Is this guy actually worth reading? So far he seems like a total meme, "lmao i'm totalitarian af bro"

Summary of ride the tiger :

To understand my book you have to be a special kind of man ok normies dont understand me and Should fuck off .

Nietzsche right(-wing) ? Fuck off
Fascists are not the real traditionalists i am

Just do Indian magic senpai , and if it doesn't work it is because your a normie and you can fuck off

> Nietzsche right wing?
Where does he imply this, what does with Nietzsche is use him to identify nihilism in the modern age, point out that his nihilism "stopped half way", and constantly refer back to him as someone influential to his own worldview

Moar liek Ayyy lmao I'm a totalitalien af fellow humans

Evola is LARPer-tier garbage

Read real reactionaries like Thomas Carlyle

damn son if you're gonna shitpost at least make it interesting

If you're interested in the spiritual, yes. If not, maybe.

I bought my bf the three main ones (Ride the Tiger, Men Among the Ruins and Revolt against the Modern World), and had a flicked through it a bit. Seems kind of stupid really, deliberately contrarian to absolutely everything with a good dose of 'wooo mysticism hindu magic' thrown in.

Seconding this, I'm not deep into this stuff but Bowden made it all sound fascinating

Bowden can make most things sound fascinating, I'd argue he is actually more interesting himself than Evola.

Yeah. I'll admit he's a little hardcore for me in some respects but he's inspiring to listen to. It's a great thing to hear someone speak with such heartfelt unapologetic vigor.

>lmao i'm totalitarian af bro

fuck off and actually read his work retard

And don't fall for the RATMW>MATR>RTT trilogy meme

>tfw Veeky Forums users post /pol/ tier shitposts because it's a right winged thinker for once

badly written nietzsche knock-off with "muh spoopy magick"

the only so-called reactionary thinker with any relevance or genuine insight other than Nietzsche is Nick Land

What about Moldbug or De Maistre?

>evola
>christian
Criticize things after you read them. His writing is still pretty crumby though.

Moldbug is just an idiot. After someone with Land's erudition it's like reading a high school kid's attempt at updating Mein Kampf. He's clearly a fedora-type elitist snob who hasn't read or engaged with any serious philosophy. Land is an interesting figure because he is essentially someone who rightly accepts a broadly Marxian critique of capitalism and rides the technological tiger through a nihilistic wormhole into a bizarro-world of transhumanism, computerisation and accelerationist meltdown. His first essay in Fanged Noumena on Kant and Deleuze is a great piece of scholarship, after reading all the fascinating stuff in it (Neuromancer essay is a particular highlight) his more modern work, like the rather woolly and poor critique of democracy (essentially reheated H. L. Mencken) feels completely trite. I'm not really sure why Land is associated so much with far-right circles - politics aside he's actually a talented and very well-read (ex-)academic. His later work shows a disappointing trend towards esotericism (Kabbala specifically) but he never seems to have renounced or even adaquately critiqued his earlier Marxism (probably because he's smart enough to know that Marx's critique of capitalism and theory of alienation are right).

Agreed. Moldbug is a moron, Land is insane but brilliant

So much this. Retards always fall for the Monocle meme.

Right-winger here, Marx's entfremdung theory is wrong.
Not saying I'm writing off Marx completely, that would be intellectually dishonest.

If someone has the intellectual skills and capacity and the theoretical tools required they would not be alienated within Capitalism.
While if you work an alienating job, they won't have the time, tools, intellect or motivation to develop such theories and will never gather enough forces to overthrow Capitalism.

Besides that I agree with Althusser that it's teleological Hegelian idealism to make the working class a subject of history and thus the philosophy of the subject.
This Hegelian dialectic is corrupted and thus so is his entfremdung theory.

Now back to Marx as a whole, I think that it's important that people start to appreciate his criticisms of the free-market cycle and the foundational criticisms of Capitalism he wrote as a whole and I am happy that Nick Land is one of the people that understands Marx's contribution, but I feel that he's often praising the wrong things.

I had no background in Heidegger when I read Ride the Tiger so it mostly went over my head. Some bits are very good though

>To fully 'get' him you need a base understanding of Hindu metaphysics and theology and knowing something about Hermeticism, Sufism and Christian mysticism would help too.
Not really, you could just read earlier Evola instead of jumping right into his later manifestos.

I'll never understand people who cannot entertain a man's ideas and/or go on a temper tantrum about it.
I can read/watch some flat earth shit and not resort to namecalling. I can just stay calm and engage in a civil discussion.

Are some of you even in charge of yourself?

Women shouldn't even read trad lit to begin with.
Your gender is always too spooked by the ruling ideology anyways, regardless of the era.

Evola wrote about feminine spirituality

>he is not familiar with the coarse nature of communication on Veeky Forums

Which is mother/life symbolism and an affinity for sex magick.

Im unnerved by the talk of magic and spirituality and shit like that, and I fucking hate his paintings. But I decided to try reading "Meditations on the Peaks: Mountain Climbing as Metaphor for the Spiritual Quest" and it's pretty good so far.

I found the usage of literary characters to prove/underline his theories a little odd. Could have been a product of the times, but "this is true because some made up person fits the scheme" doesn't seem like the greatest conceivable argument to me.

>my bf
>automatically assumes it's a woman

>Maybe I should just fuck off and start with the greeks, I dunno.
do it

>If someone has the intellectual skills and capacity and the theoretical tools required they would not be alienated within Capitalism.

>While if you work an alienating job, they won't have the time, tools, intellect or motivation to develop such theories and will never gather enough forces to overthrow Capitalism.

Where's the criticism bro?

>Land
>transhumanist
lls