http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/02/notes-on-heidegger-and-evola/
Evola believed that history’s downward trajectory toward technological modernity and cultural decadence was a falling away from the world of Being into the world of contingency. Heidegger, however, regarded Evola’s essentially Platonic outlook as part of the decline itself, indeed as standing very close to its beginning.
For Heidegger, the Platonic distillation of Being as pure intelligibility and intellect as the capacity to intuit the intelligible is false because it is an abstraction that overlooks a more fundamental unity, a mutual belonging of historical man and meaningful worlds. For Heidegger, we are too close to things and to ourselves, too involved in them, to fully understand or control them. He believes that metaphysics posits both intelligible Being and a self-transparent intellect out of a drive for mastery. Thus the will to power that comes to fruition in global technological civilization is present at the very beginning of the metaphysical tradition.
Heidegger claims that we overlooked this fundamental unity because it, in effect, concealed itself. It is a historical event that cannot exist apart from man but nevertheless was not controlled by man either. The self-concealment of Beyng creates metaphysics. And metaphysics inaugurates the downward course of history, culminating in technological nihilism.
Contra Evola, the beginning of decline is not a fall from metaphysics, but a fall into metaphysics.
하이데거의 Dasein(현존재) 개념
Heidegger’s word for human nature, however, is Dasein, which means “being here/there.” Dasein is not a view from nowhere, but a view from somewhere. Dasein‘s outlook on the world is particular, not universal. It is particularized by space and time, and particularized by language and culture, which it shares with other Dasein in its community — but not with all of humanity. Heidegger is a philosopher of distinct identities, of the concrete, of the local, and of belonging, which is a mutual relationship: we belong to our world, and our world belongs to us. (The name of this concrete mutual belongingness is Ereignis.)
Heidegger’s concept of Dasein is inherently political. We are not the rational animal but the national animal, and nation is defined by a common history, language, culture, and destiny. The politics of Dasein is, therefore, ethnonationalism.
하이데거의 Ereignis(생기) 개념
Heidegger’s concept of “Beyng” (a rendering of his use of Seyn, the archaic spelling of the German Sein) refers to his concept of “Ereignis,” which is actually an unintelligible contingency that establishes different reigning interpretations of man and world.
요약하자면, 하이데거가
에볼라(esotericist, SS와 엘리트주의를 촉발시키고 파시스트를 유발시켰으며 Protocols of the Elders of Zion의 서문을 씀)
의 글을 being만 beyng으로 하이데거의 용법에 따라 바꾼 채 인용하여 읽은 것도 사실로 보이지만,
에볼라의 "world of Being"은 플라톤적인 의미이며, 에볼라는 형이상학으로부터의 유리가 세계의 하강의 시작이라고 보았지만, 하이데거는 형이상학으로의 몰입이 세계의 하강의 시작이라고 봤고,
하이데거는 "ethnonationalism" 이었고 에볼라는 "racial nationalism" 이었던 점에서(ethnonationalism은 racial nationalism을 포함하는 보다 더 큰 집합으로써 racial nationalism은 ethnic에서 racial, 즉 biological한 특징들만 추출한 것) 둘에는 어느정도 차이가 있다는 글.
