Spiritual Racism

Have the denizens of Holla Forums ever wondered why racial nationalism in the way its understood now has yet to get off the ground? Have you ever wondered what would happen to the good and peaceable non-whites if Richard Spencer's White Imperium™ were to happen tomorrow? Have you ever spent extended lengths of time reconciling with yourself the idea that despite being a White Nationalist/National Socialist, you partake in non-white cultural practices with no clear negatives happening from it? I could go on forever about confusions of race, with examples such as the lightskin vs. darkskin debacle among blacks, Italy's historical indifference to biological racism, etc., but if any of these thoughts have ever crossed your mind, I want you to read this:

juliusevola.net/excerpts/Difference_between_Higher_&_Lower_Views_on_Racism_however_Meaningless_to_Discuss_Today.html

I will be posting excerpts from the article just in case some schmucks are too lazy and/or stupid to read and comprehend said article in it's entirety.

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.org/stream/cambridgemedieva009698mbp#page/n135/mode/2up
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Most, if not all of this article, is comprised of excerpts from The Path of Cinnabar, Julius Evola's final work. Just to clarify in case someone tries to make some bizarre reverse appeal to authority, this was his absolute final say on the topic of race. There are a lot of assumptions to unpack and I will enjoy seeing that unfold.


One's idea of race depends on one's idea of man: the nature of each racial doctrine is determined by its conceptualization of the human being. All distortions in the field of racism derive from a materialist view of man, a view informed by science and naturalism. By contrast, at the very basis of my racial doctrine I placed the traditional idea of man as a being comprised of three elements: body, character and spirit. I argued that an exhaustive racial theory has to take all three elements into account by examining race in its threefold manifestation: as race of the body, race of the character, and race of the spirit. Racial 'purity' is found when these three races stand in harmonious 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 not the alteration of the physical race and psychosomatic type - what ordinary racism is chiefly concerned with - but, rather, the divide and contrast between the three kinds of races within the same individual. As a consequence of such miscegenation, one finds men whose body no longer reflects their character, and whose emotional, moral and volitional dispositions no longer agree with their spiritual inclinations. 'Spirit' should here be distinguished from 'character' as that component of man in touch with higher values that transcend life. In this sense, the 'race of the spirit' 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 levels of 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 to the race of the spirit.
In my study of race, I argued that in accordance with the legitimate inner hierarchy of man, the inner race ought to be regarded as superior to the external and merely biological form. A similar approach called for a radical reassessment of the views of materialist racism, not least with respect to genetics and heredity. I rejected the fetish of merely physical racial purity, on the grounds that the purity of the external race of an individual is often preserved even when his inner race has dimmed or deteriorated (a common example of this is that of the Dutch and Scandinavians). Such an approach also put the problem of miscegenation into perspective: miscegenation certainly has negative consequences in those cases where the inner race is weak; yet if the inner race is strong, the presence of an external element, introduced - albeit not in excess - by means of interbreeding, potentially provides a galvanizing challenge (hence, the opposite problem of certain aristocratic stocks which degenerate on account of incestuous unions). These, and other, similar considerations I made in my book.

From a political and social perspective, I acknowledged the use of racism as the expression of an anti-egalitarian and anti-rationalistic approach. Racism clearly emphasizes the idea of differentiation, with regard to both the peoples and the members of a given people. Racism opposes the democratic ideology born of the Enlightenment which proclaims the identity and equal dignity of all human beings; on the contrary, racism asserts that humanity as such is either an abstract and fictitious concept, or the final stage in a process of degeneration, dissolution and collapse - a stage only to be posited as an outmost limit never actually to be reached. Human nature, instead, is ordinarily differentiated, and this differentiation is expressed in the form of different bloodlines and races. This differentiation constitutes the primary feature of humanity: not only is it a natural condition among all beings, but also a positive element, something which ought to exist, and ought to be defended and safeguarded. The acknowledgement of diversity never led me - unlike certain other racists - to conceive humanity as a series of isolated, self-contained units; nor did it lead me to reject all higher principles. A kind of unity is certainly conceivable for humanity, but only at a higher level; and such unity accepts and preserves differentiation at a lower level. Unity 'from below', on the other hand, is a regressive phenomenon: such is the leveling unity sought by democracy, 'integrationism', humanitarianism, pseudo-universalism and collectivism. De Gobineau had already criticized similar ideas, essentially by promoting racism in aristocratic terms.

The other, generally positive aspect of racism is its anti-rationalism, which accompanies the racist embrace of differentiation as an attempt to valorize the kind of qualities, dispositions and dignities which cannot be bought, gained or replaced, which do not derive from an external influence or from the environment, which are related to the living whole of an individual person, and which have their roots in a deep, organic terrain. Such is the foundation of the individual person, as opposed to the merely abstract or amorphous individual. My aforementioned racial theory provided a safe key to approach these issues by emphasizing the fact that human races cannot be discussed in the same terms as horse or cat breeds: for human life, unlike the life of animals, is not confined to instincts and bios.

My version of "spiritual racism" is nothing more than a higher realization that even we, the white race, are bastardized "Aryans" of old and that our higher self should be forced to prevail over our animalistic mongrelized blood over the course of tens of thousands of years. That's what I gather from the works of Miguel Serrano, Hermann Wieland, and to some extent the philosophers like Julius Evola. We haven't unlocked the ways to purifying ourselves and returning back to our former glory. Skin and hair white as snow or golden like the tales of almost every ancient civilization with deep blue eyes. Very few of those people are left in this world who are themselves likely fragments of a more purer time when we were truly "noble" peoples.

I choose to live with the recognition that I'm just a fragment in time of what was lost over the course of many millennia and that when the time is right to purify my mind, body, and soul I'll gladly do so and walk through the fires to shed this existence and be reborn. In the meantime it's my duty to focus on the noble half while keeping the animal beast side of me at bay. The pure Aryans didn't kill for saddistic pleasure no matter how much they were wronged. They were righteous with their intentions and did so because it was necessary even if that included genociding their enemies as a rebuttal. That's the path, that I see, that has to be taken, and it's a damn hard path sometimes.

tl;dr We're all bastards with a fraction of our populace being closer to the pure version of myths and legends. The choice is to overcome the animal and return to the noble in this life.

I see that someone hasn't swallowed the Mythpill.

Wow, I haven't been on here in a long ass time, and I'm happy with this response. Thank you for sharing! I definitely feel similar, but I chose this topic of Evola's specifically to address because I've noticed the energy of White Nationalism going in an even more confused direction. Especially on Twitter amongst Alt Right types, more and more do I see confused proles crying to each other about how they're betraying some foreign concept of race by simply acting in the way they were raised, be it something as trivial as smoking weed and listening to rap music or finding lightskin girls attractive. What I want people to take away from this information is that there is more to this life than collective group conflicts formed as projections of internet memes and data, and the self should be focused on more than anything, since there really is nothing left to be seen in what we call the "superior" current white race. Basically, find a craft and hone it with your loved ones and friends, and foster your own spiritual path among the ruins as opposed to clinging to sad videos of Hitler on the internet. I wish more people could understand Ride the Tiger.


Not sure if this is a meme I missed or not

Basically "sort yourself out" as Jordan B Peterson preaches.

It's the age old argumentation of ratios of collective vs individual thought process in an idyllic society.


Sort yourself out/ clean your room.
Only then are you qualified to speak for the collective.

Evola honestly just feels like a very very mediocre Yockey.
No not really.

What was this post even supposed to mean? Also, by referring to "collectives," you're still missing the point of Traditionalism at large and Evola's works, unless I'm just getting bogged down in semantics. Both individualism and collectivism are forms of equality, as they make swath generalizations about entire populations of people, with no room for quality and care in the face of efficiency and quantity, with plenty of assumptions in tow that get ignored by the average prole wanting nothing more than free toys and privileges. Start viewing societies as fundamental hierarchies, among their own populace as well as between other societies, with a place for everyone somewhere along the totem pole.


Kind of a useless low blow to Evola. Imperium came much later, and the Traditionalist School carved out it's own path in philosophy, distinct and logically conclusive as compared to any and every other ideology, especially of the time, instead of rebranding WN/NS for the millionth time. I will ask, though, was Imperium good? What makes it stand apart from works such as Spengler's?

Very much so.
In what aspect do you mean?

How is it unique and worth reading if I've already read endless right-wing works about the progressive decline of civilizations? I already have a head space for the subject and don't think it'd be worth reading, but I can be convinced otherwise to put it on my book back-burner (currently focused on religious works).

Hard to say when I don't know what you have read. But I'm not going to say what you should and shouldn't read, that's up to youself. Personally I dont even agree with Yockey on a lot of things but his analysis on rationalism is very well good, and he has a very unique way of putting things in way that you can fully understand and appreciate it even if you don't agree with it.
All I said is that I feel like evola is just a very cheap and plastic version of Yockey. Atleast I can understand and respect Yockey.

Sage was an error.

By 'sort yourself out' JBP encourages young men to seek and climb hierarchies of competence before attempting to "fix the entire economic and political system". "If you can't keep your own life in order why would anyone listen to you about keeping the world in order?"

By individual and collective I am in no way referring to equality. By collective I am referring to an individual's community. In this context I am referring to race as collective.

To improve or modify a collective race, an individual of that collective must first improve or modify themselves to those standard.

If we seek Aryan racial nobility, we must each live that way individually.

Children are not targeted. They grow up on children's shows, which promote liberalism and multiculturalism. Religious doctrines are often antithetic to such a cause. If you want an ideology to take hold, then you must start the indoctrination at birth.
I'm not really concerned with their welfare.
You must be looking for people who suffer from internal conflicts.

Of course Evola talked about alot more thing than Yockey did. I'm not sure if there field ever overlapped but the overall feel and way of thinking is very similar.

I've felt the same way myself and stopped reading books for a good decade because I knew what I felt I needed when it comes to the war we're in, but understanding the past and how we got here has opened my eyes in a far different light than I could have ever imagined. Haven't read Imperium myself, but I'm sure you're going to gain some perspectives that you wouldn't have if you hadn't read it. After Nietzsche I thought I had what philosophy I needed for the modern world down, but then I read Evola and realized Nietzsche is pretty bottom of the barrel except for a few concepts here and there.

What a boring thread i fight for my people because they are an extension of me. it doesnt matter if i sing in chinese and dance like an african

This might have been the single most retarded thing i have read in a very long time.

Please, spare us the fascination with Nietzsche and your lackluster understanding of Evola. Almost nothing about the former is his own and has been pointed out by better men that came after him. Evola is a step up from Nietzsche.

You don't really have a saying against those digits.

how do you read this garbage all hes trying to say is that not all whites are master race ubermensch but somehow he makes it unbearable to read

This sort of thinking could only apply to someone who sees themselves outside or above their racial community. Evola never truly understood the nature of the German volkish movements and it shows heavily in his writings. When you belong to something you cease to think of yourself in individual terms and begin to think in terms of group. Like if you were raising a small family you would no longer think of I but of us. This sort of opinion that one should focus solely on the betterment of one's self is not contrary to the modern world but an intrinsicate part of it.

There are no "good" non-whites. Every last one acts in a way counter to our interests and, for all intents and purposes, wants us dead. Your entire argument begins on a false pretense.
This implies that White nationalists ever considered absolutely all aspects of "non-white" culture to be bad, which is, again, a false pretense. Of course cultures have shared different aspects over thousands of years of interaction. This is natural. On the other hand, the mass destruction of one culture through the importation of hostile foreigners, both culturally and racially, is unprecedented and not natural in the slightest. This distinction is entirely necessary to make. I have no qualms about enjoying aspects of foreign cultures, since I am steadfast in the pride I feel for my own culture. Only an individual who is afraid of the weakness of their own culture would wish to isolate it excessively. The qualities of Western Civilisation stand for themselves without the need to autistically isolate and separate it from interacting with the other cultures of the world. Indeed, borrowing certain ideas and practices from other cultures can be incredibly beneficial to a people and actually ensure their survival (see the Japanese, who borrowed much military culture, discipline and organisation from the Prussians and French). First and foremost, my interests lie with the survival of our race. The survival of Western/White civilisation is merely a natural byproduct of this. If our race survives, then so will the greater civilisation we have produced, including its long legacy. Whether our civilisation borrows small bits from other non-white cultures is of no negative consequence to us if our race continues to thrive. What's more, it may even be beneficial if it ensures our race's survival.
Simply put, this is false. The Italians were every bit as "racist" as any other European power in regards to the conquered peoples in their colonial territories.

Imperium was spenglers work through a national socalist world view

Nice thread OP.

Evola wrote 28 books on topics ranging from religiousity and metaphysics to politics, and you're going to tell me that Yockey is a better Evola just because of Imperium? I don't know what to tell you, other than Evola's work is not very accessible so I understand at least partially why you would instinctively disregard it.


JBP? I agree with the rest of your post, though, albeit my definition and perspective on race is, I assume, skewed towards a different direction than yours. Do you really consider the boomer capitalist mass of holy rollers and cuck boys to be your race simply due to approximate genetics? I don't.


Not only that, but said ideology has to be presented as the default way of life (hmm, almost like a religion), with all other interpretations of this experience dumbed down to varying forms of evil, be it "racism" or inequality.
This varies from person to person, but I've met a lot of people in my life outside of politics that I share more in common with spiritually and characteristically than most in the Alt Right (I never went to large scale meetups, but shooting the shit on Discord with some people left me feeling real empty. At least the commonality on Holla Forums is that we all come from imageboards and meme culture).
What better place than here? I like helping people, to varying extents.


I actually read Evola before I read Nietzsche, and I spend a lot of time meditating and contemplating the ideas I've already gained instead of absorbing information like a pig. Nietzsche and his philosophy makes so much more sense now as a sort of character study in reaction to the Kali Yuga, and I quite enjoy it when taking from the man what I can.


lol
Define your "people."
Something like that


Are you memeing? Nietzsche's ideology is actually quite simple once you garner the head space for it and engage with his material honestly.


A lot of Evola gets bogged down in translation, so I know that feeling. What made me love him is taking time to find myself spiritually and come up with my own ideas, and it wasn't until I revisited his works months later that I realized I was a Traditionalist all along. I put the large swaths of text at the beginning of the thread so people don't have to read the entire link.

Maybe a Church of Racism would provide some interesting legal protections…

You don't?
He was of Roman blood so this makes partial sense, but don't disregard the fact that he spent copious amounts of time in Germany during Hitler's reign, even engaging with Hitler himself and many people high up in the SS.
That's how followers think. I understand what you're getting at, but recognize that different people need to aim at different goals within the large scale of a hierarchical, Traditionalist society. At the bottom caste are the proles you speak of, who work cooperatively in duty to their caste as a collective, but towards the top the castes get smaller, and the minds of aristocrats are more geared towards individualist tendencies. Ever heard the phrase "it's lonely at the top?" It's nowhere near easy to make decisions for the masses, and as they are somewhat separated from the masses, they have to act on their own as their own. Expecting literally everyone in a given country to follow the same routine except a tiny government and army is leftist nonsense steered by equal rights and capitalism.
The only opinion you can have "contrary" to operating in the modern world is opening up your wrists and not playing the game, but even I don't personally believe in that. How come you see no room for individual achievement and hardship? Heroism isn't about a giant army getting torn up by machine guns, it's about one man accomplishing wonders. This is what mythology is all about. I feel like you just misunderstand Traditionalism.


Define "good" on your terms.
There's literally no way to prove this, and there is no way you could convince me of it, either, as I have personal experience on the contrary. What I'm not trying to do is explain to you how "based" blacks are and how we need to "keep every single one of them because we're one race, da human race," but rather highlight a different perspective on race that can help people understand groups of people as something more complex than who their parents were.
Then tell me what it is.
I'm not implying anything about all WNs, I'm talking to whichever individual is reading the OP and having it hit home.
I completely agree, and that's why I'm here. I'm not an "anti-racist," but I want to add nuance to our preconceived notions of race in order to stamp out confusion or idiocy.
Do you think the "white race" as understood and glorified by a lot of Holla Forums is still alive?
Western civilization, yes, and "White" civilization to varying extents, but the point of the concept of spiritual race is to make the distinction that just because someone is white, doesn't make them our ally (ins. the name of any cucked hipster nu-male here), and just because someone is non-white, doesn't make them our enemy (granted, most of them are).
I'm talking about fair skinned Romans and Mediterraneans living in the same country with next to no hostility between the groups, as they were all ultimately Italian. Mussolini only clamped down the biological racism in 1938 due to pressure from Hitler.


Racemixing is not a necessity.

...

...

Why even post?

Alfred Rosenberg - Memoirs (Chapter: Spiritual Foundation for a thousand-year Reich) >>>/zundel/1465

James W. Von Brunn - 'Kill The Best Gentiles'; The Racialist Guide For The Preservation and Nurture of the White Gene Pool >>>/zundel/1277

Hans F. K. Günther - The Racial Elements of European History >>>/zundel/1296

T. Lothrop Stoddard - Racial Realities in Europe >>>/zundel/1157

Gustave Le Bon - Applications of Psychology to the Classification of Races >>>/zundel/150

Gustave Le Bon - How Races and Peoples Transform their Civilization and Arts >>>/zundel/151

Gustave Le Bon - The Influence of Race in History >>>/zundel/156

Bernhardt Klassen - The Klassen Letters Vol.1 (1969-1976) >>>/zundel/1444

Bernhardt Klassen - The Klassen Letters Vol.2 (1976-1981) >>>/zundel/1445

Define your "people."

Am i on leftypol? the talk the language of my family have the same face as my brothers and the same hair as my sisters they dont have brown skin and a afro you fucking mongoloid use your eyes if you cant see that red is not blue you are too far up your own asshole

Feel free to summarize if you have information you think I haven't happened upon.


Sober up and come back, or at least try to make a coherent argument.

fucking youtube scholars…

It's a big problem. Laziness. Millennial's will either end up saving the planet or being worse than boomers.

Nice meme, but you're being blatantly disingenuous. I didn't make this thread to throw shade at other people or have shade thrown at me.

Today I learned that not sitting down and reading 9 books in a row right off the bat from someone's argument means you're giving up on an argument and being lazy, and the person arguing is definitely not being lazy and disingenuous by not even bothering to make a summarized argument.

...

beta cringe

I'm not "insulted by books," it's obnoxious that instead of making an argument you simply linked books implying that anyone would read all of them in order to just make a response to your post.

Until Christianity takes part front and center, the "movements" are going to fall apart with fedoras and LARPagans at the helm. This bullshit of inventing new religions and myths is just fucking retarded to anyone with an IQ above 110.

Who said anything about movements, or inventing new religions and myths, much less religion? Are you sure you're in the right thread?

I dont know why I'm still bumping this evola kike thread. I'm trying to give you some relevant literature and you are such an infophobic salty manchild you think I am arguing with you. I am still learning to cope with how inflexible you larping summerfags can be, but sometimes I feel you are just evalion-tier lolcows trying to accustom yourselves to whatever appears to be the trending revolutionary identity.

This. Christianity is nothing more than a word applied that references beliefs long held millennia before the so-called "Christ" figure walked this earth and that is a historical fact. It's why Christian "scholars" run and hide when confronted with far older "movements" like Buddhism and Hinduism, both of which share unprecedented similarities to one another and Hinduism is undoubtedly connected with the Aryan past. Take those and then throw in some Zoroastrianism and Mithrism and you have that fucking mess of the Old Testament where the Hebrew becomes the Aryan.

Call it Christo's, and by doing so recognize the true Aryan nature of the context, or GTFO. Christianity as it is or how you wish for it to be in the 2,000 year old Judaized state is fedora larping to the maximum.

The whole story of Noah and the Ark is directly ripped from Sumerian legend. Those who distort history and take credit for what they did not accomplish are a threat to themselves and everyone else.

I will never submit to Abrahamic madness.

...

Good man. Christ-cucks will never learn though, we'll have to tolerate them until their kike-worshipping religion is extinct.

...

Reported for intl. You will literally never convince anyone here.

Elaboration is different than your argument literally being "read nine books."
TIL that being "one of us" means reading nine books at a time to form arguments in an offhand thread.
Showing your true colors.
I know who the salty man-child is, and it's not me. I have no idea what you were trying to do with that post, but I assumed it as an argument against my position because most of the authors you recommended were more racial nationalist/NatSoc than Evola.
You assume too much. I feel sorry for you in all honesty.
Because it's perfectly clear that I'm trying to be "trendy" and "revolutionary" by virtue of me offering information and wanting a discussion thread on Evola's idea of spiritual race comprised in three parts. You might want to spend some time off of the internet for a while.

Please don't feed the cuck, the last thing I want is for this thread to turn into off-the-cuff Christian vs. Pagan autism. I haven't been Christian for a few years now, and I agree with what you're saying, but it's largely irrelevant to the thread topic.

Go cut yourself on webcam again smiley you eternal beta

...

Your mode of thinking is flawed. If the Christian religion is true, then it stands to reason that the stories of it's ancient past would be remembered and spoken of around the world.

You seen to think of religion like it's naught but an intentional falsehood and that it strives for originality. That's very far from the truth

You will never be white subhuman

You apologize to Mr. Spencer right this moment user!

Based on what? Make an argument for once in your life.
Source?
Source?
I laughed audibly
I never took offense. Does it weigh on your conscious at the end of the night how much you lie?
Look at yourself, holy shit. You are reacting violently to basically nothing. Again, I feel sorry for you. Get a new ID via proxy when you want to say something meaningful, because I'm hiding yours.

One important thing that influenced his writings was the injury that paralized him from the waist down in 1945. I guess, he tried to find a deeper meaning for his misfortune.

(wasted dubs)

So you just think in arguments, and only register information that suits your bias and appeals to you? That's called being in a mental rut, guy. Why do keep projecting your one-dimensional behaviour onto me? You're just shitting up your own thread trying to defend nothing. Stop looking for a scapegoat, kike.

Looks like you're on your own here with this topic. Maybe try /fringe/, they might be able to help you?

Trying to balance out your salt with more salt? You are the exemplar of summerfagging.

There's no reason to listen to anything that Jung fanboy has to say. He's the human equivalent to Kekistan or /r/the_donald.

got an problem with jung?

Because Christianity has brought Europe such wonderful things!

There's nothing wrong with Jung, there's something seriously wrong with taking anything a pseudo-intellectual professor has to say when he doesn't present a single original thought, and all he can do is make pop-culture references. Jordan B Peterson is the Big Bang Theory of philosophers.

pick one

Maybe if you are looking at jung from a marxist freudian point of view while unironically trying to discard his contributions to aryanism.

…Who?

...

he's a fucking leaf who got a lot of attention because he openly calls out cultural marxism and argued against compelled speech last year.
while I don't think he should be relied upon for discussion here, I think he is doing good work for redpilling the masses. he's raising awareness in our culture at large that there exists some kind of agenda to subvert and destroy us and our society, and that each individual should improve their own lives before trying to control and "improve" the lives of others. he's the first person i've seen other people discussing who talks about a destructive agenda that people don't automatically presume to wear tinfoil hats or be alex-jones tier.
it will be up to us to inform people just (((who))) is behind that agenda and why it exists, and for us to spell out for people how to sort themselves out in a way keeping with the ideals of a natsoc society.


an older revival of paganism was documented in the 1911 Cambridge Medieval History series, and it outlined why it, too, failed.
I'll spoonfeed you, but it's up to you to read it yourself. start at the last paragraph on the left page:
archive.org/stream/cambridgemedieva009698mbp#page/n135/mode/2up

I'm already a spiritual racist, I'm a Mormon.

So can a person degenerate their soul by doing certain things?

Somewhat, yes.

Fun fact: Spaniards initially reframed from eating maize because they'd become less White/European from it

the greatest thing that ever happened to niggers was being enslaved, yet they all hate whites.

they made the choice, not us.

Somewhat? So there's a limit?

Wait. Let me get this straight. So. If one is a mormon not only do you get multiple wives but also have your racialism justified by your religion. Sounds pretty good user, what's the catch?

Judgement day, when your folly is revealed to you.

Op don't expect Holla Forums to be able to understand something like Nietzsche or Evola. This place is filled with people only slightly less retarded than Redditers. That makes them gods in their own little kingdoms. Really their limited conception of the world is all they have to hang on to. So yeah, a greater understanding of anything contradicting their retardation and personal malaise is neigh impossible.

We'll, not op, but whoever posted evola in the first place

>>>/worldstar/

A hierarchy is a collective dumbass

These people who says Evola is stupid.. holy fucking shit. Please read by yourself Evola first and then say something, please understand what he wanted say. Please understand what you read. Please learn to read.

Tithing. You could just not pay it though.

Also, hello only other Mormonfag I know of on Holla Forums.

Are you new here? deportation or death. They all hate us on a visceral level, so who gives a flying fuck what happens to them?

This is pretty fascinating, user. In the first paragraph you posted, , Evola discusses how racism based on biology alone is insufficient, and many times counter-intuitive because "the purity of the external race of an individual is often preserved even when his inner race has dimmed or deteriorated". I completely agree in the sense that many whites are absolute trash in the Modern Day. Now, many here on our Tibetan rice painting enthusiast forum will retort this claim with something like, "Jews ruined us! We would be a bastion of civilization without the Jews!" This is simply untrue, and will be untrue for the foreseeable future. Even the most perfect of European societies have had detractors that are native born of that society. We can see an example in those who mimic German NatSoc cultural ideals on the exterior yet fail to truly embrace its philosophical essence, which directly relates to Evola's concept of inner race. They want an all-white society, yet are nothing more than low-IQ criminals and/or degenerates who would be laughed out of Hitler's Germany.

This brings us to your second paragraph, , where Evola begins to acknowledge that "the leveling unity sought by democracy, 'integrationism', humanitarianism, pseudo-universalism and collectivism" are a "regressive phenomenon". Unity is not efficient because we are diverse creatures, and this diversity drives survival of the fittest. Yet, he speaks of how human races cannot be discussed in the same terms as "horse or cat breeds" because we humans are "not confined to instincts and bios". However, what one can assume is that for every "based" nigger, the overwhelming majority are simply unfit to live within the confines of a high-trust, civilized society. While every person of African descent, even with admixture of European DNA as with black Americans, may not be the typical nigger someone who frequents this board has come to recognize, there is still a recognizable pattern amongst them that cannot be forgiven because of the few that are 'worth their salt', so to speak. This is the paradox, and problem, when discussing strict racism. Just as there are 'good' blacks, there are 'bad' whites, and so on with every other race of humanity. We cannot be compared to the animals because there are wild variations within the stereotypes of the races. So much so that, on an individual level, one cannot accurately ascribe characteristics to a person based on the color of their skin. While on average we can stereotype the races, it fails many times at an individual level. In my opinion, is more or less correct in his view that we need to rekindle the spirit of the "traditional man" as Evola would put it. It goes beyond skin color, religion, creed, political belief, etc. Wanting to exterminate blacks or Jews or anyone else because of mere hatred is completely out of touch with the way a proper man should act. Don't get me wrong here, I want for whites to be separated from the other races just as much as anyone else, but that is not the only issue facing us today. We must reconnect with the Aryan flame still dimly lit within us, and if we cannot, then no amount of racism, no amount of political ideals, and no amount of an all-white society can save us.

kikeposting intensifies
all societal ailments can be linked to the kike.
inb4 standard faggot shill line of:

< muh race is skin colour meme
No it doesn't, faggot.
< muh arbitrary hatred meme
I see someone's fronted a few extra shiny shekels for some cognitive shills this time.

"It is better that one (((man))) should perish than that [nations] should dwindle and perish"
1 Nephi 4:13

Every gentleman with supreme taste is laughing at you

No, why would I? Its exceedingly obvious - in the presence of Jewish influence aimed at deracination and destabilization of native homogenous populations, and more specifically, in countries wherein Jews control the cultural context via infiltration/subversion of societal infrastructure (academia, media, finance, and - via media and finance - government), its is nigh unto impossible for such a cultural perspective to find ground to lay roots without immediate and significant opposition from the kosher controllers.

So you're a some kinda racial-cuckold, is basically what you're saying? Okay, so I should dismiss any semblance of seriousness in your commentary, gotcha.

That's an inherently false statement, that relies upon the concept that, in the absence of such 'non-white cultural practices', which have been directly and purposefully injected into our society, we would not be better off. When you say 'no clear negatives', what are you even describing? What 'non-white cultural practices' are you describing, even?
This is a vague statement that inherently involves a greater deal of assumptive bias on your behalf.

Then you better offer some better examples than what you've got thus far.
Not sure what you even mean by that frankly.

This is just fucking stupid.

Race is just a social construct goyim!

Fuck off you filthy TRS Jew.

Seems legit!

t. shill

This is big time bait, but I'll give a ``(You)`` anyways. This is one problem of Holla Forums in general: the fact that I am sitting here and second guessing whether you're shilling or instead, actually retarded. I definitely understand where the sentiment that "there are no good blacks"/"all kikes must be gassed" comes from, and I tend to agree in the sense that I certainly don't want them in my country, state, community, etc. The problem is that you cannot sit here and tell me with any actual semblance of a rational thought that there are not niggers out there in the world who are high-IQ and contributors to society. Are you really going to tell me someone like Ben Carson is a lowly nigger just like the ones you see in the streets of LA, New York, or any other major American city? Sure, I'll concede the point that many times even the most "well-adjusted" blacks chimp out eventually, but that is not to detract from the fact that some truly had a net positive, or neutral, impact on the world around them. Does this change things? No, not in the slightest. They still don't need to live around us, and if it comes down to us or them, I wouldn't hesitate to holocaust them based on some altruistic, humanitarian response. For the average American of average intelligence, it is right for them to hold the sentiment that they must not accept any black, Jew, or other even if they believe the person stands to be no harm to them. I hypothesize this because some European whites cannot suppress their innate altruism, so they must be "indoctrinated" (think: Goebbels) in order to refrain from being a danger to the safety of the whole. Discussion should not be met in absolutes, and ironically, you had the wrong conception on the near-absolutes of skin color (physical features, such as cranial size/volume, for that matter) and its relation to race.

What are practices to become more aryan spiritually? Do you have to act like some Indian Brahman, or are there other ways? I'm sure there's lots of discussion about this somewhere.

Another thing about it that I have to ask is if this could be used to improve the other races. The kikes use small scale MKULTRA in pop-culture in order to brainwash people into their degenerate materialist mindset. Would Aryanist propaganda be the inverse of this? Or would this actually be a bad thing because it causes a schism within that person's character if his biological and spiritual race are different?


source?

< muh based niggers
you wouldn't hesitate to genocide someone because of your own altruism and humanitarianism? Moishe, at least try to make sense. i guess whoever paid you wasted their money on supposedly cognitive shills.
< muh random projections
No one said this, faggot.
< muh assertions
firstly, you said that race was skin colour, not i, you moronic kike. secondly, physical features are as intrinsic to race as behavioral, cultural, social, mental patterns (etc)
< implying that it can eb wrong for people to hold this sentiment
Typical tricks, shlohmo.
< implying it isn't already us or them
faggot

I tried. You're retarded, but I can keep this up all day.

Maybe the sentence was a little unclear. I wouldn't hesitate because of some underlying altruism or similar belief common in European descendants.

Just preemptively rebutting a point that many like to make when discussing blacks.

Yes, I did say skin color. I didn't ever deny those things you listed contributed intrinsically to race either. I agree, but as I have mentioned, there are variations within those constructs. This largely cannot be refuted unless you are to tell me that all races behave all in the same way. If you do believe this to be true, then why are some whites susceptible to Jewish tricks (liberalism) whilst others see through the lies? Clearly there is a fault in idea that behavior is thoroughly similar and that but one example. Also, skin color is certainly an easily identifiable factor, and I don't see how skin color doesn't equal race? What are you saying? There are white niggers and black Aryans?

Sure "accept" is definitely the wrong word there, but you completely ignored my next sentence. By accept, I meant in the sense that one must accept there are intelligent, decent ones as a consequence of this Earth (namely, Bell Curve) and certainly not in the sense that we must accept them in our societies.

It is "us vs them" in a spiritual, philosophical, cultural, and political sense, but the bullets haven't started flying yet, and despite how tough many act on this board, I will not be the one to revolt until I have joined some semblance of a group with other local white men and have planned our resistance, preferably with many other regional groups or larger movement. At the foremost, providing security and prosperity for your family is most important, then community, then your larger regional volk, and so on. The foundation on which you build is as, if not more, important as the grandeur of the structure itself.

false dichotomy intensifies
t. kike
variance in intelligence and perceptiveness combined with random chance. this is an utterly atrocious argument
it's called communism you kike faggot
are you using google translate, shlohmo?

as previously stated
< muh race is skin color meme
you implied race was nothing more than skin color, not i.
no you didn't. if you meant that you would have wrote that. don't change narratives, yid.
Yes they have, across the entire white world the violence has been doing nothing but increasing.