【推文】Yuri Bezmenov's Ghost - Each form of "woke" has a shared esoteric trunk...(2/2)

連結

• 推文1 - x.com/ne_pas_couvrir...

• 推文1 - Thread Reader App版本（一頁版本） - threadreaderapp.com/...

• 推文2 - x.com/Ne_pas_couvrir...

• 推文2 - Thread Reader App版本（一頁版本） - threadreaderapp.com/...

• 推文3 - x.com/Ne_pas_couvrir...

• 推文3 - Thread Reader App版本（一頁版本） - threadreaderapp.com/...

原文及個人翻譯

推文2

I omitted Rousseau here on purpose looking for a loose thread.
Fun fact, Rousseau’s role as a librarian-secretary in the 1740s placed him in direct contact with aristocratic libraries, which, by the mid-18th century, often included esoteric works. The Kabbala Denudata (1677–1684) was commonly found in well-stocked French libraries, and Pico della Mirandola’s works were widely accessible. Aristocratic libraries, likely including those of the Dupins, contained esoteric works due to the 18th-century fascination with occultism, fueled by cheap printing and Parisian dealers. Rousseau’s task of indexing such collections makes it highly likely he handled these texts in the 1740s and thus influenced Discourse on the Origin of Inequality (1755) and The Social Contract (1762). 

Another is that Rousseau, in the 1740s, was closely associated with the Dupin salon as secretary and tutor; that salon was a key Parisian intellectual hub. The exposure is also plausible here, considering prevalence of such ideas in 1740s Parisian intellectual circles. 

At any rate, Hegel’s reference to volonte generale shows he read Rousseau closely, but his dialectic absolutely and clearly metaphysical, and draws a direct line to Böhme’s mystical, esoteric framework. At any rate, it's enough to link Hegel to Böhme here. The esoteric links are many. To wit, Hess himself has many more branches not discussed in the thread.

我這裡有意識地省略了盧梭，是爲了尋找一個鬆散的線索。
有趣的是，盧梭在 1740 年代擔任圖書管理員和秘書的工作，使他直接接觸到貴族圖書館，而到了 18 世紀中葉，這些圖書館通常包含神秘主義作品。《卡巴拉解密》（1677-1684）經常出現在裝置齊全的法國圖書館中，皮科·德拉·米蘭多拉的作品也廣泛傳播。 由於 18 世紀對神秘學的癡迷，以及廉價印刷和巴黎經銷商的影響，貴族圖書館（很可能包括杜潘家族的圖書館）包含神秘主義作品。 盧梭的任務是編錄這些藏書，因此很有可能他在 1740 年代接觸過這些文字，從而影響了他的《論人類起源》（1755 年）和《社會契約》（1762 年）。
另一個原因是，在 1740 年代，盧梭作為秘書和家庭教師與杜邦沙龍關係密切；該沙龍是巴黎重要的知識中心。 考慮到這些思想在 1740 年代巴黎知識圈中的普遍性，這種接觸也是有可能的。
無論如何，黑格爾對「一般意志」的引用表明他仔細閱讀了盧梭的作品，但他的辯證法絕對且明確地是形而上學的，並且直接與波赫姆神秘主義和神秘主義框架相聯繫。 無論如何，這裡足以將黑格爾與波赫姆聯繫起來。 神秘主義的聯繫有很多。 例如，赫斯本人還有更多未在本文中討論的分支。

A draft Rousseau entry for the Esoteric Left so far, while I chase down threads:

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778): In the Discourse on the Origin of Inequality (1755), he traces humanity's fall from natural freedom to the moment "The first man, who after enclosing a piece of ground, took it into his head to say, this is mine," inaugurating property and with it structural dependence and conflict. This act becomes a social rupture that, at a structural level, mirrors Luria's shevirat ha-kelim, an original wholeness shattering into contending fragments.

Rousseau presents property as the wellspring of inequality and a condition that anticipates the Hess and Marxian concept of alienation, itself a secular echo of Kabbalah's exile of divine sparks after shevirat ha-kelim. In the Social Contract (1762), the general will offers collective self-legislation able to re-knit citizens into civic unity, provided extremes of wealth are curbed.

以下是盧梭在神秘主義左翼中的一個草稿條目，我還在追查線索：

讓-雅克·盧梭（1712–1778）：在他《論人類起源》（1755 年）中，他追溯了人類從自然自由到「第一個將一塊土地圈起來，並心想『這是我的』的人」的墮落時刻，從而開啟了私有制以及隨之而來的結構性依賴和衝突。 這個行為成為一種社會斷裂，在結構層面上，它反映了盧里亞的 shevirat ha-kelim（神光的破碎），即最初的完整性分裂成相互競爭的碎片。

盧梭將私有制視為不平等的源泉以及一種預示赫斯和馬克思關於異化的概念的狀態，而異化本身是卡巴拉中 shevirat ha-kelim 之後神光流亡的一個世俗的回聲。 在《社會契約》（1762 年）中，「一般意志」提供了一種集體自我立法，能夠將公民重新編織成公民統一體，前提是抑制財富的極端積累。

Rousseau likely encountered Christian Kabbalistic texts (e.g., Kabbala Denudata, Pico della Mirandola, Johannes Reuchlin) while cataloging aristocratic libraries for the Dupin family (1745–1747) and engaging with their Parisian salon, a key intellectual hub where such ideas may have circulated. He may have concealed their influence, presenting their rupture-and-repair logic in secular Enlightenment terms.

Rousseau's narrative feeds the esoteric-left pattern of fracture and restoration, which Kant refines into moral autonomy, Fichte radicalizes into ethical striving, and Hegel integrates into Geist, drawing the cosmic dialectic from Böhme's Ungrund but grounding its political embodiment in Rousseau's volonté générale, a doctrine of popular sovereignty that channels the dialectic into the ethical State's institutional form. 

Rousseau’s association with the Dupin family spans a range of years, but here’s a summary:
1743: Initial contact and possible informal work as a tutor or assistant.
1745–1747: Formal employment as a librarian-secretary, with significant access to the library and contributions to intellectual projects.
Up to 1751: Extended association, though his active secretarial role ended around 1747, with his departure around 1751.

盧梭可能在為杜邦家族編目貴族圖書館（1745-1747 年）時，以及與他們在巴黎的沙龍互動時，接觸到基督教卡巴拉文字（例如，《卡巴拉解密》、《皮科·德拉·米蘭多拉》、《約翰內斯·雷克林》），而該沙龍是知識交流的重要中心。 他可能隱藏了這些影響，以世俗啓蒙術語呈現出它們的分裂和修復邏輯。

盧梭的敘述延續了神秘主義左翼的斷裂與恢復模式，康德將其完善為道德自主性，菲希特將其激進化為倫理追求，而黑格爾將其整合到精神領域中，從波赫姆的 Ungrund（原始混沌）中汲取宇宙辯證法，但將它的政治體現根植于盧梭的「一般意志」，這是一種人民主權的教義，它將辯證法轉化為倫理國家的制度形式。

盧梭與杜邦家族的關係持續了幾年，以下是總結：
1743 年：初步接觸以及可能的非正式工作，擔任家庭教師或助手。
1745–1747 年：正式僱傭，擔任圖書管理員和秘書，可以訪問圖書館併爲知識專案做出貢獻。
至 1751 年：持續的聯繫，儘管他作為秘書的積極角色在 1747 年左右結束，並在 1751 年左右離開。

推文3

Esoteric Right Draft: Carl Schmitt (1888–1985):
As a pivotal theorist bridging counter-revolutionary absolutism and twentieth-century authoritarianism within esoteric right trajectories, Carl Schmitt critiques liberal parliamentary democracy through a decisionist lens rooted deeply in Joseph de Maistre, Juan Donoso Cortés, Søren Kierkegaard, and indirect mystical influences. Rejecting liberal proceduralism as a depoliticizing illusion, Schmitt emphasizes the sovereign's existential act, distinct from and superior to Hegelian dialectical syntheses or progressive reconciliations. His conceptual framing centers on the concrete order (konkrete Ordnung) and the fundamental friend-enemy distinction, secularizing esoteric motifs of hierarchical guardianship and metaphysical restraint of chaos. Schmitt's work profoundly influences subsequent esoteric-right figures such as Julius Evola, Aleksandr Dugin, and contemporary identitarians, who employ his concepts for civilizational defense against globalist homogenization, stressing collective solidarity and existential threats within zero-sum political conflicts.

Born in 1888, Schmitt grew up within a devout Catholic family and pursued legal studies at Berlin, Munich, and Strasbourg. His formative years included service in World War I, which reinforced his conviction in decisive authority amid societal chaos. Although personal controversies and two marriages distanced him from institutional Catholicism, Schmitt preserved Catholic motifs of authority, hierarchy, and existential crisis within his secularized political theology. He joined the Nazi Party in 1933, becoming the regime's "crown jurist" before falling from favor in 1936. Post-war, Schmitt refused denazification and lived intellectually secluded, yet he continued producing influential writings on international law, nomos, and partisan warfare.

神秘主義右翼草稿：卡爾·施密特（1888–1985）：

作為連線反革命絕對主義和 20 世紀威權主義的關鍵理論家，卡爾·施密特通過一種根植于約瑟夫·德·梅斯特、胡安·多諾索·科爾特斯、索倫·克爾凱郭爾以及間接神秘影響的決策主義視角，批判自由議會民主制。 施密特拒絕將自由程式主義視為一種去政治化的幻覺，他強調主權的生存行為，這種行為不同於並且優於黑格爾辯證綜合或進步和解。 他的概念框架以「具體秩序」（konkrete Ordnung）和根本的「朋友-敵人」區別為中心，這些是世俗化的神秘主義主題，涉及等級制的守護和對混沌的形而上學的約束。 施密特的作品深刻影響了後來的神秘主義右翼人物，如朱利烏斯·埃沃拉、亞歷山大·杜金以及當代身份認同者，他們利用他的概念來捍衛文明免受全球主義同質化的威脅，強調集體團結和零和政治衝突中的生存威脅。

施密特於 1888 年出生，在一個虔誠的天主教家庭中長大，並在柏林、慕尼黑和斯特拉斯堡學習法律。 他早期的經歷包括參加第一次世界大戰，這加強了他對社會混亂中決定性權威的信念。 儘管個人爭議和兩次婚姻使他與機構天主教疏遠，但施密特在世俗化的政治神學中保留了天主教的權威、等級制度和生存危機的motif。 他于 1933 年加入納粹黨，成為該政權的「王冠法律師」，但在 1936 年受到打擊。 二戰後，施密特拒絕去納粹化，並過著智力上的隱居生活，但他繼續創作有影響力的著作，內容涉及國際法、諾莫斯和游擊戰爭。

In core works such as Dictatorship (1921), Political Theology (1922), Roman Catholicism and Political Form (1923), The Concept of the Political (1927/1932), and The Leviathan in the State Theory of Thomas Hobbes (1938), Schmitt defines sovereignty explicitly as "he who decides on the exception," an existential intervention akin to divine creation, transcending legal norms to preserve communal survival during crises. Schmitt differentiates commissarial dictatorship (temporary and restorative, exemplified historically by the Roman dictator) from sovereign dictatorship, which establishes entirely new political foundations without normative constraints. Norms derive hierarchically from exceptions without synthetic reconciliation, echoing Kierkegaard's existential leap. Konkrete Ordnung expresses a community's substantive ethos, institutions, and historical identity over abstract universalism. Politics hinges fundamentally on distinguishing friends from existential enemies, thereby creating unity through collective threat identification rather than liberal individualism. Schmitt critiques liberal neutralization, which he argues obscures inherent violence and exacerbates conflicts by moralizing enemies as subhuman. In Roman Catholicism, the Church's hierarchical structure models political stability as a bulwark against secular fragmentation and chaos.

在覈心著作中，如《獨裁》（1921 年）、《政治神學》（1922 年）、《羅馬天主教與政治形式》（1923 年）、《政治的概念》（1927/1932 年）以及《托馬斯·霍布斯的國家理論中的利維坦》（1938 年），施密特明確地將主權定義為「決定例外的人」，這是一種類似於神創的生存干預，它超越了法律規範，以在危機期間維護社群的生存。 施密特區分了委員會式獨裁（臨時和恢復性，歷史上以羅馬獨裁官為例）和主權獨裁，後者在沒有任何規範約束的情況下，建立完全新的政治基礎。 規範從例外情況中等級地衍生出來，而沒有合成的和解，這呼應了克爾凱郭爾的生存飛躍。《具體秩序》表達了一個社群實質性的倫理、制度和歷史認同，而不是抽像的普遍主義。 政治的根本在於區分朋友和生存敵人，從而通過集體威脅識別來創造團結，而不是自由個人主義。 施密特批判自由中立化，他認為這會掩蓋內在的暴力，並通過將敵人道德化為非人而加劇衝突。 在《羅馬天主教》一書中，教會的等級結構是政治穩定的典範，它抵禦著世俗的分裂和混亂。

Schmitt's esotericism functions as a "hidden" layer in his political theology: a secularized metaphysics where sovereignty echoes divine or mythical interventions, restraining chaos in an era of modernity's disenchantment. He subtly exposes how liberal neutrality conceals deeper antagonistic forces, drawing from counter-revolutionary theology and Pauline eschatology to contend that politics is essentially about safeguarding against dissolution. At the heart of Schmitt's political theology lies the katechon from Second Thessalonians (2:6-7), the restrainer of chaos that postpones apocalyptic dissolution. Schmitt employs this concept both eschatologically and politically as a bulwark against revolutionary ideologies such as liberalism and communism, which he sees as unleashing anarchy. It represents a reactionary chronopolitics, channeling millenarian energies toward maintaining hierarchical order amid modern disenchantment. In The Leviathan in the State Theory of Thomas Hobbes, Schmitt argues that Jean Bodin’s image of sovereignty as a necessary yet ultimately limited bulwark against disorder reflects an undercurrent of late-Renaissance esotericism (Christian Hermeticism, Gnostic dualism, and Kabbalah) rather than a strictly juridical doctrine. Through this lineage, Schmitt suggests, modern state theory inherits an ambivalent, almost apotropaic view of political power: it can restrain chaos but never finally redeem it. This perspective frames modernity's decay as an esoteric legacy, wherein spiritual elites confront material chaos, aligned with Hermetic undertones of concealed powers shaping the visible order.

施密特的神秘主義作為一種「隱藏」層存在於他的政治神學中：這是一種世俗化的形而上學，其中主權與神聖或神話干預相呼應，在現代的去魅時代約束著混亂。 他巧妙地揭示了自由中立性如何掩蓋更深層次的對抗力量，借鑑反革命神學和保羅的末世論，認為政治本質上是爲了防止解體。 施密特政治神學的核心在於《后使徒書》第二章6-7節中的katechon（約束者），它是一種可以推遲末日解體的混亂抑制者。 施密特將這個概念既用於末世論上，也用於政治上，作為一種抵禦革命意識形態的屏障，例如自由主義和共產主義，他認為這些意識形態會釋放無政府狀態。 它代表了一種反動的時間政治，將千禧年的能量引導到維護等級秩序中，以應對現代的去魅。 在《托馬斯·霍布斯的國家理論中的利維坦》一書中，施密特認為，讓·博丹對主權作為一種必要但最終有限的抵禦混亂屏障的描述，反映了一種晚期文藝復興神秘主義的潛在因素（基督教鍊金術、諾斯蒂克二元論和卡巴拉），而不是嚴格的法律教義。 通過這種傳承，施密特認為，現代國家理論繼承了一種對政治權力的曖昧、近乎護身符的看法：它可以約束混亂，但永遠無法最終救贖它。 這種視角將現代的衰落視為一種神秘主義遺產，其中精神精英面對物質混亂，這與鍊金術中隱藏的力量塑造可見秩序的潛在含義相一致。

Schmitt anticipates game-theoretic thinking by framing politics as an inescapable, zero-sum contest between collectives, where individualist liberalism fails because it ignores strategic antagonism. "Collective consciousness" for Schmitt can be read as konkrete Ordnung: a shared communal ethos enabling group action as a unified "player" in the political game, contrasting with atomized individuals. The friend-enemy distinction reduces to distinguishing friend from enemy, where groups unite against an "other" in potential combat. This is game-theoretic: politics as strategic conflict where collectives act as players in a non-cooperative, zero-sum scenario: winning demands solidarity and sacrifice, with no neutral ground. In crises (exceptions), the sovereign makes the "move" to suspend norms, distinguishing commissarial from sovereign dictatorship. This is game-like: politics as infinite/finite games where fluid identities enable cooperation beyond closed individualism. Liberal democracy expands into all spheres via "will of the people," turning social/personal into political: politics infuses collective consciousness, erasing non-political space. Without homogeneous ethos, it becomes mathematical majoritarianism, where groups strategize for dominance.

施密特通過將政治視為集體之間不可避免的、零和對抗，預示了博弈論思維。 他認為，個人主義自由主義失敗是因為它忽略了戰略對抗。「集體意識」對於施密特來說可以理解為《具體秩序》：一種共享的社群倫理，能夠促成群體行動，使群體成為政治「遊戲」中的一個統一「參與者」，這與原子化的個體形成對比。 朋友-敵人區分歸結于區分朋友和敵人，其中群體爲了對抗潛在戰鬥中的「他者」而團結起來。 這是一種博弈論：政治是戰略衝突，集體作為非合作、零和情境中的參與者行動：獲勝需要團結和犧牲，沒有中立地帶。 在危機（例外）時期，主權者會採取「行動」，以暫停規範，從而區分委員會式獨裁和主權獨肥。 這就像遊戲一樣：政治是無限/有限的遊戲，其中流動的身份能夠促進超越封閉個人主義的合作。 自由民主通過「人民意志」擴充套件到所有領域，將社會/個人轉變為政治：政治滲透到集體意識中，消除了非政治空間。 如果沒有同質化的倫理，它就會變成數學上的多數統治，其中群體爲了獲得優勢而制定戰略。

This aligns with esoteric right interpretations by stressing decisionism as anti-universalist. Sovereignty embodies existential guardianship transcending legalism, with the elect as decisive elites preserving rooted communities against cosmopolitan shatter. Vilified by liberals as enabling fascism, Schmitt's thought is reclaimed for political vitality in post-war revivals like the Nouvelle Droite, Dugin's multipolarity, or recent debates linking him to Strauss and Benjamin on theology and sovereignty. Leftist appropriations (consider here Agamben on exceptions or Mouffe on agonism) emphasize power critique, but the esoteric right justifies hierarchical exclusion as essential.

Thus, Schmitt pivotalizes the lineage by secularizing counter-revolutionary theology into rigorous anti-liberal realism. His work links de Maistre's absolutism and Hegel's organicism to neo-Traditionalist emphases on decisive hierarchy against egalitarian chaos. It adapts group game theory to existential politics. Withdrawal is the sovereign's decisive action interrupting liberal norms like a divine contraction. Shatter is liberal depoliticization and fragmentation eroding communal ethos through neutralization and individualism. Repair is authoritative restoration of konkrete Ordnung through friend-enemy clarity and katechontic restraint. The elect are sovereign guardians restraining dissolution, embodying spiritual aristocracy amid modernity's perpetual crisis.

這與強調決策主義的反普遍論的神秘主義右翼解釋相一致。 主權體現了一種超越法律主義的存在性守護，其中被選中的人是具有決定性的精英，他們保護根深蒂固的社群免受宇宙主義的瓦解。 儘管自由主義者將他的思想妖魔化為可能導致法西斯主義，但施密特的思想在二戰後的復興運動中被重新解讀，例如新右翼、杜金的多極性，以及最近關於他與斯特勞斯和本傑明之間關於神學和主權的辯論。 左翼的解讀（可以考慮阿甘本對例外情況的闡述或穆夫對對抗性的闡述）強調權力批判，但神秘主義右翼將等級制度排除視為一種必要性。

因此，施密特通過將反革命神學世俗化為嚴謹的反自由現實主義，在這一傳承中發揮了關鍵作用。 他的作品將德·瑪伊斯特的絕對主義和黑格爾的有機主義與新傳統主義對決定性等級制度以對抗平等混亂的強調聯繫起來。 它將群體博弈論應用於存在主義政治。 撤退是主權者採取的決定性行動，它會中斷自由主義規範，就像神聖的收縮一樣。 瓦解是自由主義的去政治化和碎片化，通過中立性和個人主義侵蝕社群倫理。 修復是通過朋友-敵人清晰度和katechon約束對《具體秩序》的權威恢復。 被選中的人是主權守護者，他們會約束解體，並在現代永恒危機中體現精神貴族。