Evola uses 'Luciferian' entirely symbolically, extracting a valuable lesson from the myth of Lucifer. Much like Prometheus, the symbol of Lucifer describes a Titanic tragedy. However, this cycle is not always ultimately destructive, and Titanism can be an important part of the development of heroes if it is overcome and tempered. The stories of Percival and Gawain represent such cases as both attempt quests that have destroyed lesser knights. Percival falls into anger at God and goes down a 'pagan' (or non-Christian) path, against all expectations coming closer to the Grail by chasing wild adventure and combat. Having used his anger to realize great changes within himself, Percival's path is the other side of the romantic path that Gawain takes. Gawain takes refuge in a woman, specifically the Pround One who causes the ruin of the Wounded King. He bears all her insults and even a perilous quest for the woman who seems to hate him. Gawain, pure of heart, perseveres through the great trial and eventually wins her love. Lucifer's fall was caused by pride, and Gawain's chastity triumphs where before the weak destroyed themselves.

It is these Titanic heroes who are to restore the King, whom Evola tentatively identifies with the Olympian symbol we've described before. The corrupted Olympian requires a renewed transcendence; a new path is to be blazed for him. In the Grail cycle it is this new sort of hero who restores the condition of the royalty. These heroes are not by nature fully Olympian but find heroism in defeating the Titan within themselves, which succeeds in reviving the King and all his land.

“What is this law of the greatest number which modern governments invoke and in which they claim to find their sole justification? It is simply the law of matter and brute force, the same law by which a mass, carried down by its weight, crushes everything that lies in its track. It is precisely here that we find the point of junction of the democratic conception and materialism...”

- 𝑹𝒆𝒏𝒆́ 𝑮𝒖𝒆́𝒏𝒐𝒏, 𝑪𝒓𝒊𝒔𝒊𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑴𝒐𝒅𝒆𝒓𝒏 𝑾𝒐𝒓𝒍𝒅, 𝒑. 𝑳𝑿𝑿𝑽𝑰.

"The creative process of nations in Europe has always followed this rhythm:

First movement.—The peculiar Western instinct which causes the State to be felt as the fusion of various peoples in a unity of political and moral existence, starts by acting on the groups most proximate geographically, ethnically, and linguistically. Not that this proximity is the basis of the nation, but because diversity among neighbors is easier to overcome.

Second movement.—A period of consolidation in which other peoples outside the new State are regarded as strangers and more or less enemies. This is the period, when the nationalizing process adopts an air of exclusiveness, of shutting itself up inside the State; in short, what today we call nationalism. But the fact is that whilst the others are felt politically to be strangers and opponents, there is economic, intellectual, and moral communion with them. Nationalist wars serve to level out the differences of technical and mental processes. Habitual enemies gradually become historically homogeneous. Little by little there appears on the horizon the consciousness that those enemy peoples belong to the same human circle as our own State. Nevertheless, they are still looked on as foreigners and hostile.

Third movement.—The State is in the enjoyment of full consolidation. Then the new enterprise offers itself to unite those peoples who yesterday were enemies. The conviction grows that they are akin to us in morals and interests, and that together we form a national group over against other more distant, stranger groups. Here we have the new national idea arrived at maturity."
~ José Ortega y Gasset

The dismantling of the present scientific industrial structure, even if it can be envisaged, involves of course a great deal more than the mere destruction of its external features,

and it will not be achieved either simply by a return to nature or by the cultivation of one’s own garden.

One of the things we are forced to recognize is that the form of society we build around us is the mirror of our own inner world; it is the extra version of our inward dimension.

In it the state of our consciousness and our attitude to the fundamental realities of human existence take shape and are given an external form.

~ Philip Sherrard, Modern Science

"[...] the sword of righteousness has no scabbard; always he must threaten or strike. " - Joseph de Maistre

"The second idea, aristocratic heroism encourages our higher hopes, for it is not a matter of morals or civilization, where the heroic and hence aristocratic sense of life is wanting. The author Evola does well to warn us that when he speaks of aristocracy, he is referring to a certain vision of the world: an aristocracy of character, not economic nor even intellectual, for intellectuality exists in a sphere separated from living wholeness of the individual , and above all from everything that is character, spiritual, courage, and inner decision. It is precisely this aristocracy of character that the best Italians (and Europeans) desire and must constitute, beyond the ruins that surround us"
-Junio Valerio Borghese, from the introduction to Men Among The Ruins

“We will emerge from this decay only through an immense moral rectification, teaching men again to love, to sacrifice themselves, to live, to fight and to die for a higher ideal.”

— Léon Degrelle

"Pacifism will remain an ideal, war a fact." - Oswald Spengler, "Is World Peace Possible?"

War will always be reality. The modern pacifist delusion is not even consistent with modernity's own tendency to inflict the most terrible sort of empty and vain bloodshed. This war is not always a literal violence, although that too is an inescapable contingency. Jesus came not to bring peace but a sword; life truly lived is constant spiritual warfare. The Beast will not be brought down by physical weapons, but by a Solar spirit that must be greater and more virtuous than its decadence is evil.

Do not live in the moment, live in the eternal.

"If you reject ethnonationalism I dont think its possible to provide a coherent explanation of how a state's sovereignty is justified as without an ethnic basis for citizenship, citizenship just becomes whatever the state defines it as, and where does the state get the right to define who is and isn't a citizen from?"

This makes no sense. Sovereign justification has nothing to do with race or citizenship, except in very rare circumstances like an occupation. And even then it is questionable what power biological race alone could have. Even in Interwar Germany race wasn't central, but rather a result of the attempt to restore will and dominion, particularly for front-line soldiers. This is easily confirmed by looking at the questions posed by the Conservative Revolution. A race can have no justification if it has no will to struggle, that its rank must be determined is a sign of its being a secondary quality. Race is a stratum formed of the will.

That restoring the "mere accident of birth" now seems significant suggests how far modern men are from understanding sovereignty. For Carl Schmitt, the sovereign decides upon the friend and enemy as an existential distinction, as the utmost intensity of struggle. Here we see to what extent race is a condition, an achievement born of the state's exceptional power. Volk has a dynamic character, it is formed of culture, will, blood, language, and identity – unlike biological race which is a static and passive concept. This was always true, as scientific race arose as a type of pessimism and determinism following the French Revolution.

The argument given here is not only that racialised popular sovereignty is the basis of justice, but that no other sovereign type is even possible. Interesting however, since it proves that the theories of race taken up by the dissident right are part of liberal historicism. Although even liberalism has a higher sense of sovereign justification.

https://news.1rj.ru/str/joeldavisx/623