Introduction To Traditionalism
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.ย. 2024
- 🔹 All my other platforms and ways to support available here: bio.link/keith...
🔹 Become a monthly supporter and get access to exclusive interviews on SubscribeStar or Gumroad: www.subscribes...
gumroad.com/l/...
Ways to support:
✔ Buy Me A Coffee: www.buymeacoff...
✔ Patreon: / keithwoods
✔ Entropy: entropystream....
✔ Crypto Donations: cointr.ee/keit...
✔ Continuum Podcast: gumroad.com/l/...
✔ SubscribeStar: www.subscribes...
Where to find me:
♦ Telegram: t.me/keith_woods
♦ Twitter: / keithwoodsyt
♦ Odysee: odysee.com/@ke...
♦ Bitchute: www.bitchute.c...
♦ Continuum Podcast: gumroad.com/l/...
♦ DLive: dlive.tv/keith...
Donations: www.buymeacoffee.com/keithwoods
Sunset Bay she goes under the anon Oakwood Forest now. She goes down a lot of rabbit holes.
the sage John David Ebert has a great series on Guenon
th-cam.com/video/mv9WK89p_60/w-d-xo.html
worth watching
@embrace reality Yea I have to agree with you. It's a very strange idea that religions are interchangeable, or that you even can become a Muslim as a white guy. Even leftists won't go as far as that. Furthermore, Christianity and Hinduism are very different religions and very different cultures. Also the idea that you can go from Christianity to another religion is just heresy, and it would be absolutely unacceptable and punishable in these traditional societies they talk about.
@embrace reality Yep, it's peak modernity.
This guy would be relevant to many here:
th-cam.com/video/qK1w5qmkR9A/w-d-xo.html
Democracy. Everyone no matter how ignorant or depraved gets an equal say in Statecraft. Truly the ideal of a 'dark age'.
Id take Starcraft over Statecraft imo..
Evola described democracy as the 'eruption of the masses into the political sphere'. But he went further in describing the effeminate, 'water' like quality of the 'formless' masses; anticipating the future political degeneracy and feminisation of the west.
better to give absolute power to some dude who might or might be not ignorant and/or depraved
@@j.2512 Some dude? No. The best of his people.
obviously, this would not be effective. a state would not be able to function correctly with a real democracy. so like athens, oligarchies form to exert authority and to maintain the facade of democracy.
"Be radical, have principles, be absolute, be that which the bourgeoisie calls an extremist: give yourself without counting or calculating, don't accept what they call ‘the reality of life' and act in such a way that you won't be accepted by that kind of ‘life', never abandon the principle of struggle".
Sounds cool, but how do I keep a job that way? Or get a gf/wife? If my princicples involve something like “cars and plastic are shit and should be avoided” how can I live in this world? I don’t want to seem shitty, but these ideas have been causing me some distress as of late.
@@robhiggerson4203 embrace a balance of radical traditionalism and radical futurism
HanselManCan The problems with cars: the environmental issues (the manufacturing, rubber pollution and how they affect the built landscape, like citites and so on) also Ive been thinking recently about the individualism angle. Where people spend their lives in a bubble of some sort. I walk to work and , at least here in the UK, I notice how much litter is absolutely everywhere. People in cars wouldn’t notice that, as they’re just in a little bubble.
Lance Biggums Yeah I have been thinking of looking up stuff In that direction. Im just a bit black-pilled as I came across some Kaczynski stuff the other day haha.
@@robhiggerson4203 read Guillaume Faye's Archeo-Futurism. Read Bronze Age Mindset. Make friends with /ourguys/. Hail Victory.
I just started reading Revolt Against the Modern World yesterday. Well timed.
anon will do.
Check out Philosophicat's series on the book on her channel. It really enhanced my reading of the book, plus it's very well produced. I don't think I would have gotten as much out of the book on my own.
Marduk's Malice I’ve watched her videos. I’m definitely glad I did.
@Mark David Chapman Your cringe bro
One of the best books ive ever read. I am astounded at Evola's brilliance and just how in depth his knowledge is.
Yo what? I thought being traditional meant unironically being a 2020 magapede and pro gay rights or whatever
@mojo jojo Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not
@mojo jojo Hey whats that conspiracy theory concerning Dugin that I've been hearing recently? I've heard that thorown around a lot in a negative manner.
@Mark David Chapman they tie it back into the classic Protocols theory in a way. Something like "hes actually a cryptocommunist in the pocket of the jews". I couldn't say either way, I haven't read the 4th political theory. But is there any substance to their claim of Keith being a Duginist?
@PissedFechtmeister 3rd position OSTENSIBLY! Lol
@mojo jojo The catboy is more based than Nick, you should hear him talk.
One of my new favorites, outstanding job mate.
Guenon and Evola ultimately led me to traditional Catholicism. There can be no culture without tradition.
they led me to Traditional Anglicanism
I also think that Evola's critiques of Christianity are somewhat warranted, but I also do not think that he had a full understanding of Traditional Christianity, during his time Catholicism was heading towards Vatican II which i am sure disgusted him
Didn’t Evola have a whole chapter in Men Among Ruins, explaining how Catholicism isn’t the way. Lmao
Ironic, because they were both gnostic and Evola was anti-Christian, but I'm glad to heard that. I'm also trad.
Evola hated christianity
It's weird how many Varg fans enjoy Keiths work (including myself), knowing that Varg would absolutely *hate* him. (not a shot at Keith, obviously. I've literally never seen Varg say a nice thing about another living human being outside of his immediate family).
Varg hates his own brother, I remember years back his brother bought him a grill and Varg was not happy about it.
@@dancorwell4550 lol I remember that too. His brother brought a "fancy grill" upon visiting Varg (A $40 Weber) because he wasn't looking forward to Vargs disgusting "naturally cleaned" burner. Varg took offense.
@Chalk O'holic He has pretty sever psychological problems that cause him to feign a nuanced understanding of Paganism that, to a large extent, he simply made up. I can't disagree.
@@BigJay703 Yes and his hatred for Survive the jive because he went to uni, He has a better explanation of paganism.
Varg is a tard
Surf the Kali Yuga.
Mashalllah! Sheikh Woods has done it again.
Try and get Abdal Hakim Murad on the show to talk about Sufism
Hello epic department
shut yo ass up, bb
Seems like lots of people in the comments section are missing the entire point of the video. This whole "X religion/faith/philosophy" is the only way forward argument is futile. The point is that all these faiths bespeak a fundamental, universal truth which has been refracted through the dasein "lens" of various peoples throughout history. Embrace the truth through the lens of your people.
That's actually a good point for a critique of perennialism, I'll copy-paste what I wrote on twitter:
"Another criticism might be that even though all authentic world religions do reflect the same Absolute Truth, there still are contradictions/conflicts between those particular religions that cannot simply be waved away."
So, sure, there are "lenses", and a great deal of commonality that is reflected through them, but there are also differences between these particular spiritual traditions that come into conflict and aren't reducible to mere insignificance. On the contrary, they can be of eternal importance,
@@horouathos8199 contradictions are merely reducible to politics and group-think mentality which is what social structure itself is based upon. There is no underlying truth in that aspect of these religions.
Exactly, the basic idea is that there IS a Truth. And that all Traditions built up systems to explain this Truth. The individual explanation might be different, it might focus on different aspects of the Truth and some explanations are better than others; but still, all explanations point to the one Truth.
Just as different approaches to empirical sciences use different methods in order to make sense of the material world. The fact that those different sciences differ and even contradict each other at times does not negate the fact that there IS an objective material world.
Shaaadaappp yah Meatheadd
Ultranationalist neopaganism
Love it Keith. Oddly enough it was the philosopher Aldous Huxley who introduced me to the concept of perennialism in his works "The Perennial Philosophy" and "Island". I call myself a pagan because I enjoy studying the spiritual practices of my direct ancestors, but the core of my spiritual belief has always been a sort of pantheistic perennialism. You explained it very well. Thank you.
John Thoroughgood cmon man this is just not needed. We dont need infighting
@John Thoroughgood I've never been an atheist. If you believe in God but you're not an Abrahamist, you're a Pagan. Perennialist pantheism makes the most intuitive sense to me and speaks to my soul. The idea of a creator who is wholly apart from creation, wholly other and unto himself, is a Jewish idea, as is the idea of man being apart from nature rather than a part of it
@@lance-biggums well a creator makes more sense to me
yup.. huxley has lot to teach the reader about true mysticism and toxic nature of christianity.. he said that the island is one text of his that he wants to be remembered by..
Huxley is certainly a major contributor to post-xtian/anti-xtian thought and someone we'd be wise to appropriate.
I think it's interesting that you're still getting ads.
Of course, the ad _was_ from Ford, so that may have something to do with it. 😉
haha I get it
Is that a Mustang in his intro? I always thought it was a Camaro.
i got a biden ad lmao
I got the Israel Children's Cancer Support Center ... Algorithm with irony ...
If this video is a product of your recent abandonment of social media then by all means continue your abstinence of such Mr Woods. Insightful, pertinent and lucid. Cracking stuff.
"Even when I thought, with most other well-informed, though unscholarly, people, that Buddhism and Christianity were alike, there was one thing about them that always perplexed me; I mean the startling difference in their type of religious art. I do not mean in its technical style of representation, but in the things that it was manifestly meant to represent. No two ideals could be more opposite than a Christian saint in a Gothic cathedral and a Buddhist saint in a Chinese temple. The opposition exists at every point; but perhaps the shortest statement of it is that the Buddhist saint always has his eyes shut, while the Christian saint always has them very wide open. The Buddhist saint has a sleek and harmonious body, but his eyes are heavy and sealed with sleep. The mediaeval saint's body is wasted to its crazy bones, but his eyes are frightfully alive. There cannot be any real community of spirit between forces that produced symbols so different as that. Granted that both images are extravagances, are perversions of the pure creed, it must be a real divergence which could produce such opposite extravagances. The Buddhist is looking with a peculiar intentness inwards. The Christian is staring with a frantic intentness outwards. If we follow that clue steadily we shall find some interesting things.
A short time ago Mrs. Besant, in an interesting essay, announced that there was only one religion in the world, that all faiths were only versions or perversions of it, and that she was quite prepared to say what it was. According to Mrs. Besant this universal Church is simply the universal self. It is the doctrine that we are really all one person; that there are no real walls of individuality between man and man. If I may put it so, she does not tell us to love our neighbours; she tells us to be our neighbours. That is Mrs. Besant's thoughtful and suggestive description of the religion in which all men must find themselves in agreement. And I never heard of any suggestion in my life with which I more violently disagree. I want to love my neighbour not because he is I, but precisely because he is not I. I want to adore the world, not as one likes a looking-glass, because it is one's self, but as one loves a woman, because she is entirely different. If souls are separate love is possible. If souls are united love is obviously impossible. A man may be said loosely to love himself, but he can hardly fall in love with himself, or, if he does, it must be a monotonous courtship. If the world is full of real selves, they can be really unselfish selves. But upon Mrs. Besant's principle the whole cosmos is only one enormously selfish person.
It is just here that Buddhism is on the side of modern pantheism and immanence. And it is just here that Christianity is on the side of humanity and liberty and love. Love desires personality; therefore love desires division. It is the instinct of Christianity to be glad that God has broken the universe into little pieces, because they are living pieces. It is her instinct to say "little children love one another" rather than to tell one large person to love himself. This is the intellectual abyss between Buddhism and Christianity; that for the Buddhist or Theosophist personality is the fall of man, for the Christian it is the purpose of God, the whole point of his cosmic idea. The world-soul of the Theosophists asks man to love it only in order that man may throw himself into it. But the divine centre of Christianity actually threw man out of it in order that he might love it. The oriental deity is like a giant who should have lost his leg or hand and be always seeking to find it; but the Christian power is like some giant who in a strange generosity should cut off his right hand, so that it might of its own accord shake hands with him. We come back to the same tireless note touching the nature of Christianity; all modern philosophies are chains which connect and fetter; Christianity is a sword which separates and sets free. No other philosophy makes God actually rejoice in the separation of the universe into living souls. But according to orthodox Christianity this separation between God and man is sacred, because this is eternal. That a man may love God it is necessary that there should be not only a God to be loved, but a man to love him. All those vague theosophical minds for whom the universe is an immense melting-pot are exactly the minds which shrink instinctively from that earthquake saying of our Gospels, which declare that the Son of God came not with peace but with a sundering sword. The saying rings entirely true even considered as what it obviously is; the statement that any man who preaches real love is bound to beget hate. It is as true of democratic fraternity as a divine love; sham love ends in compromise and common philosophy; but real love has always ended in bloodshed. Yet there is another and yet more awful truth behind the obvious meaning of this utterance of our Lord. According to Himself the Son was a sword separating brother and brother that they should for an aeon hate each other. But the Father also was a sword, which in the black beginning separated brother and brother, so that they should love each other at last.
This is the meaning of that almost insane happiness in the eyes of the mediaeval saint in the picture. This is the meaning of the sealed eyes of the superb Buddhist image. The Christian saint is happy because he has verily been cut off from the world; he is separate from things and is staring at them in astonishment. But why should the Buddhist saint be astonished at things? --since there is really only one thing, and that being impersonal can hardly be astonished at itself. There have been many pantheist poems suggesting wonder, but no really successful ones. The pantheist cannot wonder, for he cannot praise God or praise anything as really distinct from himself. Our immediate business here, however, is with the effect of this Christian admiration (which strikes outwards, towards a deity distinct from the worshipper) upon the general need for ethical activity and social reform. And surely its effect is sufficiently obvious. There is no real possibility of getting out of pantheism, any special impulse to moral action. For pantheism implies in its nature that one thing is as good as another; whereas action implies in its nature that one thing is greatly preferable to another. Swinburne in the high summer of his scepticism tried in vain to wrestle with this difficulty. In "Songs before Sunrise," written under the inspiration of Garibaldi and the revolt of Italy he proclaimed the newer religion and the purer God which should wither up all the priests of the world:
"What doest thou now Looking Godward to cry
I am I, thou art thou,
I am low, thou art high,
I am thou that thou seekest to find him, find thou but thyself,
thou art I."
Of which the immediate and evident deduction is that tyrants are as much the sons of God as Garibaldis; and that King Bomba of Naples having, with the utmost success, "found himself" is identical with the ultimate good in all things. *The truth is that the western energy that dethrones tyrants has been directly due to the western theology that says "I am I, thou art thou." The same spiritual separation which looked up and saw a good king in the universe looked up and saw a bad king in Naples. The worshippers of Bomba's god dethroned Bomba. The worshippers of Swinburne's god have covered Asia for centuries and have never dethroned a tyrant.* The Indian saint may reasonably shut his eyes because he is looking at that which is I and Thou and We and They and It. It is a rational occupation: but it is not true in theory and not true in fact that it helps the Indian to keep an eye on Lord Curzon. That external vigilance which has always been the mark of Christianity (the command that we should WATCH and pray) has expressed itself both in typical western orthodoxy and in typical western politics: but both depend on the idea of a divinity transcendent, different from ourselves, a deity that disappears. Certainly the most sagacious creeds may suggest that we should pursue God into deeper and deeper rings of the labyrinth of our own ego. But only we of Christendom have said that we should hunt God like an eagle upon the mountains: and we have killed all monsters in the chase.
Here again, therefore, we find that in so far as we value democracy and the self-renewing energies of the west, we are much more likely to find them in the old theology than the new. If we want reform, we must adhere to orthodoxy: especially in this matter (so much disputed in the counsels of Mr. R.J.Campbell), the matter of insisting on the immanent or the transcendent deity. *By insisting specially on the immanence of God we get introspection, self-isolation, quietism, social indifference--Tibet. By insisting specially on the transcendence of God we get wonder, curiosity, moral and political adventure, righteous indignation--Christendom. Insisting that God is inside man, man is always inside himself. By insisting that God transcends man, man has transcended himself."*
G.K. Chesterton
Chesterton got it.
Thank you : )
Could you direct me to the work where he discussed this.
Aw man. That intro. A blast to the past
Campaign to start a school and give Keith Woods a class or several to teach
You can't really understand third position ideas until you understand the philosophy of tradition, this is another fantastic essay Keith.
You can, but it would the opposite of the traditional worldview. The traditional ideal is decidedly anti-materialist, anti-scientism, and averse to any society that is purely "economic" in nature, as were both regimes during the second world war.
Evola levels a number of good criticisms against Mussolini and German NS that generally revolve around both systems' Marxist priors that undergird their worldviews alongside their penchant for materialistic thought, and sometimes even outright persecution and rejection of anything contra-material in some cases. Many don't know that in Italiy, the blackshirts tried to capture Evola, at which point he was forced to jump out of a window to escape. In Germany, he was forbidden from entering any positions within the party by degree of Himmler, who saw him as a subversive "reactionary roman."
In Men Among the Ruins Evola notes that Giovanni Gentile, the founder of fascism, saw the good of the worker as the highest ideal, and that the purpose of fascism was to facilitate that. He would later criticize a certain Austrian painter for conflating civilization success with material production and accomplishment, rather than any higher spiritual consideration.
Third position and traditionalism don't really mesh well, unless you consider traditionalism the only third position.
Yes I agree, however until one studies traditionalism one will always view political debate in material terms. This is the dialectic of capitalism vs communism, tax cuts vs tax hikes, once one reads Evola or Guernon one realises that there is a third way or position.
Fascism is not the same as traditionalism that is correct but it is the only political ideology which seeks to separate itself from the current paradigm and crucially, explore the organisation of society in terms of transcendence rather than through material, economic terms.
Everything you say about Evola rejecting fascism is correct but I think one can understand why his world view appealed to third position movements in Europe and remains a great inspiration to both people on the dissident right today and members of the Russian intelligentsia.
The traditional school is something I'm very familiar with as I've read nearly all of the main authors (Corbin should be included in the Traditional school too). It needs to have a 2nd wave of development focusing more on Indo-European traditions
Corbin is a great thinker & mystic.. achived synthesis of guenon and heidegger long before dugin.. his wiki page used to list guenon as his major influence but smhow that keeps disappearing..
@@mostlydead3261 Dugin took directly from Corbin if I'm not mistaken. I just searched his Wiki page, it's strange they've decided to remove Guenon.
Agreed. It has been taken too far in the direction of Islam, which would be fine in another context, but in these times of mass Muslim migration into European nations has become sinister.
Guenon's page also listed Corbin amongst the authors he influenced. He's been scrubbed off, however now you'll find Bannon right at the top of that list lol.
My guess is that Corbin is still viewed as respectable in academia so that his reputation is protected by trying to hide his ties with the 'discredited' traditionalist thought. How you can read him without seeing the strong influence of Guenon is beyond me tho.
Incredible. I kept avoiding this one because of the title and my conditioned conception of Traditionalism - having now watched it I'm inspired and a general feeling of hope has been renewed :) thank you
Thank you for this video, I love the Traditionalist School and am glad it is gaining more traction!
The further foward we go in technology , the further back we go socially
Great work here. I arrived at the spiritual perspective of perennialism after going through trying times and seeking the truth from various sources. These transcendent and universal Values and Ideals must be and are our foundation for everything in life and will be our salvation. Keep the faith brothers and sisters
Hail Europa and her children!
I guess what we need now is a spiritual Renéssance.
I'll be here all week.
Roger Theil Jesus Christ is the way the truth and the life
“It is far better to reverently preserve the old, than to build afresh” - Theoderick the great
Identity is the cause of most of humanity’s strife. “I’m white”, “I’m muslim”, “I’m a democrat”. Seeking wisdom and dis objectification with the lower self is the true path to the absolute.
Ride the tiger and Surf The wave!
@embrace reality
Simplistic and materialistic understanding. The fact that Europeans produced the greatest achievements has no bearing on the truth value of Christianity
I have read most of Evola's works, but by far his best ideas are expressed in 'Men Among the Ruins'. This is the fully expanded opus which first crystalised in 'Orientimenti' and gives a more mature, post-war look, or atleast a final statement, on the establishment of a sacred fascist state and a comprehensive warning of all the dangers present in the Kali Yuga. It is generally considered a prelude to 'Ride the Tiger'.
A bit too heavy, first thing in the morning. This is night reading.
@@bilbobaggins4710 simple mike
I don't know what you're talking about. The morning and afternoon are the best times to read "heavy" literature since exhaustion hasn't impacted your mental acuity.
It's telling that when your mental abilities are diminished you have an easier time reading complex works. Maybe you can't understand it in the first place?
Traditionalism is the future.
So glad Neither Keith or Joel’s channels have been taken down
Great video, Keith!
Keith you are a great orator. You have to write a novel now just so I can listen to the audiobook version. Ave vittoria
Great summary Keith. A great video to show someone who is new to this way of thinking.
Traditionalism is choosing Morrowind over Oblivion or Skyrim.
Retvrn to Vvardenfell
You mean Daggerfall.
Geralt of Rivia has entered the chat.
@@TheDasErdinger That's primitivism, bruh.
The TV show Lost really seems to be about Perennialism versus rejection of Dharma. The villain wants to "free" himself (his own words) from Dharma by destroying all the previous ways of being and then leaving (transcending) his own natural existence for the sake of freedom. There is even an organization in the show called the Dharma Initiative.
"Maybe they wanted you to push a button every 108 minutes just to see if you would." - Jack
@@riflemanslament9594 Well considering what happened when they didn't press the button, I think it's safe to say Jack was wrong
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6
Excellent video! This will be one I use to introduce people to these ideas.
Any recommendations for education on the JQ? Thanks.
@@stonewall3745 not a clue m8
@@stonewall3745 the Gospels, especially John
@@stonewall3745
Andrew Joyce on bitchute is really good.
dammbleth2 thanks I’ll check him out!
Keith Woods & the Vaporwave Right presents 'Introduction To Traditionalism'. Brilliant
Wow! This was excellent. Started getting goosebumps at about here 9:00.
I still think Christianity, especially the doctrines of the incarnation and the Trinity make the most sense
Very deep, I think I get it though I was a polytechnic dropout in the 80s. Keith mate, we need more of ya intellectual insight into the evil mindset of the globalists and what they're doing to European civilisation. And hopefully in a easy to digest video. We appreciate your activism over here in Britain.
Ride the tiger
It is exhausting.
5:00 Nostalgia for the sacred > Nostalgia for the past
💀
In all honesty, this is one of your best videos.
Strangely, it was Guenon himself who undermined the foundations of Traditionalism. At one time he believed that Buddhism was not a valid religion, but a distortion, however after listening to others he changed his mind. According to Guenon it was possible that a major world religion could be false, so if he was wrong about Buddhism why could he not be wrong about other religions? Traditionalism says every 'valid' religion has the same ultimate truth at its core, but what are the 'valid' religions?
Renaissance Perennialism was more coherent. While it recognized the truth found within other religions, it placed Christianity at the top. It engaged in syncretism by bringing other forms of wisdom within Christianity. Traditionalism rejects syncretism, an absurdity, both because the religions have already been formed from many different elements, and if seeking wisdom elsewhere if unnecessary, if our own 'valid' tradition is sufficient, what is the point of Traditionalism?
best comment
Based af
This is amazing Keith. Please make more videos on this topic 👏👍
Talk about Distributism please
What is that?
It's part one of my 4-part series, What Should A Healthy Spiritual Economics Look Like...
@PissedFechtmeister
It doesn't work and it's based on Catholicism.
@@grimm5155 it's never been tried fully and parts of it have worked, just look at Medieval guilds, worker coops today and even the gold standard would be considered Distributism because it's a fair and just system
@PissedFechtmeister I agree! A whole dedicated video on it by keith would be great
Excellent video Keith.
Excellent video!
I wish for everyone to experience the mystical/Devine for themselves. We are already enlightened just need to remove the illusions that make us believe we are not. 🙏🕉️🙏
This is very well done, thank you for this.
Yockey comes to mind. Excellent explanation, thanks Keith.
I do see the hole in the heart of the West. However, to me the idea that simply go shopping for a world religion is strange. They seem the have a very post-modern view of religions. Islam and Buddhism are very different doctrines for example. And Christianity and Islam are not at all ethno-centric but universalist.
I don't quite agree about Christianity. Although it is/contains a lot of Roman culture, Bible translations have always been localized. Many separatist denominations and groups still exist today. Other religions are pretty much minarchy or ancap cultures.
Mannerheim used religious emotions here by saying, "I call you to the holy war against the enemy of our nation." That is pretty extreme level of ethnocentrism.
heninen.net/miekka/p1_e.htm
I have a question. I'm a New Ager and I don't understand why Traditionalists don't like New Age. They seem to scoff at it, yet I watch many New Age TH-cam channel's and the only major difference that I can see is that New Agers tend to be more egalitarian and Traditionalists tend to be very Hierarchical. This is not a minor difference, but it seems to be the only one that I can gather from everything I've seen. I'm reading Revolt Against the Modern World right now and I'm really enjoying it. Overall, The Traditionalist School seems like a Right Wing version of New Age, which I don't consider to be a bad thing. Another thing is that Traditionalists don't like how New Agers try and boil down every Tradition into one single faith, the Traditionalist says that you must choose one traditional religion, ie Christianity, Islam, Judaism, The Chinese Tradition, Buddhism, and Hinduism. But the problem with this is that if Traditionalists think that all religions come from the same true source, then doesn't the New Ager mentality of boiling all traditions down into one new one make sense? These are my questions. Thank you Keith, or whoever answers this.
I'm not really a Traditionalist (I'm a practitioner of Sanātana Dharma, although my views are very similar to Traditionalists) but I think the problem with the New Ageism is that it essentially has Luciferian roots. Read up on Alice Bailey. All the doctrine amounts to glorifying the self, which is the opposite in traditional religions. That's an important difference, because according to the metaphysics and ethics of the traditional religions, this would make New Ageism fundamentally evil. Hierarchy is also a big and important difference because Traditionalists feel that New Ageism is a part of modernity because of this. The sacrosanct doctrine or founding lie of modernity is equality.
@@suppiluiiuma5769new ageism also has a lot of ideas that are just false, by reading theosophical society's roots one should get a pretty decent idea what it really is.
You forgot another major difference new agers believe that we are going to be in a golden age soon through human evolution, when traditonalists deny evolution. Also new age theories on afterlife, reincarnation, karma, spiritual world etc. all differ heavily from any tradition, it would take me too long to explain this but if you are reading Evola's and guenon's books the differences should be very clear, If you don't see the problem with new age after reading these 2 gentlemen's work I don't know what to say to you.
@@mikkek7555 I really don't want to argue with you. But I really didn't like Evola that much. I thought his ideas on life seemed incredibly negative. I didn't get a good vibe from any of it. I've been able to disprove most of what he and Guenon say anyway. Especially Evola. I posted my first comment three years ago. So I've learned a lot since then. I think Evola got some things right. Some of his insights are interesting, but mostly he doesn't cite his sources or he is just dishonest with how he represents his sources. Guenon does this too, but I think Guenon is not as bad about it as Evola. Also I just think that Trads and Reactionaries represent the end of Civilization just as much as Communists do. I know you probably want to argue, but I would rather just move on with my day. I'm only replying to be polite. As far as New Agers go. I don't agree with them on everything. But I still don't see anything really wrong with them. They give off more positive vibes than Evola does. And their worldview seems less negative. And if they don't follow so called "Tradition" then so what. All religions had to start somewhere. Christianity was new at one point. In a thousand years, if New Ageism is still around, there are definitely going to Trad Reactionary New Agers by then. Hope you enjoyed reading my response. Not trying to lecture, just sick of reactionary thought dominating the anti-communist conversation.
@@mikkek7555 True.
CS Lewis deals with this subject well in Abolition of Man. Particularly juxtaposed with postmodernism.
Well done. Philo Sophia.
So good I watched it twice
Kali Yuga is similar in pronunciation to Serbian word for cesspool, pile of dung, mainly in relation with pigs and mud.
Its all well and good talking about how certain ideologies such as the enlightenment, rationalism marxism etc. are responsible for the horrow show that we call modernity, but the real evils of progressivism, science and technology are still undermined even in brilliant videos like these.
Based and Tedpilled
@@MadRobexe lol didnt know what that was at first, looked it up and now i feel kind of embarassed about my comment. The guy was definetely a whack job.
I don't believe in Perennialism. You can't lump together all the world's religions without resorting to gross oversimplification of each religion. All religions may have vague similarities at a glance just like Liberalism, Marxism, and Fascism do. But when you start digging beneath surface-level you see how very different they are. They're not only different - they're contradictory.
Yet every single religions core teaching is fundamentally simple, that their is a trasncendent force that precedes reality. Tell me how that is contradicting?
@@TPJ96 "A transcendent force that precedes reality" isn't contradicting, because it's obnoxiously vague. It's like saying every human race is essentially the same, because of some low common denominator like having red blood.
@@TPJ96 That's like saying Feudalism, Marxism, Capitalism, and Third Positionism are all the same because they all rely on economic and political theory.
Like Ardepark said, it's way too vague. If you told someone you were an Islamic Buddhist you'd get funny looks. That's because those two religions are fundamentally different. Buddhism seeks nonexistence. Islam seeks a carnal paradise. Buddhism has an impersonal force called dharma teaching you nonviolence. Islam has a creator God who tells you to make war upon enemies who attack Islam. Buddhism seeks to eliminate suffering through mindfulness. Islam seeks to serve God through faith. Buddhists go to Hell in Islam. Muslims won't be privy to the teachings of the Buddha and thus will likely suffer in this life or the next.
I could go on because the contradictions between these 2 religions are limitless. Imagine all the differences between ALL the world religions.
More Power to the NP, PA and NJP!
If you want to uncover the ancient elements of human religion that is not Woo but academic, I suggest retired professor of indology at Harvard, EJ Michael Witzel’s Origins of the Worlds Mythologies, where by a comparative and historical approach he arrives at what he proposes to be the beliefs of homo sapien before we left Africa some 70 thousand years ago
sufism is nice
Good rundown, but I think your interpretation of Guenon's usage of quality and quantity is somewhat mistaken. He didn't mean them entirely in a literal sense, but it had more to do with the dichotomy between internal suprahuman qualities and external earthly ones. Of course, as he notes in the first chapter, he explains that quality and quantity are respectively correletes of essence and substance--of the immaterial and material--that both are required for manifested reality. He later expands on this, stating that quality and quantity are not synonymous for essence and substance, but instead are a correlate between them and observable earthly reality.
So the reason the democracy is a sign of the dominance of quantity isn't just because rulership is determined literally quantitatively through the vote, but also because it represents the end of any metaphysical source connected to the rulership in contrast to the divine right of kings, for example.
Likewise, the modern industrialization of art is the antithesis of quality insofar as it replaces artists directly creating individual works with their hands--using their internal suprahuman qualities and superior faculties in the process--with soulless machines that churn out identical picture-perfect images and sculptures.
If you'd like you could just replace the words "quality" and "quantity" in the book with "essence" and "substance" and you'll get just about the same meaning, but lose some of the metaphorical shading.
Any chance of knowing intro and outro music? Much appreciated
You had me at psychedelic drugs
Yes, stay grounded my brothers
Might be the best video on the school of thoughr
Julius Woods
Keith Evola
Julius Keith Evola Woods
Excellent video. I always find your work thought provoking and asking deeper questions that we should be pondering. I wonder what your thoughts are on Huxley, as he relates to the perennial philosophy. Are you familiar with hazrat inayat khan and the mysticism of sound and music? Also can you get jay dyer on your podcast? You both have differing world views, but I think it has the potential to be a very interesting dialogue. Thanks for all you do.
Huxley's conception isn't even close to the Traditional school. Jay Dyer is far closer in the Orthodox tradition, although he will reject it on the basis of Christ being the only path.
I'm from an Islamic country and i just cringe every time Islam is paraded as a paragon of spirituality. Apart from some fringe sufi sects (deemed blasphemous by Muslims anyway) Islam is pure materialism in its doctorines and worldview. Just the conception of heaven will tell you how irredeemably sensual and shalow this creed is.
I agree. The traditional school call it an exoteric dogma, it's the Sufi metaphysics they're primarily interested in (Wahdat al-wujud) which isn't really Islamic at all but a surviving remnant of the Indo-European spiritual tradition
@Riastrad yup.. even goethe was guilty of it..
sufism isn't islam btw.. it is aryan gnosticism in islamic clothing..
It's because of how often muslims pray etc. That is what some preachers in my church have used as a point of "this is how we should be". Everything else was ignored.
I am also from an Islamic country and I completely agree with your assessment about Islam being 80-90% Semitic materialism with any redeeming spiritual/transcendental qualities composed of stuff they've aped from Indo-European influenced traditions e.g. the Christianity of Rome/Saul of Tarsus. Such is the eternal nature of Semites: ancient Hellenes often described them as a materialistic culture (e.g. the "greedy knaves" quote from Homer about the Phoenicians which was based af and technically J-woke lol). Christianity itself probably couldn't have happened without the waves of Hellenic colonists settled in the Levantine coast throughout centuries with the Galilee region having an especially high concentration of them.
Sufism (basically "Sophia-ism") was a byproduct of the Hellenic and Persian influences still lingering in Asia Minor after Islam's conquest and is a completely different animal than the Islam born in the Arabian Peninsula. It had to assume the guise of an "Islamic Sect" to survive and TRVE desert religion disciples instinctively recognize it as an alien creed/not TRVE and hate it with a passion.
@Riastrad Afterlife & existence of the immortal soul after death, oneness with the source, the material world being an illusion (see "Maya" in Vedic teachings), Ego death, Natural Law, Transcendence etc. are all alien concepts to Judaism and anything derived from it while these are the central tenets of Sufism and its Aryan religious/philosophical progenitors. The best example would be the most prominent teaching in Sufism which is the concept of the material world being a fleeting thing & only a fraction of absolute reality and aiming for transcendence from it which is a common thread in Aryan spiritualism straight from the Indus Valley Civ and all the way to Aquinas.
keep it up Keith. you have a stalwart future ahead of you
I live in england but it’s becoming increasingly less white, more dangerous and more overcrowded. Not sure whether to move to Scotland, Wales or ireland. I do have scottish heritage so maybe scotland but that’s a super left wing country
Thad tuiol the thing is, england is extremely overcrowded and I like my space so I feel like anywhere but england is nice at this point
Esoteric conversion of different religions on the one hand, and common elements in different religions on the other are two very different things. They cannot both be true if there is but one true religion, only if all religions are false to a certain degree. If the latter is the case (i.e. esoteric conversion), which I feel is where the beginning of this video points at, we are in the realm of relativism because then nobody has the claim to ultimate truth. Of course, this is not a critical point for traditionalism per se, but it is very much so for metaphysics.
Yes, some traditions are more valueable than others, for they manage to express the fulness of metaphysical reality to differing degrees. But mostly, traditions simply apply to the specific character of their people and differ in focus on specific aspects of metaphysics. Just as two different languages can coexist, it does not imply that there isn't an underlying reality both of these languages try to communicate.
Thank you. More videos like this are welcome. When I have my finances in better order, I'll send you a few quid. Take care.
Retvrn to traditionalism
Ironically, Traditionalism isn't very traditionalist. It's just repackaged religious pluralism, adjacent to Theosophy. Christian fundamentalism is the only true basis for Western traditionalism. And of course, obligatory "Jesus said unto him, I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no man comes unto the Father, but by Me" (John 14:6). Also, "But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, and not to God: and I would not that you should have fellowship with demons" (1 Corinthians 10:20).
I'd actually be very interested in you addressing Evola's criticism of fascism. I very much lean toward his side and i'd like to see third positionists answer some of those objections.
I agree with nearly all of his critique. The only main points of disagreement would be on populism & the feasibility of establishing an order, restoration of monarchy as the sacred centre etc. I agree with him, but I think 3rd position is a better way of actually getting power.
thanks, a friend recommended that author to me.. and coincidently I heard someone unrelated to our type of politics mention he had this idea about the 'iron age', in reference to paranormal phenomena. It often seems like my life unfolds in a logical order as if planned.
Traditionalism is playing Rome total war and medieval 2 total war instead of Warhammer
Bismillah! Good video, such introductory stuff is desperately needed
The longing for the lost Eden.
Gaelic Ireland ftw
ditch the catholicism then
@@ArnoldTohtFan Catholicism pre 1000AD is a perfect match for garlic law
*gaelic lol
@@ArnoldTohtFan Think you mean ditch the neoliberalism. Catholicism had it's problems but it at least gave something greater to believe in. Most already have ditched the Catholicism anyways but the problem is what it's been replaced by...Meaningless materialism and liberal values.
christianity, in all its forms, is levantine malware in the european mind. it is the moral framework that pathological altruism and ethno-masochism are built on.
Whats the intro music??
We really need your GoodReads account Keith!!!
Would you be interested in a collaboration with Jay Dyer?
Mostholyfamilymonastery/ vaticancatholic channel completely DESTROYED Jay Dyer. Those sedevacantist Dimond brothers gave the best explanation of the trinity I have ever heard also against the eastern orthodox palamism and denial of the filioque.
Excellent
Who can better articulate our position? You will be heard long after youre gone. Debate tour when?
very interesting
thanks from laois
Any good first reads on the subject? I'm thinking to pick up Aldous Huxley's The Perennial Philosophy
That's a good one. Crisis of the modern world from Guenon is an accessible intro to his work
Cheers. Thank you Keith
Sanatana Dharma?
The eternal Religion of service.
We're constitutionally servants.
It's inescapable.
Service to the Supreme Person - God.
Or service to his external energy -
matter.
We have the freedom to choose.
This is exactly what Ive been telling my family and friends for the last several years...the focus should be on the Quality of number and not the Quantity. An understanding of the quality of number was elemental to the Quadrivium...
Does anybody know a good starting point for Evola’s forays into magic? I tried getting into it after finishing Revolt Against The Modern World and Metaphysics of War but it was a bit confusing.
Ave Sophia
A common critique I've heard of the perennial philosophy is that it is a product of the enlightenment and hence of modernity. A contradiction? I've heard this mostly from catholics. Thoughts?
Sebastian Sheldon “Perrenialists”painfully distort every single one of the “traditions” which they tout as mutually viable, especially those of the Apostolic Christian type and most schools of Islam. They do this from the outset by what is nothing more than syncretism dolled up in masterbatory esoterica. It’s an intellectually stimulating take, but it’s mostly reducible to linguistic sleight of hand and well-intentioned navel gazing.
@@shayneswenson had to search the comments to find this- big distinction that caught me off guard early in the video.
Put simply, it's time.
Rarely does an author encapsulate so succinctly everything *wrong* in life and in philosophy as did Guenon. His vision of religious tradition, and of society in general, as based on truths or on claims to truth is precisely the great epistemic misunderstanding that arose in the western world around the 16th century.
How so ?