The Italian religious philosopher and cultural analyst Julius Evola (1898–1974) is one of the most engaging writers of the 20th century. Both his texts on various esoteric religious topics and the more politically oriented such are generally worth consideration.
My favorite is Ride the Tiger (1961, translated into English in 2003), which covers many of the existential, cultural and social implications of the modern world, characterized by gradual spiritual dissolution. Although Evola’s preferred audience – in line with his essentialist traditional philosophy – is a differentiated priest or warrior type, many intelligent non-conformist Westerners can find something insightful and valuable in this book.
I have discerned 9 aspects that are useful in order to understand oneself and the world and still are tenable.
1. Divine despotism is a fantasy
One of the main tenets of the Abrahamic religions, Judaism and Islam in particular, is divine despotism, the idea that an omnipotent god controls mankind and the events of our world.
Although this is not a scientific topic in that sense that it can be verified or falsified through such theories and methods, it nevertheless has implications for the way which we regard ourselves and the universe.
This belief leads to—and Evola emphasizes this tenet in his book—a renouncement of individual responsibility. It is actually anti-Christian in that sense that it neglects the ”free will”.
2. Atheism versus theism is a false dichotomy
Theism simply means the belief in the existence of deities, especially an omnipotent creator god, and its negation is atheism. In a way this is a question of either or: either a god or several gods exist, or the one or them do not.
But given the above premise, spirituality can go beyond these two types. Many traditions, esoteric ones in particular, are rather linked to the individual’s character, knowledge and predisposition, than the belief in a singular deity or several deities.
It is obvious that Evola thought less of monotheistic and polytheistic religiosity than aristocratic ”Tradition”, but it is important to be aware of that the entire span of traditional spirituality is much broader than atheism versus theism. One does only have to look at Theravada Buddhism, discussed by Evola in his work The Doctrine of Awakening, to make such a notion. As such this scheme is a false dichotomy.
3. Lucid inebriation goes beyond mere animal instincts
In a rather intricate discourse on the Apollonian and Dionysian myths – linked to the writings of a recurrent figure within this book, Friedrich Nietzsche – and how they correspond to modern civilization, Evola discusses a state of mind which goes beyond the mere ”Dionysian” instincts that have become predominant in our time (such as to eat, sleep, drink, fuck and listen to modern music).
He calls it a ”lucid inebriation”, a state of intellectual clarity which can emerge in certain situations, while pursuing particular activities:
Detachment coexists with a fully lived experience; a calm “being” is constantly wedded to the substance of life. The consequence of this union, existentially speaking, is a most particular kind of lucid inebriation, one might almost say intellectualized and magnetic, which is the absolute opposite of what comes from the ecstatic opening to the world of elementary forces, instinct, and “nature”.
Even though it is a bit unclear what this specifically means, a reader can imagine a state of mind which occurs when one is living completely in the moment and makes a significant realization of some sort. Such moments are more valuable than animalistic intoxication.
4. Act without desire from the premise of causal laws
In a consecutive chapter, Evola looks into how a differentiated person can partake in various activities without desire. This frame of mind is akin to both Buddhism and Stoicism (both discussed in the last chapter, linked to a discussion on suicide), and also Taoism.
Basically, while one engages in them, remain unattached, but be aware of the causal laws that underlie them. In this way he can live in the modern world and partake in whatever field, for instance game or work, he feels like. In other words, make a good job but do not fool yourself into thinking that it represents a higher meaning or purpose.
5. The modern personality is different from the traditional
In the modern world, all individuals are equal in dignity and rights. Although this certainly is a sympathetic position (here I disagree with the vehemently anti-democratic Evola), people are still different in terms of personality and behavior. One does only have to look at IQ or the Big Five to realize this.
However, the traditional personality – as it is perceived by Evola – is very different from the modern, whether one takes into account biology or not. Many traditional ones were linked to a divine role (person means mask in Latin) in a metaphysical act, rather than any Renaissance genius or modern ”fascinating”, contingent personality.
In this regard one can agree with Evola or not, but this descriptive characterization is nevertheless quite enlightening. The American merchant culture – including most non-conformists as they appear – is linked to the ”personal trademark” rather than a supra-personal essence or function.
The traditional personality has become hidden under a new mask, that of self-indulgence and self-gratification.
6. Our world is characterized by dissolution
In Evola’s principle work, Revolt Against The Modern World (1934), he analyzes the dissolution of the traditional world. Although it is hard to take this work very seriously from a strict historical point of view, as it is linked to a very selective interpretation of the past rather than extensive historiography, it still points out some indeed real currents and patterns. Ride the Tiger builds on that.
Just look at how traditional cultures have dissolved, and how the modern world, via middle-class Christianity, nationalism and capitalism, emerged with all its nihilism, hedonism and relativism; processes which have been accelerated under the aegis of post-modernist subjectivism, “equality”, and an overtly sexualized consumerist society.
One always wonders if things can become even worse and when it is going to stop.
7. Modern politics does not reflect any higher ideals
Evola was particularly anti-American and regarded it as only better than the Soviet Union in terms of degree (a war between vaishyas versus sudras with Dharma terminology).
Realpolitik should partly or largely be hinged upon a rational and pragmatic approach, but it becomes empty if it is not linked to any higher ethics or values.
Besides perhaps philanthropy and prosperity, it is hard to see that American politics – or any politics in the modern world for that matter – represent any ideals whatsoever. Therefore Evola emphasized apoliteia, which implicates that one should stay out of politics (or be involved but remain unattached). He asserted:
The present world of party politics consists only of the regime of the petty politicians, who, whatever their party affiliations, are often figureheads at the service of financial, industrial, or corporate interests. The situation has gone so far that even if parties or movements of a different type existed, they would have almost no following among the rootless masses who respond only to those who promise material advantages and “social conquests”.
Evola also quotes José Ortega y Gasset in this regard.
In America, only the freedom from and freedom to (to some extent), as they are integral parts of some dimensions of the American constitution, appear relevant since they enable men to choose to live their own lives according to their “personal equations”.
8. Sexual intoxication is an integral part of the American society
Various modern currents, such as existentialism philosophy and popular art and music, are scrutinized in Ride the Tiger. Several chapters, two in particular, deal with the sex roles and sex as such. Even though Evola, of course, does not look into late-modern tendencies such as homosexuality and gender-fluidity which had not yet emerged, he was still very foreseeable in this respect. For instance he wrote:
I must emphasize above all the direction of the processes at work toward a freeing of sex, but in no way a freeing from sex. Sex and women are instead becoming dominant forces in present society, an evident fact that is also part of the general phenomenology of every terminal phase of a civilization’s cycle. One might speak of a chronic sexual intoxication that is profusely manifested in public life, conduct, and art.
Sexual intoxication has become an integral part of the American society, basically post-World War II onwards, processes which likewise have accelerated. Capitalism in tandem with Cultural Marxism defeated the Christian moralistic bourgeois.
9. A ”greater morality” transcends the sign of times
When one lives in the current world, and is involved in various trivial activities, it is easy to feel “inauthentic” and hard to hold on to ideals, virtues and principles. But according to Evola, there are such which transcend the contingency of history and represent a “higher morality” which goes beyond petty moralism:
I have already indicated the principles of a “greater morality” that, being dependent on a kind of interior race, cannot be damaged by nihilistic dissolutions: these include truth, justice, loyalty, inner courage, the authentic, socially unconditioned sentiment of honor and shame, control over oneself. These are what are meant by “virtue”; sexual acts have no part in it except indirectly, and only when they lead to a behavior that deviates from these values.
In summary
Overall Ride the Tiger is a book worth to read in its entirety. Many facets of a higher individualism and the current culture which are discussed are still relevant. Julius Evola was indeed an anti-modernist with an anti-democratic inclination, but nevertheless he used logic to analyze the state of affairs in our world, in many ways different from the traditional.
Read More: 5 Ground-Breaking Books Written Between 1918 And 1945
Atheism is the rejection of theistic claims. It’s basically saying “I don’t believe you” to theism
Anti-theism is the claims that deities do not exist.
He is not atheist, he is a luciferian.
I just finished Ride the Tiger earlier this week oddly enough.
I took it as a powerful reminder of how the common man used to interpret himself and his relation to the world before the Enlightenment.
I just started Revolt Against the Modern World, and Evola goes even farther back in history to try and establish perrenialisms between the Traditional religions and city states. His basic thesis seems to be that a healthy solar (i.e., masculine) society was oriented “upwards” rather than “horizontal”, in the sense that the purpose of the State was ultimately to create a higher spiritual purpose through one’s participation in it. In this sense, the Traditional concept of the King was more metaphysical than purely pragmatic or bureaucratic.
I’d recommend this lecture by Johnathan Bowden who spells out the broad spectrum of Evola’s thinking.
For those (like me) who find Bowden’s accent difficult, here is the transcript of that lecture:
https://www.counter-currents.com/2014/10/julius-evolathe-worlds-most-right-wing-thinker/
It is Luciferian bullshit
I don’t know much about Evola but from an occultist point of upwards is not just sky / solar religion but also the upward pointing triangle representing the element of fire / air / masculinity (phallus).
The note of caution here is that most occultism also places itself within an implied equilibrium with the downward, earth-bound force of the downward triangle, which may be associated with earth / water as well as material things, carnal desires and womanly things.
What I would want to know vis a vis Evola is what is position would be with respect to both the upward and the downward force. As an occultist, are they equal in his mind?
Upward and downward triangle… Star of David no?
From my reading of Ride the Tiger he definitely sees parallels between male/female, upward/downward, order/chaos.
I think he sees them equal in that they are natural forces that fight for supremacy, but he sees the masculine/solar as the true way. I remember reading something like the solar is primary and independent, whereas the lunar depends on reflecting the solar.
He sees the masculine as the true orientation. Evola is all about trancending from the world of “becoming” to the world of “being”. You’re right it is very esoteric, but I hope that answers your question.
He’s a fascist who primarily values a caste system; men are valued more than women, throughout; however, it would be dangerous to imagine the The Everyday Men who are reading this article, working 9-5 jobs, and enjoying the opportunity to read and engage in discussions about different philosophical ideals, would all be in the highest-tier as Sacred Leaders.
Most likely today’s EveryDay American Man would fall in the Bourgeoisie and Slave castes.
You’re correct about his caste system.
I think what his philosophy offers to today’s bourgeoisie/plebeian is the opportunity to be part of a state that actually has a purpose.
Evola made it clear that Traditional societies did not look down upon the workers, but saw them as an essential part of the whole.
Perhaps you are correct about the slave/serf classes but this does not matter. That most men prefer slavery has been known for ages.
All the better still if the upward striving towards the cosmos is there and reflected in the culture. Some men will still choose slavery. So be it.
Seems quite the assumption however that “All fascist men are valued more than women”.
I believe that even Hitler placed a very high value on the women of his people. In fact a woman performing her most sacred duty, giving birth to children of her volk was so valued that German families were given money by the government based on how many children she gave birth to.
Sounds like some serious devaluation right there doesn’t it?
When I started the sentence with He’s a fascist…the he I was referencing was specifically Julius Evola, and his valuation, specifically. Thank you for allowing me to clarify that point.
You are wrong. Evola was never a fascist, in fact
1) he criticized the regime and Mussolini himself.
2) most fascist leaders hated him.
3. Evola wrote an entire book criticizing Fascism and Nationalsocialism: https://arktos.com/product/fascism-viewed-from-the-right/
“He sees the masculine as the true orientation. Evola is all about trancending from the world of “becoming” to the world of “being”.”
Well, he certainly is somewhat out of step with the leftist zeitgeist, which is all about ‘becoming’ and transforming both oneself / others. I intend to read some Evola when I get the chance as well as some of the other guys in the rightist tradition (Guenon, Dugin?) perhaps, but one thing puzzles me a little in that one typically associates occultism with becoming and transformation, at least insofar as it is very often associated with alchemy / alchemical thinking. If for example Evola argues the case for men to become spiritual aristocrats, would that kind of thinking draw from the language of becoming / transformation? I’ll have to reserve any further opinions until I’ve read him but I will be interested to know if he offers something like an alternative ‘ascent’ to the kind you often find in occult / kabbalistic systems. I’m also inclined to read more about his take on the ‘mask’ aspect of personality, including as a basis for becoming / being. It seems to me the leftist take on things understood from such an occult viewpoint could be criticised for fixating on the masks we wear, as in the identity politics that often grounds their projects for social transformation.
Oh, and yes I agree about he start of david. It is also very similar to the Martinist star, but apparently not quite the same. It seems to denote non-dualism, the overcoming of dualism. The implications aren’t always easy to tease out. But then I imagine they’re not supposed to be.
“Overcoming dualism” Well put.
Guenon is on my summer reading list.
According to your source, I am correct:
“Frequently quoting Mussolini’s own words, Evola presents the core of the Fascist ideal, arguing that, for all its flaws, it remains superior to the political system which has since arisen to replace it.”-https://arktos.com/product/fascism-viewed-from-the-right/
lol
Read the book and then we can talk.
Awww…Shit! Not Homework!
I keep coming back to ROK; for a few months now (I love the articles…)even though some men don’t take to kindly to a lady’s presence here; they have tried to chase me off with some pretty vicious epithets…those men wish they had your secret:
You, Joseph Curwen, have actually found the secret to minimizing my presence: Giving me Homework Assignments, like Read the Book (the whole fucking thing??!!).
Don’t complain, is not that long.
That book is key to understand Evola’s political thinking. In it he criticizes both Nationalsocialism and Fascism from a Rightist point of view; and in essence he says that they are not rightwing enough for his taste.
I have deep problems with Evola’s doctrines (see my answer to Clark Kent someplace in this section) but if we see the bigger picture, he’s one of us Men of the Right.
I can’t speak specifically for Evola, but generally the aim of the Great Work is to attain to the equilibrium of all opposing (dualistic) forces, such as fire/intellect (upward triangle) and water/emotion (downward triangle), dissolving all into the Bliss of Dissolution, whereby the Magus attains freedom. Crowley (for one) saw the Great Work as the “dissolution of complexes” (mental constructs, but not exclusively those.)
““This ‘star’ or ‘Inmost Light’ is the original, individual, eternal essence….we are warned against the idea of a Pleroma, a flame of which we are Sparks, and to which we return when we ‘attain’. That would indeed be to make the whole curse of separate existence ridiculous, a senseless and inexcusable folly. It would throw us back on the dilemma of Manichaeism. The idea of incarnations ‘perfecting’ a thing originally perfect by definition is imbecile. The only sane solution is as given previously, to suppose that the Perfect enjoys experience of (apparent) Imperfection.”
““We are not to regard ourselves as base beings, without whose sphere is Light or ‘God.’ Our minds and bodies are veils of the Light within. The uninitiate is a ‘Dark Star,’ and the Great Work for him is to make his veils transparent by ‘purifying’ them. This ‘purification’ is really ‘simplification’; it is not that the veil is dirty, but that the complexity of its folds makes it opaque. The Great Work therefore consists principally in the solution of complexes. Everything in itself is perfect, but when things are muddled, they become ‘evil’.”
This attainment can be reached via various technical means depending on the nature and proclivities of the initiate — e.g., meditation, devotion to a deity or other appropriate symbol, the mystic union of the “wand the cup” (sexual magick), etc.
Very interesting post. It is actually quite rare to hear mention of ‘the Great Work’ at least out in the open. Do you think Crowley’s take on the Great Work is generally accepted / authoritative? And if it is ‘correct’ is that ‘all there is to the matter’. Or rather is it all about ‘spirit’ and the spiritual freedom of achieving such a ‘Bliss of Dissolution’? After all matter and spirit are also things to be dissolved; can it only be about the Magus himself – what of the macocosm so to speak?
I was looking up the Great Work not so long ago and I found a wiki entry on something called the Rebis, which according to Basil Valentine, an alchemist writing around the time of the end of the 16th century, denoted the end of the Great Work:
“After one has gone through the stages of putrefaction and purification, separating opposing qualities, those qualities are united once more in what is sometimes described as the divine hermaphrodite, a reconciliation of spirit and matter, a being of both male and female qualities as indicated by the male and female head within a single body. The sun and moon correspond to the male and female halves….”
From
It seems to me that process could be described as both a quest of the individual but could equally describe the current alchemical throes of society, what with the current fixation on gender and gender neutrality etc. Is not gender for instance something that could be seen as a making the “folds” of the veil opaque?
Other than that I find Crowley’s description intriguing if slightly puzzling. He would appear to be rejecting gnosticism, and the idea of seeking to self-perfect as say a Cathar might seek to do on account of the nature of a world created by an evil demiurge. For him there is no inherent evil, then, except when things become ‘muddled’, which presumably is to fail to see that we have an ‘inmost light’ or ‘eternal essence’. Is he then just rejecting dualism? What might a political expression of the above involve?
I’m not well versed in alchemical philosophy. I think the idea of the Great Work has had many and various interpretations by different writers on the subject … it seems to be a very subjective thing, which makes sense as it’s about becoming more and more “oneself” as an individual, so maybe there should be no final definition of what it entails. Best to see it as the ongoing effort of self-perfection, at least as a good starting point. Beyond that things get really esoteric.
I’m sure it may have multiple meanings to different strains of esotericism, I just think that given that it can be seen as the end point of so much occult practice it seems strange that so few really mention it. It’s like mentioning the name of God or something.
It’s also perhaps significant in this regard that it is Crowley who is to be found expounding on the issue. After all he was something of a blabbermouth in a world that is pretty much by definition inclined towards secretiveness and obscurity.
Re. the philosophical side of things – which I appreciate you may not be inclined to speculate about if it’s beyond your experience if it is about self-perfection, then I think this would imply a dualism that is prepared to limit that process to transformation of the self only
This is absolutely it. The upward striving/solar/masculine path.
Individually this occurs as the man undertakes the two paths of Warrior
and Priest.
So much can be said about our current degeneration in
regards to this. I leave my house in my car made on an assembly line. I
drive around looking for products to consume. Every strip mall,
shopping center and fast turd joint all look the same. Our horizontal
or dead end circular descent into oblivion is marked by a soulless
people and soulless architecture. You can see the dead life matter in
all that we do.
Where is the upward striving? It simply is not
there. Modern humans are absolutely dead inside. Nothing there.
Lights are flickering and no one’s home.
Now the Prophets of Doom
are here. Heralding the end of this age and the inglorious death of
every weak bitch. The fire is surely coming. All the wrath. All the
deserved torment for attempting to circumvent the process of natural
selection. Nature will violently and abruptly correct itself at some
point.
What worries me is the great existential questions have already been tackled in great detail. But we as a race and people have jettisoned that knowledge.
How many millennials could quote the great thinkers of Centuries 0-19?
As I write this at my In Laws house, the attention-whoring talentless slattern Mily Cyrus is on TV propagandising some third world cause or other whilst she simultaneously pisses western civilization into the sewer.
Bring on the Backlash. Bring it fucking hard!!
I wonder how many millennial history students if asked to write about Cyrus the Great, would shrug and write about Miley?
A little Mily Cyrus relief:
It is up to us to engage our children in meaningful conversation; to honor our family and friends by engaging them in conversations of substance.
The Existential Questions and Common Themes that humanity has grappled with for centuries continue to deserve our attention.
Stop giving your attention to whores, consuming that garbage only encourages people to make more of it.
“Detachment coexists with a fully lived experience; a calm ‘being’ is constantly wedded to the substance of life. The consequence of this union, existentially speaking, is a most particular kind of LUCID INEBRIATION, one might almost say intellectualized and magnetic, which is the absolute opposite of what comes from the ecstatic opening to the world of elementary forces, instinct, and ‘nature’.”
========================
“Progress along the sorcerers’ path is, in general, a drastic process the purpose of which is to bring one’s connecting link (the link we all possess which connects us to God/infinity) in order.
“In order to revive that link sorcerers need a rigorous, fierce purpose–a special state of mind called UNBENDING INTENT…UNBENDING INTENT is a sort of single-mindedness human beings exhibit; an extremely well-defined purpose not countermanded by any conflicting interests or desires; UNBENDING INTENT is also the force engendered when the assemblage point (our ‘telescope’ to what we see in the outside world) is maintained fixed in a position which is not the usual one…
“…Sorcerers see UNBENDING INTENT as the catalyst to trigger their unchangeable decisions, or as the converse: their unchangeable decisions are the catalyst that propels their assemblage points to new positions, positions which in turn generate UNBENDING INTENT (in other words, UNBENDING INTENT/LUCID INEBRIATION manifests whatever it is that the person wants to manifest within the waking world; or, in the dreaming world as well).” – from “The Power of Silence,” by Carlos Castaneda (parentheticals contain my own comments)
Castaneda’s work is pretty interesting, too. More aligned to the modern (post-1960s) generation.
“Many traditional ones were linked to a divine role (person means mask in Latin) in a metaphysical act, rather than any Renaissance genius or modern ”fascinating”, contingent personality”
I agree with this insight. In fact the term “genius” was appropriated by the late romantics like Wilde and Yeats from its 15th century usage. In fact, the likes of Da Vinci and later “geniuses” like J.S Bach or Euler (in Maths) would never have understood this term with regard to what they did. The degree of professionalism to their respective crafts would never have let their “personality” get in the way or become the main event.
It’s sad and pathetic that we are now left with the dregs of this concept in our age where every talentless half wit wants to be famous and loved because they’re mediocre and just “like everyone else”. I guess this is what Evola meant by the dissolution of our society- its eventual submergence into some-type of oceanic universal blandness, where every circuit in the board knows its the same as all the other circuits in all the other boards coming down the never ending conveyor belt.
There are nights when I look into the sky above and realise Nietzsche’s phrase about wanting to be “somewhere different”- meaning- how most people, sooner or later, end up disappointing us in life. The longer you live the more you realise this sad fact.
you’ve provided just one reason why Bach beats poseur Beethoven every day of the week
Actually in Islam, people have free will when it comes to the choice between right and wrong, but they just can’t control the outcomes of these choices.
I haven’t said that it does not exist ideas of a free will within neither Islam nor Judaism, but divine despotism and omnipotence are more emphasized in the Old Testament and the Quran, compared to the New Testament. But one finds similar ideas in Christianity too, such as the paradoxical predestination within Calvinism.
The Bible teaches both predestination and free choice. We Christians just like finding anything and everything we can possibly divide over, giving them official names like “Calvinism”, and then splintering our brotherhood while we watch the world go to hell in a hand basket.
Yea I always had that feeling like it was both as well.
The doctrines of predestination are quite different within different branches or sub-bransches of Christendom, though.
Compare Augustine of Hippo with Luther and Calvin, and put them in relationship to the “free will”. Suddenly things become so complicated.
Christianity has always been not just somewhat “incoherent” with regard to basic main tenets such as the trinity, but full of different interpretations done by men who wanted to impose their particular interpretations, not very different from Nietzsche’s will to power.
The councils in various Mediterranean locations during the first founding 400 years are clear evidence of this, but is has not stopped.
In many ways Jesus was brilliant and the mere aesthetic value, and not just the ethical value, of Christianity is fantastic, but it is no wonder why people leave it for various reasons when they had the chance.
[audio src="http://www.kingdompromises.org/kingdompromises_audio/928.mp3" /]
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/825156dbea3b18011a8e3229707cfaed9b5d2cc335fb195d6352aee760de8524.png
Evola’s anthology “Magic” (a compendium of esoteric writings) is also worth checking out.
“Learn to will without yearning, without fear or regret. Create a power to act without tiring. Let this power be cold, hard, but at the same time flexible. The secret of the force consists in willing well, willing long, willing without ceasing, and in never yearning. Cut yourself free from the bonds of passion: Reduce yourself to a simplicity that wills. Violate every need: Use everything, abstain from everything as you need. Become absolute ruler of your soul. Create a resistance: What is mobile obeys what is immobile. The powers of nature become subjected to one who can resist them. Having reached the point where you desire nothing and fear nothing, then there will be few things over which you will not rule, but enjoy nothing until you have first vanquished it in yourself. The force does not give itself up: Take it, dare. Being free, well-balanced, strong, calm and pure, having slain desire, say I want. This is the first teaching. The door has been opened to you. ”
“It is necessary to follow a discipline capable of realizing the uselessness of all sentimentalism and emotional complications. In their place: A clear gaze and appropriate action. As with a warrior, instead of fear and irrational agitation in the face of danger, the instant resolve of doing what lies in one’s power. Fear, hope, impatience, anxiety – these are all spiritual cave-ins that nourish occult and vampiric powers of negation.”
“According to the initiatic maxim, you must not seek power, it is power that must seek you. … He who knows how to give a center to this power through his own renunciation and hardness forged by self-domination of his soul, by isolation and resistance, to him is power unfailingly attracted. … An aura forms around the Adept who, like a force that presses on and does not stop at anything, appropriates the way of being. Being is the condition of power: An impassibility that does not look at it is what attracts it. Power eludes desire for power.”
A reliigion for middle age obese women. No masculine man would associate himself with new age witches.
The Best (AC) had plenty of “Scarlet Women,” but none of them were obese middle age proto-feminazis iirc.
So, will, thelema without Thelema, thanks to stoic self-mastery. Some interesting ideas in that
Profound. Looking on amazon there is only a book by evola called “Introduction to magic. Rituals and practical techniques for the magus.”
Is this it?
Yep
While I disagree with a number of Evola’s positions (especially in the race issue), its refreshing to see discussion about his ideas here at RoK.
Fucking bravo!
Finally here on ROK there is talk regarding one of my favorite philosophers. Evola’s writings have had a stark impact on my own writing. This a great piece and I hope to see more discussion about Evola and his topics in red pill circles. The man was way ahead of his time.
Reading Evola is essential for any white men who wish to deprogram themselves from the Abrahamic religious mind virus.
You are a fag…thats a religion for new age middle age women. Man up, sissy boy.
Marcos_Brazil, projecting much?
Gay witch.
It would be more helpful if you’d explain why. Or if Luciferianism is self-evidently bad, how it is Luciferian and what is Luciferian about it
Aside from your childish ad hominem. What religion are you referring to?
Glad you appreciated. I have read about 12 of his books and a couple of essays and most are interesting.
I particularly liked his approach to the JQ.
He acknowledges that Jews prey on Aryans, but claims that ultimately the Aryan’s true plight is that he is living as a degenerated version of himself.
I think this is a useful way of looking at it because for the Aryan to believe he is helpless to Jewish subversion is to concede weakness where there really is none.
In fact, Evola’s approach to the JQ is wrong in a particularly dangerous way. Evola believed that the entropy/decadence process in which we are is because of the Kaliyuga, and Judaism is not the cause but an effect of this dissolution process. So, basically he’s denouncing the Jew and at the same time exculpating him.
See my comment above about my problems with Evola.
I didnt take it as removing all responsibility from the Jew, but rather suggesting that the Aryan himself needs to overcome and become immune to degeneracy.
If we remove the Jewish problem, but are still left with a land of fat and stupid consumers, we’ve still only made marginal progress.
How man domesticated the wolf? through generations of conditioning. How the jew turned the european warrior into the european pussy? through generations of brainwashing and conditioning.
Once you remove the jew of the equation, in a couple of generations max the white man would be a warrior again, because it is in our genes. Just look at what the III Reich did in less than 20 years.
I agree that Max has it in him. All I’m saying is that at the end of the day it is Max’s responsibility to become that warrior.
The Jewish media doesn’t force anyone to buy Pepsi sugar drinks, or to listen to Miley Cyrus over reading philosophy, or to watch TV over going to the gym.
I think taking some responsibility for our actions is just as important as accepting that we have been manipulated by subversive forces.
Evola was an occultist idiot, friends with Aleister Crowley. He is an occultist before being a bad philosopher.
No masculine man should join his beliefs, unless he wants to join obese middle age new age witches covens.
There is a movement of Perennialists trying to infiltrate the conservative movement.
Perennialists or Traditionalists are people who believe the light of Lucifer is behind all religions, and modernity has hidden this occult knowledge from us, so we should go back in time and become happy witches.
Evola, Guenon, Schuon…only a faggot would follow these con artists.
It makes sense to ‘approach with caution’ but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be studied.
I lent out my copy of huxley’s perennial philosophy to one of the clients I used to work with. I had no idea at the time I was peddling luciferianianism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perennial_philosophy
I am not going to spend considerable time to defend this or that thinker and their writings, but it is errenously wrong to stress that these are ‘Luciferian’. At least if one wants to avoid simplistic propaganda tailor-made for two-digit IQs.
Rather the opposite in a way, since both Guénon and Evola emphasized the false and occult initations that take place during modernity, such as Freemasonry and various types of spiritism (“The Occult War”, “The Second Religiosity” and other chapters point in this direction).
One interpration would in fact be that the Catholic pedophile priests are a sign of occult/Luciferian infiltration within the Catholic Church! The main difference is that Guénon saw some hope in Catholicism, whereas Evola did not. Still he regarded bourgeois Catholicism as better than various modern manifestations of religion.
However, I agree that Evola can be linked to occultism, understood in broad way. Both occultism and New Age are multifaceted currents, to the extent that most religious writers in the West that do not conform to the Abrahamic religions can be considered this.
Go and bang some Brazilian butts, bro.
If they do not profess Jesus as their savior they are luciferian.
it’s time to engage with the issues, christian or otherwise. It simply isn’t enough to dodge every issue in the way christians are sometimes won’t to do. I’m not saying you’re wrong – I come from the same christian tradition – but if you’re going to argue that something is luciferian, or wrong / evil etc, you need to be able to argue the substance of the issue
I guess its similar to catholicism where they pray to patron saints and other holy figures. Prayer is reserved for God, Jesus, the most holy, not selfless peasants, regardless of how much good they did or did not contribute to the world. If there is an ideology out there that offers wisdom on how to better your life, that is fine, but they are offering wisdom and not salvation. Salvation is a concept that is not understood by anti-theists or even most non-Christians. It is something one can get into rather lengthy debates and talks about.
I do not tune out other philosophical inclinations like a state of freedom, understanding the nature of mankind, asceticism vs hedonism, etc…
I’m fine with all of that, and there may be such a distinction – between wisdom and salvation (the tree of knowledge as always been fraught with danger hasn’t it?), I just think for Christians, it’s very much back to basics. People don’t accept traditional authority any longer, christian or otherwise, and it follows that if christianity, or any other (rival or compatible) system of beliefs is to make it’s case, then it has to be prepared to do so from the ground up so to speak.
You make a good point. The thing is, no one studies the moral law of scripture anymore. That’s where the “arguing the substance of the issue” and “engaging the issues” is found. If you go back to America’s founding, our Christian forefathers were experts in it. Pre- US Constitution, our laws were Christian. Today, well meaning believers have the knowing in their heart but lack the ability to express this because Christianity has been reduced to mental ascent.
There definitely is a difference. Wisdom deals with knowledge and understanding. Salvation has to do with preservation. Most often, when the Bible speaks of salvation it is physical salvation. Today’s watered down Christianity rarely, if ever, deals with that truth and instead teaches salvation as dealing exclusively with spiritual, or afterlife, salvation.
The reason why people don’t accept “it” (it being feminized beta Christianity) is because it stinks rotten to the core of the corruption of the original teachings of Jesus, built on the old covenant God had with the tribe of Israel. That covenant was broken after the death of Jesus and a new covenant was forged, one that through the body and blood of Jesus can only one be saved from eternal separation from God and torment. You can easily tell a real Christian from a fake one by their support of modern-day Israel or anything of jewish-lobbying interest for that reason, let alone what they understand that they pray to. Instead of asking God to help you, ask what you can do for him? The answers to most of our problems in life usually start from self-analysis.
The ten commandments formed the basis of the old covenant, and as such for the new covenant, all sins that have been done, or are doing, or will be done, can only be mitigated through salvation from Christ, straight from the source, nowhere else. I wouldn’t say that testosterone be outlawed, strength is an asset as is virility. It is the androgynous perversion and feminization of men that is the ultimate “fuck you” to the Christian covenant, one that like in times of today, speaking the truth will label you an enemy of the state.
People will accept a system that works when the current one has run out of gas and the economy collapses for good. Those who have lied or been lied to regarding their faith will begin to doubt many things on that day.
I think my point, although I didn’t spell it out, was more along the lines of it’s fine to follow scripture, and the moral law it contains, to the extent that makes sense to you, but when it comes to persuading others – what would traditionally be understood as preaching or evangelising – it’s no longer ‘enough’ i.e. persuasive amongst people who exist in a ‘marketplace of idea’s’ and can choose to believe anything they wish to believe (whether that’s is good or bad is not the issue) to simply say ‘well, this is what it says in scripture’ or ‘this is what jesus did and he was the Son of God.’ Rather even if scripture were true and infallible it would still be necessary to argue one’s case from the ground up as though without the benefit of the revealed. It’s actually an analogous situation to what you find with SWJs. Increasingly many of them are at a loss to argue their case simply because their arguments might as well relate to revealed (albeit generally marxist) scripture. Let’s say communism was objectively ‘right’ – we just couldn’t see it yet – do you think your average SJW could explain why it was right? Without in other words saying ‘well, just because’. Well if Christians are little better if they cannot say why what they believe in is better, truer more beautiful etc than the next belief. One must be able to argue one’s case. Argue your case that you may be proved right.
you mean the physical resurrection? If so, you’re probably right. On the other hand that might put one in a sense in a ‘materialist’ camp, i.e. one might find oneself amongst some strange bedfellows
I actually think the status of wisdom / knowledge in christianity is a strange one. The fool for Christ is only really a fool in the eyes of men (c.f. Socrates). Likewise there is always a sense in which the man who thinks himself wise and knowledgeable may turn out to be otherwise. That might be true even with respect to spiritual knowledge
rather stupid.
Then I am Luciferian.
Perhaps to some, but after a harrowing life, it is hard for me to see otherwise now. I didn’t mean it in such absolutism, but more along the lines of there are many who do not know the peace of mind that comes with a close relationship to God, and I want to correct it to what I posted later, about wisdom and salvation being different concepts with emphasis on the latter more for some than for others,.
I include the resurrection with spiritual salvation. By physical, I mean the literal physical preservation of a person or people from God’s judgment. For example, in the NT, a (if not “the”) major theme of judgment and destruction was the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Thus, salvation in many instances dealt with surviving or avoiding that “wrath to come”. Most of the references, at least in our day, Christianity has decided to equate with something yet to happen even in our own future.
Great point. The things of God are foolish to fleshly men (1 Corinthians 2:14) and the beginning of all wisdom is the “fear of Yahweh” (Proverbs 9:10).
Another good point. We’re warned against “being wise in our own eyes” (Proverbs 3:7). My own take on this from experience is that the more I learn, knowledge wise, the dumber I get. I think this can be expressed mathematically. If I know 10 things my knowledge can be said to be 10. At 2 questions per each of those 10 things I have 20 ignorance. If I answer all 10 of those questions via seeking knowledge, I now have 20 knowledge with say at least 2 new questions per each thing I learned. In an infinite universe, a man who seeks knowledge will only find how puny his understanding really is despite all efforts.
Romans 7:14 tells us that the law is spiritual. God’s moral law is widely neglected today due to a successful smear campaign that it is “done away with”. I strive to study, understand, and apply God’s law now to be spiritual.
Sadly, I think SJWs leave modern believers in the dust “explaining” their beliefs because they’ve made gains. Neither have anything to brag about, but modern Christianity is super cucked.
The following is a great example of arguing God’s law from logic, instead of the useless, “well, this is what it says in scripture’ or ‘this is what Jesus did and he was the Son of God”, as you well point out is all but useless in the marketplace of ideas:
“Child trafficking amounts to kidnapping, which according to Exodus 21:16 is a capital crime, as determined by the Only One with the authority to designated what constitutes a capital criminal.
Instead, if convicted, he’ll be in prison for short period of time. In other words, his housing, clothing, food, and entertainment will be at the expense of innocent tax-payers, some of which will the parents of those he victimized. This, thanks to Amendment 8’s prohibition against “cruel and unusual punishment.”
Just think, had the constitutional framers (like their 17th-century Colonial forbears) established a biblical government based upon Yahweh’s unchanging moral law (including His penal laws), kidnapping pedophiles would be put to death not imprisoned. In fact, no one would be imprisoned as a penalty for any crime.
Under the Bible’s juridical system prisons are superfluous. Convicted capital criminals are put to death expeditiously, per Ecclesiastes 8:11. Non-capital criminal are required to pay two to five times restitution (depending upon the nature of the crime) to their VICTIMS, per Exodus 22:1ff, etc. If a thief is unable to pay the required restitution, he’s to be sold into indentured servitude until restitution has been paid, per Exodus 22:3. If he refuses to pay restitution, his contempt of court is a capital crime for which he’s to be put to death expeditiously, per Deuteronomy 17:9-13.
Perfect, just like King David said it was in Psalm 19:7-11. Under such a system, crime would be all but unheard of and tax-paid-for prisons would non-existent.
For more, see online Chapter 17 “Amendment 8: Bail, Fines, and Cruel and Unusual Punishments” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective”
– Pastor Ted Weiland
fair enough, but is it just about achieving ‘a system that works’. I agree that Christianity is about right conduct, living a Christian life etc., but perhaps it is not just about that. To my mind the important of masculinity in relation to Christian faith relates mainly to those kinds of virtues that it permits, including say honesty, integrity, courage, valour etc. None of those are specifically christian, and the martial spirit in relation to the church has always been complex, however I would say they are highly sympathetic. Feminized beta christianity on the other hand, although it might see itself in terms of ‘compassion’ or acceptance, seems closer to anything goes attitude.
“For example, in the NT, a (if not “the”) major theme of judgment and destruction was the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD”
I’m a bit rusty I’m afraid. Out of interest do you recall which books of the NT address that.
I think you’re right. The more we learn, the more we realise how little we know. Of course it’s also a question of the ‘kind’ of knowledge that matters ultimately. A learned professor might know vastly more than you or I , but a child or beggar might be capable of seeing something that vanity in knowledge might necessarily obscure. As such the understanding may also be about the failure of understanding, and acknowledging the latter may become the only kind of wisdom we are capable of.
well with the exception of paedophiles who kidnap children I’m not that big on capital punishment, although I understand the case for it. Those details aside, the principle is probably sound, since you are not relying upon scripture to argue your point amongst those who have may have no reason to believe it has any inherent virtue. For myself, although I regard myself as a Christian at least broadly speaking I’m partly in the latter camp insofar as I do not see the virtue of everything in it. I believe in the ten commandments, but I don’t think one can truly believe that such commandments are valid if it is simply a question of the fact that they come from authority – from scripture, or even from God. One has to see for oneself (or fail to see for oneself). Only then can one affirm or disaffirm God’s law, on whatever basis. I appreciate that might not be quite how you see things
Here’s a list of the Greek word translated “saved” and the NT passages they are used in (118 times). You can examine whichever passage and its context that way:
http://www.blbclassic.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G4982&t=KJV
Likewise “salvation”:
http://www.blbclassic.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G4991&t=KJV
thanks, I’ll take a look when I can, although I was more interested in allusions to the destruction of the temple in the NT which I didn’t know about
YW. Try the following link for that, most specifically “Interpretation of the Great Tribulation”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterism#Schools_of_preterist_thought
will do, thanks
It depends entirely on what one means when they say “Luciferian”.
Steve Bannon references this aristocratic fascist as one of his influences…
Unless you’re delivering that as a compliment, I suggest that you leave this site.
Thank God, (sorry Julius, RIP), Julius Evola’s fascination with Dadaism was short-lived (!); and he quickly segued into Occultism.
You are wrong. He mentioned Evola one time, but not as influence. If Bannon were influenced by Evola he wouldn’t be rabidly pro-jew.
Name calling zealots like yourself would like to impose a black and white view of history. You’re a troll. Anyone with common sense and practical life experience knows that things are never that simple and only professional liars use these tactics.
Haven’t read this yet, but here’s a direct link:
https://www.pdf-archive.com/2016/10/20/ride-the-tiger/ride-the-tiger.pdf
interesting article, I am becoming more inclined to read Evola. Some below warn against anything occult, and it’s worth remembering perhaps that with occult, you may be engaging with a deeper language which once you start to speak it fluently may involve ideas that sit awkwardly or even in antagonism with traditional monotheism and christianity. I don’t think that should discourage interrogating such material, at least where the approach is broadly sympathetic, and as indicated above would appear to be a compatible with a strong set of traditional core values – appollonian values of order and rationality it would seem rather than the disintegrative chaos of passion and ‘lusts’. Evola’s take on approaching desire and material wants seem healthy too. I like the sense of stoicism and the will to self-mastery. Appetites must be reined in it seems, but not because they are inherently wrong and harmful but rather because unchecked desire produces not only suffering as in the eastern way of thinking but impotence. Specifically as occultism, this is interesting insofar as in a sense it might be seen to inhabit the same ‘universe’ as say the practice of sex magick and thelema, while nonetheless conceptualising a completely different relationship to energy and libido.
Evola’s embrace of the occult after rejecting monotheism just reaffirms man’s need for dogma and ritual. Even people that don’t believe in god feel more fulfilled with some kind of spiritual system. Anton lavey knew this, and used ritual and dogma in satanism even though he didn’t actually worship the devil, but rather himself.
All non-Christian religions are some form of humanism.
I think that’s very true. Whether it serves quite the same purpose or fulfils ‘spiritual’ needs in quite the same way is another question. The equivalence of the worship of the self as an alternative to a deity, and the basis upon which it may be done, is also a very interesting matter
Disagree with point one. First off, an omnipotent God is as much a part of traditional Christian belief as it is of Judaism and Islam. Secondly there are still some things which to this day defy earthly explanation. The collapse of the Soviet Union for example. The post-war Soviet Union was fresh and purposeful, had robust economic growth into the 1970s and far outstripped the West militarily. Yet beginning in the mid 1980s it suddenly went into fatal decline. When a nation starts off by imprisoning and murdering tens of thousands of clergy and millions of faithful laypeople, God won’t take that kindly. I believe divine intervention destroyed the USSR. Odd that a nation that exported food before the revolution suddenly became unable to feed itself, or that it had sky high infant mortality despite free and widely available pre and post natal care. Shows that biblical plagues are not limited to biblical times.
Communism has always failed, that’s the biggest reason. Russia had poor leadership, plain and simple. Opposition to the church was the result of communism’s inherent atheism; it was a byproduct of a flawed system of government that was already doomed to fail. Chalking everything up to divine retribution is a cop out.
Yahweh (God) doesn’t change (Malachi 3:6). His plagues and His judgments against the wicked are the same today as they’ve ever been.
Most of the curses of Deuteronomy 28 have already come to pass in the West.
Yahweh is not God, only a demiurge…
Look it’s just you (and anyone who liked your post) have a totally wrong idea about the real situation in the former Soviet Union (ecnomic or otherwise). That why you think its fall was caused by “divine intervention”
Gurdjieff is worth a look at too, though to be honest I’ve met a few of his modern-day followers over the years and they strike me as slightly nutty. (What Gurdjieff called “candidate-for-lunatic-asylum,” ironically, since that fate was what his work was intended to avoid.)
Gurdjieff quotations
“In order to do you must know; but to know you must find out how to know. We cannot find this out by ourselves.”
“It is clear that a man left to his own devices cannot wring out of his little finger the knowledge of how to develop – and still less, exactly what to develop in himself.”
“The more a man studies the obstacles and deceptions which lie in wait for him at every step in this realm, the more convinced he becomes that it is impossible to travel the path of self-development on the chance instructions of chance people, or the kind of information culled from reading and casual talk.”
“To break through to this stream (of knowledge), to find it — this is the task and the aim of the search; for, having found it, a man can entrust himself boldly to the way by which he intends to go; then there only remains ‘to know’ in order ‘to be’ and ‘to do.’ On this way a man will not be entirely alone; at difficult moments he will receive support and guidance, for all who follow this way are connected by an uninterrupted chain.”
“A long and difficult journey is before you; you are preparing for a strange and unknown land. The way is infinitely long. You do not know if rest will be possible on the way nor where it will be possible. You should be prepared for the worst. Take all the necessities for the journey with you.”
“Do not be over curious nor waste time on things that attract your attention but are not worth it. Time is precious and should not be wasted on things which have no direct relation to your aim.”
Some Aphorisms that Gurdjieff had posted on the wall of his Institute:
Remember yourself always and everywhere.
Like what your machine does not “like.”
The highest that a human can attain is to be able to “do” – i.e., to act consciously.
The worse the conditions of life, the more productive the work — if you remember to work.
You come to a School to struggle only with yourself. Thank everyone who gives you that opportunity.
A School can only create conditions, not help.
A school can be useful only to those who have recognized their nothingness and who believe in the possibility of growth.
Only help one who is not an idler.
Love all who love work.
Only conscious suffering has any value.
Work is not for work’s sake but is only a means for further growth.
He who has freed himself of the disease “tomorrow” has a chance to attain what he came here for.
Sleep little without regret; rest comes not from the quantity but from the quality of sleep.
Energy spent on active work is immediately transformed into a fresh supply, but that spent on passive work is lost forever.
One of the best means for arousing the wish to work on oneself is to realize that you may die at any moment. But first you must learn how to keep it in mind.
One is given a potentially unlimited number of experiences, but only those consciously received are of any use to you.
After reading most of his works, here’s my take on Evola : an often accurate diagnosis of the modern world. Some interesting thoughts on how to be as much detached as possible from it.
For that, he’s worth reading.
But for the rest, his thoughts mostly consist of some obscur, pretentious and verbose new age mishmash and his idea of “tradition”, which has only existed in his mind, which allows him to discard everything that doesn’t fit his worldview as an early sign of degeneration.
And as for the man himself, a weird degenerate dandy, with a serious lack of humility, whom I have no desire to emulate.
A very overrated right wing thinker.
A more interesting reactionary read would be Joseph De Maistre.
Very interesting. I lean towards a synthesis between classic liberalism and Western conservatism. I think that José Ortega y Gasset was a much more symphathetic and humble thinker, who offered an “aristocratic liberalism”, something to aspire for regardless of origin within the frames of a democratic society. Ethics, character, and intelligence rather than static, essentialist categories that have never even existed in the romanticized fashion that Evola believed.
With that said Evola makes many good points and had much knowledge to offer on various esoteric topics that few know much about. So one can read him almost solely for that end.
As far his penchant for radical aristocratic “fascism” and occult racialism I don’t like it that much at all.
My problems with Evola are deeper, this is a comment (slightly edited) I made (in other site) about his doctrines:
1. If history have cycles, and we are in the kaliyuga, and this cycles are not caused by ‘terrrenal forces”; then there is nothing we can do to reverse/return to a golden age. In this order of ideas, any kind of resistance to the dissolution and subversion is completely useless and futile. So, we only have to wait for our honorable death as men among to ruins while the world is burning around us……
This is absurd, wrong and dangerous. This is basically a paralyzing myth. The forces of dissolution can be fight and we can win.
2. The biological race does not matter. Humans are tri partite beings with body, mind and spirit; and what its important is the last one, because its the direct link with the absolute. A thai buddhist monk is more closer to the absolute than a bourgeois aryan.
Race, like I said in another comment here, is the base. If you are going to build a beautiful sculpture you need marble. Marble is the only type of stone who could give you beauty and could last in time. You can’t build a beautiful and perennial statue with clay.
3. Related with 1), if the kaliyuga is not caused by ‘terrenal’ forces, then the role of judaism is an effect, not the cause of the subversion of degeneration. So we are wrong blaming them….
If you really think that judaism is not the cause but an effect of the process of subversion and decadence we face today, you really, really need to open your eyes.”
In a way I think that Evola makes a valid point about class categories that makes sense. For example aristocrats in France, Germany and Italy had more in common in the 1930s than an Italian aristocrate and an Italian peasant.
Or to look more globally, I may have more in common with a person with similar preferences and educational background, who has mixed or non-white background, than let’s say a random Norwegian who works at Statoil and watches mindless tv shows.
I am not saying that genetics and national culture are irrelevant, but categories overlap and also “secondary identity markers” can be of quite big significance.
Evola has some valid points, and of course its better to read him than Foucault (just to give an extreme example); but my point is that in -the long shot- his doctrines could lead to confusion and misdirection.
In a sense you are right when saying that some people seem more ‘close to us’ that certain members of our own race (I have known mongrels who are decent and even more ‘close to us’ than some german wigger) but they are not our people, they are not our extended family.
Actually I have referred to Foucault in some articles. Not the ideological stuff, but that which explains how history affects discourses of knowledge, power, and surveillence. The problem is not that he has made some valid points within social “sciences”, but that this degenerate was made into a “star” of the left-wing.
You did?
To be honest, deconstructionism/poststructuralism/whatever is just philosophical nonsense and marxist/degenerate propaganda. I don’t think there is a single sentence from Foucault/Derrida/Guattari/Lacan/whatever worth saving.
I am bit more nuanced. I often try to find something good in everything, despite fundamental flaws, as long it is based on some real data and logic.
Yes, very true, I forgot to address 1#. His entire surfing on the tiger thing is basically a call to apathy and inaction.
I get your point but I think it is a simplification. Since no political (the fact that Reagan and Trump are the least bad presidents in America says much) or spiritiual organization have any real, deeper value, a more internal position appears relevant. One can still be involved and tell the truth, make a good job, have a strong character, and be aware of the causal laws, but it would be foolish into thinking that this or that group is a true hope. I think that is the case albeit one does not really buy into the doctrine of regression of the castes, Kali Yuga etc.
Regardless, one does not need to absorb every aspect anyway.
Nice article, these kind of writings are good in introducing authors to the regulars and newcomers of the site and relating said authors viewpoints to them.