/lit/ - Literature

[...] from so many battles won against the enemies of Roman majesty, who sacrificed not only his members, but so much wealth, that of his family, and sometimes his children, and sometimes even killed his sons with his own hand for a breach of the austere laws of the world. When they present this man of ancient ages, once honored with the triumphal robe, once or twice consul, quaestor, aedile, hereditary senator, and preparing, with that same hand, which never found too heavy the sword and the spear, the raves of his supper (1) pul, with that same hand, with that rectitude of judgment, that cold reason so useful to the republic, calculating the interest on its usurious loans, incidentally despising the arts and letters, and those who cultivate them, and the Greeks who love them: the old man, this venerable man, this ideal citizen, is never but a patrician, he's an old Sabin. The man of the people, on the other hand, is that active, bold, intelligent, cunning figure who, in order to overthrow his leaders, seeks first to deprive them of their judicial monopoly and succeeds in doing so, not by violence, but by infidelity and theft; who, exasperated by the energetic resistance of the nobles, finally takes sides, not to attack them, the law does not want it, and they should all be killed with no hope of giving in to one, but the party to leave and come back only after having commented profitably on the fable of limbs and stomach. The Roman plebeian is a man who does not love glory as much as profit (2), and freedom as much as money. [...]

CHAPTER III
Buddhism, its defeat; present-day India.
Pgs. 209
We have arrived at a time which, according to the Sinhalese computation, would be consistent with the VII century B.C. (1), and according to other Buddhistic calculations, drawn up for northern India, until 543 BC (2). For some time now, very dangerous ideas had crept into this branch of Hindu science called Sankhya philosophy. Two Brahmins, Patandjali and Kapila, had taught that the works ordered by the Vedas were useless in the perfection of creatures, and that, in order to arrive at higher existences, the practice of an individual and arbitrary asceticism was sufficient. By [...]
Pgs. 210
[...] this doctrine, one was entitled, without prejudice to the future of the tomb, to despise everything that Brahmanism recommended and to do what it forbade (1). Such a theory could overthrow society. However, since it presented itself only in a purely scientific form and was only used in schools, it remained a major discussion for scholars and did not descend into politics. But, whether the ideas that gave birth to it were something more than the accidental discovery of a researchful mind, or whether very practical men were aware of them, it turned out that a young prince, of the most illustrious origin, belonging to a branch of the solar race, Sakya, son of Cuddodhana, king of Kapilavastu, set out to introduce people to what this doctrine had of LIBERAL.
He began to teach, like Kapila, that the Vedic works were worthless; he added that it was not through liturgical readings, austeritys and tortures, or through classifications, that it was possible to free oneself from the obstacles of present existence; that, for this, it was necessary to resort only to the observance of moral laws, in which [...]

>>22508659
>I wanna be a le hecking epic knight
What are you, a child?

>>22508659
Why haven't you joined up with the military yet? There are plenty of IRL conflicts going on right now that you can participate in. A lot of them are even one-sided enough that you have a good chance of surviving them.

Any aspiring aristocrat who recoils at the opportunity to test his mettle is a pseud and a LARPer.

>>22508659
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rGYArZ9KgY

>>22508659
Costin Alamariu

>>22510144
>>22510223
>hurr durr why don't you go fight in proxy wars for some millionaires
It makes no sense to participate in these things and in society in general as long as capitalism and modern democratic, parliamentarian, party politics permeate everything.

>>22508845
Source?

>>22510223
He said he is against nationalism.

>>22510621
Kino book, my boyfriends and I are currently reading it together.

Guenon/Evola

>>22511000
The Inequality of the Human Races, Volume 4, chapter 4, Italiot Rome

Jonathon Bowden, his speeches on spotify are being cleaned and uploaded by a madlad. His writings on Countercurrents are also well worth a read.

>>22510621
This man is your enemy.

>>22510902
>>hurr durr why don't you go fight in proxy wars for some millionaires
>hurr durr why don't you go fight in wars for some inbred landed noble

>>22510902
>Learn skills
>Discover brotherhood
>Maybe kill
>Confront death
>Earn a living
>Pick up a trade

Yeah, wild why people would want to join the miliitary.

>>22511737
The army teaches you a trade?

>>22511737
Nice try recrooter. Man you guys are getting desperate.

Just look up “Conservative Revolution” on Wikipedia. You’ll find all of baby’s first proponents of aristocracy thinkers there. Probably half of them were proponents of aristocracy as well as autocracy. In addition, you have counter-revolutionaries such as Edmund Burke, Joseph De Maistre, Louis de Bonald, Charles Mauras, Denoso Cortes, Josef Metternich, and even Alexis de Tocqueville to a degree. Even some of the American Founding fathers wrote positive things about genuine aristocracy. Socrates, Plato, and Xenophon considered aristocracy ideal.

>>22510223
Ernst Jünger makes it clear that the aristocratic elements of military service are largely absent today. He considered the modern soldier merely a technician and the military leader merely a technocrat. It’s hard to disagree with him. So testing your mettle? Sure, but not in the proper sort of context.

>>22511700
Don’t you see how fighting for a noble might uphold certain aristocratic values while fighting for bankers and investors might not? Those nobles themselves had totally different sort of inclinations and proclivities than the modern “nobles” as well. One commissioned churches and the other commissioned only their private residence in a trendy community.

>>22512230
>uphold certain aristocratic values while fighting for bankers and investors might not?
Like what, name one aristocratic value.
>Those nobles themselves had totally different sort of inclinations and proclivities than the modern “nobles” as well. One commissioned churches and the other commissioned only their private residence in a trendy community.
Sure they had different tastes, so what knights were still just basically hired stopped/brutes

>>22512002
Yes.

>>22512030
Nice try kike.

Where do you think picrel ends? Best to learn how to enact violence than be a victim of it.

>>22512395
A martial ethic, which stands in contrast to a technical ethic. You can’t be a drone pilot and retain the former while embodying the latter.

>>22511082
Real aristocrats love empire

Anyways, Gasset, Filmer, Hoppe

>>22512401
No one's buying the act Sergeant Gonzolez

>>22511689
What should I read to understand Bowden and his philosophy bar Nietzsche? Listening to him i can tell there is more to the man than I would think

>>22508659
Check out Bronze Age Mindset

>>22512761
Good people immediately recognize honest advice when they see it. People like you do their utmost to prevent it spreading, you wretched kike.

>>22512820
Honestly? Read what appeals to you, if you have a goal in mind of what you want to read, try books that you think might interest you. Read to find out, not to reinforce what you want to know. Bowden himself was immensely well read, for him though i find his speeches far more engaging than his written word.

>>22513269
No.

>>22511737
>>22512401
>>22513494
Can you stop shitting my thread with your retarded larp, please? There's a containment thread somewhere on /lit/, or make your own.

>>22512561
Empires aren't necessarily nationalistic. Imperialism is much older than nationalism.

>>22511737
Like I said, it makes no sense to participate in these things and in society in general as long as capitalism and modern democratic, parliamentarian, party politics permeate everything. And >>22512218 makes a good point.

>>22510902
>It makes no sense to participate in these things and in society in general as long as capitalism and modern democratic, parliamentarian, party politics permeate everything.
>I have to wait until things are 100% suited to my ever changing autistic worldview before I commit
I have been in radical spaces for 10 years now and its always the feckless losers with this chud mentality. I've been a soldier and while I won't tell you to join the army (especially if you're a USian) you need to learn to be physically and technically capable. Actually get some fucking skills that make you sharp and pointy. Military service is the fastest way to achieve that, but it is not necessarily the ideal or least costly way.
>>22511423
>Kino book, my boyfriends and I are currently reading it together.
brown hands typed this post
>>22511689
>Jonathon Bowden, his speeches on spotify are being cleaned and uploaded by a madlad. His writings on Countercurrents are also well worth a read.
Bowden is one of the few people I would endorse without any reservations etc. He was just on the money every time he opened his mouth.
>>22508659
Thomas Carlyle and Ernst Junger come to mind. Julius Evola too but he gets memed to death despite actually being quite level headed when he isn't talking about sex magic.

Defenders of the Spanish empire and the conquest of New Spain.Look up books of that period

>>22508659
fascism is the closest thing to "aristocratic radicalism" that could be implemented in the modern age. Unless you want some sort of neo-feudal capitalist hellscape like much of the "dark enlightenment" movement propose, which in technical organization might seem reminiscent of aristocracy but in spirit would go completely against it (domination by the bourgeoisie, money over blood, materialism over idealism, reason over soul)

>>22514047
The idea that nationalism is a new invention is ridiculous. The modern nation state is not synonymous with nationalism. Were the Romans not nationalistic about Rome? The Greeks not nationalistic about their city states and even then did they not still had a sense of national loyalty that united them against Persia? Call it tribalism if you want but it's the exact same thing just in a different iteration

>>22514148
>fascism is the closest thing to "aristocratic radicalism"
most aristocrats of the day rejected fascism for being too lowly and common, retard

>>22514061
>you need to learn to be physically and technically capable. Actually get some fucking skills that make you sharp and pointy. Military service is the fastest way to achieve that, but it is not necessarily the ideal or least costly way.
Yes.
>Were the Romans not nationalistic about Rome? The Greeks not nationalistic about their city states and even then did they not still had a sense of national loyalty that united them against Persia?
No.

Can all the fashies ITT leave, please? I don't want some common man movement based on flags and skin in my elitist, aristocratic worldview.

>>22514173
>I don't want some common man movement based on flags and skin in my elitist, aristocratic worldview.
You are an alienated lower middle class 20 something from the USA

>>22514163
And that's why all the aristocrats died out. Its an impractical system in today's world. All the smart conservatives jumped ship to fascism.

>>22514173
Sorry but you need to get with the times. Were in the age of mass media and mass information. No ideology is going to function without populism. This is why conservatives have been on a consistent losing streak for two centuries.

>>22514185
I agree. Aristos degraded and thus lost their mandate. That still does not make fascism aristocratic though

>>22514194
It's still the closest thing to aristocracy you could practically implement today. But yes it is different.

>>22508665
Its more a monarchy treaties than an aristocratic one. Hegel was heavily in favor of the development of absolutism as a thing that keeps aristos in check.

>>22514161
>The modern nation state is not synonymous with nationalism. Were the Romans not nationalistic about Rome?
Impulse may be similar but usually people identify it as different from modern nationalism in so far as empires contain multiple different ethnic or cultural groups.
Whereas nations tended to defer to a concept of a unitary and homogenous national cultural that belongs to a single ethnic group

>>22514214
Are you saying the British Empire wasn't nationalistic?More variation of ethnic groups under its banner than any other in history. This is just a common argument to try and disarm nationalists intellectual much the same as argument that race was socially contructed 500 years ago by European colonists. Germans had a national German indentity in the middle ages and it was quite the contentious issue incoporating Slavic nations into the HRE. This is well before the "modern nation state".

>>22508659
>completely estranged from liberal, socialist, and other petty mass movement ideals
"Buying and selling are common by now, like the art of reading and writing; everyone has practised it, even if he is not a tradesman, and gets more practice at this technique every day - just as formerly, in the age of a more savage humanity, everyone was a hunter and practised the technique of hunting every day. In that age, hunting was common; but eventually it became a privilege and thereby lost its everyday and common character - because it stopped being necessary and became a thing of moods and luxury. The same thing could happen to buying and selling one day. One can imagine social conditions in which there is no buying and selling and in which this technique gradually becomes unnecessary. Perhaps some individuals who are not as subject to the laws of the general condition will then give themselves permission to buy and sell as a *luxury of sentiment*. Only then would trade become something exquisite, and the noble might enjoy trade as much as they hitherto enjoyed war and politics, while conversely the assessment of politics could have changed completely. Even now it is ceasing to be the art of the nobleman, and it is quite possible that some day one will find it so base that, along with all political literature and journalism, one classifies it as a 'prostitution of the spirit'. "

>>22514239
>imagining the end of generalised commodity production
lol

>>22514227
Nationalism requires the Nation State that the 3 big Empires didn't have till later on. They also formed(deformed) from their monarchies being the leading principle way later. Slavs and Germans pioneered lingiuistic/ethnic nationalism in practice.

British Empire is an Empire. Nationalism initially is anti-Empire since most nationalities were under empires before they freed themselfs.

>>22514248
I can imagine: distribute advanced self-reproducing 3d-printers to everyone.

No buying and selling anymore, just infight for access to raw materials.

>>22514255
I sure hope this unbelievably complex system will survive the competency crisis.

>>22514248
"commodity production" =/= "market exchange"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palace_economy

>>22514261
I said generalised for a reason

>>22514227
>More variation of ethnic groups under its banner than any other in history. This is just a common argument to try and disarm nationalists intellectual much the same as argument that race was socially contructed 500 years ago by European colonists.
Wouldn't the vast amount of ethnic groups and cultures under its banner make it less nationalistic?
As youre essentially saying this state held a variety of cultures under it, rather than a singilar state defined by one national identity.
Usually people define empires as opposite to nation-states
>Germans had a national German indentity in the middle ages
My understanding was the German state, then the HRE, was a highly decentralized state composed of a multitude city states with a high degree of autonomy similar to Italy.
I'm doubtful they conceived of themselves as German.
As far as i understand a unified German national identity was created by Prussia.

>>22514173
I don’t care if someone is a fascist, but the appreciation of people like Jonathan Bowden as if he was a profound artist or thinker makes me think the board has gotten dumber or younger.

>>22514180
I'm upper middle class 30 something from Europe, you tried.
>>22514190
>Sorry but you need to get with the times.
>mass media
>ideology
>populism
No, I don't so, actually.

>>22515321
>I'm upper middle class 30 something from Europe, you tried.
but have you ever had sex?

>>22514057
You can not cultivate aristocratic values without military service. Specifically martial leadership. People will try to justify it as an aristocratic soul, or spirit, or mindset but ultimately it comes down to the martial aspect. If your military lacks the opportunity to obtain said values you are not going to be able to obtain them anywhere else.

Youtube video essays of gentle voices men will not awaken you to anything. Neither will Jocko or any Warrior-Philsopher type. One must undergo the trials and stresses of martial leadership to be aristocratic.

One can not simply enlist and follow, one must lead. This is why the West in the shape that it is. This is why aristocratic people are truly rare.

>>22515321
>he said while posting on 4chan (mass media) espousing an ideology

>>22513269
>cryptofag who totally ripped off revolt against the modern world

Fuck you dude lmao

>>22516600
This.

>>22508659
>aristocratic radicalism
Can anyone briefly expound on this? This sounds very similar to an idea that's come naturally to me from reading about social order in the 18th and 19th century, my belief being that social hierarchy is innate, that democracy hasn't done away with it but that our celebrities, athletes, wealthy are new aristocracy, fruit of a poisoned tree as it stands, but the answer being not to chop down all trees but continual rejuvenation when necessary. If he feels similarly that class and caste are natural and inherent, that men worship men as a default intended by nature, that the best we can hope to do is place good moral people who are beacons for the lower classes to follow in charge as best we may, id very much like to read about it. But please, in case I'm getting ahead of myself, please tell me what is meant by aristocratic radicalism. Thank you.

>>22518095
>that democracy hasn't done away with it but that our celebrities, athletes, wealthy are new aristocracy, fruit of a poisoned tree as it stands, but the answer being not to chop down all trees but continual rejuvenation when necessary.

I think you have put the cart before the horse. The reason the poison trees are spreading is because the fruit is the sweetest. When left to the masses they will devolve everything to its crudest level. The mass man can not achieve what the aristocratic embodies. If he could then we all would be one, thus meaning that nobody is one. The democratic world-view and even the marxist one seeks to make everybody equal, either overly or by their own merit.

This goes against aristocracy, the best, we can not all he the best.

>>22518134
Well yes I certainly agree, I think democracy is a mistake, I think it's the weak collectively bargaining to shackle the strong, it turns government itself in to part of the bread and circuses which sustain an enslaved populace, obviously this whole experiment has failed and we're less free than maybe we would have been under monarchism or other past popular forms of government. At the very least we seem to be ruled by a more vile elite.

>>22518134
And since I feel I'm not engaging with your question as directly as you may hope, I agree that equality is a false promise and not inherently natural, something I thought I had made clear previously but maybe not. Is this the general view of Nietzsche and what's meant by aristocratic radicalism? Does he have any works focused moreso on ideas like this if so? I'm not a reader of philosophy, rather of fiction largely, but I'd like to become one and think something that interests me would be a good springboard

>>22518141
>At the very least we seem to be ruled by a more vile elite
We are ruled by an economic elite, not a warrior, nor military, or religious, or political or ethnic elite. Hence why economics is the be all end all of everything.

>I think democracy is a mistake, I think it's the weak collectively bargaining to shackle the strong
I don't think there are 'strong' in any meaningful way it is capable and trusted leadership we want. Strong vs weak is meaningless here, there is leader and follower, officer and soldier. One needs the other.

>Is this the general view of Nietzsche and what's meant by aristocratic radicalism
I can not say, Nietzsche appears to be one of those thinkers that can be used to justify a great number of positions.

>I'm not a reader of philosophy, rather of fiction largely, but I'd like to become one and think something that interests me would be
I started with reading non-fiction, unironically with the greeks. Specifically Sparta. Gradually moved on from there. Reading a follower of Spengler currently. American Nazi, Yockey.

But i am not the person you may have been talking with.

>>22518190
Let me clarify by strong vs weak I mean the strong willed individual vs the collective that requires unity to do battle with the former and have any hope at success. I don't think leadership can come from a collective mind, at least not a leadership capable of unique perspective and competence. Ordaining officer vs soldier at random clearly isn't your intent, so maybe you have a similar belief to me, but if not how would you define the capable vs the incapable, surely you don't assume all men rise to their station

>>22518210
I think we agree here then, i appreciate the clarity.

>>22518190
idk why you're posting george lincoln rockwell on /lit/, he hated all narrative fiction because he thought it was jewish/communist propaganda par excellence, reaching its zenith in steinbeck's the grapes of wrath. just kind of strange to be posting him here, no?

>>22518277
>he hated all narrative fiction because he thought it was jewish/communist propaganda

What an absolute crazy thing to think.

>>22518190
>We are ruled by an economic elite, not a warrior, nor military, or religious, or political or ethnic elite. Hence why economics is the be all end all of everything.

https://www.counter-currents.com/tag/breaking-the-bondage-of-interest/

Everyone should read this, then read The Anglo-American Establishment:
https://thirdworldtraveler.com/Banks/Tragedy_Hope_excerpt.html

The first chapter of The Law of Civilization and Decay, on what happened to ancient Rome (it's only 40~ short pages):
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/44908/44908-h/44908-h.htm#p_1

Spengler:
“The coming of Caesarism breaks the dictature of money and its political weapon, democracy. After a long triumph of world-city economy and its interests over political creative force, the political side of life manifests itself after all as the stronger of the two. The sword is victorious over the money, the master-will subdues again the plunderer-will. If we call these money-powers 'Capitalism,' then we may designate as Socialism the will to call into life a mighty politico-economic order that transcends all class interests, a system of lofty thoughtfulness and duty-sense that keeps the whole in fine condition for the decisive battle of its history, and this battle is also the battle of money and law. The private powers of the economy want free paths for their acquisition of great resources. No legislation must stand in their way. They want to make the laws themselves, in their interests, and to that end they make use of the tool they have made for themselves, democracy, the subsidized party. Law needs, in order to resist this onslaught, a high tradition and an ambition of strong families that finds its satisfaction not in the heaping-up of riches, but in the tasks of true rulership, above and beyond all money-advantage. A power can be overthrown only by another power, not by a principle, and no power that can confront money is left but this one. Money is overthrown and abolished only by blood.

Yockey:
“Two ideas are opposed — not concepts or abstractions, but Ideas which were in the blood of men before they were formulated by the minds of men. The Resurgence of Authority stands opposed to the Rule of Money; Order to Social Chaos, Hierarchy to Equality, socio-economico-political Stability to constant Flux; glad assumption of Duties to whining for Rights; Socialism to Capitalism, ethically, economically, politically; the Rebirth of Religion to Materialism; Fertility to Sterility; the spirit of Heroism to the spirit of Trade; the principle of Responsibility to Parliamentarism; the idea of Polarity of Man and Woman to Feminism; the idea of the individual task to the ideal of ‘happiness’; Discipline to Propaganda-compulsion; the higher unities of family, society, State to social atomism; Marriage to the Communistic ideal of free love; economic self-sufficiency to senseless trade as an end in itself; the inner imperative to Rationalism.”

>>22518306
It is shocking how little known Counter Currents is. Ive read Spengler, now reading Yockey. Picrel also covered this.

Further, as a new homeowner it is horrific how much i pay in interest. The 6% you fight for is nothing when you realize of a $2200 mortage payment less than $50 goes to the loan, the rest going to interest. Gradually this will move less than a dollar each payment towards paying the principle. So of a $2200 payment, $51.25 will go to principle, then next month $52.80, then $53.98. You in fact buy two houses with a mortage.