Speaker 1: If you want to get the show early and ad free,
head on over to the Peak Kinyonas show dot com.
There you can choose from where you wish to support me.
Now listen very carefully. I've had some people ask me
about this, even though I think on the last ad
I stated it pretty clearly. If you want an RSS feed,
you're going to have to subscribe through substack or through Patreon.
You can also subscribe on my website which is right there,
gum Road and what's the other one, subscribe Star And
if you do that, you will get access to the
audio file. So head on over to the pekan yonasshow
dot com. You'll see all the ways that you can
support me there. And I just want to thank everyone.
It's because of you that I can put out the
amount of material that I do. I can do what
I'm doing with doctor Johnson on two hundred Years Together
and everything else, the things that Thomas and I are
doing together on kindinal philosophy, it's all because of you.
And yeah, I mean, I'll never be able to thank
you enough. So thank you. The pekan Yonashow dot com.
Everything's there. Want to welcome everyone back to the Peking
Yona Show. How are you doing today, Thomas.
Speaker 2: I'm doing pretty well, you know. I I think I
emphasized and I hope I'm not retreading subject matter that
already covered. Please tell me if i am. I mean
the point that there's a significance beyond one of trivial curiosity,
to the fact that it could very honestly be said
from about nineteen thirty four onward, when the National Socialist
Revolution was consolidated, you know, particularly after June nineteen thirty four,
I mean just consolidated in a most unfortunate way, but
you know, and as Mussolini really kind of came to
the four as as a major figure in European political life,
even before the Spanish Civil War jumped off, there definitely
was an internationalist movement around these Axis regimes and these
movements that were adjacent to them. And I don't want
to get ahead of myself, but I believe, and obviously
I've got Hegelian sensibilities, there's a parallel between this and
the Islamic Awakening in nineteen seventy nine, you know, with
the seize of the Grand Mosque and the Iranian Revolution
and this emergence of it truly Islamic zeitgeisten praxis that
people didn't think was possible. Okay. It was born of
some of the same historical pressures, you know as those
that ossified, and it gave rise the fascism and send
these myriad other movements in national socialism and things. And
the basis of that was, you know, what we could
think of as a traditionalist praxis with a capitalty. And
that's one of the reasons why I include a Hidger
in this camp, okay, because he was really the he
was He was really the first among this intellectual cadre
t curate a meaningful revolutionary praxis, or at least try
to insinuate such a thing into a burgening zeitgeist that had,
you know, led to various iterations of you know, real
world politics. And there's evidence to substantiate this beyond you know,
reading the proverbial indicators of historical events. You know. Marcia
Eliatti and what we're gonna talk about him at length.
You know, he he served with the Iron Guard, and
later in life they were trying to indict him on
grounds of that. Leo Strauss, who I don't have nice
things to say about, I do give him respect because
he came to Eliotti's defense pretty aggressively, you know, when
they were trying to deport him and what have you.
They were colleagues in University of Chicago, you know, but Mercia, Eliotti, Heidegger,
Carl Schmidt, Ernst Junger, Carl Lowith, who wasn't part of
that intellectual cadre, but he was kind of an intermediate
think of Strauss's, kind of an intermediary between them and
Strauss and other kind of Jewish intellectual more neutralist events.
It's an odd dynamic. Marcusa also reached out to this cadre,
and it's interesting hydrogram Marcuza had a pretty avid correspondence.
But these kinds of things were discussed, like the meaning
of the politics then the German Reich. Again, people make
a lot of the fact that you know, oh, Julius
Evola was for example, was it odds with the fascist regime?
I mean, this is what's positive? Or because the the
s s, specifically the Sikaristine's investigated them that this suggests
that somehow, you know, he he was some arch ideological
opponent of the German Reich and the national fascist regime.
That's not that's this preposterous. You know. Incidentally, when out
of Scorsini broke Mussolini out of the Alpine prison he
was being held in. You know, Mussolini was scrolled away
to Wolfflare and he sent for Evela, and Evela met
Adolf Hitler, and Hitler said he wanted to meet Julius Evela,
like he wanted him there anyway. Zeblla was close as
Ducha and Hitler were. Duchy's English was pretty good, as
German was not that good. But I mean, I there
was any number of of of people who were fluent
who Hitler would have been comfortable having on deck. Okay,
he wanted, and there's other Italian fascists intellectuals he sent
for too. But you know, the especially in the nineteen
forty three, as things were, you know, the automnat in
forty three, Hitler wasn't frivolously just like meeting people, okay,
I mean like uh and just being admitted to wolfs Layer.
I mean that that's pretty profound, okay, I mean obviously,
I mean if everyone was his own man, you know,
like he didn't cout out to anybody, and he wasn't
somebody who was just impressed by office, you know. He
so it's not like he was and he was a
genuine aristocrat. It's not like he was just starstruck at
the prospect of meeting the fur or something. You know.
He he was his own man, and he definitely had
reservations about the regime. But there results of things about
it that he considered to be great, you know, and
they can't be denied. But you know, there's always ah
and when you're talking about powerful people like men who
actually wheeled great power and you know, men who with
great power of intellect, you know, there's there's always there's
always gonna be clashes of ego and you know, of
of conceptual disparities that you know, become very personal in things,
you know. So it's important. Yeah, I mean, the the
access political culture was a house divided, but not intractably so,
and I think that's important. But I think I mentioned
before and again call me if I'm repeating myself. I'm
not going to get offended or something. I you know, Heidegger.
Hidger's view of national socialism with was essentially Aristotelian. You know,
he viewed the West as a having been compromised at
its core, when the understanding of the experience of being,
like quite literally intellectual and sensuously present existence receded from
you know, a media contemplation in both daily life as
well as and you know, intellectual endeavors. You know. Of course,
Heidegger and he wasn't the only one view the triumph
of Playtonism, of which he viewed Christianity to be in
the vain and in basic subjective terms, viewed being as
this eternal presence, you know, like only that can only
be understood and fully experience and access to this dialectical assent,
you know, and I reviewed Christianity is the zenith of that.
You know, Christianity describes soteriology in terms of this unattainable
transcendence towards eternity. You know. That's in Someonody's the conceptual
opposite of uh, you know, the immediacy of being that
you know. Heideger positive was you know, the basis of
you know, kind of Indo European metaphysics, you know, and
with the death of God, what us should in the
final withdrawal of being from immediate consciousness in the mind
of an existence of of Western man was uh, you know,
the subsummation of all life by technology. Okay, the only
thing that came to ground man then was man himself.
You know. Man was forced to kind of configure the
world around uh, his own kind of debased ontological aspects,
you know, which, uh you know what proceeded from that
was an idea that nothing preceded man, you know, and concomitantly,
you know, as a real experience of the world and
engagement with it became obscured, you know, through the lens
of technological processes, you know, objects encountered within life itself,
you know, cana basically just represent you know, aspects that
could be rendered in the service of technology, or aspects
that you know, at one time held features of the
natural world or you know, in some way were related
to this kind of holistic understanding of reality, but you know,
could only really be experienced and ascertained in in fractured aspects.
You know, they constitute these kinds of technologically rendered things,
you know, and that's kind of the final stage of
like ripping man out of a cultural existence, and that
sort of the final alienation stage of alienation from historical memory.
So I hire his view, like the only potential for
Salvation of the West was returning the question of being
to immediate consciousness of you know, the culture bearing strain,
which presumably is you know, even European or area, and
if you prefer strain like still extant within European races.
But at the same time, you know, reconciling that palagenetic
understanding of being and that sort of reemergence of cultural
situatedness and historical situatedness with the reality of high technology.
You know, Haidiger wasn't some luttite, He wasn't some reaction area,
and it didn't I mean, he didn't think that was desirable.
But even but he made the point like, even even
if people thought that was desirable, it's not. You can't
like stop knowing things that collectively are known, you know,
even if you know, even if in his view, like
the German people weren't faced with this grandest challenge that
had these you know, most severe of existential implications. You know,
even if they could kind of like retreat to some
sort of you know, simple ligrarian life, what they'd be
doing that in purposely and in dialogue with you know,
a technological existence, you know, so it would be totally contrived,
even if it was desirable, you know. So Heidegger's notion
though too, was that. And this is a problem in
National Socialism too. Traditionalists, Okay, all of them, even even
people who you know, we're kind of in I consider
the same canvas height hero it had very different empasies,
you know, like Eliati, like Julius Vola, like Carl Schmidt
to some degree. I mean, Carl Schmidt wasn't really a traditionalist,
but he had certain syms these in that regard. You know,
there's limits to political life in terms of party politics.
So even if in hiding his view, even if the
National Socialist Party was you know, Doc triningly that you know,
the greatest of all possible parties. If you can't remedy
crises of history by like passing the laws, or if
you can't just develop some sort of social program, you know,
to to rejuvenate, you know, into European metaphysics, obviously, okay.
But at the same time, party politics is an essential
aspect of how people's lives are structured and framed, and
in conceptual terms it wields a huge significance. Okay, Carl Loeweth,
though I mentioned I think before I went alive. Loweth
was an interesting guy. He was kind of this. He
was a German Jew. He was married to a Japanese
woman and he taught in Japan. He was a university
type and uh, obviously after the number of laws were passed,
you know, as a racial Jew, he wasn't real thrill
to the prospect of returning to the German Reich. But
he wasn't so marg Zionist and he wasn't He was
more of a He had the sensibilities of a lot
of Jewish perlinners, you know, like Paul Gottfried I. And
the point is that's his heritage. You know. Loweth was
kind of a kind of a German conservative in his viewpoints,
but he probably had more sophisticated intellectual leanings than a
lot of the coterie. But he and hired at a
pretty avid correspondence and heideger in nineteen thirty six, and
again this was a year that in my opinion, what
we could call a fascist international had really it's kind
of ossifying and peaking as a uh, as a truly
global movement. You know. In nineteen thirty six, you know,
he wrote to low with this long letter basically explaining
his his partisanship, you know, for the National Socialist cause,
you know, in that sense, he said, look, you know,
the National Socialists, they're the only they're the only political
faction that's truly situated in a historical capacity and whose
goals cost to like an essential historical philosophy. You know.
He said that they're consciously aware of the need for
a spiritual renewal. You know, He's like, yeah, maybe like
the bully boys, you know, who won the streets, and
the communists have no understanding of this, you know, and
and and maybe your average voter you know who's it's
you know, it's kind of like a a a common
workingman or you know, Northern Ryan Land farmer or whatever, like,
doesn't understand these things. But the you know, what the
vanguard does, and every aspect of the National Socialist program
is tailored towards a spiritual renewal and a return to
this kind of immediate understanding of being within you know,
their racial consciousness. And in terms of more conventional praxis,
you know, it was in a Heidiger's view, and I
agree with this, it was reconciling the social antagonisms that
were you know, availing Germany, Europe and the Western world
of communism. You know, the potential of the global communist revolution,
which have succeeded, would have annihilated what remained of Western dicene,
which in Heidigers speak is there being you know, literally
the consciousness of you know, that immediate ontology that we're
talking about, and you know, preclude the generation of any
cultural productivity or historical situatedness. So this was this was critical. Okay,
there was a an understanding in Heidiger's mind of existential crisis,
you know, well before war arrived in a total capacity.
You know, he understood the implications of these things, you know,
and uh also they're one of the things the essential
decision is of the fere prinsip I made this appeal
to Heidigger two. I mean not just for supervisial reasons
or kind of cliched reasons of oh, you know, Teutonic
people's like strong menu give orders, you know. Evlon Eliot.
He made the point that, you know, a strong state
the basis of a strong people, but you can't just
like curate a strong state for its own purposes. And
that doesn't that doesn't mean some total state, that doesn't
mean some Leviathan bureaucracy. You know what it means is
you need a true Caesar, you need a true Muhammad,
you need a true Cromwell. You know, you need some
heroic personage. He's capable of acting historically and rendering decisionism
and sometimes you know, the most severe and frightening capacities.
You know, you don't you don't get to pick and
choose who the man is, you know. That's why. Uh,
what's coming out to the point that you know, people
like Hiller or messianic personages, not in theological terms obviously,
I mean in historical ones, and that's not that's not
something that can just that can be cultivated.
Speaker 1: What is that tendency? I hear it today people who
you know, they understand that we have an occupation, that
we're occupied, but they only want certain people to speak
for them. If, like, you know, if like Zog was
being exposed by somebody you know who isn't in their camp,
they that that person's a gatekeeper, that person's trying to
you know, they want it to be their guy, or
they feel like what they feel like they're not they're
not winning themselves.
Speaker 2: What is that? Uh? Yeah, I think part of it
is that they're basically it's just kind of decadent moderns,
and everything to them is some sort of vicarious EO fulfillment.
You know, everything's got to be subjectively relatable in some
kind of simple minded, crude sense or you know, I'm
always making the point and this was an evil point too.
You know, Conservatives are our enemies. And one of the
reasons why the other kind of people. You know, when
Caesar arrives, they lack like a bunch of Pharisees. You know,
he's not respectable or or something like or you know,
they everything's about appearances. Everything's about you know, economics, you know, uh,
like like national economics, but also kind of the the
economics of of cast dynamics. You know, they they there
really is something too. I mean they there. I think
they're observations. They arrive at these things for the wrong reasons,
but there's something to it. When when these old Marxists
or when these uh or when these post Marxists, like
global systems theory types talk about you know, how how
bourgeois types are you know, like you know kind of
John Q and Jane Q public you know, conservative voter
they really are like culturally impoverished. I mean, I think
that's true. So I can't fully explain it, but except
you know, but that they're metaphorical pharisees, you know, like uh,
you know, Cromwell's the wrong kind of man. Or Mohammed Oh,
he's he's a he's he's from a family of merchants.
He's not you know, he's not a king, you know,
Adolf Hitler, he's he's a ruffian. I think it's someone.
I think it's that simple in some ways, you know,
or if.
Speaker 1: Like if Hamas took down Israel, they'd be pissed off
about that because it was the brown people who did
it and it wasn't proper white Europeans who did it.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but they also they but they themselves, like you know,
don't even understand uh, their own lower in that regard,
Like yeah, I mean that that's part of it too,
but they also but there I mean some of that
too is just like stupid, uh, stupid prejudic you know,
Like I don't mean racism, I mean just I mean
it's like unexamined uh, unexamined belief structures, you know, like
these people who think they and as everybody knows, like
I get a lot of shit for this, which I
don't give a fuck about. There's like literally nothing to
care less about. But I get really really irritated by
by simpletons and uh and mental midges who like think
they hate Islam when like they couldn't tell you anything
about the faith. They have no understanding the difference between
the sex. They have no understanding that, you know, literally
every race on this planet is represented within Islam. You know,
they they they don't even understand that, you know, the
the founders of the Pelatine resistant for Christian not the Islamic.
But you know they so if there's some if there's
if there's some like there's some uh, if there's some
criminally minded like lumping black guy from like Angola who
gets dropped and the you k or Ireland you know
by some by some NGO tailored to oversee like ethnic
claims and European countries, like and that guy does something
horrible they decided that islamb it's not like some like
it's not some like debiant third world guy who's criminally minded,
like somehow it's somehow it's Islam doing that, you know,
Like I made the point that be like if like
when the Venezuelan invasion for that everybody Biden was underway.
They'd be like me insisting that this was like Catholics
doing something to me, like you know, like I I mean,
that's another issue, but it's there is a there is
like a serious provincial ignorance. I think it's all of
those things, you know, but I uh but uh, you know.
At the same time, though, I mean, I'm always making
the point that with this kind of subject matter, you know,
we're not we're not Hose witnesses, and we're not scientology,
and we're not we're not a Billy Graham crusade. You know,
We're not We're not trying to like get normies to
think right or.
Speaker 1: It's always about it's always about waking up the normies. Yeah,
wake up the normies.
Speaker 2: Man. Yeah. Yeah, that's like that's literally the last thing
I have any interest in doing. I mean maybe maybe
if I ran a megachurch or something, or if I
was like a salesman, I feel differently, but you know,
there's nothing to do with what I'm what I'm up on.
But you know, the uh, and to bring it back
and I'll move us forward from Hidger because I realize
that we can't spend like endless episodes on this subject matter.
But you know, the whole in terms of practice, where
politics intersects with metaphysics and with you know, returning culture
to a situation of of higher development, you know, as
the potential for you know, a historical existence and an
authentic cultural existence recedes as the potential for you know,
like an immediate kind of ontological understanding of being, you know,
as the truth of what is truly or what is
genuinely fundamental kind of like recedes out of you know,
the collective grasp of a people. In psychological and spiritual terms,
this leads to inevitable nihilism. Okay, it creates pointless societies
that kind of passively commit suicide slowly, or you know,
an active nihilism emerges, which is communism. You know, and
you have you have megacytal class warfare, and you know, again,
the entire communist project is essentially the eradication of culture
and the reduction of people to a state of slavery.
You know, because slaves can't live historically, you know, they're
precluded from it because they can't access it historical experience.
They can't access historical memory any longer, you know. And
that's that's basically like imposing a billion deaths on it.
I mean, you're wiping out an entire culture of people,
like even if physical either descendants are still alive or
many generations, you know. And I mean, so that's that's
both like the immediate crisis that you know, higer and
and his coterie and those adjacent realized that they had
to remedy. I mean, but this was like the nature
of the emergency whereby the practice of something like you know,
national socialism or you know, the the National Fiscist Party
or or an evel Is view the Iron Guard, which
again there you know, he viewed as the most perfected
form of this tendency, you know, born of the crisis,
uh modality, you know, born of the exstons. But that's uh,
you know, aside from whatever other differences and you know,
like ethical or aesthetical or you know, moral differences in
basic terms existed between you know, the revolutionary right and
uh conservative elements. You know, the former are the only
ones acknowledging this or who probably really understood it. I don't.
I don't think people like the Stalhelm I and uh
you know, the Christian Democrats understood these things. I mean,
the obviously perceived that there was some sort of apocal
crisis afoot. I mean that's obvious. But you know, a
and even even if people who mean well and I
don't think conservatives ever really mean well, okay, but even
even if they did, you know, in absence of a
cadre that understands these things and understands what is and
is not possible and in terms of praxis, and it's
capable of, you know, developing a meaningful conceptual paradigm of
you know, the historical situation as well as you know,
the metaphysical basis of you know, the values being defended
and other things. I mean, with without that, whatever movement
or partying question is is useless, you know. I mean
that was a big part of that was a big
part of Heidegger's partisanship too, you know. And when Hidiger
stepped away, the people have a misunderstanding too. I mean,
Hiderger are pretty He disengaged himself from active membership within
the party pretty quickly after the revolution. And that wasn't accidental,
and it wasn't because he suddenly decided that, you know,
national Socialism was grossly offensive to his person, and that
Hitler was a bad man. It was because mission accomplished.
In part, you know that the ships are going to
follow where they may. You know, fate has or the
historical process or the cunning of reason has ordained this outcome,
you know, the national Socialists, or they're going to deliver
Europe to you know, a kind of racial and cultural
salvation and historical and ontological terms, or they're not, you know,
like what like a man in a Hiderger situation. First
of all, most people like a Hidager who are basically
these guys are introverted, big thinkers. They don't really like
engaging with politics. You know, I don't like that kind
of thing. I'm not nearly the man Heidiger is, obviously,
but the last thing I want to do is fuck
around with with with party politics, you know. And it
would have been kind of unbecoming for a guy like
a Heihager, who I think that I mean, hider didn't have,
I mean, hid your head ego like all like all
brilliant men do, but I don't. I don't think his
was particularly overly cultivated. But because it may, he did.
He did it with understanding of himself in his role okay,
in the German intellectual tradition, and and it's kind of
the the last true Kanine philosopher in in that discrete tradition.
You know, if he'd been like running around trying to
insinuate himself you know, into uh, into party affairs and
becomes some kind of partisan celebrity like that would have
been very gross, you know, since I mean you can
tell me that speculative, I don't. I don't think it is.
I think it's pretty clear. But you know it, uh,
this process of nihilism, you know this, I reviewed it
as literally the most the most catastrophic and disastrous development
probably since the Fall of Rome. You know, it was
it wasn't it wasn't just a it wasn't just something
that was the subject matter for you know, kind of
high falutin disengaged intellectuals to debate about in you know,
in men's clubs or something. You know, this this was
a critical existential challenge. You know that that had to
be met, you know, and even if it couldn't be overcome,
history demanded that European man, you know, go down while
meeting the challenge, you know, in a manly and upright
and forthright way. But you know, moving on to Elba
and some of these other thinkers. Yeah, I think there's
a there's a value in published. I can't remember who
published it initially, I all I wrote a series of essays,
uh directly it was, you know, directly on the subject
of national socialism and fascism and various permutations of you know,
what he viewed as radical traditionalist thought within revolutionary right
wing practice. This is also in the same period that
he wrote this uh kind of her feet to the
Iron Guard, and ten or fifteen years ago it might
have been Countercurrents. They published, uh, these collected essays in
this value. You can find uh the free pdf online.
It was uh, you know, I think it's called fascism
considered from the right, critique from the right, but uh,
you know, for context. Evla wrote a lot of stuff
that was uh critical what he viewed as the over
overly proletarian character of the fascists, particularly their direct action element.
And I love Latin people. I'm not saying bad things
about them, but nobody, nobody does honor feuds like like
like Latin people and especially the Italians. So like some
of some of U some of Evel's uh takes on Uh.
These uh Squadristi type guys really really raised their ire.
His life was threatened repeatedly, but uh he came very
much under the patronage of a man named Roberto Ferranacci.
Fernacci was uh he was the fascist party boss of
uh Cremona, and he he also ran a newspaper ill
Regime Facista regime probably a Regima fascista, you know, which
obviously was a partisan newspaper. And uh he he brought
Eval on board as uh as the editor of the
opinion page. So Evila had through an official party organ
you know, basically carte blanche, to like drop like op
eds on the state of the party, on the you know,
and on the state of the internal situation in Italy,
on the state of again what he viewed as, you know,
an an international fascist movement. And uh, I don't want
to get ahead of myself, but his corresponds with Eliotti
and George Dumizil. We'll get into Durmazil next episode. But
Domizil was he's still he's one of the few traditional anthropologists,
you know, and in the old days before you know,
long before the human genome was even you know before
for example, then when Abod's conemplation that the even geno
could be mapped anthropology and the comparative linguistics and philology,
it kind of ran together as a common discipline. Dumazil
is the progenitor or the trifunctional hypothesis of Indo European societies.
You know, those who work, those who fight, those who pray,
you know the priestly cast, the warrior cast, and you
know the the agrarian cast. And uh. Through comparative linguistics
and through endlessly pouring over these recurring symbols and national mythologies,
you know of Aryan derived cultures, he developed a conceptual picture,
literally of where ancient Aryans emerged, where their cultural footprint
was most strongly felt, what cultures were derived from this
root founding population based on the trifunctional social organization principle.
And again, these kinds of prime symbols in their pantheon
of gods and heroes and recurring motifs and things, And fascinatingly,
as the human genome has been mapped, Doumazil was basically correct.
And how he mapped these things like literally on the
physical map and conceptually okay, But Domazil and Eliotti had
a notion and Evila shared in this that one of
the things that made fascism an international tendency, a movement
of Zeitgeist, and something that was demonishraive fact that it
was something that transcended and superseded ordinary politics. The martyrdom
of Ion Moza Invesi Marine in Spain. You know, they
were Iron Guard partisans. He died fighting the communists. Domaziel
and Eliotti in their correspondence they discussed that this was
a this was a blood sacrifice, okay, and the blood
of these martyrs has awakened this, you know, dormant tendency
towards like heretofore dormant tendency towards pelagenesis, and you know,
the racial memory and the ancestral memory with an aerian
drive people's has been awakened by this. To me like
an existential enemy, even though at this time is situated
in Spain, you know, represents uh, the traditional enemy from
the Orient that you know has always menaced Europe, you know,
and just as uh, just as you know, the the
Great Khan had to be resisted as news of the
Golden Horde traveled by word of mouth as millions fled
in terror. And it's in its stead and wake, you know,
a similar awakening was underway. And you know, from the
traditionalist perspective, blood sacrifice is always a catalyst for these
sorts of awakenings, you know, which is one of the
reasons why it's universal to human societies, you know, savage
and civilized, you know, Occidental and Oriental. You know, wherever
you find man on this planet. You know, for the
most primitive sub Saharan tribe too, you know, the most
advanced Western population, you know this, this is a feature
that exists within their cultural psychology and their understanding of
worship and you know, religious practice, and even if it's
cast under different names, and even if it's theological significance
is obscured, you know it exists, you know, to the
modern present. You know, in the in the form of
you know, the martyrdom partisans, or in executing a condemned man.
You know, because the blood of the victims cry out
to Heaven for justice, and you know, because wrongs can
be redeemed, you know, by the by the sacrificial bloodletting
of the condemned. You know, how however you want to
characterize these things. You know that was in the in
the mind of Doumazel and Eliati and to some degree
of evil himself. Uh you know, the the true catalyzing
influence of upon you know, the Fascist International. You know
that was for context, I said, the outset, there's a
comparative analogy with the Islamic Awakening that the martyrdom of
Iron Motza and Vestillo Marine that was the siege of
the Grand Mosque by Slafi's Okay, is a comparable moment
or probably a more a more direct example of martyrdom.
I would say that the martyrdom of Bobby Sands and
you know, the the Catholic moment as it was called
that uh, I believe very much expedited the the death
of the East Block. Okay, that's another example, all right.
But you know so I uh, I think it's important
to acknowledge too. I mean, I I agree with these
the musings of the men in question wholeheartedly. But even
if you don't, it's important to understand that agree to
which you know this this we're not just talking about
like a prestige to kind of discrete and isolated ad
hoc right wing movements that you know, sort of arbitrarily
collided when it was expedient to do so for military
or political reasons. You're talking about, uh, you're talking about
a genuine movement, just as much as the Communist International was,
you know, and among other things. I think it's essential
to understand the Second World War. You've got to understand that,
you know, because that changes everything, you know, And uh,
the actual vanguard of that phenomenon were, you know, people
like Doumoseel, like Marcia Eliati, like Julius Saivlah, like Heideger,
you know, Carl Schmidt, who was also in correspondent with
all of these people, although you know, again his his
orientation was a bit different, but you know, he he
very much accepted these premises, you know, and anybody who
accepts those premises, they're acknowledging that what was underway, again
was something that was outside of the conceptual parameters of
what is viewed as ordinary politics. You know. But I
mean that self is a traditionalist and parent the bifurcation
of authority, of theology, of social obligation, of metaphysics, you know,
that's that's a modern contrivance that owes to you know,
a corrupted uh experience of of being, you know, the
uh and that's and that's where especially but all the
things are so named. I make a lot of the
significance of are the Guillonne as the intellectual father of
a lot of these concepts. And one of his one
of the points he came back to again and again
in is in his body of work, and that Evilla
echoed directly, was that, you know, in a traditional state,
you know, there's a holistic and spontaneous unity the human
activity and uh acts of worship. You know, obviously some
of these things are familiarly or ethically familiar to you know,
anybody on the right. You know, the subordination of the economic,
the political. But you know again this uh, I don't
think people fully grasp that. In the traditional view, a
healthy state is like a healthy human There's a unified
coherence to all of its aspects. You know, there's not
this kind of there's not this kind of agonistic pluralism
of of of institutional life factions, you know. I mean,
that's that was the that was the critique of parliament
to read democracy from the piece of Westphalia until the
nineteen thirties, you know, is that it institutionalizes social divisions
as a matter of course, but you know, that kind
of thing, that kind of thing shouldn't be possible within
a properly educated populous you know. It doesn't mean people
remain mired in a sort of honorable ignorance, you know,
like I think in some ways was George Sorell's suggestion.
But these things have when there's metaphysical agreement between worldly
human affairs, you know, these attentions just don't emerge. You know.
And again to evil is or to Heideger's point, the
German Reich essentially accomplished that. You know. It's not to
say it was some sort of tulluric utopia in terms
of relationship between the classes. But it's not as if
this was just some sort of speculative musing in order
of when you know, Cruise Shift would say that, you know,
they'll be they'll be true socialism by nineteen eighty, you know,
and we'll well, we will have done away with money
and done away with you know, ownership, you know, like
the state itself won't even exist, you know. I one
of the reasons people find these uh, these images and
these films from uh, the Third Reich in in the
in the pre war years. When there's the found some compelling,
it's not because a spectacle. I mean, there's I can
show you spectacle all day from you know, Stalinist countries.
I can uh, I can sell you spectacles from places
like Turkmenistan. Today you're like, you know, the North Korean
mass Games. There's something evocative and stirring the people about
the Third Reich for the reasons just elucidated, and I
think anybody's paying attention realizes that, Yeah, we'll end to
here because we're coming up on about an hour and
I want to I'll wrap up this little sub sub
series next time. I just thought it was important to
take up you know, and I know that the I
know that the subs want to do them. I want
to do dive into the subject matter or.
Speaker 1: That you know, Well, you were talking about the the
reaction to the right prior to the war. You know,
much of that was purely on aesthetic terms, but also
it has to go beyond aesthetics. I think that's probably
what scares people. People have been trained to be scared
of that because instinctively they look at that and they're like, yeah,
I wish we had that.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah yeah, And so it conflicts with you know,
the state related of anti fascism. So it causes this
and it causes this, uh, cognitive dissonance that also has
like moral implications because you know, people people in a marriage,
going to a real world education. You know, there's just
this kind of confused pastiche of kind of conditioned responses
and and and arbitrary assignations of of you know, evil
the things or you know, the so they it leads
to really really confused responses from you know, people who
aren't really thoughtful or self aware. Yeah, definitely, all right,
tell people where they can find you. Well, I were
you joined social media recently? I we'll see how long
that lasts. But I did that because I'm not trying
to I'm not trying to stroke myself. But people said
they really wanted me to be on social media. So
despite my aversion, I set up a Twitter account. It's
at Thomas Seer seven seven seven. It's it's Thomas T
h O M A s c y R, which is
my government name, seven seven seven. The best place to
hit me up is on substick because that's where my
pod is and all kinds of other good stuff. It's
uh real Thomas seven seven seven dot substick dot com
and my website's are one stop kind of location for
my content. It's uh Thomas seven seven seven dot com.
It's number seven h seven seven seven dot com. That's
all I have for now.
Speaker 1: All right, so the next time, thank you Thomas.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you're welcome. Thank you SA