Great Conservative Thinkers of Today

[Anonymous No.10089015]

Who are the key conservative thinkers the current age, and who is your favorite?


To me, the first who springs to mind is Theodore Dalrymple, who seems to encapsulate a the traditionalist Tory-like conservatism perfectly (even the name, which is a pseudonym, fits).

I also like some from Charles Murray and Roger Scruton, and especially Samuel Huntington. I greatly dislike Peter Hitchens.

Who are the key conservative thinkers today?
Who is the greatest?

[Anonymous No.10089022]

I like the old school ultra-hardliners like de Maistre and Ludovici. I don't agree with their views at all, but their knowledge and writing is so goddamn impressive. And their writings are generally amusing.

[Anonymous No.10089025]

>>10089015
"Great Conservative Thinker" is like saying the richest homeless in poverty

[Anonymous No.10089054]

>>10089015
Edward Feser and Alsadair MacIntyre, easy.

[Anonymous No.10089058]

>>10089025
Whether you like it or not, the overwhelming majority of thinkers and philosophers have been conservatives, from Aristotle to Plato, to Kant and Hegel.
In literature, from Dostoevsky to Eliot to Borges
Now crawl back to your marxist screeds where Shakespeare is patriarchy and shit in cans is art. Working class scum.

[Anonymous No.10089064]

>>10089015
Me

[REQUEST REQUEST REQUEST No.10089066]

I like highly practical conservative statesmen like LKY. I strongly recommend his memoirs.

Is Richard Posner any good? His blog used to be exciting.

BTW, anyone with access to New Yorker who can provide me with a copy of following article?
http://archives.newyorker.com/?i=2001-12-10#folio=078

[Anonymous No.10089281]

Love Dalrymple.

[Anonymous No.10089304]

I think there's going to be, or already is, a renaissance of "conservative" thought, though it's probably best categorized as nationalist thought. Mostly because these sentiments have been so subverted and repressed in the postwar jewish era. People can say what they want about the alt-right, but that appears to be where the leading thinkers of today are finding their way to.

[Anonymous No.10089308]

Thomas Sowell

[Anonymous No.10089310]

Bill Kristol is great

[Anonymous No.10089311]

What does "conservative" even mean?

Not even trolling or trying to stir shit, I really don't get it. If we assume that "liberal" means one thing and "conservative" is its opposite, that's inherently a bad thing, right?

I don't identify as either, so I have no dog in this fight. I just don't get it.
Apart from bigotry and a fear of change, what does conservatism entail? And please, don't just throw concepts to me that are just thinly veiled bigotry and fear like "traditionalism" and "values".

[Anonymous No.10089313]

>>10089311
>Not even trolling or trying to stir shit
>And please, don't just throw concepts to me that are just thinly veiled bigotry and fear like "traditionalism" and "values".

[Anonymous No.10089316]

>>10089058
There's literally nothing more working class than conservatism lol there's a reason why the poorest and least educated always identify as conservative.

[Anonymous No.10089317]

[Anonymous No.10089321]

>>10089316
This is a horribly uneducated opinion

[Anonymous No.10089322]

>>10089311
Is that trolling? Can't we just be honest about what conservatism is with no bias? There's nothing wrong with being a bigot or not wanting things to change for the worse. Sorry, I didn't mean to upset you or anyone else, I'll use a trigger warning next time.

[Anonymous No.10089329]

>>10089015
>>greatly dislike Peter Hitchens
Absolutely Immoral

[Anonymous No.10089332]

>>10089311
A respect for a nation's institutions. Being skeptical of, but not necessarily against, change.

[Anonymous No.10089335]

>>10089311
>bigotry and a fear of change
Lol, your opinions have been formed by a prevailing zeitgeist that has distorted the state of nature. What you think of as progressive "change" is an illusion created by an outgroup of liars. What people on the real right want is to merely accept the state of nature that revolves around jew-free ethnic homelands, a social hierarchy, and a culture based on heritage instead of permanent iconoclasm disguised as "progress."

[Anonymous No.10089337]

>>10089311

>what does x mean?
>x entails y and z
>no actual explication of meaning for x, just assertions of thick concepts y and z without further justification

top tier minds of reddit

[Anonymous No.10089350]

>>10089321
Feel free to educate me. Don't waste my time with anecdotes or personal observations, please and thank you.

[Anonymous No.10089360]

>>10089316
>There's literally nothing more working class than conservatism
Why? Wouldn't socialism be working class?

[Anonymous No.10089364]

>>10089337
I asked you to explain what x is to me, why can't you do that?

[Anonymous No.10089371]

>>10089350
I'm not sure where to start. Education skews left because it wasn't available to the overwhelming majority of the population 70 years ago (plus all those shindigs in the 60s,) but to think that conservatives are poor is just.. plain retarded. The right wins with wealthier voters in every country in the West

[Anonymous No.10089377]

>>10089058
Conservatism was born out of a reaction to progressive influences.

[Anonymous No.10089384]

>>10089371
>to think that conservatives are poor is just.. plain retarded
Have you ever been to America?
In the states and elsewhere, there's an illusion that wealthy people are conservative, which is bolstered by the reality that they use conservative people to hold on to power and squeeze more money out of the uneducated.

[Anonymous No.10089390]

>>10089364

Why would anyone bother giving an explanation for something, when your own post is a good example of "motivated cognition," thus meaning there is no real dialogue to be had with you.

Feel free to justify your claims a bit better. The onus here is really on you. You made a bunch of assertions with no supporting reasoning. Some of your claims contain thick concepts (both descriptive and normative content). You've predicated some concept with those thick concepts, without justification. That's something that deserves a bit more than reddit-tier, "right wingers are meanies!"

[Anonymous No.10089392]

>>10089384
Thankyou for proving how utterly uneducated you are

https://press.princeton.edu/titles/9030.html

Feel free to educate yourself, friend

[Anonymous No.10089394]

>>10089316
This is just not true anymore. Postwar liberalism was a jewish-led sociopolitical fabrication that was able to flourish in times of abundance but has run into the wall of reality and lost its ability to convince a dying wasp class that was attracted to it purely for virtue-signaling purposes, further hampered by the third world barbarian invasions occurring throughout the west.

[Anonymous No.10089402]

i'm not sure there are any.

conservative thought, by its nature, isnt very dynamic. so the thinkers of yesteryear are still the best.

all the conservative thinkers of today are doing are rehashing old ideas

[Anonymous No.10089408]

I'm confused you guys, why is conservatism 'for poor/uneducated people'. The alternatives don't seem much better

[Anonymous No.10089413]

>>10089392
The concept behind that book doesn't disprove anything that I believe. The rich vote republican so that they can hold on to their money. And? That's not exactly a good thing. That doesn't mean conservatism is the philosophy of the elite, it means it's the tool of the greedy.

When you're rich, you vote republican. But voting republican won't make you rich, which is something incel fedora conservatives don't seem to realize.

[Anonymous No.10089419]

>>10089408
What are the alternatives, do you think?

[Anonymous No.10089422]

>>10089408
Most people are poor and/or uneducated, so really you're going to find lazy retards on both sides of the aisle.

[Anonymous No.10089423]

Confucius is a based conservative, more focused on the individual and society than on politics though

[Anonymous No.10089441]

>>10089413
So, ignoring that I've utterly debunked the notion that conservatives are poor, by "elite," you mean those in academia? You could put that down to a million things

>Demographics
>The 60s
>The rise of cultural conservatism in the 80s, where universities sought to counter this, leading conservatives academics to leave for the private sector
>The 1900s (iirc) where there was a divergence between the educated and monarchy
It's really a Western concept, other parts of the world would be entirely different (>>10089423)

[Anonymous No.10089445]

>>10089419
Other politicial views that come up in the mainstream like Social Democracy, Liberalism or batshit leftism. The average laymen holding these views aren't much more educated.

>>10089422
True but why is conservatism the most looked down on?

[Anonymous No.10089447]

>>10089413
I'll also point out that your argument makes no sense. Of course conservatism is the philosophy of the elite. It seeks to uphold institutions.

[Anonymous No.10089452]

>>10089445
Because in The West the left have gained utter dominance of cultural institutions.

[Anonymous No.10089453]

>>10089445
Conservatism is looked down on because it's not fun or sexy and because lots of bad people wield it as an ideological tool for their own gain.

But is it the "wrong" ideology? Obviously not.

[Anonymous No.10089458]

>>10089447
>It seeks to uphold institutions.
Why do you think that's a good thing? Unless those institutions are working in your favor. Which they probably aren't, but someone is telling you that they are so they can exploit you.
Sad.

[Anonymous No.10089470]

>>10089458
I believe some institutions are worth upholding. I think you've got the wrong mindset. The world is very rarely a zero-sum gain.

[Anonymous No.10089474]

>>10089335
that's not conservatism

[Anonymous No.10089485]

>>10089470
Which institutions? How do you decide which ones are worth upholding and which ones aren't?
The way you're presenting it, conservatism is a philosophy that strives to "uphold institutions" and then... what? Because you yourself have admitted that not all institutions deserve to be upheld. So, what happens to the ones that you personally don't want to uphold? They stay in place and work against you or simply fail from a lack of support?
Is that really more sensible than a philosophy that wants to actively dismantle the ineffective or disagreeable institutions, while leaving in place the ones that work?

[Anonymous No.10089490]

>>10089445
>why is conservatism the most looked down on
years of propaganda

[Anonymous No.10089510]

>>10089335
>I'm not a bigot
>accept the state of nature that revolves around jew-free ethnic homelands

yikes

[Anonymous No.10089514]

>>10089474
Because "conservativism" for the past 50 years has meant liberalism on a slight delay.

[Anonymous No.10089538]

>>10089510
What you call bigotry I understand as a biological response that we won't get rid of by shaming people as you're attempting to do.

[Anonymous No.10089540]

>>10089485
I think you need to read Edmund Burke, friend. He explains better than I can. If you don't have the time to do so you should at least look into why he supported the American revolution but did not support The French revolution.

The idea that we should not be so quick to change something unless:
1. There is overwhelming evidence to do so
2. There is an appreciation of why we had what we had in the first place
3. That the change is not entirely out of line with the nation's past,
4. That the change should be organic and grow out of society's customs

[Anonymous No.10089541]

>>10089066
>http://archives.newyorker.com/?i=2001-12-10#folio=078
>>10089066
>>10089066
>>10089066
>>10089066
Bump. It's only one PDF page. The Posner Portrait.

It's called Bench Burner.

[Anonymous No.10089545]

>>10089538
Is that how you defend pedophilia too? lol

[Anonymous No.10089555]

>>10089545
I want to deal quite harshly with the people most responsible for pushing pedophilia these days: jews.

[Anonymous No.10089565]

>>10089555
damn, you sound so stupid
go back to /pol/

[Anonymous No.10089566]

>>10089058
>Whether you like it or not, the overwhelming majority of thinkers and philosophers have been conservatives, from Aristotle to Plato, to Kant and Hegel.
>In literature, from Dostoevsky to Eliot to Borges
I love how conservatards always forget the 20th century when spouting this retarded meme.

[Anonymous No.10089589]

>It's turned into an American """"polar opposites"""" Libtards vs Conservatards thread

[Anonymous No.10089596]

>>10089514
no because conservatism has nothing to do with ethnic nationalism

[Anonymous No.10089597]

>>10089058
>Kant and Hegel
anglocucks can't into philosophy

[Anonymous No.10089604]

>>10089058
Why no Confucious?

[Anonymous No.10089622]

>>10089596
Which is why it has failed and is no longer relevant. Conservativism begins with the conservation of race.

[Anonymous No.10089687]

>>10089596
That's false. The premise that you're supposed to surrender your nation to foreigners who will never assimilate would have never been even considered by past conservative thinkers, let alone embraced by them. It was an unquestioned assumption that communities should govern themselves and that invasions should be fended off. Just like how the Greeks understood the nature of Being so intuitively that they never needed to question what it was and how it worked. The fact that we're having this debate today and that our (((cosmopolitan))) overlords have succeeded in diluting Western civilization to such an extent is both a travesty and a tragedy.

[Anonymous No.10089707]

>>10089514
this
Conservatives always just need a generation or two to catch up to everyone else.

[Anonymous No.10089828]

>>10089015
We used to have Jonathan Bowden , but he's dead now, some people would cite Moldbug as an influence as to why they began to consider true conservativism as well, even if most of those people do not like jews.

There aren't really any prominent conservative intellectuals today, most of them have been shunned from academia completely and the rise of PC culture has ensured that they never find the mainstream without having thought police beat down on them.

Even the alt right today is mostly a joke, they are about as soft core of a reactionary movement you get and constantly bicker among themselves. That's not to say there is no intellectual basis behind them, in fact I'd suggest listening to Rebel Yell, Kulturekampf, and the Darwin Digest to get s good understanding of what the modern far-right is like today.

[Anonymous No.10089860]

>>10089015

Donald Trump.

[Anonymous No.10089867]

>>10089054
>Conservative
>MacIntyre

[Anonymous No.10089919]

>>10089311
>All the faggots taking the b8
Sad!

[Anonymous No.10089945]

>>10089867
A communitarian thomist Catholic virtue ethicist with an emphasis on tradition as epistemic basis for everything, I'd say he is easily placed with the widely conservative outlook. He's not a conservative of Edmund Burke or de Maistre type, but he's got a lot more in common with them then other ideological alternatives.

[Anonymous No.10090149]

>>10089015
As far as alive dudes go, I like scruton -despite not being a great reader - and yuval levin -though I wouldn't recommend "fractured republic". Levin's journal, "National affairs" is often interesting. Parts of Daniel Bell hold up well. Christopher Lasch (RIP) is always worth reading. (I recognize parsing him as conservative is disputable). Henry Jaffa is good to read.

[Anonymous No.10090161]

>>10089015
>Tory-like conservatism

Tories aren't conservative you dumb skinny milk drinker

[Anonymous No.10090166]

>capitalist
>conservative

You can't have both

[Anonymous No.10090186]

>>10090161
>Local man takes the midnight train going anywhere after learning his country has been overrun by migrants.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG7jKUHsLfY

[Anonymous No.10090242]

>>10089350
Look at any working class political action ever.

[Anonymous No.10090254]

>>10090166
i'd rather have neither

[Anonymous No.10090255]

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2016/02/lost-magic-england

[Anonymous No.10090556]

bump

[Anonymous No.10090563]

>>10089015
>Great thinkers today
oxymoron

[Anonymous No.10090582]

I wish the libtard/contards wouldn't argue in this thread about "wat is bestest." Go to /pol/ and do that.


>>10090255
Thank you. Delightful read. Maybe the best recommendation in the thread so far.

[Anonymous No.10090622]

>>10090255
>Conservative
>Thinks Nigel Farage is the devil and Clement Attlee should be canonized
I think it's time for that old fuck to get in the urn

[Anonymous No.10090646]

Unironically Steve Sailer

[Anonymous No.10090703]

>>10089377
>being this retarded

I'm just going to assume this is bait.

[Anonymous No.10090725]

>>10089377
Not true.

>I want things to change!
>No, I want things to stay the same!

Can still be

>I want things to stay the same!
>No, I want things to change!

[Anonymous No.10090729]

>>10090255
This guy's writings were in my parents bookshelves at home and I read them all. Despite at that time being a snob and playing the role of young fogey reactionary I found his arguments poor and unconvincing in defence of aristocracy. It's essentially those Tatler articles about why only plebs called Wayne say toilet, except dressed up with a learned style and with less nude poshos showing their tits. He seems to only care about these auras of prestige which certain institutions (for his class these tend to be Eton, ornate and liturgical churches like CoE or RCC, Oxbridge, certain clubs like the Garrick, and so on) imbue in those that belong, and conflates these with aristocracy and class, which is ironic because it's the exact same thing that uninformed working class kids do if you are at all well-educated, can speak clearly, and dress nicely. Why does he make the same mistake as non-aristocrats? Because he himself is not a true old-money red-trousered aristo, and probably better off for it as they rather in a bad way in today's world. He is a Jacob Rees-Mogg type, bog standard public schoolboy with a dollop of brains who affects a contrived toff persona and manner. Unless you are some class-insecure, twee Evelyn Waugh type his body of work is probably best left unread.

[Anonymous No.10090739]

>>10089485
Institutions that are inherently beneficial for everybody like healthcare, police force and educational institutions are worth upholding. Obviously changes can be made within those institutions but only so as to more fully recognise the spirit and core principles under which those institutions were designed for.

[Anonymous No.10090745]

>>10089308
Seconded.
Sowell runs circles around muddled thinkers.

[Anonymous No.10091723]

Buamn

[Anonymous No.10093228]

>>10091723
Who?

[Anonymous No.10093259]

>>10089015
I like him a lot, although I doubt he is "a thinker" or even that "conservative".

He's just sharp, honest, with a wide real-world experience and a wide vocabulary.

[Anonymous No.10093843]

>>10089058
Laughable, uneducated post. The "scum" in the end was a nice touch, though. Neck yourself, neckbeard trash

[Anonymous No.10093848]

>>10089555
>>>/r/thedonald

[Anonymous No.10093869]

>>10089311
I guess if you want to conserve certain values and traditions. Thus convervatism can mean anything, depending on where you live and in what time.

[Anonymous No.10094058]

M O L D B U G

[Anonymous No.10094108]

There's nothign to conserve.

[Anonymous No.10094171]

>>10094058
L A R P I N G C O M P U T E R G E E K

[Anonymous No.10094216]

>>10089015
Moldbug.

[Anonymous No.10094322]

I find the old German "radical" conservatives intriguing. Edgar J. Jung, Schmitt, Jünger, many others. The entire Fin de Siecle period is extremely interesting (any good books on the period, lit?).

I have a book of letter exchanges between Schmitt and Kojeve. Dear oh dear, absolutely brilliant men! Heidegger is interesting, but too difficult. Spengler is also too Germanic, too ponderous for me. Nietzsche is the apex of "radical conservatives" IMO.


I will be on the hunt for more letter exchanges (recommendations greatly wanted!)


Letter exchanges are an underrated book form.

[Anonymous No.10094374]

>>10094322
>I will be on the hunt for more letter exchanges (recommendations greatly wanted!)

Flaubert and George Sand.

>It is of little matter whether many peasants know how to read and listen no longer to their cure, but it is of great matter that many men like Renan or Littre should be able to live and be listened to! Our safety is now only in a legitimate aristocracy, I mean by that, a majority that is composed of more than mere numbers.

--- Flaubert

[Anonymous No.10094440]

>>10094322
Is this satire?

[Anonymous No.10094453]

>>10089015
Roger Kimball is my favorite. Most of the writers you mentioned are published in Kimball's New Criterion.

I also don't care for Hitchens because he's just as deluded as his brother. If he was more talented he would be writing books or novels about the decline of Britain rather than shilling for the Church of England which is a lost cause.

Anyway, Hitchens IS however more talented than those youtube hacks /pol/ worships.

[Anonymous No.10094504]

The left is universalist and egalitarian

The right is paticularist and elitist. I don't really like the term 'conservative' as it's an inherently losing strategy

[Anonymous No.10094514]

>>10094171
He doesn't seem like a LARPer to me. His prose is a bit purple and edgy, but pretty much everything on the internet in 2007 was quite edgy desu. He comes off as a very amiable and level-headed guy in interviews and (dare I say it) his reddit AMA.

[Anonymous No.10094833]

Jonathan Bowden was like dynamite, he was a welcome change on the British Right which became rather dry and stale but unfortunately he's no longer with us and Bowden still remains largely obscure. His speeches, when he's on form, are electrifying but his writing was a bit hard for me to follow sometimes.

[Anonymous No.10094847]

Carlyle

Enoch Powell

[Anonymous No.10095765]

>>10094847
What has Powell written?

[Anonymous No.10095795]

>>10089058
This is some serious a-historical thinking

[Anonymous No.10095918]

>>10094504
What about universalist elitism of Catholicism?

[Anonymous No.10096306]

>>10089311
>I don't identify as either, so I have no dog in this fight.
>And please, don't just throw concepts to me that are just thinly veiled bigotry and fear like "traditionalism" and "values".
So this...is the power...of """c e n t r i s m"""

[Anonymous No.10097886]

bump

[Anonymous No.10097938]

>>10089015
i'm pretty left wing but have a soft spot for peter hitchens

[Anonymous No.10097962]

>>10094322
What can you recommend from Edgar J. Jung? German is fine.

[Anonymous No.10098939]

>>10097938
Embrace it.

[Anonymous No.10098958]

"Conservatism" and "thinking" don't go together. Conservatism is the antithesis of thinking.

[Anonymous No.10098960]

>>10098958
4 more years

[Anonymous No.10098991]

>>10089316
>poorest and least educated always identify as conservative

Complete opposite in Ireland. Working class city scum are by far the most left-wing, with richer people almost all right of centre.

[Anonymous No.10098997]

>>10098958
i never know whether this is falseflagging, trolling, srs
you can't be trolling just to make people confused, there has to be anger induced
so this is serious?

[Anonymous No.10099091]

>>10090161
Aren't Tories monarchists? Which is perhaps the original conservatism

[Anonymous No.10099357]

Currently reading pic related

Roger Scruton is probably the best out there currently.

Charles Murray is a bit of a meme as be doesn't really write anything other than articles in The Atlantic (prior to it being zionised)

[Anonymous No.10099376]

>>10099091
Every relevant party supports the monarchy in the uk

[Anonymous No.10099383]

>>10099357
I've got it in my stack now. Have any feelings about it?

[Anonymous No.10099420]

>>10099383
I'm about 50 pages in but it is dreadfully depressing thus far. Gives the impression of the west being fucked and nobody really expected or knows what to do about it. Makes me mourn for a country I never knew.

Hopefully the later chapters are more optimistic.

[Anonymous No.10100416]

>>10099420
Keep us posted.

[Anonymous No.10100479]

>>10089015
Bannon

[Anonymous No.10101819]

Just finished pic related. Pretty good desu

[Anonymous No.10101831]

>>10089316
Marx would be turning in his grave.

[Anonymous No.10101840]

>>10101831
His grave which costs an entry fee to visit

[Anonymous No.10101879]

>>10097962
Not him but Die Herrschaft der Minderwertigen is his only claim to fame. I don't think there's a translation of it.

[Anonymous No.10101884]

>>10101840
Which is hilarious. I'm no marxist btw.

[Anonymous No.10101921]

Why should I even care about preserving culture? Im comfy now, have all the works of the great masters at my finger tips, and can get whatever I want and do whatever I want. Also, how is going back to traditional values not also arguing for being progressive? Aren't you saying that society right now needs to progress to a state based on one state that has never occured before?

[Anonymous No.10101957]

>>10089311
Fair question. Best not to come to 4chan if you have one of those.

Conservatism appeared as a reaction to liberal ideas but it isn't a simple 'opposite' of liberalism. Like all political ideologies, conservatism is a broad church and any characterization that doesn't run to twenty volumes is going to be a simplification, but anyway. Given that conservatism was first articulated during the French Revolution, keep it in mind when thinking about the conservative critike of liberalism.

Maybe five key ideas/concerns stand out.First (sorry) tradition. Conservatives think that a care for traditional social and political forms is important. Religious conservatives see the past as mandated (or approved) by God whilst others (like Burke) think that tradition represents a sort of accumulated stock of wisdom and those old institutions have been 'tested by time'. Burke pointed to the destruction of French traditional institutions during the revolution and claimed that only ill would come of it. He wasn't far wrong.

Second, conservatives are pessimistic about human nature both morally and intellectually. For conservatives, Humans have as a fundamental (but not only) part of their character a selfish and destructive urge. And we are pretty stupid. Again, think of 'The Terror'. When freed (say conservatives) people acted irrationally and immorally.

Third. Conservatives are not individualists. Conservatives see society as 'organic' and as having its own needs that are (at least sometimes) prior to, and more than, the some of the accumulated needs of the individuals that make it up. It's common for modern conservatives to use the language of individualism, but this license is always within a framework of a social obligation. Your free speech is valuable so long as you don't neal during the national anthem, burn the flag or claim that there isn't a god.

'Conservatives have traditionally believed the society is naturally hierarchical, characterized by fixed or established social gradations. Social equality is therefore rejected as undesirable and unachievable; power, status and property are always unequally distributed. Conservatives agree with liberals in accepting natural inequality amongst individuals: some are born with talents and skills that are denied to others. For liberals, however, this leads to a belief in meritocracy, in which individuals rise or fall according to their abilities and willingness to work. Traditionally,
conservatives have believed that inequality is more deep-rooted. Inequality is an inevitable feature of an organic society, not merely a consequence of individual differences.'

[Anonymous No.10101972]

>>10101957
Finally. 'Property is an asset that possesses a deep and at times almost mystical significance for conservatives. Liberals believe that property reflects merit: those who work hard and possess talent will, and should, acquire wealth. Property, therefore, is ‘earned’. This doctrine has an attraction for those conservatives who regard the ability to accumulate wealth as an important economic incentive. Nevertheless, conservatives also hold that property has a range of psychological and social advantages. For example, it provides security. In an uncertain and unpredictable world, property ownership gives people a sense of confidence and assurance, something to ‘fall back on’.

I started writing this myself but I'm lazy, the quotes come from Andrew Haywood, Political Ideologies an Introduction. It's a short, really well written and intellectually sound introduction to the major political ideologies. Can't recommend it enough.

[Anonymous No.10102031]

Conservatism is shit. Liberalism is shit. Both are inherently revolutionary philosophies that pretend they aren't, simply by having a longer tradition of writing. Logically, if you don't support feudalism and monarchy, you accept that revolutions for republicanism were ultimately justified, and that worthwhile social change involves violence, chaos and instability. You are only able to scoff at modern radicals because your ideas are sufficiently removed from contemporary life, but they are also radical.
Leftists, rightists and everyone in between fundamentally diverge on how a society should be organized and what values prioritized, but none of them have any valid claim to the moral highground when it comes to implementation. The major difference is that socialists have never cloaked their agenda in attractive cultural values, they were brutally honest that their politics involves terror. We can discuss the wisdom in such an approach, but let us not bullshit that being a conservative makes you a fucking nice guy. Political philosophies are naturally all-encompassing, intrusive and violent, they all lay claim to determine how people should conduct their daily lives. The trick is mainly how to conduct the war between these incompatible principles without destroying half of the world. But it is a war.

[Anonymous No.10102039]

>>10101957
>>10101972
>>10102031
Nice blog post. It's a shame hardly anyone will read it.

[Anonymous No.10102060]

>>10102039
At least no one will ever know that I spelt 'critique' as 'critike'

[Anonymous No.10102122]

>>10102039
>taking pride of having a 5 second attention span

[Anonymous No.10102129]

>>10089304
>t. Petersonfag

[Anonymous No.10103663]

>>10102129
>t. an actual fag

[Anonymous No.10104356]

>>10089015

Bruce Bawer is good for a true fag's perspective on why the gay rights movement is retarded and Islam sucks.

[Anonymous No.10104957]

bump

[Anonymous No.10104988]

>>10089015
Drumpf

[Anonymous No.10105026]

>>10104988
HAHA SO EDGY

[Anonymous No.10105994]

>>10089015
He looks like Anthony Kennedy oddly enough

[Anonymous No.10106308]

>>10104988
Stay triggered

[Anonymous No.10106328]

Paul Gottfried is the uncrowned monarch of the American Right.

[Anonymous No.10107218]

Ryszard Legutko

[Anonymous No.10107259]

>>10089058
>Borges
>Thinker
Pffff

[Anonymous No.10107260]

I like Victor Davis Hanson

[Anonymous No.10107283]

>>10102039
I read and I liked it

[Anonymous No.10107337]

>>10089015
Adrian Vermeule. He's a Catholic and a big fan of Schmitt. He's also a law professor at Harvard

[Anonymous No.10107478]

>>10101972
I'll check out that book, thanks!

[Anonymous No.10108379]

>>10107337
Never see enough talk about Vermeule on here sadly enough.

[Anonymous No.10109669]

Great thread. Though I wish the shitheads who want to discuss politics would go to /pol/. This board is about writing and literature.

At any rate, I recommend Burke and Oakeshott. They are true thinkers. Dalrymple is great, but more of a general intellectual.

[Anonymous No.10109681]

Schmitt, Strauss and Jaffe.

Also I'm having an eye on the Trump security adviser Michael Anton. He is a student of Jaffe and wrote The Flight 93 Election. Writes well.


I would really like to read some good EUROPEAN CONSERVATIVES.
For Germany I got Sarrazin and Rolf Sieferle. For France, Houllebecqc.
Scruton and Dalrymple for the UK.


Who am I missing?

[Anonymous No.10109917]

>>10089015
>great conservative thinkers
>conservative thinkers
>great
Does not compute.

[Anonymous No.10109920]

>>10089058
This is so fucking wrong I don't know where to even begin. Conservatism did not exist before the 19th century. To claim that Shakespeare was a conservative is more than a retarded anachronism.

[Anonymous No.10109926]

>>10089022
>de Maistre
>conservative
Fucking neck yourself Anglotard.

[Anonymous No.10109928]

>>10102031
>He thinks that the conservative ideology, the main point of which is being anti-revolutionary and maintaining the established order, is revolutionary

hmm

[Anonymous No.10109937]

Does Hoppe count?

[Anonymous No.10109940]

>>10089015
>Great Conservative Thinkers
That's not how you spell spin doctors and propagandists of the bourgeois.

[Anonymous No.10109949]

>>10109937
no we're supposed to post great minds

[Anonymous No.10110280]

The GOAT

[Anonymous No.10110294]

that writer who keeps talking about making small christian commune style neighborhoods and ensuring all children adhere to the faith and traditional family values. it sounds really comfy

i forget his name but he's contemporary and i think blogs/publishes a lot

[Anonymous No.10110422]

>this entire thread

[Anonymous No.10110431]

>>10109681
UK - You could argue Christopher Hitchens on Islam/War on Terror. Peter Hitchens on traditionalism.

[Anonymous No.10110436]

>>10110294
Rod Dreher

[Anonymous No.10110442]

>>10110280
I don't agree with him on hardly anything but the man knows how to issue a verbal putdown:
>"The problem isn't that Johnny can't read. The problem isn't even that Johnny can't think. The problem is that Johnny doesn't know what thinking is; he confuses it with feeling."

[Anonymous No.10110461]

>>10110442
HOW WILL JOHNNY CENA EVER RECOVER?

[Anonymous No.10110510]

>>10108379
Step one of the integralist coup is Trump nominating Vermeule to the Supreme Court.

>>10109681
Mel Bradford rekt Jaffa in an essay back in the 70s. ("The Heresy of Equality: Bradford replies to Jaffa).

[Anonymous No.10110525]

>>10110436
Dreher-ism/BenOp wouldn't work. All the smart/ambitous kids who grow up in the trad commune would leave. Without exposure to liberal degeneracy they would have little reason to believe what their parents say about it. The dumb/self-righteous kids would remain in the commune and corrupt whatever form of Christianity is being practiced by being dumb and self-righteous. The result would be something like the Amish or Hasidim, i.e. miserable scumbags with no urge to ever re-enter society. Christians going back to the catacombs is a bad thing, and if they are forced to, they should try to exit them and re-Christianize society as quickly as possible

[Anonymous No.10110577]

>>10109681

Mogg
Hitchens
Murray

[Anonymous No.10110603]

>>10089015
Why do you hate Peter Hitchens?

Conservative thinkers today have this milquetoast disaffection that turns me off from them in general, I think when it comes to 'right wing thought' far more interesting stuff was happening the reactionary wing, Bowden and Moldbug and Nick Land, and NRx in general.

Abolition of Britain is a great read though OP, give it a chance.

[Anonymous No.10111194]

>>10110525
I'm not saying I agree with Dreher, I was just pointing him out for that other person or anyone else who might be interested in his work.

[Anonymous No.10112366]

Bump

[Anonymous No.10112731]

>>10110577
Awesome to see a fellow Moggposter here.

[Anonymous No.10113066]

up

[Anonymous No.10113084]

>>10089322
>There's nothing wrong with being a bigot
Do conservatives really believe this?

[Anonymous No.10113192]

>>10109940
>the contemporary left
>not thoroughly bourgeois

[Anonymous No.10113262]

anyone who posts on saloforum or thephora

[Anonymous No.10113402]

>>10113262
Literally where?

[Anonymous No.10113407]

>>10089015
What's next, a thread about celibate whores?

[Anonymous No.10113434]

>>10113407
Wow what an edgy guy here. Shit what a takedown.

[Anonymous No.10113639]

>>10089058
5/10

[Anonymous No.10114512]

>>10113639
t. leftist loser

[Anonymous No.10114624]

>>10089413
>That doesn't mean conservatism is the philosophy of the elite, it means it's the tool of the greedy.

What's the distinction?

[Anonymous No.10114787]

>>10114624
Look at this guy.

[Anonymous No.10114822]

>I greatly dislike Peter Hitchens
Immoral drug taking pleb detected.

[Anonymous No.10115005]

>>10114822
This image is amusing. Why Brand though?

[Anonymous No.10115011]

>>10115005
Peter greatly dislikes him and has clashed with him a few times, often getting quite personal. Their views differ greatly on basically everything.

Classic set-up for a buddy cop movie. They dislike each other at the start but by the end of the film learn to respect and maybe even like one another like Riggs and Murtaugh did in Lethal Weapon.

[Anonymous No.10115029]

[Anonymous No.10115614]

Communism is it own shit, cut from history. It’s fundamentally promethea n/luciferian and no good ever comes from it. The only people that find it appealing are straight out losers/drunks/druggies who wasted a lot of time, are allergic to work, generally perplexed in how anyone can create/build something good in this world (because they fail at everything - yet deserve the same as you)

Generally the left is regressive and personified by /r/atheism smugness that they’re the only smart people on earth while appearing to others as immature children/retards.

Most commies/left on my timelines are constantly saying how sad they are, what prescription drugs they’re taking then being outraged when a good clean person does something good. Left are literal goblins few pass as humans.

>reee get out of my thread

[Anonymous No.10115617]

>>10115614
>other people are wrong because they're smug fucks who think they're the smartest people around
>i'm going to act like a smug fuck who thinks he's the smartest person around

[Anonymous No.10115826]

>>10115614
this

[Anonymous No.10115881]

>>10115617
It’s true in my case faggit

[Anonymous No.10116131]

>>10115881
Oh snap that explains everything

[Anonymous No.10116296]

does William F Buckley count

[Anonymous No.10116582]

>>10116296
Yee

[Anonymous No.10116588]

>>10116296
No, CIA man who was sent to subvert and co-opt American conservatism doesn't count.

Even Gore Vidal was a better conservative than him.

[Anonymous No.10116599]

>>10089015
Mark Steyn is the greatest conservative thinker of today.

Fuck, his book basically predicted everything that's going on today in Europe.

[Anonymous No.10117405]

>>10116588
>>10116599
I chuckled

[Anonymous No.10117458]

>>10116296
This dude thought gay men should be branded.

Conservatives literally want the world to end because they have stupid christian values

[Anonymous No.10117478]

Bowden was right about everything I've heard him talk of
>>10117458
branding gays doesn't end the world, homo

[Anonymous No.10117487]

>>10117478
Reading Revelations as truth does virgin

[Anonymous No.10117493]

>>10117487
Don't see why it should. Don't insult my virginity ever again.

[Anonymous No.10117500]

>>10117487
>>10117493
Oh my god

[Anonymous No.10117503]

>>10117478

>branding gays doesn't end the world, homo

Agreed. Or better yet lock them all away out of sight so they stop making us feel all those conflicting feelings that we don't like to feel. They need to g-go away.

[Anonymous No.10117507]

>>10117493
If you don't understand why reading revelations as truth makes you think that the apocalypse is coming then I can't help you.

Conservatives operate under the belief that the world is ending soon because they believe in Revelations.
There I did the work for you like you need me to you pathetic idiot.

[Anonymous No.10117529]

>>10117507
>all conservatives are fundamentalist Christians
lol ok buddy

[Anonymous No.10118167]

>>10113262
Macrobius is the greatest internet poster of all time.

[Anonymous No.10118547]

>>10117529
this

[Anonymous No.10118640]

>>10117507
>If you don't understand why reading revelations as truth makes you think that the apocalypse is coming then I can't help you.
>Conservatives operate under the belief that the world is ending soon because they believe in Revelations.
Nice assumption moron.

[Anonymous No.10118687]

>>10102031
Many modern countries gradually reformed their monarchies from absolute to constitutional and from constitutional to parliamentary democracies. The Nordic nations did not have significant revolutions or reigns of terror demarcating their past monarchies from their current social democracies.

[Anonymous No.10118704]

>>10116296
This sneering, pretentious twat was as insufferable as today's moralizing, condescending leftists.

[Anonymous No.10118705]

>>10109920
>conservatism did not exist before the 19th century
these are the fucking retards you post with

[Anonymous No.10118972]

>>10118705
As if this is surprising anymore.

[Anonymous No.10119295]

>>10118972
bump

[Anonymous No.10120246]

>>10109681
>For France, Houllebecqc.
> Who am I missing?

the people he larps

[Anonymous No.10120574]

>>10120246
so who?

[Anonymous No.10120945]

>>10120246
"larps"

[Anonymous No.10121007]

Oh please god not this fucking thread again.

[Anonymous No.10121016]

>>10121007
Oh please god not this fucking type of post again.

[Anonymous No.10121043]

>>10121016
Damn you sure out-witted me there bud.

[Anonymous No.10121104]

Jared Taylor is the greatest infodumper of our time.

[Anonymous No.10121139]

>>10117529
>haha, those fundamentalists sure are silly!
>not like me, I'm a modern theist, I use my own personal life experiences and the values of my peers to judge which parts are really important and which parts are just metaphor, or say the opposite of what it looks like!
>Look, here's an interpretation of the bible that somehow magically perfectly suits my race and class identity politics, while maintaining the thinnest patina of respect for a higher authority.
>It sure is lucky that the bible is code for how great people just like me are!

Insufferable god of the gaps faggot. At least fundamentalists have the strength of faith to shape their lives around their ideology.

[Anonymous No.10121142]

>>10121139
whoa calm down there buddy

[Anonymous No.10121216]

>>10121139
Protestants were a mistake.

[Anonymous No.10121330]

>>10121104
>Jared Taylor
lmao nah, he has perceived intelligence due to everyone expecting him to be an absolute moron; as it turns out, he's not. doesn't mean he's the greatest of anything

[Anonymous No.10121460]

>>10121007
Go back to /leftypol/ if you can't hack it

[Anonymous No.10121527]

>>10121460
this

[Anonymous No.10121567]

>>10113262
>salo
>conservative
There are conservative posters, but they're an absolute minority.

[Anonymous No.10122195]

>>10121460
okay

[Anonymous No.10122686]

>>10122195
thanks

[Anonymous No.10122695]

>>10109926
>de Maistre
>not conservative

[Anonymous No.10123008]

>>10122695
>It's another episode where everyone battles over definitions and classifications

[Anonymous No.10123025]

>>10116296
haha this kills the jew

[Anonymous No.10123162]

>>10089311

In the US it means to conserve or limit the scope of the government in to maximize personal freedom of citizens.

[Anonymous No.10123273]

>>10122686
still here but no problem