/lit/ - Literature

>>22978907
>no picture is made to endure nor to live with
>but it is made to sell and sell quickly
Was thinking about this line today while youtube was barraging me with algorithmic slop of actors being interviewed about their careers, obviously not caring about anything: they only do the interview because their contract mandates they must do press junkets (endlessly managed by their agents and publicists), and they only even did the movie because they have to do it to maintain "their career," but they also haven't made a good movie in 30 years and can't "afford the financial hit" of striking out on their own and making indie stuff they actually care about, because despite being millionaires they are whores who constantly need more money. The interviewer doesn't want to be there, it's just a job and she's a whore for fame and has delusions of breaking further into the industry. Likewise for everybody who worked on the movie. It just goes on and on and on, a buzzing hive of mere self-interest like Mandeville's parable of the bees, a whole ecosystem of worthless cynical materialists trying to eke out a little more benefit from themselves.

Then you compare that with random anonymous artisans who agonized over perfecting their craft because they simply took pride in it. Adorno's essay on "Free Time" in The Culture Industry is good on this, how we have a totally demented and sick sense of what "leisure" time even is, everything has been inverted.

American monolinguals seething

>>22957257
>Pound’s poetry is very academic at one level and visceral at another. Philip Larkin once criticized Pound in a post war way by saying he made poetry out of literature rather than out of life, and it is true that Pound’s poetry is fiendishly difficult. The Cantos explores 15 languages, multidimensional realities, the idea of a hell that we’re all in, a group of people that wishes to transcend that and find, if you like, a terrestrial paradise, and enormous amounts of political and economic lore, particularly in relation to the Social Credit theories of Douglas that transfixed from Pound the 1920s onwards and led him to believe that solutions to Western economic privation in the ’30s were ready and were to hand.
https://counter-currents.com/2014/08/ezra-pound-3/

>Pound pointed out what should be obvious to all, namely that money—or more accurately credit[27]—should properly serve as a means of exchanging goods and services, and that “money is not a commodity.”
>Pound pointed out the fundamentals of economic realism: that “the state has credit” and that although the sword can protect against foreign invasion, it cannot protect against the serfdom of usury, of which Pound stated: “Usury and sodomy, the Church condemned as a pair, to one hell, the same for one reason, namely that they are both against natural increase.”
https://counter-currents.com/2012/11/ezra-pound-2/

>>22924126
Fascism is a machine that removes cancers in society, cancers that infest media, work, family, economics, politics and tradition. It is a strange coincidence that it repeatedly finds jews in its crosshairs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h08jdLoHBac

>You let in the Jew and the Jew rotted your empire, and you yourselves out-Jewed the Jew. Your allies in your victimized holdings are the bunyah, you stand for NOTHING but usury.
>And above metal usury; you have built up bank usury, 60% against 30 and 40%, and by that you WILL NOT be saved. Corrupting the whole earth, you have lost yourselves to yourselves.

>And the big Jew has rotted EVERY nation he has wormed into. A mill stone. Well, an exceptionally good swimmer MIGHT conceivably be cast into the sea with a stone tied round his neck. He might perhaps untie it. If he were a Scotchman, he would remember his jackknife, before being thrown overboard.
>You seem to remember NOTHING. It were better you were infected with typhus. As to federal union, or JEW/nion. There is NO question of race in Streit's proposition. It is as proposed a union of slaves, under Jewry. Offered by liars and abettors of thieves.

https://counter-currents.com/2014/08/ezra-pound-3/
https://counter-currents.com/2012/11/ezra-pound-2/

>>22769074
White trash are the less able of a whole bell curve of ability. Blacks and browns are exclusively on the bottom half of that distribution. By your own admission you 'do not take out that argument' because you do not understand it.

>Democracy and plutocracy are equivalent in Spengler's argument, and he said the "tragic comedy of the world-improvers and freedom-teachers" is that they are simply assisting money to be more effective. He believed that the principles of equality, natural rights, universal suffrage, and freedom of the press are all disguises for class war of the bourgeois against the aristocracy. Freedom, to Spengler, is a negative concept, only entailing the repudiation of any tradition. He said that freedom of the press requires money, and entails ownership, meaning that it serves money. Similarly, since suffrage involves electoral campaigns, which involve donations, elections serve money as well. Spengler said that the ideologies espoused by candidates, whether Socialism or Liberalism, are set in motion by, and ultimately serve, only money.

>Spengler said that in his era money has already won, in the form of democracy. However, he said that in destroying the old elements of the Culture, it prepares the way for the rise of a new and overpowering figure, who he calls the Caesar. Before such a leader, money collapses, and in the Imperial Age the politics of money fades away.

"The coming of Caesarism breaks the dictature of money and its political weapon, democracy. After a long triumph of world-city economy and its interests over political creative force, the political side of life manifests itself after all as the stronger of the two. The sword is victorious over the money, the master-will subdues again the plunderer-will. If we call these money-powers 'Capitalism,' then we may designate as Socialism the will to call into life a mighty politico-economic order that transcends all class interests, a system of lofty thoughtfulness and duty-sense that keeps the whole in fine condition for the decisive battle of its history, and this battle is also the battle of money and law. The private powers of the economy want free paths for their acquisition of great resources. No legislation must stand in their way. They want to make the laws themselves, in their interests, and to that end they make use of the tool they have made for themselves, democracy, the subsidized party. Law needs, in order to resist this onslaught, a high tradition and an ambition of strong families that finds its satisfaction not in the heaping-up of riches, but in the tasks of true rulership, above and beyond all money-advantage. A power can be overthrown only by another power, not by a principle, and no power that can confront money is left but this one. Money is overthrown and abolished only by blood."
- Oswald Spengler

Read the first chapter of this, on "The Romans," to understand what has happened to modern society because of late/finance capitalism:
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/44908/44908-h/44908-h.htm#p_1

>>21597424
>Jefferson thought the formal features of the American system would work, and they did work till the time of general Grant but the condition of their working was that inside them there should be a de facto government composed of sincere men willing the national good. When the men of their understanding, and when the nucleus of the national mind hasn’t the moral force to translate knowledge into action I don’t believe it matters a damn what legal forms or what administrative forms there are in a government. The nation will get the staggers.

>Jefferson thought the live men would beat out the cat’s-paws. The fascist hate of demi-liberal governments is based on the empiric observation that in many cases, they don’t and have not.

>I think the American system de jure is probably quite good enough, if there were only 500 men with guts and the sense to USE it, or even with the capacity for answering letters, or printing a paper.
>And ANY means are the right means which will remagnetize the will and the knowledge.

>Power is necessary to some acts, but neither Lenin nor Mussolini show themselves primarily as men thirsting for power. The great man is filled with a very different passion, the will toward order. Hence the mysteries and the muddles in inferior minds.
https://archive.org/details/JeffersonAndOrMussoliniPound1935

>>22636491
Ironically the debasement of the term Nazi is allowing actual Nazis and Fascists to entee politics. This pleases me and many others greatly.

Same reason Robert Michels, Giovanni Papini, Enrico Corradini, and many others supported Fascism. It blew away a corrupt ochlocratic pseudo-liberal regime with no principles that was letting half the country rot while the other half got colonized by foreign capital, and replaced it with an integralist, corporatist regime that modernized the country economically and basically invented the modern welfare state overnight. It released all the creative energies of late 19th and early 20th century anti-liberal economics and social theory, tapping massive reservoirs of solidarity, while also answering both the agrarian and industrial socialist impulses of the country at the time in a way that satisfied the vast majority of socialists and communists and integrated them into the new regime. It also took the necessary metapolitical and geopolitical steps to ensure that Italy was a great society and not an economic satellite of its neighbors and of the Anglo-American finance empire (global usury).

He wrote a book explaining why he supported Fascism (all parts here):
https://counter-currents.com/tag/jefferson-andor-mussolini/

Here are more useful articles on why most intellectuals /lit/ respects were illiberals at bare minimum, and generally fascist sympathizers:
https://counter-currents.com/tag/breaking-the-bondage-of-interest/

For example, T.S. Eliot and W.B. Yeats also sympathized with fascism. Basically everybody who didn't like society becoming a vague pleasure-seeking zone for the new lumpenproletariat sympathized with its aristocratic elements. Also, most saw the need for a "total" (the origins of "totalitarian," a much misused term) corporatist or syndicalist state in which autonomy is balanced with a need to serve the whole. Othmar Spann for example (https://counter-currents.com/2013/03/othmar-spann-a-catholic-radical-traditionalist/)) coined the term Gezweiung to describe a society founded on reciprocal relations of duty and love, rather than on the Manchester economists' individualist principle of "every man for himself," with its in-built, Mandevillian assumption that everybody is a selfish hedonist, and also contra the "all-dissolving" tendencies of communists, who were mostly double agents of Bolshevik imperialism and neurotic sadists who just wanted to see their host nations burn. Fascism was simply the dialectical synthesis of everything great about the last 400 years of European social, economic, and moral development.

Also, the music was better
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vow1qFOTmEw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oFyI5vlkec

Everyone should read this, then read The Anglo-American Establishment:
https://thirdworldtraveler.com/Banks/Tragedy_Hope_excerpt.html

Read the first chapter of The Law of Civilization and Decay, on what happened to ancient Rome (it's only 40~ short pages):
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/44908/44908-h/44908-h.htm#p_1

Spengler:
“The coming of Caesarism breaks the dictature of money and its political weapon, democracy. After a long triumph of world-city economy and its interests over political creative force, the political side of life manifests itself after all as the stronger of the two. The sword is victorious over the money, the master-will subdues again the plunderer-will. If we call these money-powers 'Capitalism,' then we may designate as Socialism the will to call into life a mighty politico-economic order that transcends all class interests, a system of lofty thoughtfulness and duty-sense that keeps the whole in fine condition for the decisive battle of its history, and this battle is also the battle of money and law. The private powers of the economy want free paths for their acquisition of great resources. No legislation must stand in their way. They want to make the laws themselves, in their interests, and to that end they make use of the tool they have made for themselves, democracy, the subsidized party. Law needs, in order to resist this onslaught, a high tradition and an ambition of strong families that finds its satisfaction not in the heaping-up of riches, but in the tasks of true rulership, above and beyond all money-advantage. A power can be overthrown only by another power, not by a principle, and no power that can confront money is left but this one. Money is overthrown and abolished only by blood.

Yockey:
“Two ideas are opposed — not concepts or abstractions, but Ideas which were in the blood of men before they were formulated by the minds of men. The Resurgence of Authority stands opposed to the Rule of Money; Order to Social Chaos, Hierarchy to Equality, socio-economico-political Stability to constant Flux; glad assumption of Duties to whining for Rights; Socialism to Capitalism, ethically, economically, politically; the Rebirth of Religion to Materialism; Fertility to Sterility; the spirit of Heroism to the spirit of Trade; the principle of Responsibility to Parliamentarism; the idea of Polarity of Man and Woman to Feminism; the idea of the individual task to the ideal of ‘happiness’; Discipline to Propaganda-compulsion; the higher unities of family, society, State to social atomism; Marriage to the Communistic ideal of free love; economic self-sufficiency to senseless trade as an end in itself; the inner imperative to Rationalism.”

https://counter-currents.com/2012/11/two-volumes-by-gottfried-feder/
https://www.counter-currents.com/tag/breaking-the-bondage-of-interest/
https://counter-currents.com/2011/05/bonalds-economic-thought/

>>22421993
>London stank of decay back before 1914 and I have recorded the feel of it in a poem here and there. The live man in a modern city feels this sort of thing or perceives it as the savage perceives in the forest. I don’t know how many men keep alive in modern civilization but when one has the frankness to compare notes one finds that the intuition is confirmed just as neatly or almost as neatly as if the other man saw a shop sign.

>Thus London going mouldy back in say 1912 or 1911. After the War death was all over it. Italy was, on the other hand, full of bounce. I said all of this to a Lombard writer. I said: London is dead, Paris is tired, but here the place is alive. What they don’t know is plenty, but there is some sort of animal life here. If you put an idea into these people they would DO something.

>Individuals form classes according to the similarity of their interests, they form syndicates according to differentiated economic activities within these interests; but they form first, and above all, the State, which is not to be thought of numerically as the sum-total of individuals forming the majority of the nation. And consequently Fascism is opposed to Democracy, which equates the nation to the majority, lowering it to the level of that majority.

>Fascism, in short, is not only the giver of laws and the founder of institutions, but the educator and promoter of spiritual life. It wants to remake, not the forms of human life, but its content, man, character, faith. And to this end it requires discipline and authority that can enter into the spirits of men and there govern unopposed.

>As far as financial morals are concerned, I should say that from being a country where practically everything and anything was for sale, Mussolini has in ten years transformed it into a country where it would even be dangerous to try to buy out the government.

>In the Fascist State the individual is not suppressed, but rather multiplied, just as in a regiment a soldier is not weakened but multiplied by the number of his comrades. The Fascist State organizes the nation, but it leaves sufficient scope to individuals; it has limited useless or harmful liberties and has preserved those that are essential.

>[N]ote that Mussolini is NOT a fanatical statalist wanting the state to blow the citizen’s nose and monkey with the individual’s diet. IF, when and whenever the individual or the industry can and will attend to its own business, the fascist state WANTS the industry and the individual to DO it, and it is only in case of sheer idiocy, incapacity or simple greed and dog-in-the-mangerness that the state intervenes to protect the unorganized PEOPLE; public; you me and the other fellow.

>>22384761
>>22384768
No one cares about your state-backed priesthood and its mission to maintain the illusion of normalcy anymore.

Spengler:
“The coming of Caesarism breaks the dictature of money and its political weapon, democracy. After a long triumph of world-city economy and its interests over political creative force, the political side of life manifests itself after all as the stronger of the two. The sword is victorious over the money, the master-will subdues again the plunderer-will. If we call these money-powers 'Capitalism,' then we may designate as Socialism the will to call into life a mighty politico-economic order that transcends all class interests, a system of lofty thoughtfulness and duty-sense that keeps the whole in fine condition for the decisive battle of its history, and this battle is also the battle of money and law. The private powers of the economy want free paths for their acquisition of great resources. No legislation must stand in their way. They want to make the laws themselves, in their interests, and to that end they make use of the tool they have made for themselves, democracy, the subsidized party. Law needs, in order to resist this onslaught, a high tradition and an ambition of strong families that finds its satisfaction not in the heaping-up of riches, but in the tasks of true rulership, above and beyond all money-advantage. A power can be overthrown only by another power, not by a principle, and no power that can confront money is left but this one. Money is overthrown and abolished only by blood.”

Yockey:
“Two ideas are opposed — not concepts or abstractions, but Ideas which were in the blood of men before they were formulated by the minds of men. The Resurgence of Authority stands opposed to the Rule of Money; Order to Social Chaos, Hierarchy to Equality, socio-economico-political Stability to constant Flux; glad assumption of Duties to whining for Rights; Socialism to Capitalism, ethically, economically, politically; the Rebirth of Religion to Materialism; Fertility to Sterility; the spirit of Heroism to the spirit of Trade; the principle of Responsibility to Parliamentarism; the idea of Polarity of Man and Woman to Feminism; the idea of the individual task to the ideal of ‘happiness’; Discipline to Propaganda-compulsion; the higher unities of family, society, State to social atomism; Marriage to the Communistic ideal of free love; economic self-sufficiency to senseless trade as an end in itself; the inner imperative to Rationalism.”

>>22094831
Third positionism was the destiny and entelechy of the European race. Our failure to defeat 19th century industrial-financial capitalism and its Bolshevik golem (really a sad, twisted perversion and corruption of third positionism itself) is the 20th century's "turning point at which we failed to turn."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vow1qFOTmEw

You should absolutely read and engage with Marx, but you should make national socialism, or some variant of it, like national syndicalism, third positionism, integralism, Catholic social teaching, or Italian Fascist corporativism, your endgoal. Marx did some great diagnostic work, and when coupled with the up-to-date (for the last time history was actually moving) praxis of people like Othmar Spann, you can get a lot done. Was the Kingfisher assassinated? Probably. Can one critique Hitler "from the right," like Julius Evola did? Yes! Are Pol Pot, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, and Gramsci appropriatable in a fascist intellectual framework? Of course.

Just remember: Combine Marx's diagnostics with national socialist or national syndicalist (fascist) praxis and you will definitely piss off liberals and the kinds of leftists who hang out with trannies.

>>21845571
https://counter-currents.com/2022/10/remembering-ezra-pound-12/

>>21777382
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h08jdLoHBac

>>21719802
Kerry Bolton:
https://counter-currents.com/tag/breaking-the-bondage-of-interest/

Werner Sombart's German Socialism (horribly translated, read in German or any language other than English because they almost certainly have more idiomatic translations)

Othmar Spann, The True State

Spengler:
“The coming of Caesarism breaks the dictature of money and its political weapon, democracy. After a long triumph of world-city economy and its interests over political creative force, the political side of life manifests itself after all as the stronger of the two. The sword is victorious over the money, the master-will subdues again the plunderer-will. If we call these money-powers 'Capitalism,' then we may designate as Socialism the will to call into life a mighty politico-economic order that transcends all class interests, a system of lofty thoughtfulness and duty-sense that keeps the whole in fine condition for the decisive battle of its history, and this battle is also the battle of money and law. The private powers of the economy want free paths for their acquisition of great resources. No legislation must stand in their way. They want to make the laws themselves, in their interests, and to that end they make use of the tool they have made for themselves, democracy, the subsidized party. Law needs, in order to resist this onslaught, a high tradition and an ambition of strong families that finds its satisfaction not in the heaping-up of riches, but in the tasks of true rulership, above and beyond all money-advantage. A power can be overthrown only by another power, not by a principle, and no power that can confront money is left but this one. Money is overthrown and abolished only by blood.

Yockey:
“Two ideas are opposed — not concepts or abstractions, but Ideas which were in the blood of men before they were formulated by the minds of men. The Resurgence of Authority stands opposed to the Rule of Money; Order to Social Chaos, Hierarchy to Equality, socio-economico-political Stability to constant Flux; glad assumption of Duties to whining for Rights; Socialism to Capitalism, ethically, economically, politically; the Rebirth of Religion to Materialism; Fertility to Sterility; the spirit of Heroism to the spirit of Trade; the principle of Responsibility to Parliamentarism; the idea of Polarity of Man and Woman to Feminism; the idea of the individual task to the ideal of ‘happiness’; Discipline to Propaganda-compulsion; the higher unities of family, society, State to social atomism; Marriage to the Communistic ideal of free love; economic self-sufficiency to senseless trade as an end in itself; the inner imperative to Rationalism.”

>>21597424
>Jefferson thought the formal features of the American system would work, and they did work till the time of general Grant but the condition of their working was that inside them there should be a de facto government composed of sincere men willing the national good. When the men of their understanding, and when the nucleus of the national mind hasn’t the moral force to translate knowledge into action I don’t believe it matters a damn what legal forms or what administrative forms there are in a government. The nation will get the staggers.

>Jefferson thought the live men would beat out the cat’s-paws. The fascist hate of demi-liberal governments is based on the empiric observation that in many cases, they don’t and have not.

>I think the American system de jure is probably quite good enough, if there were only 500 men with guts and the sense to USE it, or even with the capacity for answering letters, or printing a paper.
>And ANY means are the right means which will remagnetize the will and the knowledge.

>Power is necessary to some acts, but neither Lenin nor Mussolini show themselves primarily as men thirsting for power. The great man is filled with a very different passion, the will toward order. Hence the mysteries and the muddles in inferior minds.

>London stank of decay back before 1914 and I have recorded the feel of it in a poem here and there. The live man in a modern city feels this sort of thing or perceives it as the savage perceives in the forest.
>Thus London going mouldy back in say 1912 or 1911. After the War death was all over it.
>Italy was, on the other hand, full of bounce. ... London is dead, Paris is tired, but here the place is alive. What they don’t know is plenty, but there is some sort of animal life here. If you put an idea into these people they would DO something.

>[N]ote that Mussolini is NOT a fanatical statalist wanting the state to blow the citizen’s nose and monkey with the individual’s diet. IF, when and whenever the individual or the industry can and will attend to its own business, the fascist state WANTS the industry and the individual to DO it, and it is only in case of sheer idiocy, incapacity or simple greed and dog-in-the-mangerness that the state intervenes to protect the unorganized PEOPLE; public; you me and the other fellow.

>The rest is political “machinery,” bureaucracy, flummydiddle. Jefferson, Mussolini, Lenin, all hated or hate it. Lenin wanted to get rid of it: “All this is political machinery, want to get rid of it,” as Stef reported Lenin’s opinion in 1918. Jefferson started to clean up the social flummydiddle, etiquette, precedence, etc.

>Jefferson thought the formal features of the American system would work, and they did work till the time of general Grant but the condition of their working was that inside them there should be a de facto government composed of sincere men willing the national good. When the men of their understanding, and when the nucleus of the national mind hasn’t the moral force to translate knowledge into action I don’t believe it matters a damn what legal forms or what administrative forms there are in a government. The nation will get the staggers.

>Jefferson thought the live men would beat out the cat’s-paws. The fascist hate of demi-liberal governments is based on the empiric observation that in many cases, they don’t and have not.

>How does the Jeffersonian answer the fascist in a.d. 1933, 157 of American independence, 144 of the republic, XI of the era fascista?
>This is not to say I “advocate” fascism in and for America, or that I think fascism is possible in America without Mussolini
>I think the American system de jure is probably quite good enough, if there were only 500 men with guts and the sense to USE it, or even with the capacity for answering letters, or printing a paper.
>And ANY means are the right means which will remagnetize the will and the knowledge.

>Power is necessary to some acts, but neither Lenin nor Mussolini show themselves primarily as men thirsting for power. The great man is filled with a very different passion, the will toward order. Hence the mysteries and the muddles in inferior minds.

>>21342241
Then you are still human.

>>20734992

“Two ideas are opposed — not concepts or abstractions, but Ideas which were in the blood of men before they were formulated by the minds of men. The Resurgence of Authority stands opposed to the Rule of Money; Order to Social Chaos, Hierarchy to Equality, socio-economico-political Stability to constant Flux; glad assumption of Duties to whining for Rights; Socialism to Capitalism, ethically, economically, politically; the Rebirth of Religion to Materialism; Fertility to Sterility; the spirit of Heroism to the spirit of Trade; the principle of Responsibility to Parliamentarism; the idea of Polarity of Man and Woman to Feminism; the idea of the individual task to the ideal of ‘happiness’; Discipline to Propaganda-compulsion; the higher unities of family, society, State to social atomism; Marriage to the Communistic ideal of free love; economic self-sufficiency to senseless trade as an end in itself; the inner imperative to Rationalism.”
“The soil of Europe, rendered sacred by the streams of blood which have made it spiritually fertile for a millennium, will once again stream with blood until the barbarians and distorters have been driven out and the Western banner waves on its home soil from Gibraltar to North Cape, from the rocky promontories of Galway to the Urals.”
>Yockey

“The coming of Caesarism breaks the dictature of money and its political weapon, democracy. After a long triumph of world-city economy and its interests over political creative force, the political side of life manifests itself after all as the stronger of the two. The sword is victorious over the money, the master-will subdues again the plunderer-will. If we call these money-powers 'Capitalism,' then we may designate as Socialism the will to call into life a mighty politico-economic order that transcends all class interests, a system of lofty thoughtfulness and duty-sense that keeps the whole in fine condition for the decisive battle of its history, and this battle is also the battle of money and law. The private powers of the economy want free paths for their acquisition of great resources. No legislation must stand in their way. They want to make the laws themselves, in their interests, and to that end they make use of the tool they have made for themselves, democracy, the subsidized party. Law needs, in order to resist this onslaught, a high tradition and an ambition of strong families that finds its satisfaction not in the heaping-up of riches, but in the tasks of true rulership, above and beyond all money-advantage. A power can be overthrown only by another power, not by a principle, and no power that can confront money is left but this one. Money is overthrown and abolished only by blood.
>Spengler

>>20422724
Not him but the simplest possible description I could think of that applies to most of third position economics is that it assumes that economic life is downstream of other forms of life, cultural or national or whatever you want to call it, and that to elevate any kind of economic abstraction to an autonomous status (that is, to hypostatize it as an entity as opposed to just an abstraction) is putting the cart before the horse. Everything emanates from human beings, organised into communities, which are in turn structured around values and belief systems that (at least in a healthy state) address the health and needs of the community, not of free-floating economic abstractions.

This is very similar to Marxist critique, which is why third positionists often gladly incorporate much of Marx's thought, or even all of it. Werner Sombart was a Marxist, a so-called Kathedersozialist, and Engels wrote to him that he was the only member of the German establishment to actually understand Marx. He later became a national socialist and a proponent of "German socialism," broadly the belief that the innate ethno-cultural characteristics of the German people contained an innate form of socialism or communitarianism, into which the confused and contradictory energies of the social movement and its anti-bourgeois and anti-capitalist critiques could be sublated without needing to destroy the existing German nation or throw the world into total chaos for some Trotskian utopian "permanent revolution" that never happened.

Third positionists often agree with most or all of the leftist critique of capitalism and stagnant bourgeois civilization, massified liberal democracy as a front for finance, etc. Where they differ is in critiquing the leftist position's latent bourgeois premises, which manifest as utopianism, which manifests as terror. The French Revolution unleashed all the natural energy of the French people, the famous elan vital that enabled them to fight off all of Europe with conscripts and create the new Roman legions from nothing, changing the shape of warfare forever. But the Jacobins' harebrained schemes to destroy Frenchness and worship deistic-atheistic "Reason" (symbolized by a dressing a whore as the goddess Reason, and enthroning her in Notre Dame) were empty abstractions.