It was some time I read Niekisch's text so I'll refrain from commenting for now. But I found it interesting, even though it gave me the impression that Niekisch's focus on politics made him unable to see what Jünger really was onto.
And also: The essay in question was published in 2008 by the german journal Sezession and is availible online in their pdf-archive: http://www.sezession.de/ ("PDF-Download der alten Ausgaben" to the right). /Stefan 2010/1/4 Joel Dietz <jdi...@gmail.com> > > > Was reviewing my notes on Eliot Neaman's Dubious Past (P. 188-189), and > came across this:* > > In a two-page critique of the Waldgang, a copy of which Niekisch sent to > Juenger, the former editor of the national Bolshevist Widerstand compared > Juenger ot Max Stirner, whose individualism was nearly solipsistic. Acording > to Niekisch, Juenger doesn’t realize how indebted every individual is to the > collective: indeed, he remarks, “glorious isolation” is a version of > societal exploitation. Niekisch wonders why the figure of the Waldgaenger > has achieved such popularity among conservatives, positing that postwar > individualism is the last refuge o the European intellectual, threatened by > the mass culture of America nad the Stalinist Leviathan of Russia.* > > * * > > *Niekisch detects in all of Juenger’s poses the flight from society, > ”whether in Africa, as a heroic soldier, a gourmet of aesthetics, as a > runaway from Hitle’rs army in the dreamy reflection of Gardens and Streets, > as a mountain dweller in the cosmic sphere of Heliopolis. .. . wherever one > looks, one uncovers the figure of the fleeing nihilist.” Finally, Niekisch > asks, “where is the forest?” He considers the trees a natural metaphor for > solitude and refuge, comparable to Rousseau’s idea of nature. AS such the > forest “is the somber feeling, the intuitive sense of the inner self, > emancipated from the exterior world.” Niekisch concludes with the material > question, “who finances this freedom”* > > Curious how list members would respond to Niekisch's critiques. > > Best, > > Joel > > > >
