Apr 13, 2025
Zionism is Modernity’s decay—rootless, democratic sickness; the battle is metaphysical: Tradition vs. dissolution. #AntiModernity #ImperialOrder
Loading...
seen from United States
seen from Brazil
seen from Taiwan
seen from Brazil
seen from Yemen
seen from Kyrgyzstan
seen from United States
seen from France
seen from Netherlands
seen from United States
seen from Russia
seen from United States
seen from Singapore
seen from United States
seen from France
seen from Brazil
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Argentina
seen from United States
Zionism is Modernity’s decay—rootless, democratic sickness; the battle is metaphysical: Tradition vs. dissolution. #AntiModernity #ImperialOrder
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Julius Evola viewed America as the epitome of modernity's spiritual decay, embodying materialism, egalitarianism, and individualism—forces antithetical to traditional, hierarchical, and transcendent values. #Evola #Traditionalism #AntiModernity #SpiritualDecline #Americanism #CritiqueOfMaterialism
Upload and share videos instantly. It's free and simple. No signup required.
America as a Symbol of Decadence
Title: Julius Evola's Critique of America and Modernity
Tags: #Evola #Traditionalism #AntiModernity #SpiritualDecline #Americanism #CritiqueOfMaterialism
America as a Symbol of Decadence
America as a Symbol of Decadence: Evola viewed America as the epitome of a mechanized, materialistic civilization, devoid of spiritual depth and rooted in utilitarianism.
Rejection of Modern Values: He saw America as the antithesis of traditional values, emphasizing progress, egalitarianism, and individualism—principles he considered corrosive to hierarchical and transcendent ideals.
Critique of Modernity: Evola's disdain for America was part of his broader critique of modernity, which he saw as a decline from a sacred, ordered, and aristocratic past.
Chain of Decline: He traced the decline of Western civilization through liberalism, democracy, socialism, and communism, viewing them as interconnected stages of the same degenerative process.
Illusion of Democracy: Evola argued that democracy and liberalism are not antithetical to communism but are earlier stages of the same subversive current leading to societal collapse.
Radicalism and Intransigence: He advocated for a radical rejection of political decadence in all its forms, emphasizing the need for intransigence and purity in resisting subversion.
Rejection of Progressivism: Evola dismissed the notion of "progress" as a destructive force, urging a return to timeless, traditional truths rather than chasing futuristic illusions.
Americanism as a Trojan Horse: He considered Americanism more dangerous than communism because it subtly undermines traditional values through materialism, consumerism, and cultural influence.
Convergence of East and West: Evola saw both Americanism and communism as two sides of the same coin, working to destroy Europe's spiritual and cultural heritage.
Call to Resistance: He called for a steadfast defense of traditional values, warning against the passive acceptance of modernity's corrosive forces and the ultimate abdication of Europe's spiritual legacy.
Some European:
"Had we Europeans foreseen the artificial construct that America is, we might not have allowed its creation."
Julius Evola's perspective on America aligns with his critique of modernity and materialism. He viewed America as emblematic of a decadent, mechanized civilization, devoid of spiritual depth and rooted in utilitarianism. For Evola, America represented the antithesis of traditional values, emphasizing instead progress, egalitarianism, and individualism—principles he rejected as corrosive to higher, hierarchical, and transcendent ideals. His disdain for America was part of his broader critique of the modern world, which he saw as a decline from a sacred, ordered, and aristocratic past.
It is crucial, both for doctrinal orientation and for the world of action, that the men of the new order clearly recognize the chain of causes and effects, as well as the essential continuity of the current that has given rise to the various political forms now clashing in the chaos of modernity. Liberalism, democracy, socialism, radicalism, and ultimately Communism and Bolshevism are not isolated phenomena but successive stages of the same degenerative process. This process began when Western man broke free from the bonds of tradition, rejected higher symbols of authority and sovereignty, and embraced an illusory individualism, reducing himself to an atomized entity rather than a conscious part of an organic, hierarchical whole. This atomization inevitably led to the tyranny of quantity, where the mass of individuals, devoid of higher ideals, succumbed to materialism and the worship of economic power.
This decline is a unified process, with each stage preparing the next. Without the French Revolution and liberalism, democracy would not have emerged; without democracy, socialism and demagogic nationalism would not have followed; and without socialism, radicalism and Communism would not have taken root. These forms, though often seen as opposing one another, are in fact interconnected, each a step in the same downward spiral. The illusion that democracy and liberalism are antithetical to Communism is a grave error. They are not opposites but different phases of the same subversion, much like dusk is not the antithesis of night but its precursor.
The so-called "liberated" governments of today, particularly in Italy, remain blind to these truths. They cling to outdated political concepts, engaging in a futile parliamentary dance while ignoring the lessons of history. What is needed is not compromise but radical intransigence—a firm rejection of all forms of political decay, whether from the Left or the so-called Right. Concessions to subversion only hasten our downfall. We must stand firm in our principles, ready to act with pure forces when the time is right.
This also requires purging ourselves of ideological distortions, which have unfortunately infected even some of our youth. They mistakenly believe that the destruction wrought by modernity is necessary for "progress," that we must fight for some distant future rather than uphold the timeless truths that have always been the foundation of legitimate social and political order. These truths, though expressed in different forms across history, remain constant. The youth must reject the false allure of progressivism and recognize that there is no such thing as "History" as an inevitable force. Men shape history, provided they remain true to their principles.
The charge of being "reactionary" is meaningless. When faced with destruction and profanation, should we not react? We are not reactionaries in the weak sense of the word; we stand for positive, original values that do not depend on the illusory promises of a "sun of the future." Our radicalism renders the supposed antithesis between the red "East" and the democratic "West" irrelevant. Both are manifestations of the same hostile force, working in different but converging ways to undermine Europe. Americanism, with its cult of materialism, consumerism, and economic growth, is in many ways more dangerous than Communism because it operates subtly, eroding tradition and quality through cultural and societal means rather than overt coercion. It is a Trojan horse, paving the way for collectivism under the guise of democracy.
In this context, Europe's submission to Americanism is a prelude to its ultimate abdication. Whether through military defeat or a "progressive" social crisis, the end result is the same: the complete triumph of the forces of decline. There is no middle ground. Americanism, whether intentionally or not, serves the same end as Communism—the destruction of Europe's spiritual and cultural heritage.
America as a Symbol of Decadence
Title: Julius Evola's Critique of America and Modernity Tags: #Evola #Traditionalism #AntiModernity #SpiritualDecline #Americanism #CritiqueOfMaterialism
America as a Symbol of Decadence
America as a Symbol of Decadence: Evola viewed America as the epitome of a mechanized, materialistic civilization, devoid of spiritual depth and rooted in utilitarianism.
Rejection of Modern Values: He saw America as the antithesis of traditional values, emphasizing progress, egalitarianism, and individualism—principles he considered corrosive to hierarchical and transcendent ideals.
Critique of Modernity: Evola's disdain for America was part of his broader critique of modernity, which he saw as a decline from a sacred, ordered, and aristocratic past.
Chain of Decline: He traced the decline of Western civilization through liberalism, democracy, socialism, and communism, viewing them as interconnected stages of the same degenerative process.
Illusion of Democracy: Evola argued that democracy and liberalism are not antithetical to communism but are earlier stages of the same subversive current leading to societal collapse.
Radicalism and Intransigence: He advocated for a radical rejection of political decadence in all its forms, emphasizing the need for intransigence and purity in resisting subversion.
Rejection of Progressivism: Evola dismissed the notion of "progress" as a destructive force, urging a return to timeless, traditional truths rather than chasing futuristic illusions.
Americanism as a Trojan Horse: He considered Americanism more dangerous than communism because it subtly undermines traditional values through materialism, consumerism, and cultural influence.
Convergence of East and West: Evola saw both Americanism and communism as two sides of the same coin, working to destroy Europe's spiritual and cultural heritage.
Call to Resistance: He called for a steadfast defense of traditional values, warning against the passive acceptance of modernity's corrosive forces and the ultimate abdication of Europe's spiritual legacy.
Some European:
"Had we Europeans foreseen the artificial construct that America is, we might not have allowed its creation."
Julius Evola's perspective on America aligns with his critique of modernity and materialism. He viewed America as emblematic of a decadent, mechanized civilization, devoid of spiritual depth and rooted in utilitarianism. For Evola, America represented the antithesis of traditional values, emphasizing instead progress, egalitarianism, and individualism—principles he rejected as corrosive to higher, hierarchical, and transcendent ideals. His disdain for America was part of his broader critique of the modern world, which he saw as a decline from a sacred, ordered, and aristocratic past.
It is crucial, both for doctrinal orientation and for the world of action, that the men of the new order clearly recognize the chain of causes and effects, as well as the essential continuity of the current that has given rise to the various political forms now clashing in the chaos of modernity. Liberalism, democracy, socialism, radicalism, and ultimately Communism and Bolshevism are not isolated phenomena but successive stages of the same degenerative process. This process began when Western man broke free from the bonds of tradition, rejected higher symbols of authority and sovereignty, and embraced an illusory individualism, reducing himself to an atomized entity rather than a conscious part of an organic, hierarchical whole. This atomization inevitably led to the tyranny of quantity, where the mass of individuals, devoid of higher ideals, succumbed to materialism and the worship of economic power.
This decline is a unified process, with each stage preparing the next. Without the French Revolution and liberalism, democracy would not have emerged; without democracy, socialism and demagogic nationalism would not have followed; and without socialism, radicalism and Communism would not have taken root. These forms, though often seen as opposing one another, are in fact interconnected, each a step in the same downward spiral. The illusion that democracy and liberalism are antithetical to Communism is a grave error. They are not opposites but different phases of the same subversion, much like dusk is not the antithesis of night but its precursor.
The so-called "liberated" governments of today, particularly in Italy, remain blind to these truths. They cling to outdated political concepts, engaging in a futile parliamentary dance while ignoring the lessons of history. What is needed is not compromise but radical intransigence—a firm rejection of all forms of political decay, whether from the Left or the so-called Right. Concessions to subversion only hasten our downfall. We must stand firm in our principles, ready to act with pure forces when the time is right.
This also requires purging ourselves of ideological distortions, which have unfortunately infected even some of our youth. They mistakenly believe that the destruction wrought by modernity is necessary for "progress," that we must fight for some distant future rather than uphold the timeless truths that have always been the foundation of legitimate social and political order. These truths, though expressed in different forms across history, remain constant. The youth must reject the false allure of progressivism and recognize that there is no such thing as "History" as an inevitable force. Men shape history, provided they remain true to their principles.
The charge of being "reactionary" is meaningless. When faced with destruction and profanation, should we not react? We are not reactionaries in the weak sense of the word; we stand for positive, original values that do not depend on the illusory promises of a "sun of the future." Our radicalism renders the supposed antithesis between the red "East" and the democratic "West" irrelevant. Both are manifestations of the same hostile force, working in different but converging ways to undermine Europe. Americanism, with its cult of materialism, consumerism, and economic growth, is in many ways more dangerous than Communism because it operates subtly, eroding tradition and quality through cultural and societal means rather than overt coercion. It is a Trojan horse, paving the way for collectivism under the guise of democracy.
In this context, Europe's submission to Americanism is a prelude to its ultimate abdication. Whether through military defeat or a "progressive" social crisis, the end result is the same: the complete triumph of the forces of decline. There is no middle ground. Americanism, whether intentionally or not, serves the same end as Communism—the destruction of Europe's spiritual and cultural heritage.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
"The power of antimodernity, which was unrealized in the socialist revolutions and struggles for national independence, comes to the fore again, intact, in our times. Che Guevara seems to intuit this fact during the final years of his life when he tries to break away from the structural determinism and the historical linearity of socialist doctrine, which, he recognizes, merely reproduces the basic features of capitalist modernity. 'Pursuing the chimera of realizing socialism with the help of the blunt weapons left to us by capitalism,' he writes, leads to a dead end. 'To construct communism it is necessary to make, simultaneous with the new material foundation, a new humanity [el hombre nuevo].' Che certainly knows firsthand the constraints of socialist developmentalism. He serves as president of the national bank and minister of industries in the years after the revolution. But in 1965 he mysteriously disappears from public view and leaves to join revolutionary struggles first in the Congo and then in Bolivia, where he is killed. Some see this decision to leave Cuba and his government posts as a sign of a romantic's restlessness for adventure or an unwillingness to roll up his sleeves and face the hard work of building a national economy. We interpret it instead as a refusal of the bureaucratic and economic straightjacket of the socialist state, a refusal to obey the dictates of development ideology. The new humanity he seeks to build communism will never be found there. His flight to the jungle is really a desperate attempt to rediscover the forces of antimodernity he knew in the liberation struggle. Today it is even more clear than in Che's time that only movements from below, only subjectivities at the base of the productive and political processes have the capacity to construct a consciousness of renewal and transformation. This consciousness no longer descends from the intellectual sectors that are organic to what was once called socialist science but rather emerges from the working classes and multitudes that autonomously and creatively propose antimodern and anticapitalist hopes and dreams."
Antonio Negri & Michael Hardt, from "Ambivalences of Modernity" in Commonwealth
"The dominant forces of modernity encounter not mere differences but resistances. What colonial historiography primarily accomplished and what needs to be countered, as Ranajit Guha explains, 'is a conjuring trick to make resistance disappear from the political history of India under British rule.' There is something psychotic about the idea that modernity is a purely European invention, since it constantly has to deny the role in the construction and functioning of modernity of the rest of the world, especially those parts of it subordinated to European domination. Rather than a kind of psychic repression, we might better think of this denial as an instance of foreclosure in the psychoanalytic sense. Whereas the repressed element or idea, psychoanalysis explains, is buried deep inside, the foreclosure is expelled outside, so that the ego can act as if the idea never occurred to it at all. Therefore, whereas when the repressed returns to the neurotic subject it rises up from the inside, the foreclosed is experienced by the psychotic as a threat from the outside. The foreclosed element in this case is not only the history of contributions to modern culture and society by non-European peoples and civilizations, making it seem that Europe is the source of all modern innovation, but also and more important the innumerable resistances within and against modernity, which constitute the primary element of danger for its dominant self-conception. Despite all the furious energy expended to cast out the 'antimodern' other, resistance remains within."
Antonio Negri & Michael Hardt, from "Antimodernity as Resistance" in Commonwealth