The way out of the current situation, according to Evola, will not come from a new political party or platform. Rather, it will require men of a certain character, vision of life, and principles. These are not yet made. Probably, they are still not clear, because after 60 years, there is still no single vision of life among those who oppose the modern world.
Political systems alone are not determinate: the best systems will fail if the population cannot maintain it, while a superior people will succeed despite the system. After 60 years, there should be evidence for this claim. In making this moral argument, Evola goes against the entire modern world which sees the Axis powers he supported as the very embodiment of evil.
Such a problem indeed goes beyond yesterday’s alliances, since it is clear that the winners and losers [vincitori e vinti] now find each other on the same level and that the only result of the second world war was the reduction of Europe to the object of extra-European powers and interests. It must be recognized then that the devastation that we have around us is of an especially moral character. We are in a climate of general moral anesthesia, of profound disorientation, in spite of all the words of order in use in a society of consumption and democracy: the breakdown of character and every true dignity, the ideological confusion, the prevalence of the lowest interests, living hand to mouth, are what characterizes, in general, the post-war man. To recognize this, also means to recognize that the first problem, the base of every other, is of an inner nature: To pick oneself up, to rise up interiorly, to give oneself a form, to create in oneself order and rectitude.
No one has learned from the lessons of the recent past if he still fools himself about the possibilities of a purely political battle and about the power of one or the other formula or system, whose new human quality is not made by a specific opposing party. Here is a principle that today more than ever should have absolute evidence: if a State possesses a political or social system that, in theory, is of value as the most perfect, but the human element was deficient, that state would descend sooner or later to the level of the basest societies. However, a people, a race capable of producing true men, men of right feeling and reliable instinct, would reach a high level of civilization and would stand on their feet in the face of the most calamitous tests even if its political system was defective and imperfect. One takes therefore a precise position against that false “political realism” that thinks only in terms of programs, party organizational problems, or social and economic prescriptions. All this belongs to the contingent, not to the essential. The measure of what can still be saved depends upon the existence — or not — of men who are in front not to preach formulas, but to be examples, not going towards demagogy and the materialism of the masses, but to awaken different forms of sensibility and interests. Starting from what can still remain among the ruins, to reconstruct slowly a new man to animate through a determinate spirit and a suitable vision of life, to fortify through the tenacious adherence to given principles — this is the true problem.
“Starting from what can still remain among the ruins, to reconstruct slowly a new man to animate through a determinate spirit and a suitable vision of life, to fortify through the tenacious adherence to given principles – this is the true problem.”
This problem is a very true one that still begs for a solution and surely it will be ongoing for the foreseeable future. For it appears that each rectitude since the end of WW2 has been one of a personal nature rather than one holistically aligned. I praise Gornahoor for trying at least to bridge this divide in an original way by continuing Dantes’ task, the hermeticism and templar Rosicrucianism of transcendent European sovereignty that links a Tradition from our deepest hyperborean antiquity to our break with the present circumstances. Guenons example to abandon his own Tradition and seek that of an Islamic one, is not ours and neither can Evolas’ personal equation amount to a solid example for emulation despite the greatness of the man’s works. Yes I’m generalizing in this post without getting into academic specifics, but its holds true all the same.
To quote Mouravieff, from Gnosis (book III):
“Since then, the revolutions that have successively brought us steam,
electricity, mechanimtion and atomic energy have transformed the
face of the world, and habit as a substitute for buppiness has disappeared
during these upheavals. This means that, although we hear people claim
hnppiness with growing fewour in the feverish atmosphere of our times,
we find ourselves in a void. If a few ‘last of the Mohicans,kith their
outdated mentality, raise their voices to call for a return to the ‘normal’
state of things, in their ndive sincerity they appear like mediaeva1 knights
leading a cavalry charge against armoured cars”
It is slightly puzzling to understand why such an important work as “Orientamenti” had not been translated into English before so for that reason I extend my thanks to Gornahoor for taking the initiative. If all systems have fallen and all ideologies have failed then surely a guide of this sort that works on interior strengthening of the spirit is needed more than ever. At the same time I’m not suggesting anything conclusive will be drawn from this, but I look forward to the subsequent points in this series. We know what the problem is but the answers are lacking as usual, and even the best minds spend years in the wilderness piecing together the pieces of a fragmented interior.