Traditionalist / Conservative / Reactionary Literature II

[Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo No.4191302]

Due to the popularity of the last two threads, I'm continuing our discussion of traditionalist / conservative / reactionary literature.

Last thread:
>>4188487

Some recent authors discussed:
>Oswald Spengler
>Carl Schmitt
>Yukio Mishima
>Joseph Conrad
>Wyndham Lewis
>D.H. Lawrence

DISCLAIMER: Please respect all global rules. Keep civil. Refrain from racism, shit-posting, /pol/ meme-spamming, etc. This thread is intended as a forum to discuss and recommend traditionalist/reactionary authors, literature, and philosophy.

NOTE TO JANITOR: This thread is posted in good faith, for the purpose of discussing a large subset of literature and philosophy. Threads on anarchist and socialist literature appear fairly regularly on /lit/. Any shitposting should be the responsibility of those who shitpost, not those seeking civil conversation. Thanks again.

[Anonymous No.4191318]

Rough draft of a right-wing lit infographic from an Anon in the previous thread.

[Anonymous No.4191342]

[Anonymous No.4191359]

>>4191318

Others might disagree, but I'd argue that Hesse's The Glass Bead Game belongs on that list.

It's a utopian future in which technological "progress" seems tightly controlled, academics are protected by a elite group of secular monastics, and the Catholic church holds considerable influence.

[Anonymous No.4191364]

>>4191359

Also, the two main character are based on Nietzsche and Jacob Burckhardt.

[Anonymous No.4191366]

>>4191364

Speaking of which --

I'd add this book to the list, too.

[Anonymous No.4191373]

>>4191318
it just bothers me so much that people would actually go on labelling great writers according to their political affinities. What's the point? Céline, Conrad, Lawrance and such are just as good if you dont bring out their wretched political opinions. This is yet another ridiculous excess of our era's desperate need for communitarianism

[Anonymous No.4191374]

>>4191302
Why do you KEEP PUTTING MISHIMA UP THERE.

[Anonymous No.4191384]

>>4191359
>>4191364
added.

[Anonymous No.4191387]

I'm not sure if these threads are a part of some le red pilling raid, having 4 of the same threads on the front page and using the excuse of "it's on topic" to justify it. If it were restricted to one I wouldn't bat an eye.

Though that's not to say that the hourly Zizek threads are any better.

[Anonymous No.4191392]

>>4191318

How is Journey to the End of the Night right wing? I'm only a third of the way through so no spoilers please

[Anonymous No.4191393]

>>4191387

OP here.

No, there's no campaign underfoot. I started a new thread because the last one was reaching its bump limit.

Given that it garnered almost 300 posts within a 24-hour period, I figured it was worth continuing the discussion.

The other thread (I only count 3 on the front page) is an off-shoot started by another Anon.

[Anonymous No.4191396]

>>4191392
Guess what, it's not. Great literature isn't fucking atlas shrugged, it doesn't promote a political ideology; reason why these threads are shi-

[Anonymous No.4191399]

>>4191393
>>4191346
You wouldn't mind that /lit/ turns into /pol/? why don't you take your crap threads there then?

[Anonymous No.4191403]

>>4191392

Like a lot of writers, Celine shifted right as he matured. He sided with the Nazis during the war. He was also a life-long Holocaust denier.

[Anonymous No.4191411]

>>4191403
"like a lot of writers"
nope

[Anonymous No.4191412]

>>4191399
/lit/ is the right place to discuss Moore's utopia as a satire of the incipient liberalism within humanism. And Moore burnt plenty of radical heretics. Fucking reactionary Moore.

[Anonymous No.4191415]

What are some secular argmuents for social conservativism?

[Anonymous No.4191422]

>>4191399

Like we discussed in the last thread, the notion that /lit/ will somehow become a /pol/-like gutter shit-hole because of a few civil threads devoted to conservative literature is a bit histrionic.

As long as people are respectful and abide by the global rules of 4chan, there's no reason why this thread -- and others like -- should exist.

Especially when you consider the number of threads devoted to anarchist and leftist literature.

[Anonymous No.4191423]

Daily reminder that when you commit to right wing traditionalism you loop round to left wing anarchism and vice versa

Manichaean babbies

[Anonymous No.4191425]

>>4191403
Unlike a lot of writers his brain deteriorated in a faster pace than usual, as he got older, he was, in fact, turning into an old bitter fart, who was angry at the children for being happy.

[Anonymous No.4191428]

>>4191422
* this thread -- and others like it -- shouldn't exist.

>forgiveness prease

[Anonymous No.4191433]

>>4191425

Totally agree. I don't particularly like Celine. But he was undeniably conservative.

[Anonymous No.4191439]

>>4191403

I know Celine was right-wing, but that doesn't answer the question.

[Anonymous No.4191460]

>>4191439

I'm guessing that some feel his fiction exposes the inherent rot and corruption of modern society, as well as the idiocy of notions like
"democracy" and "progress," which are significant components to most right-wing literature.

See Wyndham Lewis, Evelyn Waugh, Saki, et al for other examples.

[Anonymous No.4191461]

Conservatism is a purely aesthetic movement. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

[Anonymous No.4191462]

>>4191433
>If you had read Céline properly, you would understand that he, along with other writers of his time, doesn't give a shit about politics, and actually despises all sort of political commitment. They are not writing propaganda, but doing art.
–anon

[Anonymous No.4191474]

>>4191461
No but it's shit aesthetics since they require people suffer, I prefer progressive aesthetics.

[Anonymous No.4191480]

>>4191460

Oh, there's another for the list, actually:

Evelyn Waugh

Though which work best represents his conservative views?

Black Mischief
Put Out More Flags
Decline and Fall
Vile Bodies
A Handful of Dust

My vote would be for Black Mischief.

If only because of based Basil Seal.

[Anonymous No.4191483]

>>4191462
>TFW someone else quoted you, danke my bruder

>>4191460
That isn't enough to qualify him as a "conservative". Every modernist writer, with the exception of Joyce maybe, loathed modernity. In fact, even all the romantics hated their form of modernity. Literature reacts against its time and has always done so, are you just gonna put every good writer in that chart?

[Anonymous No.4191484]

>>4191462
>They are not writing propaganda, but doing art.

All propaganda is art.
--Orwell

[Anonymous No.4191494]

>>4191484
i think you got the quote the other way around
and Orwell has a very marxist interpretation there, which doesn't really reflect our argument.

[Anonymous No.4191495]

>>4191474

>implying people suffer less under the rule of "progressives"

tippity toppity tip top kek

[Anonymous No.4191497]

>>4191495
The world is statistically better than ever.

[Anonymous No.4191500]

>>4191497
Statistically?

[Anonymous No.4191505]

>>4191500
Yes, take a reading of health, wealth, infant mortality, average life span. It's all better than ever. Despite America is crashing hard.

[Anonymous No.4191507]

>>4191495
>>4191497
>>4191500
Here we go again. Let's not discuss about books and how it's a fucking pity to label authors, but rather get into another endless political argument

[Anonymous No.4191511]

how the fuck is dh lawrence right wing, nigga writes about poor people living shit lives down coal mines

[Anonymous No.4191513]

Would we consider Nabokov a conservative?

I'm confused at Bulgakov's inclusion as well.
Are classical Liberals being considered conservative?

Also: I would love some readings re: Traditionalism, as it's something I haven't heard of, but sounds interesting.

Also: We should include Joseph Campbell

[Anonymous No.4191515]

>>4191507
Isn't this political philosophy and literature?

[Anonymous No.4191524]

>>4191515
No.
It's /lit/ - Literature; philosophy of language, moral and ethics, ontology, and epistemology are allowed - not poli sci, because it sucks balls.

[Anonymous No.4191528]

>>4191524
Fuck off, like you bourgeois pigs never argue the capitalist stance in Marxism threads. Still you're just evading, because you know your belief in Atlantis and Aryans is bullshit.

[Anonymous No.4191531]

>>4191528
wat
did you actually get what i said? did you even bother to follow the thread?

[Anonymous No.4191533]

>>4191531
What thread? This trainwreck of idiocy?

[Anonymous No.4191538]

>>4191528
>>4191533
Wow, you sound butthurt.

[Anonymous No.4191540]

>>4191533
now you are just making a fool of yourself bro
thanks for reminding me that the far left is as bad as the far right

[Anonymous No.4191541]

What about Heidegger?

[Anonymous No.4191543]

I haven't read much Spengler but I would argue that Mann's Death in Venice is in line with his civilization model, acknowledging the rise of winter while foreboding its ends.

Despite Spengler's book being released 6 years after, it did apparently have an impact on Mann

[Anonymous No.4191545]

>>4191483

> Every modernist writer, with the exception of Joyce maybe, loathed modernity.

Agreed.

The difference, in my opinion, is that most liberal authors dwell in the sadness and melancholy that's resulted from modernity, with the belief that either a) life is necessarily melancholy and there's nothing we can do about it or b) we haven't "progressed" enough to pull ourselves out of the shit ditch we've fallen into yet, but with more "compassion" and "understanding" we'll eventually get there one day.

On the other hand, right-wing authors like Celine and Waugh fiercely and joyously dismiss the notion that modern life could ever be reformed or progressed or whatever, and they make relentless fun of those who attempt to do so -- especially by exposing their hidden hypocrisies, etc. They also tend to see life as either high tragedy or comedy, but rarely as a melancholy thing-that-must-be-endured.

[Anonymous No.4191546]

I'm reading the Hammonds' _Village Labourer,_ a master piece of early social history. If you are historically trained to a 2nd year level, I strongly suggest you read it if you're a conservative. (1911 edition, the 1913 edition deletes the first chapter on the ancient regime in England).

It shows how "Tories" as liberals enclosed land and destroyed the basis of real conservatism in England. The first modern enclosure sealed the fate of England: that the Tories would adopt Manchester School ideologies.

[Anonymous No.4191547]

>>4191538
Wow, I'm not, can't you even defend your views without resorting to name-calling? At least, we Marxists take our time to explain ourselves?

[Anonymous No.4191553]

>>4191540
Ok bro, we don't like petit-bourgeois like you anyways.

[Anonymous No.4191557]

As an anarcho-syndicalist, I think we can all get along.

[Anonymous No.4191567]

>>4191547
>Calls everyone bourgeois pigs
>hurr stahp saying I'm butthurt
>acting like a vexed child over different views

Stay mad, faggot.

[Anonymous No.4191568]

>>4191545
>They also tend to see life as either high tragedy or comedy,

As a side note, this might explain why reactionary authors are generally better than those who identify as liberals -- or at least more PASSIONATE.

It seems that most contemporary American "liberal-approved" literature spends an inordinate amount of time poking at the cold noodle melancholy of our day-to-day upper-middle-class lives. There's plenty of sadness in these works, but very little passionate action.

[Anonymous No.4191569]

>>4191545
So right wing authors are essentially euphoric fedoras?

[Anonymous No.4191571]

>>4191547
Can you explain why kids love the cinnamon taste of Cinnamon Toast Crunch?

Also, why Marx reduced every action undertaken on a large scale throughout history to a matter of economic motivation when this is clearly bullshit?

[Anonymous No.4191572]

>>4191567
"Oink oink" is all I hear.

[Anonymous No.4191578]

>>4191557

Every anarcho-syndicalist should get a minimum wage job at a plastic molding factory, then a job on a small farm, then a job as a retail clerk, and finally a job at a bustling law firm or finance company.

Once they meet enough people from enough different walks of life, they'll realize how impossible their ideology is to put in practice.

Source: I once identified as an anarcho-syndiclist, too.

[Anonymous No.4191579]

>>4191569

2/10 try harder

[Anonymous No.4191581]

>>4191571
So the leisure-class never wanted to hold on to what made their leisure possible?
The rest is just comic book tier euphemisms.

[Anonymous No.4191589]

>>4191578
For whatever it's worth, I'm actually an "anarchist-without-adjectives" but think that the economy that would most likely arise organically in a stateless society would be a sort of bastard child of syndicalism and mutualism, but I didn't want to derail the thread further, and anarcho-syndicalism is closer than most anything else I could say quickly.

[Anonymous No.4191594]

>>4191318
Just because the writers are conservative doesn't necessarily make the literature so, although I don't doubt you are aware of this and are simply labeling most of them "right" or "reactionary" to artificially benefit your politics.

[Anonymous No.4191597]

>>4191318
I'd say we include either Evola's Ride The Tiger or his 'Men Among Ruins' or maybe even both. R.O.T. is his most philosophic work but M.A.R. is his political traditionalist manifesto.
Furthermore this list needs Guenon, perhaps include his 'Reign of Quantity and the signs of the times'

[Anonymous No.4191598]

>>4191581
>So the leisure-class never wanted to hold on to what made their leisure possible?
Good job building a man of straw. I said not every action ever taken on a grand scale was for that reason. I didn't claim the opposite extreme, that no action was ever undertaken for that reason.

[Anonymous No.4191600]

>>4191373
I'd disagree that a author's politics aren't worth acknowledging since many times it's reflected in their writing. It's naive to think of an author's work as being purely apolitical. Shakespeare wrote about Queen Elizabeth, Steinbeck wrote on topics of socialism etc.

[Anonymous No.4191601]

>>4191594
I'd like to add its retarded to put modern political identity buzzword labels on people of old.

[Anonymous No.4191605]

>>4191601
Someone who wants to read about an ideology will probably want to read about people who influenced that ideology.

[Anonymous No.4191608]

Don't call out /pol/ and expect us not to come a play

We are always watching

[Anonymous No.4191613]

>>4191608
Gas the kiks race war now

[Anonymous No.4191614]

>>4191598
>I said not every action ever taken on a grand scale was for that reason.

What are you 12? You accuse Marx of thinking in extremes?

[Anonymous No.4191618]

>>4191608
Lel tough guy.

[Anonymous No.4191621]

[Anonymous No.4191623]

>>4191605
Sounds like an idiotic thing to do, maybe you believe to much in thoughts that are not your own then.

[Anonymous No.4191625]

>>4191614
In science, the criteria for determining the validity of a theory is much more rigorous than in metaphysics and such. The second Marx started talking of science, he entered a field where a single counter-example can be devastating.

[Anonymous No.4191628]

[Anonymous No.4191629]

>>4191623
...What?

First, I'm not a conservative. Second, what? Why would you not want to know about history? Why would you not want to understand the basis of the ideas you're reading about?

[Anonymous No.4191633]

>>4191621
Obviously the Chinese one. They can't do anything right.

[Anonymous No.4191634]

>>4191302
Thats the worst name I've ever heard

[Anonymous No.4191635]

>>4191629
Like its all about people you don't know, like you don't know if hitler even existed if it's not all just a Judeo-Bolshevik lie.

[Anonymous No.4191638]

>>4191589

No prob. Didn't mean to offend. I have strong affinity toward mutualism, too -- but I'm too old to believe it's possible without a strong system of defense to protect against those who'd seek to derail the community through a) greed or b) some inborn impulse to destroy. Anarchism cannot provide the type of defense needed.

[Anonymous No.4191644]

>>4191633
>Dissing China
Uncool. It's not their fault Mao fucked their shit up and ruined their culture.

[Anonymous No.4191645]

>>4191366
As a Traditionalist Catholic, i dislike the worship of the Renaissance since it puts down the influence of the Middle Ages in western civilization.

Actually, the Renaissance in Italy was a much less interesting period in literature, philosophy and science that it is considered by anti-clerical writers. It only excelled in visual arts.

[OP No.4191650]

>>4191608

If you want to participate ITT, that's fine -- but be civil, follow the global rules, and keep on topic.

This is /lit/. We're discussing literature.

Any shitposting -- whether it's subhuman /pol/-tier or screeching SJW tumblr-tier -- will be reported.

Thanks.

[OP No.4191664]

>>4191634

[Anonymous No.4191667]

>>4191645

Totally agree. If you haven't read Burckhardt, you'd love him.

[Marxist No.4191668]

>>4191598
You strawmanned Marx mate. Lets stop building harvest dolls and get down to gleaning.

[Anonymous No.4191670]

>>4191318
>>4191597
Definitely need Guenon.
Are we just using Political works/fictions?

[Marxist No.4191672]

>>4191625
>The second Marx started talking of science
I think you'll find it is Engels who considered his work scientific. Methodologically Marx is rather humble in his claims.

[Anonymous No.4191675]

>>4191670

Maybe the list should be broken down into categories, i.e. fiction, poetry, history, essays, et al.

[Anonymous No.4191678]

>>4191318
>all of that good literature
>contaminated by the presence of kaczynski's manifesto

[Marxist No.4191680]

>>4191675
>>4191675
One of the problems with history is that the "right" is liberal-whig in complexion, and the centre, and a shit load of people who claim to be "progressive" in some sense.

There are few anti-Enlightenment reactionaries, fewer even than actual Marxist marxists in historiography.

Also, there tends to be a rather pained detestation of historiography amongst rank-and-file reactionaries; as if using the diaries of peasants in the 19th century is somehow "insulting" the culture of the West. (Never mind the claims that the actual right makes regarding repositories of culture...; I really do not get the dissonance of the truly conservative movement.)

[Anonymous No.4191681]

> These aren't /pol/ threads!
> /pol/ ideology
> /pol/ posters

what more do we need?

[Anonymous No.4191683]

>>4191678

>implying it doesn't offer one of the best criticisms of the contemporary left

Everyone should read it. Especially those who want to improve the left.

[Anonymous No.4191685]

>>4191664
Hey, joey joe joe!!

[Anonymous No.4191686]

>>4191594
You're right, but imagine if /pol/tards started reading Celine and Eliot. This might be a good thing.

[Anonymous No.4191689]

Could Michel Houellebecq be considered a contemporary reactionary writer?

[Anonymous No.4191692]

What you're witnessing with these threads is the final cry of the right. It's normal to retreat into the mystical when all hope is lost.

[Anonymous No.4191693]

>>4191686
You'll need an IQ over 85 to comprehend.

[OP No.4191694]

>>4191685

[Anonymous No.4191698]

>>4191680
I disliked marxist historiography (like the Annales School, which pretty much made me drop out of college) because it is boring. I'm not interested in 16th century french cheesemakers.

[Anonymous No.4191700]

>>4191689

Probably.

[Anonymous No.4191704]

>>4191692
If i wanted to be on the winning side of history i would be a liberal progressive. But since i was a kid i always supported the underdogs.

[Anonymous No.4191705]

>>4191680
This thread isn't about the liberal-whig complexion its entire purpose is to find traditionalists who aren't that, who look above and beyond such bourgeoisie ideals

Evola has a historiography so does Yockey so does Spengler, so does Carlyle; all these men are in the reactionary/traditionalist camp. I'm not sure what you're getting at.

[Anonymous No.4191706]

>>4191692
>m-m-maybe if i s-say this on /lit/ someone will think its true

[Marxist No.4191710]

>>4191698
I am glad that you say "dislike," rather than "disbelieve."

Proper conservative historiography needs to be similarly detailed btw. CHEESEMAKERS FOR EVERYONE.

[Anonymous No.4191711]

>>4191705

And based Burckhardt. Can't forget him.

[Marxist No.4191712]

>>4191705
I'm suggesting that when compiling a list of conservative historiography; that merely being "right wing" is insufficient criteria to enter a historical text in the reading list.

And so, that it will be a hard list to compile because of the small numbers of historians working with such an ideology, even within the right of historiography.

More, there's the general "Cheesemaker" problem with history. Most historians write detailed studies. You're probably going to find the most fruitful ground for reactionary historiography in biography tbh.

[Anonymous No.4191714]

>>4191706
I get it dude. You NEED it to be the Kali Yuga in order to justify your personal and political failings. It's alright. Fantasy is a well-known defense mechanism.

[Anonymous No.4191725]

>>4191714
>leftists calling conservatives "failures"
>implying leftism isn't a systemic celebration of personal failure

let's keep the focus on literature, friend

[Anonymous No.4191727]

>>4191725

> makes equally bullshit, generalist claims about leftism
> let's keep the focus on literature, friend
> pretending this isn't a thinly veiled pseudo intellectual /pol/ it's habbedig thread

Tippest of Top Keks

[Anonymous No.4191730]

>>4191727
>equally bullshit

There's no "bullshit" in pointing out the psychological aspect of basing ideologies around mysticism. It's important to remember that such escapism is just a method of avoiding responsibility.

[Anonymous No.4191731]

>>4191727

If you read what's been written in this thread and the last, you'd see that's not the case. People are discussing literature. If you don't want to engage, feel free to hide the thread.

[Anonymous No.4191733]

>>4191725
>a systemic celebration of personal failure

This would imply that it's possible for 314 million people to sustain their lives (speaking for 'murica) independently of governmental assistance. That the same opportunities are available to all of them. AKA fantasy.

[Anonymous No.4191735]

>>4191730
What part is mystical exactly? How is left ideology escapism from responsibility?

[Anonymous No.4191736]

>>4191731

Just because the words have been printed in books doesn't mean this discussion, given its aims, content and target audience, would be better suited to /pol/.

[Anonymous No.4191739]

>>4191736

would not*

[Anonymous No.4191744]

>>4191735
Have you read the likes of Evola and Guenon? They literally believe that we're in an age where things are specifically meant to be "degenerate" and nihilistic. Think of how dangerous that ideology is: let's just sit back and meditate, patricians, all is well according to the spiritual clock! Evola has a book on magick for Christ's sake. Grown arse men practicing magick.

I mean, let's not pretend these ideas aren't fucking ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.4191755]

>>4191736

> its aims
Are stated in the OP:

"This thread is intended as a forum to discuss and recommend traditionalist/reactionary authors, literature, and philosophy."

> content
Mostly follows the threads' above-stated aims.

> target audience
This thread was posted on /lit/ for the readers of /lit/. Given the fact that it's one of the most bumped threads, with many interesting and apposite replies (from people on both sides on the political spectrum), I'd say it's a success.

>better suited to /pol/
This is the best board for civil, respectful discussions about literature. The notion that /lit/ will suddenly fall to the huns of /pol/ because of one or two threads about conservative books is a bit histrionic.

[Marxist-Leninist-Maoist !quM58wnvXA No.4191766]

Not literature, but Weber is a dick. Some consider him to be reactionary. Try some of him?

[Anonymous No.4191775]

>>4191712
My problem with micro-history is that it blurs everything outside the scope of the historian. That's why i prefer history done by people like Spengler (and Braudel, to mention a non-reactionary).

Of course, Spengler is very wrong about many things he is not a specialist about, but the quantitative fact that he knows something about everything compensates and makes him superior than someone who is a specialist in XIXth century british peasants and know jack shit about anything else.

[Marxist No.4191797]

>>4191775
The macro historical conclusions I want to draw I care deeply about demonstrating or refuting (as I would expect every historian would).

The problem for me is that I see the only way to conduct such a macro-historical analysis being on the back of rigorous micro-historical studies. The process of ideological formation in the children of the working class in Czechoslovak Universities in the early 1960s is of great interest, for example, to an analysis of the soviet-style societies, and thus to the potential trajectories of capitalism.

I am completely sure of the account of the transition away from feudal relations of corvee and tithe to industrial society. This was the work of two hundred years of analysis. Good work.

I lack the experience to be able to answer _other_ questions, and so seek micro-history first.

One of the key problems I have with any macro-history, any survey work, is that I feel that they are too distanced from the texts and that their exegeses fall into replicating the theory held by the writer; that the texts become eisegeses.

I am looking, for example, at Hobsbawm for example; and, decrying the very idea of the "Ages of" series.

YMMV: if you don't touch archives it ain't history for me.

[Anonymous No.4191804]

>>4191474
There is no ideology or orientation that doesn't cause suffering somewhere.

[Anonymous No.4191808]

>>4191415
I'm a secularist and I base my beliefs off our evolutionary history and commonalities between societies in recorded history. Needless to say I'm a strong traditionalist.

[Anonymous No.4191812]

>>4191415
A lot ot of them stem from a pessimistic view. They tend to think tinkering is likely to make shit even worse. That's why a lot of pessimistically inclined authors (Schopenhauer, Celine, Cioran to name a few) end up conservative or reactionary.

[Anonymous No.4191831]

>>4191541
he just is as he is, thrown into the world

[Anonymous No.4191832]

>>4191812
I would say that conservatism leads to pessimism, not the other way around.

[Anonymous No.4191835]

>>4191497
dont forget to check individual variance

[Anonymous No.4191841]

is it that conservatives tend to be idealists, or is it that they have appropriated idealism in response to historical materialism, or is it that idealism tends to foster conservatism?

[Anonymous No.4191844]

>>4191841
They are not idealists at all. They are traditionalists.

[Anonymous No.4191846]

>>4191318
>Unabomber
>Conservative
I really don't see how being an anarchist is fucking right wing.

[Anonymous No.4191854]

>>4191846

>2013
>thinking k. is an anarchist

he's the most radical of traditionalists, bro. a step up from linkola.

don't conflate him with that hippie fuck zerzan.

[Anonymous No.4191859]

>>4191844
>They are traditionalists.
...which is a subset of idealists.

[Anonymous No.4191862]

Posting again:
http://orgyofthewill.net/

[Anonymous No.4191864]

>>4191862
>open this
>ORGY OF THE WILL and nothing else appears across the screen in giant capital letters
>a million bad things run through my mind
>close tab

[Anonymous No.4191868]

>>4191399
>implying most of /pol/ cares about literature
I've talked to a few anons on there who knew Evola and Ludovici, but most people just seem to be there to discuss the Happening and post scheming_jew.jpg variants.

[Anonymous No.4191869]

>>4191846
Might hve something to do with his thoughts on modern leftism.

[Anonymous No.4191874]

>>4191399
>pople dont agree with me
>where's my Kafka thread

Get fucked, /pol/ and /int/ will conquer this board and theres shit you'll do about it, kike.

[Anonymous No.4191878]

>>4191874
please no

[Anonymous No.4191882]

What's with all that /pol/ retards infecting /lit/?

One doesn't necessary need to be reactionary/right-wing to read this.

I hope this doesn't turn into a board talking crap and reading sasha grey's nooks.

[OP No.4191883]

>>4191874

Reported.

Keep it civil or get the fuck back to /pol/, peasant.

[Anonymous No.4191885]

>>4191883
Suck a dick, nigger.

[Anonymous No.4191888]

>>4191868
I think that's because most people that are into literature and philosophy tend to be left wingers. Leftists see the world as it should be, and rightists see the world as it is.

[Anonymous No.4191889]

>>4191885
>being this edgy

[Anonymous No.4191890]

>>4191874
Please leave. We were supposed to keep it civil and discuss ideas and books. Please don't make me report this thread, it's really good so far
Please, Anon, keep it civil ;_;

[Anonymous No.4191895]

>>4191878
Discuss literature in an acceptable fashion, or die. This board is awful for those who dont want to only discuss zeek or kafka or camus.

[Anonymous No.4191900]

>>4191890
There is no discussion here. That's the point. It's academia on a shit, lonely, worthless board.

[Anonymous No.4191901]

>>4191885
la reporte façe quand

[Anonymous No.4191911]

>>4191497


thanks to what?

i would charge that instrumental advances have been masking the effects of increasingly deleterious social and civil conventions. we need look no further to perceive this dynamic than the spectacle of once thriving american cities and burroughs deteriorate into haunted waste-lands, in spite of its ostensible position as an economic super power.


to put it to the point, how has the progs favored political tool, the african american, fared under benevolent progressive strictures? statistically speaking, he is WORSE off socio-economically than he was 60 years ago prior to desegregation (ie, spaces where he could compete, that created jobs for him), the only real difference is... technology...

[OP No.4191936]

>>4191888

> I think that's because most people that are into literature and philosophy tend to be left wingers.

That might be true today.

It probably wasn't always the case, though.

I'm not saying that the publishing industry, which is almost entirely run by leftists, formed a conspiracy against right-wing literature -- but I'm sure pressures from the left (especially within academia) have kept some authors from mainstream publication and critical promotion.

Almost all contemporary fiction that's celebrated in the New York Times, for example, fits within the liberal comfort-zone. They wouldn't dare exult any book that defies pop media's soft bans against sexist, racism, etc.

When you exclude these types of books from participating in the world of "high literature" (as opposed to pulp doggerel, which is almost never covered and much more conservative), is there really any wonder that conservative readers don't engage in discussions about American contemp. lit.?

[Anonymous No.4191937]

>>4191911
In terms of socio-economics, POC have improved greatly. But i'll admit there's a caveat, and that's that while a good portion have experienced improvements in their respective social and economic status, the other portions still remains ravaged by the acts of the Europeans and Americans in the 16th century on.

I wouldn't say the clear difference is technology, I'd argue that the difference in the contemporary society is that the POC who have succeeded, (I believe "buppie" is an increasingly common term--black-yuppie) have turned to conservatism and are now apologists to those in their race that have not had the same opportunities and are stuck in the confines of the "ghetto."

[OP No.4191940]

>>4191890

Don't report the thread; report the poster.

[OP No.4191967]

>>4191940

Actually, I take that back:

After reporting that shitposter from /pol/, I was issued a ban warning myself for "false or misclassified reports."

Now I'm not sure what to do.

If the Janitor (or a Mod) is here, I'd appreciate some clarification.

So far they've been doing a good job at keeping this thread civil.

[OP No.4191975]

>>4191967

Oh, never mind. I suppose it had something to do with the fact that I *stated* I was reporting him ITT.

[Anonymous No.4191979]

>>4191967
You were warned for replying to a thread saying you've reported a post.

[OP No.4191986]

>>4191979

Got it. Thanks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whadmRePr_8

[Anonymous No.4192079]

>>4191808
Could you go explain further?

>>4191812
>>4191832
That is a coincidence far more than an argument.

[Anonymous No.4192085]

>>4192079
It's not. If you're an Hegelian who thinks ratio rules the universe and history is working towards some delicious end state then progress is good. If you're a Schopenhauerian who thinks humans are shitheads guided by blind desire who nearly can't help fucking everything up then change will quite possibly lead to something worse.

[Anonymous No.4192094]

http://heartiste.wordpress.com

[Anonymous No.4192090]

>>4191937


the most relevant ravaging is directly causal to decolonization, inflicting democracy on africa was perhaps the worst thing possible (for them).

i want to say 'worst while still in good faith' to exempt outright warfare and the like, but to be honest i truly question the concern at work here to begin with. i do not see ideas of 'democracy' or 'equality' as noble at all, but vile expressions of psychic weakness. the leveling tendency is the last resort of the solipsistic narcissist unable to rationalize away their failings, their lack of ability and virtue, yet still satisfying that desire for control, for mastery, to see their vision of righteousness cover the globe (even if [or in this case, especially if] it is vicarious). the poor and downtrodden, mere props for validating the ego, the imposition of the system is self-indulgence.

and what of the response when faced with failure to meet objectives? horror? introspection? moral reevaluation? three times it is no, rather, the old insecure canard, more rationalization, 'it must have been someone or something elses fault', were it not, that would be a devalalidation of the self, and the solipsist cannot do this without a more transcendent context (ultimately, this sentiment leads back to gnosticism, if the ideals cannot be of this plane, then existence itself is *moraly flawed*).

the truth is, the revolution has already happened, the people who influence and administer society today are by overwhelming majority belivers in these ideals, societies failings are their failings. and how has this come about? who is around to say otherwise? modern society tolerates only variations on a theme, if you desire moral excelence, only one real choice is offered, to be called a communist is a joke, a 'fascist' or the like, a mortal condemnation.


so indeed, a caste of mulattos and octaroons have been siezed up and thrust into positions through quotas and the like, certainly we can say positively that there are more high profile 'blacks' in business and public office, more black graduates. but is this not mere white wash? has the black community, blacks themselves changed? indeed they have changed, but are burned out ghettoes, broken homes, and gangster culture emblematic of 'popular government'?

i would say that it is?

[Anonymous No.4192097]

[Anonymous No.4192102]

>>4192097

Coming along nicely, Anon.

[Anonymous No.4192104]

>>4191318
Why is kazninsk on there? Hes an anracho-primitivist.

[Anonymous No.4192111]

>>4192104

No, Zirzan is an anarcho-primitivist.

K. is a radical traditionalist.

Zirzan's essentially coopted K.'s platform and tried adapting it to fit within the left-leaning anarchist community. It's fucking disgusting.

[Anonymous No.4192118]

>>4192111
I was not aware of that. I just assumed that K was a Luddite who wants to go back to nature. Secondly, in relation to other reactionary, where would he be placed at? I really think we need to map out the right wind and place all these authors on some 2D Cartesian plane for coherence.

[Anonymous No.4192120]

>>4192111

Just to be clear:

Most of the difference has to do with their position on what constitutes a sustainable communities. Zirzan wants to somehow bring us back to a primitivist time. K., on the other hand, has positive things to say about most societies that keep themselves free from the influence of Western "Enlightenment." He praised the social cohesion of medieval China, for example. To me, this position makes much more sense.

Zirzan, on the other hand, is a star-child crypto-leftist hippie idiot.

[Anonymous No.4192154]

>>4192097
i'll have to check out a few of these

[Anonymous No.4192281]

He's a bit more revolutionary than reactionary (like most fascist movements really) but Corneliu Zelea Codreanu's "To My Legionaries".

[Anonymous No.4192297]

No Pat Buchanan? Paul Gottfried? It's worth checking out paleo-libertarian/conservative works.

[Anonymous No.4192298]

>>4191600
Shakespeare wrote about politics. But he never took a stand in his writing.

[Anonymous No.4192301]

>>4192281
added to the infographic, thanks

[Anonymous No.4192304]

>>4192297
any specific titles in mind?
>inb4 you haven't actually read them

[Anonymous No.4192306]

>>4191373
So conservatism = communitarianism?

[Anonymous No.4192307]

>>4192097

[Anonymous No.4192309]

>>4192304
>Leo Strauss and the American Conservative Movement
>Death of The West

[Anonymous No.4192314]

If we're willing to put Pat Buchanan on there, I wouldn't mind seeing some Andrew Bacevich on there.

But he's might be too far to the left for you all (and to be fair more an immediate political author, less a theoretician)

[Anonymous No.4192330]

>>4192314
it makes it easier if you can name a specific work

[Anonymous No.4192351]

>>4192307
cmon guys, any possible additions? fiction could use some more suggestions. make /lit/ history and whatnot, actually help out the board for once.

[Anonymous No.4192359]

>>4192307
Cioran, Donoso Cortes' Essays, Hobbes, Mosley (maybe), Gentile, Nietzsche maybe?, Sorel's Reflections on Violence

[Anonymous No.4192423]

>>4192359
can you name any specific works for mosley or cioran?

[Anonymous No.4192427]

>>4192351
Possibly:
>Kipling
>CS Lewis
>FT Marinetti
>Thomas Mann, after Weinmar he went left.
>HL Menckin
>Marianne Moor
>Alexander Solzhenitsyn
>Robert Heinlan
>Mircea Eliade

I got this off a blog btw.

[Anonymous No.4192429]

>>4192307
>the Cantos
>fiction

Really?

Get a poetry section you fucking plebeians.

[Anonymous No.4192432]

>>4192351
something by Alain de Benoist maybe?

[Anonymous No.4192434]

>>4192429
I mean, that's the only book of poetry on there

[Anonymous No.4192452]

are we talking about gassing the jews yet?

[Anonymous No.4192457]

i know you guys like the foreplay but let's get down to business, we all know what's this about

[Anonymous No.4192458]

>>4192423
Short History of Decay might be the most representative of Cioran

Mosley is controversial, he'd probably be relatively unknown if not for his fame from the BUF. If you do add him, I'd recommend The Alternative, but also possibly The Greater Britain (for which he's probably more famous). http://www.oswaldmosley.com/the-alternative/

Also Ortega y Gasset's Revolt of the Masses

>>4192432
This too

[Anonymous No.4192459]

>>4192434
>only book of poetry on there

Plebeians, I'm fucking telling you.

[Anonymous No.4192461]

Also
http://www.oswaldmosley.com/people/

[Anonymous No.4192464]

>>4192452
Not yet, lets gte our party doctrine down first.

[Anonymous No.4192479]

http://home.alphalink.com.au/~radnat/spengler/prussianism.html

Has anyone read this and want to discuss it with me?

[Anonymous No.4192480]

>>4191936
>pop media's soft bans against racism, sexism etc.
You don't actually follow pop media huh?

good for you

[Anonymous No.4192482]

>>4192464
>1. meet up at the beer hall
>2. combine nationalism with socialism
>3. ????
>4. gas da joos

[Anonymous No.4192487]

>>4192480
Basically that video was accused of being 'rapey' because it has a white guy in it, and you can't really accuse all the black rappers of promoting rape and forced prostitution. So thanks for proving out point.

As Erin Burnette said,
>I'm not ingnorant on what goes on in rapland, BUT [I'm going to blame Robin Thicke instead].

Since not

[pti No.4192492]

>>4192434
put Yeats and Pope in at least

[Anonymous No.4192497]

>>4192487
No it wasn't you moron, literally no-one brought up the race of Robin Thicke

it was because of the line "I know you want it" and the general gist of the song being that a woman seemed to have refused Robin Thicke sex and he was insisting/ignoring this

[Anonymous No.4192502]

>>4192497
The only moron is you with your knee jerk reaction who cant comprehend people may disagree with you and be reasonable.

>>has a white guy in it, and you can't really accuse all the black rappers of promoting rape and forced prostitution. So thanks for proving out point.

If you cant see what point he's trying to get across theres no hope for you.

[Anonymous No.4192503]

>>4191868
>discussing authors discussing the fall of the west and degeneracy
>not the quintessential habbedign thread

[Anonymous No.4192507]

>>4192497
Why would they bring up that they're singling him out because of his race? People don't go around saying "i'm a bigot" or "i'm lying".

The point is they don't accuse black rappers of doing the same thing over and over.

When a New Zealand girl complained about American pop music promoting degeneracy (things that don't work for young people) in her song, a white Hispanic feminist complained about how it was anti-black racism.

Who's accused of being the most sexist in America? Not ghetto thugs.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/09/showbiz/lorde-royals-racism-spat/

[Anonymous No.4192531]

>>4192502
>>4192507
Sexism was a flashpoint of the controversy over gangsta rap in the '90s.

Nobody talks about it any more because a) mainstream rappers have toned it down b) the debate got played out and boring.

[Anonymous No.4192563]

>>4191484
But is all art propaganda?

[Anonymous No.4192567]

>>4192307


>allan bloom

neocons pls go.


but, potential additions.

economics: 'anti-fragile' by nassim taleb; 'the fatal conceit' by hayek; '23 things they dont tell you about capitalism' and 'bad samaritans' by ha-joon chang; 'the truth in money book' by ted thoren; 'The 7 Deadly Innocent Frauds of Economic Policy ' by warren mosler.

cultural/philosophical: 'three rival versions of moral inquiry' and 'dependent rational animals' by alasdair macintyre; 'liberty or equality' by Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn; 'the revolt against civilization' by lothrop stoddard; 'notes on the third reich' and 'fascism viewed from the right' by julius evola; 'spiritual authority and temporal power' by rene guenon; 'propaganda: the formation of mens attitudes' by jacques ellul.

hysterical works: 'order and history' by eric voeglin; 'tragedy and hope', and 'the evolution of civilizations' by carrol quigley; 'wall street and the bolshevik revolution' by antony sutton (has a number similar of books about the antics of global capitalists); 'Gods of Money' by william engdahl; 'into the darkness' by lothrop stoddard; 'the singapore story' by lee kuan kew; 'witness' by whittaker chambers.

[Anonymous No.4192577]

>>4192351
check out 'camp of the saints' by jean raspail.

[Anonymous No.4192661]

Enoch Powell:
A Nation or No Nation?: Six Years in British Politics.
Freedom and Reality.
Collected Poems.

[Anonymous No.4192667]

>>4191318
I would remove the Cantos since it isn't really that politically aligned

[Anonymous No.4192675]

>>4191766
I thought Weber supports capitalism and reacts only against Marxists

[Anonymous No.4192685]

>>4192567
>The Singapore Story
Hell yea my country. Being right here in the middle of the action is so interesting because I actually get to witness what living in a country not based on pure democracy and freedom is like.

[Anonymous No.4192854]

>>4192667

u aving a giggle m8?

XLVIII

....'deface and obliterate' wrote J. Adams
'become fathers of the next generation,' wrote Marx
..tuberculosis...Bismarck
blamed american civil war on the jews;
particularly on the Rothschild
one of whom remarked to Disraeli
that nations were fools to pay rent for their credit

Later, several cantos return to the topic of usury.

Then there are the Adams Cantos (LXII–LXXI), in which Pound excerpts passages from Adams' personal and political writings.

[Anonymous No.4192875]

>>4192307
Please, at least read the fucking works before you do this shit. I could make a better conservative list and I'm not a conservative.

[Anonymous No.4192885]

>>4192875
yeah good idea ace, i alone should read the entirety of every single book suggested before i add it to the infographic. see you, i'll be back in a year.

i'm just adding recommendations from people who (i'm presuming) have read the books, it's a community effort, so if you want to help then suggest some to remove or some to add. or you could be absolutely no help at all and brag about how comparably smart you are, there's that option.

[Anonymous No.4192897]

>>4192359
>Nietzsche maybe?

definitely not.

[Anonymous No.4193255]

>>4192567
>'into the darkness' by lothrop stoddard
I'm seconding this.

[Anonymous No.4193457]

>>4192307
can anyone think of any fiction?

[Anonymous No.4193466]

>>4192897
You wouldn't interpret Nietszche as mildly aristocratic, vitalist, etc.? He inspired tons of thinkers who were.

[Anonymous No.4193467]

[Anonymous No.4193493]

>>4193467
i have a hard time believing that's an actual penguin classic

[Anonymous No.4193497]

>>4191318

Conrad fan here. Nostromo is probably more significant as a novel than The Secret Agent. Both are great, though.

[Anonymous No.4193501]

>>4193493
It should be.

[Anonymous No.4193562]

>>4193493
Of course its not you silly gook. What the actual fuck is you thinking?

Thats Narcissus on the cover... And Breivik is narcissistic shit.

>>4193501
And why is that?
>b..Because its edgy

kill your self you tragic fuck .

[Anonymous No.4193566]

>>4193562
>And why is that?
It would upset people like you.

[Anonymous No.4193711]

>>4193255

For those interested in learning more about the book:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n2p69_Stoddard.html

[Anonymous No.4193759]

Yukio Mishima was far right, but he is japanese so i guess you whities don't care

[Anonymous No.4193794]

What Mishima should I read?

[Anonymous No.4193805]

>>4193794
Confessions of a Mask is terrific

[Anonymous No.4193995]

>>4191474
conservatism doesn't require people to suffer either

[Anonymous No.4193999]

why was my shit deleted?

[Anonymous No.4194001]

>>4191497
That's because white men have contributed more to math, science and medicine than all other races and women combined. Ideology doesnt cause progress, white men do.

[Anonymous No.4194003]

>>4194001
go to bed cracka

[Anonymous No.4194024]

How is The Lightning and the Sun? It sounds batshit crazy.

[Anonymous No.4194029]

>>4193711
>IHR
Absolutely disgusting. It makes the book sound pretty pro-Nazi, too. Considering where it's from, though, it's a decent description.
>>4194001
u jus an ignant racis bigot jealous that we takin all yo fine white ass ur girls love the bbc u bes watch yoself whit boi

[Anonymous No.4194039]

>>4193999
What was it?

The worst kind of censorship is the *snipsnip* nothing to see here kind.

[Anonymous No.4194047]

>>4194024
This looks fucking amazing. Thanks for mentioning it.

[Anonymous No.4194054]

Is there any place where I can download the Evola trilogy from?

[Anonymous No.4194057]

>D.H. Lawrence

Someone please explain how he made his way into that list, same with Conrad. Achebe calling him a racist doesn't count.

Dostoevsky should be included.

[Anonymous No.4194070]

>>4194054
There's a reactionary ebook torrent up on the Pirate Bay that should have them all. There's also a "Perrenial Wisdom" collection going around that has six of his books.

[Anonymous No.4194072]

Forgetting the racist stupid imperialist, Rudyard Kipling.

[Anonymous No.4194075]

>>4193995
You suffer if you're forced to live under it and don't believe in its themes. Liberalism on the other hand is generally much more forgiving to individual taste.

[Anonymous No.4194076]

>>4194070
Thanks based anon

[Anonymous No.4194098]

>>4194075
>Liberalism on the other hand is generally much more forgiving to individual taste.
Unless you don't believe in its themes and suffer to live under it.

[Anonymous No.4194104]

>>4194098
>living under liberalism aka passive-aggressive fascism
I'd rather kill myself than cater to everyone's sensibilities with my lifestyle under threat of brainwash if I don't admit I'm at the bottom of the chain because I'm a heterosexual male.

[Anonymous No.4194117]

>>4194075
Contemporary liberalism honors diversity and tolerance above all, but what it calls by those names is different from what has been so called in the past. Its diversity denigrates and excludes ordinary people, and its tolerance requires speech codes, quotas, and compulsory training in correct opinions and attitudes. Nor do current liberal totems and tabus have a clear connection with letting people live as they wish. Prohibitions, both grand and petty, multiply. To outsiders the rules often seem simply arbitrary: prayer is forbidden while instruction in the use of condoms is required; smoking and furs are outrages, abortion and sodomy fundamental rights.

Many of these oddities can be explained by reference to the specific understanding of tolerance held by contemporary liberals. "Tolerance" is traditionally understood procedurally, to mean letting people do what they want. Contemporary liberals understand it substantively, to require equal respect as a fact of social life. These understandings are radically inconsistent. As a political matter, procedural tolerance calls for laissez-faire, while substantive tolerance requires pervasive administrative control of social life. A regime that adopts substantive tolerance as its goal must be intolerant procedurally because it must control the attitudes people have toward each other, and any serious attempt to do so will require means that are unforgiving and despotic.

[Anonymous No.4194146]

>>4194104
Then please do.

[Anonymous No.4194158]

>>4194146
2edgy4me

[Anonymous No.4194171]

>>4194146
>muh free thought for those who think like I do

[Anonymous No.4194198]

>>4191318
Céline was a staunch anti-nationalist, anti-heroist, anti-war writer with anarchists tendencies. He has nothing to do here (and if you had to pinpoint him he would land much closer to far-left than far-right). I have mixed feelings about Saki too. He's not really a progressist, bt I don't see why he should be classified as "conservative". Couldn't say about the others.

[Anonymous No.4194201]

>Evola
>Guenon
>Spengler

>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.4194209]

>>4194198
I fucking hate demjews where my nazi gold at - literally celine

[Anonymous No.4194213]

It's a bit troublesome that conservatism is always identified with right-wing ideology and with reactionary thinking. You can be criticizing modern society's corruption and be a hard-line leftist.

[Anonymous No.4194219]

>>4194104
You're at the bottom of the chain for reasons that have nothing to do with being a heterosexual male.

[Anonymous No.4194237]

>>4194117
Seems like you're conflating liberalism with every perceived fault of the contemporary world.

[Anonymous No.4194253]

>>4194209
Céline sided with the nazis for mainly three reasins:
1) As many people who had fought in WWI, he had grown disgusted with the idea of war, and ideas such as "fighting for the motherland" or "heroic resistance" were to his eyes stupid excuse for manslaughter (see my comments about his antiwar, antinationalist, antiheroist opinions).
2) He was an antisemite (in part because he thought the Jews were controlling Europe through capitalism and that they were responsible for WWI, which is arguably as good a reason to hate someone as there is). Fighting the Nazis was basically for him to play into the hands of machiavelic Jews. His antisemitism and his refusal to resis are very much correlated.
3) He was opportunistic enough to see his interests in siding with the victors (who were the Nazis at the time).

It's true that there is a dose of conservatism in Céline, but that doesn't mean he was right-wing, that doesn't mean he had an actual nostalgia for a past society (that he had never known, by the way, he lived his whole life in the modern society he decried), and that doesn't mean he was a traditionalism in most senses of the term. Basically he didn't care about traditions, he cared about spiting on modern humanity, if not simply humanity. He's not even a particularly political writer, merely a very exalted, talented and loud-speaking writer in an era of tremendous political turmoil. He left himself get caught in the ideological storm of the Occupation but that was mostly so that he wouldn't drown and still have a right to speak.

[Anonymous No.4194272]

>>4194117

Hurr durr I feminazis and blacks

[Anonymous No.4194290]

>>4194272
>>>/reddit/

[Anonymous No.4194304]

>>4194290

Good one Cletus

>>>/pol/

:^)

[Anonymous No.4194319]

>>4194272
When in doubt, make worthless posts.

[Anonymous No.4194320]

>>4194098
Liberalism arguably benefits a much larger group of people than it disenfranchises.

[Anonymous No.4194323]

>>4194319

Because the post he was replying to was more than just a verbose version, full of insight, of that, right?

[Anonymous No.4194362]

>>4194323
Yeah dude the two posts are totally on par in terms of effort and earnestness. Good job. Justify your one line trollposts more.

[Anonymous No.4194390]

>>4194304
Fuck off with your shit-posting.

[Anonymous No.4194573]

[Anonymous No.4194581]

>>4194573
Respect for your effort in putting this shit together bro, even if it's formative it's still a noble effort

[Anonymous No.4194601]

>>4193497
Nostromo isn't exactly right wing though, not in the same way that The Secret Agent is. I'd say that Conrad's politics were a bit all over the place because he could be sympathetic with various ends of the spectrum. In Nostromo, thought there is clearly a cynical view of human nature, there is also a sort of underlying sympathy for the non-european masses. Though I doubt Conrad would condone a revolution, he certainly picked up on the fact that one was coming. Same goes for colonialism and Heart of Darkness. His message seems to be that "we are all the same, we are all savages", and this doesn't really condone or condemn colonialism.

I'm kind of drunk though somebody smart correct me.

[Anonymous No.4194617]

Anyone know of any non Western conservative books? Like Chinese traditionalism etc...

[Anonymous No.4194622]

>>4194573
Needs some Mencken and maybe some Tocqueville? Blake's works should have a purple dot by them and I think storm of steel is technically nonfiction.

Still pretty good.

[Anonymous No.4194643]

>>4194320
>Liberalism arguably benefits a much larger group of people than it disenfranchises.
[citation needed]

[Anonymous No.4194647]

>>4194617
Confucius

[Anonymous No.4194663]

In what way is Confessions of a Mask fascist?

I know Mishima was nationalist, traditionalist and possibly a fascist, but I didn't read it as fascist.

[Anonymous No.4194679]

I have no idea if pic related is any good but seems like it'd be pretty right wing.

Maybe add some Emerson or Thoreau too?

[Anonymous No.4194739]

>>4194362

> effort and earnestness

kek, cry harder nitch nigga, that might make your posts better, right?

[Anonymous No.4194765]

>>4191689
Here's the problem of this thread. He's probably a reactionary but he's no traditionalist and no right conservative either.

[Anonymous No.4194851]

>>4194573
I'm confused...how is Storm of Steel, an autobiography by a non-Fascist classified as not only fascist but also as fiction?
Also a look at the Blood and Soil books exposed in the early 20th century might be a good place to start. I might suggest Houston Stewart Chamberlain's "The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century".

[Anonymous No.4194870]

>>4194851

Yeah that really doesn't give me confidence in the people who are recommending these books.
Makes one wonder if they've even read any of them.

[Anonymous No.4194878]

>>4193794
Sun and Steel.

>>4193759
Hes on the graphic, i think.

[Anonymous No.4194882]

>>4194072
this guy got him: >>4192427

[Anonymous No.4194889]

>>4194573
No Marinetti?

[Anonymous No.4194893]

>>4194573
Really good call on the key, man. Just one little objection: I'm a wee bit on the colorblind side; would it be possible to use letter or symbols or words or something instead/in addition to the colors?

[Anonymous No.4194904]

>>4194573
What sort of tag would one use for the rule-by-the-few sort of stuff in Leviathan, The Republic, Revolt of the Masses, etc.?

[Anonymous No.4194919]

>>4194851
in its first publication it was a pure autobiography but since then it's become more of a dramatized, nationalistic novel about war in general. and it was praised by a lot of fascists.

junger wasn't a member of the natsoc party but he was everything but really, he was pretty well-situated on the right as to make him at the very least borderline fascist.

[Anonymous No.4195105]

>>4194573
>Unabomber's manifesto
>Batshit crazy
But his analysis on contemporary leftism and industrial society is lucid as fuck. Practically beats anyone else to it.

[Anonymous No.4195108]

>>4194663
anybody?

[Anonymous No.4195109]

>>4194573
Why is confessions from a mask fascist?
Can anyone explain?
Did we even read the same book?

[Anonymous No.4195113]

>>4195108
So it seems we're wondering the same.
I think the guy messed it up, there's no way it's a fascist book.

[Anonymous No.4195127]

>>4195113
Seems like someone just wanted a book to represent Mishima.

There's a struggle between a traditionalist/nationalist philosophy and homosexuality, but that doesn't constitute right-wing literature.

[Anonymous No.4195136]

>>4194904
Aristocratic, maybe? I'd say "authoritarian" but it feels a little generic and can just as easily describe a number of things associated with the left.

[Anonymous No.4195158]

>>4192307
Add Robert A. Heinlen, either under Libertarian with "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" or possibly Fascist with "Starship Troopers"

>>4191415
Sometimes you'll hear appeals to nature, like "hierarchies are an inevitable part of life" or "the brain is just wired that way" to offer some admittedly simplistic examples

[Anonymous No.4195160]

>>4195158
how can you be a libertarian and a fascist?

[Anonymous No.4195190]

>>4195160
You write one book about restricting political participation to people who demonstrate their absolute loyalty to the state through military service, and another about the perfect heaven of a world that is anarcho-capitalism (provided you have a hyperinteligent AI to clandestinely manage the economy, essentially fulfilling the role of the state)

[Anonymous No.4195267]

>>4194851
>>4194851
Storm of Steel is really more of a Reactionary, arguably traditionalist/imperalist work.
Junger was aligned with the old prussian guard and friends with those who tried to assassinate Hitler.

[Anonymous No.4195272]

>>4195158
>Sometimes you'll hear appeals to nature, like "hierarchies are an inevitable part of life" or "the brain is just wired that way" to offer some admittedly simplistic examples

If anything that's a symptom of progressives. The argument from nature is used to justify everything from homosexuality to promiscuity. If anything social conservatives appeal to some sort of higher nature in humanity, that we are more than animals and thus should not degrade ourselves by acting like them.

[Anonymous No.4195275]

>>4191415
>>4195158
>What are some secular argmuents for social conservativism?
Generally it's about the stability of society. If you look at history pretty much every civilization that built permanent agricultural settlements of some size and thus allowed for large cities to be formed was built on the back of a traditional family structure that encouraged kids being raised under it and to perpetuate it. Some of the oldest divorce laws as with the Babylonians and Assyrians deal with enforcing monogamy for instance.
Interestingly marxist norm-critique seems to be built on similar ideas in wanting to remove the idea of the family and replace it with the state.

I recall the Dominique Venner, the French academic pagan reactionary/traditionalist, that shot himself in Notre Dame wrote some interesting secular views on the subject.

[Anonymous No.4195276]

>>4195160
He was neither. He admired concepts from each of the ideologies. From libertarianism, the freedom to grow as an individual, while from fascism, the importance of subsuming the individual will to a higher purpose.
You could say his writings were pessimistic in this regard. He believed the only way that humanity would ever break free from the confines of Earth and actually survive as a species would be if we united and subsumed ourselves into a greater whole.

[Anonymous No.4195332]

>conservatism is not an ideal

wat

[Anonymous No.4195487]

[Anonymous No.4195519]

>>4195487
If one considers God unjust, it's his job to adjust his idea of justice to that of God, not saying "well God you're a baddie by my standards so fuck you" and burn for eternity.

[Anonymous No.4195546]

Check out Ludwig Klages. As far as I know, The Biocentric Worldview (a collection of essays) is the only thing available in English.

[Anonymous No.4195564]

Does anyone know of some 'revolt against the modern world' type of thought that isn't racist? For example, I don't want 19th century conceptions of race peddled in a book about returning to ancient traditions.

[Anonymous No.4195577]

>>4195564
>that isn't racist
First define what you mean by racist to make the distinction meaningful as a qualifier.

[Anonymous No.4195588]

>>4195577
That doesn't believe in the superiority of one person to another based on a biological conception of race.

[Anonymous No.4195600]

>>4195588
Nouvelle Droite or Neue Rechte writers maybe?
Their distinction between races isn't one of inherent superiority but tend towards nativism and homogeneity as desirable.
Note that racism on the recommendation chart has it's own key

[Anonymous No.4195615]

>>4195600
Different person but I was looking for something without ethnic nationalism.

[Anonymous No.4195616]

is a "global" fascism possible? IE one the discards all identity other than that of humanity?

(assuming we don't contact aliens or anything)

[Anonymous No.4195631]

>>4195275
Venner was pretty good at writing and had strong, well expressed, political views. Him shoting himself is a shame.

[Anonymous No.4195634]

>>4195615
Then you want the Libertarians, the American New Right or some minorities within the American Paleoconservatives.
Reactionaries and Traditionalists in Europe know that the people is key.
>>4195616
>IE one the discards all identity other than that of humanity?
That alone is an impossbility. Homogeneity is a key factor in the stability of strong states.
Italian fascism was however originally built on the idea of spiritual and cultural "race" and expressively dismissed biological factors.

[Anonymous No.4195661]

>>4191744
They are mysticists and religious, something the modern world has grown to disdain.

[Anonymous No.4195677]

>>4195616
Mosley in his later years advocated a European union that preserved and even highlighted the local cultures of each country. Keep in mind he was proto-UKIP extraordinaire when he founded the British Union of Fascists. Might be worth checking out.

I think Mussolini was big on fascism as the nation, not the race, too. Jews were fine as long as they served Italy.

[Anonymous No.4195680]

>>4192097
>Hayek
Defense of capitalism comes in contradiction with almost all of the other authors cited here...
>Plato
Maoists love him and his Republic. Its Badiou's favorite book. What is he doing here ?
>Jewish stuff
What ?

[Anonymous No.4195684]

>>4195680
Are you literally retarded

[Anonymous No.4195687]

>>4195677
>Mosley in his later years advocated a European union that preserved and even highlighted the local cultures of each country.
Same view espoused by Alain de Benoist and
Nouvelle Droite.

[Anonymous No.4195702]

>>4195684
Care to explain ?

Also, where is my von Salomon at ? Conservative as its most, at least before the war.

[Anonymous No.4195704]

>>4195680
>he thinks jews are somehow excluded from the rightwing
Israel is an ethnonationalist state and pretty gung-ho about it. It's pretty funny to see american and french leftists in AIPAC, CRIF, ADL and LICRA cheer them on while far less severe actions or even just words in America and France rouse them into career-destroying mode.

[Anonymous No.4195759]

>>4194573
Against Democracy and Equality: The European New Right by Tomislav Sunic.
Archeofuturism by Guillaume Faye.

[Anonymous No.4195812]

>>4195634
Some minorities. Paleoconservatives are about as conscious of race as liberals/social democrats are. They were frequently discussing the demographic change a decade before you saw the democrat party and it's media do it.

[Anonymous No.4195838]

>>4195812
We seem to be in agreement?
I was saying that only a small part of them are not keen on ethnic nationalism.

[Anonymous No.4195875]

>>4195838
Yes.

[Anonymous No.4195900]

The Fourth Political Theory by Aleksandr Dugin.
Generation Identity by Markus Willinger.
War and Democracy by Paul Gottfried.

[Anonymous No.4195955]

Dark Enlightenment

readinglist:
http://freenortherner.wordpress.com/2013/05/17/dark-enlightenment-reading-list/

radish is also a good place to read
http://radishmag.wordpress.com

[Anonymous No.4196070]

Evola - Revolt Against the Modern World.
Spengler - The Decline of the West, The Hour of Decision and Prussiandom and Socialism.
Thomas Molnar's The Counter-Revolution.

[Anonymous No.4196781]

>>4194573

>industrial society and its future
>crazy

Anon, you're doing God's own work -- but K. isn't crazy. Horribly violent? Yes. A loner? Yes. But crazy? No.

He wrote possibly the best (and most accessible) critique of the contemporary left.

Apart from that one minor quibble, great job. Really well-done.

[Anonymous No.4196805]

>>4195955
How do the futurists work?

[Anonymous No.4196867]

We've reached another bump limit.

New thread:

>>4196860
>>4196860
>>4196860