Newsgroups: alt.revisionism Subject: Holocaust Almanac - Yockey's "Imperium" - A Critique Summary: Reply-To: email@example.com Followup-To: alt.revisionism Organization: The Old Frog's Almanac, Vancouver Island, CANADA Keywords: carto,imperium,yockey Lines: 693 Archive/File: fascism/usa/yockey yockey.001 pub/people/carto.willis carto.004 Last-Modified: 1994/05/20 Francis Parker Yockey's "Imperium, The Philosophy of History and Politics" a Summary and Evaluation by Neighbors Network The end of the Cold War, the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the growing violence and instability both around the world and here in the United States, have impressed on the minds of millions the idea that the world is at a crossroads. People with an interest in history and in ideas are hungry for a perspective that can show their own country and the world what new direction it can take to get out of the current confusion. So far, two trends have emerged. New nations have arisen and claimed what they consider to be their rights, including sometimes the right of revenge against their neighbors for centuries-old grievances, as in Bosnia-Herzegovina. On the other hand, former U. S. President George Bush and others have expressed the hope for a New World Order. "Imperium, The Philosophy of History and Politics" by Francis Parker Yockey, published in 1948 and still available, provides an ambitious perspective on the future, specifically for all peoples of European descent. Francis P. Yockey was no statesman, nor a professional academic, and he has been dead for thirty years. Why is his book important today? "Imperium" is important because Willis Carto is important. Willis A. Carto, publisher since the Seventies of the tabloid newspaper "Spotlight," knew Yockey in the last decade of his life, was one of the last visitors to Yockey before Yockey's mysterious death in jail in 1960, wrote the introduction to the 1962 edition of "Imperium", and has recommended the book on many occasions since. Because readers of "Spotlight" have been engaged in much discussion about the alleged anti-Semitism or "fascist hidden agenda" of "Spotlight," they will no doubt be interested to know what "Imperium" has to say about the possibilities for the survival of Western Culture. "Imperium" begins with a biographical sketch of Yockey by Carto. Yockey was born in Chicago in 1917. He received a B.A. in 1938, then attended Notre Dame Law School, graduating cum laude in 1941. Though opposed to intervention in World War II before the Pearl Harbor attack, he enlisted in the U. S. Army, but received a medical discharge in 1942. Back in civilian life, he began a law practice in Illinois, but soon relocated to Detroit, where he became an Assistant District Attorney in Wayne County, Michigan. In 1946, Yockey was offered and accepted a job preparing testimony for the War Crimes Tribunal, set up by Allied occupation forces after World War II to try Nazi leaders. For eleven months, he worked in Wiesbaden, Germany, helping to prepare the cases against some mid-level Nazi leaders. After a quarrel with his superiors, who, he claimed, were pressuring him to produce propaganda instead of indictments based on objective facts, he resigned in early 1947. Yockey returned to America for a short time, and then moved to Ireland, where took up residence in an inn in Brittas Bay, County Galway. There he wrote "Imperium". Anticipating controversy, he wrote under the pen-name Ulick Varange. Only a handful of copies were printed, at the author's expense, and the two-volumn first edition attracted little notice. Carto published a one-volumn hardback edition in 1962, and a paperback edition in 1969. With a few followers, Yockey founded the European Liberation Front in London in 1949. For his activism, he was beaten in Hyde Park. The group soon collapsed because, according to Carto, Yockey's collaborators were consumed by their great envy for his enormous gifts, and because a great philosopher is almost never also a great man of action. Carto considered Yockey a thinker first and foremost. After a brief job at the Red Cross, he resigned in 1951, and began to travel. Carto does not say where Yockey went on his travels, nor how he supported himself. The FBI, however, revoked his U.S. passport. In 1960, he was arrested in San Francisco for passport fraud, after three passports had been found in one of his suitcasese. Yockey allegedly committed suicide in his cell. Carto is skeptical of this official story. The following evaluation of "Imperium" is footnoted, so the reader can easily verify from the text the points which are summarized here. The index Carto's 1969 paperback edition is very inadequate, containing only references to proper names. Yockey on History Yockey's philosophy of history proposes a cyclical "life-cycle" for the history of all hitherto existing civilizations. He proposes to demonstrate the existence of this "organic" process in eight distinct "Cultures" existing in the past, to explain what part of the cycle our own "Western Culture" is in, and thereafter to expound the political principals which alone can effectively guide the West out of the Civilization Crisis which he saw around him. He acknowledges a large debt to Oswald Spengler, author of "Decline of the West," whom he calls "the philosopher of the twentieth century"; and to Friederich Nietzsche. (1) To understand Yockey's philosophy, one must first understand his definition of Culture, a word which he uses to define the whole history of a civilization. Yockey's definition of a Culture includes not only the arts and literature of a period of history, but also its technology, politics, and economic activities. This resembles the anthropologist's definition of culture, except that for an anthropologist, any people, including a primitive tribe, has a culture, while for Yockey only certain peoples in certain times and places can have a Culture. It also resembles the more typical historical use of the word Civilization, but for Yockey Civilization is a specific later stage in the development of a Culture. The Cultures are Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Indian, Chinese, Arabian, Classical, Western (also called European), and Mexican-Peruvian, for a total of eight in all. (2) Following Spengler, Yockey rejects the usual Ancient-Medieval-Modern "linear" conception of world history. For Yockey, what is commonly called "ancient history" is actually the history of Egyptian, Babylonian, and Classical cultures. Egypt, Babylonia, and the Classical world each went through stages of early growth, vigor, senility, and death, followed by barbarism. Medieval history is not merely "a middle age" in between ancient and modern history. It is actually the history of a new beginning, the early stages of the history of the Western Culture. (3) The human mind cannot make sense of reality without grouping observed facts into categories. However, any attempt to categorize will produce ambiguities, doubtful cases that straddle the borderline between two categories. Yockey does not recognize that his grouping of civilized human history into eight Cultures creates such doubtful and ambiguous cases. For example, the two halves of the "Mexican-Peruvian" Culture were separated by hundreds of miles, and before the Spanish conquest they were not aware of each other's existence. On what historical grounds are they the same Culture? Was the Byzantine Empire a remnant of the Classical Culture, or the Medieval Greek section of the Western one? Did the Ottoman Empire belong to the Arabian Culture? Yockey does not trouble himself to acknowledge, let alone answer, these questions. Others could be raised as well. A Culture (sometimes he uses the term High Culture) has an organic nature. "Since a Culture is organic, it has an individuality, and a soul. Thus it cannot be influenced in its depths from any outside force whatever. It has a destiny, like all organisms. It has a period of gestation and a birth-time. It has a growth, a maturity, fulfillment, a down-going, and a death." Therefore it has its own individual stamp. After its death, it does not recur. There will not be another Indian or Peruvian Culture, and after its death there will be no recurrence of the Western Culture either. (4) Yockey contrasts the organic view of Culture, which he prefers, to the rationalist-materialist view of history. The latter seeks cause and effect in events of human history. This is, according to Yockey, a misleading way to view history. "Material happenings can be controlled, are reversible, produce identical results under identical conditions, are recurrent, can be classified, can be successfully comprehended as though they are subject to an a priori, mechanical necessity, in other words, to Causality." (5) On the other hand, the events of a Life are "uncontrollable, irreversible, never-recurring, unique, cannot be classified, are not amenable to rational treatment, and possessed of no external mechanical necessity." (6) Destiny-thinking (or organic thinking) is the most fruitful way of viewing history, because the history of a Culture is the history of a type of life. Causality-thinking (or rationalistic-materialist thinking) has produced errors in understanding of history and erroneous theories such as Marxism, Darwinism, and Freudianism. (7) Yockey opposes Materialism on the grounds that it fails to take into account the spiritual aspect of history and of human activity. He does not distinguish between Materialism as a method of analysis and Materialism as a value system. He lumps together Materialism and Rationalism. Moreover, he does not recognize the usual distinction made by philosophers between Rationalism and Empiricism. Here is his list of the foremost philosophers of Causality-thinking: "Kant is the height of this type of thinking, and to this side of Western philosophy belong also Hume, Bacon, Schopenhauer, Hamilton, Spencer, Mill, Bentham, Hobbes, Locke, Holbach, Descartes." (8) This is a curious collection. Yockey, who vehemently rejects atheism, includes in his list the eighteenth century French atheist and materialist Holbach, but also Descartes, who proved to his own satisfaction the existence of God from the existence of thought. What have all these thinkers in common? According to Yockey, they have in common that they all sought to find "Causality" in human institutions, even in Culture. The enmity of a Culture to all outside itself is a fundamental concept for Yockey. "Each Culture-soul is stamped with individuality. From others it takes nothing, and to them it gives nothing. Whatever is on the frontiers is the enemy, whether primitive or Culture-populations. They all are barbarians, heathens, to the proper culture, and no understanding passes between them." According to Yockey, historical facts prove this. "We saw the Western peoples prove the lifeworthiness of the European culture by their Crusades against the highly civilized Saracens, Moors, and Turks. We saw the Germanic populations in the East and their Visigothic brothers in the South push the barbarian Slavs and the civilized Moors continually back during the centuries. We saw Western ships and Western armies make the whole world into the object of booty for the West. These were the relations of the West to that [sic] and those outside." (9) A Culture is the highest form of life, in a hierarchy that consists of plants, animals, "man", and Culture. (10) "A High Culture is plantlike in its attachment to its original soil ....; animal-like in its ruthless devouring of other life-forms; man-like in its spirituality; and original in its power to transform human life, its great life span, and the forcefulness of its destiny." (11) However, not everyone belongs to a Culture. Those outside are no better than animals. "... Man's life in primitivity, and in an area where a High Culture is fulfilling itself, are two incommensurable things. . . . Vis-a-vis the history of Culture-man, primitive man seems merely zoological." (12) By Yockey's premises, there is no such thing as humanity, and therefore no universal ethical duties which any human being owes to any other human being. In fact, there is no serious discussion of ethics in "Imperium". Yockey implies something about his ethical philosophy when he asserts that a Culture proves its "lifeworthiness" by conquest and looting. We can also now note an important feature of Yockey's methodology. Whenever in history Europe is antagonistic to those outside, he cites "the facts" to support him. He ignores the many known historical facts of borrowing between Cultures, or of peace between them. For instance, as Yockey defines his terms, Christianity must be considered a product of at least two non-Western Cultures, the Classical and the Arabian. In the Arabian, Yockey includes not only the Arab civilization at its height, but also both the ancient Israelites and all modern Jews. Nonetheless, Christianity has had a profound influence over the arts, literature, social life and politics of Europe during the whole of what Yockey calls "the Western Culture." So what are we to make of Christianity, according to Yockey's scheme? A profound silence on this subject is maintained throughout the book. A Culture must have a Culture-bearing stratum, which contains all the creators of "religion, philosophy, science, music, literature, the arts of form, mathematics, politics, technics [i.e., technology], and war." It also contains the appreciators who "transmit the great creations downward" and thereby recruit the more talented of individuals into the Culture-bearing stratum. The Culture-bearing stratum is not a class. Some of its members are poor (like Beethoven), and others are unnoticed until after their deaths (like Copernicus and Kierkegaard). (13) According to Yockey, the life-cycle of a Culture is as follows. First there is a Race, which then develops into one or more Peoples, which then develop into Nations, after which there is a Civilization-Crisis, which ends with the resurgence of Authority and the founding of an Imperium. Civilization is the stage at which a Culture becomes "completely externalized" through conflicts (military and Cultural) with alien peoples. Yockey is unclear on the precise difference between the terms "Civilization" and "Civilization-Crisis." He seems to be saying that Civilization is a higher category comprising the two stages of Civilization-Crisis, and Imperium. (14) According to Yockey, it is possible to recognize a person's race at a glance, but he admits that it is difficult to say exactly how one knows a person's race. For Yockey, pigmentation and facial characteristics are mere "group anatomy," and insufficient to characterize a race, for a race possesses a "spiritual" as well as a material nature. He concedes that races can only be classified "arbitrarily," though he also maintains that a Race is "organically" related to its native soil. (15) However, races can be ranked in a hierarchy according to function. The function that Yockey considers most important is "will-to-power." Will to power, the desire to control, is the fundamental difference between human beings and animals. Only by classifying races by will-to-power can modern history and the imperatives of the Western Culture in this age be understood. (16) Will to power is a healthy racial instinct, and is not only good for soldiers, but also impels the higher intellectual achievements of a ulture. "Life which places rationalistic ideas of 'individualism,' 'happiness,' 'freedom' before the perpetuation and increase of power is decadent. Decadent means moving towards extinction, extinction of Higher Life in particular, and finally even of the life of the race." (17) Two things, a superpersonal idea and a leader, transform a Race into a People. The superpersonal idea is communicated by a leader, or a leader-stratum. The leader and the superpersonal idea can be, but are not necessarily, at the service of a Culture. The leader can transform a race into a people if he harmonizes instinct and intellect. "Instinct says, preserve! Multiply! Increase power! Intellect seeks means of preserving Life and increasing power." (18) There must also be some tension between the People and the surrounding human environment. (19) Peoples can exist outside a Culture, but only a Culture is able create Nations. Each Culture has its own conception of nations. In the Arabian Culture, people of the same religion were of the same nation. Their nations had no national frontiers at all. All Muslims were a nation, and all Jews another. In the Classical Culture, the nation was the City-state, a few hundred square miles in extent. The modern concept of a nation-state with wide-ranging boundaries would have been incomprehensible to inhabitants of Arabian or Classical Culture. (20) Nations play a role in the development of the Culture. A Culture goes through a succession of stages, and each stage has its corresponding Spirit of the Age. Since each Nation has a distinct Nation-Idea, the Nation whose Nation-Idea best expresses the Spirt of the Age will come to dominate the Culture. The Nation-Idea is not something that can be summarized in words, but can only be shown by deeds. The English Nation-Idea, for instance, includes Rationalism, money-making, and parliaments. These ideas (which most people would call institutions) have advanced in recent centuries because the English Nation-Idea was in tune with the Spirit of the Age during the "English Age," which Yockey dates from 1750 to 1900. (21) At the height of the Civilization-Crisis, whatever the constitutional law may say, the real power behind the government is the Master of Money. Rationalistic theories of all sorts are now his servant in the realm of thought. Rationalism's "sole effect is to destroy. It destroys . . . art forms and literature, its destroys traditions of service, dignity, loyalty, honor. It destroys the State-idea as embodied in its last refined form, the Absolute State. It lays Civilization waste from within, politically speaking." Meanwhile, the Master of Money keeps all real power in his own hands by corrupt means. What can freedom mean in such a setting? Only two things. "Freedom was attractive to two great groups, the intellectuals and the trading-class. To both of them, the State was a burden. For its one pulse, one imperative . . . the pavement-intellectuals wish to substitute universal criticism, and the traders introduce universal trade without any restriction whatever. . . . The intellectual with his atheist pamphlet and the trader in his counting-house are respectively the masters in the democratic world of thought and action." (22) The twentieth and twenty-first centuries mark the transition from the Civilization-Crisis to the resurgence of Tradition and Authority, and creation of an Imperium. The Imperium will unite all the Nations of the Western Culture, and it will be governed by an Absolutist State. (23) Yockey makes a detailed attempt to demonstrate the Civilization-Crisis only in the Western Culture. He makes passing references to such a stage in the Classical, Egyptian, and Chinese Cultures, and merely asserts that it occurred in the other four. In the whole text of "Imperium", nearly all of the historical references come from the Western and Classical Cultures, with only occasional references to Egypt and China, and about two sentences on the "Arabian" Culture. The others are barely mentioned. In fact, there are no footnotes at all in "Imperium", and according to Carto's introduction, Yockey wrote the entire book without notes. In short, Yockey has failed to document adequately the life cycle of a Culture from his eight historical Cultures. Therefore, there are no historical grounds for believing what he says about the Civilization-Crisis and the Destiny of the "Western Culture." Yockey on Politics When Yockey speaks of the State, he refers to sovereignty, like a European theorist, not to the autonomous States of the Union which most Americans means with they speak of "States." His views on the State can be summarized briefly. "The State is the form of the nation for action." In Western Culture, it transforms itself through stage of (a) Empire and Papacy; (b) Feudal or aristocratic State; (c) Absolutist State; (d) Democracy, by which he means the whole history of constitutional and elected government; and (e) Resurgence of the Absolute State, which instead of being merely National constitutes the unity of the West in a single Imperium. (24) "Politics," as Yockey defines it for us, "is activity in relation to power. . . . Thus it is not morality, it is not esthetics, it is not economics. . . . The way politics divides the world is into friend and enemy." (25) Inner political differences within a State can exist, but if the State has to resort to force, then there are at least temporarily two States, not one. Yockey sometimes uses the term "political unit" to mean State. (26) Since he separates politics from morality, he provides what he calls a political justification for war. "Units engaged in politics may either gain or lose power. Instinct and understanding direct them to seek to increase power. War is the most intense method of trying to increase power. Thus a war that has no practically foreseeable possibility of increasing power is not politically justifiable. A war which promises an increase in power is politically justifiable." (27) He goes on to declare that a political victory can emerge from a military defeat. His example is the utter defeat of France in the Napoleonic Wars, followed by Tallyrand's diplomatic victory for France at the "Congress of Vienna." Yockey's illustration proves the opposite of what he claims for it. When we compare France's position in defeat after the negotiated settlement at the Congress of Europe with its highly influential diplomatic and strategic position in the last quarter of the eighteenth century, it is obvious that France lost power. By Yockey's own criteria, France was defeated. Yockey's definition of a true enemy is very revealing. "To say that a unit gained a military victory and also suffered a political defeat is only another way of saying that the military opponent was not a real enemy. A real enemy is he whom one can strike down and thereby increase one's own power." (28) The real enemy is someone weaker than oneself. This is the consequence of Yockey's complete separating of politics from ethics: the politics of a bully, and therefore the politics of a coward. He criticizes Great Britain for fighting two World Wars. In the process, he says, Britain lost commercial supremacy, supremacy at sea, the Empire, and even allegedly its own independence, and survives as a weaker ally of the United States. How did this disaster happen? Because Germany and Britain were not real enemies. Both were a part of Europe and therefore of the Western Civilization. Their real enemies were Russia, Japan, and the United States. Yockey, an expatriate American, does not regard Russians and his fellow countrymen as part of the Western Culture. To him, both are as alien as Japan. (29) Is "Imperium" a post-War rationalization for the Nazis? Yockey himself removes all doubt. Referring to the end of the Second World War, he says, "The Western Civilization was not extinguished . . . even though it was brought to the lowest possible point politically." (30) This can only mean that Germany and her allies were the political representatives of Western Civilization in that war. Yockey does not note the fact that Japan, alleged threat to the West, was Hitler's ally. Perhaps he considers the alliance with Japan as Hitler's temporary expedient, like his two-year-long pact with Stalin. Yockey's attitude toward cross-cultural borrowing and cooperation can be summarized in two words: Culture Pathology. Because a Culture is a form of life, it can suffer from diseases, which can kill it, thereby preventing it from achieving its destiny. As Culture Pathologist, Yockey enumerates three diseases: Culture Parasitism, Culture Distortion, and Culture Retardation. Immigrants into an Alien culture cause Cultural Parasitism. They are parasites because the native Culture comes into conflict with them, and has to expend energy fighting them. Race riots in the United States are Cultural conflicts, in which the host body is attempting to expel the parasites. Such conflicts are not caused by hatred, intolerance, or ignorance. Hatred, intolerance, and ignorance are merely traits of individuals. However, racial conflicts are the result of "higher organic unities" which "impel the mere individuals." (31) Culture Distortion is the borrowing from one culture into another. Any sort of borrowing is unhealthy to the Culture and prevents it from achieving its destiny. Inviting in troops from a State Alien to the Culture---such as the Russian troops in Europe in 1815 and in 1945 and after---is Culture Distortion, for instance, since Russia is outside the European Culture-idea. The political influence of Jews in American life is Culture Distortion also. Writing in 1948, Yockey insists that the Jews control broadcasting, the film industry, book and magazine publishing, and the Universities, as well as both political parties. The election of Franklin D. Roosevelt was "the American Revolution of 1993," in which the Culture Distorters (that is, the Jews) took over the U. S. Government. (32) Culture Retardation is the failure to keep up with the latest advances of the Culture. In America, it means that Americans do not appreciate the advances in thought made by Oswald Spengler and other twentieth century German apologists for the Third Reich. (33) By this point, the reader call well imagine what Yockey thinks of the Jews. Because of the Middle Eastern (Yockey prefers "Arabian") origin of their religion, the Jews are spiritually alien to the Western Civilization. It is only to be expected that the European or European-descended majority would resent their presence, or even persecute them. The Jews would as naturally resent the Gentile majority in return. (34) When Jews in Great Britain and America were given equal rights, they merely took advantage of their Gentile fellow-citizens, as revenge for many years of persecution. They used the new freedom to undermine the Western Culture, working through secret societies such as "the Illuminati and its offspring." Yockey believes that the Jews have one ethic for themselves and another for the Gentiles, which requires them to treat a fellow Jew decently, and allows any crime no matter how vile if done by a Jew to a Gentile. These are standard anti-Semitic slurs. Anti-Semitism is no problem for Yockey. He sees it as a sign of the fundamental health of Western Civilization. "Anti-Semitism is precisely analogous in Culture pathology to the formation of anti-bodies in the bloodstream in human pathology. In both cases, the organism is resisting the alien life." (35) In other words, the Jews are bacteria, and their presence makes Western Culture sick. We have seen that Yockey uses historical facts to prove his point about the necessity of conflict between a Culture and anyone from outside it. However, when he deals with cross-cultural influences, he places a value judgement on the facts, calling them symptoms of Culture Pathology. The medical analogy does not disguise his obviously contradictory and subjective method of treating the facts. One might as well compare anti-Semitism to the immune system's attempts to reject a kidney transplant, even though the host body needs at least one functioning kidney and both original kidneys have had to be removed. Yockey's alleged Jewish-controlled conspiracies, of course, do not exist. Judaism teaches that a Jew has precisely the same ethical duties toward a Gentile as toward another Jew. Because Yockey avoids discussing religion in any concrete terms, he never explains in what precise sense the Jews, whose ancestors wrote most of the Bible, can be "spiritually alien" in the predominantly Christian Western Civilization. Given all Yockey has said about the utterly alien nature of the Jews, and given what he has said throughout "Imperium" about the inevitability of conflict between Cultures, then presumably he would consider the Holocaust, in which millions of Jews perished, to be just another example of the German antibodies consuming the alien Jewish bacteria, out of organic necessity. Yockey does not do this. Writing in 1948, he is a pioneer of what is now called Holocaust denial. The photographic evidence is all fraudulent, the gas chambers never existed, and the survivors are all liars. After all, the Jews have one ethic for themselves and another for the Gentiles, so why wouldn't they lie to us? This is what Yockey really meant when he condemned as propaganda the evidence which he was required to gather for the War Crimes Tribunal. (36) According to Yockey, American ideas of liberty and equal rights are nonsense, and were only adopted because the Spirit of the Age was the spirit of the Civilization-Crisis, which promotes individualism and every type of decadence in the name of liberty. In his chapters on America, he repeats the charges which many others have made before him, in his own time, and since, about corruption in American politics. Yockey, however, is not interested in reform. He even questions whether European settlers should have come to America to begin with. White people are "organically" related to their home soil in Europe, and emigration to other continents weakens their resistance to Culture Pathology. (37) The pro-Axis minority in the United States who still opposed the war after Pearl Harbor were the real patriots of World War II in America: "Certain American nationalists were held in gaol for having said in 1941 that a military defeat was to be desired for the welfare of America, since a defeat would destroy the hold of the Culture-distorting group." Those who fought were merely dupes of the Culture Distorters who have controlled America since 1933. (38) If the Axis was fighting for Western Civilization, did the defeat of Germany in World War II spell the doom of the West? Yockey urges the sympathetic reader to take courage. The Spirit of the Age favors revival of the Imperium. Men will no longer die for "liberty." The last chapter of the book is an extended outburst of ranting, the text of which Yockey might have subsequently used in his Hyde Park addresses on behalf of the European Liberation Front. In these last few fervid pages, he assures us that the West possesses "the mightiest superpersonal idea that has ever appeared on this earth-ball." He looks forward to the day when "the Western banner waves on its home soil from Gibralter to the North Cape, and from the rocky promontories of Galway to the Urals." There is no room for his native America in such a vision. Yockey finishes with his favorite quote from Nietzsche: "What does not destroy me makes me stronger," which he presents both in English and in the original German. Conclusion Yockey repeatedly calls for a resurgence of Faith, Tradition, and Authority. Implicitly, Yockey asks the reader of "Imperium" to take his philosophy of history on faith. If "Imperium" is a religious revelation to be accepted on faith, then we can take Western Culture to be its God. Oswald Spengler or Friedrich Nietzsche takes the place of Abraham, the nations of Europe play the role of Israelites, the upcoming Western Imperium is the location of the Promised Land, and Adolph Hitler is the Aryan Moses who pointed the way to the Promised Land without himself being allowed to enter it. If this is Yockey's faith, what personal satisfaction did he receive from it? Earlier we noted that, according to Carto's admiring preface, Yockey's brilliance provoked envy in those less talented than himself throughout his life. Yockey could play the piano well enough for the concert hall, was able to speak several languages, never lost a case in the courtroom, was well-versed in finance, and, above all, knew all the main issues of modern philosophy. Carto does not mention that Yockey's discharge from military service in 1942 was for dementia praecox, a synonym for schizophrenia. His medical report stated that he head disembodied voices speaking to him, believed that a great destiny lay ahead for him, and included important world leaders in his delusions. Perhaps he did have all the intellectual gifts and talents which Carto ascribes to him, but the schizophrenic episode of 1942, even if of brief duration, is the real clue to his philosophy, and to his faith. Yockey's undocumented and ill-conceived "Imperium" is a pseudoscholarly rationalization of his delusion that the envious and resentful dupes of Culture Distortion who were forever dogging him. Yockey wrote "Imperium" confident that History would vindicate him, for it was his destiny to be the prophet of the future Western Imperium! Footnotes (1) Friedrich Nietzsche was not, or course, a twentieth-century man, but Yockey credits him for anticipating the Spirit of the Age of the next age. (2) Yockey, Francis Parker, "Imperium," (Sausalito, California, 1969), pp. 1-8. All references are from the paperback reprint of "Imperium" published by Noontide Press at the date given. Not only are Yockey's definitions of the terms Culture and Civilization unusual, he scatters other idiosyncratic usages through "Imperium". He uses the adjective "erotic" to mean "eroticism" or "eros." In the place of "traditional" he always says "traditionary," a less familiar but acceptable synonym. Instead of "technology" he always writes "technics," which is an acceptable synonym for "techniques," but not of "technology." He refers to Charlemagne in one place as Karl der Grosse, and in a passing reference to the Belgium city of Dunkirk, he calls it Dunkirchen. Throughout, Yockey's choice of words reveals a fondness for the sometimes inappropriate display of obscure vocabulary, and shows him to be an extreme Germanophile. (3) Ibid., 29-37. In opposing the "linear" view of history, Spengler wished to give appropriate significance to the breakdown of the Classical civilization through barbarian invasions during the 5th Century A.D. However, the debt of Western Civilization to the Classical world has been vast and deep. How can a sharp line be drawn between 5th century Rome and Medieval Europe? Since "Imperium" was written, Spengler's criticism of the "linear view" of history has been more convincingly made by Arnold Toynbee and others. Toynbee, for instance, does not insist on the enmity of different Cultures. His theory that a "universal church" can survive from the end of one civilization to the beginning of another accounts for Spengler's objection, without ignoring the profound cultural influence of the Roman Catholic Church, a legacy of ancient Rome and of the ancient Jews, on Medieval Europe. (4) Ibid., 12. (5) Ibid., 13. (6) Ibid., 13. (7) Ibid., 66-97, 224-230. Yockey's critique of Marxism is directed at a narrow, mechanical post-Engels Marxism which was popularized during his lifetime by pro-Moscow intellectuals and propagandists. Yockey is unaware that Marx and Engels conceded that an idea can achieve a "material force" when it is believed in and acted upon by large numbers of people. However, many Marxists of Yockey's time, and since, have been equally unaware of this concept. Yockey's treatment of Darwinism and Freudianism is equally superficial, and with less excuse, since all the significant concepts of Darwin and Freud had been widely published and debated in the literature available in his time. (8) Ibid., 13. (9) Ibid., 9. (10) Ibid., 38-39. (11) Ibid., 369. Like nearly every male English language author before 1975 or so, Yockey uses "man" where many people today would say "humanity" or "human beings" or "a man or woman." (12) Ibid., 43. (13) Ibid., 253-254. (14) Ibid., 612-614. (15) Ibid., 274-285. (16) Ibid., 286-291. Despite all he has just told us, Yockey has no difficulty detecting "blondness" as the physical sign of strong will-to-power in European populations. (17) Ibid., 294-295. (18) Ibid., 321. (19) Ibid., 323. (20) Ibid., 330. (21) Ibid., 334-337. (22) Ibid., 362-363. (23) Ibid., 364-366. (24) Ibid., 355-362. (25) Ibid., 127. (26) Ibid., 131. (27) Ibid., 147. (28) Ibid., 149. (29) Ibid., 150. (30) Ibid., 123. (31) Ibid., 376-381. (32) Ibid., 402-439, 491-511. (33) Ibid., 517-523. (34) Ibid., 311-313. (35) Ibid., 381-391. (36) Ibid., 533. (37) Ibid., 450-471. (38) Ibid., 549-558. (39) Lipstadt, Deborah, "Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory," (New York, 1993), p. 147.
Site Map ·
What's New? ·
© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012
Home · Site Map · What's New? · Search Nizkor