Prove you're not a childish ideologue

[Anonymous No.11919030]

Name three writers whose political views you find to be repellent and diametrically opposed to your own, but whose writings you acknowledge to be extremely beautiful and intelligent

[Anonymous No.11919038]

Pynchon
McCarthy
Vonnegut

[Anonymous No.11919048]

Pretty much everyone

[Anonymous No.11919064]

>>11919030
I’m not so much of a fag that there’s a wide span of political views I find “repellent”. I might think they’re silly or destructive, but I’m so bored with disgust... disgust as a substitute for morality

[Anonymous No.11919072]

>>11919030
people who have no ideology have no true beliefs.
This is objectively true.

[Anonymous No.11919090]

I don't have political views

[Anonymous No.11919091]

>>11919030
Thomas Babington Macaulay

[Anonymous No.11919122]

>>11919030
Dostoyevsky
Scruton
Mansfield
bonus: Conservative Catholicism generally

t. pic

[Anonymous No.11919126]

I love Salman Rushdie's major novels. I think he's a fantastic stylist. But when I see his Twitter page, or watch his interviews, I find him to be an obnoxious jackass with head firmly lodged up his ass.

But Satanic Verses and Midnight's Toddlers are still my jam.

[Anonymous No.11919162]

This post seems kind of redundant. It tacitly claims that the way for one to not be an ideologue is to seek out media that you don’t agree with politically just for the novel sake of their prose or imagery etc. Wouldn’t that just mean that your more concerned with the portrayal of the ideas than the ideas themselves? A true non ideologue would challenge his ideals with well based counter arguments by the other side. Ideologues on the other hand want to stay as safe in their ideology as they can be and therefore would discard the ideas and just take the book for its “beauty and intelligence”

Anyway I’m tired from making this post. Back to shitposting

[Anonymous No.11919261]

>>11919030
I've never come across anyone that I couln't agree with in at least some small way.
If you are 'diametrically opposed' to anyone, you are an ideologue.

[Anonymous No.11919692]

>>11919072
And that's unironically not a bad thing

[Anonymous No.11919698]

>>11919030
pascal
turgenev
AYN RAND

[Anonymous No.11919711]

Havent read three authors why am I here

[Anonymous No.11919798]

The only people i find repellent are SJWs and third wave feminism but there is little literature associated with them. I do read non fiction essays they write and some are well done.

[Anonymous No.11919831]

Adam Smith(along with all the great liberal advocates of ficticious property)
Karl Marx(his critique of commodity markets was flawed, and that flaw ruined socialism and afforded room for the great autrocities of the bosheivks.)
Spengler(the west is in fact, declining)
All of these people where terribly wrong, but I respect their analysis, fundamentally flawed as it may be. If only they were scientific men like I, the world would be a better place.

[Anonymous No.11919840]

>>11919798
Yeah you are a juvenile. SHOO, SHOO, BACK TO WHATEVER CRINGE COMP YOU CRAWLED OUT OF, SHOO.

[Anonymous No.11919852]

>>11919030
Keynes
Piketty
Rothbard

It's hard to think of more names since OP said you have to be diametrically opposed to their views and still find their work beautiful and intelligent. With Keynes I disagree with a whole lot, but his work is rather elegant; the same can be said about Piketty.

When it comes to Rothbard I agree with many things, I just think he takes things a bit too far. Still very interesting.

[Anonymous No.11919857]

>Orwell
>Steinbeck
>Virginia Woolf
Socialism is theft and therefore wrong. I agree with Orwell about how it's important for the people to be armed, with Steinbeck about the need for organized labor to protect employees from unethical treatment by immoral management, and with Woolf to some extent about being a woman. I can't get over the whole "redistribute the wealth" thing though, so I have to disagree with them on politics in general.

[Anonymous No.11919865]

>>11919852
Disgusting liberal that only reads liberal thinkers. Not only that your the worst kind of liberal, you want to give legal fictions free reign to pillage reality.
Giving human rights to capital through private property is the worst thing to happen in history.

[Anonymous No.11919870]

>>11919030
Plato
Dostoevsky
Kierkegaard

[Anonymous No.11919882]

>>11919865
Go cry in a corner you useless commie faggot.

[Anonymous No.11919893]

>Solanas
Extremely entertaining to read
>Dworkin
Had heart and brains

Uh

>Vonnegut
Cozy, wistful style

[Anonymous No.11919905]

I dont care so I cant answer your question.
Do I win?

[Anonymous No.11919943]

>>11919905
You cared enough to post, so no. You lose.

[Anonymous No.11919968]

>>11919030
theres not like 5 ideologies in the world you retard and there will likely never be a total diametrical opposite for my or anyone elses beliefs, politics and economics are more than just "lole gommunizmms and gapittlolists xddde"

[Anonymous No.11919976]

>>11919882
Woah sorry I triggered you dumb dumb. I figured you were at least literate enough to enage with ideas pertaining to the legal foundations of capitalist business.
I'm not a communist in any sense and see serious flaws in marxs critique of commodity markets. Id prefer free markets, really free markets that aren't under the boot of ficticious legal entities, free market capitalism is an oxymoron.

[Anonymous No.11919978]

>>11919893
Valerie Solanas?

>>11919976
Are you on drugs? You sound like you're on drugs.

[Anonymous No.11919987]

I don't know their political views.

[Anonymous No.11919993]

>>11919978
Did you know markets existed for thousands of years before capitalism. The only way to fix our political economy is to dispell the monster of private property.

[Anonymous No.11920019]

>>11919993
Yeah, I know you're a useless dick who wants to steal other people's things, you don't need to keep harping that string.

[Anonymous No.11920052]

>>11919030
I'll try to be diverse
Lenin
Erich Fromm
Dostoevsky

[Anonymous No.11920055]

Marx(Communist), Hesse(Pacifist), Kafka(Atheist).

[Anonymous No.11920148]

>>11920019
I want the opposite actually.
I want people to be able to live in their home without paying for it, as is natural.
People should only own things that are actually in their possession.
Capitalism is stealing and property is theft. The largest scale of theivery to ever take place is privatization. It is how the land was stolen from the Indian (dots and feathers) all those people in the slums of mumbia, lagos, Shanghai, latin American favalas, etc. are there because transnational corporations bought the land out from under their feet. Privatization is not only theft, it is now the principle driver of the 6th mass exinction, and climate change which threaten everything good we have in this world.
You're capitalist delusions are what allows the greatest autrocities in human history, I'm sure I can't get the scale of it. Youre mind has been poisoned by demented capitalist ideaology.

[Anonymous No.11920156]

Selling land is horribly sinful

[Anonymous No.11920172]

Nabokov (don’t know a whole lot about his views but he was intolerably smug)

Mishima

Bellow (Mr Sammler’s Planet is a bizarrely hateful book, but also well-written)

[Anonymous No.11920201]

>>11920148
You are a brainwashed idiot who can't even spell. Move to your paradise in Venezuela or North Korea, and then kill yourself.

[Anonymous No.11920202]

don't read books, just /lit/
>comics are alright
>ok I read 2 books a year max

[Anonymous No.11920208]

>>11920201
>he thinks capitalism is some eternal state of humanity
hey anon, humans had millions of years of diverse existence before capitalism. assuming that the only two realities are a gluttonous amoral capitalist society or venezuela/dprk shows how unbelievably small and ignorant you are

[Anonymous No.11920220]

>>11919857
Wage labor is theft and therefor wrong. Fredrick Douglas proudly became a wage laborer after being a slave/abolistionist then said it needed to be abolished with slavery.

[Anonymous No.11920223]

Thomas Mann
Nietzsche
Martin Luther

[Anonymous No.11920231]

Tolstoy
St Paul
St Augustine

[Anonymous No.11920235]

>disagree with someone completely
>still find their writing extremely intelligent
Literally how?

[Anonymous No.11920252]

>>11920235
I'm pretty sure the theory of Forms is nonsense, the Republic would be a nightmarish dystopia, the Laws are idiotic, his 'proof' of the immortality of the soul is stupid, but Plato is pretty smart no?

[Anonymous No.11920261]

Cass Sunstein
Emma Goldman
Pat Buchanan

[Anonymous No.11920271]

Machiavelli
Rousseau
Heidegger

[Anonymous No.11920275]

>>11919840
Looks like he can find plenty of 'cringe' right here.

[Anonymous No.11920303]

>>11920252
>Plato is pretty smart
[citation needed]
He's overrated as fuck.I f he wasn't one of the very first (chronologically) philosophers, hardly anyone would bat an eye.

[Anonymous No.11920342]

>>11920303
>he wasn't one of the very first (chronologically) philosophers, hardly anyone would bat an eye.
Yeah but he was. Paint like Picasso now you're a hack. Do it 100 years ago you're a genius

[Anonymous No.11920347]

>>11919122
good

the weak should fear the strong

[Anonymous No.11920367]

>>11920208
>millions of years of diverse experience

that’s just wacky when you consider that humans have been around for, at most, 250,000, and that the Neolithic revolution really only “diversified” the human experience around 10,000-13,000 years ago.

but other than these crucial points you definitely know what you’re talking about!

[Anonymous No.11920383]

>>11919072
Yes. This is true. All belief is ideology, all ideology is belief.

To not believe anything is perhaps too much, but not unjustified. To move as close towards it as possible is probably the most sane and reasonable thing to do.

Contrarily, to claim total knowledge or to move close towards that claim, is less reasonable and less sane.

Then again, you don't have to like reason-ability and sanity anon.

[Anonymous No.11920386]

>>11919030
Only Schmitt comes to mind in terms of politics, I think he was subversive in a clever way and actually puts forward good arguments for dictatorship.
Other than that I guess I enjoy Land's writings, him along side people like Debord and Fisher have this tendency of elevating Capital to metaphysical heights that I find quite interesting to read.

[Anonymous No.11920390]

Waugh
Dalrymple
Fukuyama

[Anonymous No.11920405]

>>11920386
Where do I start with schmitt?

[Anonymous No.11920413]

I can't.
I'm 44.
My political attitudes are set for life.
I think they were informed by reading history, but set firm by biology.
I'm far right.
I have peers who are far left, where I used to be.
The ones who are still friends - we have mutually decided to spend our time talking about shared non-political interests.
The ones who can't stop taking about politics are history.

[Anonymous No.11920457]

>>11920235
You need to agree with faulkner's abortion stance to like Hamlet?

[Anonymous No.11920468]

>>11920261
you too?

[Anonymous No.11920715]

>>11919857
You are basically already in the 95th percentile of socialists

[Anonymous No.11920734]

i don't have strong political views

[Anonymous No.11920741]

>>11919976
>>11919993
>>11920148
based mutualist comrade

[Anonymous No.11920759]

>>11920413
>biology

lmfoa

[Anonymous No.11921236]

>>11919030
why those nigga got they tongues out? white people so childish and petty on god

[Anonymous No.11921316]

Dostoevsky
Heinlein
Mishima

Good thread. Confused as to why others in this thread find it so difficult to understand that you can still enjoy or gain something from a work even if you find yourself in total disagreement with its themes.