I can't recommend that book, tho

I'm pretty skeptical of modern philosophers in general. You don't need to know Evola, you need to know Steve Bannon's interpretation of Evola. You don't need to know Girard, you need to know Peter Thiel's interpretation of Girard. You don't need to know Nietsche, you need to know Richard Spencer's interpretation of Nietsche, except you don't anymore, and I would argue you never did. It's not that Nick Land is the driving force behind accelerationism, it's that there's a bunch of privileged white assholes who want to fuck shit up and they read stuff sometimes.

Tony Judt's Postwar does a yeoman's job of covering the cultural evolution of Europe after the defeat of the Nazis, the cultural malaise, the anarchist brushfires, etc. None of that was driven by philosophy, but some of it was justified by philosophy.

I don't think you learn shit from polluting your brain with Evola. I think the take-away is "some people are so hell-bent on justification that they'll look up what Mussolini read and try to give it a fresh take." The problem is not that "tech bros don't get Rene Girard" it's that they were never looking for any philosophy that would guide them away from their hearts' desires in the first place.

Edited to add: It usually takes me fifteen to twenty minutes fumbling around with search terms like 'italian fascist philosopher' 'italian accelerationist philosopher' 'philosopher Steve Bannon likes' to remember Evola's name, which I think is wholly appropriate and I wouldn't change a thing. Often I will throw out random Italian names that percolate out of my brain which is why this morning I thought the fascist philosopher Steve Bannon likes was Piero Umiliani which is so choice