Evola: about Miscegenation and the tripartite division of the Race in Body, Soul and Spirit

“While in a “thoroughbred” horse or cat the biological element constitutes the central one, and therefore to it can legitimately be narrowed down every racist consideration, this is certainly not the case for man or, at least, for every man worthy of this name, which is yes a biological and anthropological reality, but connected to elements, forces and laws of different character, superbiological, as real as the first and whose influence on the first can often be decisive”.

“The distinction in the human being of three different principles, of body, soul and spirit, is fundamental for the traditional view. Starting from such view, it must be recognized that the inequality of mankind is not only physical, biological or anthropological, but also psychical and spiritual. Men are different not only in body, but also in soul and spirit. In accordance with this, the doctrine of race must be articulated in three degrees. The racial problem must therefore be established for each of the three elements. The racist consideration of man as body, as a purely natural and biological being, is the task that belongs to the doctrine of the race of first degree. Follows the consideration of man inasmuch he is soul, that is the study of the race of the soul. As crowning, we’ll have a doctrine of the race of third degree, that is the racial study of man inasmuch he is not only body and soul, but, in addition, spirit”.

“The racism of first degree, having to consider the bodily data and, in general, that aspect of the human being, according to which he obeys to purely natural, biological, anthropological, constitutional laws and determinisms, can legitimately assume the research methods used, in general, by the natural sciences. In front of the environment the race has a certain amplitude of reaction, the type can mutate, but in a transitory and contingent manner, in the same way as an elastic body that regains its shape, once the action of the force that deformed it has ceased. As determinant, essential, decisive and permanent, is however always considered this internal racial hereditary element, always ready to reassert itself”.

“As racism of second degree we must consider a theory of the race of the soul and a typology of the soul of the races. Such a racism has to detect the elements, in their way primary and irreducible, that act from the inside, causing groups of individuals to manifest a constant way of being or “style” in terms of acting, thinking, feeling. Here we arrive at a new concept of the racial purity of a given type: it is no longer the case to see if, like in the racism of first degree, a given individual presents that given group of physical characteristics or, also, generically behavioral, that make it conform to the herditary type, but it is about establishing if the race of the body brought by a given individual is the appropriate expression, in compliance, of his race of the soul, and vice versa. If this occurs, the type is pure also according to the survey of second degree”.

“Consider, for example the phenomenon of the comprehension. In reality there are even too many cases of people, that are exactly of the same race of the body, of the same stock, sometimes even – as brothers or fathers and children – of the same blood in the most real sense, but nevertheless they fail to understand each other. A frontier separates their souls, their way of feeling and seeing is different and against this the common race of the body and the common blood can do nothing. Exists a possibility of comprehension, and therefore of true solidarity, of profound unity, only where exists a common “race of the soul”. Come into question, here, subtle elements, of an instinctive sensibility. While for long years nothing has been suspected, in a given circumstance can happen that a given person with his way of acting gives us the clear feeling that he “is of another race” and, then, there will be nothing more to do with him, there may be, with him, relations of various nature, but always at an intimate restraint, at an intimate distance”.

“We now turn to say something about the racist research of third degree, having for its object, as known, the races of the spirit. This is, indeed, the research of the race according to its ultimate root, wherever we talk about normal civilizations and of superior human lineages; root, already communicating with super-personal, super-ethnic metaphysical forces. For such a research, the specific way to conceive both the sacred and the supernatural, rather than the relationship of man with respect to it, the vision of life in the highest sense, furthermore, the whole world of symbols and myths, constitute a subject matter so positive and objective, as for the racism of first degree are the facial indices and the cranial structures”.

“It is evident that, kept in mind all this, the problem itself of the hybrids and of their effects must be studied much more in-depth compared to what is usually done, as long as the doctrinal field is maintained, without looking for, instead, suitable suggestions for their practical utility. In general, the perniciousness of the hybrids should certainly be acknowledged, and it is of course all the more evident, as much as the racial elements of the two parts are definitely heterogeneous. Then we stress, that the deleterious character of the hybrids is not revealed much in the determinations of degenerate and deformed human types compared to their original race of the body, but especially in the realization of cases, in which interior and exterior no longer match, in which the race of the body can be in contrast with that of the soul and, this, in turn, can contradict the race of the spirit, or vice versa, thus giving rise to dilacerated, semi-hysterical beings, to beings that, in themselves, are no longer, so to speak, at their home. And when no inner resistance, no awakening of the primordial forming force occurs and, instead, to the previous hybridizations are added new ones, the result is the creation of a true ethnic amalgam, of a disarticulated, shapeless, semi-leveled mass, for which starts seriously to become true the immortal principle of the universal equality”.

Note: it is possible to interchange the term “soul”, in reality quite ambiguous, with any among these: “mind”, “personality”, “character”.


Related posts: Evola: about Work, Economy and Life, Evola: about Feminism, the Woman and the Responsibility of ManEvola: about Christianism, Chivalry and the Nordic-Germanic vision of LifeEvola: about Initiation, Immortality, Death and Rebirth


Lost Wisdom

The only video interview at our disposal – with English subtitles – where Julius Evola, for about an hour, discusses a wide range of subjects from him already deepened in his most important books. A precious and valid record that I wish to share here:


Related posts: Evola: about Work, Economy and LifeEvola: about Christianism, Chivalry and the Nordic-Germanic vision of LifeEvola: about Initiation, Immortality, Death and Rebirth

Evola: about Initiation, Immortality, Death and Rebirth

“To be clear it is necessary to refer to a fundamental traditional teaching, after all already mentioned: to the one concerning the two natures. There is the nature of the immortals and the nature of the mortals; there is the superior region of <<those-who-are>> and the inferior region of the <<becoming>>”.

“The passage from the one to the other was considered possible, but on an exceptional basis and under the condition of an essential and effective and positive transformation from a way of being to another way of being. Such transformation was achieved by means of the initiation in the strictest sense of the term. Through the initiation some men escaped from one nature and conquered the other, thus ceasing being men. Their appearance in the other form of existence constituted, in the order of this last, a rigorously equivalent event to that of the generation and of the physical birth. They were therefore re-born, they were re-generated”.

“To the eternal sleep, to the larval existence in Hades, to the dissolution thinked as destiny of all those for whom the forms of this human life have constituted the beginning and the end – would therefore escape only those who already alive have been able to orient their consciousness towards the superior world. The Initiated, the Adepts are at the limit of such path. Obtained the <<remembrance>>, according to the expressions of Plutarch they become free, they go without constraints, crowned they celebrate the <<mysteries>> and see on earth the crowd of those who are not initiated and who are not <<pure>> pressing and pushing themselves in mud and darkness”.

“To tell the truth, the traditional teaching about the postmortem has always stressed the existing difference between survival and immortality. Can be conceived various modalities, more or less contingents, of survival for this or that principle or complex of the human being. But this has nothing to do with immortality, which can only be thinked as <<olympic immortality>>, as a <<becoming gods>>. Such a conception lasted in the West until the hellenic antiquity. Indeed from the doctrine of the <<two natures>> proceeded the knowledge of the destiny of a death, or of a precarious, larval survival for the ones, and of a conditioned immortality (conditioned by the initiation) for the others”.

“It was the vulgarization and the abusive generalization of the truth exclusively valid for the initiates – vulgarization that began in some degenerate forms of orphism and then had broad development with christianism – to give birth to the strange idea of the <<immortality of the soul>>, extended to any soul and distanced from every condition. Since then until today, the illusion continues in the various forms of the religious and <<spiritualistic>> thought: the soul of a mortal is immortal – immortality is a certainty, not a problematic possibility. Thus established the misunderstanding, thus perverted the truth, the initiation could no longer appear necessary: its value of real and effective operation could no longer be understood. Every really transcendent possibility was little by little abolished. And by continuing to talk of <<rebirth>>, the whole thing, by and large, ran out in a matter of sentiment, in a moral and religious meaning, in a more or less indeterminated and <<mystical>> state”.

-Julius Evola


Related posts: Evola: about Work, Economy and Life, Evola: about Feminism, the Woman and the Responsibility of ManEvola: about Christianism, Chivalry and the Nordic-Germanic vision of Life

Words of Wisdom #38

“We can’t ask ourselves if the “woman” is superior or inferior to the “man” more than we can ask ourselves if water is superior or inferior to fire. Therefore, for each of the sexes the criterion of measurement cannot be given from the opposite sex, but exclusively from the “idea” of one’s own sex. The only thing that can be done is, in other terms, to establish the superiority or the inferiority of a certain woman according to her being more or less near to the female typicity, to the pure and absolute women; and analogous thing also applies to man. The “demands” of modern woman derive, therefore, from wrong ambitions, besides from a complex of inferiority – from the wrong idea that a woman as such, as “only woman”, is inferior to man. Rightfully has been said that feminism has not really fighted for the “rights of woman” but rather, without realizing it, for the right of woman to make herself equal to man: thing that, even if it was possible outside of the superficial practical-intellectual plane before mentioned, would be equivalent to the right of woman to distort herself, to degenerate. The only qualitative criterion is, we repeat it, that of the degree of more or less perfect realization of one’s own nature. There is no doubt that a woman who is perfectly woman is superior to a man who is imperfectly man, in the same way as a peasant loyal to the land, who performs perfectly his function, is superior to a king unable to perform his function”.

-Julius Evola


Evola: about Christianism, Chivalry and the Nordic-Germanic vision of Life

“The power of the tradition that gave its character to Rome revealed itself, towards Christianism, in the fact, that if the new faith managed to subvert the ancient civilization, it couldn’t really conquer the western world as pure Christianism; that where it attained some greatness, it was able to do so by betraying, to a certain extent, itself: it was able to do so more thanks to elements taken from the opposite tradition – thanks to roman and classical pre-christian elements – than thanks to the christian element in its original form. De facto, Christianism <<converted>> the western man only externally; it constituted its <<faith>> in the most abstract sense, while the effective life of this one continued to obey to forms, more or less materialized, of the opposite tradition of action and, later, in the Middle Ages, to an ethos that again had to be marked essentially by the aryan-nordic spirit. Theoretically, the west accepted Christianism, – and that Europe could accommodate, in this way, many themes related to the jewish and levantine conception of life is something that always renews the wonder of the historian – practically, it remained pagan. The result was therefore a hybridism. Even in its attenuated and romanized catholic form the christian faith represented an obstruction, which took from the western man the possibility to integrate his authentic, insuppressible way of being by means of a conception to him congenial of the sacred and of the relationships with the sacred”.

“Catholicism took shape through the rectification of various extremist aspects of the Christianism of the origins, the organization of a ritual, dogmatic and symbolic corpus beyond of the simple mystical-soteriological element, the absorption and adaptation of both doctrinal and organizational elements taken from the romanity and the classical civilization in general. That’s how Catholicism presents sometimes <<traditional>> traits, which however must not induce to misunderstanding: what in Catholicism has a truly traditional nature is very little christian and what in it is christian is very little traditional”.


“By having as model the hero more than the saint, the winner more than the martyr; by placing the sum of all values in fidelity and in honour more than in the <<caritas>> and in humility; by seeing in cowardice and in shame an evil worse than sin; by knowing very little of resisting evil and of repaying evil with goodness – intending much more to punish the unjust and the wicked, excluding from its ranks those who literally followed the christian precept of the <<don’t kill>>; by having as principle not to love the enemy, but to fight him and to be magnanimous only after having won it – in all this chivalry affirmed almost without alteration an aryan ethic within a world only nominally christian”.


“The life of the ancient nordic-germanic societies was based on the three principles of personality, freedom and fidelity. To it was totally alien both the promiscuous communitary sense and the inability of the individual to valorize itself if not in the context of a given abstract institution. Here being free is, for the individual, the measure of nobility. But this freedom is not anarchic and individualistic, it is capable of a dedication beyond the person, it knows the transfiguring value proper to the principle of fidelity in front of who is worthy of recognition and to whom one subordinates oneself voluntarily. Thus were formed groups of faithful around leaders to which could well be applied the old saying: <<The supreme nobility of a roman Emperor is of being not a master of slaves but a lord of free men, who loves freedom also in those who serve him>>; and the State, almost according to the ancient roman aristocratic precept, had as center the council of chiefs, each one free, lord of his land and in his land, leader of the group of his faithful. Beyond this council, the unity of the State and, in a certain way, the superpolitical aspect of it was embodied by the King, since this one belonged – unlike the simple military leaders – to one of the lineages of divine origin: Amals, the <<heavenly>>, the <<pure>>, was a name of the kings among the Goths. No impersonal <<duty>> and <<service>> existed, everywhere there were free, strongly personalized relationships of command and obedience, of understanding and fidelity. In this way the idea of the free personality remained the foundation of each unity and each hierarchy”.

-Julius Evola


Related post: Evola: about Work, Economy and LifeEvola: about Feminism, the Woman and the Responsibility of Man

Evola: about Feminism, the Woman and the Responsibility of Man

“After centuries of <<slavery>> the woman has therefore wanted to be free, to be for herself. But the so-called <<feminism>> has not been able to conceive for the woman a personality, if not in imitation of the male one, thus its <<claims>> mask a fundamental distrust of the new woman towards herself, the impotence of the latter to be and be worth as what she is: as a woman and not as a man. For such a misunderstanding, the modern woman has felt a completely imaginary inferiority in being only a woman and almost an offense in being treated <<only as a woman>>. Such has been the origin of a wrong vocation: she, precisely for this, has wanted to take a revenge, to claim her <<dignity>>, to show her <<worth>> – passing to compete with man. Except that the latter was not at all the true man, but rather the artificial man, the puppet man of a standardized, rationalized civilization, not implying almost anything anymore of really differentiated and qualitative”.

“The man, for that matter, like a true irresponsible has permitted, or rather he himself has helped, has pushed the woman in the streets, in the offices, in the schools, in the factories, in all the contaminatory crossroads of modern society and culture. In this manner the last levelling push has been given”.

“Not different the results of western <<emancipation>>, that moreover is already on the road to infect all the world with more speed than a plague. The traditional woman, the absolute woman, in giving herself, not in living for herself, in wanting to be entirely for another being with simplicity and purity, fulfilled herself, belonged to herself, had a heroism of her own – and, deep down, became superior to the common man. The modern woman in wanting to be for herself has destroyed herself. The craved <<personality>> is taking away from her every personality”.

“Having accused the decadence of the modern woman, we should not forget that man is the first responsible of such decadence, in a society ruled by men worthy of this name the woman would have never wanted or been able to take the road along which she is proceeding today. Therefore the real reaction against feminism and every other female deviation is not against the woman, but against the man that should be directed”.

-Julius Evola

Related article: Evola: about Work, Economy and Life

Words of Wisdom #10 & #11

“First of all, we must distinguish between individual and personality. Between the individualistic ideal, that starts from the idea that the individual is an entity in himself, beginning and end to himself, without roots and without history, bound to create on its own all that for which he has worth – between this ideal and racism there is of course a categorical conflict. But such an “individual” is a pure abstraction. Concretely, man is not “individual”, but “personality”, and personality is something articulated, that presupposes a history, a blood, a race, a totality of relations and forces that date back to distant times. Surpassed the individualist illusion, race and inheritance are therefore things to which one is inwardly connected and that are in action in us. The conscience of the individual, far from being compromised by this, instead is strengthened and expanded: it goes beyond the short horizon of the individual life, it integrates with temporal distances, receives a sacred and mysterious heritage, to be transmitted again, almost against the current of time”.

-Julius Evola

“Or wanting one’s own nature, delve into it and realise it until reconnecting with the prehuman and superindividual principle that corresponds to it; otherwise devote oneself to arbitrarily build an unnatural way of being, devoid of relation with its deeper forces or even in contradiction with them. This is exactly the opposition existing between the traditional ideal, and especially the nordic-aryan one, and the “modern” ideal of civilization. For the first, the essential task is to know and be yourself; for the second, the task is instead to “build yourself”, to become what one is not, breaking every limit to make possible everything to everyone”.

-Julius Evola

Immagine correlata

Evola: about Work, Economy and Life

“This should be held firmly by those who today stand against the forces of the left. Nothing is more evident that modern capitalism is subversion as much as marxism. Identical is the materialistic vision of life that is at the base of the one and the other; qualitatively identical are the ideals of both; identical, in both, are the premises tied to a world the center of which is constituted by technology, science, production, <<productivity>> and <<consumption>>. And as long as we only talk of economic classes, profits and salaries, production, and as long as we believe that the real human progress is conditioned by a particular system of distribution of wealth and goods and that, in general, it has to do with wealth or indigence, then we will have not even touched what is essential…”.

“It must be stated in no uncertain terms that everything that is economy and economic interest as satisfaction of the material needs and of the more or less artifical appendages of them, has had, has and will always have a subordinated function in a normal humanity, that beyond this sphere must differentiate itself an order of superior political, spiritual and heroic values, an order that doesn’t know nor accepts simply economic classes, that doesn’t know neither of <<proletarians>> nor of <<capitalists>>, an order, only in function of which must be defined the things for which is really worth living and dying”.

“So it can be legitimately stated that the so called <<improvement of the social conditions>> has to be considered not as a good thing, but as an evil, when the price of it is the enslavement of the individual to the productive mechanism and to the social conglomerate, the degeneration of the State in <<State of work>> and of society in <<consumer society>>, the elimination of every qualitative hierarchy, the atrophy of every spiritual sensibility and of every <<heroic>> capacity in the more broad sense of the word”.

“The fundamental idea was that work did not serve to bind, but to release man: to allow him to choose more worthy interests, once regulated what is requested by the needs of the existence. No economic value seemed as to deserve that to it one had to sacrifice one’s independence and that the search for the means for existence committed beyond measure the existence itself”.

“The turning point has been the advent of a conception of life that instead of keeping the needs within natural limits in view of the pursuit of what is really worth of human effort, has had as ideal the growth and artificial moltiplication, of the same needs, but also of the means to satisfy them, without consideration for the growing slavery that, by virtue of an unavoidable law, this had to constitute, first for the individual and then for the community”.

“One of the features of the economical era according to its more sleazy and plebeian aspects is indeed this sort of auto-sadism, that consists in glorifying work as an ethical value and essential duty, and in conceiving as work any form of activity. To a future, more normal humanity there is no perversion that will appear more unique than this, hence, again, the means becomes end”.

“The fundamental point, here, is indeed to be able to recognize that there is no external economic growth and social prosperity that is worthwhile and to whose flattery one should not absolutely resist when counterpart is an essential limitation of the liberty and space required so that each one can achieve what is possible to him beyond the sphere conditioned by matter and by the needs of ordinary life”.

“In the modern world, if the <<unjustice>> of the caste regime has been deprecated, even more have been stigmatized the ancient civilizations that knew slavery and has been ascribed as a pride of the modern times to have claimed the principle of the <<human dignity>>. What instead is worth to be put in relief is that, if there ever was a civilization of slaves in large-scale, this is exactly the modern civilization. No traditional civilization ever saw such large masses condemned to a dark, disanimated, automatic work: slavery, that doesn’t even have as counterpart the high stature and the tangible reality of figures of lords and dominators, but that is imposed through the tiranny of the economic factor and the absurd structures of a more or less collectivized civilization. And since the modern vision of life, in its materialism, has taken away from the individual every possibility to confer to his own destiny something transfigurant, to see in it a sign and a symbol, so the slavery of today is the more dark and desperate of all those that have ever been known”.

– Julius Evola