On 25 November 1970, the great Japanese novelist and playwright Yukio Mishima arrived for an appointment with the commandant of the Tokyo barracks of the Japan Self-Defence Forces, Eastern Command. With the help of four others who joined him on his visit, Mishima tied the commandant to a chair and then strode out onto his balcony to pour vitriol on post-war Japan. A crowd of bewildered recruits below heard Mishima effectively call for a coup d’état, accusing his countrymen of chasing economic prosperity while “forgetting the principles of the nation, losing their native spirit, pursuing the trivial without correcting the essential [and] leading themselves into spiritual emptiness”.
The reaction among most Japanese to Mishima’s speech and subsequent ritual suicide — he plunged a samurai sword into his belly back in the commandant’s office, before one of his comrades beheaded him — was one of mystification and sadness. Others, both in Japan and around the world, found that Mishima’s message resonated.
Among them was the Italian philosopher Julius Evola, by this point in his early-70s. Disappointed by the demise, 25 years earlier, of what he regarded as the “miracle” of Japan’s fascist theocracy, Evola saw in Mishima’s final act a courageous call for his country to awaken from the prosperous slumber into which it had been cast by the United States, first as post-war occupier and then as partner in an uneven alliance.
Born in Rome in 1898, Julius Evola frequently looked to Asia for inspiration in helping to rescue the Western world from its malaise. In this, he was not unusual. Any number of Romantics, from Goethe through to Coleridge, found in Indian drama and philosophy a depth and vitality that Europe appeared to have lost. And from the second half of the 1800s, Japan became a source of inspiration: its people and landscape, paintings and woodblock prints, calligraphy and kimono, Zen Buddhism and tea ceremony.
But where much of this interest was focused on spiritual and aesthetic renewal, Evola’s engagement with Asia was defined by the intertwining of the spiritual with the political. And where the personal politics of many Western enthusiasts for Zen or India’s Vedanta philosophy skewed towards the progressive, particularly in the post-war era, Evola was a leading thinker of the far-Right, whose ideas inspired figures within Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany (albeit to a lesser extent than he would have liked) and later many others around the post-war world.
Although often overlooked amid the peace-and-love associations of “the East”, Asian ideas and practices have been used to buttress Western ideologies with elitism, racism and conflict at their core. Much depended on what a given commentator thought was wrong or lacking in Western life in the first place. Where many a 20th-century critic of the modern West focused on the recent past, and on the damage done by industrial capitalism to European scenery and souls, in countries such as Germany and Italy one could find writers reaching back further: beyond what they regarded as the disaster of Europe’s Christianisation and into the realms of Nordic myth, ancient German folklore and Imperial Rome. They managed to combine these interests with investigations into the occult and Eastern thought, as additional sources of inspiration in battling modernity and recovering lost values and human capabilities.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“It would be a stretch to say that yoga risks turning you into a f*scist.”
That completely depends on what you think f*scism currently looks like. Once you realize that what passes for the “left” nowadays — totalitarian elitism — has nothing to do with the working class Left of the pre-war 20th century, you begin wonder where progressives actually fit in.
Why dies fascism have an asterisk after the f? Is this Unherd censorship or your sensibilities?
Because in the past spelling it fully meant your comment was passed for moderation.
Strangely typing communism and prising Stalin and Mao is fine.
Pretty funny that he doesn’t understand that progressives are fascists.
Correct. The Left had largely disengaged from the working class by the 1990s.
As Orwell pointed out in the 40s, “fascist” is basically a meaningless word at this point that has become nothing but a term of abuse.
If “fascist” doesn’t refer to Mussolini’s party, and nothing else, then basically it refers to whatever the speaker doesn’t like, unless the speaker is Julius Evola.
The author clearly wanted to write about Evola, which is fine, but he stretched it big time to make it relevant today.
I disagree that it’s not relevant, for two reasons. The first is that in many of these writings, the diagnosis (disaffection, social alienation) is correct, but the prescription is disastrously wrong. Once you’ve nodded in vigorous agreement to the first part, it takes a great deal of awareness to stop following the author to the “logical” conclusion.
The second reason is that the influence is not open and direct, but rather transmitted through several filters so that the influence is not readily recognisable. Only if you know the source can you see the linkage.
The journey that an individual needs to undertake to be able to understand the meaning the writer aims for in this article is long and complex; in other words, the antithesis of contemporary progressivism and also something not open to those who simply accept the ‘received wisdom’ of traditional religious orthodoxies.
I suppose it is, in its own right, a form of elitism… of the right, but also something which could help act as a counterbalance to the cultural sinkhole that much of Western society is descending into, including its political and academic institutions. The goal, as i’ve come to understand it, is to become personally evolved to the extent of being able to see through and reject all attempts at cultural brainwashing though the religious and ideological paradigms with which people try (and usually succeed) in fooling themselves into believing.
It’s not that complex. You just have to pull out the weeds on a daily basis.
Thanks for a thought provoking article.
It’s always interesting to know how Buddhism has lent itself to multiple interpretation.
Dr Ambedkar, the chief architect of the Indian Constitution, in his own rebellion against caste stratification chose to convert to Buddhism.
His choice is radically contrary to the reasons cited by Evola. Certainly there is no organic linkage between supposed “Far Right” thinking today( I don’t much care for that epithet) and Buddhism.
Indeed to many it is Leftism and it’s extreme versions of atheism and moral causes of an absolutist nature( Wokeness)that is far more dangerous and intolerant.
As an eclectic Hindu who also draws comfort from Christian precepts, Taoist and Zen Buddhist thought, my attraction for Buddhism is quite different to that of Evola. Certainly what appeals to me is it’s broad practicality of ” The Middle Path” and a blend of simple ritual with pantheism.
So, my quibble would be with the conclusion drawn by the author – ” a sense of superiority” doesn’t arise from Eastern mystical practices or creeds per se; but as the personal choices of an individual or set of persons.
Religion just like beauty does finally ” lie in the eye of the beholder”..
The huge difference between Western religions, which, scripturally, are so enmeshed in social responses to endemic conflict and crisis; and Eastern religions like the Tibetan, Chinese and Japanese versions of Buddhism, and also the Tao te Ching, is the serene, detached, contemplative grandeur and deep inward focus of these. So completely unlike anything Western, and an utterly different mode of experiencing the world. I think they escape anything as crude as any particular Western political project.
Your claim makes some general sense to me. But given its geographic and cultural origins and spread into Syria and Egypt, for example, I don’t think Christianity is correctly confined to the West.
And figures such as Hildegard of Bingen, Meister Eckhart, and the unknown author of The Cloud of Unknowing stand against your claim that far-Eastern Buddhism or Taoism is “so completely unlike anything Western”.
Seems like Alexandria was the Alchemy or melting pot of both Eastern and Western religion.
Plausible claim. Rome and Jerusalem are also candidates.
I guess it depends on the context. Of course there can be a link between Buddhists and Confucian thoughts transported to a militaristic creed. For instance the violent Tibetan invasions of 8th- 9th century AD Bengal were of Buddhist storm troopers. Some have found a link between Zen and the Samurai creed or Sinhalese Buddhist armies attacking Tamil Hindu parts.
I do however get your point about strict religions of the ” Book” and conquest.
The Buryats, with the Chechens noted as exceptionally cruel Russian fighters in Ukraine, are followers of the Dalai Lama. Moreover, he has never condemned either the invasion of Afghanistan or the invasion of Iraq. For more on Buddhism as no more a religion of peace than Islam is (no less so, but no more), then see Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Mongolia, Japan, Thailand, and beyond. In fact, an examination of the relevant texts shows that violence in general and war in particular are fundamental to Buddhism. Tibet is particularly striking for this. A rare balanced treatment of Buddhism and violence was broadcast in August 2013. The subject is also addressed in great detail here.
I disagree – this is pure Orientalism. Eastern religions can be, have been, and are being instrumentalised for political projects and heinous brutality against fellow man no less successfully than Christianity.
” a focal point for fears that disaffected young men ….”
Young men are always restless and go through a period of searching before they (hopefully) settle down.
During my life, their social position and self-worth has been whittled down to almost zero by a combination of economic and cultural forces. There’s very little to inspire anyone in the current collapsing consumerist shitshow of modern life. Is it any wonder they’re searching for some meaning somewhere, anywhere else ?
In the Independent yesterday, there was the usual smorgasbord of fact-lite, therapeutic, feminist-leaning waffle about women’s ‘guilt, problems and difficulties’ dealing with, among other things, partners who are too nice (Mr Nice Guy ‘syndrome’ apparently) – so obviously not toxic enough.
Is is any wonder some young men are inspired by Andrew Tate and Bronze Age Pervert ? At least these Internet ‘philosophers’ seem to have bucked the trend and not just rolled over and given up. If they were women, everyone would be saying how ‘feisty’ they were and giving them a free pass.
Evola wrote a very good critique of Nazism and Fascism from a ‘far-right’ perspective which he takes to task on the basis of their populism and Socialist aspects (it’s in the name of the former of course so should be obvious) and as such is far more interesting and informative than the fake, superficial, postwar binary of Fascism bad, ‘Leftism’ good which we’re still hobbled with 70 years later. Especially since the Left are now displaying all the signs of a totalitarian cult themselves.
Well worth a punt, if only for a radically different view of how society can be run – cleans out the intellectual cobwebs (if you leave the magic hocus-pocus to one side).
I could be wrong, but I thought “wellness” was rather a female thing – yoga too – rather than being a magnet for disaffected young men.
The author seemed to recognize his own overreach with the decent quip about “stretch” and “yoga” in an otherwise solemn effort. Does Harding’s concluding warning amount to a ethnocentrist’s warning to contemplate your own “cultural navel” before venturing too far into exotic ground? (If so, I’m in substantial agreement).
As it stands, this piece seems too dense and self-serious. I’d like to see Harding bolster his central claim about Evola, instead of packing his text with assorted “fun facts” that are sometimes interesting but short on fun.
Probably Blofeld’s favourite writer, hence his affection of a monocle.
Evola was also in a wheelchair like Bofeld. In this case it was because he used to take walks during bombing raids while in Vienna in between climbing mountains and writing.
Sounds more like the far left to me. Maybe there isn’t much difference
“Across long centuries, the samurai had been able to impart their vigour and imprint their values upon an entire people.”
This vigour and those values culminated in a pre-war militarized force it would be difficult to top for sheer savagery. Training, if you survived the beatings — many didn’t — was meant to produce soldiers and sailors incapable of human feeling toward enemies, who were viewed as sub-human, no better than pigs in their divine scheme of things. The fanaticism drilled into them saw death as better than surrender; there was an extra incentive in that families back home would would pay a price in shame and perhaps more if you gave up. Death was even better If you took an enemy with you who had believed you gave up. Japanese tortures were inventive. They buried Chinese to their necks in fields and rode over them on horses and nailed them to walls by their tongues. Herding scores into a building and setting it afire was common. More than 300,000 civilians died during the six-week occupation on Nanking. Germans killed more people faster, but that was because they had more industrial know-how. The Japanese would have fought to the last grandmother with a sharpened stick if it hadn’t been for the two atomic bombs.
Apparently, there are connections between some versions of the yoga worldview and fascism/Nazism, as well as QAnon. I wouldn’t want to overstate it. The yoga and wellness worlds have a conspiracy problem – Vox
That was an interesting read, but as someone from the East it appears to me to be more an obsessive reductionism.
Traditional Western herbalism would have equal apprehensions about allopathic medicine, no different from the Ayurvedic, Tibetan medicinal or Chinese varieties.
Evola’s Asian ramblings are nonsense. I know this as I was able to check them one at the time, with a very educated Chinese guy, while struggling through Ride The Tiger.
One thing after another that he’d say about Chinese symbol, myth and so on, was just plain wrong. It got so that you couldn’t get to the end of a page without yet another howler.
Just garbage. In the end I threw the book away.
Evola never pretended to be particularly knowledgeable about China and his limited writings about it were always tangential to his Traditionalist thinking. His interests were Hinduism, Rome, sex, the Holy Grail, those sorts of things.
If you thought you had some sort of slam dunk on him because of his relatively brief excursions to Chinese religion while writing in the mid 20th century you are a fool.
These ‘findings’ are supposed to be part of a foundation which he uses to construct his solutions. The foundation falls away because of the misunderstandings of the religious versus the esoteric. He cherry-picks irrelevancies all over, things that would make any Chinese frown. But these errors do tell anyone discerning, that something is seriously adrift. Your conclusion is therefore specious.
Do writers get brownie points every time they write “far-right?” Inquiring minds want to know.
I’ve read Revolt Against the Modern World. It’s OK, but nothing amazing.
As for “Evola’s radical elitism.” Really? More radically elite than your average lefty mostly peaceful protester? I doubt it.
This is part of wondering after the beast of Revelation and the rise of the Antichrist. Revelation 13.3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. Read full chapter. The wound was when Hitler shot himself at the end of WWII. The healing occurred when elite university students made Antisemitism fashionable again. It also involves the rise of extreme facist ideology in Europe leading to a man who will be the Antichrist.
It may be ‘heresy’ but there appear to be very few philosophers whose views were not shaped by their initial predispositions. Which means that it is easy to pick a philosopher to agree with, or disagree with, without much further thought.
There are a few that started out working from ‘first principles’ but these often wander off into absurdity.
I’m open to correction but I see little evidence that BAP is influenced by Evola.
I think it’s just the “vitalism”, “action is masculine” and “Christianity is slave morality” parts.
Interesting summary of Evola’s meanderings. Shows how he found round the world those things which responded to and reinforced initial misgivings and presuppositions, rather than bothering to ask why he harboured either. That self centred complacency explains why he’s not a good guide to any of the cultural traditions he purports to value. And it also helps explain why his appeal has been limited to those with similar afflictions.
This article & many of the comments is a splendid example why the Left-Right paradigm confuses rather than enlightens unless discussion is about France in the 1790s.
I am sometimes also guilty of this lazy categorisation, but it really doesn’t provide a useful political taxonomy of anything, not when the National Socialist German Workers Party gets put on the same ‘wing’ as Javier Milei’s Libertarian party or Maggie Thatcher’s Tories, and the Khmer Rouge gets put on the same ‘wing’ as Obama’s Democrats or Mette Frederiksen’s Social Democrats.
Perhaps this interest is linked to North American white nationalism but personally I regard myself as being on the Hard Right, support Trump/Farage, return to Rand occasionally while backing economic nationalism, and vehemently oppose neoliberalism and neoconservatism alike. Which is to say that I don’t have any interest in racial nativism.
That said I am no longer 25 years old and grew up thinking the Le Pen family were as neo-Fascist as Haider’s Freedom Party. The same goes for the latest arrivistes in Germany, the AfL. We are anti-globalisation 20-25 years ago, now a lot of us are anti-globalist and if anything it’s the liberal Left we oppose not the children of the post-colonial generations.
Having a familiarity with Sloterdijk, Stiegler and Zizek as well as the older French post-structuralists, I have no interest in Italian futurist fashies — we have enough problem as it is with transhumanism…
So, anyone who opposes your train of thought is a fascist.
Yep! That’s about right for a university lecturer.
What is wrong with Live and Let Live? The problem is with those who insist on forcing others to conform to a particular agenda.
Thankyou for a most interesting article. I’m not familiar with Evola or his work. The connectiions between supposedly passive eastern philosophy and western far right ideology was revealing.
“The Far Right…”:
This phrase has become like the old Etch-a-Sketch toy upon which one could create an image, shake it away, and then create some other image. Here we have the modern “far right” depicted as acolytes of Evola, an esoteric intellectual who espoused a complex philosophy synthesized from many influences. How many of the skin heads and QAnon types that are another far right stereotype have even heard of him? So which is it? Is the “far right” comprised of under-educated knuckle-dragging deplorables or ponderers of arcane metaphysics? It seems that the far right is merely anyone not subscribing to the entirety of left orthodoxy in every minute detail. One needn’t be “far” at all anymore, nor even “right”, to be labeled “far right.”
Our current state of divisive, political rancor stems in large part from our inability to agree on reality.
For example, there isn’t anything morally wrong with being white, male, or heterosexual. Nor is there anything about being black, female, or gay that makes one morally superior.
I suspect many of the left would strongly disagree, and can recite a litany of superficially understood history to tell the rest of us why men, for example, are awful.
This is also why we have so many “disaffected young men.” The left tries awfully hard to punish them.
For the most part, this article is a rewrite of similar pieces that appeared in the New York Times, The Atlantic, and Vanity Fair back in 2017. All of them use vague innuendo to create supposedly diabolical links between Julius Evola and today’s nationalist conservatism–and all use Steve Bannon as the paradigm case. Harding adds a few tidbits of mildly interesting historical background, which do little to explain the alleged influence of Evola on the contemporary Right. Indeed, the bulk of the article is intellectual fog. When Harding does speak plainly, like so many on the American Left, he seems oblivious to the import of his own words. He accuses the Right of seeing “politics not as technocratic tinkering but as a grand salvation project.” But it has been the “technocrats” of the Left, on both sides of the Atlantic, that long ago got bored with “tinkering” and embraced giant salvific causes, most significantly the attempts to arrest global warming, and to change the demographic makeup of their nations. The technocracy pursued those goals without a mandate from the people–in other words, it is they, not the political Right, who behave as a self-conscious “elect” of Ubermenschen. The people were patient, but have finally had enough of it. Will this weekend’s European Parliamentary elections actually produce a meaningful change of direction? Will a second Trump term in the U.S.? Those of us who believe in consensual government hope so, but it’s at least equally likely that the technocracy will remain impervious to popular control.
Who’d ever conflate suppleness with “stoic calm”? I conflate it, nay live it, with elation and erotic possibility. Seems to me you’d have to be an irregular clinchpoop to do anything else!
The manifesto is entitled “Bronze Age Mindset.”
It’s a shame it’s so poorly written, because the argument against “equality” is important and must be made.
It is equality-obsession that is weakening the West and dragging it into decadence for several centuries now. Those that blame “Christianity” have perhaps missed the point. Equality-obsession enables Christianity, not the other way around. The two are symbiotic, but the obsession came first; the whacky dogma afterward.
Rule by a chosen enlightened elite (themselves) is pretty much what Aristotle, Gnostics, Calvinists, Hobbs, Burke, J.S. Mills, Marxists, Nietzsche, Fascists, Socialists, Woke, etc. have been saying as well. Nothing new to see here.
The current media mantra is ‘Far Right’ or ‘Hard Right’. The BBC employs this term every day in its news bulletins and current affairs articles in an effort to make us believe that fascist belief system is a far greater menace and more sinister threat than Islamism, Russian aggression, woke progressivism, communism. etc. Movies, fiction and documentaries, build plots around the concept.
Why do we never read articles or hear endless references in the news media about the ‘Far Left’ or ‘Hard Left’? I suggest it is because the progressiveist tradition which has been in place since the Russion Revolution in 1917 has always applied the formula: Left = Good; Right = Bad – e.g. Stalin is good; Hitler is bad, etc. The 21st Century Woking Class has presented the Right = Bad worldview as a fundamental truth.
How about Unherd facilitating some balance in this area?
It’s good that the author differentiates between fascism and Nazism; in so many articles they’re used interchangeably, invariably so by left wing authors. It’s as thought they want to disassociate socialism from National Socialists…
The German National Socialists themselves never referred to themselves as Nazis though. They used their actual name, or NSDAP (National Socialist German Workers Party).