/lit/ - Literature

>>21518267
Yes, read Evola or basically any real right wing thinker.

Methinks you have weird anger issues over these "conservatives" you're talking about.

They have therapists for that, y'know. They'd help more than ruining /lit/.

Every single conservative movement is just an absolute joke. They all refuse to address the elephant in the room. That elephant that is raping children, attacking emergency services, draining public health systems dry, setting up ethnic enclaves, yet they still celebrate when one of them ties its own shoes.

>>21518267
I dont even know what exactly conservatives today are conserving.
It's all confusing today what "traditional" even means in a world so global.
Even the Reagan conservatives were supportive of a free market global exchange, so what about that is conservative given that it's entirely specific to the later 20th century?

I’ve only found this so far that talks about conservatives in the 19th century

It seems conservatives have been like this for a long time

Read Moldbug.

>>21518296
That accurately sums up my thoughts on Conservatives, Republicans and the likes.

>>21518267
>conservative political ideology
R..rule Britannia!

>>21518307
He knew. There is no way he did not realize when that picture was taken.

>>21518294
post ww2 there hasn't really been a real right wing

>>21518294
>It's all confusing today what "traditional" even means in a world so global.
Traditionalism is to Conservatives what Progressivism is to Democrats. It is a largely meaningless term that they can apply any positive connotation to and be identified as an ally.

Nobody is really traditional, just like nobody is progressive. They are just buzz words, typically self applied in lieu of doing anything. Sad thing is both are the death-knell for the West.

>>21518339
Traditional civilisations are just normal civilisations. Read Guenon.

>>21518349
I don't want to live in a traditionalist civilization. Read Darre.

>>21518328
>hasn't really been a real right wing
what about conservatives like Andrew Sullivan, David French, and Rod Dreher?

>>21518367
What makes them Right-Wing?

>>21518367
see>>21518328

>>21518373
>What makes them Right-Wing?
they support the rule of law and believe in democratic institutions?

>>21518379
So they're liberals from 10 years ago?

>>21518379
>they support the rule of law and believe in democratic institutions?

I too voted for Obama.

>>21518383
>So they're liberals from 10 years ago?
I might kneel for BLM but I stand for the Pride flag
God bless America!
t. former ¡JEB! supporter

>>21518395
you're thinking of an American patriot, John McCain, buddy.

>>21518303
What did Thomas Carlyle have to say about conservatives?

>>21518405
>fascist republitard
fuck off racist

>>21518409
>fuck off racist
go back to r/politics, buddy

>>21518405
They're all shit, anon. None of these are right-wing, you can't be Right-Wing in a democratic institution.

>>21518408
He was firmly against democracy, jews, blacks and many other things that the Left are fond of. He was also firmly of the belief that socio-political hierarchies were entirely valid.

It would appear he is actually Right-Wing. A firm believer in Prussian morals and values, that is militarism and politics together.

>>21518409
I literally posted GLR and you call him a Fascist?

one thing great about trump is that he stopped the gop from becoming ultra cucks instead of just normal cucks. they were so ready to cave to the obama world "we have to get more diverse" social justice bull shit.

i cant find the quote but i agree with michel houellebecq that its impossible to stop the degeneracy but you can document it

>>21518434
>you can't be Right-Wing in a democratic institution.
Based and Emperor pilled
what about right wing ideology attracts homosexual men?

>>21518453
>what about right wing ideology attracts homosexual men?
Nothing. In any right-wing society they would be beaten back in to the closet. Homosexual men are the biggest predator to a society and should be treated as such, not as a soft and injured party.

>>21518267
Because it arises in reaction to things it has already lost.

>Robin's central idea is that there is a thread that runs through all conservative thought since its inception (which he traces to Burke and the French Revolution): that it is a reaction to power lost, and is part of a bigger project to regain that power. It's counter-revolutionary -- it arises in reaction to movements for liberation that repeatedly spring up as a result of modernity and the Enlightenment. Because conservatism is a reactionary ideology, always responding to modern stirrings, it is much more nimble than the Left, which traces its political projects to what are mostly stable ideals concerned with expanding liberty to those who don't have it. The consequence of this is that conservatives are able to adapt to new circumstances -- frequently, as Robin repeatedly points out, adopting the very characteristics of the liberatory movements they're reacting to! -- in ways that the left does not.

>>21518467
>Homosexual men are the biggest predator to a society and should be treated as such, not as a soft and injured party.
Yes and they should be beaten back. Beaten off the face of this world. They've been such a bad boy. We need to beat off the homosexuals.

>>21518294
I agree. Things are so shit. We either need ideological progressives (the left, NWO West) or practical progressives (far right, China). Conservativism should not be considered unless things are going very well for the vast majority of people in a society.

>>21518408
>There is a noble Conservatism as well as an ignoble. Would to Heaven, for the sake of Conservatism itself, the noble alone were left, and the ignoble, by some kind severe hand, were ruthlessly lopped away, forbidden ever more to skew itself! For it is the right and noble alone that will have victory in this struggle; the rest is wholly an obstruction, a postponement and fearful imperilment of the victory. Towards an eternal centre of right and nobleness, and of that only, is all this confusion tending. We already know whither it is all tending; what will have victory, what will have none! The Heaviest will reach the centre. The Heaviest, sinking through complex fluctuating media and vortices, has its deflexions, its obstructions, nay at times its resiliences, its reboundings; whereupon some blockhead shall be heard jubilating, "See, your Heaviest ascends!"—but at all moments it is moving centreward, fast as is convenient for it; sinking, sinking; and, by laws older than the World, old as the Maker's first Plan of the World, it has to arrive there.
His was the "Heaviest" kind of "noble Conservatism".

>>21518408
>There is a noble Conservatism as well as an ignoble. Would to Heaven, for the sake of Conservatism itself, the noble alone were left, and the ignoble, by some kind severe hand, were ruthlessly lopped away, forbidden ever more to skew itself! For it is the right and noble alone that will have victory in this struggle; the rest is wholly an obstruction, a postponement and fearful imperilment of the victory.

>>21518655
>laborarS Sst orarS
Poor choice of font.

I hate the antichrist

>>21518267
Why Liberalism Failed by Patrick J. Deneen is pretty on spot.

>>21518267
>conservatives
British conservatives is such a misleading term. They do have "conservative" values, by that I mean rich people values from like the last 50 years, those values were mostly to do with money and how to hold on to wealth. Forget about nationalism, classic right wing politics etc, these are non issues to "conservatives" because they do not result in generation of wealth and in fact will make one suffer a loss.

>>21518267
Beautiful Losers. It's US centred but it works for most countries really.

>>21518703
the problem with deneen is that he doesn't seem to want to break with the system he's been picking apart through out the whole book., which is also implied in the final chapters.

>>21518434
>They're all shit, anon. None of these are right-wing, you can't be Right-Wing in a democratic institution.
True, but true democracy would lead to a right wing populist dictatorship, which is why the establishment is so afraid of fascism.

>>21518750
I'm not sure, going from his other writings, on substack and such, he does seem to be genuinely anti-liberal. And in any case, it's a good book for giving the anon an idea on why conservatives are just slower progressives.

>>21518405
songbird's execution for treason was a rare highlight of the Trump years

>>21518267
No but its very simple. They're either afraid or unwilling to be honest, and as a result are forced to play 'who's the real progressive,' which they will never in a million years play as well because leftists are masters of pity politics mobilizing the vastness of human refuse.

>>21518267
They have no active struggle towards a vision they have of the world. They're just nostalgiafagging for how the world was 10-20 years ago (anything more is too extreme) and nothing more.

>>21518303
>ugh look at this anglophile Conservative who hated his country

>>21518769
>>21518953
these