A couple of things that haven't been mentioned in this thread yet. 1) Niekisch was a Marxist who, because of this, spent WW II in jail and later lived in the DDR for a while. This fact alone would cause him to dislike any pro-individual, anti-State position. His charge of "nihilism" against Juenger probably comes as much from this as from anything else.A Fascist like Evola could make the same charge, and for essentially the same reasons.
2) The meaning of words can change over time, and probably no group of words is more susceptible to this than political labels like "conservatism". "Conservatism" in 1920s Germany probably isn't the same as "conservatism" in 1960s Germany any more than the "conservatism" in the 1960s US is the same as the "conservatism" in the US today. The historical and biographical background of Juenger's writings is important for their evaluation and interpretation, and Juenger clearly changed his mind on some things during his long life. For now I have decided not to read any of Juenger's writings prior to the second version of Das abenteurliche Herz, partly to keep the amount of material under control, and partly to keep from having to deal with evaluating his changes of positions while having to read him in German, with the possibility of misinterpretation due to faulty reading or a misunderstood idiom or reference. (I also need to read more on WW I and the Weimar Republic before dealing with his early writings, as my knowledge of these periods of German history is poor.) Pinning down Juenger's final position, or even the evolution of his thinking, is necessary before deciding that this or that position that he took is applicable to one's own life. This is. perhaps, one of the main reasons for this list. John Simon Friedrich wrote: > > Joel, an anarch spends his energy and time sparingly and according to > his own judgement of what merits its expenditure. None of us have > enough energy to get involved in all the battles and opportunities > that come our way. For me, the discussion of Niekisch's estimation of > Juenger is a waste of time in comparison with subjects I find of > greater relevence. > > But forgive me if, in a moment of irritation, I projected my > priorities onto those of other anarchs. > > I agree - an anarch evaluates the relevance of ideas on their own > merits. But HE does it, and precisely for that reason he doesn't feel > obliged to evaluate every other opinion on that thinker. He may, but > he certainly does not feel it behooves him because someone says it > does. All externals are only accessories to him forming his own > understanding - they are not sacred because others give them that > name. And when they are dispensable, he doesn't waste his time with them. > > I only enter arguments that I can think I can benefit from. Do I > misjudge the value of this Niekisch argument? So be it. I hope you > find others who respond to your interest in it - certainly, IF one > felt obliged to defend Juenger, then the points you make below would > be good ones to follow. But I don't feel that obligation - is someone > on trial here? > > "The Truth? None of my business." I know what I think and that is what > counts for me. > > Simon > http://ernst-juenger.blogspot.com <http://ernst-juenger.blogspot.com> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Von:* Joel Dietz <jdi...@gmail.com> > *An:* juenger_org@yahoogroups.de > *Gesendet:* Montag, den 18. Januar 2010, 17:19:36 Uhr > *Betreff:* Re: [juenger_org] The two groups of Juengerites > > > > I should think that the Anarch would not take the relevance of any set > of ideas from any thinker for granted, but would evaluate them on > their own merits. Aligning oneself with Juenger is itself an alignment > with an individual or school of thought. If Niekisch, a critical > observer, cannot see something other than a well articulated aesthetic > Nihilism in Juenger's oeuvre, I should think it behoves the > Juengerites to defend him against this claim. > > Were one to attempt such a defense, I should think it would crystalize > along these points: > > (1) The distinction of Juenger's concept of the forest and "natural > man" from Rousseau's > (2) A thorough evaluation of Juenger's citations of Nietzsche. For > instance, is Nietzsche primarily evaluated in a positive light? > (3) An account of Juenger's late relationship with the Catholic church > (4) A description of Juenger's evolving political views, insofar as > they can be assertained, from his writings. > > I am disappointed that no one has attempted any such thing on any of > these points, and instead we are talking about heavy metal and > porntube. My understanding was that this was a Juenger discussion > group, not simply a fan group. If you take offense at critical > reasoning or think that this is by definition "stupid," I encourage > you not to read or respond to posts of mine in the future. > > Jd > > joeldietz.com <http://joeldietz.com> | twitter.com/jdietz > <http://twitter.com/jdietz> | twitter.com/fractastical > <http://twitter.com/fractastical> (tech) > > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 4:57 AM, Simon Friedrich > <simonfriedr...@yahoo.de <mailto:simonfriedr...@yahoo.de>> wrote: > > > Dear List, > > Klaus is correct in saying that a majority of people (in the world > and to a lesser degree on this list) regard Juenger only in a > retrospective analytical sense, while only a minority look to his > ideas for their present and future value to us as ordinaryhuman > beings trying to learn more about ourselves and the world. > > The larger group is interested in distracting itself from its own > deficiencies with historical analysis and critique - this group > has evidently not really perceived the extraordinary value of > Juenger's insights for them. Perhaps they are also smug in their > own self-ignorance and thus have little aspiration to evolve to a > better version of themselves. Were they to understand their need > and the value of what is being offered them in Juenger's works, > they would put the historical nitpicking and time-wasting in its > rightful secondary place. > > Each member of the second group - having sensed the value of > Juenger for them as individuals, and having also understood their > own comparative ignorance - wants to increase their OWN > understanding of what Juenger is saying. Having a genuine and > unique own-understanding is totally incompatible with any kind of > pigeon-holing. (I thus appreciate Klaus's list of Juenger's > characters below, a list which defies any kind of stereotyping.) > > These rarer Juenger fans feel no need to align themselves with any > other individuals or schools of thought etc. They do not want to > pigeon-hole because they understand that such a premature action > immediately stops their own further understanding. These > individuals have a genuine personal NEED to understand and cannot > satisfy themselves with any self-pretence or "verboasting" to others. > > Now is the whole lengthy discussion of Niekisch's critique of > Juenger really that relevent? I read the first two or three > contributions and deleted the rest unread. If distraction is the > goal, www.porntube.com <http://www.porntube.com> will be more > effective. > > As one example, why not spend the same time and energy discussing > what Juenger would have thought about the Earth's changing of its > skin? In light of present occurences, an deeper or higher > understanding of natural disaster could be genuine useful to humanity. > > I'm not feed up with this list because it is not all about > intellectual onanism. Hang in there Klaus! > > > Simon > http://ernst-juenger.org <http://ernst-juenger.blogspot.com> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *Von:* klaus gauger <klaus_gau...@yahoo.com > <mailto:klaus_gau...@yahoo.com>> > *An:* juenger_org@yahoogroups.de <mailto:juenger_org@yahoogroups.de> > *Gesendet:* Samstag, den 16. Januar 2010, 12:20:50 Uhr > *Betreff:* Re: AW: [juenger_org] Niekisch's Critique of Juenger > > <snip>
