[mikema63]

Do you prefer the clockwise interpretation?

[Far-Right Sage]

Time was viewed cyclically for thousands of years, Michael, with popular belief during the Vedic period being but one example.

This view has begun, in the past thirty or thirty-five years or so, to gain a fair bit of traction, at least in the intellectual world within the West, which is a credit to the scholarly work of men such as Eliade. One can foresee a time in the future in which the Abrahamic obsession with linear time and progression as a leading viewpoint within the mainstream Western consciousness is severely marginalized as a form of philosophic break with certain unsavory, formerly established traditions.

[starman2003]

It's suffice to say that as our own Rei has indicated, I don't believe the user Starman's ideas have a wide degree of traction within the bosom of the far-right community present.

Due to the effects of Scotch, Bourbon and Gin. At a time of quickening advances in all fields, a phenomenon unique in history, I don't think a progressive, linear view will give way to a cyclical one--despite of course, repudiation of the holy joe take.

[Rei Murasame]

It will indeed, because the Whig version of history - which you are now defending - is actually held in scorn by almost everyone except Anglo-American liberals.

History is a spiral, and I think that this will become blatantly obvious to everyone once the resource crunch kicks in and capitalism finishes penetrating every region of the world around 2025.



The Kunming–Singapore Railway will likely be completed around 2020, and by that time things will be getting really late in the day, because once that connection is made, the present world system will have swift access for passengers and cargo to everywhere where there is a civilisation that can trade.

After that point, we will see a decade of turbulent times, as economic crisis will continue, off-shoring will continue in earnest, and global capitalism will finally push against its geographical limits. The moment will be upon us.

How will the rise of China, and for that matter, the rise of India as well, affect the underlying dynamics of the existing world system itself – the capitalist world-economy? Immanuel Wallerstein argues that the existing world system has entered into a structural crisis. The system has developed to the point that several secular trends have now reached their respective asymptotes, exhausting the system's space of self-adjustment. We are now in an age of great transition, at the end of which the existing historical system should be replaced by one or several other systems (Wallerstein 1995; 1996; 1998; 2003).

In other words, we do not live in "normal" times. In the coming century, instead of expecting more "development," more "modernization," more upward mobility, more of the same pattern of systemic dynamics that we have observed and with which we have become familiarized over the past five or six centuries, it may be more appropriate to expect more bifurcations, more chaos, more transformations and transitions, and more "turns" and "tricks" of the world history.

[Far-Right Sage]

It will be rather sublime to witness the contradictions which are to come fall upon certain heads as if they were indeed steel anvils in some sort of cartoon or comic strip. Many interesting developments are to come; I'll no doubt smile upon them in some form, as the status quo in any capacity has proven terribly unacceptable.

Starman, I enjoy your attitude, but I do believe some of your aims have fallen out of fascism's periphery. It would be encouraging to see a bit of self-analysis on those positions or at least an explanation for anything with the potential for causing controversy and turning numerous fascists away.

[Rei Murasame]

It will be rather sublime to witness the contradictions which are to come fall upon certain heads as if they were indeed steel anvils in some sort of cartoon or comic strip. Many interesting developments are to come; I'll no doubt smile upon them in some form, as the status quo in any capacity has proven terribly unacceptable.

Pretty much, when that moment comes, it will be time for people on both the far ends of the spectrum to play whatever hand that have accumulated. The one thing that is certain is that liberalism will end up fighting for its life, perhaps even physically.

[mikema63]

I'm not really sure what you mean about a time being a cycle, it sort of looks like your saying that things tend to become more like they were in another period of history and cycle through. While I see how that is possible I do not see why it is contained in the nature of time and space.

Of course time is relative after all.

[starman2003]

I'm not really sure what you mean about a time being a cycle, it sort of looks like your saying that things tend to become more like they were in another period of history and cycle through.

Many past civilizations arose, peaked and then declined and fell. But I don't buy the cyclical interpretation, the spenglerian view of civilization as a sort of organism that inevitably matures and then dies. That's not rational.

While I see how that is possible I do not see why it is contained in the nature of time and space.

It isn't supported by either entropy or cosmic evolution.

[Orestes]

Rei, you should totally read Otto Rahn's Lucifers Court (unless you already have).


My two cents on the topic.

Even though fascism is naturally compatible with some form of esoterism due to its own para-religious undertones, I think this compatibility makes it in turn somewhat incompatible with mainstream political discourse, which it has to engage in order to gain and maintain respectability.

Back in the day the mainstream was Christian, today it's increasingly secularised, none of these seating too well with the occult. Hitler, being the political player that he was, realised those cultural realities to be reckoned with and lost his patience for esoterica the higher he moved up the ladder - his disrespect for the more mystical musings of Rosenberg is known, and Himmler could pursue his interests with the Ahnenerbe because he was valuable in other roles (still at times iritating Hitler with it), similarly the German Faith Movement was tolerated, but not treated preferentially; In Italy Evola never managed to have much sway either.

Mein Kampf (distancing himself from Ariosophists):

The characteristic of most of these natures is that they abound in old Germanic heroism, that they revel in the dim past, stone axes, spear and shield, but that in natura they are the greatest cowards imaginable. For the same people who wave about old Germanic tin swords carefully imitated, and wear a prepared bearskin with bull's horns covering their bearded heads always preach for the present only the fight with spiritual weapons and flee quickly in sight of every communist blackjack. Posterity will have little cause for glorifying their heroic existence in a new epic. I got to know these people too well not to feel the deepest disgust at this miserable comedy. They make a ridiculous impression on the great masses, and the Jew has every reason to spare these folk comedians, even to prefer them to the true fighters for the coming German State.

My New Order:

National Socialism is not a cult-movement — a movement for worship: it is exclusively a volkisch political doctrine based upon racial principles...We will not allow mystically-minded occult folk with a passion for exploring the secrets of the world beyond to steal into our Movement.

The Far-Right seems to have been the most receptive to kooky stuff before, and especially after, the virile phase of fascism in the West. I doubt that if the fascist proposal hadn't been excluded as one of the possible political alternatives, it would have ever given the attention to the likes of Savitri Devi and Serrano (assuming those would have even appeared on the stage in such circumstances) as it has after the war, with occultist exploration becoming for many a substitute for actual, meaningful politics to channel their energy into.

[Rei Murasame]

Well, it's always easier to just cop out and not talk about anything religious, but ultimately it can't really be avoided no matter how hard they try. If people went about things the easy way, they'd end up abandoning everything eventually anyway.

[michael3]

Time was viewed cyclically for thousands of years, Michael, with popular belief during the Vedic period being but one example.

This view has begun, in the past thirty or thirty-five years or so, to gain a fair bit of traction, at least in the intellectual world within the West, which is a credit to the scholarly work of men such as Eliade. One can foresee a time in the future in which the Abrahamic obsession with linear time and progression as a leading viewpoint within the mainstream Western consciousness is severely marginalized as a form of philosophic break with certain unsavory, formerly established traditions.

Cycles as in Neitzsche's 'Eternal Return'? No. But a cyclical view of history in which it is recognized that human history always falls into certain cyclical patterns because of human nature? Yes. All that the Abrahamic/Pauline/Augustinian linearism is saying is that there will come an End which will objectively shatter this cycle, a Speciation Event, the 'New Man'.

[Orestes]

Well, it's always easier to just cop out and not talk about anything religious, but ultimately it can't really be avoided no matter how hard they try. If people went about things the easy way, they'd end up abandoning everything eventually anyway.

...... Why ?

Are you somehow not confident the materialist components of fascism can enjoy sustainable legitimacy without the backing of some cooked-up narratives about lost continents and White people from space, which are sure to offend the intellect of most educated Westerners ?

The intersection between Far-Right and occult emerged from a certain cultural climate at the break of centuries (Revolt Against Positivism), that is not really relevant today, and I think acting like it was can only serve to marginalise your cause (I am assuming here of course secularisation will progress in the next 20 - 30 years, since I don't see why it wouldn't).

Also Rei, congrats on your Argentum Astrum

[Figlio di Moros]

Are you somehow not confident the materialist components of fascism can enjoy sustainable legitimacy without the backing of some cooked-up narratives about lost continents and White people from space, which are sure to offend the intellect of most educated Westerners ?

If you think spiritual fascism is "white people from space", you're utterly insincere and decieved in the nature of spiritual fascism. The contents of our beliefs are not the wackjob scenerios of "ancient astronaut theorists", not the Alex Jones types. We're not even so unrealistic as creationists. To equate us with such either shows a serious misunderstanding on your part, or willfull deception to demean our views.

However, the idea that challenging the perspective of liberal-capitalism cannot be challenged without challenging the viewpoint of liberal-capitalism (materially, socially, and spiritually) is completely correct. Religion does inform politics, no matter how delusioned we are to believe otherwise. To assume we can have an informed discussion with the international-financier class while they poison the minds of those they destroy is more absurd than the idea we should have a spiritual perspective to our position, is it not?

[Orestes]

Even if the doctrines of Esoteric Fascism are to be treated metaphorically instead of literally, then frankly that doesn't make them much less silly in XXI century West. It simply pushes them right at square one to the same region where Bible stories gradually had to move in the light of scientific discoveries about physical reality.

It's fighting the poison of Christianity with a poison of your own making.

But I also cannot exactly know how I misunderstand you, since you haven't explained how you yourself interpret those doctrines, you just told me I am wrong about your beliefs.

Religion does inform politics, no matter how delusioned we are to believe otherwise.

That is somewhat US-centric. Politicians pander to the cultural Zeitgeist. If it happens to be secular, then politics becomes secular as well, it's not that complicated.

[Figlio di Moros]

The linear progression of history, secular as it is, is a dogmatic look at world history and one that informs politics and society, no matter what the scientific view of it is. To assume secular and religious are distinct is erronous in and of itself, since many secular views are equally dogmatic and all-encompassing as any religious one you'll find.

[Orestes]

The linear view is an overhang of Judeo-Christianity, and I would say it informs rhetoric (again, to greater degree in US than elsewhere) more than actual on-the-ground politics, let alone "society". It will probably wither away together with the religion that gave birth to it, and (is my hope) be replaced with no specific historiosophy at all.

You are conflating the dogmatism of secularism's adherents with the idea of secularism itself. The difference with religion is that, ideally, the secular is the sphere where statements are supposed to be testable and intersubjectively confirmable (not always happens, but the corrective is still there as an in-built part).

The religious has no analogical mechanism of self-examination, and the only constraint on its claims is the imagination of the followers, not logic and not feasability, so it cannot be reasoned with.

"Hitler was an avatara of Vishnu" is a sentence that is not even true or false, but has literally no epistemological status, it's like a perfectly smooth orb that cannot be grasped by the fingers on any side of it.

I fail to see what good can come from society being guided by principles of the latter sphere. I have no more to say.

[michael3]

The linear progression of history, secular as it is, is a dogmatic look at world history and one that informs politics and society, no matter what the scientific view of it is. To assume secular and religious are distinct is erronous in and of itself, since many secular views are equally dogmatic and all-encompassing as any religious one you'll find.

What it does do is break the dead hand of ancient Greek Philosophy, and the concept of 'eternal truths' and 'autonomous morality/ethics' which has been the bane of both Christianity and true Science from the beginning. Linear Time at least makes the idea of progress even a possibility, even as another view could see the 'line into the future' as a degeneration leading to Apocalypse....Hmm.

[Sithsaber]

Technically there are cyclical cycles that permeate a linear whole. "There is nothing new under the sun" and numerous alluding to past glory ages and symbolic events are in the bible. Yet Christ becoming flesh can not be viewed as a repeating event, seeing how it is portrayed a s the moment when the Devil lost. Even the apocalypse is linear but has cyclical aspects, seeing how both Satan will be forever thrown into the lake of fire and a new heavens and the earth being born will coincide with the eternal victory of the city in the clouds. Although most of this is probably figurative.

[Red_Bull]

I'm glad Fasces started this thread. I was thinking of making a similar one given how I've evolved to appreciate some elements of fascism. All this esoteric nonsense spouted by their idol Serrano has no scientific basis at all. To suggest blood is some kind of mystical liquid is insanity. Even if one were to entertain the ideas of Serrano there is no way to prove them. The obsession with myths like Atlantis and lost continents like Lemuria are distractions to the goals of fascism. Fascism is inherently atheistic because it substitues slave morality for master morality. Serrano leads you to believe Aryans are like the Zerg in starcraft with a collective hive mind lol.

Serrano proves his stupidity with his claim Hitler was an avatar for aryans. Yeah, slaughtering human beings is really noble . I bet Serrano in private was a holocaust denier.

[Sithsaber]

To be fair fascists believe they have moved past nobility, kind of like a Jungian great work where the limits are the ones they impose themselves. In other words, they bathe in blood and call it a spa.