A Handbook for Right-Wing Youth

by Julius Evola

A Handbook for Right-Wing Youth consists of essays selected from throughout Evola’s lifetime, but most especially from the post-war era, when youth across the Western world had thrown their societies into chaos with protests, civil unrest, and by defying conventional mores. According to Evola, the problem was not with the youth themselves, given that he viewed the inquisitive and seeking mentality associated with the young as essential toward opening oneself to the wisdom of Tradition, but rather with the fact that post-war Western civilisation itself had come to venerate youthfulness over maturity, thus leaving the young without any guidance or authority. Evola believed that it was only by channelling the energies of the rebellious youth into the political Right — not the Right of today, but rather that Right which represents the timeless principles which stem from before the advent of liberalism — thus restoring the West to a healthy and organic condition once again. In these essays, he defines those principles which must be undertaken by youth — not just by those young in age, but those young in spirit as well — if they are to gain mastery not only over their societies, but also over themselves. As such, while this is a book aimed at the young, it is not exclusively for them.

This book was assembled out of Evola’s writings by the Hungarian traditionalists, and includes a Foreword by Gábor Vona, Chairman of Hungary’s political party, Jobbik.

Genres: Politics, Philosophy, Nonfiction, Religion, History

182 pages, Kindle Edition

Published March 14, 2017

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

[A · Rating 4 out of 5]

8/10.

Here are some excellent quotes from Evola with my commentary:

1. “Marxism did not arise because of the existence of a real social question, but the social question arises — in countless cases — only because Marxism exists, in other words artificially, or in terms that are almost always unsolvable, because of agitators, who are notorious for ‘raising class consciousness’.”

Marxists and Cultural Marxists create "problems" and "oppression" where no such thing existed in the past. By agitating and screaming about the "haves" and the "have nots" to the populace, they incite people to subversion through media propaganda. They create problems while lying that the "problem" was there for all of eternity until today. A prime example of this is the decreasing happiness of women since the sexual revolution of the 1960s.

2. “With respect to modern civilisation and society, it may indeed be said that nothing possesses a more revolutionary character than Tradition, which — in proper and Hegelian terms  — constitutes the ‘negation of a negation’: for the latter is what, through ‘progress’, has desecrated everything and subverted every normal order, leading us to the state we find ourselves in today.”

The world we currently live in is a negation of the True, Beautiful, and Good. It is satanic in essence — i.e. is a complete inversion of the natural order. Only by negating the Great Negation that is modernity can we return to health. As opposed to infinite "choice", we fulfill our duties and obligations as men; as opposed to seeing ourselves as helpless and "depressed", we cultivate ourselves and bring our potential to fruition through discipline and effort; as opposed to falling in the endless pursuit of material goods, we devote ourselves to our ideals, feeling their great weight upon our shoulders. We return to health by turning away from the negation that is modernity.

3. “Courage, loyalty, lack of deviousness, an aversion to falsehood, an incapacity to betray, and superiority vis-à-vis any selfish pettiness or lowly interest may be counted among those values which, in a way, transcend ‘good’ and ‘evil’, as they are situated on an ontological rather than a ‘moral’ level: precisely because they bestow or strengthen ‘being’, in contrast to the condition represented by a feeble, elusive, and shapeless nature. No ‘imperative’ applies here. The individual’s natural disposition is what counts. To use a simile, nature presents substances which are both fully crystallised as well as those which are imperfect and incomplete crystals, mixed with crumbly gangue. Certainly, we will not call the former ‘good’ and the latter ‘bad’ in a moral sense. It is a matter of different degrees of ‘reality’. The same holds true for human beings.”

Weak beings are not even beings — they are amorphous blobs. They are forever molded by their environments, not by their internal souls and consciences. A being is, by definition, something that is stable. If one is "feeble, elusive, and shapeless", one is ever-changing and thus one's "being" does not truly exist. As opposed to this, courage, loyalty, and truthfulness are premised upon a forthrightness of putting out one's being and beliefs. One acts how one is; one does not shirk what is right for fickle social approval. Thus one is ontologically stronger — "held together" stronger as a being — than the liars, deceivers, and sycophants.

4. “Against psychoanalysis we should oppose the ideal of an ego which does not abdicate, and which intends to remain conscious, autonomous, and sovereign in the face of the nocturnal and subterranean part of his soul and the demonic character of sexuality. This ego does not feel either ‘repressed’ or psychotically torn apart, but achieves an equilibrium of all his faculties ordered in accordance with a higher significance of living and acting.”

Psychoanalysis and behavioral psychology attempt to convince us that our reason has no control over our passions. This leads to a relinquishment of duty and a falling-down into the basal animal state of pursuing pleasures. Everyone is turned into a slave of their passions — hunger, sex, and comfort — which destroys society (but greatly benefits the financiers). As opposed to this, we take responsibility for our life and its direction. We take care of our bodies. We build them into strong structures and become mentally stronger thuswise. We admit our mistakes and aim to improve them the next day. We attempt to constrain our unruly passions with our reason. That fight — never given up — is what keeps us "conscious, autonomous, and sovereign".

[Jeremy Egerer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Couldn't finish. What this is, a diatribe written by a right-winger in post-war Europe, is a call to be a better, stronger, more brilliant race of men. To focus on building yourself and stand tall despite everybody else. The same thing every great person has been telling us from the beginning of time. It's nice that he says it, but I don't think many people are listening.

[Петър Стойков · Rating 2 out of 5]

Евола го имат за най-влиятелния фашистки автор на новото време, но срещата ми с есетата му ме остави може би не с почудата, с която ме остави Моята борба на Хитлер, а понеже вече бях наясно с качеството на крайдесните писания, по-скоро с примирение тип "Е, какво пък друго очаквах...".

Идеите в книгата произхождат от стандартния традиционализъм, модерното общество е дегенерирало и заразява човешката душа и т.н. знаете ги тия. Не, че няма доста истина в такъв поглед върху развитието на човечеството, но залитанията на Евола са някак езотерични, анти-Дарвин, подобни на "духовния" "спиритуалистичен" шит който, иронично, бълват хипарите.

Не ми е проблем, че не съм съгласен с гледната точка, но нито критиката на съвременното общество, нито предложените "вдъхновени" решения в кратичките есета се впускат в някаква заслужаваща интерес дълбочина на разглежданите въпроси (което явно е характерно за крайнодясната литература, и доста по-малко за крайнолявата), но пък езикът на писане е неприятно тежък и муден.

[Garrett Edwards · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Aside from opposing democracy and all 'socialist' myths, belonging to the Right means upholding the values of Tradition as spiritual, aristocratic, and warrior values."

While this isn't a "handbook," nor is it focused primarily on "youth," I enjoyed several of the essays (while others felt less germane/focused). There's a disjointedness due to the essays being drawn from various periodicals Evola wrote for spanning the 1930s to the 70s, which led to a lack of cohesiveness overall. I'll also add that if you aren't familiar with any of Evola's other works, this is likely not a good place to start. These essays assume a working knowledge of his Traditionalism, which is best expounded in his masterpiece, Revolt Against the Modern World.

Many of these essays are his attempt to apply a Traditionalist analysis to contemporary issues such as the student movements of the 60s/70s (the so-called "Beat" generation), but the ones I liked most dealt with the tenets of Traditionalism.

"Liberalism, then democracy, then socialism...then finally Communism only appeared historically as steps taken by the same evil...The great illusion of our days is that democracy and liberalism are the antithesis of Communism." These are all steps of decline, an involution.

In Orientations, he emphasizes that "a religious factor is necessary as a background for a truly heroic conception of life...It is necessary to feel the evidence in ourselves that beyond this earthly life there is a higher life, because only someone who feels this way possesses a force that cannot be broken or overwhelmed."

His comments here on Catholicism are interesting since they reflect the criticisms many traditional Catholics have of modernist tendencies in the Church:

"Certainly, if Catholicism were capable of making a capacity for high asceticism its own, and precisely on that basis to make of the faith the soul of an armed bloc of forces, almost like a resumption of the spirit of the Middle Ages of the Crusades--almost a new order of Templars that will be compact and inexorable against the currents of chaos, surrender, subversion, and the...materialism of the modern world--in a case like this, and even if at minimum it held firm to the positions of the Syllabus (Syllabus of Errors by Pope Pius IX, 1864), we would choose it without hesitation...But...given its surrender to modernism and the growing opening of the post-conciliar Church to the Left--for our men the mere reference to spirit can suffice, precisely as evidence of a transcendent reality."

In The Right and Tradition, he explains the Right/Left political distinction originating in the wake of the French Revolution (because of their physical place in Parliament--the Right being counter-revolutionary), whereas, prior to that, under monarchical regimes, the Right "acted not for any cause of its own, but rather in defense of the higher principles of authority and order eminently enshrined at the very head of the state...Only with the rise of revolutionary ideologies and movements did the definition of the Right and the Left as fully opposed factions emerge."

A truly Traditionalist movement must be hierarchical and aristocratic in character and oppose concepts like democracy or "the masses," which means that fascism deserves reservations since it "cannot be described as Right-wing in the old, traditional sense of the term, since they are rather marked by the mingling of Right and Left; on the one hand they uphold the principle of authority, but on the other relied on mass parties and embraced 'social' and revolutionary principles of the Left." Evola considers fascist tendencies to be "plebeian" in nature in opposition to the aristocratic values of Traditionalism.

"The concept of Tradition applies to a system in which 'all activities are in principle ordered from above and have an upward direction. Consequently, the natural and fundamental prerequisite for a 'traditional' Right would appear to be the acknowledgement of a reality of a higher order." He proposes a "revolution from above" to oppose all of "the anarchical tendencies of today."

In Historiography of the Right he cites Carl Schmitt's criticism, noting that "whereas Left-wing forces have systematically elaborated and perfected a historiography of their own as the general background for their destructive action, nothing of the sort has occurred in the opposite camp of the Right."

Evola believed that above an enlightening historiography of the Right, which presents an anti-materialist conception of history (a total ideological rejection of the socialist myth), to combat the subversion of the Left "would require a Right-wing international, as organized and powerful as the Communist one."

On Youth, Evola states "youthfulness is to be assigned to that which stands at the origins, whereas the last, chronologically younger generations are the older, senescent, twilight ones."

He later draws reference from the ancient Arab-Persian civilization. "The term for 'young man' was used to describe the quality of 'being young' precisely in the spiritual sense...a special disposition of the spirit. Thus, 'the young' came to be conceived as an Order whose members would undergo a rite connected to a kind of solemn vow always to maintain this quality of 'being young.'"

He also brings up the concept of guilds, which would instill a spirit of honor and ethic in the youth who participated in them. This included initiation rites (perhaps even duels) and the distinctive concept of upholding honor, for which a rigorous code was enforced. "For their part, the youth regarded themselves as a kind of elite and a seminary for a higher, more virile class within the country."

Evola contrasts the old youth guilds with the nihilism the so-called Beats or hipsters who do "not react or rebel...by having a precise idea of what a normal and sensible order would be, and firmly keeping to certain fundamental values. He reacts against the prevailing situation as though by instinct, in a confused, existential way...The Beat, in his chaotic revolt, not only lacks any such grounds (a sense of traditional order), but would probably reject them were they shown to him. Hence, the definition 'rebel without a flag' or rebel without a cause' fits him well."

"If a state were to possess a political or social system that, in theory, would count as the most perfect one, but the human substance of which it is comprised were tainted...that state would sooner or later descend to the level of the lowest societies, while a people, a race capable of producing real men...would reach a high level of civilization and would stay on its feet before the most calamitous tests even if its political system were faulty and imperfect...The measure of what can still be saved rather depends on the existence, or absence, of men who stand before us not to recite talking points, but to be models."

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

It was a tough read

[Bobby Daugherty · Rating 4 out of 5]

A collection of articles published in different phases of Evola's career. A good introduction as many of his books may focus on one topic and not present an overall view of his range of ideas and expertise.

[Khedher Lahssini · Rating 5 out of 5]

الزمن الذي نجد أنفسنا نعيش فيه، يوحي بشكل واضح إلى ما الذي يجب أن يكون عليه شعارنا: أن ننهض من جديد، أن تعاد ولادتنا روحيا، أن نخلق نظاما جديدا و استقامة بأنفسنا. أولئك الذين لديهم أوهام حول وجود صراع سياسي محض وقوة تلك الصيغة أو ذاك النطام، بدون وجود جودة بشرية جديدة كنظير لهذا كله، لم يتعلموا أي درس من الماضي.
نجد أنفسنا في عالم من الحطام_ لا يجب علينا أن ننسى هذا. وما يمكن إنقاده يعتمد فقط على الرجال الذين لا زالت لديهم القدرة على البقاء واقفين بين هذا الحطام. ليس من أجل إملاء أية صيغ، بل ليضرب بهم المثل؛ ليس بكونهم سماسرة للدوغمائية والمادية عند الجماهير، وإنما ببعثهم لأشكال مختلفة من الشعور و الاهتمامات.
أن لا يدع المرء نفسه تتوه هو شيء مصيري اليوم. في هذا المجتمع الذي ضل الطريق، على الواحد أن يكون مؤهلا لمفخرة أن تكون عنده شخصية. يجب على المرء أن يكون كذلك حتى قبل أن يتم الاعتراف به كبطل لفكرة سياسية ما، عليه أن يظهر نوعا من التوجيه للحياة، تناسق داخلي, ونمط يقف على الاستقامة والشجاعة الفكرية في كل العلاقات الانسانية. كل هذا، بأسلوب مستقيم، ليست فيه افتضاحية، ولا كلمات كبيرة, ولا مواقف متزمتة. بالنسبة ل"لماذا الارباك؟" للآخرين، دعونا نجيب بشكل واضح بقوة: 'لايمكننا التصرف بشكل آخر_ هذه حياتنا' إذا كان هناك أي شيء ايجابي، مثل نظام جديد، يمكن الحصول عليه، فذلك لن يكون عبر مكر الدعاة الديموقراطيين، ولا تفاهة السياسيين. بل عبر الهبة والتقدير الطبيعيين للإنسان_القديم بالإضافة للجيل الجديد_ القادر على الكثير بما في ذلك الجزم في مثله العليا.
الإستقامة، مع ذلك تقتضي معرفة وافية بالمراد. الشباب عليهم أن يكونوا حذرين من السموم التي انتشرت بين جيل كامل عبر تنافس بعض النظرات الخاطئة لفهم الحياة, الشيء الذي أفسد هذا الجيل وحرمه من تلك القوة الداخلية في الوقت الذي يحتاجها لأقصى الحدود. بشكل أو بآخر، هذه السموم لازالت تعطي مفعولها داخل الثقافة المعاصرة، العلوم، السوسيولوجيا والأدب: هذه هي الأراضي الخصبة للعدوى التي يجب تحديدها وقهرها. لعل الأكثر بروزا بينها هو الداروينية، الماركسية، مدرسة التحليل النفسي والوجودية. هذه الإيديولوجيات تنقل نفس التأثير المهين. و نفس الهجوم ضد الإنسان الحقيقي.
ضد الداروينية، دعونا نؤكد على القيمة الجوهرية لمنزلة الانسان ومكانتها الخاصة، هذه ليست مكانة معينة، لحيوان تطور بين الكثير من الحيوانات الأخرى عبد الانتخاب الطبيعي بينما حافظ على بعض روابطه بأصوله الوحشية والبدائية.  مثل هذا بالأحرى إزالته من البيولوجيا.
ضد الماركسية والاشتراكية، دعونا نقر أن الإقتصاد كان وسيكون دائما له دور أدنى عند الإنسان العادي؛ أن التاريخ وكل منظومة سوسيوسياسية يتم تحديدها بناء على قوى مختلفة؛ وأنه خطأ جوهري أن يؤمن المرء بأن العوامل المادية والبيئية  و ظروف، الثروة أو الفقر يلعبون دورا حاسما في تقدم الإنسان.
ضد مدرسة التحليل النفسي، دعونا نشد على أن مثل الشخصية هي التي لا تلعب دورها؛ شخصية واعية ومستقلة تحفظ سيادتها على جانب روحها المظلم والمخفي وعلى شيطان النشاط الجنسي_ شخصية ليست مكبوتة ولا منفصلة نفسيا، بل وصلت لنوع من التوازن عبر إخضاع ملكاتها لمعنى سامي للحياة والفعل.
وأخيرا، حول أسس الوجودية، أنه الواحد عليه أن يعترف بحقيقة أن الانسان مشتت، أتى ليتعرف على الوجود عبر مستوياته الدنيئة و اللاعقلانية. وتجلياته المظلمة والفارغة من المعنى، متخبطا في نوع من تطبيق السادية على النفس. ضد كل هذا دعونا نفهم أن الوجودية ليست هي الملاذ الأخير، وأن الوجودية تصل إلى تحققها في أولئك الذين استطاعوا توجيه أنظارهم لما وراءها. أولئك الذين استطاعو اخضاع الحياة المجردة لما فوق الحياة.
هذه هي أسطر القهر، التي لا يجب أن تكتفي بكونها فكرية وجدلية فقط، بل تجب تجربتها أولا، والوصول لها بدلالاتها المباشرة عبر الحياة الباطنية وتوجيه المرء لنفسه. من المستحيل أن ننهض ونحن لازلنا نتعرض لتأثيرات التفكير الخاطئ والمنحرف. بمجرد أن نتحرر من السم يمكننا الوصول للصفاء والاستقامة، والقوة الحقيقية. دعونا نكرر هذا المبادرة الداخلية يجب أن تسبق كل المبادرات الاخرى، على هذا أن يفهم خاصة من طرف الشباب الذين لازالوا يحملون شرارة بداخلهم، حتى يتمكنو من حمل شعلة اولئك الذين لم يسقطوا بعد، حينما تظهر لنا جبهة كهذه، الارتباك بين تأثيرات الجماهير العريضة والديموقراطية لن يكون بعد ممكنا. إن كنا نتمنى مستقبلا كهذا فحتما سيكون لهؤلاء الناس: حينها سيتم إيجاد طريق حتى لاصلاح السياسة والوطن.
مهما يكن الذي سيحدث علينا أن نحافظ على مكانتنا، كهيئة جوهرية يجب أن تكون هي موروث المثل لهؤلاء الناس الذين وليس لوقت بعيد وقفوا في أماكنهم وحاربوا، حتى وبمعرفتهم أن المعركة كانت خاسرة. في أي حدث دونما الهبوط إلى مستوى أدنى، دون خلط ماهو جوهري وماهو دون ذلك.
ما يجب فعله سيتم فعله.

[Fnaught · Rating 4 out of 5]

The two best essays here are 'The Trial of Air' and 'Against the Youth', with all the others making essentially the same points best on display in these two remarkable pieces of writing. 'The Trial of Air' concerns the necessity for the New Right to mentally prepare itself for losing the oppositional basis on which it learns to sustain itself -opposing leftism, degenerating Christianity, migration, fractional reserve banking, etc.- and the importance of getting ready to actually wield power without what amounts to a form of external support. 'Against the Youth' is about the moral and cultural desert inhabited by the American Beat generation and their Italian and German counterparts: it is at its worst a downward pointed deluge only made possible by the dissolution of most sorts of unilateral or symbolic authority that existed before the Second World War (monarchy, royalty, aristocracy) and the wet puddle of unconsciousness-directed psychoanalysis.

As opposed to these people, as he should, Evola posits right-wing anarchists -we might think of Bill Hopkins, Yukio Mishima, and eventually John Braine- who sincerely oppose the current democratic order by questing after real embodied authority on the earth and immersing themselves in healthy adventures that really risk things. A line a friend of mine gave me on the subject of the New Right versus the "New Left", whatever that means, is that neither of these are new in any way: "Everything is exactly as it's always been." The forces of dissolution and mass sludge politics have always been left, and the forces of authority, power, and elitism have always been right. Even if these terms 'left' and 'right' unfortunately originate in the French revolutionary cabinet in the wake of real monarchy, they are more ancient than the year 1789.

Thuletidechan puts it well when he describes the Leftism of the Xin dynasty only fifty years or so after the birth of Christ; we might as well add John Bagehot Glubb's description of the pop singers in 11th century Baghdad that excited undisciplined Dionysian sexual passions in the young people of that generation. Eastern studies fren and I have even considered the possibility that Taylor Swift incarnated in Baghdad as a particular pop singer and that there is an exact historical equivalent to the Eras tour at Madison Square Garden near Maran Temple.

Better then to speak in the language of the angelic and daemonic when talking about right and left, their exact equivalents, than pretending that culture nowadays is somehow more powerful than biology and spirit combined. Evola's pitch is to the only section of the youth today that matters for the upward direction of man: the transcendent Right wing, the Tyr rune. His recommendations are useful in this, even if he did not foresee the widespread promotion of endocrine disruptors and phthalates in his day.

What is coming, if it hasn't got here already, is a tiny salvageable island of talented, sane young people against an endless continental horde of the resentful, insane, and unfortunately broken. Gen Z will in all likelihood experience a situation exactly analogous to the divide Gustave Dore portrays between the beautiful Satan and his endless snakes and minions who, almost reluctantly, obey him in their ugliness. As the generation born at the end of the world, let us pray that this time he will not side with them against God, but crush them, rightly, with what divinity remains in him.

[Michael Nguyen · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a good read. The idea of this being a "handbook" is misleading though. Focuses on traditionalist themes. Although I found it odd that he thinks God is dead and believes in transcendence. He outlines his ideas of a strong state, and the problems with youth today. Hyperactivity, excess energy, and how to channel that into discipline and traditionalism.

[Sami Eerola · Rating 2 out of 5]

Boring as hell. This is a collection of Evolas articles on youth and most of them are ramblings of a old man on youthsubcultures that he does not like. The first articles that are about how a "good Traditionalist" or fascist society should be are the best, because they open the Evolas ideology and values and shows that fascist of today drew inspiration on him

[Oolalaa · Rating 3 out of 5]

11/20

[Ross · Rating 2 out of 5]

Useful introduction to the writer worth reading in this way

Some essays included are very dated, boring to read

In essays supposedly written decades apart there are repeating phrases

[Big Boy Marty · Rating 3 out of 5]

Solid intro to Evola. Cringe title though.

[JVPITER ⚡️ · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another classic by Evola, at least, multiple writings by him, all compiled into one handbook for the use of a clear minded, sophisticated & radical individual.

[Justin Goodlow · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nice collection of short essays written by Evola on postwar Italian politics and society. Practically all of the essays included in this collection were originally written for Italian peridoicals. Definitely not a good introduction to Evola- as usual, Evola is pretty lacking (ironically) when it comes to clear elucidation of his ideas, in that he seems to refuse to discuss concrete things and instead focuses wholly on the abstract. This is appropriate when discussing philosophy but can be rather irksome when discussing political matters. Then again, concrete politics was definitely not Evola's interest.

[Drew · Rating 3 out of 5]

Extremely hard read, and much of it topical to when it was written (1933-1974)

[DivinePresence · Rating 5 out of 5]

God Bless!