Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Evola On Race

Evola On Race

Ratings: (0)|Views: 408|Likes:
Published by STAMPALIA
Difference between Higher & Lower Views on Racism however Meaningless to Discuss Today (from "The Path of Cinnabar")
Difference between Higher & Lower Views on Racism however Meaningless to Discuss Today (from "The Path of Cinnabar")

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, History
Published by: STAMPALIA on May 12, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less

07/06/2013

pdf

text

original

 
Difference between Higher & Lower Views on Racism however Meaningless to Discuss Today(from "The Path of Cinnabar")[...] Racist ideology, as is known, had always played a prominent role within National Socialism:generally promoted in an extremist and primitive fashion, racism represented one of the mostproblematic features of the Third Reich, and one in need of rectification. On the one hand,racism was associated with anti-Semitism; on the other, racism had given rise to 'pagan'tendencies, the chief exponent of which was Alfred Rosenberg. As I already mentioned whentalking of 
Pagan Imperialism,
Rosenberg - whom I had personally met - regarded me as thespokesman of an Italian current similar to his own. In fact, the differences between my ownthought and that of Rosenberg were very conspicuous. In his well-known book entitled
The Myth
of 
the Twentieth Century,
Rosenberg, not unlike myself, had quoted authors such as Wirth andBachofen in order to discuss the idea of Nordic origins, and to provide a dynamic historicalanalysis of various civilizations from a racist perspective. Rosenberg's study, however, wassuperficial and imprecise; politically, it was aimed at serving, almost exclusively, Germaninterests. Rosenberg also lacked any understanding of holiness and transcendence - hence hismost primitive critique of Catholicism, a religion which he even attacked, in a kind of renewed
Kulturkampf,
by borrowing the most obsolete arguments from Enlightenment and secularistpolemics. The 'myth of the twentieth century', according to Rosenberg, was to be the myth of blood and race: 'A new myth of life that is called forth to create, along with a new kind of life, anew kind of state and of civilization.'As for the racism of the German state, it merged a sort of pan-Germanic nationalism with theideas of biological science. With respect to the latter, I believe that Trotsky was not far off themark when he described racism as a kind of zoological materialism. The German state embracedbiology, eugenics, and the theory of heredity, accepting all the materialist assumptions behindsuch doctrines. This led National Socialism to posit the unilateral dependence of the superior tothe inferior: of the psychic and super-biological part of man to the biological. This materialistview was little affected by the superimposition of a vague mystique of blood. A materialistperspective was also responsible for the National Socialist illusion that mere prophylacticintervention on the biological level - an intervention, that is, upon the physical race - mightautomatically better all aspects of the life of peoples and nations. Where a similar analysis mighthave proven valid was in the idea that it is not the state, society or civilization which are of central importance, but rather race - had 'race' here been understood in its higher sense, asdescribing the deepest and most fundamental components of man. Also potentially valid was theNational Socialist acknowledgement of the need and opportunity to 'fight for a worldview'appropriate for the Aryan man - this representing a means of promoting a broad reassessment of the values which have come to inform the Western world. A negative element, instead, was thefanatical anti-Semitism of National Socialism, something which many people have regrettablycome to identify with racism
tout court.
 On more than one occasion in the past, I had already had my say on the issue of materialistracism. As for Nazi neopaganism, at a press conference held in 1936 at the
Kulturbund 
of 
 
Vienna, I argued that its theories were enough 'to turn into Catholics even those best disposedtowards paganism'. I should also mention the fact that Mussolini expressed his approval of onearticle of mine entitled 'Race and Culture' ('Razza e cultura'), which I had published in 1935 inthe magazine
 Italian Review (Rassegna Italiana).
In this article, I affirmed the pre-eminence of formative ideas over merely biological and ethnic traits (the same argument I also made in thepages of my own section in
 Regime Fascista).
An editorial of mine in Balbo's newspaper,
Corriere Padano,
was also well-received by the upper echelons of the Fascist regime. Theeditorial was entitled 'The Duty of Being Aryan' ('Responsabilita di dirsi ariani'), and was aimedat criticizing the fetish of physical race. I here denounced the irrelevance of 'Aryanness' as anexpression used merely to denote individuals who are neither Jewish nor colored, rather than as aterm employed in the spiritual and ethical sense to imply a certain duty towards oneself. Racism,I suggested, certainly expressed legitimate needs, but needed to be redefined on a different basis.By exploiting my aforementioned influence in certain German circles, I sought to promote arectification of racist ideology. The opportunity for me to take a more decisive stand on thematter, however, only presented itself in 1938, when Fascism suddenly turned 'racist' and issuedits 'Race Manifesto'.As in the case of many other policies adopted by the Fascist regime, most people today havemisunderstood the Fascist embrace of racism. It is generally believed that Fascism passivelyfollowed Hitler in this regard, and that racism, in Italy, was merely something imported. It iscertainly true that racist ideology had no precedents in Italy - not least because of the historicalprecedents of the country - and that it only took hold with difficulty. Yet, intrinsic and legitimatereasons existed for the Fascist promotion of racism. Firstly, the establishment of an empire inAfrica, and the new contact with colored peoples such an empire entailed, required a sense of remoteness, and for the racial consciousness of the Italian people to be strengthened, as - to avoidforms of dangerous promiscuity and to safeguard a necessary colonial prestige. Besides, thesame approach was favored by Britain until very recently - had it been maintained by Whites, itwould have forestalled the kind of 'anti-colonial' uprisings which struck at the heart of aweakened Europe like a righteous Nemesis in the aftermath of the Second World War.A second justification for the Fascist embrace of racism was the well documented anti-Fascistsentiment of international Jewry, which intensified following Italy's alliance with Germany. Itwas only natural, therefore, for Mussolini to react. The suffering of Jews in Fascist Italy - a smallthing in comparison to that of Jews in Germany - was due to the attitude of Jews on the otherside of the Alps. The third and most important reason for the Fascist adoption of racism,however, was Mussolini's ambition to invest his 'revolution' with more than a merely politicalsignificance by shaping a new kind of Italian. Mussolini correctly believed that politicalmovements and states require adequate and well-defined human resources in order to survive andassert themselves. It is as a means to secure such resources that Mussolini first approached themyth of race and blood.The Italian 'Race Manifesto', however, which had been hurriedly assembled on Mussolini'sorders, proved a slipshod piece of work. No doubt, Italy lacked individuals capable of discussingsimilar issues. The same carelessness that marked the Manifesto also surfaced in the course of the Fascist racial campaign, which was partly articulated by means of cheap and virulent
 
polemics. All of a sudden, a whole bunch of Fascist men of letters and journalists realized theywere 'racists', and started using the word 'race' at every turn, to describe the most varied and lesspertinent things. People also started talking of the 'Italian race', an utterly meaningless idea,given that no modem nation corresponds to one race - Italy least of all. The various Europeanraces described in racial studies rather feature as the single components of a whole in almost allWestern nations.In 1937, the publisher from Hoepli entrusted me with the writing of a history of racism. Thebook was entitled
The Myth of Blood (II milo del sangue),
and a second edition of the work waspublished during the war. In this volume, I discussed the antecedents of racism in the ancientworld (where 'race' was seen not as a myth, but as a living reality), and in the centuries leadingup to the present day. I then outlined the modern variants of racial ideology by describing thebasic ideas of de Gobineau, Woltmann, de Lapouge, Chamberlain and various other authors. Ialso examined racist views of anthropology, genetics, heredity and typology, and discussed theracist view of history and the foundations of anti-Semitism. Finally, I provided an outline of thevarious forms of political racism in Hitler's day. The book, with its descriptive character, allowedme to clarify a number of points.The research I had conducted in order to write
The Myth of Blood 
Ied me to develop a racialdoctrine of my own. I outlined such a doctrine in a book entitled
Synthesis of the Doctrine of  Race (Sintesi di dottrina della razza),
which was published by Hoepli in 1941 (a slightly revisededition was published in German by Runge Verlag of Berlin). The appendix of the volumeincluded 52 photos.One's idea of race depends on one's idea of man: the nature of each racial doctrine is determinedby its conceptualization of the human being. All distortions in the field of racism derive from amaterialist view of man, a view informed by science and naturalism. By contrast, at the verybasis of my racial doctrine I placed the traditional idea of man as a being comprised of threeelements: body, character and spirit. I argued that an exhaustive racial theory has to take all threeelements into account by examining race in its threefold manifestation: as race of the body, raceof the character, and race of the spirit. Racial 'purity' is found when these three races stand inharmonious balance with one another, each race shining through the other two. This, however,has long been only a rare occurrence. The most unwelcome consequence of the various cases of miscegenation which have occurred during the historical development of human society is notthe alteration of the physical race and psychosomatic type - what ordinary racism is chieflyconcerned with - but, rather, the divide and contrast between the three kinds of races within thesame individual. As a consequence of such miscegenation, one finds men whose body no longerreflects their character, and whose emotional, moral and volitional dispositions no longer agreewith their spiritual inclinations. 'Spirit' should here be distinguished from 'character' as thatcomponent of man in touch with higher values that transcend life. In this sense, the 'race of thespirit' manifests itself in the different approaches to the sacred, to destiny and to the question of life and death, as well as in world-views, religions, etc. I here argued, therefore, that three levelsof racism ought to be distinguished in order to reflect the three kinds of races: the first level of racism pertaining to the race of the body, the second to the race of the character, and the third tothe race of the spirit.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->