How do I prep myself to read Evola?

first: kill yourself and hope your shitskin gets reborn as white

>Not a mensa member
Maybe in the next life nigger. This thread is 131 IQ and up gtfo

Yes. Then Men Among the Ruins, then Ride the Tiger. They're sort of a trilogy, but not really.

yes, though you'd probably get more out of following this list I don't think it's neccessary at all for the three main works. Not much point in reading the esoteric work unless you intend to go the whole way with traditionalism and philosophy.

>The Camp of the Saints
>Translated by Norman Shapiro
You won't get me this time, kikel!

>can't remember what was written first
>try check the publishing dates of his works on google
>holy fuck the absolute state of his wikipedia article

Seriously go look. There's two editors reverting anything that says he didn't 'advocate rape' (source: a political blog on qz about how steve bannon is evil and evola is evil) wasn't 'a facist' and wasn't 'an ultranationalist.' They both have leftist badge like 'nationalism is outdated' and 'proud liberal' on their talk pages.

This is the first fucking thing people will read when they get curious about his work. That he 'advocated rape' and was an 'ultranationalist.'

Then you think about how that effect multiples for literally any right-wing thinker that's mentioned in the media. Any time anyone gets a name check in association with someone alt-right, they get slandered so badly on wikipedia it's an automatic bluepill for anyone with a cursory interest.

Fucking depressing.

Attached: 1 (2).jpg (1038x584, 249K)

Read Spengler instead.

EVERYONE READ THIS

THE DECLINE OF THE WEST ON AMAZON IS AN EDITED VERSION

YOU NEED THE OLDER, UNABRIDGED VERSION YOU CAN FIND ON GUTENBERG

THE AMAZON VERSION DELIBERATELY GUTS CENTRAL ASPECTS OF HIS WORK

DO NOT REPEAT NOT BUY PIC RELATED IT'S BEEN DELIBERATELY FUCKED WITH

Attached: images.jpg (393x584, 33K)

>Evola is popular in fringe circles, largely because of his extreme metaphysical ideas (including belief in ghosts and telepathy) and his extreme traditionalism, nationalism, and misogyny. Many of Evola's theories and writings were centered on his idiosyncratic mysticism, occultism, and esoteric religious studies,[3][4][5] and this aspect of his work has influenced occultists and esotericists. Evola also advocated rape (among other forms of male domination of women) because he saw it "as a natural expression of male desire". This misogynistic outlook stemmed from his extreme right views on gender roles, which demanded absolute submission from women.[3][4][5][6]
lmao

Better res pic pls

It still has some good parts. The actual book is too long man. I can barely even read this edited version without falling asleep.

>By Spengler
just watch this video

youtube.com/watch?v=FsaieZt5vjk

git gud faggot

No, seriously. If something is abridged, it's been fucked with and you don't know how. If it's a book that is avowedly right-wing and famed for a criticism of modern civilisation, guess (((who))) is going to want to fuck with it and undermine it's power?

Reading can be as much an exercise in discipline as lifting or eating well. Try and over time you'll find it becomes easier. Don't fall for the 'waaah it's too hard' degeneracy - it's conditioning by (((them))) to stop you engaging with provocative material. (((They))) want you reading fucking Stephen King and bragging on facebook about you're 'so into books,' not thinking about political philosophy.

Text version:
pastebin.com/zHQ3wStq

Attached: TheCultureofCritique.jpg (317x475, 24K)

Even this one? amazon.com/decline-West-Oswald-Spengler-ebook/dp/B008I6GW28/ref=mt_kindle?_encoding=UTF8&me=

I just bought this shit an hour ago

He doesn't have to read selectively, to the contrary he has to be read in full, the sperg/tism fanbase comes from people who read one, two books, don't get the point and then proceed to blabber bullshit. I've traced every kind of evolafag tendency to a criticism of said tendency by Evola, they're exactly the audience he criticized extensively - intellectuals/philosophers/no-fun tists and autists - combine that with what Hitler said on how people don't know how to read properly and you get the source of all the tist fanbase. Even here on our forum some people miss the mark completely, for one how they criticize his work Metaphysics of Sex as being "autistic" because they take it as some instruction as to the mundane, day to day relationship between the sexes, when its true point is the metaphysical relationship of the sexes that exists outside our daily interactions.

He made an explicit point of how the subject matter of his books are not for all because the subject material is not for all and that is not something he came up with. Evola was foremost a researcher, something most people don't get, things he wrote about are not his invention or intellectual wank, it's research of ancient knowledge and translation of it into more comprehensible terms.

Another issue comes from the translations, english is primitive as fuck compared to most other languages and Evola could've been writing in a particular literary or stylistic style that is most likely a better read in Italian than when translated. There's always the obvious danger of just bad translation that could alter the original meaning (exactly why its important to read several works to clarify any possible confusion produced by a bad translation).

(cont)

In terms of the order in which to read his books: most people just read his big trio - Revolt Against the Modern World, Men Among the Ruins and Ride the Tiger. I am only now learning that reading those first would be a mistake as you won't get their full benefit without reading his works that deal with spiritual, esoteric and transcendental matters, which are far more logical and science-like than what one would imagine from hearing those terms today.

As such I'd recommend starting with his spiritual works first. One of the most comprehensive ones is the Hermetic Tradition, however it is a very difficult read and takes actual effort to make sense of, but once you do, you will have a good point of reference for a lot of other things he wrote. I'd suggest reading his other spiritual works thereafter but you could, technically, proceed to the big trio right after the Hermetic Tradition. Otherwise I'd suggest first reading:

Mysteries of the Grail (could be a good start as a way of easing into the subject matter of the Hermetic Tradition, so you could read that first and then proceed to HT)
Introduction to Magic (a collection of articles, not just Evola's but it was his group that wrote them, this is to a large extent optional reading)
Meditations on the Peaks (somewhat optional, it gets you a good aesthetic vibe that surrounds the core, the essense of what Evola wrote about)
Doctrine of Awakening (reading this myself right now, it can be optional as well but this is one of the books you'd have to read after the Hermetic Tradition if you want to compare notes on the subject matter, one of its paths)
Yoga of Power (same as with the Doctrine of Awakening but it deals with the other path, or so I understood, I am still to read this one)
After this you can read some intermediate materials that already deal with more down to earth subjects but from the platform of information covered in the spiritual works, so those would be:

(cont)

Nope, that's exactly what you need. Enjoy.

is there an easy way to tell if you're getting the unabridged version? because some of the versions i've looked at don't mention anything.

how many pages is the unabridged version? (i know that not all formatting is the same, so page length may vary, just trying to find some method of telling)

Agreed. Read more, user, 300ish pages is pretty average length for anything worth reading.

i admit, i could be wrong, but it looks like you only got volume 1.

I personally wouldn't/didn't do this. Start with Metaphysics of war and his political essays (Fascism viewed from the right, a traditionalist confronts fascism, notes on the third reich) then men among the ruins, revolt against the modern world, ride the tiger. Then the more metaphysical works.

I say this as an avowed rationalist who would have found it difficult to engage with his spiritual material at first. Best to go political -> metaphysical in my opinion.

>The Camp of Saint's first
I haven't heard of it and didn't even realize it was a best seller. Why do you recommend this book? Is it well written and smeared by leftists or just a edgy book with little substance?

Truvada, ask your doctor.

if you are ebookextremist then you are an absolute hero

Attached: IMG_20180409_093656.jpg (500x294, 25K)

Dunno about pages, but this is the one you need.

You have to be extremely fucking careful with anything that's sold on amazon if it's right-wing. Most of evola's stuff has thankfully been published by an alt publishing house under the guise of 'spiritualism' as he's obscure enough to slip under the radar, but spengler is so iconic/famous they're going to undermine him if they can.

This is a decent summary, btw - aristocratsofthesoul.com/julius-evola-books-a-guide-to-radical-traditionalism/

Attached: Flammerion Engraving.jpg (1024x798, 490K)

It's sort of a tough read, Raspail loves long sentences and sweeping metaphors. However, it is incredibly well written, and you'll recognize nearly all of the cast of characters in our modern world; the lefty reporter who never misses a chance to race-bait, the weak Pope who cares nothing for historic Catholicism, and so on.

Considering that the book was published in 1973, it must detail the modern world with remarkable accuracy.
It seems like the author is still alive to see this unfold before his own eyes as well. I wonder how he must feel.

Too bad the hardcover is expensive as I prefer them for durability and aesthetic reasons, but I'll likely pick up a soft cover and read it when I'm done with my current book.

Reading "Revolt Against the Modern World" currently. While interesting, it's difficult to work into any realistic political framework. Additionally, his subject matter is often so obscure it's frequently difficult to know if he is fudging the facts or not.

It's a little premature for me to render judgement on him, but I'm somewhat unimpressed.

He's of his time and he has some ridiculous ideas (north pole etc) but I'd say he is the single best person I've ever read for getting into the mindset of ancient societies, particularly roman, I've ever seen. He can think like a roman. (I studied classics)

He's also like nietzsche - there's a lot of shit in there, but the underlying ideas are genius. His idea of 'mechanistic thinking' driving every society since the french revolution is genius.

It's not that hard to understand but many people seem to fail to understand him anyway. A good litmus test is that if you come out of Revolt or Heathen Imperialism with a positive perception of Christianity as it relates to tradition, you've fucked up somewhere.