The Enemy of Europe

by Francis Parker Yockey

WHEN Francis Parker Yockey completed and published *Imperium* in 1948, he wrote a comparatively short sequel or pendant to his major work. This sequel, which he later entitled *The Enemy of Europe*, is now lost, but he had his manuscript with him when he was in Germany in 1953, and, after revising two passages to take account of events since 1948, he had it translated into German and printed at Frankfurt-am-Main in an edition of two hundred copies. Yockey's work displeased the Jews, who accordingly ordered their henchmen to raid the printing plant, punish the printer, smash the types, and destroy all copies of the book. Yockey escaped and fortunately had already sent several copies abroad, and it is from a photocopy of one of these that Mr. Francis has tried to restore Yockey's English text, so far as possible.

*The Enemy of Europe* is a work of great philosophical, historical, and political significance because

1) In it Yockey applies to the contemporary situation of the world the philosophy of history that he elaborated in *Imperium*, much as Spengler in *Die Jahr der Entscheidung* applied to the world of 1933 the philosophical theory he had expounded in his *Untergang des Abendlandes*.

2) It is the earliest coherent expression of a political attitude in Europe which first became manifest to Americans in the late 1950s and which at the present time largely determines the conduct of the various European nations in their relations with the United States and the Soviet Union. This attitude, which is generally misunderstood because, for the most part, Europeans cautiously use in public only equivocal or vague terms to intimate or disguise what Yockey said explicitly and without diplomatic subterfuge, was quickly imitated in other parts of the world and is commonly designated by such terms as 'neutralism,' 'uncommitted nations,' and 'The Third World.'

3) Yockey's analysis of the situation when he wrote poses today the most urgent question before intelligent Americans and, indeed, all other members of our race--a question of political fact that each of us must solve, at least provisionally, before he can estimate the chances that our species will survive on this globe.

It will be proper, therefore, to examine, as summarily as possible, each of these three aspects of *The Enemy of Europe*. Before we do so, however, it behooves us to say something about the only text in which Yockey's work is now available.

Genres: Politics, Philosophy, History, Nonfiction

322 pages, Paperback

First published August 1, 2003

About the author

Francis 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.

Reviews

[Hank · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Enemy of Europe & The Enemy of Our Enemies (Liberty Bell, 2003) utgavs för fösta gången 1981. Denna bok består av två böcker skrivna, i tur och ordning, av Francis Parker Yockey och Revilo P. Oliver.

The Enemy of Europe (skriven 1948) är en väldigt intressant analys av läget i väst och Europa som fortfarande känns relevant. Boken är ett tillägg till Yockeys klassiska magnum opus Imperium och precis som i Imperium fortsätter han att utveckla Oswald Spenglers idéer. Som titeln antyder argumenterar Yockey för att det är Amerika (i händerna på en viss etnisk grupp) och inte Ryssland som är Europas (och västvärldens) största fiende. Författaren påvisar att Europa redan då bestod av Amerikanska vasallstater ledda av landsförrädare vars lojalitet varken var till Europa eller till sitt eget folk. Vidare argumenterar Yockey för ett Pan-Europeiskt Imperium som han ser som den ända vägen att rädda Europa och den västerländska civilisationen.

The Enemy of Our Enemies (skriven 1979) är en kritik av The Enemy of Europe. Oliver kritiserar och analyserar Yockeys idéer och värderar dessa drygt 30 år efter The Enemy of Europe skrevs. Vi bjuds även på en del biografisk information om Yockey. Revilo P. Oliver ger ett ytterst beläst intryck och refererar till en mängd intressanta och mindre kända böcker. Vi noterar även att The Enemy of Our Enemies är betydligt mer polemisk i sin ton är Yockeys bok. Författarens verkar vara otroligt trött på en viss grupp och visar öppet sitt missnöje och förakt på ett ofta roande, vasst och välformulerat sätt.

Boken avslutas med två appendix. Det första är en kort men informativ biografisk redogörelse av Yockeys liv skriven av Thomas Francis. Det andra är Yockeys artikel "What is behind the hanging of eleven jews in Prauge" som skrevs 1952.

Det här är en, eller rättare sagt två mycket läsvärda böcker som vi varmt rekommenderar.

[Patrick · Rating 5 out of 5]

I havn`t read Spengler or Yockey`s "Imperium" yet.

Yockey gives a more indepth of the Pan-European Idea than other Pan-Europeans Like Norman Lowell and Oswald Mosley.

Personally I`m not very into geo-politics and are more of an etnicist. Many Europeans are still too emotional attached to their current states or on states that used to exist. Pieces of land can be reattained but if a people is gone, it`s gone forever.

About what yockey calls culture-retardation. Although I consider the cultural demise of European as a bad thing, it puts the emphasize more on race and etnicity. Like it happened in America.

[Nick · Rating 5 out of 5]

A fantastic perspective on the American place in European politics, that I have been searching for some time for.

Yockey is thoroughly a Spenglerian, and his construct of society, culture, history, and politik all stem from this great german influence. Emphasizing German Historicism, he bridges from Spengler's the Dichotomy between Kultur und Zivilization that reflects the spiritual and moral and materialistic and technical qualities of a Volk. Thus, recognizing the challenges the West faces, Yockey posits the place of NS Germany in context of European Civilization, and the model of robust Prussian socialism as the only possible future for us. In Yockey's words: “For the solution of its tasks this age demands the old Roman virtues: a warlike ethos, a sense of military honor, political and organizational talent, will-to-power instead of will-to-plunder, firmness, devotion to duty, the cult of conscientiousness. Since the Prussian idea agrees with the imperative of this age, power flows organically, naturally, irresistibly toward the focus of this idea.”(22)

To lead up to this solution/conclusion Yockey first writes a historical timeline in Spenglerian terms, and also levies the complexities and realities of power in the 19th and 20th centuries that guided the western world to where it was. What I valued heavily in this section, was the extensive analysis of English policies and failures, and although they had been leading the west through the "Age of Economics", they would betray it during the "Age of Absolute politiks." Anglo-Capitalism-Democracy simply could not adapt to respond to the changing world around it, politik became absolute, a totalitarian cultural imperative. Everything became sublimated to the power and functioning of the state, race, blood, soil, culture, religion, economics, politiks, philosophy, music, everything, and I emphasize everything became a part of necessary European Cultural fortification against the ailing revolts of the "Colored world" (USSR, China, Japan, India, Africa, etc.) Only NS Germany understood the necessary measures that needed to be taken. And it is because of this inability to adapt (while being the head of Europe) that would led to the destruction of the European Civilizational project around the world (that took possibly a millennia to build up to).

Thus, the world we see now, is a rotting corpse, a stain on the once glorious west, a pock-stained shell that refuses to be buried to give birth to the next stage of evolution of organic civilization.
(This sort of irrelevant system being maintained, is why there is such abject degeneracy, and the abomination culturally as we know today.) Interestingly however, Yockey does not seem to lose hope in the West, incredible foresight for man who wrote this analysis a few years after 1945 ( I would have been beyond demoralized to witness such potential rise and fall). Despite the collapse of the Axis, Yockey still believed that an iron socialist destiny still awaited Europe, for "Revolution is an Organic Inevitability."

This does transition to the current world that Yockey does live in, and he writes a controversial perspective on the differences between American and Soviet occupation. He views them both as foreign occupations but, to the outrage of my many Eastern European friends, states that the Soviet brutalist/mongol system would be better for the preservation of a European identity/culture than the Hyper-consumerist American system. Although my ancestors did pay in blood in the East, as did many of my friends because of the Soviets, I agree with this assessment by Yockey. The old Warsaw Pact countries are significantly less degenerated than the original NATO ones, but was the sacrifice worthwhile? I understand both points of view.

While the soviets were a political and basic power overlord, this asiatic system was very culturally foreign, primitive, and "barbarian." And this barbarian is strong willed and resolute, simple in violence and control.

However, the American system, with its comforts and "Wealth" was highly effective at culturally infiltrating the European soul and subverting it to "Alien elements" otherwise known as the cough* J cough.* that plagues our entire world today, through its host "America."

These are my notes/paraphrasing attached from Yockey and gives great hope for us:

The inner qualities of Europe that inspire a world system: 16th century Spain, 18th +19th century England, Ethical socialism of Germany in the 20th. *Consciousness of a mission* comes not simply from human politics or resolve, but emanates from a super personal soul, the organ of a higher destiny, a divinity.

We must have faith in the future. Follow the path prescribed by our instincts, our intelligence, and our inner imperative, whatever happens to us will be good. For us there is but one mistake, one dereliction, and one crime: to be untrue to ourselves, follow alien leaders, and hold alien ideals.

The internal enemy is whoever pursues policy other than a sovereign Europe. All the petty nationalists and foreign agents are the internal enemy. No European owes petty fake states his loyalty.

The European is equal to its historic task. It has faith in destiny and ethical principles of heroism.
The European will create the highest cultural political and national imperium of the wet.
We shall transform the world.

When they behold the remnants of our buildings and ramparts, they will tell their grandchildren that a race of gods one dwelt on the soil of Europe.

Ave.

[noblethumos · Rating 5 out of 5]

Francis Parker Yockey’s The Enemy of Europe (1953) represents the second major installment in the author’s ideological project following his earlier and more substantial work, Imperium (1948). While Imperium offered a sweeping metahistorical vision grounded in a Spenglerian civilizational typology, The Enemy of Europe narrows its scope to a geopolitical polemic. Written during the early Cold War period, the text is marked by an impassioned opposition to American liberalism and Soviet communism alike, which Yockey interprets not as ideological opposites but as twin manifestations of materialism and anti-European decay.


The book’s title signals its central thesis: that the primary antagonist of Europe’s spiritual and cultural unity is not communism, as the prevailing anti-Soviet consensus in the West held, but the United States. For Yockey, the American occupation of Western Europe, particularly West Germany, represents a continuation of what he terms “Culture-parasitism”—the domination of Europe by foreign interests hostile to its organic cultural essence. Drawing from Spengler’s cyclical model of civilizations, Yockey sees postwar Europe as entering its final, decadent phase, under the tutelage of alien powers determined to suppress its resurgence.


Stylistically, The Enemy of Europe departs from Imperium’s philosophical density and adopts a terser, more polemical register. The book’s structure alternates between historical interpretation, geopolitical analysis, and calls to action. Yockey’s disdain for American hegemony is not only political but metaphysical. He argues that the liberal democratic model, epitomized by the United States, is predicated on the denial of hierarchy, spirit, and destiny—concepts that he holds as central to the European soul.


One of the most controversial elements of The Enemy of Europe is its pro-Soviet inclination. In contrast to the prevailing anti-communist right-wing movements of his time, Yockey identifies the USSR as a potentially rejuvenating force for European nationalism, interpreting Stalin’s purges and policies as signs of an emergent Russian particularism breaking from Jewish Bolshevism. This strategic endorsement of Soviet power was not rooted in Marxist sympathy but in Yockey’s theory of political realism: namely, that any power capable of displacing American influence in Europe should be treated as a provisional ally in the restoration of Europe’s cultural independence.


Academically, the work poses significant challenges. It operates outside the norms of scholarly rigor, often engaging in sweeping generalizations, conspiracy theories, and racial essentialism. Yockey’s vocabulary of “culture-pathology,” “Jewish culture-distortion,” and “Western soul” is deeply embedded in a metaphysical and biologically deterministic worldview that lacks empirical grounding. His unapologetic embrace of fascist and National Socialist ideas, including the rehabilitation of certain elements of Hitler’s vision, renders the work ideologically marginal and morally suspect.


Yet, The Enemy of Europe is not without historical interest. It serves as a document of postwar fascist thought in exile, articulating a vision of pan-European nationalism that foreshadows later iterations in the European New Right. Yockey’s focus on cultural sovereignty, the critique of liberal universalism, and his emphasis on geopolitics over ideology resonate—albeit in different registers—with later theorists like Alain de Benoist and Alexander Dugin. His attempt to forge an ideological “third position” between East and West prefigures many post-Cold War realignments among far-right intellectual circles.


The Enemy of Europe is best understood not as a contribution to political theory in any conventional academic sense, but as a primary source for the study of postwar fascist ideology and its transformations. Its historical importance lies not in the persuasiveness of its arguments but in its illustration of how a defeated political tradition sought to reconfigure itself in the Cold War world. As such, it merits scholarly attention not for its coherence or morality, but for its role in the subterranean currents of 20th-century radical politics.

GPT