... the essence of nationalist ideology is the treatment of homeland and nation
as ultimate values, seeing them as mystical beings
about an almost self-existent existence and demanding absolute existence
the right towards the individual; while they are in fact simply
torn and shapeless reality, for they deny
any actual hierarchical rule as well as any symbol
or the authority of a transcendent authority.
Julius Evola
The Renaissance of Nationalism
It would seem that in the era of ever-increasing globalisation and expanding consumerism, increasingly
in oblivion, values or ideas will go away, making it more or little hard for man to drift in blissful quietism and to adhere to the culture of carefree usage of life. Meanwhile, on the political map of Europe, there is simply a certain revival of movements referring to the defence of national identity, taking up fresh concepts of national states and talking about the obligations towards their own national communities and the obligations that members of these communities should fulfil. The French National Front, Hungarian Jobbik and Greek Golden Dawn can be mentioned here[1]. Although it is inactive hard to talk of the power of this wing of the perfect matrix of the Old Continent, there is no uncertainty that the spokesmen of progress, tirelessly wrapping themselves up in the building of the fresh wonderful world, have encountered this obstacle that would seem to have dealt with long ago.
The issue of nationalism comes back to the main political discourse.
Although the conventional apologist of national identity apologists is naturally the left (not all, of course, due to the fact that there are besides alleged "patriot lefts"), it should not be forgotten that nationalism besides has its antagonists on the right.
In this text, we would like to draw attention to a alternatively peculiar case of a thinker who, despite his hostility to the national idea, is sometimes seen as his representative, whose concepts would supply inspiration for activists of nationalist organizations. He goes here.
The Italian traditionalist Julius Evola.
Interpretation dilemma
The definition of "nationalism" is not an easy task, primarily due to its advanced heterogeneity. That's why it seems appropriate to talk about nationalisms, alternatively than nationalism, especially since, as Jacek Bartyzel rightly points out, “as a socio-political doctrine
and organized political formation nationalism occurs in diverse
and frequently mutually counter-dictive worldview and programming characters"[2]. Adam Wielomski, in turn, states that “there is no and never 1 meta-historical and meta-geographical nationalism. There is no archetypal nationalism, a model in the sense of the Veberian ideal type. In the past of Europe and European political thought, we can talk about various nationalisms (necessarily plural) [Sub-Cr. M.R.], which with large difficulty form a uniform current, to which we so willingly and frequently name nationalism“[3].
The analysis and explanation of the assumptions of the individual incarnation of the nationalist concept goes far beyond the subject of the following considerations. adequate for our needs in this respect will be limited to establishing the main core of nationalism, or a common denominator for all nationalisms. mostly speaking, he can be narrowed down to love.
and attachment to their own nation and their own homeland, acting for their good, and seeing them as belonging to their chief values. The problem of knowing this good and the method of putting it into practice is naturally a separate issue. Consider, for example, 2 nationalist organizations: monarchist Action Française and Republican National Democracy. No 1 can deny that both Charles Mauras and Roman Dmowski were nationalists, but both visions of nationalism were not identical, even in this regard, that the culmination of the Maurras doctrine of integral nationalism was the monarchic idea[4]. However, this does not change the fact that the notions of a nation
and homeland are the center of nationalist ideology.
Evola a nationalist?
In the light of the above, and in the light of the analysis below, the task of proving that the author of the "Revolts Against the Modern World" could be regarded as a nationalist thinker is indeed to be serious. Nevertheless, in literature, there are isolated cases attributing that name to him. For example, Marek Maciejewski, in the mid-1990s, in 2 independent publications describes the Italian aristocrat as a ‘nationalist ideology’[5]. Zbigniew Mikołejko seems a small more restrained to say that nationalism is close to Evola's concepts[6], although he besides sees the division between them[7]and yet concludes that “nationalism is not mentioned in evolianism stricto sense, due to the fact that it appears (...) in the costume of the imperial idea”[8].
In contrast, let us callback the voices of researchers of different perceptions of the Evolian thought. Paul Furlong noted that since the author “People and ruins” had connections
with Italian fascism, contacts with the Nazi government and sympathized
with Romanian Iron Guard, this may seem to have supported Italian nationalism or nationalism as such, or possibly even been a supporter of the national state. However, the author immediately dispels the fog of uncertainty by writing that no of these possibilities are true[9]. He adds, in turn, that the extremist antagonist of modernity “has recognised in nationalism the key origin behind the catastrophe of modernism”[10]. Alain de Benoist mentions the Evolian criticism of Fascism, which Italy accused of utilizing nationalistic rhetoric[11]. Adam Wielomski, who emphasizes that he rejected and fought
with all the force of fascist nationalism which is for them the Jacobin ideology[12]. In another place, Polish political scientist states that nationalism did not fit into the conventional imagination of the aristocratic world[13].
What does Julius Evola gotta say about this? His sympathy for the Romanian Legion of Michael the Archangel is rather well known – an organization of a nationalist nature. Nevertheless, what fascinated him in this phenomenon was not so much nationalism as the component of ascetic-military overpowering all component of the activities of this more spiritual order than the average organization of ideological-political[14].
As regards the ideology of nationalism itself, in 1 of the numbers of the magazine “La Torre” he describes himself as “the relentless enemy of all Nationalist ideology’[15]. In another issue of the same magazine, he states: “We are neither nationalists nor internationalists, due to the fact that the problem of the empire is higher than both ideologies. This old nationalist ideology, first Hebrew, then Germanic
And Pruska, on the 1 hand, and on the another hand Giobertian and Mazzian, is only a fruit of vanity and superstition. History Philosophy“[16]. In “Peoples and ruins” he states that “in a united Europe, homelands and nations may exist... What should be rejected is nationalism’[17].
What, then, is the point? What did the Italian baron dislike about the national idea? What allegations did he make about nationalism? We effort to answer these questions below.
Revolutionary
The problem of nationalism from Julius Evoli's point of view begins naturally with his genesis, which is not anything original. It is not known from this day on that nationalist ideology was written in bloody sounds on the revolutionary banner of the "idea 1789", while the first nationalists were French Jacobins[18]. However, the very concept of nationalism did not yet exist[19], however, this does not change the fact of the corruption of this ideology with the first sin of revolutionaryity.
"Nationalism," says Adam Wielomski, appears erstwhile the period of social emancipation begins from conventional structures. (...) is so not a doctrine that fits into the standard strategy of values of conventional society; on the contrary, it is an expression of its decay.”[20]. The emancipation process, on the another hand, gained momentum 230 years ago in France. Let us callback that the General States, convened in May 1789 by God's grace of the King of France and Navarra Louis XVI, were self-appointed into the National Assembly, which passed the Declaration of Human Rights and the Citizen a fewer months later. Article III of this paper states: “The origin of all authority rests entirely
In the Nation. No body, no individual can exercise power that does not come explicitly from the Nation”[21]. It could be said, then, that the revolution (anti)French in 1 effort brought the nation to life and overthrow the conventional legitimacy of power, "has invented the Nation against the king, the rightfulness from below against the rightfulness from above."[22]. In another words, the nation has been regalized, which Jacek Bartyzel considers to be the most enduring component of that revolution.[23]. This nation, in the eyes of the Italian baron, embodies the collective-demagogical concept
of a revolutionary, subversive and anti-hierarchical nature[24].
As Adam Wielomski points out, “nationalism and sovereignty of the nation are
During this time, synonyms. It was difficult, until the Spring era, to find a nationalist in Europe who was not a Democrat, not to guillotine kings, execution priests and send them to the stewardate aristocrats“[25]. The author of “The story of Blood” indicates that
in revolutionary movements inactive during the mentioned Spring of Peoples terms specified as “people, national idea and patriotism on the 1 hand, and on the another hand the revolution, liberalism, constitutionalism, republican and antimonarchical tendencies, were their compatible and sometimes even inseparable elements"[26]. It is worth mentioning here that Jacek Bartyzel, the revolutionary incarnation of nationalism, proposes to mention to as nationalitarianism, in contrast to nationalism, which became the name of Kontrrevolution in the 20th century.[27].
Another crucial aspect of the revolutionaryness of nationalism must be highlighted. Well, the Italian traditionalist sees
in negation and disintegration of the conventional rule of legitimacy and sovereignty of the breakthrough, paving the way for further erosion of civilization. He claims that it was at that point, i.e. at the time of the abolition of governments by God's will (from above) for governments by the will of the nation (from below), that the abyss separating the conventional political body from communism was removed[28]. Nationalism proved to be the mask of the revolution; it became an instrument for preparing the ground for the coming of the revolt of the masses, the regulation of the 4th state, i.e. mobs, fats, the mass age[29]whose will submits to all higher values. This is the final effect of "breaking off the European plebs chain"[30], as the (anti)French revolution described Evola.
Egalitarianism
Another, but closely related to the previous, negative – according to the Evolian perception – the face of nationalist ideology is its anti-aristocracy and egalitarianism. The emergence of nations is closely related, among another things, to the demolition of the feudal system, and so is simply a symptom of the decay of civilization, as René Guénon notes[31]. “Where the remnants of feudal dependence disappear,” says Nicholas Gómez Dávila – there the increasing sense of abandonment and social loneliness of individuals push it into a totalitarian mass”[32]. At the cost of dynastic bonds, ancestral traditions, state dependencies, concepts of homeland and nation were raised to the rank of primates. The point of gravity was transferred from the spiritual plane (traditional legitimacy) to the naturalistic plane (etnos), so material/physical. The inevitably consequence of this process is the present image of a society in which, as the Colombian reactionary has accurately stated, “there is no higher class and no more people, only rich and mediocre people”[33]. This is an anti-metaphysical revolution alienating man from a higher reality and pushing him towards empirical, average life and possibly dispersing in amorphous mass. demos.
In “People and ruins”The Italian Baron notes that “the sacral nature and inviolability nation and peopleare simply a transposition of the attributes attributed to the large parent in ancient plebeian gynecocracy and in societies ignoring the male and political rule of the empire.”[34]. The native land, the matrix, is the image of a parent whose all members of a given nation are children and among themselves brothers—so they are all equal. This image depicts “the physical order, the feminine-mother from which Male distance to make a male
and the luminous order of the State, while the physical order, per se, is pre-political”[35]. Johann Jakob Bachofen, in turn, states: “How
in fact, the thought of restraint is contained in the father's principle, so in the case of the maternity rule we are dealing with the thought of generality; as the erstwhile carries a regulation to narrower circles, so the latter, like natural life, knows no barriers. From the giving womb comes the thought of universal brotherhood of all human beings, and cognition and designation of it fade as patriarchal relations develop"[36].
The author of the "Revolts Against the Modern World" (inspired by the writings of a Swiss anthropologist) differed from him interpreting the past of civilization – he polarized various categories in terms of either female or male character, while the second naturally attributed superiority. So all that is male (and simultaneously solar, uranium) – in our case the state created by elites (legitimization
from above), stands above what marks the female component (and simultaneously the lunar, chtonic) – in our case the national state as the emanation of ethnos (legitimization from below). Gustav le Bon wrote that aristocracy was the creator of civilization, and the people was the destroyer of it.[37], therefore, erstwhile the second takes control erstwhile his will becomes the law and the state becomes its emanation, then the gates to the complete disintegration of the conventional planet are widely spread.
Julius Evola frequently referred to Rome in his deliberations. In his opinion, the Roman plebs were filled with motherly, feminine, and material principles. Meanwhile, the patrick was to derive his higher dignity from the father's law.
And although the erstwhile yet became part of the state, he never participated in political or juridical institutions of the patricate (having divine ancestry as opposed to the "children of the earth" or plebs)[38]. Therefore, the thought that the state (form) is secondary to demos (matter) and drawing from it her legitimacy appeared to Italy as an ideological perversion[39]. Ernst Jünger erstwhile wrote that "the acquisition of a tiny border belt on the basis of the national regulation is far little valid than the capture of the full kingdom by matrimony in a strategy of dynastic forces"[40]. Physical existence, bodily forms, social institutions etc. they are of small importance unless they are attached to, and directed towards a higher reality. Nationalism, however, reverses the appropriate proportion of the cultural component (and hence the naturalistic element) – in the form of a late politically handicapped 3rd state – over the spiritual element[41]. Objectivity is regarded as abstraction, and higher principles are reduced to service the nation. It is against all that is alien, not ours, that does not strengthen the nation[42]. Culture, philosophy, art and even religion are raised to national terms. Their task is no longer to support and facade the unit on a metaphysical plan[43]. The will of the nation, the national interest, therefore, becomes the primary principle, almost higher law. 1 could say that the body takes control of the soul, the creature takes over the function of its creator.
Herd spirit
One of Evola's distinctive features of subversive ideologies is that “a man, before self-identification, as a personality or myself, should identify with a social group, organization or nation”[44]. In another words, the identity of a individual is to be expressed primarily through 1 or another collective, and only later – if at all – to participate
in something qualitatively different. Thus, the feeling of being e.g. a Pole (a associate of the Polish national community) or a Kowalski (a associate of the Kowalski clan) – this refers to the feeling based solely on naturalistic, material bond, so purely formal – is regarded as a priority, unlike being e.g. a Catholic (a associate of the Catholic faith) or a cyster (a associate of the order) – a bond of a higher type, due to the fact that rooted in transcendence.
In the eyes of a traditionalist, this phenomenon is in a sense a relapse to the recognition relation between a primitive man and the totem of his tribe or clan[45]. The thought of a community of origin is obtained here by a mystical halo, a nation becomes one, almost incapable of going beyond blood and earth. National solidarity grows to the rank of chief ethical value. All that matters is the collective, whose unity is horizontal, i.e. it derives its legitimacy from the common – naturalistic and materialistic – denominator of the nation
and the country[46]. Thus understood nationalism renounces its orientation to a higher reality, and at the same time only a degree of strength distinguishes it from the collectivistic anonymity appropriate to the 4th state[47]. Thus substance dominates the spirit, form over content, physics over metaphysics.
Even the concept of "traditional" in a nationalistic context is devoid of a transcendent dimension, for it refers only to the continuation based
of belonging to a given nation and its task is to consolidate the latter. According to the Italian aristocrat, this knowing is behind the Chesterton “democracy of the dead”[48]. More crucial than what is specifically transmitted
in the relay of generations, it becomes the very fact of continuity, and above all, the fact that it is our “strategy” that our “our” fathers and grandfathers have left us a deposit, which we are obliged to pass on, regardless of its relation (or alternatively its absence)
with metaphysical reality.
It is not hard to imagine that the author of the “Typing Tiger” would never sign the constitution, which is simply a natural paraphrase of the thoughts of 1 of the fathers of Polish nationalism Roman Dmowski – “I am Italian – so I have Italian responsibilities (...) the wider the side of my spirit I live the collective life of the nation, the more costly it is to me, the more it has a price for me and the more powerfully I feel the request to care for its wholeness and development”[49]. For being a associate of the Italian people themselves, or whatever else, does not prejudge anything important.
Particularism
Nationalistic ideology in Evolian optics is not only a manifestation of subjectiveism, but besides of particularism. We have already said that the emergence of nations in the historical arena coincided with the eruption of revolutionary ideas. 1 of the consequences of the once-imposed process was to negate the conventional concept of legitimacy and sovereignty, and yet to disintegrate – under the overwhelming emphasis of nationalism – transnational political organisms aspiring to uphold the banner of universalism, culminating in the dissolution of the Habsburg Empire after planet War I.
Rejecting the imperial thought was so identical with raising the rule of particularism to the level of absolute value. This reduces "the anticipation of common knowing and cooperation between nations to a minimum"[50] – states the traditionalist. Emphasizing differences between them, highlighting different interests, fueling feuds, chauvinism – all this
in the name of national unity – does not meet with his acceptance. As we know, he was an ardent supporter of the thought of an empire, so unity far beyond cultural particularism, longing for which Ernst Jünger utilized to say is older than the crown of Charles the Great[51]. This unity embodies a higher rule universalità, standing clearly on antipodes of collectivism[52].
And again the mention to the legacy of Rome: Julius Evola – notabene living in the heart of the capital of the ancient world, i.e. just a small over 1000 meters from the Capitol or the Roman Forum – opposes the thought romanità (Romans, an perfect community, a spiritual one, joined by a transcendent element) thought italianità (Italianity, ethnicity, i.e. naturalistic, materiality). Thus, to a nation understood in terms of naturalistic, materialistic, or collectiveistic, it opposes the concept of a spiritual nation. Its focal point is not blood or empirically understood tradition, but an idea, something like a decisive force from above[53]. Examples of its embodiment are seen
in the Romans, Franks, Germans or Arabs, and a peculiar case is to be the Prussian state with its genesis in the Knights' Order (Crossers)[54]. The cultural component (body) descends there into inferior positions, giving way to ideas, style, universalistic component (soul).
One of the phenomena, or even archetypes, exemplifying manifestations of the update of this transnational universalistic component are in the eyes of the Italian traditionalist medieval crusades. In the form of crusaders, he viewed those who “took to ascend, fight and die for a intent that
in its essence it was overpolitic and superhuman and service on a front defined not in peculiar but universal terms"[55]. It was then that princes and Dukes coming from different lands, leaving their own interests and political divisions out of the way, chose a common front under 1 banner, which resulted erstwhile in past in achieving a large European unity transcending the borders of countries and blood[56]. This kind of unity goes distant with the emphasis of national interests and the submission of universalistic elements to them.
breach 1: nationality and nationalism
We are now coming to a thread which, possibly for some, is an component of consternation, or at least a origin of any uncertainty about the explanation of the relation on the Evola line – nationalism. In spite of what has been said above, however, the Italian Baron sees a affirmative feature of nationalist ideology.
Here in respective places makes a precise discrimination between 2 nationalisms, i.e. demagogue / folk on the 1 hand,
and restaurant / aristocratic / spiritual on the other. The first was naturally already mostly characterized above. As for the second, it is worth noting that the author of the “Myth of Blood” carefully separates nationality from nationalism. The former, widely present in the conventional world, was recognized as an component without a political context which it had only acquired
in modern times. "Nationality – he writes – is simply a natural origin that includes a group of common simple characteristics that are preserved both
in hierarchical differentiation, as well as in hierarchical participation, both of which do not oppose"[57]. They constituted a material plane over which the plane of the higher kind was spread, i.e. hierarchy and primacy of political sovereignty. The conventional state was “loyality without naturalistic nationality”[58]. It was any dignity and caste that united
and divide individuals vertically: this is the unity of the higher type.
Consequently, 2 aristocrats of different nationalities understood each another better than the nobles and peasants of the same nationality. This order was destroyed by the revolution, with its centralist impulses which created the nation, abolishing vertical divergence, and establishing a horizontal place.
breach 2: spiritual Nationalism
As we know, Julius Evola was against any collective drive. We mentioned earlier that the establishment of governments at the will of the nation was for him to exceed the barrier between the conventional political body and communism. Nevertheless, as he noted, since nationalism had its part in the fall, i.e. the transfer of power from the elites to the hands of the nation (third state), then – before it would fall into the hands of anonymous fats (fourth state) – he might as well be active in reversing this process and serving as an instrument of the restaurant of the right order of things. In another words, it would change direction from collectivism to reconstructing an aristocratic hierarchy[59], which will consequently lead to a redistribution of the national community, as it were, across.
The fundamental condition which must be fulfilled in order for nationalism to play this affirmative function is simply a restaurant of the order of values not reduced to their practical, social or economical dimension.[60]. The abandonment of this horizontal position will enable the supremacy of higher values over all aspects of reality. This, in turn, is the basis for the existence of an authentic hierarchy, i.e. the subjection of a lower nature, i.e. everything applicable or temporal, of a higher nature, expressing a pure and selfless form of activity. The restitution of the hierarchy means rebuilding the state of knighthood with the monarch as the first among them to lead. This, in turn, will be the first step on the way to the "sudden" of the state, i.e. to teardrop it from simply secular garments and reconstruct it to transcendent binding[61]. The culmination of this process will be a universal restaurant the sacrum empire.
Another affirmative aspect of nationalism, as the traditionalist points out, is its divergence with the lowest collectivism. The regulation of mobs do not know and do not want to know any difference, for it would deny extremist egalitarianism. Nobody's better or worse. Everyone's expected to be equal. At least that's what the explanation says, due to the fact that in practice – as we know – everything looks different, due to the fact that there is always 1 or another "elita".
Nationalism, on the another hand, differentiates people from nationality to internationalistic decay[62]. Ernst Jünger, referring to the victims of the First planet War, states that “millions of the dead on both sides are a evidence that the nations consider to be far more crucial what separates them than what can connect them.”[63]. Arthur Moeller van den Bruck adds that nationalism “sees the nations through contradictions between them and each of them grants him only the appropriate message”[64]. True, the way to the Evolian perfect of caste society is inactive far away, yet all road begins its first step. As Lagarde utilized to say, being just a human being[65] means a step backwards from being a ‘national’ being, and being the second means a step backwards from a ‘person’[66].
So national identity is simply a qualitatively different component from amorphous humanity, but it should be an unformed substance against the background of individuals. And erstwhile these individuals “come to be fulfilled and become themselves, and erstwhile they are realized in life forms higher than those that are simply conditioned either by blood or by collective needs, then they go from a state of chaos to a state of space, from potentiality to action. The nation so ceases to be the end of the individual, and alternatively the individual as aristocratic or spiritual personality is the end of the nation."[67]. Nationalism must so fulfil at most the function of the transitional or first phase[68], alternatively of acting as a catalyst for plebeian apotheosis of understood homeland and nation.
Direction: desecularisation
In conclusion, it can be concluded that the author of the Revolution Against the Modern planet does not aim at absolute depreciation of the category of nation. It sees the nonsubjective fact of nationality, but tries to put it in the right context, to give it appropriate meaning.
What he feels to be irrevocably rejected is nationalism as an absolute concept of the national community and its interests, and so anti-Aristocratic, anti-hierarchical, hostile to universal unity of the higher type, and eliminating the importance of the individual by bringing its identity to the collective level. Italy wants to rebuild the organic unity of Europe, which, in his opinion, is precisely the vulnerability of national particularities leading to a failure of perspective. He argues that "organic reconstruction so involves a two-track process of integration: national integration – by recognising the rule of over-individual authority as a foundation for the organic and state form of political and social forces of each individual nation; transnational integration – by recognising the rule of authority which should dominate the individual individuals of the peculiar ethnos to no little than members of a peculiar state"[69]. They would agree here with Ernst Jünger, who stated: “The European declaration of independency is naturally a spiritual act”[70]. This kind of unity may only be achieved within a structure that will, to any extent, reflect the perfect of the medieval Roman Empire[71]So nationalistic aspirations have no place there.
In addition, a homeland within the meaning of the parent of the national community, an ancestral land should be replaced by a homeland understood as an thought combining individuals
across national ties. It is closer to the classical knowing of it as land and institution. The full revalorisation must so be subjected to the substance, at the expense of form,
According to the operative part: “A fatherland is an empty word if that word does not mean the full of the laws that have been lived; this is what creates a fatherland. A homeland conceived as territory tells nothing to the human heart. To love your homeland erstwhile it loses its rights, customs, customs, is absurd idolatria”[72]. Let us besides callback the longing of French counter-revolutionary emigration, which is convinced that "where are the bourbon lilies, there is home country"[73]. 1 for Spanish dwarfs
from the primaries next door Dios, Patria, Rey the rules were fueros, i.e. old laws and they were their homeland[74]. Evola himself stated that “in the thought we admit our actual homeland. What truly matters present is not the origin of the same earth or the speaking of the same language, but the sharing of the same idea. This is the only basis, the right starting point”[75]. Thus the concept of a nation, in its collective sense, opposes the concept of the Order[76]which would form the root of the revival of conventional order.
What in turn should be appreciated in nationalism is not only its distinguishing braking mark, due to the polarization of nations, further degradation of man
towards an anonymous, formless human mass, but besides its possible function as an instrument to enable civilization to return to the right path, nevertheless nationalism at the end of this process, i.e. after fulfilling its affirmative function, will die giving way to order of character par excellence anti-national.
The position of an Italian aristocrat in this substance is no different from that of another question. In short, it is essential to reconstruct the appropriate order of things, i.e. to overcome horizontal optics with a simultaneous restaurant of vertical optics and to supremacy of the higher element: transcendent, spiritual, qualitative (soul) over the lower: naturalistic, material, quantitative (body).
In another words, the starting point of any effort at counter-revolution, restaurants should be the desecularization of the planet and man, interior rebirth, and based on the spiritual element. The political struggle, the closeting of specified or another slogans, the support of this or another system, while the deficiency of roots in transcendent reality is barely building on sand,
i.e. it has no permanent basis[77]which will inevitably consequence in disintegration. Even if the banners are written in gold with the highest slogans.
Marek Rostkowski
The article was published in No. 22. "National Policy".
[1] For another contemporary movements of a national nature see Mr Malendowicz, On the way to power... Nationalist projects of the 21st century European countries, Bydgoszcz 2017.
[2] J. Bartyzel, Right-nationalism-monarchism. Political and Historical Studies, Radzymin-Warsaw 2016, p. 53. Nationalism or nationalism? (Instead of admission), [in:] Nationalism or nationalism? Function of Christian, secular and neo-Pagan values in shaping nationalistic ideas, under ed. B. Grott, Kraków 2006, pp. 4-17.
[3] A. Wielomski, Nationalism against the problem of Europe, Warsaw 2018, p. 17. French Nationalism 1886-1940. Genesis, transformations and the essence of political philosophy, Warsaw 2007, pp. 16, 24-25.
[4] J. Bartyzel, Die, but slowly! About the monarchist and Catholic counter-revolution in the Romanesque countries 1815-2000, Kraków 2002, 605-606.
[5] Mr Maciejewski, German elites and Nazism. About the Revolutionary Conservatives' attitude to Nazism in the Democratic and Nazi Reichs, Wrocław 1994, p. 6; Carl Schmitt and Modern Political Thought, under R. Skarzyński, Warsaw 1996. S. 144. See Ibid. p. 145.
[6] Z. Mikolejko, The myths of integral traditionalism. Julius Evola and the spiritual Philosophical Culture of the Right, Warsaw 1998, pp. 63-65. In another place, the author adds that “Evolian approach to the first Tradition (...) is besides active in modern worldviews – modernist nationalism (...)”.
[7] Ibid. p. 65. By the way, the author speaks of the paradoxical proximity of Evolianism to the ideology of the French Action. The paradox is precisely that the concepts of an Italian traditionalist are contrary to the nationalism of French royalists. Ibid. p. 21.
[8] Ibid. p. 71.
[9] Mr Furlong, Social and Political thought of Julius Evola, fresh York, NY 2012, p. 74.
[10] Ibid. p. 75.
[11] A. de Benoist, Julius Evola, extremist Reactionary and Committed Metaphysician: A Critical Analysis of the Political thought of Julius Evola, https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/alaindebenoist/pdf/julius_evola_radial_actionary.pdf (accessed 12.09.2017).
[12] A. Wielomski, The traditionalist revolution. Julius Evola and Fascism, "Study on Fascism and Hitler Crimes" XXIV, Wrocław 2001, p. 172. The explanation of Human Races by Julius Evoli, “Study on Fascism and Hitler Crimes” XXV, Wrocław 2002, p. 18.
[13] The same, Race theory..., pp. 17.
[14] M. Rostkowski, Legiunea Arhanghelului Mihail. The nationalist-metaphysical dimension of Romanian legionaryism in the optics of Julius Evola and Cornelius Zelea Codreanu, ‘National Policy’ 2018, No 20, pp. 123-134.
[15] J. Evola, Men Among the Ruins. Postwar Reflections of a extremist Traditionalist, Rochester, VT 2002, p. 42.
[16] The same, Identity Card, [in:] that, A traditionalist confrontations fascism. Selected essaysLondon 2015, p. 30. W. Pagan Imperialismwrites about nationalism as an obstacle to the reconstruction of the imperial unity of Europe. See the same, Heathen Imperialism, b. m.2007, pp. 126-127.
[17] The same, Men Among..., pp. 276.
[18] A. Wielomski, Conservative Decalogue, Warsaw 2006, p. 42; Same, Nationalism and Conservativeism in Charles Mauras' Thoughts, [in:] Nationalism and Conservativeism and Monarchism. Action Française and its radiation, under J. Bartyzel and D. Góra-Szopiński, Toruń 2011, p. 85.
[19] His appearance here in an interesting sense dates back to the late 19th century, erstwhile he utilized it Maurice Barrès. See J. Bartyzel, Right..., pp. 55 Cf. A. Wielomski, French nationalism..., pp. 17.
[20] A. Multi-mersian, French Nationalism... dp. cit., pp. 31, 33; Same, Nationalism a Conservativeism..., pp. 85.
[21]Declaration of Human Rights and Citizen of 26 August 1978., http://libr.sejm.gov.pl/tek01/txt/const/francja-18.html (accessed: 14.07.2019).
[22] Quoted for J. Bartyzel, A cross in the mediate of the moon. past and ideario Mexican Synarchism and Catholic Underground Organization El Yunque (1932-2012). Precluded by the past of Catholicism's conflict with liberalism in independent Mexico, White Podlaska 2012, p. 317.
[23]The same, Nothing without God, nothing against tradition. Political Cosmovision of Carlist Traditionalism in Spain, Warsaw 2015, p. 150.
[24] J. Evola, Men Among..., pp. 249.
[25] A. Wielomski, Decalogue..., pp. 42.
[26] J. Evola, Ride the Tiger. A endurance Manual for the Aristocrats of the Soul, Rochester, VT 2003, p. 181. A small earlier, he points out that the word “patriot” not known before 1789 appeared after the revolution and functioned to identify the supporters of the revolution in its fight against monarchy and aristocracy. See besides the same, Men Among..., pp. 128.
[27] J. Bartyzel, Dying...14-15. 882; The same, On the Antipodes of National Idea: Nationalism and Nationalitarianism, http://www.legitimism.org/nationalism-nationalitarianism (accessed: 17.07.2019).
[28] J. Evola, Revolt Against the Modern World, Rochester, VT 1995, p. 340. The author further suggests that later the communists supported nationalist aspirations precisely due to the subversive nature of the latter. Ibid..
[29] Ibid. p. 341.
[30] Ibid. p. 321.
[31] R. Guénon, The Crisis of the Modern World, Hillsdale, NY 2001, p. 90; Same, Introduction to the survey of the Hindu Doctrines, Hillsdale, NY 2001, p. 49.
[32] The Presidentávila, Next Scholia to the Text implicite, Warsaw 2006p. 38.
[33] Ibid. p. 50.
[34] J. Evola, Men Among..., pp. 129.
[35] Ibid. p. 128.
[36] J. J. Bachofen, Matriarchate. survey on the Ginacocracy of the ancient planet according to spiritual and legal nature, Warsaw 2007, p. 17. See besides Ibid. p. 357. CfM. Eliade, Images and symbols. Sketches on Magical and spiritual Symbolism, Warsaw 1998, pp. 17-18.
[37] G. le Bon, Crowd Psychology, Warsaw 1996, p. 9 1/3
[38] J. Evola, Revolt..., pp. 267. See besides Ibid. p. 153. Leek. J. J. Bachofen, Myth, religion and parent Right, Princeton 1992, p. 194.
[39] J. Evola, Revolt..., pp. 24.
[40] The president Workman. Control and Form of Being, Warsaw 2010, p. 181.
[41] J. Evola, Universalità imperiale e particolarismo nazionalistico. https://www.rigenerazioneevola.it/universalita-imperiale-particolarismo-nazionalistico/ [9.VII.2019]. Cf. the same, Critical Observations on National Socialists "Racism", [in:] that, A Traditionalist..., pp. 116; Same, Men Among..., pp. 128.
[42] The same, Two Faces of Nationalism, [in:]of which, A Traditionalist..., pp. 40
[43] Same, Revolt..., pp. 339; Universalità..., pp.
[44] The same, Two Faces..., pp. 37.
[45] Ibid. p. 37. See besides Revolt..., pp. 153, 326.
[46] The same, Two Faces..., pp. 39; Ride the Tiger..., pp. 182; Men Among..., pp. 276; Metaphysics of War. Battle, triumph & Death in the planet of Tradition, Aarhus 2008, p. 24; same, Revolt..., pp. 153.
[47] Same, Revolt..., pp. 340.
[48] Ibid. p. 340. Orthodoxia, Warsaw 1998, p. 61.
[49] See R. Dmowski, Introduction,[in:] the same, Thoughts of a Modern Pole, Lviv 1904, p. 4.
[50] J. Evola, Revolt..., pp. 339.
[51] The president Harvest, [in:] that, Gordian knot. The essays of the 1950s, Kraków 2013, p. 40.
[52] J. Evola, Universalità...See footnote 1.. P. Furlong, Social..., pp. 80
[53] J. Evola, Critical..., pp. 116.
[54] The same, Men Among..., pp. 129-130.
[55] The same, Metaphysics..., pp. 40.
[56] Ibid. p. 41; Ibid., Heathen..., pp. 128.
[57] The same, Revolt..., pp. 338-339. Cf. the same, Ride the Tiger..., pp. 181.
[58] The same, Ride the Tiger..., p. 182.
[59] The same, Two Faces..., pp. 41.
[60] Ibid. p. 42.
[61] Ibid., pp. 43-44.
[62] Same, Men Among..., pp. 249.
[63] The president Nationalism, [in:] that, Political Publications 1919-1936, Kraków 2007, p. 148.
[64] A. M. van den Bruck, Third Reich, [in:] Conservative Revolution in Germany 1918-1933, selection and op. W. Kunicki, Poznań 1999, p. 361.
[65] Mircea Eliade refuses to accept the concept of “man in general”. For he recognizes them as pure abstraction, which is due to the imperfections of our language. M. Eliade, Images..., pp. 36.
[66] J. Evola, 2 Faces..., pp. 41. Cf. the same, Universalità..., pp.
[67] The same, Two Faces..., pp. 42.
[68] The same, Revolt..., pp. 338; Two Faces..., pp. 32
[69] The same, Europa und der organische Gedanke, [in:] that, Tradition und Herrschaft. Aufsätze 1932-1952, Arnshaugk 2009, p. 140.
[70] The president Harvest..., pp. 41.
[71] J. Evola, The Bow and the Club, London 2018, pp. 253-254.
[72] Citation for. A. Wielomski, Conservative Ideas for Russia of the 19th Century, [in:] Conservative Ideas in Russia, under ed. A. Raźny, Kraków 2010, p. 32.
[73] Quoted for: P. H. Beik, The French Revolution Seen from the Right. Social Theories in Motion, 1789-1799, Philadelphia 1956, p. 51.
[74] A. Wielomski, Spain Franco. Sources and essence of political doctrine, White Podlaska 2006, p. 52.. J. Bartyzel, Nothing without God..., pp. 211-215; Dying..., pp. 248-249.
[75] J. Evola, Orientations, Chorzów 1993, p. 19; the same, Ride theTiger..., pp. 183; Men Among..., pp. 131.
[76] The same, Men Among..., pp. 132; the same, Order of the Steel Crown, "Reactionist" 5107 [2005], No. III, pp. 35-36.
[77] The same, Heathen..., pp. 33; A handbook for right-wing youth, London 2017, p. 1; the same, Men Among..., pp. 66. This remediation is closely linked naturally to the diagnosis of the collapse of Europe, according to which the origin of the crisis is the disintegration of the first unity of the political and spiritual component embodied by the king-priest. The separation of authority from spiritual authority has resulted in a chain reaction, the consequence of which is simply a fall now observed in our eyes. The same, Heathen...33, 42, 85, 118; Taoism. The Magic, The Mysticism, Edmonds, WA 2004, p. 19.
