Metaphysics of War

by Julius Evola

This is the second, revised edition of Metaphysics of Battle, Victory & Death in the World of Tradition. In this book Evola considers the spiritual aspects of war in different spiritual traditions, including the Vedic, Iranian, Islamic and Catholic. In so doing he concludes that war can, in certain circumstances, have a ‘sacred character’ through which man may achieve self-realisation. In the second edition we have added a large number of new footnotes and a comprehensive index.

This collection of essays is about war from a spiritual and heroic perspective. Evola selects specific examples from the Aryan and Islamic traditions to demonstrate how traditionalists can prepare themselves to experience wars in a way that could allow them to transcend the limited possibilities of life in our materialistic age, entering the world of heroism, i.e., achieving a higher state of consciousness, an effective realisation of the meaning of life. His call to action, however, is not that of today’s armies, which ask nothing more of their soldiers than to become mercenaries in the service of a decadent class. Rather, Evola presents the warrior as one who lives a cohesive and integrated way of life – one who adopts a specifically Aryan view of the world, which sees the political aims of a war not as war’s ultimate justification, but as being merely a means through which the warrior realizes his calling to a higher form of existence.

Genres: Philosophy, Politics, War, Nonfiction, History, Religion, Occult

154 pages, Unknown Binding

First published May 23, 1996

About the author

Julius Evola (19 May 1898 – 11 June 1974), born Giulio Cesare Andrea Evola, was an Italian philosopher and esoteric scholar. Born in Rome to a family of the Sicilian landed gentry, Evola was raised a strict Catholic. Despite this, his life was characterised by 'an anti-bourgeois approach' hostile to both 'the dominant tradition of the West—Christianity and Catholicism—and to contemporary civilization—the 'modern world' of democracy and materialism'.

By turns 'engineering student, artillery officer, Dadaist poet and painter, journalist, alpinist, scholar, linguist, Orientalist, and political commentator', he has been described as a 'rare example of universality in an age of specialization'. Yet behind it all lay a singular emphasis on, and pursuit of, a 'direct relationship to the Absolute'. For Evola, 'the center of all things was not man, but rather the Transcendent.' This metaphysical conviction can be seen to have determined both Evola's stance on socio-political issues, and his antipathetic attitude towards 'all professional, sentimental and family routines'.

The author of many books on esoteric, political and religious topics (including The Hermetic Tradition, The Doctrine of Awakening and Eros and the Mysteries of Love), his best-known work remains Revolt Against the Modern World, a trenchant critique of modern civilisation that has been described as 'the gateway to his thought'. Since his death, also in Rome, his writings have influenced right-wing, reactionary and conservative political thought not only in his native Italy, but throughout continental Europe and, increasingly, the English-speaking world. Nevertheless, he should not be considered primarily as a political thinker, but rather as an exponent of the wider Traditionalist School that encompasses the work of such individuals as René Guénon, Titus Burckhardt and Frithjof Schuon.

Reviews

[Joseph Hirsch · Rating 4 out of 5]

Like with Ernst Junger, Julius Evola sometimes gets slandered and lumped in with Nazis, but his traditionalist, elite view of the warrior and what he represents (and transcends) is at odds with the plebeian nature of the Third Reich. and his critique of the harnessing of the warrior spirit for the bourgeois project of empire, colonialism, and the military-industrial complex (then unnamed, but still in its nascent form) shows not only how silly the "Nazi" brand is, but how Pyrrhic a task it is trying to plot such a fluid thinker on a Left-Right axis.

My only minor quibble (and it is minor) is that some of the essays don't so much compliment each other, as reiterate their themes. A more varied selection on the same topic would have been better, but this is the fault of the publisher, not of the writer. Recommended for anyone who likes to think about man's propensity for transcendence, through combat or other means, regardless of your own political outlook.

[Eugene · Rating 3 out of 5]

Half the book is boring and hard to read. Another half is quite interesting though emphasizing one thing: old civilizations were cool, heroic and perceived war in a spiritual way and we have to turn to that old philosophy and tradition if we want to live a fulfilled life.
Though the author supposedly served during first world war, the way he criticizes Remarque made me think that he didn't actually fight properly (did they do any proper, mechanized fighting at all?). Modern warfare has nothing heroic in it, and the problem is not in people. When you fight modern war (starting World War I) you 90% don't even see the enemy. It's all about artillery strikes, bombardment, and blind shooting. Death from above. It's really hard to feel any purpose of war sitting in trenches and thinking that every moment you can get killed by a piece of metal that flew 10-20 km before killing you. Remarque and even Jünger (though latter being very pro-war) showed that very explicitly.

This book rather made me think about how come absolutely different civilizations ended up in the same idea of heroism and heroic warfare. This is something really worth researching from the perspective of psychology and anthropology.

[CivilWar · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is a not a book analyzing war, this is a LARP book and I mean that in an extremely literal sense, if you have the eye for it you can see it many many times, but there's this moment where Evola really gives the game away to even the most naive and uncritical of readers, in the article "Soul and Race of War", where he writes


Let us come now to our final point, which is the clarification of the sense of our war and our heroism on the basis of the general doctrinal and historical views we have expressed. At the risk of being taken for hopeless Utopians we will never grow tired of repeating that our taking up once more of the Aryan and Roman symbols must lead to the taking up once more, also, of the spiritual and traditional conceptions which were peculiar to the original civilisations which developed under those symbols.


And there you have it, the entire 150 pages that make up the book are completely contained in that one line - Evola makes a big philosophical system out of war, worthy of any academic philistine (which he ostensibly hates), separating "aristocratic" from "secular" from "bourgeois" ("bourgeois" is used here negatively - when these articles were nothing but propaganda for the most bourgeois war in all of human history!) from "proletarian" wars, none of them based on class analysis but all of them based on the "spirit" of the war and the "race" of the peoples who fight it, but the entire shtick is revealed in its nakedness right there in that single paragraph.

It does not actually matter if a war is "aristocratic", "secular", "bourgeois" or "proletarian" - we take up the symbols of ancient Roman-Aryan warfare, therefore this war we are fighting, which is PURELY bourgeois and motivated entirely by big finance, which Evola ostensibly despises, is exactly like ancient Roman-Aryan war - because its symbols have taken up. "Aristocratic", "secular", "bourgeois" or "proletarian" are thus words that are completely devoid of substance because they only refer to the "symbols" taken up by the contending sides, i.e. their FASHION SENSE. The Russian civil war (a communist war) and the Great Patriotic War (an imperialist war) are both "proletarian" because they both use communist symbols, i.e. they both dress in red, i.e. they both share the same fashion sense despite being substantially entirely different from each other.

All this shit about "race" and "blood" and "spirit" is, probably accidentally, revealed entirely in this single statement - "we dress in the clothes of X, therefore we are X".

Evola despises the wars of big finance as being signs of a decadent age, but this war of big finance - the war of big finance, WW2 - is heroic because one of the sides has dressed themselves in the clothes of Ancient Rome.

And what do we call when we dress up in the clothes of something we're not and play a part? Play a role, perhaps? In live action, rather than in text or a video game or a tabletop game?

This is not the only time where Evola drops the ball and reveals his hand of cards to anyone who isn't a total idiot, but it is the most blatant as it essentially comes down to "we dress up in the glory of the Roman Empire, therefore we have the glory of the Ancient Romans upon us, even though we are fighting a bourgeois war of finance that we are being farcically humiliated on".

Another example where the ball is comically dropped is when he defends Imperial Germany in WW1. Evola writes this about WW1 and WW2, in 1940:

"Bourgeois nature has two main aspects: sentimentalism and economic interest. If the ideology of ‘freedom’, and ‘nation’ democratically conceived, corresponds to the first aspect, the second has no less weight in the unconfessed motives of ‘bourgeois war’. The 1914-1918 war shows clearly, in fact, that the ‘noble’ democratic ideology was only a cover, while the part which international finance really played is now well-known. And today, in the new war, this appears even more clearly: the sentimental pretexts offered have proved to be more and more inconsistent, and it is obvious, on the contrary, that material and plutocratic interests, and the desire to maintain a monopoly upon the raw materials of the world, as well as upon gold, are what have set the ‘tone’ of the fight of the democratic Allies and have led them to take up arms and ask millions of men to sacrifice their lives."

In this he is entirely correct. But then, like a poker player who hasn't been exactly taught the most basic rules of the game, he completely reveals his hand:

"Over and against this view [democratic "The Central Powers are aggressors and their oppressive regimes are remnants of medievalism"] there is the other according to which the military element permeates the political, and also the ethical, order. Military values here are authentic warrior values and have a fundamental part in the general ideal of an ethical formation of life; an ideal valid also, therefore, beyond the strictly military plane and periods of war. The result is a limitation of the civilian bourgeoisie, politically, and of the bourgeois spirit in general in all sectors of social life. True civilisation is conceived of here in virile, active and heroic terms: and it is on this basis that the elements which define all human greatness, and the real rights of the peoples, are understood.

"It hardly needs to be said that, in the 1914-1918 World War, the former ideology was proper to the Allies and above all to the western and Atlantic democracies, while the latter was essentially represented by the Central Powers. According to a well-known Masonic watchword – which we have often recalled here – that war was fought as a sort of great crusade of worldwide democracy[4] against ‘militarism’ and ‘Prussianism’, which, to those ‘imperialist’ nations, represented ‘obscurantist’ residues within ‘developed’ Europe."

Just like that little quote about how adorning the symbols of something makes you something, Evola reveals here his true interests, which is not the "nature" or "spirit" of anything, but how something is dressed and how adept it is at LARPing or cosplaying.

He admits that by now everyone knows that the first world war was an imperialist war of plunder instigated by big finance, which is trivially correct, and does not distinguish between sides, but then drops the ball by simply stating that the Central Powers were strong and virile and full of good "warrior values" and all that jazz. All this is to say - the bourgeois war of finance which I ostensibly hate is all fine because one of the sides dresses in the colors of medieval warriors, which I am rather fond of. Except this was not even true, because what encouraged the soldiers to fight in WW1 where the pseudo-revolutionary lies of the SPD, which would be very "proletarian" indeed for Monsieur Evola, the German soldiers were NOT motivated by "warrior spirit", but precisely by those myths which he hates, and what's more, when they saw the gig was up, they brought the communist revolution home, the thing Evola hates the most! How "warrior-like" of the German soldiers!

Evola is very offended by the victory of the "democratic" Entente, and shows how hypocritical it is:
"With the peace treaties and the developments of the post-war period this has become more and more evident. The function of the military element deteriorated into that of a sort of international police force – or, rather than really ‘international’, a police force organised by a certain group of nations to impose, against the will of the others and for their own profit, a given actual situation: since this was, and is, what ‘the defence of peace’ and ‘the rights of nations’ really mean. The decline of all feelings of warrior-like pride and honour was subsequently demonstrated by the fact that all sorts of ignoble means were developed to secure the desired results without even having to resort to this army degraded to the status of international police: systems of sanctions, economic blockades, national boycotts, etc."

It's completely true - the armies were international police forces (against the proletariat, not the imaginary warriors that exist in Evola's head) and that "defense of peace" was nothing but the schemes of capitalist scoundrels. But again the hand is revealed by the fact that he says that if the central powers won, this wouldn't be the case - then it would be, I'll repeat the passage:
"True civilisation is conceived of here in virile, active and heroic terms: and it is on this basis that the elements which define all human greatness, and the real rights of the peoples, are understood".

One side does this, and is dressed in fashion that monsieur Evola is not very fond of, so this means that we are in the Kali Yuga and the great warrior spirit is being repressed by bourgeois mediocrity and so on and so on. If the other side, exactly the same, did the exact same thing, for the exact same reasons, for the exact same purposes, then citoyen Evola would be most pleased because this side happens to have impeccable fashion taste.

It is not even a matter of wrong analyses, of essentialist analyses, of petit-bourgeois philistinism, of "disgusting" racism, of glorifying war or whatever.

It's that this is a literal LARP book where the substance, which is ostensibly the thing in question when words like "the nature", "the spirit", etc of something are thrown around, is literally Evola's least concern, because his concerns start and end at "what symbols are the sides in different wars wearing", aka what role are they pretending to play, i.e. LARPing.

Monsieur Evola considers the modern world decadent because the heroic spirit is slowly being drained out of wars - they start out as sacred, then are secularized, then are "for the fatherland" and then finally by and for the slaves, the proletariat, the lowest class for him.

Being a true aristocrat of the soul, he puts it upon himself to analyze the matter of war in history, one of the most important things in all of history to analyze, and against the decadent modern bourgeois world he puts forth this bold thesis: THE NATURE AND SPIRIT OF WAR DEPENDS ON THE FASHION OF THE CONFLICTING SIDES - WHETHER YOU MAKE CONTACT WITH THE "SUPRA-NATIONAL" DURING WAR DEPENDS ON YOUR FASHION TASTE DURING THE FIGHTING.

Monsieur Evola is an expert fashion designer however, and as such he is not content with "taking inspiration" from the Romans as Mussolini was - everything here is robbed, from the Bhagavad Gita to the Kuran, all done as if one was quote-mining for positive reviews of one's fashion line.

Per example on the distinction between Greater and Lesser jihad in Islam, "Baron" Evola has this to say:

"Having said that, in the tradition in question two ‘holy wars’ are distinguished: the ‘greater holy war’ and the ‘lesser holy war’. The distinction is based on a saying of the Prophet, who, when he got back from a military expedition, said, ‘I return now from the lesser to the greater war’.

"In this respect the greater holy war belongs to the spiritual order. The lesser holy war, in contrast, is the physical struggle, the material war, fought in the outer world. The greater holy war is the struggle of man against the enemies he bears in himself. More precisely, it is the fight of the supernatural element, innate in man, against everything which is instinctual, passionate, chaotic and subject to the forces of nature. This is also the idea that reveals itself in a text of the ancient Aryan warrior wisdom, the Bhagavad-Gita: ‘Thus knowing oneself to be transcendental to the material senses, mind and intelligence, O mighty-armed Arjuna, one should steady the mind by deliberate spiritual intelligence and thus – by spiritual strength – conquer this insatiable enemy known as lust’ (3:43)."


We rob from the Bhagavad Gita and from the Kuran to say, essentially, the following: the actual war, the nature of which is ostensibly the topic of the book, does not matter, what matters is the interior experience, feelings, etc of the individual fighter.

This is a repeat of the whole symbol argument - the actual nature of the war does not matter, but only what the fighter "gets" from it "spiritually", i.e. (no matter how much Monsieur Evola would have hated that we reduce it to these terms), what the individual fighter feels about the war.

It does not matter that the Italian soldier was killed for the sake of the profits of the Italian bourgeoisie, he did it while wearing the symbols of ancient Rome and so he died for the same principles as the Ancient Romans, while the Allied soldiers do the exact same thing, but they do not fight with the delusion that they are restoring ancient Rome but fall for the stupid lie of bourgeois democracy, therefore they are inferior, either spiritually or racially.

The same stupid, idiotic principles can be adopted to the left, there is nothing aristocratic about them: It does not matter that the anarchist in Ukraine right now is fighting "for the fatherland" alongside the fascist, for this is the "lesser jihad", and he has won the "greater jihad" against the fascist in himself, by acting, by LARPing, as if the war is an anti-fascist crusade. Exact same mentality.


All in all, if you want to look at war the same way one looks at a fashion catalogue, you might like this book. Unfortunately monsieur Evola promised me that this book would be about WAR and not FASHION, so I cannot recommend it... perhaps he should have written for Vogue instead?

Monsieur Evola is obsessed with a specific form of fashion, cosplay: he cannot help but be a puppet of the Italian bourgeoisie and writing his bellicose dribble because he is that obsessed with cosplaying as the Romans in WW2.

Perhaps he would be a better fit for the contemporary world where this boner for war cosplay could have been softened by discharging inside of a literal cosplayer, his penis rather than his rifle mind you, at some anime con, rather than a war-zone, the same war-zone where Evola often walked around the city during air raids to better "ponder his destiny" until a piece of destiny lodged itself in his spine, rendering him paralyzed from the waist down for the rest of his life. Perhaps destiny would have been better contemplated while feeling up the breasts of a 02 cosplayer? We would resolve both the cosplay fixation and the spinal chord situation in one fell swoop then.

Unfortunately he was born then and not now and so we all have to suffer a small army of pseuds online who mold their pathetic personalities, or lack of them, around such bad quality literature. I am sure that quite a few of them will angrily comment on this review - they will be promptly ignored, because as we have established, they belong at a LARPing event, not in analyzing war.

[Justinian the Great · Rating 5 out of 5]

"They are not illuminated by any superior element; no force from above supports them in the vicissitudes and contingencies with which their life in space and in time presents them. In these ordeals, what predominates in them is the collectivist element, in the form of instinct, ‘genius of the species’, or spirit and unity of the horde. Broadly speaking, the feeling of race and blood here can be stronger and surer than in other peoples or stocks: nevertheless, it always represents something sub-personal and completely naturalistic, such as, for example, the dark ‘totemism’ of savage populations, in which the totem, which is in a way the mystical entity of the race or tribe but meaningfully associated with a given animal species, is conceived as something prior to each individual, as soul of its soul, not in the abstract, in theory, but in every expression of daily life. Having referred to the savages, incidentally, and reserving the right to return eventually to the argument involved, we must indicate the error of those who consider the savages as ‘primitives’, that is, as the original forms of humanity; from which, according to the usual mendacious theory of the inferior miraculously giving rise to the superior, superior races would have ‘evolved’. In many cases it is exactly the contrary which is true. Savages, and many races which we can consider as ‘natural’, are only the last degenerate remnants of vanished, far anterior, superior races and civilisations, even the name of which has often not reached us. This is why the presumed ‘primitives’ who still exist today do not tend to ‘evolve’, but rather disappear definitively and become extinct."

"He [modern man] looks rather like what primitive peoples in reality, and not in the view of evolutionists, are: beings which, even though they proceed from originally superior races, have degraded themselves to animalistic, naturalistic, amorphous and semi-collectivist ways of life. What Landra has accurately described in these pages as ‘the race of the bourgeois’, of the petty conformist and right-thinking man, the ‘advanced’ spirit who invents a superiority for himself on the basis of rhetoric, empty speculations and exquisite aestheticisms; the pacifist, the social climber, the neutralist humanitarian, all this half-extinguished material of which so significant a part of the modern world is made up, is actually a product of racial degeneration, the expression of the deep crisis of the Man of the West, all the more tragic as it is not even felt as such."

[Zare · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a very strange read.

Apologists aside, author was very fond of Fascist rule (not that much of Nazi's that he considered so romantic (as he says, they are Germans after all) that they ultimately strayed from what author thinks is proper path) and this permeates entire book. Considering that book is collection of articles Evola published in Fascist magazine during the WW2 and then in publications in 1950 it is visible that he had change of heart regarding the Fascism but unfortunately not as a critic of the same but because Fascism was flawed and finally failed in the eyes of Evola. His thoughts on the subject are clear when one considers he considers himself supra-Fascist. Which is terrifying in itself. So answer to question where does the author's heart lies politically is pretty obvious even from the introduction. Evola is so right he could pop up on the left any time.

As many of his contemporary philosophers Evola delves way too deep in esoteric areas. We can see mentions of Hyperborians and Aryans from Indoeuropean traditions and mystic stories from further east, Persia and India. There is whole bunch of citations from various holy texts, from Islamic (he as majority of authoritarian regimes is enamored by Islamic approach to holy war) to Christian (although author does not like it that much because of its tame nature) to Indian Hindu traditions. Considering that majority of these literature works are strictly hierarchical it comes as no surprise that author longs for the times when people were split across social strata, or more precise cast system.

Reason is simple, aristocracy was aristocracy for the reason, Evola reasons, they had the pure blood and they are the rulers of the world (personally would not agree considering that same aristocracy due to their way of life caused its own demise). Plebs (or masses) are just slaves, automatons, degenerative and (as Evola says with sadness in his voice) currently in power. When you have masses ruling the world there is nothing good to expect so we need aristocracy back quickly, because they are the ones that are solely qualified to lead and rule (again rather questionable logic and I dont agree with return of degenerative lords of life and death, but OK).

So, as can be seen Evola would aggravate whole bunch of people today. With all this talk about the chosen elites Evola weaves his story of how masses have taken every meaning from ones life because everything needs to be tamed and ridden of goals towards higher level of existence - everyone needs to be molded and controlled. All of this was caused by rise - can you guess it? - of Jewish influence and control of world (again as I said author is Fascist to the core so antisemitism is expected). So when it comes to political manifesto of the Fascist sympathizer, Evola does everything by the book, Thule society and other race superiority cults of early 1900's would be proud of him.

So this is the background. Now we can move to the core of the book - Evola's discussion on nature of war, or better said conflict.

Evola's main comment is that together with progress towards pacifism and humanism (both considered as aberrations by Evola) people have lost their edge, their ruggedness and are tamed and placed under control of forces like bankers and world's financial rulers. Due to this people get slaughtered in new wars but as a form of cattle/cannon fodder that manages to survive only because of the base emotions and drives that enable people to survive - but because of which people degenerate even further. There is no motivation that could help people to rise up and be the best they can be. People are no more people of action but constantly paralyzed by conflicts in their minds that make them powerless and pliable to external forces.

Evola's view of perfect man is someone who manages to place himself under control, manages to control the lower emotions and evolves through danger. It is not that Evola thinks wars are required - although he does consider them excellent means of natural selection - he thinks that man needs to yearn to become best he can be, he needs to engage in the internal war to defeat bad elements in himself and thus rise up. But in order to do this man needs to become man of action, not of constant, self-paralyzing contemplation. Of course true warrior is the person who is best suited to achieve this inner victory because he is accustomed with corporeal warfare and that fact makes him the most qualified when it comes to internal (spiritual) warfare. Arjuna from Hindu tradition pops up every so often - when paralyzed by conflict in his mind he is advised by God of Light to act! and stop contemplating forever.

If above reminds you, beside often cited India's warrior cast logic, of Japanese Bushido you would be right. Same applies to Romans and to Scandinavian/Nordic people. In general it is true for every discipline that deals with life threats - everything is better than non-action, just act and move on the way one thinks its best. We might not like it but nature of life is struggle and this is something that we as society (in large) might have lost contact with. Instead of acting, thinking (just another way of acting but one that has potential for change but not necessarily can make the change) has a very weird effect - majority decides to be pulled this way, that way and thus play the role of play-doh used by the controllers in the shadows (media included). When one realizes that death awaits us all and that one can decide to die under ones own conditions - this is when when ultimate freedom is won. And death is the ultimate terror - just look at what is done by using this fear in last several months.

Here I agree with the author - people need to learn to act and think. And through that action they need to seek their own freedom by conquering their fears. Without action it all remains theoretical and thus creates depression and maladies of the spirit that bring people down and under greater control.

But to be able to act one needs sets of belief that need to be ingrained in oneself to have any effect. I agree with this too - last decade showed that people are actually missing the higher goals (considering that religion or belief system into higher power ran out of favor by majority of intelligentsia and is not considered hip or trendy). Everyday activities are just not sufficient to keep man motivated (imagine getting motivated by never ending cycle of wake up, go to work and repeat - and for majority it seems they are working in fields they dont like at all). To succeed mentally/spiritually man needs a higher goal. And this is where problem arises - if person is not capable to individually identify that higher goal it will be imprinted on him by external forces that have their own goals and imprisonment continues, even worse than before.

In the end we are all warriors in our own right just by living in the world. Through everyday struggles we need to seek enlightenment and become ultimate warriors by making sure we are free as individuals and not controlled by outside forces. We need to control our own fate. Today this would be frowned upon because inner strength and thought chain that goes with it - reasonable stoicism and practice of Musashi's thought for example - would be thought as toxic (omg, new age....). This is greatest hurdle for today's society, return from pure impulse emotional response to acceptance of world as it is and working on improving it.

So it is not that this book does not have its merits it is just it takes awhile to get to it. So if you have patience and will to go through the book and through some pretty disturbing thought chains about race and population structure there are things to learn here.

Just dont make this one starting point in your philosophical reading list - read classics and other authors (preferably even those from the other side of spectrum) so more complete picture of world can be made. Only then you can go through works of Evola and be able to learn something new where possible.

[tyagi · Rating 3 out of 5]

dw saar the east has fallen too

[Juan Gallardo Ivanovic · Rating 2 out of 5]

Very academically research for not for everyone. It dwells too much in the figure on the traditional heroism vs modern materialism. For me it was repetitive and it was not fruitful as I though reading the summary.
A hidden gem lays within this book but I may not be one who will discover it.a

[Mason Masters · Rating 3 out of 5]

Eh, interesting enough.

[Nico · Rating 4 out of 5]

I heard about this book more than two years ago, when I was searching for works on the so-call philosophy of war and how much important to our traditions and cultures war and human-conflict has been along history and still is (in a sense) in modern days. I was always fascinated about the question of how much violence and the strive for armed conflict and combat shaped human nature and society and why. Why do men "seek "so much war ? Why is war and the tradtions around the idea of a an ideal warrior class and warrior representation present in almost every society and myths ? Why does the image of "great warriors' and the ability to overcome and transcend other humans in battle so important to our history and traditions ?

This book surely offered me food for thought on those questions.

Evola deeply explore the conservative political idea that the Western World was (already at the time of his writtings) only a shadow of his former-self in terms of spirituality and traditions. More specifically the "warrior tradtion". Unlike the Eastern world who still according to Evola was capable to keep alive and important the spirituality and warrior tradition of their ancestors albeilt in a lesser version.

A great deal of Evola argument is notably set about the first wolrd war and how it was actually according to him , a spiritual and cultural conflict more than a political one per see. The Central Powers forged themselves around the idea of the honorification and conservation of old Western tradtions they sought to keep alive the "Warrior class". Meanwhile, the Allies represented the Bourgeois vision of warfare. Which are basically according to Evola the cumulation of greed and egoism, a model of society based on the illusion of personal confort and reliance on technology for everything. They are the new face of the western life, a western world without traditions, without spirituality and who only take war as a burden, with no deeper consideration or vision about it other than that of a tragedy and obligation outside of the norm and which should not exist in the first place. For them, a "warrior class" have no place in society , because war is not natural and no culture or tradition should be made around the certainty of war as an inevitable and important part of life let alone of a greater spiritual tradition.

According to Evola ancien civilizations greatest times was when the proper balance between class was established. The Noble Warrior class leading and representing society. However, with the evolution of society and the change of social structure the bourgeoisie took power over the upper positions of society and notably over the millitary and conduct of war. "Warrior tradition" and 'warriors classes' as such does not exist anymore. Now we have soldiers and mercenaries, people who do the job for money and social gains and without the leadership of the nobles born for the role of leading them in war, without the spiritual and traditional conduct and education behind.

According to Evola the" Aryan heritage" model of war and the tradtions around it was representative of what the ideal western society can strive to be. He use many examples of diverses cultures in which war itself was not only respected but mystified. The role of the warrior was not only a position of honor, but sometimes the highest form of livigin (and dying) a man can seek for. Fighting and dying in battle was the greatest accomplishement that a man could do in the mortal plane. This is because war is the place in which human can reach the highest form of spirituality, the act of going willingly against the insctinct of survival and preservation or even more so to sacrifice your mortal body for your cause is what Evola consider the greatest achievement of human existance. Because there is hardly greater display of determination and faith than going to sacrifice yourself for something you believe in.

In many cultures and religions our wordly life is not the end, in fact it is not even the greatest point of our existence. Evola demonstrate that by taking in example various religions or cultures such as the Romans and Ancien Scandinavians or even events such as the crusaders and their ennemies to show how the act of being killed in the battlefield is usually considered the greatest self-sacrifice by religion and religious figures and in turn lead to the greatest rewards in the afterlife.
For example in the Quran we can read the following citation

"So let those who sell the life of this world for the ext
World fight in the Way of Allah. If someone fights in the Way
of Allah, whether he is killed or is victorious, We will pay him an
immense reward''

Or for example in the Bhavad Gita a hindu religious text, we can read the followings citations from the god Krishna when he is speaking to Arjuna when the later is reluctanct to go to war (because he have to fight and killl people he actually know) which reflect the same vision as above

'[E]ither you will be killed on Ih ' battlefield and attain the heavenly planets, or you will conquer and enjoy the earthly kingdom. her fore, get up with deterrninaIion and fight' (2:37)


Here we have another example given by Evola when Saint Bernard adress then templars before battle

"It is a glory for you never to leave the battle
[unless] covered with laurels. But it i an even greater glory to
earn on the battlefield an immortal crown ."

"Immortal crown" meaning obviously dying in combat.

With many other examples Evola show us how throughout history the tradition of war and sacrifice on the battlefield was often in fact considered to be an achievement and a success from the point of view of man spirituality. The participation of war and the acceptance of dying or to sacrifice willingly yourself in it for your cause was also the greatest way in which our ancestors could win what Evola named the "greater war" for the warrior as in the spiritual mastery of one-self as a result of armed conflict. The "lesser war" was the act of physically fighting and willingly taking part in an armed conflict in order to establish your faith or your culture or your tradition or claimed rights for whatever over ennemies. By doing so properly man could reach victory in the Greater War and thus acces the spiritual domain after death and the highest point of it's existance. To quote his own words from the book when he talk about what the lesser and greater conflicts reflect for humans (using Islamic tradition as an example, but it applies generally)

"The lesser war here corresponds to the exoteric war the
bloody battle which is fought with material arms against the
enemy, against the 'barbarian' against an inferior race over whom
a superior right is claimed, or, finally,when the event is motivated
by a religious justification, against the 'infidel''

"The 'great Jihad is, in contrast, of the spiritual and interior order: it is the fight of man against the enernie which he bears within himself, or, more exactly, the fight of the superhuman element in man against everything which is instinctual, passionate and subject to natural forces. The condition for inner liberation is that these ennemies, the 'infidels' and 'barbarians' within us, are pulled down and torn to shreds"

Evola consider that the tradition and livehood of a warrior within the tradition of a warrior-class based society , if lived throught properly is what consist of overcoming the lesser war. The war against fear, against doubt, against lazyness, against greed against lust and everything an ideal warrior would consider not fitting. Because the warrior in order to be in his highest form cannot be slowed down by self-conflict, emotions , hesitations or regrets. He need to live life in the most proper and respectable way possible in order to be the most proficient and respectable in conduct during war and for the victory of his kin or cause.

Basically, regardless of which warrior-tradition the warrior was born in, by being capable to overcome his emotions and instincts in the face of death and suffering, man can possibly reach the greatest point of it's perception of the world and spirituality. But more importantly, society as a whole would be better with such a mentality of acceptance and "veneration" of war.

As such, Evola want for the Western world to reconnect itself with the old traditions of our warrior classes and spiritism. According to him the way that war is fought and and considered as of now is a reflection as to how Western society is corrupted and destined to inevitably reach a breaking point. Because by losing the metaphysic of war the Western world lost the tradtions related to it and as of now have no more soul or spiritual depth. The over-dependence on technology both to live in confort and security and to fight in war which was based on the model of the "Bourgeois" way of war is resulting in a soulless civilization.


I can't say I agree with Evola analysis and it's position on the so call"Decline of the West", even tho I understand and kind of see some of his points about the importance of tradition and can relate to it. I disagree even more so with his interpretations of "racial"disctinction between different types of ethnicity and how spirituality affect each of them in a different proporition. He clearly have the outdaded view of a conservative italian man of his time and was biased by it. However, other than that, his philosophical and cultural analysis on the subject of warrior tradition was very interesting.

[Hank · Rating 5 out of 5]

Den här samlingen av essäer behandlar strid, seger och död utifrån ett spirituellt och heroiskt perspektiv. Julius Evola undersöker hur krigare, som följer Traditionalistiska principer, kan använda strid, seger och död som en katalysator för ett transcendentalt självförverkligande genom att besegra både den yttre och den inre fienden. Författaren använder sig av exempel tagna från olika religiösa traditioner (dock i huvudsak de som har en stark koppling till Arierna) som; Asatron, Hinduism, Romerska och Persiska traditioner samt Islam och Kristendom för att illustrera gemensamma metafysiska drag. Julius Evola bjuder oss som vanligt på en fascinerande och tänkvärd bok som vi varmt rekommenderar.

[Grant Houtary · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely fascinating, you won't find any worldview quite like Evola's around anywhere. While at times rather severe and fundamentally anti-egalitarian there is still much to be learned from this text.

[Абрахам Хосебр · Rating 3 out of 5]

Вчення, яке Крішна ( Принцип знання) дає Арджуні (Принципу дії), щоб розвіяти його сумніви, націлене в першу чергу на те, щоб змусити його усвідомити відмінність між тим, що не схильне до псування як абсолютна духовність, і тим, що існує тільки ілюзорно, як людські і натуралістичні
елементи: “У неіснуючого(тіла, матерії) немає буття, у існуючого (духу) немає небуття. Знай, не можна зруйнувати те, що все пронизує (дух). Хто вважає, що він вбиває, і хто вважає, що його можна вбити, - обидва перебувають в омані.Він не може вбивати і бути убитим. Вона (душа) не виникала, не виникає і не виникне. Вона ненароджена, вічна, постійна і найдавніша. Вона не гине, коли вбивають тіло. Усі ці тіла минущі. Тому бийся “(II, 16, 17, 19, 20, 18).
Але це ще не все. Усвідомлення метафізичної нереальності того, що можна втратити або що можна змусити втратити іншого, - наприклад, ефемерне життя або смертне тіло - усвідомлення, тотожне визначенню людського існування як “всього лише забави” в одній з традицій, яку ми вже
розглядали - пов’язана з думкою, що дух в його абсолютності і трансцендентності може здаватися тільки руйнівною силою по відношенню до всього, що обмежене і нездатне перевершити власну кончину. Таким чином, виникає проблема того, як воїн
може пробудити дух, особливо через своє буття інструментом руйнації та смерті, і ідентифікувати себе з ним.
Відповідь на це питання - це саме те, що ми знаходимо в наших текстах. Бог не тільки оголошує: “Я - сила сильних, позбавлених жадання і прихильності. Я - жар вогню, життя в усіх істотах і аскеза подвижників. Я - розум розумних. Я - велич могутніх” (VII, 11, 9, 10), але, врешті-решт, відкривається Арджуні в трансцендентній і викликаючій страх
формі у виді блискавки. Ми, таким чином, підходимо до спільного бачення життя: як електричні лампочки, які горять занадто яскраво, як електричні ланки із занадто високим потенціалом, людські істоти падають і вмирають тільки тому, що всередині них горить сила, що перевершує їх кончину, що перевершує все, що вони можуть робити і бажати. Саме тому вони розвиваються, досягають піку, і потім, ніби віднесені хвилею, яка до даного моменту несла їх вперед, падають, розчиняються, вмирають і повертаються в непроявлене. Але той, хто не боїться смерті, хто здатний, так би мовити, взяти сили смерті, ставши всім, що вона знищує, долає і руйнує - він зрештою переходить за межу, він продовжує
залишатися на гребені хвилі, він не падає, і в ньому проявляється те, що знаходиться за межами життя. Таким чином, Крішна, уособлення “духовного принципу”, відкрившись Арджуні, може сказати: “Крім тебе, всі ці воїни з обох сторін загинуть. Тому встань і знайди славу. Перемігши своїх ворогів, насолоджуйся процвітаючим царством. Вони вже вбиті Мною одним. Ти, Арджуна, будь лише Моїм знаряддям. […] Не вагайся. Бийся, і ти переможеш суперників у битві“(XI, 32, 33, 34).
Ми знову бачимо ідентифікацію війни з “шляхом Бога”, про
яку ми говорили в попередній статті. Воїн більше не діє як
особистість. Коли він досягає цього рівня, велика нелюдська
сила перетворює його дію, роблячи його абсолютним і “чистим” у своєму вищому вираженні. Тут є дуже пам’ятний
образ, що належить до тієї ж традиції: “Життя - як лук, розум - як стріла; мета - вищий дух; з’єднай розум з духом, як випущена стріла вражає свою мету”.
Це одна з найвищих форм метафізичного виправдання війни, один з найбільш повних образів війни як “священної війни”.

Юліус Евола "Метафізика війни"

[Szymon Skalski · Rating 4 out of 5]

Książka "Metaphysics of War" autorstwa Julisa Evoli to fascynujące, choć miejscami kontrowersyjne, spojrzenie na wojnę jako zjawisko zarówno fizyczne, jak i metafizyczne. Evola, będący wybitnym humanistą i myślicielem, w swojej pracy łączy głęboką erudycję z nietuzinkowym spojrzeniem na historię, kulturę i duchowość. Choć nie sposób zgodzić się z wieloma jego wnioskami, lektura tej książki otwiera okno na światopogląd, który prowokuje do refleksji.

Evola dzieli wojnę na dwa porządki: „mniejszą” i „większą”, przy czym ta pierwsza odnosi się do konfliktów zewnętrznych, fizycznych, a druga do walki wewnętrznej – starcia z samym sobą w dążeniu do duchowego oczyszczenia i podporządkowania się wyższym prawom. Jak pisze autor:

The lesser war here corresponds to the exoteric war, the bloody battle which is fought with material arms against the enemy, against the 'barbarian', against an inferior race over whom a superior right is claimed, or, finally, when the event is motivated by a religious justification, against the 'infidel'. No matter how terrible and tragic the events, no matter how huge the destruction, this war, metaphysically, still remains a 'lesser war'. The 'greater' or 'holy war' is, contrarily, of the interior and intangible order – it is the war which is fought against the enemy, the 'barbarian', the 'infidel', whom everyone bears in himself, or whom everyone can see arising in himself on every occasion that he tries to subject his whole being to a spiritual law.
(s. 44-45)

Tego typu rozważania są charakterystyczne dla Evoli: jego zdolność do wnikliwej analizy i budowania koncepcji łączących duchowość z polityką i historią sprawia, że jego prace są intelektualnie angażujące, choć nierzadko trudne w odbiorze. Warto jednak zaznaczyć, że jego myślenie jest mocno osadzone w tradycjonalistycznym światopoglądzie, który dla współczesnego czytelnika może wydawać się archaiczny lub wręcz niebezpieczny.

Jednocześnie wiele stwierdzeń Evoli na temat współczesnego świata i kryzysu wartości wydaje się niepokojąco trafnych. Jego analiza rozpadu tradycyjnych struktur i poszukiwania sensu w świecie pozbawionym duchowego fundamentu wybrzmiewa aktualnie, mimo kontrowersyjnego kontekstu, w jakim te obserwacje są osadzone.

Jednak książka ma także swoje wady. Jedną z nich jest powtarzalność wielu motywów i wyjaśnień. Evola często wraca do tych samych koncepcji, tłumacząc je kilkukrotnie niemal tymi samymi słowami. Choć może to być przydatne dla mniej uważnych czytelników, dla tych, którzy analizują tekst skrupulatnie lub czytają go „za jednym zamachem”, staje się to męczące. Powtarzanie niektórych treści odbiera lekturze dynamikę i utrudnia utrzymanie zaangażowania.

Oceniając Metaphysics of War, doceniam przede wszystkim intelektualną głębię i prowokacyjny charakter książki. Evola zmusza czytelnika do konfrontacji z ideami, które mogą wydawać się nie do przyjęcia, ale jednocześnie skłaniają do przemyślenia własnych przekonań. To nie jest książka, z którą łatwo się zgodzić, ale właśnie dzięki temu jest tak wartościowa.

4/5 – za intelektualny wkład i inspirację do głębszej refleksji, pomimo powtarzalności i trudnych do zaakceptowania aspektów światopoglądu autora.

[Alejandro Paulovitch · Rating 5 out of 5]

El libro de julius Evola son muy similares a otros que he leído, metafísicos y espirituales, con su encanto orientalista y anti-cristiano. No utilizo esta palabra como mala, me parece bien que hable del espíritu como un ser neo pagano y mucho más de lo que digan las fes católicas y evangélicas. Julius Evola, pagano católico declarado como decía Jonathan Bowden es un ser que ha hablado con propiedad el tema de la guerra. La guerra contemporánea es terrorífica, el ser lo es todo y puede ser destrozado en una micra de segundo por fuerzas nucleares. Existe la guerra total en la que el ser humano es consumido completamente por las fuerzas belicistas y militaristas. No es nada, sino una herramienta más del sistema sirviendo los intereses de las élites conquistando territorios sin avanzar su propio espíritu y su salud. La metafísica de la guerra ha pasado de una lucha de la vida o la muerte a un sin fin de sangre y fuego. Consecuencia directa de la revolución industrial si se ha de ser honesto. La guerra ha perdido su valor original y de grandeza, su tradicionalismo maravilloso y su colectivismo escondido. El fin del ser humano llegó no con la creación de la bomba nuclear sino con la creación y la industrialización del ser humano. Julius Evola avisó con certeza que el futuro sería la putrefacción absoluta del espíritu y el ser humano no tendría valor propio. ¿Ha llegado el fin de ciclo? ¿Es el fin de la historia como decía Fukuyama? No, pero para eso está el pasado y la historia, para leerla y aprender de ella. Podemos ver la antigüedad y las épocas medievales con valor porque así eran, mucho más útiles y bellas de lo que nos cuentan las élites. Este pasado tiene que funcionar de la mano con la modernidad porque al pasado no se puede volver, solo se puede apreciar y el futuro tendrá que ser como decía Guillaume Faye: Arqueo-futurismo. Lo mejor de los dos mundos a la medida de lo posible.

[Tvrtko Balić · Rating 1 out of 5]

This is probably the worst thing Evola has written. There's some good quotes in there, but as a work, as a collection of essays, it is horrible, all essays here are bad. His approach to war is very larpy. As for the other part of the title, there isn't much metaphysics here either, unless we take a very amateur stance that anything vaguely spiritual can be considered metaphysical. The essay with that name within the collection comes close to actual metaphysics when it talks about deification of a triumphant warrior or commander in Rome and throughout the essays there's talk about the soul of the warrior, but that is barely metaphysical because Evola doesn't discuss the nature of the soul itself and there's no good arguments for these things being any more than metaphors and ethical, political or social stances instead of primarily metaphysical ones. And then there's lack of substance resulting from inconsistencies, Evola criticizes fascism while never transcending it as he claims to do, he criticizes nazism and western racism for its modern biological conception of race even though he himself spends a lot of time talking about race and even the Aryan race all the while using biological metaphors (maybe one shouldn't do that in the same breath and without proper clarification of the difference because it seem), he criticizes modern individualism and yet he is also extremely opposed to collectivist interpretations of history as vulgar and focuses his message on worthy individuals, he criticizes romanticism, but any politics he has is pure romanticism... Not to mention that he makes mistakes typical of him like focusing so much on the spiritual that he completely ignores that we live in the physical material world no matter what our assesment of it may be. So yes, this is all the flaws with Evola front and center and dialed up to 11, it is probably the worst book of his out there.

[Wes Moyer · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a collection of essays from Evola written in various Italian publications between 1935 and 1943 with one essay (the final chapter) written in 1950. The essays follow the theme of realizing the true heroic warrior spirit through combat as according to the ancient Indo-European traditions.

Many highly motivating quotes from ancient Indo-European texts with accounts of their rituals and culture with a focus on rituals of combat and achieving, what some would call, "self-overcoming" or "self-actualization" through combat. Evola talks about achieving a spiritual level beyond material earthly goals, such as money, honours, or even territory, and instead achieving goals of overcoming the experience with life or death itself to conquer the spirit of the negated corporeal man. The "negation of the negation" as Jung would say.

Excellent quick read that I would say served as a good introduction to Evola's thought and writing style. The final chapter written in 1950 was a very interesting addition to give you a sense of Evola's thought five years after the war after having just read his thoughts pre-war and during the war throughout the rest of the book. In a way this book gives you a taste of Evola from the "Revolt" era and from the "Men Among The Ruins" era.

Some repetitiveness because the essays were written in various places over the course of 8 years.

[Adam · Rating 4 out of 5]

A strong Evola work, there is much value in the ideas presented here, even more so into the 21st century with the technologization of warfare, which likewise completely made void its spiritual purpose and made it bloodshed for no higher end.

There are the typical Evola themes present here, such as involution and a striving for transcendence and the divine, just in the context of war, which is very interesting especially within the context of many modern conflicts, we can see the validity of Evola's thought ever more so. My main gripe is that the congruence of the whole work can feel lacking, but Evola didn't intend it as a singular work, so it's not his fault at all, much like Modern Man in Search of a Soul for Jung. But Evola does blatantly regurgitate the same ideas and quotes he mentions in other essays in the same text, so that's the only thing I could point a finger at him for (but even then, said ideas are absolutely strong, so I can almost understand his repetition of them).

If you are a fan of Evola: it's a must-read. If you have interest in warfare and its implications and spiritual characteristics: it's a must read. A perfect complementary work to many classic treatises of war, notably The Prince and The Art of War.

[Paithan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Listened to it as an audio book.

Very good. Great perspective on Lesser Jihad and Greater Jihad, that is respectively the Material War and the Inner Spiritual War. Succeeding in war is done by overcoming the animal instinct to flee or hide, to rise to a higher level of consciousness in the danger. This was the attitude of Christian and Islamic knights during the Crusades.

Ancient Indo-Aryan warriors viewed themselves as the gods or the champions of the gods when they went off to war. The enemy were giants or demons. The conflict was the cosmic conflict made manifest in the world. Victory meant an earthly kingdom. Death meant a spiritual kingdom.

How does this manifest in modern life? Think of yourself as a warrior handpicked by God. He only throws the worse at you because you are his best. He wants you to succeed but in order to do that you need to conquer the inner animal that wants to sleep in, get drunk or goof off all day.

Would recommend.

[Syed Emir Ashman · Rating 4 out of 5]

A series of essays defending the conception of the warrior ethic within a traditional hierarchy - in opposition to what the author deems as the inverted hierarchy of the materialistic, modern world. An obviously esoteric, almost mystical work - the Metaphysics of War stands in marked contrast to Huntington’s more corporeal ‘The Soldier and the State’.

Some ideas were obviously written for a different audience, especially those that speak of race. I don’t agree with many of these racial analyses in particular, although I did find it interesting.

It takes a certain level of concentration to truly understand some of these essays, considering Evola’s wordy and intellectual style. All that being said, there are some real gems in here and these essays will be appreciated by the traditionalist.

[Irene Algeciras · Rating 4 out of 5]

Voy a empezar aclarando una cosa y es que les recomiendo a los lectores en español darle una oportunidad a la versión simplificada de este título (no es difícil de encontrar). Es una buena forma de adquirir todos los conceptos clave que se tratan en el libro. Personalmente me he quedado satisfecha.

Por lo general me ha gustado pero algo está claro, no es fácil de leer. El lenguaje que Julius Evola utiliza es complejo, así como es típico de encontrar en libros filosóficos por lo general. Pero me parece necesario a la hora de tener conocimientos sobre la guerra, así como las distintas perspectivas que se tienen sobre ella. Te guste o no, demuestra su realidad.

[book_explorer · Rating 2 out of 5]

Interesting reading, though I found it a little too woo-woo for my liking. Also, Evola's ideas on race are more than a little strange. I can see the connection between Evola and BAP pretty easily, and while I appreciate the notion that there is something greater--heroic--in man, I struggle with the idea that only a spiritual conception of heroism can unleash it. To be frank, I think it exists and is found in times of struggle, regardless of whether one recognizes it as spiritual or simply a heightened mental state.

[Beto Laso · Rating 5 out of 5]

Cabría de esperar que un adepto al Sendero de la Mano Izquierda, concretamente seguidor del Tantra, tratara en un ensayo el arcano arte de caducar al prójimo haciendo de la autodestructivo la vía para trascender.

Más que elogiar el conflicto hace ver que cuanto más cerca se halle de lo divino y a nivel personal sea por tu alma (elogio vacunador contra el negrojismo sobre las Cruzadas mediante) más digna. Pero como dijo Don Paco: "La vida es conflicto y la paz una feliz incidencia"; Kuruksetra es nuestro día a día y lo deja claro el Guita. Recomendable y no hay excusas, son 30 páginas.

[Norman Bennett Jr. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Julius Evola is a brilliant voice of the perennial school of philosophy and metaphysics. This beautiful books lays out one of the traditional paths to enlightenment and service of the ideal. In this book, Evola explores the metaphysical and spiritual nature of war itself, and how struggle and warfare offers one of the greatest opportunities to experience and engage in the self-denial and self-sacrifice which frees one from self, and opens a portal to the Divine.

[Arsen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting read and window into very different world view.

Since the author is radical traditionalist I suppose that it is not for everyone's taste.

It is also of notice that book is actually collection of papers on same topic published independently so some repetitions are present since each chapter doesn't start of with assumption that reader had actually read previous chapters (papers).

[Fearless Leader · Rating 4 out of 5]

A collection of essays on war by Julius Evola. They get a bit repetitive at times as many concepts are repeated several times between essays. However, you do get a glimpse at how Evola viewed the progress of the second world war, and for that it might have some value. At one point he talks boldly about the new Europe they (the axis) would create after the war, and later descends into a morbid fatalism about European man.

[Jamie · Rating 5 out of 5]

Ignoring the anti-semitism of the author, this book has a lot of value regarding the current crisis of meaning in the west, a brief criticism of bourgeois capitalism from a non-communist perspective, and what solutions can be offered (Evola being a "super fascist" or traditionalist, recommending the return to a Roman / Indo-European spiritualised warrior culture where heroism was central, rather than comfort).

[Collin]

“Modern man, by creating the world of technology and putting it to work, has signed his name to a debt which he is now required to pay. Technology, his creature, turns against him, reduces him to its own instrument and threatens him with destruction. This fact manifests itself most clearly in modern war: total, elemental war, the merciless struggle with materiality itself.”

Ondanks wat super-facisme hier en daar toch best een interessant werkje van Julis

[Brian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Evola, another arrogant and annoying philosopher. Everything that pisses me off about philosophers is present here. Yet in this one there are many gems that I personally needed to find. I would consider it one of the most important books I’ve read this year.

I think he is slightly more ‘useful’ than his peer Guenon, yet I find Guenon much more palatable and enjoyable to read as literature.

[Joshua · Rating 5 out of 5]

Evola is a constant joy to read and presents ideas to play around with. These ideas are typically not discussed in new age philosophy books, so a book on metaphysics with masculine ideas is quite valuable. Well written, and an excellent translation of the original Italian work.

[Jack Meyer · Rating 5 out of 5]

prepare to force yourself to finish it, lol it's tough.

All the right ideas.. Pretty difficult to read/understand some specifics, but easy to grasp the main concepts and purpose for his writing and I agree with his ideas.