/lit/ - Literature

>>18613729

stop eating onions

>>18613744
I don't get it, master

>right-wing
>philosopher
see the problem?

>>18613781
>Nietzsche
>Heidegger
No

>>18613729
How do you define 'non-bourgeois', and frankly, how do you define 'right wing' in this sense? Thomas Sowell comes to mind as an influential thinker for the right but you might not consider him a 'philosopher'.

>>18613781
>see the problem?
You having nothing of value to contribute?

>>18613729
>fascism
>right wing

>Hitler
>fascist

>>18613729
How can anarchism be left wing went it advocates absolute individuality and freedom? Meaning no state whatsoever

>>18613729
If you feel like you understood Hegel read Giovanni Gentile for right Hegelianism
>frankfort
>himslef his philosophy on hegel
But I don't think you did
>>18613744
>waaah I typed ꜱoy and it turned to onions waaaaaaah laugh
There's literally nothing wrong with ꜱoy btw,pure copium from the unwashed masses

>>18613729
>hitler
>facsit
>right wing

>>18613806
>non-bourgeois
What I call burgeois is a mentality: conservative-minded person who seeks economic and social stability. Generally vulgar and mediocre. And also right wing.

>how do you define 'right wing'
right wing is basically a category defined by the left to put everything that isn't marxist or related inside, my pic in OP is related

>>18613729
That image holy shit

Fake image

>>18613781

Just going to say some real basic stuff: Most of the great philosophers we had were either Pagan or Christian, by today standards they would be considered ultra-reactionary religious fanatics who would make the "mainstream right" look like a bunch of left-lib progressive pinkos. Trying to classify philosophers of the past as right wing or left wing by today standards seems pretty dumb, it would be like the Scholastic philosophers trying to classify the Pagan philosophers as "more christian" or "less christian" when in reality they lived mostly before Christ was even alive.

>>18613729
Lots of classic authors would be considered non-bourgeois right-wing.

Aristotle: "as regards the sexes, the male is by nature superior and the female inferior, the male ruler and the female subject"

"The slave is wholly lacking the deliberative element; the female has it but it lacks authority; the child has it but it is incomplete"

Thus the female and the slave are by nature distinct (for nature makes nothing as the cutlers make the Delphic knife,1 in a niggardly way, but one thing for one purpose; for so each tool will be turned out in the finest perfection, if it serves not many uses but one). Yet among barbarians the female and the slave have the same rank; and the cause of this is that barbarians have no class of natural rulers, but with them the conjugal partnership is a partnership of female slave and male slave. Hence the saying of the poets2— “ 'Tis meet that Greeks should rule barbarians' "

The last one is my favorite because of how alien his way of thinking is to us: Aristotle literally said that barbarians(aka non-greeks) are more equalitarian than greeks, therefore they are inferior, therefore their nations should be invaded and the people enslaved. No need to mention he would not be welcome at CPAC after espousing ideas like this.

Btw, the last one is from his book on politics, that is one of the most influential works on politics in the history of the West and for millennia no one took issue with this.

Of course, calling all the ancient authors "non-bourgeois right-wingers" would be a stretch, since the term had no meaning at the time. But if you disregard this and go for "reactionary sounding philosophy" then you just need to read basically ANY author who lived before the 17th century.

Pic related is another philosopher who would meet your criteria while also being post-17th century thus being classifiable in the right/left spectrum(he is cringe tho).

>>18614039
you must be over 18 to post here

>>18614043
Don't be talkin shit bout ma boy Freddy

>>18613729
Alain de Benoist

Your OP pic that it is no surprise it was made by a socialist. Their brains only function in binary terminology.
Franco Freda, Giovanni Gentile, George Valois, Charles Maurras, are among the fiercest anti-bourgeois philosophers of the "Right Wing" (although they would consider themselves to be beyond right and left dichotomy).
The philosophers of the "New Right", namely, Alain de Benoist, Guillaume Faye, Aleksandr Dugin, are good authors too.

>>18614143
Your OP pic is so fucking stupid that it is no surprise*

>>18613729
>right wing non-bourgeois philosophers?
>>18613873
>right wing is basically a category defined by the left to put everything that isn't marxist or related

Hannah Arendt, since proles/labores are "animal laborans" (in contrast to workmen aka "homo faber"), and the sphere of political was ruined by allowing laborers to participate, lowering it to the lowest common denominator.

>>18614172
>laborers
typo

>>18613848
It's not. "Left-wing anarchists" like all left-wingers are confused retards.

>>18613729
>Doesn't read Marx
>Listens to Jordan Peterson talk about Marx
>Hasn't read Marx either
>where is the philosophy?
>asks /lit/ for a different Jordan Peterson
>Gets called retard
>Never picks up a book, just as the prophecy foretold

>>18614251
>Hasn't read Marx either

This pertains to both ends. There are so many people who praise/lament Marx that haven't read him.

>>18614260
but there's so much maaaaaaaath

>Liberalism
>Right wing
Do people just really now know anything about philosophy?

>>18614285
You obviously don't know anything about politics if you're a throne-sniffing christer.

>>18614251

I have read Marx, studied using lots of reference books. Don't like the stuff, think he was massively wrong. He has cool concepts tho that I keep using(super-structure, base, alienation), don't know if they were all his original ideas, but useful anyway. Most people should not waste time reading outdated economy anyway, there are lots of modern textbooks that are far more useful. If what you want is the dialectical view of history then just read Hegel.

>>18614267

No. Marx did not use lots of math in most of his works. You can understand Ricardian economics with a very basic understanding of math(just like Marx himself did). If you want to understand modern economics(which is more useful than Marxian economics) you'll need less basic stuff like calculus(what is still basic and anyone should learn anyway).

>>18614260
He has some fairly competent insight into the behavior of capitalist industrial production but it's best to see his analyses as "frozen in time". There is always a bit of extrapolation needed to adapt him to an economic and social landscape which is fundamentally distinct from that of modernity proper.

>>18614310
and it's so looooooooong

>>18614326
Based

>>18614326

It is true. He likes to repeat the same thing time after time. But, for me, this was only the case with his main works(Capital), his journalistic work was far more fun to read and it is actually pretty fucking well written. But his main economic ideas are not very useful anymore, a modern textbook is still favored for a comprehensive study of economics.

>>18614344
Which textbook would you recommend? You talk like someone in the field

>>18614344
>But his main economic ideas are not very useful anymore, a modern textbook is still favored for
for comprehensive study of astrology

>>18614297
Is there any framework to competently relate Labor, Capital, material production, and economic power relations which does not resemble anything out of the Marx's philosophical canon (and it's derivatives)?

>>18614370
>is there any philosophy that isn’t derivative of Plato

>>18614344
>a modern textbook is still favored for
https://www.academia.edu/45538021/The_1_2_3_Toolbox_of_Mainstream_Economics_Promising_Everything_Delivering_Nothing

>>18614359
>would you recommend?
Steve Keen "Debunking economics"

>>18614374
The Bible

>>18613729
i got a politcal spectrum for you

virgin: communism socialism fascim

human being: liberalism anarchism monarchism conservatism basedism

>>18614368

What are you trying to imply with that random page? Do you actually think this niche controversy you found on Google means that our whole liberal economic paradigm is wrong and that the way to advance economics is by going back two centuries in time to an outdated theory of some philosopher? If that is what you are trying to imply then holy shit, if you are only saying that there is some issues with how mainstream economists deal with capital then ok, seems like a fair point.

>>18614370
>Is there any framework to competently relate Labor, Capital, material production, and economic power relations which does not resemble anything out of the Marx
If you renounce labor, then Power Theory of Value

https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2020/09/04/stocks-are-up-wages-are-down-what-does-it-mean/
"Capital, Nitzan and Bichler argue, is not a ‘thing’. It’s an ideology. Capital is the ritualistic quantification of property rights. And because property rights stem from the power to exclude, it follows that capital is the ritualistic quantification of power."

>>18614402
Okay I do like the idea of energy use as a measure of net production. Might have to give this a read.

>>18614359

Sowell basic economics is good for people who have no experience in the field. Sowell is Chicago school, so he is not allergic to data like Austrian economists nor really outdated like Marxian economists. Some Keynesians are good too, but I know less about their work.

>>18613793
>i-i can shoehorn Nietzsche in a box, I swear!

>>18613830
>Fascism as a movement: a couple years
>fascism as regime: 20 years
>fascism as seen in RSI, the puppet state:barely 18 months

Damn i wonder what people usually refer to when talking about fascism...

>>18613848
Holy jesus. Do you happen to be from the united states of America ?

>>18613873
>ight wing is basically a category defined by the left to put everything that isn't marxist or related inside
holy jesus...

>>18614383
>The Bible
*sigh*

>>18613873
retard: the post

>>18614297
>think he was massively wrong
about what
>If what you want is the dialectical view of history then just read Hegel.
historical dialectical materialism is different to hegelian materialism though

>>18613848
mart sharting hands wrote this

>>18613729
Real right wing thought is anti-bourgeoisie. Read Gentile de Maistre and Evola for some aristocratic right wing lit

>>18613729
>fascism
>right-wing
>fascism
>opposite of communism
Sure.

>>18615266
Let me guess...American?

>>18613729
Your first problem is thinking of politics in this way. Read Hegel, he's proto-marx.

>>18613729
Zerzan

>>18616471
He's not proto-marx.
Marx is a Hegellian.

>>18614388
Thanks Joe Biden!

>>18613729
Sneed

>>18614039
Her boobs got smaller the more commie she got. Who would want to live in such a world?

>>18613729

>>18616783

Lenin

>>18616797
Under global capitalism millions starve a year.

>>18616820
Unfortunately this line of reasoning doesn’t work on them, because that’s what they want for all the millions of brown people

We’re just going to have to shoot them

>>18616834
>>18616820
TLDR:Cope

>>18613830
>noone knows fascism is just the name of the italian corporativist party

Fix'd

>>18616820
Under global communism billions starve a year

>>18616888
>said the dumb frog

You’ve never read a book in your life

>>18616892

You should not be like mr froggy then

>>18613729
The pig is the most forced meme of all time

>>18616892
Probably more than you bucko. At least enough to know attempts at communism do not have a good track record with food supplies

>>18616899
Real sciences actually predict things, economics doesn't.

>>18616916
Famines occured in Russia roughly once every decade. The last famine they had was in the 40's, largely as a result of the war. The Soviets ended famines.

>>18616930

>The Soviets ended famines

So that is why Ukranians love Stalin so much even to this day and are always erecting new statues of Lenin, all makes sense to me now.

>>18616899
>Only rich people can grow food and distribute it well enough to make some of the less poverty stricken eat.
>people can’t grow their own food and share it. I’ve got soe. Doctored stats to prove it. Don’t even think about breaking those chains

>>18616948
>Probably more than you bucko.
> So that is why Ukranians love Stalin so much even to this day and are always erecting new statues of Lenin
You can’t even read.

>every attempt at communism
I don’t even count authoritarian capitalism as communism, buckbo

>>18616948
30% of Ukrainians miss the Soviet Union despite the holodomor propaganda.

>>18616920
I guess Marxism isn't a science then either.
>>18616930
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Chinese_Famine
>The Great Chinese Famine is widely regarded as the deadliest famine and one of the greatest man-made disasters in human history, with an estimated death toll due to starvation that ranges in the tens of millions (15 to 55 million)

You also conveniently "forget" to mention:
>The second major Soviet famine happened during the initial push for collectivization during the 30s. Major causes include the 1932–33 confiscations of grain and other food by the Soviet authorities which contributed to the famine and affected more than forty million people, especially in the south on the Don and Kuban areas and in Ukraine, where by various estimates millions starved to death or died due to famine related illness (the event known as Holodomor).

Ending famines != ending hunger. Most Soviet shops still barely had enough basic food for everyone's needs. Most of the time you'd still be hungry unless you're a top bureaucrat.

Also basically the only famines in Russia prior to socialism were caused by, you guessed it, political insurrections caused largely by liberals and communists, or extreme climactic conditions, or war.

>>18616971
Because of communist propaganda about how great the "old times" were, even though none of them lived there. It's basically socialist traditionalism.

>>18616820
who is starving under capitalism? you cannot starve in america. it is an oxymoron to be american and not be fat

>>18616953
You can't feed 8 billion people with a homegrown garden, illiterate idiot.

>>18616953
one cheeseburger please

>>18613729
Junger
Spengler
Evola

>>18616967

Sorry man, I will learn some day. Maybe then I will be able to read the extensive literature showing that Stalin was actually some sort of great humanitarian feeder instead of the authoritarian monster that he is painted as.

>>18616971

Yeah man, those CIA propagandists brainwashed the Ukrainians into thinking their relatives died in the massive famine when in reality they all died of excess excitement they had towards the greatness of socialism.

>>18616973
Mostly drought, floods and insect invasions. But sure Lysenkoism played a large role too. There was a famine of 25 million before then, and one every year since forever.
>According to the Central Intelligence Agency, an averageSovietcitizen consumes 3,280caloriesa day, compared to 3,520caloriesfor the American.
And
>it was all liberal and communist uprisings except when it wasn't
Ok...
>>18616978
Yes all the communist propaganda in Ukraine LoL. It's mostly boomers who lived through it. The Zoomers are only 15% nostalgic. So the inverse is true.
>>18616983
>murica is the whole world
Brainlet burger

>>18617010
I'm not saying there wasn't a famine, just the idea it was deliberate is a meme, unlike the Bengal famine, which was under capitalism.

>>18617014
>Mostly drought, floods and insect invasions.
Nope. The insect invasions were caused by the Chinese communist authorities declaring the extermination of all sparrows, which then led to a massive increase in insects, for example. The famine was man-made, caused by communist retardation.
>>According to the Central Intelligence Agency,
Lol.
>>it was all liberal and communist uprisings except when it wasn't
Most of the time it was. In the 1900s prior to 1917, there was only famine which was caused by climactic conditions (severe drought during Summer). The rest occurred during or slightly after the major revolts in 1905, etc.
>>murica is the whole world
It's not just America. It's basically every country with an intelligent, white or northern Asian population. Niggers starve because they are niggers and therefore incapable of consistent high yield agriculture in a framework that requires intelligent coordination (capitalism) in order to sustain an unnaturally high population (which requires unnatural, ie industrially supported, farming methods and techniques). You should be blaming evolution and natural selection for the mass starvation of niggers, not capitalism. It's not the first world's responsibility to provide for incapable animals who squander everything they're given. We already give them billions in aid every year.

>>18617050
The CIA well known pro communist shills made it up? Actually, you probably do believe that.
>We find that the countries of Africa are collectively net creditors to the rest of the world, to the tune of $41.3 billion in 2015. Thus much more wealth is leaving the world’s most impoverished continent than is entering it.

>>18613729
You have options
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethical_socialism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_socialism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-left_anarchy

>>18617101
Narrow that down to sub-Saharan Africa for me please. "Africa" includes various oil-rich, Bedouin/Berber nations of North Africa (which, if geography were the only factor, should theoretically be doing WORSE than the sub-Saharans).

>>18617101
>>18617019
>>18617010
>>18616930

It is summer. The seething r*ddit leftists have again settled in; good Christian anons will have to suffer them yet another year. "Why does the LORD send them?" you might ask. There's a simple reason. These r*dditors -- who are on a divine mission, albeit unbeknownst to themselves -- have come her to further strengthen the right. "What!" I heard you say. "But these people are leftists! Why would they further a right-cause?" The answer is very simple: the right is a reactionary movement. The more threads they make, the more they screech and seethe about capitalism, racism, and so forth, the harder those other people (who have perhaps only opposed them only mildly) drift to the right. And so, they are creating right-wingers. They are the ones who convert normies into nazis; a power that only a proper leftist possesses.
tl;dr: Thank you for your service!

>>18616986
You certainly can when eight billion people will have their own garden

>>18616993
Easily done

>>18616930
Famines occured in precolonial Mexico roughly once every 2 decades. The last famine they had ocurred during the first 50 years of colonialism. The imperialism ended famines.

>>18617010
Man, if CIA has such amaizing mind control MK ultra superhero powers, why they dont shut up your mouth?

>>18613793
Heidegger was a commie

>>18614043
Aristotle was a retard.

Reminder that marxism is just the final form of line on graph go up mean life gooder.
It's just for wagies.