What do you think?
Rate this book
Imperium: la philosophie de l'histoire et de la politique, traduction française: la philosophie de l'histoire et de la politique: la philosophie
DECOUVREZ LE LIVRE QUI TERRORISE ENCORE L'AMERIQUE
M�connu en Europe et pourtant livre d'extr�me droite le plus vendu de tous les temps aux Etats-Unis, on a tous d�j� entendu parler de ce livre unique et d�rangeant, ne serait-ce que pour le film du m�me nom d�di� � l'extr�me droite am�ricaine o� il ne fait pourtant qu'une fugace apparition.
Mais ce qui est certain, c'est que ce livre a beaucoup � dire, m�me encore de nos jours: Imperium se veut la suite du d�clin de l'Occident de Spengler. En fait, l'auteur d'Imperium surpasse l'oeuvre de Spengler: il d�finit la Culture dans toute son importance et les cons�quences � long terme du multiculturalisme. Imperium �tudie et rejette les mauvais apports du XIXe si�cle: Marx, Freud, l'�tat pluraliste, le lib�ralisme, la d�mocratie, le communisme, l'internationalisme... Rien de tout cela ne satisfait les r�alit�s organiques et vitales de la politique. Imperium pr�sente des d�finitions et des explications politiques, sociales et historiques uniques, presque �sot�riques qui sont ind�niables et doivent �tre reconnues par tous avant qu'il ne soit trop tard, que l'Occident ne puisse plus survivre...
M�connu en Europe et pourtant livre d'extr�me droite le plus vendu de tous les temps aux Etats-Unis, on a tous d�j� entendu parler de ce livre unique et d�rangeant, ne serait-ce que pour le film du m�me nom d�di� � l'extr�me droite am�ricaine o� il ne fait pourtant qu'une fugace apparition.
Mais ce qui est certain, c'est que ce livre a beaucoup � dire, m�me encore de nos jours: Imperium se veut la suite du d�clin de l'Occident de Spengler. En fait, l'auteur d'Imperium surpasse l'oeuvre de Spengler: il d�finit la Culture dans toute son importance et les cons�quences � long terme du multiculturalisme. Imperium �tudie et rejette les mauvais apports du XIXe si�cle: Marx, Freud, l'�tat pluraliste, le lib�ralisme, la d�mocratie, le communisme, l'internationalisme... Rien de tout cela ne satisfait les r�alit�s organiques et vitales de la politique. Imperium pr�sente des d�finitions et des explications politiques, sociales et historiques uniques, presque �sot�riques qui sont ind�niables et doivent �tre reconnues par tous avant qu'il ne soit trop tard, que l'Occident ne puisse plus survivre...
566 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1948
163 people are currently reading
2399 people want to read
About the author
Francis Parker Yockey
15 books108 followersFrancis Parker Yockey was an American fascist, Pan-European and ideologue best known for his neo-Spenglerian book Imperium, published under the pen name Ulick Varange in 1948. This 600-page book argues for a race-based, totalitarian path for the "preservation of Western culture". Although best remembered today as a writer, Yockey was active with many far-Right causes around the world throughout his adult life until his suicide in FBI custody in 1960.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews
April 7, 2015
Turgid, impassioned and repetitious. How ironic that Yockey's dream of a united Europe is coming true, on his schedule...in the name of everything he despised.
February 22, 2016
Simultaneously brilliant and objectionable. Somewhat like reading Heidegger, since Yockey like National Socialism. However, it comes from the mind of a brilliant analyst and tactician - a master geo-political thinker. Comparable to City of God in many ways, for it's breadth and scope, yet not a theological work.
This is the book for "right wingers" who live in fantasy lands and not in reality. The critiques of Marx, Darwin and Freud are masterful, as well as the chapters on genius and world outlook and Amerika. Yockey, however, bears Hegelian and Nietzschian influences wherein man never transcends time and history - we are caught in historicism. So, on the whole, the thesis of a western euro empire is not really tenable. While Yockey saw many things to come, other arising forces he could not see, like the cryptocracy. To make it long story short, it's brilliant, but departs from the Bible.
This is the book for "right wingers" who live in fantasy lands and not in reality. The critiques of Marx, Darwin and Freud are masterful, as well as the chapters on genius and world outlook and Amerika. Yockey, however, bears Hegelian and Nietzschian influences wherein man never transcends time and history - we are caught in historicism. So, on the whole, the thesis of a western euro empire is not really tenable. While Yockey saw many things to come, other arising forces he could not see, like the cryptocracy. To make it long story short, it's brilliant, but departs from the Bible.
January 28, 2010
Interesting neo-Spenglerian metahistorical and metapolitical analysis of the world situation as of 1948. Written when he was 31, this work is a remarkable achievement. Yockey's rhetorical style is a font of quotable sentences.
November 26, 2019
Mind sucessfully blown. I have read more than 100 history books - check my 'history' shelf - and this book is only matched by the six volumes of Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.
Will have to read it again before I can even try to summarize my thoughts.
Will have to read it again before I can even try to summarize my thoughts.
October 8, 2022
This book is the standalone best book to understand third position/revolutionary nationalist politics. Absolutely essential to read this for 21st century dissidents as well as those who want to learn about 20th century nationalism.
June 27, 2014
Excellent book to understand the West, its past and its future. Oswal Spengler's Decline of the West should be read before to truly understand Yockey's work though.
August 21, 2017
Well, what to say about "Imperium"? Is it a kind of Spengler fan-fic? A kind of revised and more abstract version of "Mein Kampf"? Did Yockey want to be the new Spengler or a kind of St. Paul bringing National Socialism to the gentiles/non-Germans? It's certainly long-winded, and probably better written than the usual run of ranting manifestos. Writing after WW-2, Yockey wanted to revive the core ideas and worldview of National Socialism without actually calling himself a neo-Nazi (or mentioning Hitler by name). But it's all there--- the vision of social and cultural decay caused by "culture-destroyers" (guess who?) who are behind capitalism and Marxism both, the dreams of apocalyptic redemption, the fascination with dreams of militarized asceticism, the invocation of vague and esoteric traditions, the rejection of "modern" culture as lacking in dignity and nobility for the true elites. What's interesting about Yockey is that in the mid-late 1940s, he's doing what so many alt-right types do today--- holding out a dream of some kind of alliance with a non- or post-Communist Russia in the hope that "traditional" Orthodox culture and Russian nationalism will provide a backbone for a Western rejection of modernity (and those carefully unnamed culture-destroyers). Anyway--- as I said, better written than most rants, certainly with more literary pretensions. But it's Nazi-lite--- don't ever think it isn't.
July 29, 2025
In this work, Francis Parker Yockey continues the "organic-historical method" developed by Oswald Spengler in his Decline of the West. He argues that Western Civilization (possessing what Spengler termed the 'Faustian Spirit'), now mired in liberalism and capitalism, will move into a period of authoritarianism. (Spengler's 'Caesarism'). Indeed Yockey believes that this turn in the 1930s was temporarily thwarted by the Second World War. We can see today the beginnings of this "Resurgence of Authority" when we look at figures like Donald Trump and his contemporaries in Europe. it is clear that the process of "trying to free the sacred soil of the West from the heel of the primitive" will necessitate a return to strong, traditional authority and an end to Liberalism.
"The conflict is far-reaching; it affects every sphere of Life. Two ideas are opposed ... The Resurgence of Authority stands opposed to the Rule of Money; Order to Social Chaos, Hierarchy to Equality ... 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 idea of Polarity of Man and Woman to Feminism ... 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." According to the Spenglerian model, after the age of authoritarianism, the civilization withers away and dies, leaving behind fellaheen living amidst the ruins of the glorious past. But if we succeed, our stock will survive to one day found a new culture.
"The conflict is far-reaching; it affects every sphere of Life. Two ideas are opposed ... The Resurgence of Authority stands opposed to the Rule of Money; Order to Social Chaos, Hierarchy to Equality ... 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 idea of Polarity of Man and Woman to Feminism ... 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." According to the Spenglerian model, after the age of authoritarianism, the civilization withers away and dies, leaving behind fellaheen living amidst the ruins of the glorious past. But if we succeed, our stock will survive to one day found a new culture.
March 5, 2024
Schmidt meets Spengler with esoteric prose, sweeping generalizations, and some antisemitism for good measure. That said Yockey was certainly not boring in his personal life. An American Nazi who worked for the prosecution at Nuremberg and then became a Soviet spy only to die in FBI captivity is not a dull life at least. The book though is far less interesting than the man.
February 1, 2022
An absolute must read, Yockey might be a bit optimistic about how long the struggle will be, but he presents a very convincing argument that we most certainly will win. Destiny compels us to do so. Hail Victory.
July 29, 2025
Francis Parker Yockey’s Imperium: The Philosophy of History and Politics, published in 1948 under the pseudonym Ulick Varange, is a sprawling, provocative, and ideologically charged attempt to reframe the history of Western civilization through the lens of Spenglerian morphology, authoritarian nationalism, and cultural pessimism. Positioned as a successor and expansion of Oswald Spengler’s The Decline of the West, Imperium seeks to articulate a totalizing vision of Western destiny, contending that liberal democracy, materialism, and Americanism represent the terminal decay of Western high culture, and must be replaced by a new form of culturally unified, authoritarian Imperium.
From a scholarly standpoint, Imperium is a paradoxical and controversial work. It is intellectually ambitious but ideologically extremist; methodologically eclectic but deeply polemical. Yockey begins with a historical-philosophical argument grounded in Spengler’s cyclical theory of cultures as superorganisms. Like Spengler, Yockey posits that cultures undergo a fixed lifecycle—from birth to growth, flowering, and eventual decline. For Yockey, the Faustian culture (i.e., the Western world) reached its creative apex in the High Middle Ages and is now in its period of decay, dominated by rationalism, money-power, and cultural disintegration.
Central to Yockey’s argument is a violent repudiation of Enlightenment ideals, which he associates with individualism, egalitarianism, and liberal democracy. He denounces what he terms “culture distortion,” which he attributes primarily to Jewish influence—a core theme that places the book squarely in the tradition of antisemitic conspiracy theory and disqualifies it from any legitimate historical analysis. The overt racialism and virulent anti-modernism further entrench the work within the intellectual lineage of fascism and National Socialism, which Yockey explicitly supports.
Yockey advocates for the emergence of a pan-European empire—an “Imperium”—ruled by an elite, grounded in spiritual unity and high culture, and opposed to both Soviet communism and American liberal capitalism. The proposed “culture-state-nation-race hierarchy” is fundamentally hierarchical, ethnocentric, and anti-democratic. His admiration for authoritarian leadership and aestheticized politics echoes Carl Schmitt, but with a more apocalyptic tone and less intellectual coherence.
While the book is sometimes credited with a certain literary and philosophical ambition, its ideological content is unambiguously extremist. Yockey’s misuse of history, selective appropriation of Spenglerian concepts, and mythologizing rhetoric disqualify Imperium from serious engagement in the fields of history or political theory, except as a document of fascist intellectual history.
Nevertheless, Imperium has had a persistent, if marginal, afterlife among post-war far-right intellectuals. It is cited by elements of the so-called “Third Position” and the European New Right, and has been influential in certain neo-fascist and identitarian circles. As such, it demands attention not for its scholarly merit, but for its role in the ideological continuities and transformations of 20th- and 21st-century radical right thought.
Imperium is best approached as an ideological artifact rather than a work of legitimate historical or philosophical scholarship. It exemplifies the dangers of pseudo-intellectual rationalizations for authoritarian and exclusionary politics. Its continued circulation in far-right milieus underscores the importance of critical engagement with the intellectual traditions that sustain extremism. For scholars of fascism, cultural pessimism, or the radical right, Imperium is a revealing—if disturbing—text, one that reflects the capacity of totalizing historical narratives to serve reactionary political ends.
GPT
From a scholarly standpoint, Imperium is a paradoxical and controversial work. It is intellectually ambitious but ideologically extremist; methodologically eclectic but deeply polemical. Yockey begins with a historical-philosophical argument grounded in Spengler’s cyclical theory of cultures as superorganisms. Like Spengler, Yockey posits that cultures undergo a fixed lifecycle—from birth to growth, flowering, and eventual decline. For Yockey, the Faustian culture (i.e., the Western world) reached its creative apex in the High Middle Ages and is now in its period of decay, dominated by rationalism, money-power, and cultural disintegration.
Central to Yockey’s argument is a violent repudiation of Enlightenment ideals, which he associates with individualism, egalitarianism, and liberal democracy. He denounces what he terms “culture distortion,” which he attributes primarily to Jewish influence—a core theme that places the book squarely in the tradition of antisemitic conspiracy theory and disqualifies it from any legitimate historical analysis. The overt racialism and virulent anti-modernism further entrench the work within the intellectual lineage of fascism and National Socialism, which Yockey explicitly supports.
Yockey advocates for the emergence of a pan-European empire—an “Imperium”—ruled by an elite, grounded in spiritual unity and high culture, and opposed to both Soviet communism and American liberal capitalism. The proposed “culture-state-nation-race hierarchy” is fundamentally hierarchical, ethnocentric, and anti-democratic. His admiration for authoritarian leadership and aestheticized politics echoes Carl Schmitt, but with a more apocalyptic tone and less intellectual coherence.
While the book is sometimes credited with a certain literary and philosophical ambition, its ideological content is unambiguously extremist. Yockey’s misuse of history, selective appropriation of Spenglerian concepts, and mythologizing rhetoric disqualify Imperium from serious engagement in the fields of history or political theory, except as a document of fascist intellectual history.
Nevertheless, Imperium has had a persistent, if marginal, afterlife among post-war far-right intellectuals. It is cited by elements of the so-called “Third Position” and the European New Right, and has been influential in certain neo-fascist and identitarian circles. As such, it demands attention not for its scholarly merit, but for its role in the ideological continuities and transformations of 20th- and 21st-century radical right thought.
Imperium is best approached as an ideological artifact rather than a work of legitimate historical or philosophical scholarship. It exemplifies the dangers of pseudo-intellectual rationalizations for authoritarian and exclusionary politics. Its continued circulation in far-right milieus underscores the importance of critical engagement with the intellectual traditions that sustain extremism. For scholars of fascism, cultural pessimism, or the radical right, Imperium is a revealing—if disturbing—text, one that reflects the capacity of totalizing historical narratives to serve reactionary political ends.
GPT
December 28, 2012
Seriously important work
January 21, 2019
A very deep book. I found myself reading many parts over two or three times.
November 16, 2019
Patched Spengler up quite nicely, along with giving the reader a good systematic way of understanding the March (fall) of nation's. Holes in his ideas are sprinkled throughout (such as the idea of that the"Italian" Jews that moved to America had offspring with different skull shapes due to the effect of Americas soil...) but excuses like that can be easily overlooked by the strength of his vision. Too bad about his early passing(killing?), perhaps he could have done better and fixed the holes, or perhaps 'tis better that fate had her way.
June 11, 2018
Libro delirante que fue dedicado a Hitler por su autor, quien ya por otros muchos motivos era un completo demente ¿qué se puede esperar de semejante basura?
Le doy de calificación menos mil estrellas.
Le doy de calificación menos mil estrellas.
September 1, 2013
this book is pretty bad and i found myself scoffing audibly multiple times whilst reading it. stick to spengler if you're going to get into this type of garbage.
March 18, 2019
Obra maestra que trata la crítica al materialismo, la importancia de la cultura y el problema de la democracia entre otros muchos aspectos.
March 15, 2020
curious ideas there might be, this though does not conceal the fact that the author is a delusional psychopath, a tediously boring book
April 18, 2024
Wow. That devolved into pure hate.
The first 150 or so pages, in which Yockey puts forth interesting philosophical ideas about the course of history and cultures? (4/5)
The remaining 400 or so pages (0/5).
To say Yockey was extreme (Especially for his time) is an understatement. This could've been written by the man he honors in this book.
I have never, and hope no never read something so mindlessly hateful and bigoted ever again. There was such an almost unfathomable amount of hatred for Jews that I would read this with a constant migraine.
Virtually every single point that Yockey makes about what is wrong with the world (in his eyes) is attributed to a cabal of Western-Culture-hating Jews.
On multiple occasions, Yockey promotes provenly false narratives, such as:
- Benjamin Franklin being anti-semitic
- Denying the Holocaust happened because
- That the US was about to make German their official Language in the 18th century
- The International Jewry Conspiracy
- The Great Replacement Theory (his early version of it)
- Only 600,000 Americans volunteered in WW2 (the actual number was 6 MILLION, 1/3 of all who served)
He opens supports the KKK, states that the only racism occurring in America is against the whites, calls for another Lebensraum in Europe against Russia, wants a return to the glory days of 1941 and 1942, believes that the Civil War (War of Secession in his eyes) was not about slavery, but about states rights and economic differences between the North and the South. (STATES RIGHTS TO DO WHAT, YOCKEY). Oh, and for a new American Civil War based on white vs black and Jews vs 'Western Culture'.
Among many of my grips was his American 'Revolution of 1933' that he was hyping up to explain from near the beginning of the book. Well, after trudging through a good 80% of the book, we have our answer. Was this revolution having to do with political or economic policies that were rapidly changing in America due to the Great Depression? Nope. The revolution was 1933 was the year that the Jews started to flee from Europe and settle in the US., thus they took over the US government. JESUS CHRIST, I wanted to quit then. After going without a single intelligible argument/philosophical view for the past 400 pages, it's all a bunch of conspiratorial BULLSHIT.
List of Things Jockey Hates:
- Jews
- Russians
- Japanese
- Chinese
- Slavs
- Mexicans
- African-Americans
- Rich People (because they are or are controlled by Jews, obviously)
- Immigrants that don't originate from Western Europe)
- Homosexuals
- Anyone from Hollywood
- Women's Rights
- Feminism
- Any form of sexual expression
- Democracy
- Socialism
- Communism
- The Jews again, because he hates them that much (did I mention this was written in 1948, just after the holocaust)
This man in nothing but a disgusting, hate-filled monster, who deserved the fate he got a thousand times over. It's terrifying how many people still believe what this man espouses and view his work as a template. I can only hope that his wishes do not come true.
If you do wish to read this for philosophical purposes, STRICTLY read only the first section of the book. All else is a waste of time and brain power.
The first 150 or so pages, in which Yockey puts forth interesting philosophical ideas about the course of history and cultures? (4/5)
The remaining 400 or so pages (0/5).
To say Yockey was extreme (Especially for his time) is an understatement. This could've been written by the man he honors in this book.
I have never, and hope no never read something so mindlessly hateful and bigoted ever again. There was such an almost unfathomable amount of hatred for Jews that I would read this with a constant migraine.
Virtually every single point that Yockey makes about what is wrong with the world (in his eyes) is attributed to a cabal of Western-Culture-hating Jews.
On multiple occasions, Yockey promotes provenly false narratives, such as:
- Benjamin Franklin being anti-semitic
- Denying the Holocaust happened because
- That the US was about to make German their official Language in the 18th century
- The International Jewry Conspiracy
- The Great Replacement Theory (his early version of it)
- Only 600,000 Americans volunteered in WW2 (the actual number was 6 MILLION, 1/3 of all who served)
He opens supports the KKK, states that the only racism occurring in America is against the whites, calls for another Lebensraum in Europe against Russia, wants a return to the glory days of 1941 and 1942, believes that the Civil War (War of Secession in his eyes) was not about slavery, but about states rights and economic differences between the North and the South. (STATES RIGHTS TO DO WHAT, YOCKEY). Oh, and for a new American Civil War based on white vs black and Jews vs 'Western Culture'.
Among many of my grips was his American 'Revolution of 1933' that he was hyping up to explain from near the beginning of the book. Well, after trudging through a good 80% of the book, we have our answer. Was this revolution having to do with political or economic policies that were rapidly changing in America due to the Great Depression? Nope. The revolution was 1933 was the year that the Jews started to flee from Europe and settle in the US., thus they took over the US government. JESUS CHRIST, I wanted to quit then. After going without a single intelligible argument/philosophical view for the past 400 pages, it's all a bunch of conspiratorial BULLSHIT.
List of Things Jockey Hates:
- Jews
- Russians
- Japanese
- Chinese
- Slavs
- Mexicans
- African-Americans
- Rich People (because they are or are controlled by Jews, obviously)
- Immigrants that don't originate from Western Europe)
- Homosexuals
- Anyone from Hollywood
- Women's Rights
- Feminism
- Any form of sexual expression
- Democracy
- Socialism
- Communism
- The Jews again, because he hates them that much (did I mention this was written in 1948, just after the holocaust)
This man in nothing but a disgusting, hate-filled monster, who deserved the fate he got a thousand times over. It's terrifying how many people still believe what this man espouses and view his work as a template. I can only hope that his wishes do not come true.
If you do wish to read this for philosophical purposes, STRICTLY read only the first section of the book. All else is a waste of time and brain power.
July 22, 2020
It's a pretty bad and disappointing book. It is long and boring. It is clearly the author forming his opinion on issues presented for the first time. There is a clear unresolved tension that can be felt between the author realising the decadence of the west and his identity being formed by it. The one thing where the book succeeds is presenting Spengler in a more understandable manner, but as soon as Yockey gets original he takes those ideas to conclusions where they feel out of place.
January 15, 2022
Mind-blowing! I would say life-changing, but I already held the beliefs in it. Nevertheless, it is a clarion-call to fight for the future of the West, and steels the armchair soldier for The Great Task ahead.
January 14, 2025
By mixing the ideas of Oswald Spengler, Carl Schmitt, Georg Hegel (somehow) and your uncle that’s no longer invited to thanksgiving, Francis Yockey sought to create a counternarrative to the one that reigned in the immediate years following WWII.
Mainly, Yockey argues that, in the vein of both Spengler and Thomas Hobbes, that states. must be considered as fundamentally organic entities, which are to be understood in terms of the people that make up the state. And Yockey argues that the state must be a collective cultural unit, where the individual people’s wants and needs take a backseat to the will and destiny of the state. And being Yockey, obviously there must be a strong man in charge of the state, a man that serves as the mouthpiece of the collective. A dictatorship for and by the destiny of the people.
From this comes what’s probably Yockey’s most interesting and most unique (at the time) point, that the American influences in Europe as being inherently anti-western, and Yockey frames the US’ intervention in the two World Wars as being an expression of America working against a singular European empire. An empire that Yockey sees as the final expression of Europe’s destiny. And while that perspective is very interesting, Yockey bases and bolsters his argument on more or less esoteric conspiracy theories. And when that isn’t the case, Yockey is drawing connections between completely unconnected political expressions.
But overall, it is quite difficult to get anything substantial from the book, as Yockey most of the time has written what reads like the ravings of a madman. His ideas of history are ahistorical, the politics are often contradictory and the conspiracy theories are almost laughable in how easy they are to debunk. And obviously the Evolian racial politics fails in the same way as they did with Evola, although, to his credit, Yockey does embrace the logic of the politics more than Evola ever did.
My main issue, however, is that whenever Yockey actually makes sense, it’s more down to the writing not being original. Whenever the lines connect and the argument at least sounds coherent, Yockey has seemingly lifted it directly from either Spengler or Schmitt. Something that was actually really difficult to find out, as the entire book is largely unsourced, with no references or footnotes.
Mainly, Yockey argues that, in the vein of both Spengler and Thomas Hobbes, that states. must be considered as fundamentally organic entities, which are to be understood in terms of the people that make up the state. And Yockey argues that the state must be a collective cultural unit, where the individual people’s wants and needs take a backseat to the will and destiny of the state. And being Yockey, obviously there must be a strong man in charge of the state, a man that serves as the mouthpiece of the collective. A dictatorship for and by the destiny of the people.
From this comes what’s probably Yockey’s most interesting and most unique (at the time) point, that the American influences in Europe as being inherently anti-western, and Yockey frames the US’ intervention in the two World Wars as being an expression of America working against a singular European empire. An empire that Yockey sees as the final expression of Europe’s destiny. And while that perspective is very interesting, Yockey bases and bolsters his argument on more or less esoteric conspiracy theories. And when that isn’t the case, Yockey is drawing connections between completely unconnected political expressions.
But overall, it is quite difficult to get anything substantial from the book, as Yockey most of the time has written what reads like the ravings of a madman. His ideas of history are ahistorical, the politics are often contradictory and the conspiracy theories are almost laughable in how easy they are to debunk. And obviously the Evolian racial politics fails in the same way as they did with Evola, although, to his credit, Yockey does embrace the logic of the politics more than Evola ever did.
My main issue, however, is that whenever Yockey actually makes sense, it’s more down to the writing not being original. Whenever the lines connect and the argument at least sounds coherent, Yockey has seemingly lifted it directly from either Spengler or Schmitt. Something that was actually really difficult to find out, as the entire book is largely unsourced, with no references or footnotes.
February 6, 2025
This is one I’ll definitely plan to reread someday. Second half of the book really picks up…you can tell how brilliant his mind is. I would love to know how his outlook on all of this formed. I wouldn’t mind going down that rabbit hole and compare with established consensus.
February 2, 2025
Now very easy to get a copy. One of my top 5 favorite books.
May 25, 2024
Yockey isolated himself in Ireland, and wrote this book in massive rush, without notes, and it shows. Yockey is more preoccupied with showing off a verbose vocabulary, and syntax than he is with creating an original view on ideology with interesting argumentation. Being a Hitler fanboy, he more or less took Mein Kampf, and forced his views through a perverted distortion of Spengler's works. Even by far-right standards, this work is considered to be fringe, and fantastical. Oswald Mosley hated this book, and so do I.
March 11, 2024
Maybe the most important book I've ever read.
Maybe not.
Maybe not.
November 4, 2019
The very short version of a review for a very long book.
Yockey was a brilliant mind who was wrong anywhere from 40% to 60% of the time in Imperium and roughly 85% of the time in everything else he wrote (and did) afterwards.
That being said, when he got things right, he was spot on 101% brilliant.
Imperium is worth the time it takes to read, when Yockey goes off the rails for whatever reason, there is no shame in skimming through it..... and you do not want to abandon the book and miss the insights that are worth getting.
Yockey was a brilliant mind who was wrong anywhere from 40% to 60% of the time in Imperium and roughly 85% of the time in everything else he wrote (and did) afterwards.
That being said, when he got things right, he was spot on 101% brilliant.
Imperium is worth the time it takes to read, when Yockey goes off the rails for whatever reason, there is no shame in skimming through it..... and you do not want to abandon the book and miss the insights that are worth getting.
June 18, 2020
A very Spengler-esque take on history and its movements. A little bit on the long side maybe but the analysis of America is very much spot on. A lot of his predictions like many other people writing shortly after WW2 have not come to pass, but his instinct and analysis is still correct.
August 29, 2024
It's as close to a Theory of Everything for human history as I've ever seen, though unpolished. I don't like his assertive writing style, but this book was worth reading for its historical and political insights alone.
Read
January 28, 2010asdsdfasdadsasdwfea
Displaying 1 - 30 of 46 reviews