Why does this polemic make me resoundingly depressed every time

Because you realize dozens of half-educated edgy young men wasted their time reading this tripe. See also: Atlas Shrugged.

>>1935287
More like Julius Ebola LMAO.

>>1935287

A survival manual give me a break - he doesn't say shit about what we should do

>>1935318
#RideTheTiger my good man

>aristocrats of the soul

On all levels except social and legal we are aristocrats.
[tips crown]

>>1935287
Because it's literally "It's over": The Book.

>>1935318
He says we should be nihilists and indulge selectively in hedonism.

>>1935396
Brilliant life strategy. Truly unbeatable. No one can possibly argue with this brilliant life strategy. The philosophy is so powerful. Brilliant examination of the strategies of life.

>>1935396

He says we should reject bourgeois pleasures. I don't if he means that we need more contact with nature, or if we should reject the capitalist/communist dichotomy all together (he thinks they are part of the same system, which I agree with).

>>1935287
the whole book is just edgelord complaining, disguised as magick esoteric traditionalism
it's a fave amongst neets who are too traditional to work

Can /his/ recommend a book dealing with the soullessness of modern man that is constructive and NOT religious in the "Purpose Drive Life" sense?

>>1935546
what do you mean "not religious"? I'd argue the entire problem with modern man's soullessness is that he rejects religion

>>1935552

Which religion?

>>1935552

No I agree. I just don't want an American prottie telling me I need to find Jesus.

>>1935287
>Ride the Tiger
You can see his stripes but you know he's clean?

>>1935559
probably christianity
although these people will larp as suffi muslims, hindus and pagans
oh and protestants are pure evil

>>1935559
oh boy. It's not a matter of picking a pre-made religion, like you would order a pizza. That's an entirely modern thing. It's matter of religion and spirituality combined in a way. A different way of viewing the world, apart from the modern way of seeing the world as matter (materialism) and spirit as something un-natural and lofty and un-real.
>>1935560
I would recommend Evola's "Revolt Against the Modern World", just finished it and it really made me think

>>1935563
Oh, don't i see what you mean.

>>1935527
>bourgeois pleasures
fine dining, fine wining, fine cigars and fine suits, enjoying your vacation and your beautiful wife on your private beach or in your winter chalet with a bear rug by the fireplace, is that what he meant? How is that different from the aristocrat lifestyle exactly?

>>1935662

he doesn't fucking specify so there's no way to know

>>1935662
When Evola says "aristocrat", he's not referring to material wealth or comfort. It's in the mind.

>>1935287
Because most of what he says is true. The truth is depressing.

>>1935552
Religion != spirituality
Besides what is 'the soul'? How do you define it?

Beside the point, saying religion is tge answer is in adequate because it usually (in a sane, rational person) arises more questiond than it answers.

Because you were dumb enough to take an insufferable hack like Evola seriously.

>>1935546
Ethics - Spinoza.

>>1936471
t. Lemming

>>1935546
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/8380609-man-in-the-modern-age

>>1935568
It's not possible to be a catholic or orthodox without larping either...

>>1935287
Anything political that Evola wrote after he got blown up and paralyzed in WWII is defeatist trash.

Read "Revolt Against the Modern World" and stop there.

>>1937316
>follows his own herd of sperglords off a cliff into reality denying insanity
>thinks he's not following a herd in so doing

t. moron

But hey, feels > reals.

>>1937471
Riding the Tiger isn't following the lemmings off. It's letting them go and picking up the pieces when they're gone.

>>1936473
HA.
"no".

>>1937474
No. It's throwing in with another batch of lemmings, because you're enlightened by your own intelligence.

>>1937478
In what way? It's neither religious, nor soulless. It proposes a sound ethical system that doesn't require you to be a autistic cretin to buy into, which can't be said of anything Evola ever wrote.

>>1937492
Ah yes, the age-old

>HURR YOU'RE JUST A FEDORA TIPPER argument

Suck it up buttercup.

>>1937499
It's pretty much iconic behavior of the fedora. It was never the atheism that made the fedora catch on. It was the smug self-righteousness, the pretensions of being intellectually superior to others on account of their beliefs, which absolutely sums up Evolaists one and all. You can see it right on the cover of the rag being peddled in this thread "Aristocrats of the Soul." But what you're not acknowledging is that it's just more fucking kool-aid, and you're happily guzzling it down while mocking others for their choice of juice substitutes.

There's a reason that while having a bibliography bigger than Nietzsche that Evola's philosophy never resulting in spurring any thought or intellectual traditions.

File: 1474086871048.png (260KB, 563x542px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 563x542px

>>1937505
You gonna keep attacking the reader or the book? I'm guessing the former because you've continually proven you have absolutely nothing to say. Also, got your smug right here, fuccboi

Why is Evola so antisemitic anyway?

It seems like the Jews do, and have been doing for the past 2000 years what he suggests doing in Ride the Tiger. Just with their own Jewish beliefs.

>>1937509
>picture of crying wojack wearing a smug pepe mask

K. Address the fact Evola's philosophy contributing nothing to any intellectual tradition. It was basically ignored for being the garbage it is.

>>1937519
You mean it was basically ignored for political reasons in the Post-war era because it was sympathetic to the far right. Address the book, sir. Or haven't you read it?

>>1937521
He was largely ignored pre-war too.

>Or haven't you read it?

I don't read trash. I also never claimed to.

>>1937530
>He was largely ignored pre-war too
If you call being lauded by fascists ignored, even if he snubbed them, then you go right on ahead with being stupid.

>I also never claimed to
>talking shit about books you never read
Really? Get the fuck out of here.

>>1937534
>If you call being lauded by fascists ignored, even if he snubbed them, then you go right on ahead with being stupid.

He was considered a curiosity by the Italian fascist party and something of a pet intellectual. He didn't spur any thinkers to follow in his foot steps before or after the war.

>Really? Get the fuck out of here.

Nah. I've read plenty of secondary sources on the man.

>>1937534
>>1937536
Also being lauded by fascists isn't something to brag about, since they were by and large expressly anti-intellectual.

>>1935568
Are you protestant?
Or just happen to be calling out a bunch of pretentious pricks?