/lit/ - Literature

>>16306994
They just want the one they grew up in. It's that simple.

>>16307008
Is it really? That is quite weak philosophically.

>>16306994
Today's conservatives are yesterday's liberals.

>>16306994
Conservatives claim to want that, but conservatism is ultimately more akin to an immune system reaction against Progressivism. Progressivism, ultimately, is prostitutional, and in the sea of sharks that is international politics, prostitutes are just a palate cleanser for chum.

>>16307018
conservatives don't know what philosophy is
they understand things they can hold in their hands

>>16307008
so, the children born this year who become conservative will want the society of today preserved.
the genie won't go back into the bottle once he's out. burying your head in the sand is not a grown-up way of going through life.

>>16306994
It's not about preserving a specific society, whatever that means. It's about preserving the institutions that are necessary for the better facilitation of the survival and advancement of the species.

>>16307122
Most philosophers throughout history would be considered right wing extremists today.

>>16307122
pure cope lol

>>16307316
The genie goes back into his bottle after you make 3 wishes though...

>>16306994
Its not that hard anon. they simply want to conserve what they have and feel attached to. you could lay the same critique towards radicals in reverse. "sutrely, isnt the society we live in now the one you wanted 10 years ago?"

Conservatism and progressivism literally need and measure each other. both are absurd from a certain point of view, and someones inability to see the virtue in both is the real idiot.

>>16307417
Proof?

>>16306994
>counter-enlightenment
>conservative revolution
>neoconservative
These are not the same thing anon, there is noting conservative about the liberalist rendition of conservatism. Modern conservatism is merely a facade that liberalism has created to make it appear as if liberalist democracy works or has the discourse it proposes. In reality the modern "conservative" is nothing more than manufactured dissent, creating an illusion of the political. Ask for a king, then we'll talk.

The Republican Party is not a Conservative party, it is a Liberal party for losers who want to go back 10 years ago and make better stock market investments.

Having gotten that out of the way, they want an Illiberal society. A Conservative, a Right Winger, all they are is an Illiberal. A Confucian scholar-bureaucrat, a French knight, an Islamic Cleric, all three of these men are Conservatives, all three are Right Wing, as all three are Illiberal. They believe the end goal of society should be something other than the maximization of economic gains. What THAT means depends on the individual.

Edmund Burke wanted a stated rooted in Christianity, that existed to help Christians get to heaven, and to spread the gospel of Christ. A different Conservative would want something different.

>>16308629
What if I jus wan frens?

>>16308620
>>16308629
Those are both conservative and i dont think you understand what the word conservative means. Everything is CONTEXTUALLY conservative or progressive. Conservative positions from Trajan's administraction in the early 2nd century would be radically progressive in the same time in china.

The split is wholy determined by the present context and its surrounding history.

>>16308646
Not really. At all, in fact. You should look into a matter before having an opinion on it. Read Edmund Burke, actually, he discusses this. The only thing a Conservative wants to Conserve is Illiberalism. That's it. Notice the big C.

They want to preserve the fundamental PRINCIPLES of that society, which they see as pro-civilizational.

>>16308656
I have read it and he has a paraticular stance. but Conservative and progressive, by definition are contextual to the circumstance they are applied.

In any administatration, at any time and at any place there is are relitively conservative and progressive aspects.

>>16308646
Conservatism is not on a linear model. Progress and regress aren't the narrative, there were futurists who were conservatives and there are regressionists who aren't conservatives. A conservative demands a mythos, a national myth, and an authority which will halt the derascination and atomizing effects promoted by liberalism. Right-Left politics don't exist like that fren.
>>16308674
Again no, conservatism is not juxtaposed to progressivism. If anything you're closer with the idea of status quo/regime maintenance, but at the same time we don't live in an era where that's the case. There are no real regimes only the stagnancy that conservatives failed to prevent. We are without national myth, and therefore unable to create real conservatism, which is why it is manufactured in the west.

>>16308690
Where in the term conservitive does it necessitate a national myth? and I never talked about some arbitrary idea of a left/right dichotomy.

The core part of conservative is to "conserve". Now what is implied by that is CONTEXTUAL and it can be a national myht, but it could also be an economic policy, or a social policy, etc. and on the opisite end i am not talking about progressivism as simply the modern implication of the term, but simply the idea of "Progress" or "change", weither that be in reconstructing the political landscape, changing the economic system, or reformation.

During the time of Ceaser and Cato and all the others there was a conservative faction and a more progressive faction. and the bent of them were generally what i layed out, but the parties shifted towards less necissarily conservative and progressive to pro pompii and pro ceaser.

Cato's conservstim is not necisarily the conservatism of a modern republican.
They are gestalt terms of alignment.

>>16308722
>Cato's conservstim is not necisarily the conservatism of a modern republican
That's because we don't have conservatives anymore, there is nothing to "conserve" in your terms. There is no referent because we're erasing and constructing all opposition artificially. You can't look at this from a historical lens, because we're approaching a new and unexplored era entropic capitalist realism. This is what the real conservatives warned us about.

>>16308786
I disagree. Cato's conservatism is also not the conservatism of the 300's or the 1200's or the 1700's. We cannot know we are entering some unprecedented epoach, as far as we can tell we are still continuing in this general trend. the only synthetic part of modern conservatism is that which could be considered synthetic in any other conservatism or any other progressivism for that matter.

>>16308809
Supporting the "history just keeps going" narrative is a mistake, think words like "control society" and "atomization". This isn't temporal, and never has been. The fight of conservatism has always been a vanguard against the rationalist reductionism that you're promoting. People have worldviews, and, if they don't fight for them, they'll lose their ability to produce such things. We do live in unique times because we're pretending like we aren't. If this doesn't make sense to you then you need to read more, especially contemporary philosophy.

>>16308874
Im not disputing that, and i dont really think you are disputing my point either. that is a useful paradigm to see things through. I am simply saying that the terms are contextual to the times and context. Not that this current time isnt important or worth fighting for/against.

Saying this or that isnt real conservatism or that conservatism is in itself a farce is to play a word game with the terms meaning.

>>16307417
right wing =/= conservative

especially not retarded American conservatism

>>16308959
>contextual
>Saying this or that isnt real conservatism is in itself a farcse
But it isn't, on both accounts. Let's put this in linguistics terms: a referent or sign loses its semanticity if its language community stops using it (in the semiotic world this is simulacra). We cannot regain this meaningfulness, however we can still see that it used to exist and might have been important by deduction. This is the state of modern conservatism. We lack anything that we can hold on to, but we remember that we used to hold on to principles and worldviews. Liberalism is not a worldview, it is the corrosion of worldview. So we create fake conservatism to keep up appearances, but if you look at its core something prevalent througout all of human history was lost as soon as we entered the stagnant liberal narrative. A thing can't be contextual if it lost its ability to exist.

>>16306994
That's my main gripe with conservatism. Even if its proponents aren't smug neocon yuppies who will always value their bank account and career over anything, they chain themselves to reaction and thus can never make a first move towards a new society.

Conservativism isn't a philosophy and never claims to be
Conservativism is in favor of enlightenment ideals and freer market

>>16309058
>Liberalism is not a worldview, it is the corrosion of worldview
I disagree. If people think it is a worldveiw and at some level hold it as implicitly true, it is a worldveiw just as any other. Doesnt making it a right or good worldveiw from a meta perspective of some criteria, but that is besides the point.

>>16306994
Conservatives don't conserve anything.

>>16306994
There's multiple types of conservative. Liberal conservatives want to preserve things as the way they are, national conservatives want a stronger nation state to guard against the neoliberal global market, traditional conservatives want a return to pre-modernity, and conservative revolutionaries want to lead a revolution against liberal capitalism.

>>16310301
This, there are different kinds of conservative.

>"Reaction is a necessary term in the intellectual context we inhabit in the twentieth century because merely to conserve is sometimes to perpetuate what is outrageous." - Mel Bradford

>>16306994
Nothing their worldview is internally inconsistent and totally incoherent which is why they snap periodically and go on killing sprees. This is the reason why they are supplied with Blacked and felony pornography- to prevent the brain fog from lifting long enough to recognize they have been duped and go commit a mass shooting.

>>16310251
>Conservativism is in favor of enlightenment ideals and freer market
How wrong can one man get?

Will right wing populism save us from idpol?

>>16307018
It is. That is why you must become a facist

>>16310301
Those two are the only thinkers I respect that came out of the conservative revolution

>>16310560
They're my two favorite, but there's others that were pretty influential, most notably Heidegger. Ernst Niekisch was based too.

>>16310512
Fascism is baby tier critiques of liberalism compared to the Conservative Revolution.

>>16310478
Right wing populism is the original idpol

Conservatives are not unlike anticapitalists in the since they want to get rid of the degenerate parts of the capitalist system like mega corporations, consumerism, and usury which they see as a harm to the society and they want a focus on small communities of people who care about and are interested in the preservation of the community along with wanting to save the good parts of our ancestors like art. I don't see why anyone would be against this who isn't a CEO or people who don't mind watching the culture degenerate.

>>16310880
>the degenerate parts of the capitalist system
There's no part of it that isn't degenerate, especially at this stage in the game. Capitalism by its very nature will destroy centuries old ways of being.

When do we rise up and give America a democracy?

>>16310251
>Conservativism is in favor of enlightenment ideals and freer market
t. american

>>16310880
Ahaahahahahha

>>16307406
Then why are they always pushing policies that undermine such institutions?

>>16306994

The common form of conservatism just like that of liberalism often becomes conflated with more extreme forms
In a practical sense ordinary conservatism doesn't seek to preserve anything it only seeks to slow down the rate of change, take the cautious approach, ensure a smooth transition so as to avoid growing pains and etc...
All things considered it is comparatively more moderate than liberalism but not staggeringly so

>>16310560
What about Davila? Or Scruton(he's so quaint)? Or T.S.Eliot?

>>16307122
t.retard

Conservatism is a Marxist psyop to subvert society from within and push for communism. "Conservatism" has never really meant much in politics until fairly recently, generally since Trotskyists subverted american republicanism and turned it into yet another socialist movement

>>16312263
Those had nothing to do with the Conservative Revolution.

>>16308528
https://blackcentraleurope.com/sources/1750-1850/kant-on-the-different-human-races-1777/

https://medium.com/@christopherrichardwadedettling/david-hume-versus-the-negro-as-an-inferior-human-race-5430648f14fa

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle%27s_views_on_women#:~:text=8%20Sources-,Differences%20between%20males%20and%20females,ruler%20and%20the%20female%20subject%22.

>>16312526
Those are questions about biology, not politics

>>16312479
Oh.

>>16312242
this.
idk why are everyone is having some
>um achualy
takes on it like they are some sort of grand all knowing metanarritive outside force with riveting hot takes like
>conservitism doesnt exist
>its oxymoronic
>REAL tradtiinalism is this specific brand if traditionalism

>>16307417
Imagine being this retarded, philosophical thought is a product of it's time

>>16312685
>most philosophers are Illiberals
No, that's a fact.

>>16312242
Yes, what you are referring to is a trend in Liberalism. But OP started this thread with a picture of Burke, who as previously explained, had very clearly defined views and a vision of the future and didn't want just "Liberalism but 10 years ago". See >>16308629. If we were talking about the Republican Party or whatever, yeah, sure, fine, but that's not what Burke, or the Conservatives who wanted to preserve the various Ancien Regimes of Europe, were.

Actually read Burke. Actually read de Maistre. Actually read Pobodonostsev. These men weren't just fuddy-duddies wanting nothing to change. They wanted change, they just wanted a different change than Liberals want. That doesn't mean that they're ACK-CHYU-YU-ALLY Progressives or whatever.

>conservatism
Who is even "a conservative" nowadays, you're either a liberal from 10 years ago or you've figured out that Postwar Democracy isn't real and egalitarianism isn't aligned with reality.