I seldom come across anyone who reads Evola unless they also have an interest esoteric and spiritual topics. He’s probably the only writer I’ve come across who has a diverging view (out of other things I read) that I agree with (decay of society, the nihilistic elements of various subcultures, materialism). Even though I’m sure he would lay the blame for this at the feet of “bourgeoisie” culture, I don’t entirely disagree, but I don’t think it’s capitalism itself that has led to those things, but the people themselves.
A paragraph from Ride The Tiger on politics:
Like the true state, the hierarchical, organic state has ceased to exist. Νο comparable party or movement exists, offering itself as a defender of higher ideas, to which one can unconditionally adhere and support with absolute fidelity. The present world of party politics consists οnly of the regime of petty politicians, who, whatever their party affiliations, are often figureheads at the service of financial, industrial, or corporate interests. The situation has gone so far that even if parties or movements of a different type existed, they would have almost nο following among the rootless masses who respond οnly to those who promise material advantages and “social conquests.” When striking these chords does not suffice, the οnly influence over the masses today - and now even more than ever - is οn the plane of impassioned and subintellectual forces, which by their very nature lack any stability. These are the forces that demagogues, popular leaders, manipulators of myths, and fabricators of “public ορinion” count οn. ln this regard we can learn from yesterday’s regimes in Germany and Italy that positioned themselves against democracy and Marxism: that potential enthusiasm and faith that animated masses of people, even to the ρoint of fanaticism, has completely vanished in the face of crisis, or else been transferred to new, opposing myths, replacing the preceding ones by the sole force of circumstances. One must expect this from every collective current that lacks a dimension of depth, inasmuch as it depends οn the forces Ι have mentioned, corresponding to the pure demos and its sovereignty - which is as much as to say, literally, “democracy.”