Quantus tremor est futurus - Actaeon Journal

I rarely discuss race here, my thinking on it is based in the friend-enemy distinction. But it seems an important discussion at the moment and I have received a number of questions about this comment from Jünger. It is quite difficult to explain, and perhaps can only be grasped if one has read Bloy's Salvation Through the Jews. There is also a note that Schmitt sent to Jünger related to this where he quotes Bruno Bauer. "But after all, God also created the Jews, [and if they disappear], we will take their place." One would not expect to hear this from the grandfather of anti-semitism.

"The German learns, as the Jews before them, what it means to be despised." Jünger's remark that liberalism is civilisation's jew has two sides.

For reference, the title is from a Bible passage, "salus ex judaeis est." One of the reasons this is an essential book is because of its Christian anti-semitism, which is in some ways more severe than anything found today but also from a lost idea of race which makes this type of anti-semitism difficult to grasp.

Based on the title alone would you consider reading this book?

Of the French Revolution Nietzsche says that Napoleon is its justification. Of Homer, that he is the fatality of Hellenism, he is the great destroyer, but also the father of Pan-Hellinism. One has to wonder why such a rule does not apply to Christ.

"But, good God! what frightful ancestors!" ~ Léon Bloy

Democratic man mourns in the only possible way left to him.

Not finished yet but I would highly suggest reading Weber's lecture along with Schmitt's Concept of the Political and Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy. Schmitt of course references Weber in a lot of his essays and he is another of the abused authors because of the sociology departments.

Weber's three grounds for legitimate rule are helpful for understanding the question of legality and anarchy. "First, the authority of "the eternal past," of custom, sanctified by a validity that extends back into the mists of time and is perpetuated by habit. "Traditional" rule." "Second, there is the authority of the extraordinary, personal gift of grace or charisma, that is, the wholly personal devotion to, and a personal trust in, the revelations, heroism, or other leadership qualities of an individual. This is "charismatic" rule." "Lastly, there is rule by virtue of "legality," by virtue of the belief in the validity of legal statutes and practical "competence" based on rational rules. The rule of statutory duties."

Very important. I need the ancient method of looking at an eclipse in a pool of water. I can't bring myself to use the reddit cereal box method. Currently trying a cast iron frying pan with water in it.

"The modern state is the form of human community that (successfully) lays claim to the monopoly of legitimate physical violence within a particular territory—and this idea of "territory" is an essential defining feature." ~ Weber The emphasis on the legitimate here is often missed. While the modern citizen is forced to renounce his own use of violence, and thereby his aspirations to power and protection, his power increases in another form. This is in part a type of security, but there is also a planetary power and the formation of a new race that compels. The danger is in the automatic condition of this power's movement, national power increases, but often at the expense of the territorial form. This is where the citizen begins to take on greater deficiencies. At the same time, the state renounces its monopoly on violence following the world wars, which can be seen clearly in the abolition and reform of emergency powers, any form of dictatorship is eliminated. This is at once a response to the automatic violence of the technological form and also a pacification of the state's use of violence. Anarcho-tyranny may only be understood in this light. As Weber says, without the use of violence the rule of state is revoked. The greater tendency is towards anarchy, the disorder of the private man. There is no longer an elite knowledge of rule, nor the possibility of its legal seizure, all conditions of the tyrant who could at least be respected.

One may think that Bloy and Nietzsche meet on the ground of God, "Dieu se retire" or "God is Dead." But it is really the Execration of the Race that begins all of our outrages.

What is the distinction between the anti-war song and the pro-war song? It may be obvious on the surface but not in the depths. https://youtu.be/2SzUJ2JjIk8?si=LxC8qzO1BiVy1c8p

The great migration does not confirm Third Worldism, it is rather a sign that the industrial revolution is beyond national power in these regions. What seems most significant is that the foreign mass rises with the end of industrial technology. The threat, for a time, was that artificial intelligence and automatic manufacturing would replace the worker, but his era has come to an end. Instead, a mass takes shape in the old image, and it is as if this mass had missed out on an entire age. "If I could imagine myself as God, I’d become him!" They repeat the religious wars but do not know their laws.

Does Nietzsche look to the tragic or the overture?

The Right has been just as successful in appropriating marxist-feminists as they have Nietzsche.

Nietzsche can only be compared to the revolutionaries, he is not one of them. This may be the reason for the appropriation of his work by revolutionary and reformists groups, both Left and Right. He speaks to the revolution of earth forces, atomic power. The appropriation unfolds as if by necessity, a part of the revolution of forces.These forces surpass the political and theological revolutions, and man finds himself without resistance, his power is one-sided. Perhaps only in Germany was this revolution known to such a degree, and even given a response, but it was not powerful. We see how nationalism began after a series of defeats, and erupted out of a silence rarely heard before the political revolutions. And bourgeois man found his place in Germany in much the same way, he is the figure of a revolution that lasts many centuries. The earth finds the German just as Europe found the New World.This is the source from which romanticism springs, and the private priesthood of which Nietzsche is a part yet bitterly resists. His condemnation of the Germans is surprising in this light, but perhaps a necessary sacrifice, a death-war already found in the image of Ajax.

"When Overbeck said: "Nietzsche is not to be taken seriously at all as a scholar, but very much as a thinker", he meant it critically. But it is the best that can be said of a mind that it nourishes itself not from the texts but from the source." ~ Jünger This seems to have been forgotten in discussions of Nietzsche. Not only do we have to consider the nourishing source in his time, but that of our own time as well. Every time he is named Nietzsche is threatened with condemnation to the text.

Biology as the suffering of fate, atomic power. The earth dies but its forces remain. One should not lose sight of the fact that Nietzsche struggled with these forces. Biology is one of them, a trait of the new man perfected as a science – but he may also succumb to its hidden power. For even the instincts are in revolt, and the will assigns its own fate, marks it within man's biology. The blood as an adventure of the atoms, the struggle of the will becomes eternal.