/lit/ - Literature

>>17986668
Yeah, I'm bumping my own thread. Idc

>>17986696
>>17986699
Yee

Hegel, Heidegger, Gentile, Schmitt

>>17986668
I guess read (pic)

See these videos as introduction:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CfHGLcRz-P8
https://www.bitchute.com/video/FMr3VTW30Fuj/

and read (most) of this list:
https://ghostbin.co/paste/nqefs

Good luck in getting into third positionist, best ideology

>>17986668
Stop posting here and read these
https://ghostbin.co/paste/5dvy
Some anon made this
Also you really should start with the greeks,just fuck around with philosophy and /x/ shit before this.
Unless something isn't translated(like a lot of Dugin's better works) you can find them online yourself.
>>17986855
>recommending a newfag Heidegger and Hegel
Don't start with those OP

>>17986876
I'll also post some more charts

>>17986881
HOLY FUCK I MADE THAT. What a coincidence. The post above yours has the updated list

>>17986876
Pretty bad list

Hitler wasn't a fascist, pretty much everything GLR said is fairly obvious, Evola wasn't a fascist, Savitri Devi is a meme, Mason and everyone after him except maybe the last two are D tier shit.

Not to mention, it is very incoherent.

>>17986901
Just noticed the post has the wrong list; that is for books I find online. this >>17986881 has my correct list

>>17986876
Who the fuck would ever think to read Mein Kampf BEFORE Gentile

>>17986668
>/pol/ told me to come here.
And we’re telling you to go back.

>>17986909
>>17986922
dammit, I didn't even look at the file. Plus Ted is an anarcho-primitivist. Sorry for the mistake

>>17986901
It's a really nice list fren
>>17986909
I agree with *most* of this
>>17986901
>>17986910
The order on these two is really bad but they are old

>>17986929
I wouldn't mind if they were getting into the proper intellectual philosophy that more or less builds up fascism, but if you're just gonna screech about Evola and Mosley and fucking Ironmarch books, then gtfo

>>17986931
Ted was definitely not an anprim, he thought the anarchists childish and idiotic. He was simply a luddite, or whatever word we are using to describe people skeptical of technology nowadays.

>>17986668
Internet archive.

Here, I'll get you started:
https://archive.org/details/tenpointsoswaldmosley
https://archive.org/details/OriginsAndDoctrineOfFascismGiovanniGentile
https://ia801509.us.archive.org/3/items/for-my-legionaries/ForMyLegionaries.pdf
https://archive.org/details/TheAwakeningOfANationalSocialist
https://archive.org/details/IronmarchSquiresTrial
https://archive.org/details/JamesMasonSIEGE3rdEdition

>>17986922
Hitler didnt give a fuck about Gentile. Nazism and Fascism are different things

>>17986939
>It's a really nice list fren
Thanks; if you want you can ignore Hobbes since, at the end of the day he's a liberal.

>>17986957
>The anarchist[34] too seeks power, but he seeks it on an individual or small-group basis; he wants individuals and small groups to be able to control the circumstances of their own lives. He opposes technology because it makes small groups dependent on large organizations.

>[34] This statement refers to our particular brand of anarchism. A wide variety of social attitudes have been called "anarchist," and it may be that many who consider themselves anarchists would not accept our statement of paragraph 215. It should be noted, by the way, that there is a nonviolent anarchist movement whose members probably would not accept FC as anarchist and certainly would not approve of FC's violent methods.

That's where I took the idea:
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/fc-industrial-society-and-its-future#fn34

>>17986945
>I wouldn't mind if they were getting into the proper intellectual philosophy that more or less builds up fascism
I agree
/pol/ shouldn't ask
>uuhh which one of these 3 books do I start with?
They should ask
>what books do I nead to read to understand the following works?

All these nice books of theory, in practice they'll sadly all go to shit...

>>17987009
most people on /pol/, unfortunately, are just people tired of the mainstream (media, thought; modernity in general) and are there for a few laughs. You see, as long as people are talking, they aren't acting against the system.

>>17986961
Not that different. Natsoc was obviously a subset of Fascism, from policy to aesthetic.

Should the doctrine of fascism be the very first fascist book i should read?

>>17987116
yeah, probably

>>17986929
No "we're" not.

>>17987116
Makes sense to me