ABSTRACT
Because this book ultimately aims to apply Jung’s theories on political extremism to contemporary racist, ethno-nationalist and Identitarian movements, it is necessary to clear the ground by examining Jung’s views on race more closely. Jung differentiated between “archaic” or “primitive” versus “modern” man. Because Jung classified many Africans, for instance, as archaic and many Europeans as modern, Jung has been seen by critics as creating a hierarchy of races with Europeans at the top. But it is important to remember that, for Jung, the consequence of the spreading of modern consciousness was Western society descending into spiritual and moral chaos and decline, introducing the catastrophic possibilities that came to pass in the rise of Nazism and communism. For Jung, “modern” was not considered good, and “archaic” was not considered bad. Jung’s purpose in studying the cultures of Africa, India, Asia and the United States was precisely to discover what Europeans lacked. Sensitivity to the threat that modernization, Western-style, may pose to the spiritual values of other cultures, and the gravity of that threat, would be enhanced by an appreciation of Jung’s teachings on archaic versus modern societies.
