Talk:Ride the Tiger (book)

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature

Books

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Is there a connection between this book and the song of the same name by Jefferson Starship? Cranston Lamont 08:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ride the Tiger Cover.jpg

Image:Ride the Tiger Cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"fascist philosopher"

I have changed the description of Evola as a "fascist philosopher" to a "Traditionalist philsopher," with "Traditionalist" linking to the Traditionalist School (which considers Guénon foundational). Evola was not a "fascist philosopher," in either of the two senses: 1) a philosopher who presented philosophical arguments in favour of fascism (Gentile, Rosenberg, Yockey), or 2) a philosopher who happened to support fascism (Heidegger, Schmitt, Eliade). Evola was never a member of the Fascist Party, openly criticised aspects of fascism that he considered anti-traditional as well as praising aspects of fascism that he considered in line with tradition, and was considered inimical by Himmler. He successfully acquitted himself of the charge of fostering a rebirth of fascism in 1951. He was a traditionalist, and critiqued fascism from that viewpoint as he did communism and liberal democracy; that he saw fascism as being slightly more in line with tradition than he did the other two does not make him a fascist.128.164.214.138 (talk) 18:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He is, however, essential to neo-fascism, but that's not really the same ideology, and something traditionalists are/were called by critics.

16:01, 3 July 2011 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.53.61.62 (talk) How? He spoke out against Facism in Europe during the 30's and 40's. How would that make him a part of neo-facism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.255.49.47 (talk) 23:26, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]