/lit/ - Literature

>>10629549
Because right-wingers are retarded

>teleports infront of you
heh, nothing personal kid

cause the task of intellectuals is to go against the establishment or at least mark a contrast to it. if the establishment is right wing there is no need or possibility of contrast to it from its inside.

>>10629560
>le happy & unironic platonist man

>>10629566
>implying academia aren't overwhelmingly left wing
>implying that hasn't been the case for at least 50 years

There are plenty of them, you just need to know where to look.

>>10629549
The American right has adopted a platform that really doesn't jive with the college crowd (defunding, restrictions on students, general contempt for higher ed and strong emphasis on Christianity as practically a state religion), which basically is the breeding ground for new intellectuals. Republicans are increasingly expected to be total partisans as well, or the base falls on them like a pack of coyotes (Flake, McCain, Wray, Comey, Kasich, etc). This isn't to say the Left has a monopoly on intellect, but it's much more open to the ideas of societal critique and higher education that help make intellectuals.
A serious conservative intellectual like Haas gets outsold 10,000 times over by "People Who Disagree With You Are Evil," by Ann Coulter.

>>10629587
Caveat to my own post: I wish the Left had a more intellectual bent as well (it more tolerates the intelligentsia than embraces their ideas), but all politics has to be by and for farmers now apparently.

>>10629590
Either farmers or intellectuals that have their heads too far up their own asses.

>>10629582
>implying academia is the establishment

>>10629549
>Ezra pound
>WB Yeats
>Edmund Burke
>TS Elliot
>Joseph de Maistre
>Honore de Balzac
>Fernando Pessoa
>Giovanni Gentile
>Oswald Spengler
>Martin Heidegger
Shall I continue

>>10629602
http://atavisionary.com/cathedral/the-cathedral-compilation-page/

>>10629602
>implying they're not

>>10629549
Because academia and intellectualism are cancerous and incestuous and someone has to grow food and build roads

Conservatism is a political philosophy that actually lends itself to pragmatism and usefulness

>>10629582
>implying academia is the establishment >>10629585
>best known for his critique on liberalism

>>10629604
>Giovanni Gentile
>Serious

>>10629613
stupid

>>10629615
>Third Reich establishment opposes liberalism
whoa!

>>10629618
He's one of the best Hegelian idealists out there.

*blocks your path*

>>10629611
>>10629612
>what is the financial elite

The only way the right has any claims of legitimacy is because they present themselves as the underdog. But they're not.

>>10629549
SHES SO CUTE

>>10629637
>neoliberals and fiscal conservatives are "the right"

>>10629566
thats not true at all

Roger Scruton

>>10629549
Because all conservatives, without exception, are subhuman. They have reptile brains. They see only black and white, fight or flight, right and wrong. They cannot think deeply, cannot identify nuance or subtelty. They are purely subhuman animals. The left should capture, cook, and eat them, same as any fish, flesh, or fowl.

>>10629582
you're mistaking centrist liberalism for leftism again. the actual academia is full of gray "apolitical" liberals and vaguely conservative old dudes that teach exactly what they've always taught except sprinkled with passive-aggressive complaints about how they're not supposed to say X anymore immediately before saying X. the whole reason you get all these tepid controversies about safe spaces on the campus or whatever is because nobody there has any real political views so they just end up arguing about the intricacies of liberal etiquette.

>>10629627
Way to avoid my point completely.

Being right wing amounts to reacting (whoa!) to the liberalism of the west. Your epipheonomonal at best.

>>10629658
Hi there Reddit! You off to see the groundhog?

>>10629659
You sound like you get your information on college from Ben Shapiro videos

>>10629566
>cause the task of intellectuals is to go against the establishment or at least mark a contrast to it
what you're talking about is demagoguery. An intellectual doesn't have a metaphysical purpose. Just a form.

>>10629664
>everything I don’t like is Reddit
Again, reptile brains the lot of em

Nietzsche
Leo Strauss
Carl Schmitt

>>10629665
oh boy you're really really bad at reading people's politics. i'm a raging pinko and your first association is fucking shapiro?

>>10629659
>you're mistaking centrist liberalism for leftism again.

People like Sartre, Foucault, Chomsky, Badiou, Zizek, Guattari, and Kristeva are all linked to the radical left, and many are committed communists. Saying that they're all just liberals with no committment is bullshit.

I'm sure there is plenty you just seem biased

>>10629673
>Hurr Durr everyone I disagree with is a soulless, heartless retard.
Only an echo chamber filled with gold and circle jerking upvotes would conjure up such a meaningless and stupid statement with no substance such as yours.

>>10629684
No, I was unclear. My image is of you scrolling through zuckbook and seeing a Shapiro video about college someone shared. You hatewatch it but because you've never been to college you assume that the professorial class is split into the two groups you described, which seems to be the point of the Shapiro vids.

>>10629604
>WB Yeats
>Intellectual

Lol

>>10629696
B-but there are multiple studies concluding that conservatives are retarded. Are you anti-science?

>>10629699
i don't have a facebook account, i've been to college, i've never actually watched a shapiro video and only know about him from /lit/ shitposting and in fact had to google him to make sure i was even thinking of the right person. but please continue imagining things about me. when you picture me, what am i wearing?

>>10629720
can you for one sentence say something that isn't riddled with anachronisms?

>>10629723
Do you not know the definition of anachronism?

>>10629722
edible panties?

>>10629690
the point isn't that these guys aren't leftist but that people like that don't actually run universities in the west today. a guy like zizek does not have any actual authority, he's just making his rounds as an amusing curiosity. the guy with real authority is some politically inactive gray figure who made his career doing statistical analysis of soil samples in relation to malnutrition in the late roman empire or whatever.

>>10629658
Woah watch that edge buddy

>>10629766
Maybe not the universities, but they do run the philosophy/sociology departments, writing the PhD projects and organizing the seminars. That gives them a significant amount of influence.

>>10629775
I’m just trying to make everyone hate each other so there’s a war and I don’t have to work anymore.

Hey kids, wanna learn some economics?

>>10629822
I love Sowell but sometimes he needs to admit that free market economics sometimes has negative effects. Global warming and ecological damage are real.

Intellectuals are edgy cunts, thus they will be revolutionaries or at worst reactionaries.

>>10629658
>all my enemies are subhuman monsters!!1
>they're the ones who can't understand nuance

Have you guys actually not read anything pre-WWII or do you just like to pretend anything written before the left enjoyed complete cultural hegemony doesn't exist?

>>10629855
Correct. I thought that was clear.

>>10629658
What's funny is that there are people who unironically think like this on major reddit subs.

>>10629840

I have never heard him say that free market economics is perfect or that it's always the solution. I have no idea where this comes from. I think he generally views economics as a system of trade offs where we have to decide what policy to pursue based on how much good it does. He supports free market economics because that is what provides the most innovation and lifts the most people out of poverty and he always gives his reasoning for believing it.

>>10629604
Pessoa wasn’t right wing at all. He was an anarchist

>>10629871
It all shattered after World War II, the bar lowered. There is a deliberateness and adhesion to craft in prewar fiction that I deeply miss.

>>10629876
/r/politics and /r/politicalhumor are catastrophes. The weird thing is I’m pretty center and anti-Trump, and yet when I try to point out how obviously flawed/misleading this or that headline is, I’m swiftly downvoted and told to heil Hitler and all that

>>10629720
>race is a social construct
>political ideology isn't

psychologytoday quoting shitlib is definitely the lowest tier of the political left

>>10629913
Who said race is a social construct? Surely it wasn’t me ...

>>10629926
So you think race is biological?

>>10629934
But of course our conception of race is grounded in biology ...

>>10629943
I agree with you, but there are plenty of people on the left who do not believe this to be the case.

I'm a molecular biologist, though, not a sociologist or philosopher, so biological classification of races isn't as controversial in my field.

>>10629549
There are plenty, they just don't write racist rants, or about white genocide, which probably stretches your definition of right wing

>>10629604
Add Cicero to that.

>>10629950
Is it true that, and I quote, “the study of complete genomes from different parts of the world has shown ... there is not a single absolute genetic difference”? - Svante Paabo

Because regardless of how liberal one is, that seems plainly impossible.

>>10629549

>>10629892
>unironically browsing reddit

Wew laddy

>>10629549
*teleport behind you*
hehe, nothing personal

>>10629646
Deciding whether or not something is left or right depends on a universally agreed upon political spectrum, which despite that political compass thing isn't really the case. So
>neoliberals and fiscal conservatives are "the right"
Fiscal conservatives are def "right wing" in that their only options for political allegiance tend to fall within right wing parties like the GOP or Libertarians. Neoliberals aren't nessecarily "the right." Many neoliberals are right wing, but not all. The only thing known for sure is that neolibs aren't leftist. They're further to the right. Argue however long you want, but they are either centrist or right. Center-right leaning.

>>10629972
>not experiencing everything all of the time
Be gone Mortal

>>10629964

>Is it true that, and I quote, “the study of complete genomes from different parts of the world has shown ... there is not a single absolute genetic difference”? - Svante Paabo

There is not one "caucasian mutation", and there isn't one "African mutation". But there are polymorphisms that are related to being caucasian and there are those that are related to being African, and although you cannot pinpoint one individual polymorphism on a particular race, you can form clusters of polymorphisms that together form a statistically distinct cluster of people.

For my work it's mostly the functual effects. In pharmacology and immunology, race is just seen as something we have to account for in our tests because it affects the biochemistry of the cell. Enzyme kinetics aren't really a social construct.

>>10629549
There's a lot of intellectuals who are conservative or apolitical. There just happens to be a big overepresentation of left wing """intellectuals and intellectual theory""" due to Jewish influence.

>>10629881
Thomas Sowell replies to a lot of comments and answers many questions from his readers. Unlike his mentor Milton Friedman, who would often begin his answers with "well, let's compare the free market to the alternative...", Sowell gets very defensive and tries to justify free market positions by denying its negative side effects. He says that waste isn't a problem, for instance, and that there's enough space for much bigger landfills in North America. Friedman instead, who was an adviser to Ronald Regan, knows how to compromise properly, and would say "if it becomes a problem we could tax companies for producing waste".

>>10629549
https://web.archive.org/web/20180202171802/http://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/20180129/106822/HMTG-115-IG00-20180129-SD001.pdf

>>10629991
>enzyme kenetics aren’t really a social construct
Careful, you could lose your job for that kind of cultural insensitivity.

>>10629884
>Pessoa was an anarchist
*Ardent nationalist and staunch anti-egalitarian. Where did you hear he was an anarchist from? He had whole world dedicated to hoping that Portugal would have a new era as a dominant super power in his neopagan writings.

He just disliked monarchism and the Catholic Church, he was by no means and anarchist

>>10630012
Actually the opposite is true. There are well established racial differences in some key liver enzymes and if we ignore those then people will either be given the wrong dose or the wrong medicine, which could cost lives.

>>10629708
>Yeats
>Not intellectual
But hurt englishfag detected

>>10630004

Are you copying that from some blog? You're essentially just repeating yourself when a simple citation would do. Show me where Sowell says the free market is perfect or that it's the solution to everything.

>>10630021
>whole world
*Works

>>10630025
So then to say “race is a product of biology” isn’t inaccurate or racist?

Am I redpilled?

>>10630004

An argument that waste isn't a problem is not an assertion that that free market economics is perfect. It's an assertion that waste isn't a problem.

>>10630030
I'll take that as a compliment, because I literally just typed it out. I haven't read any Sowell in a while, I used to be a subscriber of his column and I often found him trying to deny criticism rather than addressing it. Maybe have a look at his response to environmental problems...

>>10630065

It's not a compliment. It looks like it was copy pasted because it didn't answer anything and repeated what you said earlier. What does environmental shit have to do with anything? You said he thinks the free market is perfect and the solution to everything. Give your reason for believing that instead of simply restating your opinion.

>>10630021
Pessoa scholars will disagree, but you can continue believing your dubious /pol/ shit

>>10630087
Dude, how are you not getting this.

You said he "views economics as a system of trade offs", I've told you why he doesn't.

Let's look at an example. In laissez faire economics there is zero intervention, so businesses can dump as much toxic waste as they can. On the other side of the spectrum, a liberal party might want to put a stop to this. Now many libertarians will actually concede that toxic waste is a problem, but will argue a case for the free market by saying "it's better to allow the waste to continue than for the economy to collapse" or something along those lines.

Got it? Now Sowell, unlike many "consequentialist" libertarians, will simply tell you that waste isn't a problem. This isn't the only thing he has denied exists in the free market. He denied that it's possible for people to not receive adequate medical treatment too.

>>10630097
>I'm not going to cite anything so fuck off to /pol/
>Tfw pessoa scholars agree with me

]Also like Yeats, Pessoa was a man of the Right who opposed modern liberalism and egalitarianism. He described the ideal state as an “aristocratic republic” governed by an elite based on merit (rather than birth)

José Barreto, “‘History of a Dictatorship’: An Unfinished Political Essay by the Young Fernando Pessoa,” trans., Mario Pereira. In Patricio Ferrari & Jerónimo Pizarro, eds., Fernando Pessoa as English Reader and Writer (Dartmouth, MA: Tagus Press, 2015): 132.

Here is pessoa himself

Let us apply to the organism called the state the general law of life. Which are the elements (composing the cells) of this organism? Obviously the people, that is, the individuals composing the nation. Which is then, in the state, the force that integrates, which is the force that disintegrates? There is an exact analogy—how could there not be, since both are living “bodies”?—with the individual organism. Thus, in the state, obviously, the disintegrating force is that which makes the people many—their number—and the integrating force is that which makes them one, a people—the unification of sentiments, of character brought about by identity of race, of climate, of history, etc.

Fernando Pessoa, The Transformation Book, eds., Nuno Ribeiro and Claudia Souza (New York: Contra Mundum Press, 2014), 12-13.

>>10629654
Dont know much about him, rec me some Scruton lit

>>10630155

I'll ignore the unsupported assertion that laissez faire economics allows for absolutely no government intervention and just point the contradiction in your own post. You say Thomas Sowell doesn't view economics as a system of tradeoffs but then you say he holds the position of it being better to allow the waste to continue than for the economy to collapse. Does that not sound like a judgement call based on tradeoffs? Assuming you're quoting him accurately, he's saying that it's better to let certain waste happen since it's positive benefits it gives the economy outweigh the negative effects of the waste.

That's not a crazy position when you consider things like water purification. There's no such thing as pure water in the real world. There's always some trace amounts of waste or chemicals inside that are not worth filtering out since they don't cause any trouble. This is an instance where where it would be worth leaving that waste in the water rather than spending money lots of money to clean it. It's a judgement based on an evaluation of tradeoffs.

All of this is beside the point. You asserted that he believes the free market is always the solution to everything but when asked why you believe that all you've done was change the subject. Him believing that waste is not a problem, even if that's his actual position and not some poorly understood strawman, it's not an assertion that the free market is perfect.

>>10630204
A Political Philosophy: Arguments for Conservatism (2006)
How to Be a Conservative (2014)

>>10630263
>you say he holds the position of it being better to allow the waste to continue than for the economy to collapse
You're skimming. I said MOST LIBERTARIANS would say that, not Sowell. Sowell WOULD NOT say that.

>You asserted that he believes the free market is always the solution to everything but when asked why you believe that all you've done was change the subject
You are very hard to talk to. You misread my post then accused me of changing the subject. I literally can't explain this any more clearly without sounding condescending. As a libertarian myself I hold the same positions as Sowell but at least I can admit there exists a trade-off, Sowell doesn't, he will deny any negative side-effects. Read the last sentence of my last post.

Of course he didn't state "the free market is perfect" but he implies it all the time--all I'm saying is be careful with him because he's very biased.

>>10630025
Um no sweaty, there is only one race, the human race. Get it right, honey buns :)))

>>10630350

I'm glad you can finally admit that you were wrong to say he believes the free market is perfect. That's the problem I had with your post. You said that was his position and when I asked why you believed that you started talking about environmental shit.

In order to say that something is not worth worrying about you have to recognize that it exists. You have to recognize that there is a negative effect to waste in order to say that the negative effects or waste aren't outweighed by the positive effects on the economy. That is an evaluation of tradeoffs. You're contradicting yourself by saying Sowell doesn't believe tradeoffs exist and then saying that Sowell holds the position that waste isn't worth worrying about.

The conservative has no capacity for new ideas or thought that challenges his well-defined boundaries and morals. This can of course be a good thing as it makes for a man of great fortitude and morality, often with a deep spiritual life.
However, when it comes to the realm of intellectuals the conservative cannot compete with the liberal. The conservative's world is based on hard facts and tradition while the liberal actively seeks to question those accepted narratives.

>>10629604
How was Balzac right-wing exactly? He satirized the establishment but that's doesn't make one right wing.

>>10629884
>>10630097
You must be trolling. Pessoa described himself as a conservative.

>>10630527
He had right-wing heteronyms so simple minds think this means he also was.

>>10629549
Because right wingers want too keep everything as it is while left wingers want to reach new frontiers. Intellectualism is all about shaking the status quo and finding new ideas. The right wing isn't even a proper ideology. They're just people defending what they already have.

>>10630535
Dude, stop larping as a deluded leftist.

>>10629549
KantBot.

>>10630555
memes aren't serious desu

Who cares? The right can meme and the left can't.
Which matters more in 2018?

>>10630573
>The right can meme and the left can't
stupidest thing I've read today, congrats

>>10630573
Ah yes, the state of memes on this site when literally any black person anywhere is now cause to KANGpost. Obviously the left need to step up their game to match this sophisticated meme

>>10629720
>Go college.
>Get left wing ideals forced down your throat daily.
>Slowly accept it to fit in with others and/or to get pussy.
>Somehow liberals are smarter.
The only retards are those that buy into the idea that somehow liberal ideas derive solely from high IQs and aren't down to sociological and cultural factors.

>>10629636
>Hung around with whores
>Always high on some shit
Yeah, seems like your average republican senator

>>10629658
>identify nuance or subtelty.
The word you want is discern lol

>>10629784
Dude, as someone who went to art school and hung around phil departments a lot, most professors are either balanced (even kinda retrograde) soc dems or 100 year old mummies going on about muh classical marxism but also getting outraged at gays and trannies.

>>10629658
>14 year olds on reddit

>>10629590
Most farmers I know are of a much more intellectual bend than the average member of the intelligentsia, desu.

>>10630509
He was a monarchist my dude , he wasn't necessarily status quo reactionary but he was definitely a rightists

>>10630509
He was a devout Catholic and supported the Bourbon monarchy. More "conservative" than "rightist" I suppose but still

>>10629658
this but unironically

>>10629549
There are, they just don't embarrass themselves with sensationalist bull shit and over debated topics. A shit ton of Foreign Policy work put out in journals and books is out of Neo-Con and Cold Warrior playbooks that still gets citied all over the place.

>It should be noted that there is now no intelligentsia that is not in some sense ‘left’. Perhaps the last right-wing intellectual was T. E. Lawrence. Since about 1930 everyone describable as an ‘intellectual’ has lived in a state of chronic discontent with the existing order. Necessarily so, because society as it was constituted had no room for him. In an Empire that was simply stagnant, neither being developed nor falling to pieces, and in an England ruled by people whose chief asset was their stupidity, to be ‘clever’ was to be suspect. If you had the kind of brain that could understand the poems of T. S. Eliot or the theories of Karl Marx, the higher-ups would see to it that you were kept out of any important job. The intellectuals could find a function for themselves only in the literary reviews and the left-wing political parties.

- George Orwell, England Your England.

READ LAWRENCE!

>>10630727
Just jumping into the conversation. I find this to be true. I work for a bloke who's friendly with the royal family, well read and incredibly powerful politically and socially. He's also quite intelligent, although his age is starting to show.

Farmers, graziers and even managers aren't as dumb as people seem to believe.

>>10629658
>They cannot think deeply, cannot identify nuance or subtelty.
>cannot identify nuance or subtelty.
>identify nuance or subtelty.

>>10630977
What are you getting at, exactly?

>>10630649
They’re synonyms. Read a book

>>10630555
(((kikebot))) is really the only person that qualifies as "alt-left". Anyone who believes that Locke, Rousseau, and other liberal idiots from the so-called "Enlightment" period deserve to be read and taken seriously is ipso facto a leftist and a retard.

>>10630919
I think its just the stigma thats always been held for the career in general. Being a farmer in the 21st century probably is no easy feat and requires lots of land and capital which retarded people dont generally have.

>>10631074
I think it's the necessity of being skilled in multiple and vastly different areas. It creates an individual that's quite well rounded.

Perhaps it's also to do with the fact that, in Australia at least, the remote locations of many of our largest farms force the children of farmers to go away to some of the top boarding schools in the country. Distance Education is also a big thing, as is probably quite a lot better than most state schools.

But you're right. People aren't willing to look beyond the image of the simple small scale farmer. There's just too much you need to master now to be successful, and too many terrible things to witness that leave you with philosophical reflections, to allow for the feeble minded to succeed.

I don't think I've ever met a stupid farmer. I've only ever dealed with large properties, so maybe that's a contributing factor. I have found even the most uneducated (left school at 12 or 13) to be both quick of thought and capable of great insight.

I mean, if you're walking cattle for 6 hours and you have absolutely no need to seriously concentrate on anything, you can spend quite a lot of time thinking. That's something that most people dont have.

To be an intellectual you must be able and willing to consider and think about new ideas, and right-wingers by nature will not do that.

>>10630173
Seems like the same opinion that Baudelaire had. I wouldn't call it plainly "conservative" though. There are caveats, such as getting rid of democracy that American conservatives would never agree with, for obvious reasons. It's why Baudelaire felt so sorry for Poe, because he couldn't survive in a society that demanded him to sell his work rather than create a truly original piece of work. They were artists of an old world.

>>10629822
my nigga, my nigga

>>10629549
Sargon of Akkad is a right-wing intellectual!
also this >>10631087

>>10629558
fpbp

>>10631047
They aren't, you fucking dumb hack. "Idealist" as used in ordinary conversation has nothing to do with heavenly Forms or the mental origins of qualia

>>10629549
Thomas Sowell

>>10629587
neither the right wing nor the left wing exists in america, just dumbfuck cuckservatives and libcuck retards throwing piss and shit at eachother over manufactured non-issues amplified by multi billion dollar media conglomerates and their complete stranglehold over the dissemination of information bought and paid for by even larger businesses and oligarchs beholden to no interests other than furthering a """global""" """free""" market. there's no real proper right or left dichotomy, just a middling brown.

>>10631047
lol sent you the wrong reply
they're synonyms, but discern is the word you want there. Identify is better for some specific thing, not a general detection, which implies passive activity.

every economist is a "right wing intellectual" and no there are no "marxist economists" anymore, only "marxist english professors"

Have you noticed free speech defeners/ reddit libertarians / radical centrists started off denying themselves as bigots and saying they were only ever against “sjws” but now are openly antagonistic towards minorities and queer people?

Really makes u think

>>10631166
Wrong

>>10631166
Wait what? I think I see. who did you mean to reply to? I want to see what caused your anus shredding rage

Why do mods allow these threads. Anything with the words left wing or right wing in the title and that doesn't explicitly reference a book should be deleted.

>>10629549
The emoji movie is the essence of capitalism. You cannot accept the emoji movie’s existence as natural and consider yourself an intellectual unless you’re some /lit/ tier half ironic pseud contrarian who has no idea what they’re talking about like sam hyde or zizek or kantbot

>>10631201
There was something subtle and sinister about that movie. It activitated my almonds for reasons I couldn’t describe. Maybe this is why...

>>10631193
Lol some guy was trying to tell me that an "idealist" only means platonis
Probably a troll

>>10629549
>Julius Evola
>Oswald Spengler
>Alain De Benoist
>Carl Schmitt
>Francis Parker Yockey
>Thomas Carlyle
>Nicolas Gomez Davila
>Plinio Correa de Oliveira
>G.K Chesterton

>>10631065
If you can't do an esoteric reading of people like Rousseau and just accept what the system tells you about him then you're the retard. I like Kantbot because he shills for people that deserve to be read more like Fichte, Hamann, and Herder

>>10631133
>I wouldn't call it plainly "conservative" though. There are caveats, such as getting rid of democracy that American conservatives would never agree with, for obvious reasons.

No one said he was an American-style 2017 Republican. Being anti-democracy, among other things, puts him to the far-right of most present day conservatives. He was a reactionary and a big fan of de Maistre, although he couldn't say no to mulattas.

"There is no form of rational and assured government save an aristocracy. A monarchy or a republic, based upon democracy, are equally absurd and feeble. The immense nausea of advertisements. There are but three beings worthy of respect: the priest, the warrior and the poet. To know, to kill and to create. The rest of mankind may be taxed and drudged, they are born for the stable, that is to say, to practise what they call professions."

>>10631201

hey douchebag, emoji movie was pure kino so shut the fuck up

>>10629549
it's funny because basically the root of all contemporary left thought comes from two far right thinkers, Hegel and Nietzsche (many of the French degenerates approached Nietzsche through Heidegger, a literal Nazi).

The left cannot create, only subvert.

>>10631302
There's nothing new under the sun. To create one must tear apart two (or more) things and then mash them together.

im a right wing intellectual, im just not very serious about it

>>10631182
>queer """people"""

>>10629661
Schmitts legacy today has next to nothing to do with his critique of liberalism, it's mostly left academics who utilise his theory

>>10630915
I hate George Orwell so much. It's like he made his life mission to write essays shitting on better writers because they weren't as progressive as him.

>>10631197
>MUH KEEP THE BOARD CLEAN
Just go to reddit, man.

>>10629984
The internet told me I'm a neoliberal. Now what do I do?

>>10631486
absolute cuck slave to jeff bezos

>>10631493
but leftists are proven statistically to be weak cucks

can you even do a pull up?

>>10629549
There are no serious intellectuals that you could define as right-wing or left-wing. You can't be an intellectual and a limited ideologue. Certainly not ones that anyone not immediately working with, would know of.

>>10629658
Didn't you just oust yourself as this, with your reply:
>They have reptile brains. They see only black and white, fight or flight, right and wrong. They cannot think deeply, cannot identify nuance or subtelty.

>>10631493

Why are people so angry at Jeff Bezos?

>>10629659
You're sort of right, what people don't realize is how departmental it is. At my school the breakdown was this (these are departments I had direct experience with, from what I've heard STEM is totally different and many professors are anti-leftwing if not right-wing themselves) : Social work/gender studies/anything critical theory related is full of nutcases, english is mixed between left-leaning, apolitical and a few old conservative types, and history (my department) was fairly mixed, however, culturally very left leaning and has the effects of social constructionism on history were more increasingly felt (especially in seminars, big undergrad intro classes haven't changed too much), archaeology/classics same as history, political science was overwhelmingly neo-liberal and pragmatist in its leaning while the economics department was your standard Wall St. Journal politics.

>>10631683
sorry for the random tense changes I'm high af, Bill Clinton pic related

right wing intellectuals exist in niche fields, they aren't media whores like libshit pseuds

>>10631569
because he's literally a CIA nigger trying to seize the means of production by taking over every industry in the united states. he wants to be a god ruling over the slave castes.

>>10631683
>and history (my department) was fairly mixed, however, culturally very left leaning
How can someone dedicate his life to history without being a conservative? What is a conservative if not someone who wants to conserve history?

>>10631768
>Be me
>kinda dumb girl
>teachers in highschool praise me for adressing that there are too many white men
>white men everywhere I look
>don't actually talk about the white men, just point and say "white male"
>need to find a field of study in college where I can point at white men
>history is full of white men

>>10631692
looks like somebody salty they didn't cop a buncha amzn when it was 10 bucks a share after the dotcom crash, but don't worry i'm sure ur bitcoins price will come back

>>10629549
Kant, Hegel, Heidegger, Wittgenstein, Fukuyama, Schumpeter

>>10631943
has fukuyuma ever been correct about literally anything? and i mean anything?

>>10631201
Of course fedora-tipping redditors can't grasp multi-layered ironic satire when they see it. I just watched it and I was literally in shock by how one thing can be so kíno. It wasn't meant to be a comedy; it wasn't meant to be a kids movie. It was supposed to be watched as an allegory for the modern world's blind acceptance of anything that's presented as being cool just for its own sake. The very act of watching the movie was it telling you "See? You like to use emojis everyday and so does everyone around you so you have to watch this because you're part of the grotesque machine that is modern pop culture". The screen was laughing at me and I enjoyed every moment of it. Of course Reddictor McAtheists won't ever understand that, their small "le epic upboat XD" brains could never allow them to pull their heads out of their asses and really appreciate the art that is Le Filmé Emojie.

>>10629658
how did this weak bait get so many unironic (you)'s

>>10629587
Really low time horizon on this post

>>10631569
>>10631569
>Richest man in history, making ~$1100 a SECOND
>Workers have to piss in bottles on the job in order to keep up pace
>Many workers on food stamps
>Creates automated store where food prices are low because less overhead of paying cashiers. Smart phone a necessity to shop there.
>Stores don't accept foodstamps
>Warehouse employees have timed bathroom breaks and are so overworked they fall asleep on their feet. Some have had to be taken to the hospital from exhaustion.
>Can't take a 55+ hour work week? Fired.
>Recently acquired patent on wristbands that track warehouse workers' hand movements and guides them through vibration to ensure they're constantly working.

He's a cunt.

>>10629634
He's Hegel with autism

>>10629658
Is the fact that this weak bait got so many (You)s another proof of the fact that conservatives are morons?

>>10632826
>Weak b8 just happens to.be what lots of liberals actually unironically think of conservatives
I've had the same opinion shouted at me ad infinitum my dude

>>10629634
Was he actually? I know nothing about him other than fascism, right? That sounds interesting

>>10629560
>Evola
>Intellectual
An erudite esotericist sure, but certainly not an intellectual.

>>10629560
>le based trad die without reproducing man
why do all the "good" right wing thinkers do this?

>>10629604
>pound
>intellectual
he was a fraud who faked knowing chinese.

>>10632850
No.
If you want the best Italian idealist read Benedetto "everything I say is right" Croce.

>>10632885
>For a third time, a liberal/leftist has to bitterly deny that the opposition has intellectuals
How many times are you types going to do this

>>10632850
Yes, anyone who says otherwise is just butthurt that they have to admit that fascism weren't just a bunch of skinheads who liked invading things and putting people into camps

>>10632898
what opposition? i'm merely pointing out the well-established fact that ezra pound could neither speak nor read chinese despite pretending that he could. he was a phony.

>>10632826
yes

>>10632908
>Ezra pound isn't an intellectual
He just keeps going. A black hole of brainlet, God help us all

>dismantles your failed aesthetics with the style of a demi-god

>>10632913
he was a fraudulent aesthete turned propagandist, not an intellectual. i'm not surprised you don't recognize the difference.

>>10632917
Ah yes, the propoganda of imagism and his collections of poetry are completely.shattered by his bad translations of Confucius.


Butthurt levels that shouldn't even be possible.

>>10632917
>Pound was an asthete meme
How can one man's talent trigger so many

>>10632864
>Evola
>Not intellectual

>>10632917
>the man who encouraged joyce, hemingway, eliot, was best friends with yeats
>not an intellectual
Kys

>>10632920
>>10632942
even if he wasn't a fraud, his artistic attempts would not make him an intellectual. artist and intellectual are not synonyms, get it?

btw his phoniness regarding chinese extends FAR beyond "bad translations of Confucius." on top of simply pretending to know chinese when he didn't, he also fundamentally misunderstood the nature of chinese writing as purely ideographic. when your entire style is based on a misapprehension of basic orthographic principles in your supposed area of expertise, it's safe to call you a fraud.

PS hemingway, eliot, and yeats are pleb-tier

>>10632925
He's not, no serious thinker takes him seriously

>>10632947
>he also fundamentally misunderstood the nature of chinese writing as purely ideographic.
Not that anon, but there's been a litany of academics and intellectuals who've written on a host of topic in the past - anthropology, mythology etc. - who gotten varying degrees of shit wrong all over the place. Some slightly, some significantly. Them being wrong doesn't stop them from being remembered as intellectuals though. I don't think you are that cognizant of the ironic degree of propagandist impetus behind your completely hyperbolic writing off of the man. You're playing along ideological lines right now as well.

What exactly is there left to conserve? I see pretty much no foundation for conservatism outside of insane free-market economics that intensify social inequality, which the right-wing has turned into. Needless to say those very policies have destroyed every aspect of traditional life that conservatives are supposed to cherish. The mad chase for profits, growing job insecurity, dismantling of public services and public education - these are your conservative politics apparently.
Sorry, but what I want to conserve is a decent life for the average person and a possibility to reject market economics without having your nation destroyed by western hegemony, therefore I'm a leftist.

>>10632979
Well put

>>10632958
pretending to understand chinese when you don't isn't just "getting something wrong." it's fraud and the fraud is blatant, obvious, and documented.

and i am not playing along ideological lines, i am probably more "right wing" than all the retards defending this phony.

>I don't think you are that cognizant of the ironic degree of propagandist impetus behind your completely hyperbolic writing off of the man.
i just want to point out what a horrible sentence that is.

>>10632979
who said anything about conserving? the OP said "right wing."

kys

>>10631475
It's explicitly against the rules. Go back.

>>10632947
>PS hemingway, eliot, and yeats are pleb-tier

Adam Smith
Ayn Rand
David Ricardo
Murray Rothbard
Carl Yung
Oswald Mosley

>>10629566
That's a glorified contrarian anon, usually the least intellectual people.

>>10629722
>what am I wearing

Not that guy but I'm sure you're wearing a tanky.

>>10632894
But Croce himself said that Gentile was among the best Hegelian idealists.

>>10632947
>artist and intellectual are not synonyms, get it?
>There is no intellect in creativity , especially in the field of literature and philosophy
Yeah no, you might as well just admit you're ideologically biased against Ezra Pound holy shit , what did he do screw your great grandmother.
>He's a fraud [citation needed]
>His translations were horrible and therefore have no merit [citation needed]
>Ignores imagism and vorticism completely simply because his translations a shit
Wew lad goes in all fields

>>10632949
>He's not, no thinker I agree with takes him seriously
Ftfy

>>10632979
>What exactly is there left to conserve?
Modern pleb tier conservativism is essentially just the worship of classical liberalism desu. That's about as much as they want to conserve.

>>10632002
Victim complex

>>10631768
>How can someone dedicate his life to history without being a conservative? What is a conservative if not someone who wants to conserve history?
this is one of the dumbest things I've ever read

>>10629566
>the establishment is right wing

>>10633417
economically, yes

>>10629659
>vaguely conservative old dudes

Just come out and say old white dudes you leftist faggot, you aren't fooling anyone

>>10633404
What if I want to conserve the history of communist movements against liberal hegemonic erasure?

>>10633435
maybe start with writing something comprehensible first

>>10629558
>Retards aren't serious

>>10629637
>>what is the financial elite
It's the group that funds the academia to create leftist lunatics who fight against the workers, both sexes, standards that are in the way of market monopolization of the human experience, so that they can stay on top and make more money (which they create).

>>10633488
>male and female standards are in the way of the financial elite's profits
>which is why they're financing people who would add even more standards (non-binary, FtM, MtF)
capitalist logic

>>10632915
>is bribed by tobacco companies for over a decade

wow really building societal trust there

>>10633002
>and i am not playing along ideological lines
Lmao okay.
>i just want to point out what a horrible sentence that is.
I just want to point out that it hit a nerve regardless. I know this because you were compelled to respond to it on some level yet felt unable to address the content because it rung too true, so you sheepishly settled on addressing the form.

>>10631970
>i enjoy crypto communist corporations controlled by kike cabals cuckolding my culture via crooked and queer kino

pure redditor mentality, bravo

>>10633571
>a collection of blogposts

>>10633571
>me strong u weak
The right wing american chimpanzee, everyone.

>>10633592
>>10633606
The Redditor is immunized against all dangers: one may call him a scoundrel, parasite, swindler, profiteer, it all runs off him like water off a raincoat. But call him a Redditor and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: “I’ve been found out.”

>>10629549
Every writer born prior to 1950 would be considered "right-wing" today, face it brainlets the only left leaning intellectual you have is Gore Vidal and he wrote this:

>Norway is large enough and empty enough to take in 40 to 50 million homeless Bengalis. If the Norwegians say that, all in all, they would rather not take them in, is this to be considered racism? I think not. It is simply self-preservation, the first law of species.

>>10633642
>redditposting
your stupid

>>10633693

>>10633709
>frogposting
your stupid

>>10633717

>>10633741
>posting memepics
your consummate intellectual

>>10633606
Having such low test levels is actually a serious medical issue, and it'll affect much more than just physical strength.

>>10633787
What do you mean?

>>10633793
The pic showed testosterone levels. Having low testosterone won't just cause weakness, but it'll disrupt a man's entire physiology.

>>10633801
>it'll disrupt a man's entire physiology
how?

>>10633571
>vice
>daily wire
>nbc news
>the try guys

>>10633822
Causes muscle loss, decrease in bone density, increase in fat, hair loss, cardiovascular disorders, erectile dysfunction, and a shitload of mental problems.

>>10633841
source?

>>10633841
>hair loss
that's actually from high testosterone levels you memer

>>10633844
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1569444/#b1

>>10633848
Low testosterone also causes hair loss, actually.

>>10631683
agree. im in an economics department and while we're your standard "liberal" (markets can both work and fail, governments can both work and fail), we're no-nonsense. I am very grateful the econ profession has not been infected by SJWs (well, theres some but its unsuccessful). Thankfully, our profession is more results-driven than ideology (to some extent). We gotta try our best from turning into neo-sociology, and some retards are doing this (e.g. Levitt and his freakonomics bs)

>>10633844
>in males aged at least 45

>>10631768
I don't have an appropriate brainlet meme for this level of stupidity.

>>10632800
>Workers have to do their jobs and can't slack off
Leftist detected

>>10633856
>in males aged at least 45

>>10629549
Evidently high testosterone makes you a brainlet

>>10633885
>mfw i will never be to smart too win

fug :((

>>10632979
Thank you. Some sense on this board for once. I hope more of these neo"tradcons", clutching their Milo pictures, fellating themselves with the idea of Lauren Southern in mind see this post and realise that their half-wit ideology is nothing more than a farce at this point

>>10632979
>>10633912
this guy is right >>10633374, don't be plebs, conservative just means classical liberalism, and leftist means just progressive liberalism

yes, there are actual reactionaries and marxists, but if you guess liberal of the 2 brands mentioned above you'll be right 95% of the time

>>10629549
Russell Kirk put this meme to bed in 1953. As others have mentioned, Scruton also proves this wrong. No has mentioned Santayana or Voeglin yet.

>>10632979
it is a human race. I will run you over. fuck everything you stand for

>>10633988
you already lost buddy

>>10629549

Because we can't take anything seriously anymore.

>>10629549
>destroys Freud, Marx, and Darwin all in one book and then proceeds to outline the revival of Europe both spiritually and politically

>>10631955
Did he hurt your Feelings stating History ended?

>>10634119
who's the guy? he doesn't look european

>>10629549
Because they known that it is a waste of time as they are in power. Also, they just sit and watch how the left ridiculizes itself by not agreeing with eachother

>>10629645
She is the ugly female version of the kid that acts in Stranger Things, kekekek

>>10634480
>he doesn't look european
How so?

>>10634533
there's some rootless anglo-american air to the guy

>>10634544
it's the face of a man captured by the FBI after a 10 year chase

American right wing intellectuals sit on think tanks like hoover institute, cato institute, aei, heritage foundation. If you you really care, go read their publications.

>>10631768
LMAO. What a fucking brainlet. Conservatism has nothing to do with history. It's about protecting the institutions that systematically benefit them. They only pretend to care for history as a way to justify their privilegues, like your typical /pol/tards talking about their culture achievements, but when it comes to actually studying it in a serious way, you will find very little conservatives interested in it.
History in fact appeals to the left because it's all about progress. We don't study history to fantasise about living in older times but to awe for how far we have com from that. History has a left leaning bias.

>>10635005
>History in fact appeals to the left because it's all about progress.
That's just one particular way of looking at history, and it's certainly not shared by many. And it's funny that you'd say that /pol/tards aren't interested in history, because the biggest damage to history (as a science) was not done by the right, but by left-wing poststructuralists who were often very lenient with their interpretation of historical facts.

>>10635005
>. History has a left leaning bias
History shows societies collapsing all the time, which is really not 'progress'

>>10635005
>mfw people call me a leftist

>>10635005

history shows how humans have lived in absolute misery for thousands of years and if you don't do so right now it's thanks to western civilization, rule of law, and capitalism, all of which are despised by the left.

>>10635005
>but when it comes to actually studying it in a serious way, you will find very little conservatives interested in it.
Where do you think you are?

>>10629549
Thomas Sowell you pseud.

>>10635037
lol

>>10629549
intellectuals are idealists and right wingers are realists

>>10635081
I'm right wing myself but this is the dumbest shit i've ever read

>>10629549
Introducing yourself to new ideas as is typified by academia doesn't appear to conflate with regressive politics.

>>10629549
Why the fuck does this picture trigger me so much?

>>10635109
Wrong. A conservative had to be introduced to ideas new to him. A conservative is more accurately characterized as one who trusts more in ideas that he can study because they've been tried and a progressive has determined that what has been tried failed so miserably that drastic change is needed even if there are consequences of the unknown. Both are right sometimes and both are wrong sometimes and a wise political thinker respects both the need to retain good practices and the need for occasional drastic reform.

>>10635053
This is what putting politics as the determining factor in your life does to people. To be so bound up in partisan hackery that this is something you actually believe? You're desperately in need of self-reflection.

>>10635005
>implying history isn't the history of institutions
>implying progress is exclusive to the left
I don't know, man. I don't study history nor anything related, but my impression is that the left, at least since post-structuralism, is much more ahistorical than the right, which sees progress as the slow depuration of human institutions and traditions through history, while the left sees progress as getting rid of historical hierarchies by criticizing the institutions and traditions that support them.

I think the canon is a good example of what I'm saying. To conservatives art is about the progression of the canon, while for leftists is about self expression.

>>10635142
please get a taste of your venom at >>>/venezuela/, mr. history-is-progress

>>10635140
Conservative values are passed on in childhood for the most part, and tends to appeal to nostalgia more so than intellectual rigour. I really doubt that most people who characterise themselves as 'conservative' needed to educate themselves about that position.

>>10635185
Hahahahaha yeah I mean I read the Leviathan and Wealth of Nations before I turned 13.

>>10629690
People like sartre foucault and guattari are dead. People like zizek aren't mainstream academia, unfortunately. Also, what the other anon said, none of these people have or had any real power. Yes academia tends to be left of centre, but the establishment is so far right its not hard to be slightly left of it. From my experience you have to look pretty hard to find committed left wing academics - most are like most people with relatively comfortable careers/lifestyles, which is a little bit reactionary, a little bit conservative, whatever opinions they outwardly profess

>>10635156
>hurr durr conservatives can be progressive too
Somehow you have managed to be the biggest brainlet on a thread filled with brainlets trying to defend right wing intellectuals.

>>10633557
i already addressed the content in the same post. but that sentence was so horribly written it had to be noted as well.

>>10629549
Intellectualism and the arts have always been of the left. There's a reason they are called liberal arts.

>>10629991
What of the biological usefulness evolutionary of combining distinct racial groups (as defined by the scientific category of certain clusters of polymorphisms) to produce fitter, stronger, smarter offspring?

Essentially, if we acknowledge race in some capacity exists empirically, to what extent does it serve a biological rational to "preserve" a ceratin cluster?

>>10629558
fpbp

>>10630041
Depends.
You cannot exactly start to correlate racial;y defined enzyme and polymorphisms to then produce a definitive division of humanity and a prediction of the essence of a human's capacity to be xyz human to form the basis of social policy.

Recommending a ginger person wears Sunscreen is not the same as stating that a Ginger person should be killed/seperated/spat on for being a Ginger no-sun-fun mutant.

>>10636026
It's evolutionary beneficial to preserve those with your genes, because you are also preserving your own genes by doing so. You cannot look at people as individual organisms at this point, but rather the race as a meta-organism. Apparently it's evolutionary beneficial, because this type of behaviour is found in most vertebrates, from fish to amphibians to mammals.

>>10630492
But to what extent does questioning lead one to simply stroke ones own ego and lurch into pretentiousness?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEPwn2Yit9E

Literally modern "Intellectual Intelligentsia" in london right now

>>10636050
Disagree; surely race developed via the migrationary and evolutionary nature of human genetic development which demonstrably shows that a monolithic genetic pool leads to susceptibility to environmental pressure changes negatively.

That is to say Alexandra The great and Genghis Khan had a dramatic and favourable impact on human genetics rather than a self-preservationist mindset which doesn't really have a rationale in light of the very examples you cite; they exist in niches, Human genetics are far more adaptable and conducive to genetic exchange to build stronger progeny.

>>10635325
True
Most leftists are actually comfy centre liberals but don't want to admit it as they earn enough and have a nice inheritance from asset price inflation and mummy/Granny or are themselves dirty landlords having bought 5 houses to people-farm (rent out)

>>10629558
This

>>10636050
>>10636079
insofar as "evolutionary benefit" is even a thing it can ONLY be assessed after the fact. if in 500 years the only people on earth are black-skinned 60 IQ hunter-gatherers, then their genes have proven to be evolutionary beneficial. evolution isn't about what's "best" in some qualitative sense, it's about what's left.

because right wing thought is not as obviously right wing as left wing thought is obviously left wing. learn to look a little bit harder

>>10636110
But when will it be after "the fact?"
i suggest you look at the genetic similarities.

>>10636079
>Disagree; surely race developed via the migrationary and evolutionary nature of human genetic development which demonstrably shows that a monolithic genetic pool leads to susceptibility to environmental pressure changes negatively.

Preferring your own genes does not result in a monolithic gene pool, because even genetically homogenous groups of individuals show remarkable genetic variation, more than enough to sustain a viable population. Trying to homogenize races by mixing them together serves very little biological purpose and is often related to outbreeding depression. Genetic selection often selects for alleles within the context of other alleles, which means that polymorphisms in one gene also affect selection for genes that are related to that particular gene. This selection of clusters of genes is one of the reasons that outbreeding depression develops, and why it's a bad idea to just mix subspecies/races of distant gene pools up for no reason.

>Human genetics are far more adaptable and conducive to genetic exchange to build stronger progeny.

This is at odds with evidence that shows that people have innate and often subconscious preference for their own race/ethnicity. This cannot (fully) be explained by culture and social conditioning either, because it's already observed in infants before they learn to speak.

>>10636147
>Indians are whiter than fins

lel

>>10629549
Because there aren't any good right-wing ideas. High time to just bin the whole enterprise as a botch job.

>>10636149
>Trying to homogenize races by mixing them together serves very little biological purpose and is often related to outbreeding depression.

I love how racemixing on 4chan is always talked about as if everyone was forced to do it at gunpoint for some reason

>>10636159

>>10636349
I was talking more about what happened to domestic animals that were bred together to form offspring that didn't fit in their biome.

>>10636228
>>10629549

From only my narrow and random selection of reading and understanding, arranged by country.

England, probably the most "liberal" country on earth, birthplace of every major left wing philosophy, also generally speaking an anti-intellectual country, nevertheless produced the below and many many more:

Thomas Hobbes (laid down the framework for royal absolutism); Thomas Carlyle ("the nigger question", the heroic in history"); Wyndham-Lewis (anti-progress, anti-humanism, cruelty as a moral value), GK Chesterton (traditionalist Catholicism, anti progressive ideas); Darwin (extreme racialism, amusingly brushed over nowadays, believed that "inferior races" would be exterminated); JRR Tolkein (Catholic reactionary); Patrick Moore (famous astronomer, supporter of various far right "send em home" style groups); Philip Larkin (wrote an amusing ditty about sending out the niggers and locking up communists, national treasure and one of our greatest poets); Oliver Cromwell (exterminated racial enemies, enforced strict religious puritanism, Roger Scruton (one of the greatest thinkers in aesthetics, worked to undermine the Czechslovak regime in the 80s); Maurice Cowling (ultra-high Tory of a similar pedigree).

Even Hitchins was a neo-con. Even Bernard-Shaw, a radical progressive liked Hitler. Britain has often had a left wing "intelligensia", but its seminal figures are in a peculiar way very traditional and conservative, even the lefties.

>>10636149
>your own genes
Define your genes by any metric of science and your race then please as opposed to "other," divisions.

>Trying to homogenize races by mixing them together serves very little biological purpose and is often related to outbreeding depression.

When did I say anyone is homogenizing races?
How would one scientifically homogenize a race?
Your unscientific bias is showing.

Surely by not increasing genetic variance and breeding within one tight definition of race will dramatically increase inbreeding?

>outbreeding depression
Is this your mental state when you see Abdul with Emily?

>Genetic selection often selects for alleles within the context of other alleles,
I'm sprry which alleles?
>which means that polymorphisms in one gene also affect selection for genes that are related to that particular gene.
What are you on about lad?

Let's go with your argument, genetic selection can also select for:
> status
> money
or physical characteristics
or fame
or fortune
or resources
or power level
or be powerless in the form of invasion.
or...
>Love.

Also
>and why it's a bad idea to just mix subspecies/races of distant gene pools up for no reason.

Go on then lad, which gene pools / sub-species / races exist and where has mixing been "bad."

>This cannot (fully) be explained by culture and social conditioning either, because it's already observed in infants before they learn to speak.
Evidence? have you been to India literally the most genetically diverse place on earth?

There, white skin is simply a social signifier of status and wealth in light (no pun) of a caste system.

>>10629560
This is a great image, I really wish we could see what Evola would say about ISIS. I just can't decide what he would think...

>>10636428
>where has mixing been "bad."
I'm not supporting the "muh allyotypes phenenograms" shite, but clearly countries like Brazil, South Africa have shown multi racial societies are plagued by greater levels of violence, disunity and cruder politics (part of the reason for the US' declining political life is that you have a white and minority party, even if unofficially).

If a race has essential characteristics, then breeding within the group should be the norm to continue them. That's not racism or pseudo-geneticism. Its just a fact.

>>10629884
Those terms aren't mutually exclusive.

>>10631229
>>G.K Chesterton
even if he was a Christian and old-fashioned, he seemed to disdain politics in general. Also, he was a distributist.

>>10632947
>PS hemingway, eliot, and yeats are pleb-tier
And what does that make you? Crusty dogshit tier?

>>10636474
someone with their own tastes and preferences, unlike most of the retards ITT who like what they are told to like.

>>10636473
Chesteron was radically right wing. He criticised Naziism for being too progressive and (I shit you not) "Jewish".

Also don't fall for the Capitalism is right wing meme, its the soft left and always has been. Old Tories were anti markets.

>>10636493
You're denouncing world renowned writers and thinkers as if you're some great arbiter. You're probably some fat virgin that got bullied in school and doesn't even have a job. Get your head out of your arsehole you delusionally arrogant idiot.

>>10636493
Agree with you except for Eliot. First poetry I ever really loved

>>10636453
You haven;t answer by questions.
You cite Brazil and South Africa and completely ignore India or better yet, Singapore.
You also vastly ignore specific economic and political history and systems.

This is not to ignore race in any capacity; but go on define your race.
>If a race has essential characteristics, then breeding within the group should be the norm to continue them
You say this. tell us what they are.
>That's not racism
I never said it was. Are you projecting?
>pseudo-geneticism.
Smells like it. It;s certainly not logic or science.
>Its just a fact.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

>>10636473
Sucking capitalist cock is not a right wing position. It's a liberal position (liberal in the real sense).

>>10636513
>>10636493
>Because I do not hope to turn again
>Because I do not hope
>Because I do not hope to turn
>Desiring this man's gift and that man's scope
>I no longer strive to strive towards such things
>Why should the aged eagle stretch its wings?

>>10636519
>You haven't answered my*

>>10636527

>>10636519
Spent a lot of time in Singapore, so will answer first (although I'm not the original guy). Singapore is a shithole. Its like Dubai, in that its a shopping centre with an airport attached and nothing more. Spend two days there, you'll love it, there's a casino on a giant boat suspended across three skyscrapers, but spend more than a week and you will realise its a desiccated husk of a society. Its a transitory state, a business class no-mans land with nothing to recommend it. Apparently the old Singaporians hate it and grumble about foreigners. I can't blame them.

India is diverse, but united by a religious faith, and its constituent genetic subgroups are separated by a strong hierarchy that prohibits outbreeding. Therefore its a stable society. Not really comparable to East London.

In answer to your racism point, I am racist. I think race is a valid concept as people require an in-group, values aren't universal across humanity and what's true for me may not be for them. Especially in an increasingly post-religious world, race must play an increased role in forming identity as its an essential category that can't collapse from lack of belief. The "race is skin deep" movement failed, killed by the left ironically enough.

But the genetic reality is complex, but ultimately race as a category is obvious.

I don't like how "right wing" threads descend into people talking about haplogroups. Go to /sci/. Argue it from a spiritual, metaphysical, essentialist perspective, sure. But not "waaaa x studies show y!!!". I'm an Anglo-Saxon myself and this kind of thought is typical of our society, but its not the best way of approaching concepts like this at all.

>>10633880
fucking brainlet

>>10636527
holy...i want more

>>10636594
>Why should I mourn
>The vanished power of the usual reign?

>Because I do not hope to know again
>The infirm glory of the positive hour
>Because I do not think
>Because I know I shall not know
>The one veritable transitory power
>Because I cannot drink
>There, where trees flower, and springs flow, for there is nothing again

>Because I know that time is always time
>And place is always and only place
>And what is actual is actual only for one time
>And only for one place
>I rejoice that things are as they are and
>I renounce the blessed face
>And renounce the voice
>Because I cannot hope to turn again
>Consequently I rejoice, having to construct something
>Upon which to rejoice

The recordings of him reading this are fucking top. Listen to them on the train to work quite often.

>>10629558
is this the cuck board?

>>10636688
that was sarcasm, newfag.

>>10636711
>newfag

Give me a single valid flaw with that poem, or Eliot in general.

And no, anti-semitism is not a flaw

>>10633880
good goy

>>10633880
Your bosses cock is so far up your ass I'm surprised you have room in your mouth to speak

>>10629549
Because conservatism doesn't make sense to bign with. Why would you want to be stuck on the same thing forever?