/lit/ - Literature

>right-wing
>producing art
heh

>>4977688
Leo Strauss

>>4977688
>>4977711
Consider your dubs officially checked

This was posted in

>>4977724
why is Conrad considered reactionary or imperialist? the only first hand experience I have with his work is Heart of Darkness and a collection of short stories, but apart from the racism blunder in HoD, he struck me as being anti-imperialist

>>4977730
Perhaps that's because a rightwinger put the list together?
They'll look past little things like that. All in the Family for instance. They didn't care that Archie was a Goofus to Michael's Gallant

>>4977713
mah nigga

Leo Strauss is the only one who gets it. holy shit.

>>4977724
>racism blunder

It was intentional, you fool!

Well London was a socialist, but Call of the Wild explores right-wing themes in a positive way.

>>4977745
so a text that was anti-imperialist was designed to be racist? so he's saying anti-imperialists are racist and overlook humanity?

that's pretty meta

>>4977711

They're really good at producing big scary caricatures of black people and Jews.

That's about all I can think of that they've contributed.

The best art is rightwing

>>4977811
I have to admit that propaganda can be of high artistic quality on occasion.

Why is /lit/ left wing central?

>>4977746
>right-wing themes in a positive way.
>positive

That book is straight up piss and vinegar. It's utterly vile. It's a product of it's brutal, hideous era.

Books like Call of the Wild and anything G.A. Henty were responsible for the blood-lust that fueled the first world war.

>>4977824
creative types are generally liberally minded
fact of life
but because this is 4chan, there is an eternal influx of /pol/ stormfronters

>>4977824
It's not. Why are there so many left-wing threads here? Mostly because the left has interfaced with philosophy and social theory (both of which happen to have fallen to this board for their discussion ground) more than the right has over the past hundred plus years.

>>4977829
>creative minds are generally liberally minded
extrapolate
>>4977836
Why did the right ignore such an important aspect of the past hundred years?

>>4977828
I don't think so. WWI was fueled by propaganda and the ambitions of the bourgeoisie and the last traces of the aristocracy.

>>4977711
>Futurism
>Not better then marxist smashing art because muh bow wah ze

>>4977839
Because the paradigm-changing minds in those department right-wing. In order for the right to be involved, there would had to have been an overtly right-wing game changer equivalent to Nietzsche or Marx (I would call
Nietzsche leftist, but was definitely an existentialist, which is not properly compatible with right-wing values).

>>4977854
>in those departments weren't right-wing

>>4977854
>I WOULDN'T call Nietzsche a leftist

>>4977828
You're the guy who was traumatized by Call of the Wild? Bloodlust has been around a long ass time

>>4977854
>>4977857
>>4977862
That is it? The social scientists and philosophers of the last century weren't right wing thus everyone here is a leftist? Simple herd mentality?

>>4977871
No, I'm saying social theory and philosophy of the past century is devoid of much right-wing material, so threads on it aren't going to discuss a whole lot from a right-wing perspective; so every time you see these thread, you might assumes it means an echo-chamber, but it's really not one. There are plenty of right-wing posters here, they just don't have a ton of recent works to tout.

I respect right-wing philosophy, I think it shouldn't be marginalized and considered inherently evil as it is today, but I agree too much with liberal ideas to embrace it personally.

That said, Strauss and Evola are good introductions. Even though Nietsche is high-school tier, I think he echoes alot of right wing thought on hierarchy and power.

Finally, De Maistre's writings are very important. He gives a great outline of why he believes conservatism and right-wing philosophy in general is the correct path for society.

>>4977879
That makes sense. Thanks for explaining.

>>4977884
Which works of Nietzsche have you read?

Evola's more of a mystic than a philosopher, and by that I mean most of his conclusions rest on mysticism he developed more than on rational or empirical arguments.

>>4977871
The right-wing of lit (tend) to be the ones most devotional to the past, IE religious threads, Schopenhauer, Romaphile etc. ... and -> >>4977879

We are going leftwards as a species. Terribly slowly.

>>4977714
Motion smoothing is the worst thing.

>>4977897
What about the dark enlightment?

>>4977910
It's nothing. Pay it no mind.

>>4977910
>dark enlightment

>>4977917
>>4977916
k

>>4977824
>why does reality have a liberal bias?
>why do well read people have a liberal bias?

>>4977711

>dostoevsky
>mishima
>schoppy
>heidegger

>>4977954

>quoting a late night fake news show

i'm sure you're amazingly well read kid

>>4977829

>creative types are generally rich kids who never have to deal with minorities

fixed that for you

>>4978002
Please anon, elaborate on how Schopenhauer was right wing.

also: http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/04/0956797611421206.abstract

>>4978008

>dislikes women
>dislikes africans

>>4978007
Certainly there has been never such a thing as a poor artist.

>>4978013

certainly the post I quoted and my own aren't speaking in broad generalizations

>>4978012

It's deeply amusing to me that "fuck bitches and niggers" is such a firm tenet of modern "conservatism" that adherence to it is enough for any random asshole to be claimed as a friend and a brother.

>>4978012
So? Didn't Schopenhauer also expand Kant's categorical imperative to doing as much good do to other people as you can? It's not like the guy was a friend of slavery.

>>4978020

what is your point? yes, not everyone perfectly aligns perfectly with a certain ideology because there are so many different aspects to each one. he's close enough though and any modern SJW would consider him one

>>4978016
?

>>4978027
Please define what you consider right wing ideology. Like it's goals and so on.

>>4978025

>doing as much good do to other people as you can?

why do you think this excludes someone from being right wing? I don't why you're conflating right wing with evil.

>>4978032

Maybe it's because holding the opinion "fuck bitches and niggers" is enough to qualify one as a conservative

>>4978032
>I think he was right wing because for all what I know he hated women and africans
>why do you think this [doing good on principle] excludes someone from being right wing

“The deep pain that is felt at the death of every friendly soul arise from the feeling that there is in every individual something which is inexpressible, peculiar to him alone, and is, therefore, absolutely and irretrievably lost”

Read Manifesto for a European Renaissance by Benoist and the other guy, Growth of the Soil by Hamsun, Harrison Bergeron by Vonnegut, the earliest possible version of Storm of Steel by Junger, Revolt of the Masses by Ortega, and On Heroes & Hero-Worship by Carlyle. All short.

Then decide whether you're interested in
>alternatives to forced egalitarianism
>strong cultures and their preservation
>cultural masculinity/virility
>political sovereignty
>authoritarianism / statism
>mystical, quasi-mystical, or philosophical statism/'volkism'
>mass psychology and right wing populism
>classical liberalism (and associated meritocratic ideas etc.)

Then come back.

>>4978047
“The assumption that animals are without rights and the illusion that our treatment of them has no moral significance is a positively outrageous example of Western crudity and barbarity. Universal compassion is the only guarantee of morality."

>>4978060
Typical thing a neo nazi would say. I'm sure this is a quote from american history x.

>>4978025
It's just that our modern conceptions of "Left" and "Right" do not adequately describe the positions of historical figures.


As for the OP, I guess Mishima was right-wing, and Pound's The Cantos definitely is.

>>4978151
Yeah, shit, forgot about Mishima. He's a very good right-wing writer, and Sun and Steel is sort of right-wing personal philosophy, although I am hesitant to besmirch its greatness with something so banal as politics.

>>4978044

But not all people who believe that are conservative (reactionary, though) and obviously not all conservatives believe v that.

>>4978163
And yet it's that (in the 19th Century no less!) that people are using as a qualification for thinkers being "right-wing"); that's reachin'

>>4978168

Fem replied to me, night is over

But yes, you're right.

>>4978168
Honestly, I feel that ascribing the labels left and right to people that lived before the advent of fascism is fairly pointless. Some of them may have ideas that fit the bill, but they, as a whole typically won't.

/pol/ made a reading list this one time

>>4978025
jesus christ, you are absolutely retarded. Have you actually read On the Basis of Morality by Schoppy? Seems not. So shut the fuck up, you moron.

>>4978208
Do think /pol/ has read or rather understood half of it?

>>4978208
>thus spake zarathustra
>spake

>>4977777

Why is Dostoievsky considered right-wing?
I've only read Brothers Karamazov and it didn't see that much to me (though I've read it long ago, at a time which I may have missed something).

Also, what about Vonnegut? (Never read him)

>>4977824
Why is /tv/ and /pol/ right wing central?

The answer is who fucking cares

>>4978208
So why is the Commedia right wing, exactly? Because it's Christian?

>>4978406
Not everything on that is right-wing.

>>4978405
The answer is cunnyfor you.

>>4978411
Well okay, how is the Commedia /pol/-related then?

>>4978208

>Good authors
>Tom Clancy

Whelp.

>>4977724
>>4978208

I like how /pol/lutors feel the need to mix in their stormfront kook novels in with respectable high-brow literature. They're so clueless that they can't seem to understand that most of these authors are politically diametrically opposed to each other.

>>4978511
/pol/
>doesn't align every single thing it reads to be exactly congruent in philosophy so as to avoid any unpleasant cognitive dissonance or the need to think

leftists
>can't even read a fucking ten-word disclaimer

nazis: 2
leftists: leading cause of genocide on planet

>>4977829
>creative types are generally liberally minded

No, tryhard wannabe artists are generally liberally minded.
Especially NEETS and other welfare leeches.

>>4978543
>No, tryhard wannabe artists are generally liberally minded. Especially NEETS and other welfare leeches.

Uh... yeah... we call these people creative types. You haven't made any distinction.

>>4978543
I would say its more correct to say that creatives are usually not conservative. They are trying to create something new or smash paradigms.

>>4978545
>only tryhard wannabe artists on welfare are creative

>>4978530

It's in bad taste to lump in respectable novels with kook trash in order to give your views a degree a respectability. I'm not even a leftist, I'm just not trashy kook who thinks Hitler was a great guy because a thread on stormfront and a obscure kook novel told me so.

>leading cause of genocide on planet

If anything you stormfront kooks are leading to the death of the white race by making anyone opposed to mass immigration look like a psychotic kook.

>>4977711
>left wing
>producing art
kek

>>4978547
>I would say its more correct to say that creatives are usually not conservative.
Lol says who?

>>4978548
Categorically, necessarily, yes. Capitalistic drudgeries extirpate all creativity.

>>4978562
>yes
Lol ok.
Allow me to rebut: "no".

>Capitalistic drudgeries extirpate all creativity.
Do you know what patronage is?
The greatest artists in history were very well-paid professionals.

>>4978565
>The greatest artists in history were very well-paid professionals.

And they searched far and wide for the most advantageous positions, using their artistry and reputation as leverage.

>>4978565
Yeah, had they not been supported, had they instead taken menial work to avoid being considered wannabe artists and welfare leeches by mean-spirited anons, they would not have been the greatest artists. Find me some patrons and I'll be a great artist, too.

>>4978555
Fantastic, well thought out point.

>>4978557
Literally no more stupid that this blanket statement >>4978543

>>4978571
>Find me some patrons and I'll be a great artist, too.
That's not how it works. Only a very VERY small elite managed to find well-paid positions.

Nothing like today when vast amounts of deluded young people are convinced they're artists.

>>4978573
That "blanket statement" is an objective observation.
I know many talentless hacks who survive on an "artist's statute".
Euro here btw.

>>4978574
>I know many talentless hacks who survive on an "artist's statute".

So they get paid?

>>4978593
>So they get paid?
Yes.
Despite the fact that they suck and have no exposure whatsoever.

>>4978598
So your angry because they're not 'big name artists'? Whats the big deal about people doing what they want to do if they're making money off it?

>>4978622
I'm not angry, just pointing out that liberal-minded people tend to be drawn to a bogus life of being a tryhard wannabe artist on welfare.
The fact that modern society doesn't punish lack of talent as much as it used to helps greatly.

>>4977829
>creative types are generally liberally minded
and intelligent people who actually have an impact on the world around them are generally conservative-minded

>>4978622
*you're

>>4978630
And about 6 in 10 of them are sociopaths.

>>4978816
>because i say so
that's not how the world works

>>4978571
>Find me some patrons and I'll be a great artist, too.
I doubt it. What would you do?

>>4978818
http://www.forbes.com/sites/victorlipman/2013/04/25/the-disturbing-link-between-psychopathy-and-leadership/

>>4978829
>article talks about psychopathy, not sociopathy
>in business
>not conservatives
>6/10 anywhere
lel

>>4978834
Dude, do I have to spoon feed you?

>>4978552
>kook

wtf is it with redditors and these weird gay words for stormfront users

stormhoagies

>>4978837
no, just dont present the wrong information when trying to prove a point

>>4978870
How do you know what I'm trying to do?

>>4977711
Capitalism produces most art.

>>4978012

>liking africans

he was, one thinks, right about them

>>4980992
Not really. Capitalism might allow for more full-time artists then were possible under the aristocracy, tho

>>4977884
This is the correct answer.

>>4981034
But you respect all the other ones

>>4978552
>It's in bad taste to lump in respectable novels with kook trash in order to give your views a degree a respectability.
>if my leftist peers agree with it, its respectable

I think you fallacy m8.

>>4977897

>We are going leftwards as a species. Terribly slowly.

>THINKING THAT THE LEFT V RIGHT DICHOTOMY CAN BE APPLIED OUTSIDE OF WESTERN POLITICS
>THINKING THAT SOCIAL CHANGES IN THE WESTERN WORLD = THE ENTIRE HUMAN RACE

THAT REALLY SHIGGIED MY DIGGIES

This thread is hilarious.

Quick list of things wrong with leftism/fallacious assumptions inherent in their philosophies:

>There is a such thing as good
>Equality is valuable
>The collective is what matters, not the individual
>"Society" is a real thing
>Most people are actually capable of critical thought/want to be more than tv watching slugs
>The protection of the weak is a desirable goal
>War is bad

When an entire ideology rests on empty assertions you know it's time to abandon ship. Come on, leftists.

>>4981244
"There is such a thing as good" is inherent in any value system, rightism surely included.

>>4977892
Empiricism =\= Rationalism

>>4977730
New Imperialism was a Enlightenment project based on the notion of liberal universalism and in the civilizing mission of Europeans to bring it's superiority to the rest of the world.

Not really right-wing per se, though many right-wing people (wrongly) defended it, specially after the left abandoned this project and tried successfully to push it unto us (like they did with Eugenics, another Progressive flag they abandoned).

>>4981391
No shit, that's why I said OR

>good
>right-wing

Challenge: Name one person who is both right wing and intelligent.

Pro tip: impossible.

>>4981409
He was apart of the Rationalist movement though so.... lol

>>4981423
That's a terrible bump

>>4977824
Why is /biz/ pro free-market?

People will support the ideologies (they believe) give them power. And left-wing ideologies gives a lot of power to intellectuals. The intelligentsia as a class is a result of the Enlightenment after all, they gotta be loyal to it's project.

>"Probably the intellectual has more difficulty than the common man in freeing himself from this ideology which, like the State which derives from it, is his especial handiwork. The Soviet government rules in the name of a doctrine elaborated by an intellectual whose life was spent in libraries and interpreted for the past century by countless other intellectuals. Under a Communist régime the intellectuals, sophists rather than philosophers, rule the roost. The examining magistrates who unmask deviations, the writers coerced into socialist realism, the engineers and managers who are supposed to execute the plans and to interpret the ambiguous orders of the central authority—all must be dialecticians. The Secretary-General of the Party, master and arbiter over the lives of millions of men. is also an intellectual: at the end of a triumphal career he offers to the faithful a theory of capitalism and socialism—as though a book represented the highest accomplishment. The emperors of old were often poets or thinkers; for the first time the emperor actually reigns qua dialectician, interpreter of the doctrine and of history."

Raymond Aron. The Opium of the Intellectuals

>>4981059
-Religions on the defensive against reason and science.
-Effective end to hereditary monarchy.
-Notions of self rule trending.
-The truth about capital has been spreading.

True there are counterrevolutionary measures being taken, but the overall trend is "leftwards". The masses will have what it is they want. The elitists will not get their glory days back. Would they actually nuke us all in a fit? Doubtful.
So goodbye dinosaur. Into the future you go. Suffer well!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz1xPhjaVHM

>>4981439
Why right wing ideologies don't give power to intellectuals?
Also, I disagree with the text you posted. Other regimes ruled in the name of doctrines elaborated by intellectuals. Plato's "The Republic" proves so.

>>4983399
Because in a right-wing world, intellectuals are born already in a intellectual enviroment. If they aren't, they should just hop on the capitalist become-rich train and hire private tudors for their teachers, so their family can be intellectual.

>>4977688
>Any good right-wing books?
no

>>4981423
Nietzsche
Churchill
Thatcher
Mussolini
Caesar
Richard the Lionhearted
Genghis Khan
Charlemagne
Saladin
Bobby Fischer
Buddha
Several of Hitler's cabinet-men
Mussolini
Kaiser Wilhelm, 1 and 2
God
Odin
Moses
Several of the Founding Fathers of the United States
Richard Nixon
George S Patton
General Eisenhower
Everbody good ever
Your mom when I'm fucking her
Allah
Sultan Osman
Frederick the Great
Gustavus Adolphus
the universe
Mother Nature
Stalin if you're deflecting and saying "Umm... he wasn't a REAL communist, he was like a fascist"
My dick
Your ass

>>4981652
>implying religion isn't going to surge back
i mean, it's going to be way more left when it does, but fucking look at this francis guy, liberation theology shit is makin a comeback

(yes i know he rejects liberation theology, but he's still emphasizing economic issues and specifically decrying capitalism, for the pontiff, pretty good)

>>4981652
>implying the Cult of Reason and scientism (and liberal universalism too) are not a religions
>implying financial and policial familes (and organized crime too) are not hereditary monarchies
>implying the last 200 years have not seen a decline in self-rule (pic related)
>implying capitalism is not a bastard child of the Enligthenment leftist project

Of couse i agree that the last 500 years have seen a shift leftward, since the Protestant Reformation at least, but not for the reasons you exposed.

>>4983399
Because it gives more power to the customs and morals of our people, the formulated experience of generations, instead of what can be explained in a college course.

The institutions, conventions, customs and laws that make up the complex structure of a society are the work of a hundred centuries and a billion minds, but intellectuals expect to comprehend them in one lifetime.

Actually, less, they expect to comprehend them in in twenty years.

>>4981652
Wow, you are American-centric as fuck. Take a look at the recent political developments of the Middle East and South East Asia and tell me the world is trending leftwards. Even western and Northern Europe is seeing a surge in immigrant animosity and the organized right.

How are you still falling in line with Leftist Hegelian teleology?

>>4977730
He was cautious of liberal democracy and opposed socialism and grand ideological/idealistic projects (ie 19th century imperialism) in general. Regardless of what he, or scholars of his work, considered his own political position, this places him to the right of modern mainstream politics, even further right than the modern Republican and Conservative parties.

>>4984161
I wouldn't say Conrad falls anywhere on the left-right political spectrum. He's deeply pessimistic in regards to all aspect of men.

>>4984168
Which is another characteristic of right-wing politics. The Left is Rousseaunian.

>>4984168
Which is a core aspect of reactionary theory, that man needs powerful hierarchical social institutions and obligations to give him meaning and keep him from moral and societal degeneration. Why do you think Catholicism is so attractive to reactionary writers, even the atheist ones?

>>4983892
>Caesar
>Richard the Lionhearted
>Genghis Khan
>Charlemagne
>Saladin
You wot mate?

>>4977688
Mishima and Cèline were right wingers, and so many others.
The stereotype of the leftist intellectual only consolidated after WW2, when in europe took place a quite sharp definition of political areas of influence. Rightwingers got military and police, leftwingers got education and intellectual.

>>4984156
>the recent political developments of the Middle East
>The Arab Spring
Yu-hu
>Europe is seeing a surge in immigrant animosity [among their rightwingers]
K. People have usually disliked foreigners

At times I stress this, so let me say it again since you're probably new. It trends SLOWWWWLY. Look at history. What the fuck has been going on for that past three hundred years?

>>4984193
>that man needs powerful hierarchical social institutions and obligations to give him meaning and keep him from moral and societal degeneration

But it was strong social/political institutions at play in Heart of Darkness and Nostromo. Conrad is pessimistic of all human structures. It's absurd to think that he simply regards one human structure as above cynicism as any other.

>>4981652
>-The truth about capital has been spreading.
Yep, into the filter you go.

>>4984243
There are no historical trends, there is no progression towards something "better." There is a piling up of catastrophe with flashes of promising contingency piercing out of the rubble every now and then. Every Paris Commune met with a stark, decisive reaction. Every CNT/FAI broken down by oppressive fascism. Just 70 years ago the Germans (who enjoyed a period of intense, left-leaning cultural flourishing) were systematically murdering millions. Just in the past century the Japanese went from being relatively peaceful among other asian nations (and in some cases, harboring strong pan-asian sentiments) to raping, gutting, and beheading across China.

You're creating a political, historical myth, a story where there is only really nothing.

>>4984314
Uh-oh! The truth that there's no real value to money? Cover your ears!

>>4984318
Your narrow interpretations are pessimistic. I think you naive.

So go. Suffer well.

>>4984243
The Arab Spring empowered Islamists and the Muslim Brotherhood in the end. So much that they had to backtrack it in Egypt.

This, of course, shows that the Enlightenment project is not something the masses want, but something that is imposed on them by the elites. Just like the liberal elites did in the XIXth century Europe, they will manage to beat secularism and progressivism upon the islamic masses and useful idiots like you will claim victory and say "this is what the masses wanted all along".

Chaps.

This is the only book that is anti capitalism, anti communism, anti left, anti right, anti eu, anti anti-eu, anti israel, anti palistine, anti gay, anti kkk, anti feminist, anti political correctness and anti anti-political correctness.

It's beautiful.

>>4984369
Your logic of history falls right in line with the logic that underlies history as false promise.

http://www.sfu.ca/~andrewf/CONCEPT2.html

>>4981439
Why is /crime/ anti guns?

Profiling is racism

>>4984448
A friend of mine, before she got completely subsumed by tumblr, admitted that it was rational to be more on guard when in a "bad" neighborhoods because she was more likely to be a victim of crime. Now, of course, she wouldn't admit anything like that.

I wonder how many of those tumblr SJWs running around Oakland or Detroit or Chicago would try to convince themselves that they weren't absolutely terrified of being caught on the late bus alone.

>>4984318
>the Germans (who enjoyed a period of intense, left-leaning cultural flourishing)

It was mostly Jews, though.

>>4981042

Yes.

>>4984318
>weimar
>flourishing

>>4984488
For "artists" (aka Jews and degenerates), it was.

>>4978030

Desire to keep things as-is or return to the way things were in the past

Dali and Duchamp were both right-wingers...can't really dismiss them as artists, can you?

>>4984504
As were Eliot and Pound. There is nothing more aesthetic and full of the godly essence that the left-wing dismantles than fascism.

The left-wing cannot understand art unless it is couched in the small, base terms of historical materialism and ideological critique. Read the aesthetic theory of Heidegger and Nietzsche versus that of Benjamin or Adorno.

>>4984504

Dali had Anarchism and Communist sympathies when he was young. When he was old and crazy he called himself an anarchist and monarchist. He was really into the Church in his later years, but he was left-wing\crazy more than right wing.

>>4984528
He was an aesthete above all. It's difficult to deny the beauty found in the Church and the traditional Monarchy.

>>4984528

This, Orwell got mad at him for running away during the Civil War because he would've fought with him on the anarchist side.

He was crazy for crazy's sake when he was old, if he's right wing for his obsession with Catholicism so is Madonna.

Anyone know of a good history of Fascism that isn't limited simply to Germany and covers the philosophical roots through to present day movements? Or is there no such comprehensive history?

>>4984548
Also preferably books that are neutral and not blatantly biased against Fascism. Thanks.

>>4984548
Stanley Payne's History of Fascism 1914-1945 is good.

Also look for Nolte's Three Faces of Fascism.

>>4984528
>he was left-wing\crazy more than right wing

Oh...you fell for it.
Ávida Dollar was a Franco supporter, make no mistake...he even managed to make Breton & co believe otherwise.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EycMdz4fC0w

>>4984376
Since you're a newfag in for the summer, I guess I have to repeat this. I am under no delusions about the prospect of humanity continuing to flourish beyond this century. We could continue to see the idle worshiping of Jesus of the ever renewing resources and Ba'al the bull of the mighty dollar, lead us to our complete ruin, or we could see just an old fashioned nuclear winter wipe us all out. Oh, maybe a combination of the two.
I do try to stay positive, that's just my quirk. We are capable of changing, don't think for another minute we're not.
See, you fail to take in the full scope of history is all. We live in unprecedented times, and there's very little to go on to predict with. (Only scientific projections) Nothing cyclical going on with this commercial-empire/republic. I still can't even tell if you're fascist leaning or just a great big pessimist.
In any case, kindly get out of my sun.

>>4977688
Not really "right wing" but Mein Kampf

>>4977854
>was definitely an existentialist, which is not properly compatible with right-wing values).

That doesn't even make any sense. Existentialism doesn't have anything to do with politics.

>>4977711
Hobbes "Leviathan"
Platos "Republic"

>>4978008
Because he was a monarchist who hated republicanism, supported eugenics, and hated women.

>>4984528
Didn't he support Franco?

>>4985707
Eugenics was a progressive cause in the early 20st century, even the Fabian Society supported it.

Then Hitler made it look bad.

>>4985741
Probably whoever paid for pieces.

>>4985747
>Then Hitler made it look bad.
Pretty sure eugenics was still big in the US after WW2, it's still going on

>Between 2006 and 2010 close to 150 women were sterilized in Californian prisons without state approval.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States

>>4978399
>Why is Dostoievsky considered right-wing?

He was ultra-religious Slavophile who supported the Tsar and opposed socialism and almost every left-wing movement of his day. The only thing he wasn't right-wing on was the death penalty.

>>4985747
Do you know who the progressive are?

>>4981423
rebbit pls go

>>4977688
>right winged
>good


gtfo

>>4977688

>Liberty or Equality
>Leftism Revisited

Read these books by pic related and never turn back.

>>4978399
>Also, what about Vonnegut? (Never read him)

Vonnegut was an anarchist, hardly right-wing.

>>4985819
>Liberty or Equality
Why not use them to balance each other?

>>4985747
>Fabian Society
This is like the fifth time I've heard of that on /lit/ in three days.

Is that the new thing /pol/ is preaching about? Are they done pretending they know Frankfurt?

>>4985833
It's simply not possible. The truth is, democratic-egalitarian movements have been the spawn of the most violent and despotic regimes in human history. Monarchy is the superior and most liberal form of government, assuming it conforms to national traditions. In the case of the USA, this is impossible, the USA must be an aristocratic federalistic republic or die.

In Liberty or Equality, our hero Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn smashes the myths of egalitarianism and democracy being liberal in the slightest. Writing in the wake of Hitler, he convincingly traces the heritage of Nazism all the way back to medieval egalitarian uprisings.

In Leftism Revisited, he dissects the entire ideology of leftism beginning with the Marquis de Sade all the way to Herbert Marcuse, and proves that fascism and Nazism are leftist.

>>4985845
>It's simply not possible.
Okay, listening
>The truth is, democratic-egalitarian movements have been the spawn of the most violent and despotic reg...
>Have been
When was this?
Dropped.

>and proves that fascism and Nazism are leftist.
WAAAHAHAHAHAHA. By changing what it is to be on the right I suppose. Double dropped.

Summer /pol/fags. Please go.

>>4985819
This guy is based, legit polymath. Hans Hoppe was an acquaintance/peer of his. Highest recommendations.

I haven't looked over /pol/'s list, but I imagine they just included pretty much anyone remotely racist. Anyway, most artists tend to be left-wing, but in the past (pre-WWII), the relationship between art and left-wing politics was a lot weaker. Off the top of my head, here are some examples of prominent right-wing authors:

Fyodor Dostoevsky
H.P. Lovecraft
Charles Baudelaire
T. S. Eliot
Ezra Pound
Knut Hamsun
Louis-Ferdinand Céline
Ernst Junger
D.H. Lawrence
Vladimir Nabokov
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Nikolai Gogol
Evelyn Waugh
H.L. Mencken

>>4985861

>When was this?

The French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and Nazism were all mass democratic movements.

>WAAAHAHAHAHAHA. By changing what it is to be on the right I suppose. Double dropped.

OK, dickhead, don't challenge what you believe and just keep /lit/ a circlejerk. When you get a PhD in political science, write thousands of pages with thousands of end notes dissecting in detail the writings of all the major leftist thinkers since the French Revolution era and connecting it to modern atrocities, I'll consider your argument, but until then, shut up.

Gene Wolfe was conservative:

“I am a conservative. I certainly read William F. Buckley, Jr. with delight…I think he mellowed a little too much at the end…He wasn’t as sharp-edged as he really should have been. Perhaps the same thing will happen to me. But that doesn’t mean that it’s good."

>>4985845
Sade was a libertine, but definitely not a leftist. Not *exactly* a liberal either (he didn't believe in natural rights), but somewhat allied with liberalism.

After reading Discipline and Punish, I have a heard time understanding how how anyone could support old fashioned monarchy.

>>4985865

>Baudelaire
>D. H. Lawrence
>right-wing

>>4985871
I don't believe anything you slap the name "democracy" on is automatically a real and functioning democracy, anymore than I believe anything you slap the name "communism" on is automatically a real and functioning commune. Hair splitting? Sure. And there are no real fascists regimes atm /sarcasm

>>4985861
>Anonymous 06/07/14(Sat)20:36 No.4985837▶
>>>4985571 #
>is that some kind of joke post?
>of course not
Not who you're replying to, but this was what the SA was about, and why it was stamped out by Hitler in the Knight of the Long Knives. Just because it's the GERMAN people doesn't make it less demoktatia. To say otherwise is to be obtusely an ideologue.

>>4985894
Feminister, this is the most tautological post I've read from you.

>>4985904
>this shit again

(_))::::::::::D~~ Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

>>4985896
>Baudelaire

Along with Poe, Baudelaire named the arch-reactionary Joseph de Maistre as his maître à penser and adopted increasingly aristocratic views. In his journals, he wrote "There is no form of rational and assured government save an aristocracy. A monarchy or a republic, based upon democracy, are equally absurd and feeble. The immense nausea of advertisements. There are but three beings worthy of respect: the priest, the warrior and the poet. To know, to kill and to create. The rest of mankind may be taxed and drudged, they are born for the stable, that is to say, to practise what they call professions."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Baudelaire#Politics

>D.H. Lawrence

Critic Terry Eagleton situates Lawrence on the radical right wing, as hostile to democracy, liberalism, socialism, and egalitarianism, though never formally embracing fascism, as he died before it reached its zenith. Lawrence's opinion of the masses is discussed in detail by Professor John Carey in The Intellectuals and the Masses (1992), and he quotes a 1908 letter from Lawrence to Blanche Jennings:

"If I had my way, I would build a lethal chamber as big as the Crystal Palace, with a military band playing softly, and a Cinematograph working brightly; then I'd go out in the back streets and main streets and bring them in, all the sick, the halt, and the maimed; I would lead them gently, and they would smile me a weary thanks; and the band would softly bubble out the "Hallelujah Chorus"."

More of Lawrence's political ideas can be seen in his letters to Bertrand Russell around the year 1915, where he voices his opposition to enfranchising the working class, his hostility to the burgeoning labour movements,and disparages the French Revolution, referring to "Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity" as the "three-fanged serpent." Rather than a republic, Lawrence called for an absolute Dictator and equivalent Dictatrix to lord over the lower peoples.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D._H._Lawrence#Philosophy.2C_religion_and_politics

Yeah, none of that sounds right-wing at all.

>>4985914
If I read you right: Yes, Hitler was democratically elected. Was the Reich egalitarian? No. Was Athens? Of course not. Is the US? Only recently has it been trying to be/putting on a show of it. But it is in fact not.

>SA
Something Awful?

>>4985923
Thas her job, yo.

>>4985950
>Dictatrix

>>4985861
>feminist
>uses oppressive -fag suffix
>still hasn't read the Benjamin essay

>>4985865
Is Gogol really right wing? He pretty much tears down the Tsarist Russia political/social structure of power in Dead Souls.

>>4985959
One of the standard things you learn about in a Russian history course weighted on the side of intellectual history is that Gogol did an about-face after Dead Souls and blew everyone's mind by becoming staunchly tsarist, pro-church, and even pro-serfdom, which even conservatives didn't like.

>>4985965
Forgot

Relevant thing to look up is Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends

>>4985959
>Gogol was stunned when The Government Inspector came to be interpreted by many, despite Nicholas I's patronage of the play, as an indictment of tsarism. In reality, Gogol himself was an adherent of the Slavophile movement and believed in a divinely inspired mission for both the House of Romanov and the Russian Orthodox Church. Similarly to Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Gogol sharply disagreed with those Russians who preached constitutional monarchy and the disestablishment of the Orthodox Church.

>After defending autocracy, serfdom, and the Orthodox Church in his book Selected Passages from Correspondence with his Friends, Gogol was attacked by his former patron Vissarion Belinsky. The first Russian intellectual to publicly preach the economic theories of Karl Marx, Belinsky accused Gogol of betraying his readership by defending the status quo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolai_Gogol#Politics

>>4985953
>>4985904

You are the most useless trip. At least Evola and REI have their autustic gimmick and Feminister is the token edgy leftist who for some reason finds more value in reading Stirner than Arendt, Spinoza, Leibniz, Hume, Deleuze and so on, but what the hell do you actually contribute aside from base, "liberal" centrist platitudes?

>>4985972
>liberal
See? You're not even reading a thing.
Fine with me though.

I believe Borges supported Videla and Pinochet and described himself as a "Spencerian (Herbert Spencer) anarchist" (i.e. a Social Darwinist).

>>4977839
It's just fundamentally the nature of things. Right wing people are fundamentally a reaction to change. In other words, the opposition to new creations and creativity. Reactionary is synonymous with right wing for a reason. The creator is trying to change things and create a new world rather than dwelling in and cherishing the past. The people naturally want to improve on the old. Why would creative types trend towards whatever nostalgic past reactionaries of the age have conjured up. The truth is right wing people who claim to treasure their culture so much ironically just have nothing to contribute.

>>4986062
This is dumb as shit. All change isn't necessarily good, and all change isn't necessarily left-wing.

I personally feel that the world would be a better place if we deported all minorities, implemented a program of eugenics, and executed most violent criminals. Do you agree? If not, why do you hate change?

>>4986104
These methods have been put into use for thousands of years and only recently have been rejected by mainstream society. The desire to implement these things is part of the right wing nostalgia for the past. Not just the methods themselves it must be mentioned but also the implicit values behind them. You aren't bringing anything new to the table. Change was perhaps the wrong word, but I stand behind new creations and creativity.

>>4977854
Nietzsche wasn't an existentialist.

>>4977688
>Turner Diaries
>Even once
Anyway read these big boys and then feel free to like down on the troglodytes who post here.
Nicolas Gomez Davila, Dominique Venner, Yukio Mishima, Evelyn Waugh, Julius Evola, Ernst Junger, Thomas Carlyle, Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, Donoso Cortes and Hans Herman Hoppe.

>>4986025
He was also raised by a father who like anarchists and while in Europe he wrote some praising pieces about the Russian revolution. Lived under tyrants, but for the most part probably just got sick of politics and ended up a middle of the road conservative.

>>4986116
So it is with forced redistribution of wealth and free sexuality.

Framing certain ideas as "change" is a good political tactic nowadays, but you shouldn't buy too much into it.

>>4985923
Maybe if you don't understand the real and significant distinctions between those ideas, and haven't read Sade's writings; to call Sade a leftist is simply incorrect.

>>4986116
OK, how about this? We kill everyone who isn't white. This obviously hasn't been done yet, seeing as there are plenty of non-white people, so why don't we try it? If there is only one race left, it will mean the end of racism (there will still be ethnic bigotry, but that will be easier to deal with by comparison). It will also be great for the environment.

Oh, and by the way, the commune is literally the most primitive form of social organization.