their popularity on /pol/.

Nah, I don't think so. Before /pol/, Veeky Forums was a very left-wing board and such authors were unacknowledged or even unknown. Now there's a good equilibrium "thanks" to /pol/.

I was being facetious in the hopes of you elaborating on why you liked it, since I'm a brainlet and couldn't analyze the book much besides I liked the prose and it effectively made me feel certain feels.

What's wrong with Diego Fusaro? He rightly points out that Gentile was one of the first to write on Marx. Honestly, I don't find much objectionable in the thought or practice of Gentile. He is certainly no Goebbels or Goering.

Are Vattimo and Preve idiots to associate with Fusaro, if the latter is such a meme? What other philosophers does Italy have?

I disagree. Veeky Forums explored reactionary writers since before /news/. We had threads discussing reactionary elements in Shakespeare for fuck's sake. We don't need literal bydlo to tell us what to read.

>What's wrong with Diego Fusaro?
Apparte il fatto che non riesce ad avere un pensiero intelligente o comunque qualcosa che non sia riconducibile al "il neolibbbbberalismo imperante" e che sia il classico rossobruno che ciancia di economia senza capirne un cazzo pur collocandosi nella tradizione filosofica iniziata da un economista?

Ah, dimenticavo. Supporta Putin.

>What other philosophers does Italy have?
Agamben, Severino, Luciano Floridi though he teaches @ Oxford, Michele di Francesco, "Bifo" Berardi...

We lost Giovanni Reale in 2014, and Perniola died fucking yesterday.

Veeky Forums was always a catholic board, there was more leftist discussion because Veeky Forums is a contrarian website, and at the time being left wing was perceived as more contrarian than now

...

Franco Bifo Berardi
Tiziana Terranova
Antonio Negri
Christian Marazzi
Nuccio Ordine
Massimo Pigliucci
Massimo Cacciari

>Perniola
Looks interesting, I didn't know him. Have you read any of his books?

I have a very strong feeling Fusaro is where he is because of intercessions and recommendations, if you know what I mean.

>Imagine actually being brain kike'd in the age of the internet

Face it ALL good authors are right wing.
Even lits big three let the mask slip sometimes. Joyce knew about the jews

The fact is they were not extreme like /pol/ brainlets. The intelligent mind, being above, makes a synthesis of leff and right.

And we already know they're annoying. Thanks for making another garbage thread to call attention to something we already know though. Real fucking nice work, genius.

Alain De Benoist has nothing to do with the like of great men like Charles Maurras. He is a fucking fraud.

I didn't because (his) aesthetics isn't something I'm terribly interested in, at least currently, and Paolo D'Angelo's book, untranslated in English, Estetica, introduced me to the field but also sated my curiosity for good.

You will like Perniola if you're into Debord and Baudrillard, given his interest for capitalism and simulacra in art.

D'Angelo is more original IMO in that he wants aesthetics as a philosophy of experience, not a philosophy of beauty, not a philosophy of art, not a philosophy of perception. In English you can read: eurosa.org/volumes/5/DAngeloESA2013.pdf

Veeky Forums is where /pol/fags come to pretend they read books and don't browse /pol/.

I think Veeky Forums has a reactionary bent (e.g. Nick Land) which isn't exactly /pol/ but there is overlap.

There's this paragraph on the guy:
plato.stanford.edu/entries/postmodernism/#8

Yeah, pretty stupid of me to forget Agamben. I don't think Negri and Berardi are any good (Berardi is kind of interesting but not much). The rest I haven't heard.

What are your problems with Fusaro? I don't speak italian but I watch some of his videos that are translated into french or english. Reading Gentile and Gramsci isn't terrible and it's more interesting than the stupid "return to Guattari" that Berardi pumps out.

You don't like him because he's reactionary? Is he really wrong about neoliberal imperalism? Are you simply an orthodox Marxist? Fusaro got me into Gramsci, for this I am grateful.
He simply knows the right people is what you're saying?

Fraud? How?

He has no original opinion of his own, he steals content everywhere he can. That and also the fact that he is an opportunistic fuck changing his speech according to the audience political sensibilities, he pretends to be a right winger with the retards at the "alt-right" while he sucks as many leftist cocks as he can so they would let him into the special club for authorized intellectuals where he laughs and sneers at the far right, new right, whatever.
He said recently that he voted for Melenchon and this does not surprise me the least, he was always a "tiers mondiste" at heart and this probably goes well with his anti-christian stance too.

I get what you're saying but I've always found he did good academic work. I don't follow everything he does but his work on Schmitt is good, rigorous and honest.

I heard about him voting Melenchon and was surprised but I don't see anything wrong with Benoist progressively moving towards an anti-liberal leftism. Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me if he converted to Islam. Does he still LARP as an armchair pagan?

Let's not forget Maurras was an atheist Catholic integralist.

Ultimately only what's edgy is interesting.

Non-Euro Ausfag who has never read Benoist and has only a cursory familiarity - but I am interested how you can say he throws himself in with the "alt-right" (something I've noticed) and then "mock the new right, far right", and so on. Isn't there something embarrassing about contributing to the Occidental Observer?

Refreshing myself on him through Wikipedia (generally a bad idea) I find some of what he says attractive and close to my heart:
>Benoist considers himself both left and right-wing ("I happen to define myself as a “man of right-left,” as a rightist from the left and a leftist from the right, i.e., as an intellectual who simultaneously refers to the ideas of the left and the values of the right."
>his support of multiculturalism rather than disappearance of immigrants' identities (though he does not support immigration itself)

Post bobs and vagene then.

>What are your problems with Fusaro?
He has a massive philosophical culture, able to give students notes on everyone from antiquity to tomorrow, but somehow the best philosophy he could produce was endless ranting against a conspiracy of an "unique thought" outside of which the common man cannot think, an abusive marriage of Gentile, the philosopher of fascism, with Gramsci, the philosopher on the other side of the bars, and one of anti-realism and right-Hegelian souverainism with fucking Marx, the man of materialism and internationalism.

Basically the French lack fear of association when it comes to politics. Benoist holds an award by the Academie francaise for crying out loud.

You mean the guy formerly known as Prince?

Only Evola and Spengler are /pol/ tier

>He simply knows the right people is what you're saying?
Yeah. He's a good scholar, anyway. I see him more like a popularizer of philosophy than a philosopher. Most of his books are not very original and simply revisit current debates about late capitalism, Marx revival and the future. I guess you should expect more from someone who's graduated in Philosophy.

>Berardi is kind of interesting but not much
In recent times Berardi has become more similar to figures like Zizek (pop, energetic, not that hard to read, etc). But unlike Zizek, Berardi doesn't go on television clowning around like a meme. Moreover, his early works are genuinely original and complex. He was the voice of Workerism in the 60s, along with Negri, and anticipated many of the present concerns of left-wing accelerationism.
>the stupid "return to Guattari" that Berardi pumps out
The return to D&G is pumped out from all sides tho...

That French attitude is refreshing to me. There is something horribly Puritan in the Anglophone world. And yet, wasn't it the French who used to have much more repressive censorship of their literature, their artists and radicals envying the English? Maybe an accident of history. Maybe simply because the English always had less to fear from radical politics than the French.

Poor Spengler.

>tfw this thread on /pol/ reactionary literati devolves into an autistic discussion of some random Italian philosophers noone cares about outside Shitaly

>You don't like him because he's reactionary?
I don't like him because he doesn't say anything substantial. He basically recicles the four or five concepts from Preve and one or two catchphrases from Gramsci (muh cretinismo economico) over and over and over.
> Is he really wrong about neoliberal imperalism?
Yes. "Wrong" is not exactly the word I would use, he just doesn't say anything meaningful. Everytime there's something that he doesn't like he just starts mumbling on "muh neo-liberalism" without even saying why or how this "neo-liberalism" caused the phenomenon he's analysing. He says, for example, that neoliberal forces want to destroy the nuclear family while not understanding that critiques against the concept of nuclear family come mainly from american radical feminist (which also happen to be anti-capitalist funnily enough) and that the nuclear family is fundamental to the function of modern state, which shows his (unsurprising, considering he has an hard-on for Gentile) total lack of knowledge in social sciences. He says to be against imperialism, yet supports Putin. He talks and talks about capitalism, yet he his a pure product of contemporary Culture industry (some may say spectacle). The only reason why he keeps getting contracts with top tier publishing houses is that he sells, and he sells because he gets invited on trash TV shows on the Italian TV, which keep inviting him because he raises the share thanks to all his following of grullini and populist which he has built thanks to social media. He also thinks, like his teacher Preve, that we should ignore the economic teachings of Marx (because of their personal disdain for economics) and only care for the philosophical ones (or rather: we should remove economics from Marxism), something I find pretty stupid.
>Are you simply an orthodox Marxist?
I'm a simple milquetoast liberal with an interest in marxism
>Fusaro got me into Gramsci, for this I am grateful.
Eh, ok.

To be fair they lived in a different time. For all we know they might've been more extreme had they lived today or maybe even less. We simply don't know. We are all just reacting to the current situation.

Kek, you should come to Germany. Here we have digital pillories operated by antifa activists for everybody who only associates with what these people deem "far right".

That's what happens when you make a thread on Veeky Forums - people will start talking about literature.

/pol/ is where I go for memes and race-baiting, personally. Maybe some occasional book recommendations, because they can actually do those in contrast to Veeky Forums.

>Maybe some occasional book recommendations, because they can actually do those in contrast to Veeky Forums.
It's called propaganda and dissemination of hatred.

I hate /pol/ and everything that cames from it. That said, I do have quite a bit of interest in Evola, though I haven't read him yet, but fully intend to, in Italian. I'm probably gonna read some Mishima some point in the future.

Digital pillories? A name and shaming sort of thing, I imagine?

I remember a little local webpage I came across here called "the Anti-Bogan" (bogan being slur for Australian white lumpenprole) which just uploaded screenshots of retarded middle age poor people making mean Facebook posts about chinkos and abos and pooftas and boat people or whatever shit, harrassing their work. Just struck me as dull and cruel - college educated youth trying to get these barely employable people fired. Brave New World - Betas getting a morally gratifying endorphin boost out of toying with Epsilons. This was all back in 2010 or 2011 that I saw this, mind you.

Evola is fun, specially his books about studying different traditions, don't care so much for the big 3 political ones

Is Evola similar to Crowley, somehow?