Danke fur 108 followers, next milestone 1488

Our mission is that of Emperor Julian, Adolf Hitler and Padmasambhava combined.

But the striking difference between the great men and the masses is that they feel themselves to be different.

Both Hitler and Napoleon felt as if they were chosen by the Providence.

Hitler and Napoleon could be interpreted as demagogues, as "sons of the people", even they presented themselves as such on instances, but I think this is missing a great deal of the truth. They felt it on a deep level to be the chosen ones, differentiated from the masses.

Napoleon may have sowed the seeds of revolutionary liberalism throughout Europe. But this was not because he was a great admirer of the revolutionary cause, he was only filled with his will to power, I believe he cared little about both revolutionary and counter-revolutionary ideologies. And just this will to power of a certain individual who is above the mere people was an idea that the revolution tried to shatter.

Also Hitler did not just represent the will of common german people, he looked at something more archaic and distant and wanted to fuse it with a new and revolutionary idea, he looked at the Nordic Greek man and with that inspiration he wanted to create a New Man, a superman, a new and greater race. And again he felt himself chosen for this task by Providence.

Neither of the men wanted to simply serve the will of the common people nor did they feel themselves one and the same with these people.

Evola mentioned something called the Trial of water, or Trial of air:

"In everyday material life, we are used to solid things which provide something unyielding to hold onto, thus giving us some support even when it is a matter of reacting against them. This is the ‘non-I’ of which the I usually stands in need in order to perceive itself, almost by way of contrast. The neophyte would be asked to display a capacity for active engagement even in the absence of any support of this kind, even when not having a solid, consistent, and resistant element such as earth around or below him, but a fluid one, such as air or water. The neophyte could therefore prove his freedom, the faculty of performing an act which was truly his own, coming from within".

Now Evola in this essay mostly makes a point of the negative identity of that times' italian movements, where they had no positive doctrine but simply reacted against the government and their policies. However I think it can go the other way too, people also use this "Non-I" as a source of something positive, like people do with God or providing for family etc. But an inner trial of air should be carried within the elite, could they act without any positive nor negative objects that constitute the "Non-I" thus could they create something that is perfectly their own.

Well I believe we see this in Vajrayana where we take rebirth in order to liberate all sentient beings. Though knowing that these sentient beings are not seperate from us due to dependent origination and emptiness and that they are already Buddhas, just with veils of illusion covering their true nature.

So thus with Yogacara and Madhyamaka view that there is nothing outside of us, no subject-object dualism, we still take rebirth and engage in various creative means to liberate all sentient beings which depend on us and on whom we ourselves are dependant. So we see in this the fullfilment of the Trial of air.

Most people cannot bear freedom.

They need a set purpose for their existence, they need to be a cog in the machine. Otherwise they will fall into nihilism. Thus they need to engage in labour and they need an external deity who gave a purpose to them.

On the other side stand those for whom "God is dead, everything is allowed" means something positive. Those who can create their own meaning and purpose, those who can bear freedom. They should be the aristocratic elite that builds and rules the state, with an initiatic tradition that goes beyond theism. Thus they should give meaning and purpose to the first type.

Wherever a civilization arose it was a creation of the Aryan. Spengler makes a difference between different souls of civilization, whether its western Faustian, or greek or magian soul, but really all civilizations were created by the Faust. Other souls are…

Wherever a civilization arose it was a creation of the Aryan.

Spengler makes a difference between different souls of civilization, whether its western Faustian, or greek or magian soul, but really all civilizations were created by the Faust. Other souls are just the souls of different sustainers of civilization be it Chinese or Arab or Aztec etc.

It is only Faust who can actually create something new, something out of nothing, because only he has this consciousness of space and the vast possibilities it offers.

Spengler contrasts the greek Apollonian sense of form and limitedness with the Faustian sense of open space and the infinite, but it is out of this infinite space that any form is born, its like a playful creation. Thus Spengler also labels music as Faustian art, Nietzsche in Birth of tragedy makes a point of the dionysian nature of music, the tragedy opens with this dionysian art, then comes the play, the Apollonian side. Apollo is born of chaos, of openness of infinitude just how an alchemists first dissolves lead to prima materia via mercury to create gold out of this, an extremely firm, indestructible form out of its opposite.

Now the one who does not have this consciousness of space, of openness and infinitude of possibilities just stands numb in the face of chaos, thus we see wherever Aryan didnt come to create a civilization only the most primitive social and family institutions, dealing with the most mundane task of life, not thinking about any luxury. Such as can be seen in pre aryan Middle East or Africa or Dravidians. Thus also once given the civilization they'll cling to it, not dare to change a single thing, they fetishize it like Chinese. You give them form, they'll have form, you let them in chaos they'll stay in chaos. They don't have the ability of dissolving and extracting, of the royal art.

So we see among all peoples a myth of the craft-teachers, of light bringers, just as is the case among Aztecs and their White Gods and their Tollan god Quetzalcoatl, they have their legends of people coming from the ocean and teaching them various crafts and arts. Something similar is found among Sumerians, and the Tocharian origins of China are aswell known. All of this speaks of one race, of Tuatha de Danaan, of the Atlantians, of the ancestors of the Aryan race, aswell as the so called fallen angels from Bible who mated with the beasts and taught them crafts aswell.

But, as you, my dear reader, are at least not a full-blooded Jew — for such a one will not go astray as far as this — we will still go along a bit of road together, till perhaps you too turn your back on me because I laugh in your face.

-Max Stirner

June 21, 1920. Summer solstice. "I ordered my Cossacks to light fires in the hills surrounding Dauria. The Bolshevik partisans will wonder what we are preparing for them. Quite simply, another Revolution, a little more terrible than theirs. They love the red star. We celebrate the yellow sun. Religious war." Roman Von Ungern-Sternberg