Talk:Jörg Lanz von Liebenfels

Later life
Could more information about his later life be included in this article? XXX


 * I did some editing, including a note about his being banned from publishing and his post-war utterances against Hitler.


 * I also, removed the reference to Karl Kraus. It is not obvious to me what kind of a influence that was. Maybe a stylistic one. If it is to be included, someone should provide a reference for that. Str1977 10:11, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

This post-1945 section is missing as of 2019. Zezen (talk) 10:57, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Links
Ludicrous amount of links in this article. Distracts from the reading, honestly why does right wing for example need to be linked?????

Given name erroneously omitted
This article seems to assert that Lanz was applied as von Liebenfels' given name. I believe that is incorrect. "Lanz von Liebenfels" would be his assumed surname, never giving up "Jörg" as his given name. Thus, I propose that the article should be moved to Jörg Lanz von Liebenfels. That name currently being occupied by a redirect page, that redirect should be deleted by an administrator before the move in order to preserve the article's edit history. __meco 15:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Blavatskian-Theosophic Racialism
Sumathi Ramaswamy, The Lost Land of Lemuria (University of California Press, 2004), p. 68: Indeed, Theosophy generates a complex geography of human races in which all the black peoples of the world are either Lemurians or their degenerate descendents, while the most advanced peoples of today--white Caucasians--are members of the fifth Root-race, far removed from them (77). In the Theosophical evolutionism, as Spirit--or Monad or Pilgrim--works its way through the history of the earth, it "is compelled to incarnate in, or rather contact, every race" (78). As it marches across the history of the earth, Spirit manifests itself in the form of the various Root-races and sub-races which it successively sheds as it surges upward toward our present Fifth Race, the most perfect so far. Those who get left behind--referred to variously as "sluggards" and "failures"--are destined to stagnate. Arguably, this enchanted evolutionary vision is much more racist and hierarchical than that espoused by many a contemporary disenchanted materialist, for millions of years separate the white Anglo-Saxon from the black aborigine whose origins are ascribed to the "racial decay" that besets the seventh sub-race in the closing years of Lemuria's life on earth (79). Further, rather than emerging from the more perfected forms of the Fourth Root-race on Atlantis, as the majority of northern humanity do, the blacks of the world--"fallen, degraded semblances of humanity"--are deemed to be descendents of a Root-race that was ultimately transcended by other, superior forms (80). Lemuria is handy in this regard as well, allowing the Theosophist to not only place the lower, degraded specimens of humanity in a different time, but also to isolate them further from the more evolved races by tracing their origins to a totally different continental configuration (81). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.136.1.133 (talk) 06:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I believe Blavatsky also wrote in The Secret Doctrine somewhere that any racial mixture can evolve into a new root-race sui generis, and if it fails to develop 'superior' qualities it is only for lack of historical opportunity, not because of any inherent incapacity. I think she may even have written that Australian aborigines might have become the dominant race if matters had fallen out differently; she certainly wrote that all the claims about superior and inferior races collapse to the ground. I wish I had made a note of the reference. Maybe somebody else can dig it up.


 * Regarding the previous post, I agree that the article should be moved to Jörg Lanz von Liebenfels, but since that particular redirect has only one edit in the edit history, my understanding is that the move can be performed by anybody without needing an admin. In fact I'll be bold and do it myself. Gnostrat (talk) 20:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

The point is, the present fair-skinned Aryan Caucasians, Indo-Celtic/whatever or "white people" of this decadent age are sure to be destroyed in a Platonic-Atlantic cataclysm in time, but Blavatsky SPECIFICALLY CONCRETELY ANTHROPOLOGICALLY LOCATES the "ONLY recipients" of the "most advanced monads" (i.e., those gifted with largeness and brilliance of intellect potentially) EXCLUSIVELY within current "white", Anglo-Teutonic humankind. The next racial step is the up-breeding of Anglo-Celtic and Slavic-Teutonic Germanic types into a higher type of Germanic. The next sub-race of the Aryan race is supposed to be of even whiter complexion and more fair and delicate of hue, "blue blooded", and to combine emotion, intellect and intuition i noetic holism. Negroid-Lemuria "stragglers" and "residual" aboriginal elements are to be wiped out by means of assimilating genetic conquest of appropriation, or left to die off in a regression to bestial status. It is all outlined in open in the S.D.

EVEN IF there is an ENDLESS CYCLE OF REPEATED RACIAL DESTRUCTION, BLAVATSKY MAKES CLEAR DISCRETE IDENTIFIABLE RACIAL FACTORS OF THE BIOLOGICAL ORDER ARE CENTRAL TO PICTURING THE OVERALL COSMIC-DRAMA, MOMENTARILY AND WITHIN EACH CYCLE OF ADAMIC HUMANITY AND SUB-CYCLE... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.52.186.148 (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Article's origins
I was searching for a source for the claim of correspondence with August Strindberg since the latter's page (which is seriously lengthy and detailed) doesn't seem to mention it. I found what seems to me like an indication that the article was copied verbatim from World Heritage Encyclopedia, on self.gutenberg.org followed by /articles/eng/Lanz_von_Liebenfels Am I interpreting this correctly? Is it a problem that requires a response, such as WP:COPYVIO? What would that response be? ЄlєvєN єvєN | | иэvэ иэvэlэ 17:08, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

"Scientific career"
Is there a more suitable title we could use in the box rather than "scientific career"? I mean, he was basically -- to put this as objectively as possible -- a froth-mouthed mysogynist, raging racist, and obsessive mythomaniac, albeit fun to read. There is nothing in his writing that would warrant the term "scientific". Trigaranus (talk) 10:48, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Replaced the "infobox scientist" by "infobox person" since there is no "infobox loon". --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:11, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Secret Society Order of the New Templars
The use of the terms "fascist" and "fascism" is anachronistic, as is the reference to communism in this section. Furthermore, the goal of an organization founded in 1900 could hardly have been "to bring rightwing extremists together and mobilise them in favor of Nazism".Fredhedges (talk) 05:22, 21 July 2022 (UTC)