/lit/ - Literature

Apart from the constant muh I opened china muh secret trip self-fellatio it's pretty good

Look into Quigley's Tragedy & Hope, and Anglo-American Establishment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._Edward_Griffin#The_Creature_from_Jekyll_Island

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mII9NZ8MMVM

Werner Sombart, The Jews and Modern Capitalism

Read these four articles ASAP
https://counter-currents.com/tag/breaking-the-bondage-of-interest/

Also these are good
https://counter-currents.com/2012/11/two-volumes-by-gottfried-feder/
https://counter-currents.com/2014/10/kerry-boltons-the-banking-swindle/
https://counter-currents.com/2014/12/kerry-boltons-peron-and-peronism/

Based shit:
Burnham, Jouvenel, Ellul
>>17634612
Francis is good. Sombart is too but I like his Modern Capitalism volumes more than the Jews. I'm not sure about Quigley though. He's worth reading but I don't think if his books really named all those who were in power that they would stay up. People put too much faith in him.

>>17634612
OP is going to understand less about how the world works if he reads this retard tier crap

>>17634696
It's only his articles that are bad the rest is fine.
Also OP watch the documentary "The Money Masters"

>>17634706
I’m not reading Quigley’s conspiratorial nonsense book, nor am I going to watch some bonkers documentary.

Any resources to start studying the formation of the European Union? Who advocated for it? Who financed its development? How does it relate ideologically to USA?

>>17634825

Cini, M. and Perez-Solorzano Borragan, N. (eds) (2013) European Union Politics, Oxford
University Press, Oxford.

Dedman, M. J. (2010) The Origins and Development of the European Union, Routedge.

Dinan, D. (ed) (2014) Origins and Evolution of the European Union, Oxford University Press.
Hix, S. and Hoyland, B. (2011) The Political System of the European Union, Basignstoke:
Palgrave.

Lelieveldt, H. and Princen, S. (2015) The Politics of the European Union, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Moravcsik, A. (2001) The Choice for Europe Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to
Maastricht, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Nelsen, B. F. & Stubb, A. C.-G. (2014) The European Union: Readings on the Theory and
Practice of European Integration, Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Rosamond, B. (2000) Theories of European Integration, Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Wiener, A., Börzel, T. A. and Risse, T. (eds.) (2018) European Integration Theory, Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

>>17634601
Chomsky said Henry Kissinger was one of the worst people so he must be pretty based, might give that a read

>>17634727
no one cares what some nobody is not going to do. if you want, you can go continue being nothing nowhere like you already were, and give us a status report on how nothing happened in your empty brain 50 years later. 50 year intervals only please, thanks.

>>17634825
>>17634974

For some context, this is the reading our resident European Union expert sets for his modules on this topic. He is a colleague and former dissertation supervisee of Simon Hix, the pre-eminent scholar of all things European Union.

The Hix and Hoyland is highly recommended and is one of the most cited works in EU scholarships. It pairs nicely with the Dinan and Dedman. These three works combined should give you theoretical knowledge and understanding of the EU that would quite honestly be well beyond most Polsci majors and on par with most grad level EU scholars. The ideas Hix and Hoyland deal with can be quite dense, in which case Lelieveldt and Princen would be more accessible. Nevertheless, Hix and Hoyland are 1st rate writers and scholars, so with perseverance and proactivity, I would say that you would get the most out of them.

>>17634730
Bertrand Russell cringe

>>17634825
remember that the EU exists first and foremost as as a supernational organization to prevent the formation of a communist government in any member state. the whole point was to create the framework to be able to correct a given member state's policies regardless of the actual desires of its population. hence why the actual governance of the EU is the province of professional bureaucrats with little to no electoral responsibility while the actual citizens are just along for the ride (think how the irish rejected the lisbon treaty, then were made to vote again on the exact same treaty with the obvious implication that they'd have to keep doing it until the "correct" result was obtained). it's telling that the germans have been able to exploit that machinery so effectively that the EU is now the de facto fourth reich, with borders basically that of the third at its peak

>>17634730
Other than the Ellul and Gorbachev, this is nonsense.

>>17635093

srs question: why would I bother to get a theoretical understanding of the EU when they change the rules to suit themselves? Explain the value of this theory to a know nothing.

>>17636727
It's useful bc of how bureaucratically the EU operates. Once you have read the most recent edition of a book discussing the EU, it is much easier to keep track of the systemic transformations it undergoes, why it undergoes such transformations and what it has to gain/lose from such transformations. Why certain countries seem to benefit so much more than others on an operational level. As for the Dedman and Dinan books, they're really just books that give you insight into how the union was formed, who advocated for it, why they did etc. Additionally, understanding the EU on a theoretical level also gives you insight as to how other newer continental unions or intergovernmental organisations like the African Union or the failed Union of South American Nations operate and disintegrate or how future unions may arise (the EU is always used as a template in this regard). In turn, their failures may inform us on what problems to look out for in the EU itself. If your interest is to know or at least begin to know how the world works, at least in this intergovernmental respect, then such a theoretical understanding is very fruitful. Moreover, most critiques of the EU operate by showing how alleged contradictions in its theoretical framework point to its practical failures. The question of whether the EU could ever become a superstate is also always tackled by examining the union on a theoretical level. At times it is argued that certain institutional and operational features outlined in the many treatise legally and practically make it impossible for the EU to ever become a superstate. Knowing such theory, then, enables us to anticipate when certain bodies within the union gain certain competencies through institutional reforms that may or may not enable said bodies to undermine the national sovereignty of the Member States.

>>17636848
treatises*

>>17634609
He doesn't talk about that very much, from what I remember. The section on Vietnam is also... suspiciously short.

>>17634612
It's schizo time, it seems.

>>17636848

ok, I will look in to a few of these then

He >>17636848 is absolutely correct.

>>17634825
Perry Anderson wrote a great book, "The New Old World", shitting on the EU a decade ago

See his article "Ever Closer Union?"

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v43/n01/perry-anderson/ever-closer-union
https://pastebin.com/PdFXySQa (mirror if you get a paywall)
>Thanks to the pioneering work of a young historian from Luxembourg, Vera Fritz, we now have a detailed scholarly study of the composition of the court in the first twenty years of its existence. Her findings are illuminating. There were seven founding judges and two advocates-general. Who were they? The Italian president of the court, Massimo Pilotti, had been deputy secretary-general of the League of Nations in the 1930s. There he acted as the long arm of the fascist regime in Rome, advising Mussolini on what counter-measures to take to shield Italy from condemnation by the League for its actions in Ethiopia. On resigning his post in 1937, Pilotti took part in the celebrations in Genoa of the conquest of Ethiopia; and during the Second World War headed the high court of occupied Ljubljana after Italy’s annexation of Slovenia, where resistance was met with mass deportations, concentration camps, and police and military repression. The German judge on the court, Otto Riese, was so devoted a Nazi that without any duress – he spent the war as an academic in Switzerland – he retained his membership of the NSDAP until 1945. His compatriot Karl Roemer, an advocate-general to the court, spent the war in occupied Paris managing French companies and banks for the Third Reich; after the war, he married Adenauer’s niece, and acted as defence lawyer for the Waffen SS charged with responsibility for the massacre of the occupants of the French village of Oradour. The other advocate-general, Maurice Lagrange, was a senior functionary in the Vichy government, fully committed to the ideology of a ‘National Revolution’ to sweep away the legacy of the Third Republic. Acting as link-man between the judicial apparatus of the Conseil d’État and the political apparatus of the Council of Ministers, Lagrange was in charge of co-ordinating the first wave of persecution of French Jews. When Laval took over the reins of Vichy in 1942, transferring Lagrange back to the Conseil d’État, Pétain thanked him for his ‘rare perseverance’ in the regime’s legislative and administrative work, to which Lagrange replied that ‘for me it has been a great privilege to be so closely associated with the enterprise of national renovation you have undertaken for the salvation of our country. I am convinced that every Frenchman can and should take part in this work.’ After the war he was chosen by the Americans to help democratise the civil service in Germany, and by Monnet to help draft the treaty establishing the Coal and Steel Community.

>>17636917

>that greentext

Is this supposed to make me dislike the EU?

>>17636923
When you study the history institutionally of the EU it is and always was a reactionary neoliberal project, there's no other conclusion... but see the context of Brexit and left liberal opinion on the EU as some sort of great hope... it's all quite strange

>>17634706
The articles are great. You don't have to agree with Bolton to benefit from his amassing the entire suppressed and subaltern narrative of right wing and conservative alternatives to liberal capitalism. Just treat it as a list of names to know about, if you like.

Unless you think even learning about something is potentially dangerous like our retarded friend >>17634706 I guess.

What kind of books do diplomats read?

>>17637992
https://www.afsa.org/fs-reading-list

>>17638014
Amazing. Thanks, anon! I have asked this so many times but no one seemed to know any resources.
Do you work/plan on working in this field?

>>17638036
No.

why don't we put all this in the wiki? you do remember that we have a wiki, right?

>>17634601
What is the point of putting that quote on the cover? Any schmuck can come up with three nice adjectives. It is absolutely meaningless and everyone knows it

>>17634612
>combining goldbuggery with Gottfried Feder
How does this even happen?

>>17634601
>works
That's esoteric, and no words can do it.

>>17638120
Have you started?

>>17634601
Unironically Sapiens.

>>17636947
surprisingly good take for 4chan, congrats

>>17634601

>>17635011
You might as well watch Ancient Aliens on History channel, that’s the intellectual level your retard tier book and documentary are at you dumb son of a bitch.

>>17636901
>tfw he’ll never get the seroquel prescription he needs

>>17634601
One Man's View of the World by Lee Kuan Yew

>>17634612
This Griffen guy doesn’t believe HIV is real, but he does believe in chemtrails. He sounds like a real scholar and brilliant thinker.

>>17634612
>counter-currents.com

Bumps

>>17640630
Based