I have been hearing alot about this spirituality to satanic neo-nazism pipeline on twitter over the last couple weeks

Does anyone here care to explain what it means?

I am not breaking any rules for making this thread am i?

it’s people who read a lot of Weininger, Evola, etc. - spiritual philosophy from the early to mid 1900s which is used as a precursor morality to justify an extremely specific political instantiation of fascism.
It’s better to consider it post-fascism, as it has nothing to do with the historical origins of fascism itself politically otherwise intrinsically.
It’s a logical step a lot of (online LARPing) ultra right white nationalists take in further cementing their worldview or creating a universal moral philosophy.
Stuff like evola is considered esoteric because it deals a lot with obscure religious and historical concepts and tenets. This stuff is incredibly dense and it’s a lot of walls of text and in depth obscure references and literature to basically boil down to “friend good enemy bad” and “racism good traditionalism good modernism bad”. I can write an in depth explanation if you really want one but believe me it’s a waste of effort and time
A lot of it is really just a meme, it’s a dead ideology and the philosophy is so insanely dense it’s basically a meme and conspiracy chart drawing red lines between ideas and concepts. No one really believes any of it, it’s 4chan and Twitter nonsense for right wingers to feel countercultural and edgy and smart.

This but unironically

leftypol.org/leftypol/res/56299.html

Thread discussing it

leftypol really has gotten bigger over the years

And a really interesting thread about ethiopia thanks bruv

Fascism is ironic; by rejecting 'modernity' it forged for itself the most 'modern' ideal possible. The only thing 'esoteric' about fascism is its tendency to 'centralise' as in centralising the authority and creating a certain outward state of worship, unlike in communism or democracy where the people can worship and idolise themselves and pat themselves on the back under fascism the people ostensibly idolise the 'central' authority. Of course all these modern ideals are predicated on the back of nationalism which excludes them from any true notions of 'traditionalism'.

If we want to talk explicitly about the 'esoteric' tendencies of fascism we can say (and see) that it is esotericism 'inverted' because the esotericism is made to furnish the exoteric; the myth is written and then the action undertaken.

it has influenced contemporary neo-nazism though, especially post-trump

most of it is a meme fbi honeypot though

vice.com/amp/en/article/dyv9zk/fbi-bankrolled-publisher-of-occult-neo-nazi-books-feds-claim

its influential in a roundabout way. lots of neonazism is based on it, but what influence does actual neonazism have in actual politics or political discourse? Neonazis may as well be gangs committing decentralized crime rather than a real branch of politics. also the satanic/occult neonazi stuff is a bit different than this esoteric stuff, Stuff like O9A (which is separate but still derivative) is basically all feds too on top of that.

A lot of this stuff is really just popular in online circles from edgy people trying too hard to be countercultural intellectuals.
Actual "influential" neonazis (let's say, Nick Fuentes for example), have no connection to this stuff at all, whether latently influenced or otherwise. People like Richard Spencer are aware of this stuff by proxy but don't really draw on it beyond acknowledging it. Plus he really has no actual influence beyond self-proclaimed leadership.

Of people who actually have a level of political influence who are aware of this stuff:

Steve Bannon - seems scary until you realize trump was in the white house and couldn't get anything done, bannon couldn't even get anything done abroad in actual countries with neonazi populations (italy, hungary, etc), not gonna happen here. he doesn't know what he really believes, he was saying he was a Leninist too like 2 years ago lol

Curtis Yarvin - doesn't actually believe any of this stuff and doesn't advocate anything related to race, just a nerd who glorifies corporations and rich people. he's basically just a peter thiel puppet influencer who's well read

Peter Thiel - radical ancap who doesnt believe in any of this stuff

European political intellectuals like Dugin and Benoist exist but this stuff is basically disconnected at best in its influence. Its basically a pipe dream even for the furthest right people out there in those places. Most of them have shedded the racialized origins and basically just believe in it as a vague intellectual background replacing what we may say in the west is like, Hobbes or Locke or something. The same way our policy barely resembles anything from them these people barely resemble anything from Evola despite throwing out the name on a regular basis. it ends up being aesthetic rather than anything foundational.

Now, there's level of which there are people on the right who sympathize with historically fascist causes but it's still a very disconnected movement from practicality. A lot of it is mostly a social thing - "look how cool I am for liking evola, bet you've never heard of him before" type stuff (or as you say it's literally just feds). People like that BAP guy who used to be very popular on twitter hijacked the aesthetics to basically just advocate paleoconservativism. You're more likely to see a resurgence of paleocons who are attracted to traditionalist policies than you are any form of political belief system emerge based on this stuff. It's so incredibly dense and pseudo-religious that 95% of people talking about it likely have not even read it or know the actual literature/topics within the writing

“We gotta get rid of these people but also Santa Claus is real and we can find him with symbols”

A lot of modern far-right ideology is in this weird bind of Christian aesthetics with evil rhetoric, all justified in the name of the "greater good". I found Charlie Kirk's debate with Vaush quite interesting, because later in the debate, or right after it ends, they start talking about philosophy and I noticed his (Kirk's) thoughts on it were very much conservative "greater good" stuff and citing things like Plato and Voltaire, but from what I saw people discussing, it seems like he kinda misunderstands it.

It's a trend I find in any authoritarian tendency, that everything bad is for the greater good, the ends justify the means, and I don't get it myself.

I kinda concede because now that I think about it, a lot more of the violent and militant far-right's influence is from insurgency literature like Siege, ideologically, and apocalypse fantasies that usually tied to "greater good" Christian ideology and the "cleansing of degenerates" and stuff like that.

is leftypol any good, because any time i browse it or any adjacent boards, it just seems like a bunch of nazbol posting

The christian aesthetic stuff is completely disconnected from this stuff - the origins of this type of ideology is vehemently anti-christianity, the kind of re-emergence of it with christian aesthetics is only a result of edgy teenagers looking to be cool and unique by thinking advocating christian monarchy is in any way viable or meaningful, and just a result of that strive for unique edginess manifesting in the same places (say, pol on 4chan).
In wider real life politics (i.e. Charlie Kirk), it's a result of post-Reagan co-opting of explicit evangelical values alongside the lineage of conservationist principles from paleoconservativism. The thing is that it's inconsistent because it basically was meant to be - post-Reagan GOP isnt about ideology or political values, its about getting votes, bunching in a ton of incompatible beliefs and groups together under one flag. It's the same post-Trump, the GOP is about owning the libs, it's not about achieving anything practically.
as with all things you then create the spectacle associated with it and people draw from the spectacle and it gets legitimized as an ideology/group despite it being insincere and improbable which then ends up feeding the cycle of self-reference and irrational branching out. this even happens on an individual level. you can't be pro-evola esoteric fascism pro-lenin pro-reagan and pro-christianity all at the same time but people like Bannon claim to be, hence why once they get any ounce of power nothing actually happens

Yeah, I find Bannon's statements about Lenin are quite odd, but I think he was generally using that in a rhetorical sense. He was trying to say he wanted to radically change the structure of the country like Lenin did with the Bolsheviks' overthrow of the Tsar, and I think we all know what him and his buddies want to change that to. A lot of those Christo-fascists in the Trump administration were linked to s*** like the Heritage Foundation and a lot of dark money, who are then linked to the GOP, who cynically play with fire for votes, and end up embracing a lot of reactionary fringe s*** that can lead to mass death.

Barr literally gave a speech about America being a Christian nation and how it shouldn't be secular, and how secularism ruined America or some s*** like that, it's creepy.

I'm sorry but you're incorrect in your assessment of Christianity in these 'sects'. The entire 'ideological' deviation can be explicitly traced back to protestantism. 'Christianity' in its 'individualised' (Protestant) sense is the very foundation of all of these beliefs and it's foolish to try and link it to 'edgy teenagers' when the seeds for this entire modern epidemic were sown in the late 19th century by the Theosophical Society and the numerous political, imperialistic ties they forged. Forever binding their specific brand of 'pseudospirituality' and pseudoreligious ideals to political institutions under the guise of protestantism.

Evola was explicitly anti-Christianity, and while he what you describe, the philosophy itself is distinct. If you want to argue that Protestantism directed resulted in the 1900s Italian Fascism or in the precedent that created Modernism which was a precursor to this stuff, then...yeah, I mean, I guess so; but that's a different a***ysis, obviously the protestant morality in western history is its own root of cause and effect.
As far as influence go, Weininger was a protestant but didn't look at Christianity as a religion or as a whole of church teaching so much as an abstract framework of moral spirit apart from Christianity itself. Obviously Protestantism and its historical connection to Nietzsche which then eventually influenced these people exists. But none of that is what i'm talking about.
The modern revival of esoteric fascism (which is a very specific set of beliefs and ideas, it's not a descriptor of the word fascism, the ideology is "esoteric fascism" apart from "fascism", its a distinct philosophy and set of ideas) is completely disconnected from its history and it's a purely aesthetic movement with no real fundamental tie to its belief. When I talk about christianity in politics, i'm not talking about christian morals in western politics and i'm not talking about christian morality itself. I'm talking about the rise of twitter crusaders with vatican flags in their usernames advocating for a theological monarchy or anonymous neonazis on 4chan or discord who adovacate the same. It's a completely distinct movement with a different lineage and roots that just happens to overlap in aesthetics

I was more just using it as an example of how these people don't really have clear outlined beliefs. I wouldn't overthink it because I doubt they do themselves, it's basically the equivalent of reading "destroy the corrupt state" and being like "oh yeah thats a good idea" but then immediately being like "anyway onto the next book" without putting deeper thought into it.

The stuff about barr I find interesting. Politicians have been saying for that years. Trump even won over the courts with conservative judges. It still doesn't feel any step closer to a evangelical utopia. I think people like Barr really do believe that stuff, but I don't think they have any deeper notion of what that means. To me it's the christian-right wing equivalent of the anarchists debating bed time abolition on twitter.

Lame nerd politics for people who've had their brains boiled by the internet, a rich inner life of delusion to cope with social isolation, and that's just those who believe it, most posting about it are just trying to meme some schizophrenic person into agreeing with them

Off-topic but it's bizarre how widespread fetishisation of mental illness is, libs have trauma depression anxiety that can be wielded as a cudgel, far-righters love to be woah cool esoteric schizo woah so detached from the modern world dude, it's otherkin stuff for people who think being dissatisfied with society is the same as being an active shooter

from time to time it has no idpol rule which actually gets u discussion about class and more in-depth theory, there’s anarchist there but it’s mainly full of ML, if you can ignore all the ableist s*** and the /pol/ trolls lurking posting racial s*** and the whole chan culture s***, it’s a pretty good place. Also News Anon 3 prob the best user or bot whatever they are for global news.

the way internet right wing people fetishize schizophrenia/schizotypal personalities is gross as f*** to me. its not even like a meme, it's like legit "god im such an edgy knowledgeable detached schizo im so cool" like you say. im related to people who actually suffer from schizophrenia and it's absolutely ridiculous and deranged that people online LARP like it's some cool badge to add to your boy scout sash

i dont use the site but theres a really good screencap from leftypol of an anon breaking down and arguing against Zizek's culture theories and also Mark Fisher (separately) which is probably one of the best pieces of content to ever come out of that website, wish i had it saved offhand

I don't really mind "chan culture" because I'm desensitized to it kinda, it's just gets annoying to me for a while because no one is actually discussing well, it's bunch of anons s***posting wojak memes or talking about da j00s being responsible for everything bad and it gets annoying, but once in a while, there are some good posts

im mainly talking about other imageboards, but im pretty sure leftypol is susceptible to the same dumb habits

i still use 4chan for some general threads and wallpapers but thats really it

i kinda grew out of that edgy s*** years ago, i just don't like when anons (/leftypol/ or r/stupidpol) use that "no idpol" rule to be outright reactionary, instead of critiquing structure and basically just do psuedo-tucker carlson arguments under the guise of "leftism"

Evola was an idiot. I would actually argue the opposite; it's obvious that Italian fascism was reactionary against ideals that could be 'protestant', its Roman-warrior posturing should be obvious enough to disqualify it from 'protestant' associations. The 'Protestant morality in Western history' is the very genesis of the fabric of this conversation, if it wasn't for that deviation there would be no political ideology or 'nationalism' we are experiencing the 'effects' of its 'cause' at this moment.
When you say 'aesthetic' do you mean sentiment? I think you are misunderstanding what I initially said, this 'blending' of politics with pseudospirituality in a way that could be called 'esoteric' (by people who don't know what they're talking about) is the multi-century labour of the Theosophical Society, certainly the Nazis were exposed to some of their theories but Hitler was professedly an 'atheist' was he not? It's just vague imperialistic humanism wearing a different mask. Certainly it seems to me that 'esoteric fascism' is just Nazism based on what I can glean from this thread after my initial post. But the theosophical/protestant angle is the very syncretism of 'Christian', as you 'aesthetics', with politics that creates such an ideological dumpster fire as this. But if these people want to make a 'new Atlantis' let them, it ended so well for them!

mythic from fashion sxn