/lit/ - Literature

>>10760551
Well this thread won't last long before some 19yo pseudo-marxist comes in and BTFOs everybody with his novel and insightful critiques, but until then check out Scruton op I think he's accessible but scholarly at the same time. I like his writing on aesthetics too. Also, if you haven't read Hobbes or Burke do that now.

>>10760570
Somehow i still havent gotten around to Hobbes. Ill check the other 2 out as well. Thanks anon

>>10760698
William F. Buckley is also fine. You can find his argument with Gore Vidal on YouTube I think. It'll make you lament the state of the American right deeply.

Paul Gottfried and Russell Kirk are both worth a read.

>>10760709
>his argument with Gore Vidal
>argument
>singular
I'll sock you in the face and you'll stay plastered, you queer

If you're interested in social science Edward Banfield is a dude to check out

>>10760723
Calm down William, I didn't mean it!

>>10760551
Douglas Murray is Jewish

>>10760551
Start with Burke, especially Reflections on the Revolution in France. If you would like to learn more about contemporary Constitutionalism read Randy Barnett.

>>10760551

It's not like he titles the youtube video. He is great.

>>10760570
Roger "smoke em and shill em" Scruton

>>10760551
Leo Strauss
John Lukacs
Alasdair Macintyre (sort of)
ignore scruton...

>>10760551
>nonpleb conservatives
There is no such thing, conservatives have the intellectual depth of a puddle because they think history began in 1950.

Douglas Murray is just highbrow Tommy Robinson at this point. Look up GRECE and the conservative revolutionary movement if you haven’t already. Also, try to avoid Roger Scruton and William F. Buckley.

>>10761498
This thread really doesnt seem to like scruton. What did he do?
I like national review, so tempted to read some essential Buckley

>19yo pseudo-marxist
>offers Scruton
They don't need to come into the thread. Scruton isn't the best example for for a non plebeian view of conservatism
Some of his good views from a skepticism of of full-blown capitalism and Thatcher, but otherwise he holds old guard labour beliefs, like having an egalitarian society and helping the poor.
His critiques on socialism are also poor because he usually singles out one thing and blames it when in reality it's a plethora of things that makes socialism.
Pretty much all the actual conservative beliefs Scruton holds would come from Edmund Burke anyway.

>>10761569
Meant for >>10760570

>>10761569
>he holds old guard labour beliefs, like having an egalitarian society and helping the poor.

>>10761562
I'm sorry to disappoint you but Buckley is of a particular strand of conservatism which has ultimately proven itself weaker than the left and consequently, it has adopted some of the ideas of the left while shaving off its harder edges. Just skip Buckley and read some de Maistre, Carl Schmitt, Rene Guenon and Julius Evola (he gets meme'd a lot around here but he does have some good points). Anglo style mainstream conservatism is a faulty product and has been BTFO'd consistently since the second half of the 20th century. Just look at any mainstream conservative party in the Anglosphere, the only consistent principle they hold is free market economics while they leave social issues to the Left. It was the """conservative""" party in Britain which pushed for gay marriage, which allows mass immigration to continue, which is doing nothing about the decay of Anglicanism, which is slashing the military and sending them off to pointless wars in assorted deserts on the other side of the world. Best to just avoid it all.

Read Confucius

>>10760854
Got proof?
Not that it would surprise me.

>>10760854
>>10764727
He’s an Anglo, but there are really no differences between Jews and Angl*s anyway so it doesn’t matter.

>>10760551
gay jew

>>10761569
>>10760925
>>10763104
>have a thread about conservatism
>recommend a conservative thinker
LMAO dude why would you recommend a dumb old guard shill like Scruton? *insert traditionalist reactionary.

I don't think you guys know what conservatism means in this context. It's not the same thing as right wing, and it's about as similar to the New Right as anglo positivism is to Continental theory. God this board is retarded sometimes.

I also stand by my recommendation of Scruton, dude isn't perfect and his critiques of the new left are weak but his writings on conservatism and aesthetics are comfy, accessible and most importantly point you in the direction of where you need to go.

>>10764983
ur mom gay lol

>>10760698
Hobbes is irrelevant for conservative thought. And you can mostly skip him unless you’re interested in how enlightenment classical Liberalism developed.

>>10765171
Hobbes is one of the central figures in Right wing thought

>>10765171
Hobbes got the prima facie of what a revolution would actually look like and is arguably history's first counterrevolutionary.

>>10760551
There are some good suggestions itt and some absolute retarded suggestions. Check out these guys for well rounded look: Richard weaver, Russell Kirk, Eric voegelin, g.k Chesterton, Roger Scruton (ppl telling you to ignore him are retards), Alasdair Macyntyre (as other noted only sorta), T.S Eliot, Irving Babbitt, Tocqueville, Orestes Brownson, James Fitzjames Stephens, Pierre Manent, C.S Lewis’s Abolition of Man, Robert Nisbet, Yuval Levin (sorta pleb), Wilhelm Ropek, Burke

Leo Strauss is good, but you need lots of background to get the most out of him. Evola is kind of trash imo. Not sure what you can get out of him that you can’t get out of Nietzhe. Buckley is good, but almost not worth reading because his positions became default conservatism.

>>10765213
>>10765173
I think it’s a misreading of Hobbes to call him conservative, or a counter revolutionary. What people tend to forget about Hobbes is that he was a moral reletavist who’s primary intellectual goal was the destruction of the scholastics. Leviathan is mostly about getting the church out of politics and proving scholastics wrong. Though, he did defend monarchy in the face of liberal revolution, he did so upon liberal principles. While I understand the reasoning behind calling him conservative/right wing, I think he is too slippery a thinker to be labeled that way, and whether or not the left would like to admit it, he has an equal influence on both the modern left and right

>>10765303
, he did so upon liberal principles.

valid point anon.

>>10765303
He reformulated monarchy without its former principles because he clearly recognized that those principles were what got the monarchy into trouble in the first place - and he was right. Which is why I labeled him a counterrevolutionary, not exactly a conservative

>>10765346
Again, I think this is a misreading. His primary “reformualtion” was to take God out of the monarchy. This puts him 100% within the general atheistic trend of enlightenment thought, so not sure how he could be considered counter revolutionary.

>>10765366
That doesn't make Hobbes as a whole an enlightenment thinker, he had a pessimistic view of man that didn't coincide with the enlightenment at all.

>>10765387
I would 100% place Hobbes as an enlightenment thinker. The state of war takes up like 6 pages in a 600 page book. Hobbes’s metaphysics and ethics are all straight up enlightenment, as also shown by his interactions with Descartes. Though I see what you’re getting at and get your point. However, a pessimistic view of man is 100% not an intrinsic element of conservatism. Conservatism’s “pessimism” can more accurately be traced to Aristotle, and Hobbes’s primary topic was trying to eliminate Aristotle’s influence on politics. Not saying Hobbes isn’t someone to read, just that his influence is spread out across all modern political thought. So I’d say he’s necessary political reading, but not nevcesary “conservative” reading.

>>10760551

>destroys lefty

Americans were a mistake.

>>10760551
James Mason, Savitri Devi, Miguel Serrano, Alfred Rosenberg, Francis Parker Yockey,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLe2muuJ9fs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oo64nlKdA0k

>>10765409
I feel that. I more recommended it out of personal experience, having been a Rousseau loving neo-Marxist dweeb a few years ago who then decided to read from Plato onwards and gradually shifted to a sort of conservative skeptical position. I would say that most strains of conservatism, at least in the anglo paradigm, aren't anti-enlightenment per se, and Burke was definitely influenced by Hobbes to a great degree.

>>10765238
Thanks anon. Absolutely loved Abolition of Man, ill poke through this list

Read Antifragile.

>His talk on Joe Rogan today
Why did I never hear about his international trolling campaign against Erdogan before? That was a fantastic story

>>10760551
I tried to read "Neoconservatism: Why We Need It" by him and it sucked so bad, holy shit.

>>10766136
Murray's a fairly typical neocon twat. He's pro Israel, pro Iraq War, and pro interventionist foreign policy in general. He articulates problems associated with mass immigration well, but apparently has no opposition to the kinds of policies that cause it.

>>10765790
Start deadlifting.

G A B I S H
A
B
I
S
H

>>10765387
Enlightenment does not necssarily = liberal

>>10765017
I didn't even mention Scruton in my post you mentalist.

Bump

Europe is OVER buddy boyos

Sit back, smoke a cigar and watch it perish

>>10766204
>pro Israel, pro Iraq War, and pro interventionist foreign policy
If you disagree with this you don't understand geopolitics.

>>10768534
This. No use in having power if you dont create advantages for yourself. Trumpettes are manchildren and soyboy cucks

>>10760551
Can you give me a quick rundown? Heard his JRE podcast today and decided I’d read his book

>>10768567
>create advantages for yourself
The use of power of the United States so far has done the exact opposite, though. We're about to get involved in another Afghan-style quagmire in Syria, except this time we'll have Russians and Kurds to deal with. You can't export democracy to brown people by force.

>>10765097
No, anon. DM is literally a homosexual Jew.

Bump

>>10768534
Oy vey