A Case for Superfascism (Metaphysical Traditionalism)

[Enigma777]

50 minutes ago, NewKidOnTheBlock said:

So you are basically advocating for a society in which each individual naturally submits to a certain Divine Principles and order, so to speak, right? But you are not actually advocating for the content of the premodernity but rather for structure, meaning it's not about for example, abolishing all technology and returning to ancient premodern ages in the literal sense, it's also not about worshiping God necessarilly, but about abiding by a certain transcendent universal divine principles? Would this be correct assesment?

First, I appreciate you so much for taking the time to read through it and seriously and genuinely engaging with the content. And yes, you’ve got the gist of it definitely.

About the concrete vision of what it would “look like”, I’ll say it again, and you’ve said it yourself: “you are not actually advocating for the content of the premodernity but rather for structure, meaning it's not about for example, abolishing all technology and returning to ancient premodern ages in the literal sense”. This is essentially right. Therefore, I can’t sketch out a specific vision of what such a society would look like in terms of CONTENT, since I am more interested in the STRUCTURE. I can tell you it would be hierarchical, organic, spontaneous, ordered along an ontological axis of qualitative differentiation, oriented toward the Absolute,  have Divine justification for rulership(i.e. Plato’s Philosopher Kings) etc, but the content of a society with such structure wouldn’t matter much as far as I am concerned. 

Transcendent metaphysical principles can be instantiated/expressed through different cultural forms, and unlike other Traditionalists, I am not fundamentally against technological progress or nostalgic for specific premodern social forms themselves. 

Now, “what exactly are these Principles anyway” is a good question to which the answer would utterly exhaust the bounds of a forum conversation. But I’ll say a few things briefly:

-What I am calling for—a Traditional social order—is a collective orientation and structure grounded in qualitative ontological differentiation(not qualitative in terms of race or such qualities—I would consider such criteria as still merely “quantity”—but rather according to metaphysical-esoteric/initiatory qualities). In contrast, political power in the Modern world is based on *quantitative* variables: Capital accumulation, socio-economic status, voting power of the majority etc. Rulership is not based on qualitative distinctions anymore, but mere quantitative or contingent variables that are fundamentally, metaphysically and ontologically meaningless, or uprooted from the fundamental ground of Being. 

-The loss of this qualitative aspect of being has lead humanity to forget about the meaning of such qualities as Wisdom, Courage, (Transcendent/Divine) Love, Virtue, Discernment, Consciousness etc, effectively leading to a collapse of universal hierarchy; anything goes, quantity over quality; socio-economic concerns over affairs of the soul and the fulfilment of the human being. 

The Principles are the eternal Platonic Forms, of which the Ultimate is “the Good”. Hierarchical ontological and qualitative differentiation of Being is all over ancient philosophy, implicitly and explicitly. 

The rise of Scientific Positivism, Materialism, Analytic philosophy and other such subverting currents are the hallmarks of the what René Guénon called “the Reign of Quantity”

To really grasp what I am referring to, one needs to be familiar with the Classical philosophical schools of thought, German idealism(to some extent), and the Western Esoteric tradition. An extensive study of the following would give one a foundation for understanding this framework:

-Virtue Ethics(with en emphasis on the Ancient Greek concept of “Eudaimonia”)

-Platonic political and metaphysical philosophy (Philosopher-Kings, Platonic Forms etc)

-Neoplatonism

-Kabbalah(especially the “Tree of Life” as a hierarchical “map of consciousness” and ontological gradation, which the mystic/initiate ascends, toward reunification with the source of Being that was “shattered” or “fragmented” at the creation of the universe)

-Vedic metaphysics 

-Guénonian metaphysics and Traditionalism

-Julius Evola’s political Philosophy 

Also, and finally, it is pretty self evident that a society which PERFECTLY instantiated the Eternal Forms probably never existed. Rather, such a perfect society remains as a sort of Platonic ideal itself, a star forever out of reach but toward which we can still aim at the best of our abilities. It’s not like societies either do or don’t embody those Principles, but rather, to what DEGREE do they do so? And here, we see modernity as especially disconnected from such Principles and “fallen” in relation to the Traditional ideal; modernity is seen a time of significant decline from this archetypal ideal.

Edited yesterday at 08:06 PM by Enigma777

[Enigma777]

3 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

It would not occur to someone normal to support fascism; It happens when you are particularly neurotic and bored and that you want an authoritarian force to organize your own enjoyment for you; to the detriment of others.

Fascism is about authoritarianism; you don't need to be a fascist to criticize modernity. 

Just say you can’t read x2 😂😂😂

[Basman]

1 hour ago, Salvijus said:

This would've been enough to make your point. Nobody has the attention span to read long ass posts, lol. 

Long and waffly text tend to reflect a lack of mental clarity and reactivity in the writer in my experience. If you find yourself writing a lot to convey a point then theirs a chance you could probably cut out most of it. You really only need a couple of sentences to convey a good point in most cases.

Brevity is more witty, elegant and respectful of people's time. 

Edited yesterday at 08:08 PM by Basman

[Enigma777]

1 hour ago, Basman said:

Long and waffly text tend to reflect a lack of mental clarity and reactivity in the writer in my experience. If you find yourself writing a lot to convey a point then theirs a chance you could probably cut out most of it. You really only need a couple of sentences to convey a good point in most cases.

Brevity is more witty, elegant and respectful of people's time. 

You watch Gura’s videos right? Here’s one for you:

 

Edited 23 hours ago by Enigma777

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

30 minutes ago, Enigma777 said:

First, I appreciate you so much for taking the time to read through it and seriously and genuinely engaging with the content. And yes, you’ve got the gist of it definitely.

About the concrete vision of what it would “look like”, I’ll say it again, and you’ve said it yourself: “you are not actually advocating for the content of the premodernity but rather for structure, meaning it's not about for example, abolishing all technology and returning to ancient premodern ages in the literal sense”. This is essentially right. Therefore, I can’t sketch out a specific vision of what such a society would look like in terms of CONTENT, since I am more interested in the STRUCTURE. I can tell you it would be hierarchical, organic, spontaneous, ordered along an ontological axis of qualitative differentiation, oriented toward the Absolute,  have Divine justification for rulership(i.e. Plato’s Philosopher Kings) etc, but the content of a society with such structure wouldn’t matter much as far as I am concerned. 

Transcendent metaphysical principles can be instantiated/expressed through different cultural forms, and unlike other Traditionalists, I am not fundamentally against technological progress or nostalgic for specific premodern social forms themselves. 

Now, “what exactly are these Principles anyway” is a good question to which the answer would utterly exhaust the bounds of a forum conversation. But I’ll say a few things briefly:

-What I am calling for—a Traditional social order—is a collective orientation and structure grounded in qualitative ontological differentiation(not qualitative in terms of race or such qualities—I would consider such criteria as still merely “quantity”—but rather according to metaphysical-esoteric/initiatory qualities). In contrast, political power in the Modern world is based on *quantitative* variables: Capital accumulation, socio-economic status, voting power of the majority etc. Rulership is not based on qualitative distinctions anymore, but mere quantitative or contingent variables that are fundamentally, metaphysically and ontologically meaningless, or uprooted from the fundamental ground of Being. 

-The loss of this qualitative aspect of being has lead humanity to forget about the meaning of such qualities as Wisdom, Courage, (Transcendent/Divine) Love, Virtue, Discernment, Consciousness etc, effectively leading to a collapse of universal hierarchy; anything goes, quantity over quality; socio-economic concerns over affairs of the soul and the fulfilment of the human being. 

The Principles are the eternal Platonic Forms, of which the Ultimate is “the Good”. Hierarchical ontological and qualitative differentiation of Being is all over ancient philosophy, implicitly and explicitly. 

The rise of Scientific Positivism, Materialism, Analytic philosophy and other such subverting currents are the hallmarks of the what René Guénon called “the Reign of Quantity”

To really grasp what I am referring to, one needs to be familiar with the Classical philosophical schools of thought, German idealism(to some extent), and the Western Esoteric tradition. An extensive study of the following would give one a foundation for understanding this framework:

-Virtue Ethics(with en emphasis on the Ancient Greek concept of “Eudaimonia”)

-Platonic political and metaphysical philosophy (Philosopher-Kings, Platonic Forms etc)

-Neoplatonism

-Kabbalah(especially the “Tree of Life” as a hierarchical “map of consciousness” and ontological gradation, which the mystic/initiate ascends, toward reunification with the source of Being that was “shattered” or “fragmented” at the creation of the universe)

-Vedic metaphysics 

-Guénonian metaphysics and Traditionalism

-Julius Evola’s political Philosophy 

Also, and finally, it is pretty self evident that a society which PERFECTLY instantiated the Eternal Forms probably never existed. Rather, such a perfect society remains as a sort of Platonic ideal itself, a star forever out of reach but toward which we can still aim at the best of our abilities. It’s not like societies either do or don’t embody those Principles, but rather, to what DEGREE do they do so? And here, we see modernity as especially disconnected from such Principles and “fallen” in relation to the Traditional ideal; modernity is seen a time of significant decline from this archetypal ideal.

I must say, upon further reading, I definitely have to acknowledge the quality of your posts, very interesting and I think I get it now. Will definitely spend some time educating myself about these matters further

[Basman]

6 minutes ago, Enigma777 said:

You watch Gura’s videos right? Here’s one for you:

 

Leo is very brief here on the forums actually. It is fair to expect users here to understand the basics when conveying an idea.

[Apparition of Jack]

Fucking LARPers.

[Enigma777]

41 minutes ago, Apparition of Jack said:

Fucking LARPers.

So insightful bro, I love how you provided this sharp, systematic, comprehensive essay in response to my arguments and contributed your own perspective to the discussion in a constructive manner. Keep it up man 👍

[Sincerity]

Be honest. You wanted to elicit emotional reactions with that title. Do you need to resort to spicy clickbait to get attention on your writing and you?

Your current title gives this forum a bad name. Please change it. Here are some ideas for titles generated by chatGPT, which still reflect the content quite well I think.

• Revisiting Premodern Political Philosophy in a Modern Age
• Beyond Left and Right: A Case for Metaphysical Traditionalism
• Why Modern Politics Misses the Transcendent
• From Modernity to Tradition: A Philosophical Reorientation
• Understanding Julius Evola’s Traditionalist Political Vision
• A Defense of Premodern Political Metaphysics
• Recovering the Sacred Foundations of Political Order
• Why Modern Ideologies Are Incomplete: A Traditionalist Perspective
• What Traditionalism Offers That Modernity Cannot
• A Philosophical Argument for Premodern Hierarchy
• Why Contemporary Politics Lacks Depth: A Traditionalist Critique
• Restoring Cosmic Order in Political Thought
• The Misunderstood Vision Behind Evola’s Political Thought

Hey @Carl-Richard, I just realized you can't paste chatGPT links when you use the temporary chat. This fucking sucks. 

[Carl-Richard]

1 minute ago, Sincerity said:

the temporary chat

Dahel is dat

[Sincerity]

6 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Dahel is dat

See the icon in the upper right. You can open a temporary chat which won't be saved in memory. I often use it for irrelevant stuff which I don't want chatGPT to remember. Lately I pretty much use it always.

Edited 21 hours ago by Sincerity

[BlueOak]

They'll never be a day someone doesn't want to build man in his own preferred self image.

I guess I needed to hear it.

*To save you time, all responses will collapse into this.

Edited 21 hours ago by BlueOak

[Enigma777]

9 minutes ago, Sincerity said:

Be honest. You wanted to elicit emotional reactions with that title. Do you need to resort to spicy clickbait to get attention on your writing and you?

Be honest? “The title is provocative click bait” is literally what I’ve said a few texts ago, I don’t hide that.

BUT, the title remains true. I AM a Superfascist; if you actually read the text, I actually explain the meaning of the word. I explain it’s etymology and what it means, and yes, I do give it a technical term. In this sense, the title, although “click bait-ish”, is not misleading. 

Superfascism is NOT Fascism; it refers to a political orientation that is BEYOND it. 

[Sincerity]

2 minutes ago, Enigma777 said:

Superfascism is NOT Fascism; it refers to a political orientation that is BEYOND it. 

I understood that. But the title is still provocative clickbait, in your own words. So please change it.

You even inserted a swastika, for God's sake. Again, don't give this forum a bad name.

Edited 21 hours ago by Sincerity

[Enigma777]

3 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

They'll never be a day someone doesn't want to build man in his own preferred self image.

I guess I needed to hear it.

*To save you time, all responses will collapse into this.

This is true in many cases, but here, it’s a lazy oversimplification. 

 

[BlueOak]

1 minute ago, Enigma777 said:

This is true in many cases, but here, it’s a lazy oversimplification. 

 

Its the core point. All i'd be doing is taking everything you've said and putting it in different ways.

[Enigma777]

10 minutes ago, Sincerity said:

I understood that. But the title is still provocative clickbait, in your own words. So please change it.

You even inserted a swastika, for God's sake. Again, don't give this forum a bad name.

To repeat myself, the word itself is not misleading, and it’s technical meaning has pretty much nothing to do with historical Fascism.

Now, I will concede the Swastika part though😂😂😂 I’ll take out the Swastika for you but I am not  changing the title, because I actually AM a proud Superfascist. 

If you’re not happy with it, you’ll have to take it down, but that would be a shame, and ACTUAL fascist censorship🤧

Update: Well, idk how to change the title, so that’s that

Edited 20 hours ago by Enigma777

[Enigma777]

6 minutes ago, BlueOak said:

Its the core point. All i'd be doing is taking everything you've said and putting it in different ways.

Start by making a genuine effort at comprehension and come back around after buddy.
Again, it’s a lazy oversimplification; you don’t know what you’re talking about. 

Edited 20 hours ago by Enigma777

[Enigma777]

Here, free game for everyone; eat my children

[Sincerity]

I changed the title to: A Case for Superfascism (Metaphysical Traditionalism). It's still pushing it, but I think it's a middle ground. 

I hope I'm not being too fascist.

Edited 20 hours ago by Sincerity