The Jüngerian theses present a troubling similarity with the fundamentals of Marxist doctrine. The advent of the Figure of the Worker as the dominant Figure incontestably recalls, deeply, the Proletkult. The planetary pretensions of this Figure constitute a philosophical justification for the dictatorship of the proletariat, and the intransigence with which the bourgeoisie will see itself deprived of its right to existence is reminiscent of the class struggle. Finally, the planetary feeling-of-the-world that characterizes this “type” echoes in a certain fashion the spirit of proletarian internationalism called to lead the entirety of humanity. However, the trench that separates Jünger from the fundamental positions that Marxism holds, is impassable: with Jünger, what appears clearly as courage before reality and as an audacious description of what it will become, is in its Marxist counterpart, a made up, fantastic image of humanitarian sentimentality, imbibed with bitterness. Moreover, this ideological neighborship of which we speak does not come from Jünger having submitted to Marxist postulates; it simply suffices to state that Marxism, as well, constitutes a specific world view bound to an existence that its accompanied with and by the essence of technology. But Marxism still gives a sentimental response to the technologization of existence. The response of Jünger, it is exclusively imprinted with “heroic realism.”
We can trace the parallels of the same type between the view that Jünger holds of his epoch and Russian reality. No part of the Figure of the Worker was imposed in a more definitive fashion than in Bolshevik Russia. Nowhere else does the character of work encompass existence more sensibly, no part of the Figure of the Worker is a more determinant element than total mobilization. The theses of Jünger are sometimes perceived like conceptual abstractions, as philosophical transfigurations of the world and Russian reality. But in fact, they are nothing like that at all. Jünger only maintains a living interior relation with the irresistible tendency of the world towards technology, which has already overthrown the structures of Russia and readies itself to transform other peoples equally. If we try to retrace the routes imprinted by this global tendency and give an exact general description, we are always astonished to state that concrete realizations and specifics of the Bolshevik space prove Jünger right. He is not a Bolshevik, but he testifies despite himself how much Bolshevik Russia is in accord with the dominant tendency of the world.