Darwin, Marx and Freud: Kulture Killers


freud-and-friendsThe Mind, Body and Soul are the places in which the struggle for the fate of nations unwinds.

The immortal Soul of a person or that of a nation persists in spite of external conditions.  The materialist struggles we face today control the expression and actualization of our Soul, but not its range of possibilities.  In this use, Soul does not refer to that part of us which Christ died to save, but something else entirely.

American philosopher Francis Parker Yockey defines culture as the “unfolding” of a an organism’s soul.  A soul is inherent to any organism, whether it be a plant, animal, human, or a civilization.  Each specific type of thing is destined to become a particular sort of thing, but the external factors can affect its fate so as to modify its ultimate expression.

For example, a seed when treated under the right conditions of fate will germinate, take root, sprout, and eventually bare fruit of its own; such is the destiny of a seed.  The conditions of fate are external factors to the range of possibilities for that seed, and can affect how it expresses in the world.  Its fundamental nature of being a seed is non-negotiable, but the manner in which it grows and whether or not its soul can fully actualize and be realized in a well grown plant is a matter of fate.

We humans are no exception to this fact.

The type of culture we live in is something which will nurture the expression of our soul and the full realization of ourselves as people in a civilization.  High-Culture is what we should aspire to, because this is what can feed our souls.  The man who aspires to feed his soul, and that of his community, is what Yockey calls “Culture-Man.”  Consumerism, secularism, materialism, and decadent bourgeois lifestyles are the antithesis of High-Culture, and should not be seen as simply the absence of culture, rather the antithesis of Culture-Man.

It is not the case that we are ever without culture, the question is what kind of culture we have, and how it affects the soul of man.  Three historically significant world views affect the soul of man, and those are Darwinism, Marxism and Freudianism. These three schools of thought work to produce a type of culture which negatively affects the expression of the soul of man, and the negative effects are wrought on three fronts.  Yockey’s brief description of these systems does not implicate them as being proper “food for the soul.”

“[Darwinism, Marxism, and Freudianism] are nihilistic.  Culture-man is the spiritual enemy.  He must be eliminated by animalizing him, biologizing him, making him economic, sexualizing him, diabolizing him.”

The first of this trio of culture killers is Darwinism, and Yockey describes it as being an economic struggle which is “free trade capitalism” in spirit.

“The whole grotesquerie of Darwinism, and of the materialism of the entire 19th century generally, is a product of one fundamental idea — an idea which happens also to be nonfactual to this century, even though it was a prime fact a century ago.  This one idea was that Life is formed by the outer.  This generated the sociology of ‘environment’ as determining the human soul.  later it generated the doctrine of ‘heredity’ as doing the same.”

Darwinism purports the ideals of “survival of the fittest”, “evolution”, and that “the future” is invariably the direction of “forward movement” and “progress.” But, we all know this isn’t how it really works.  Evolution as a biological phenomena has never been measured, observed, documented, or correlated in any past or present organism.

Darwinism was a popularly accepted (junk) science which advanced the rationalist society which birthed it.  This is the same as what we have been seeing with the Global Warming and pro-multiculturalism narratives.  The science confirms the dominant world view– otherwise it would never be allowed as science.

The second culture subverter is Marxism.

Yockey explains that Marxism is fundamentally capitalist in nature.  Yes, I know, that probably flies in the face of everything you’ve been taught about Marxism, but it’s  the truth.  If that comes as a surprise to you, then you’ll start to appreciate Yockey’s amazement that Marxism was ever taken seriously in the first place.

“The explanation Marxism offered of the significance of History was ludicrously simple, and in the very simplicity lay its charm, and its strength.  The whole history of the world was merely the record of the struggle of classes.  Religion, philosophy, science, technics, music, painting, poetry, nobility, priesthood, Emperor and Pope State, war, and politics — all are simply reflections of economics.  Not economics generally, but the ‘struggle’ of the ‘classes.’  The most amazing thing about this ideological picture is that it was ever put forward seriously, or taken seriously.”

What’s even funnier is that Marxism did not fix the problem of class conflict, rather it created the problem of class conflict and incited workers to revolt against their employers.  Yockey explained this best, and I’ll say it again for emphasis; Marx did not come to solve the conflict between workers and owners– he fomented the conflict between them so as to further his own political goals.

“The important part of Marxism was its demand for active, constant, practical, class-war.  The factory-workers were selected as the instruments for this struggle for obvious reasons:  they were concentrated, they were being mistreated, they could thus be agitated and  organized into a revolutionary movement to realize the completely negative aims of the coterie of Marx.”

The third nail in Culture-Man’s coffin is Freudianism. The High Culture which we should all be aspiring to reach is perverted by Freud’s psychoanalysis. Taking up the Freudian view of the world is akin to putting on sex-o-vision goggles.  It’s a near-cousin to Beer Goggles, but it’s not quite as simple as that.  Beer Goggles make everything attractive, but in Yockey’s explanation, Freud Goggles reduce everything to a fundamentally sexual interaction.

“Freudianism is one more product of Rationalism.  It turns rationalism on the soul, and finds that it is purely mechanical.  It can be understood, and spiritual phenomena are all manifestations of the sexual-impulse.  This was another one of those marvelous and grandiose simplifications which guarantee popularity for any doctrine in an age of mass-journalism.”

The tech department is still working on mass producing Yockey Goggles.  Until then, everyone will have to come to TradYouth for social commentary and critique based on Yockey’s writings. But, to get back on topic, Freud’s system of psychoanalysis was not an accident; it was a conscious decision on his part.  In Yockey’s words, Freud’s system of psychoanalysis was designed to “deny all the higher impulses of the soul.”

Darwinism, Marxism and Freudianism are all dangers to the proper development of Culture-Man and the possibility of producing a High-Culture.  The Soul of man exists in spite of the dangers of these materialist and capitalist worldviews, but the “unfolding” of the Soul of man can be severely limited by them, too.

The three Kulture Killers and their respective schools of thought might prove useful in creating provoking social commentary, but they drag down the Soul of man and limit the possibilities of more fully realizing ourselves through High-Culture.  I don’t believe it’s practical or possible to somehow revive an idealized society or culture from the past, but it is possible to look at them for tips on how to synthesize our own High-Culture.  Yockey said it, too.

We don’t need nihilistic and materialist Kulture Killers to teach us about the human psyche and the Soul of man.  Yockey says that we already have the best materials already available.

“The greatest repository of psychology is History.  It contains no models for us, since Life is never-recurring, once-happening, but it shows by example how we can fulfill our potentialities by being true to ourselves, by never compromising with that which is utterly alien.”

This is what Traditionalism does for man.  The study of Tradition is the study of History, and the practical application of the models which it reveals allows us to reject “that which is utterly alien”, and to more fully realize our possibilities.
Creative Commons License
Darwin, Marx, and Freud: Kulture Killers by Thomas Buhls is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.




  • Your lack of research is showing. Darwin himself never used the phrase, “survival of the fittest.” That term was coined by Herbert Spencer. If such simplification can be forgiven, Darwin’s theory could be summarized as, “survival of the procreators.” It’s not about being “fit” to survive, but living long enough to avoid predators and produce off-spring.

    If you’re going to jump on the anti-evolution bandwagon, you should know right now that you’re setting yourself up for endless mockery and sound de-bunkings from the science crowd. Saying that because nobody has “witnessed” evolution it doesn’t exist is a very short-sighted argument. That’s a little bit like saying that because one single person didn’t “witness” your development from birth to adulthood your years as a teenager didn’t exist. Silly, huh?

    • So, you’re going to lose your shit over something related to Darwinism, and let the rest of it slide? I guess this means that you’re warming up to the Radical Traditionalist school of thought.

    • No, not warming up, just picking over the pieces. Anyhow, if you wanted to do a follow-up to this article you could write something to explain how you reconcile your anti-evolution philosophy with Matt Parrott’s pro-evolution philosophy. That’d be an interesting exchange to watch. *eats popcorn*

    • He’s already got a post coming out about that. We don’t have to agree on everything to work together, and I’m looking forward to his take on Darwinism and evolution. That’s what makes TradYouth better than most blogs– it’s not an echo chamber in here.

  • Goldberry

    Like you said Thomas, we are never without culture it’s just a question of what kind of culture we have. You did a nice job of briefly showing how these three well known schools of thought affect us culturally (whether we know it or not) and how culture can have a negative impact on our “souls”.

    Detractors can continue to come to traditionalist sites and proclaim that these established cultural systems are legitimate and beneficial, but if that is the case, they should be happy living outside of any political dissent. For those of us that know these systems are incompatible with a happy soul or culture, we can continue to work towards one that nourishes our cultural needs. Let the haters hate, you gave me food for thought today. Thanks

  • Dustin

    Tom, this is the most intelligent article you have ever written.

    Darwin, Marx, and Freud are indeed the “holy trinity” of the whole sorry “Enlightenment” religion.

    I am really proud of Tradyouth right now. The last four posts have all been some of the best we have ever published. 😉

  • Your Majesty

    Darwin? With two communist Jews? Uh, no.


By: Thomas Buhls



%d bloggers like this: