/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12465292]

what right wing theories are most similar to the frankfurt school's social criticism?

i saw a post by an anon today saying that women enjoy working in office jobs because it allows them to play dressup, gossip, "go to lunch" and generally waste their lives living in a perpetual present. later i went to buy some food and i noticed that niggers really enjoy working menial jobs, as long as they are playing music and jumpin' and jivin' with eachother, smoking weed and so on. at the top of modern society the bourgeoisie is short term hedonistic only with more expensive taste. its like the world has stopped turning and the laziest most selfish people are in charge.

i like the frankfurt critiques of all these phenomena and im reading negative dialectics but they are totally unwilling to think about aristocratic virtues, timeless principles, idealism and so on for obvious reasons. are there any right wing equivalents that have the same deep analysis but are willing to think about such things?

[Anonymous No.12465304]

>>12465292
It's called religion, idiot.

[Anonymous No.12465309]

>>12465292
>niggers really enjoy working menial jobs, as long as they are playing music and jumpin' and jivin' with eachother, smoking weed and so on
today I learned i am a nigger

[Anonymous No.12465310]

>>12465304
please no phone posting in my thread

[Anonymous No.12465363]

>>12465310
I'm more serious than you are. You wanted the right-wing version of the Frankfurt School; it's theology. There's a bunch to choose from. Each provides a comprehensive and unlimited system of analyses which explains the origin and expression of all problems through the understanding of meta-physical properties of value.

[Anonymous No.12465400]

nouvelle droit

[Anonymous No.12465410]

>>12465363
I am torn between the fact that your original answer was too brief to be of any real value and the fact that he did not deserve this much better, expanded explanation.

[Anonymous No.12465435]

>>12465400
good idea, i know they have some good gramscians but do you know if they have any frankfurt or ex-frankfurt people specifically? i would be interested to see rogue marxists

someone recommended james burnham to me

>>12465410
he upped the word count but added no content. if he wants to discuss books or authors he should post. otherwise he's just posturing.

[Anonymous No.12465473]

>>12465363
>You wanted the right-wing version of the Frankfurt School; it's theology.
-t paleocommunist

[Anonymous No.12465481]

>>12465410
>>12465435
How can you possibly need more than the obvious? If you could actually grasp the Frankfurters you'd obviously know that counterpart would come from the other side of the modernist/capitalist gap. If capitalism is the dominant frame, the right-wing counterpart must be whichever frame criticizes it (for much the same reasons) but is traditionalist. And, having much more time, there are more avenues to explore. Do I really have to tell you to begin with the respective canons?

[Anonymous No.12465483]

>>12465304
>no proof of a deity
>if there is proof of one, can't prove which one
>no proof which religion is objectively correct, literally all subjective

Facts don't care about your feelings.

[Anonymous No.12465495]

>>12465473
Obviously, and obviously not. We (being Catholics) would say the communists, like all the descendent ideologies, took central teachings of the faith, isolated them, and stripped them of God. To a formalist it might look the same, but we are firm that if it not taken in whole, it is evil. And also, the communists might say we are the source of Liberalism.

[Anonymous No.12465507]

>>12465483
Not only false, but also irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.12465516]

>>12465481
the important thing is that you've managed to expand "Religion, DUHHH!!!!," a godawful post, into a license to repeat yourself for 500 more posts and fill the thread with your autism. i hope you enjoy yourself, given this is what you wanted from the start you chatrooming faggot.

hopefully the other guy is smart enough to disengage.

[Anonymous No.12465560]

>>12465292
Evola, Coomaraswamy, Lazslo, Uzdavinys

[Anonymous No.12465628]

>>12465435
The Machiavellians is a classic. Carrol Quigley is fascinating too.

Regarding ex-Frankfurts, I do not believe so but the Gramsci influence is clear and pronounced. If you're interested in this kind of stuff just check out Joachim Ritter and co.

[Anonymous No.12465630]

>>12465516
But the recommendations are literally obvious. If Christianity, why should I have to tell you about Augustine, or Aquinas, or Origen? Is this the first time you've heard if the Bible?

You asked for right-wing theories similar to the frankfurt school. Religion--theologies--are the answer. There's an incredible amount. Or are you looking for a right-wing author that uses the same terminology as the Frankfurt School? Because, if you've read your Foucault (yes I know he's not frankfurt) you'd know that couldn't possibly exist.

[Anonymous No.12465632]

>>12465292
What is "timeless" about "aristocratic virtues"? Isn't this literally a historically constructed ethos?

As far as idealism is concerned, you're completely wrong. Every major Frankfurt thinker addresses the tradition of idealism at some point.

This is a funny post to me for many reasons. It's obvious that the Left has a much better critique of liberalism than the Right. The only success that the Right has had post-WWII has come through anti-intellectual "populist" movements. If you hate neoliberalism, identity politics etc. you don't necessarily need some kind of reactionary ideology.

That being said, the person who you should read is definitely Sloterdijk, specifically his first book "Critique of Cynical Reason." Sloterdijk provides the only major response to the questions of history, responsibility, and reason posed in Negative Dialectics. Sloterdijk is very invested in the aristocracy and the non-human (sometimes divine or whatever) but in a completely anti-fascist way, although he gets into some sketchy genetic stuff in later works. But yeah, as far as non-"dialectical materialist" social criticism goes, he's head and shoulders above everyone else.

[Anonymous No.12465636]

>>12465628
>Carrol Quigley
also reccing Quigley
idk about him being Right wing though

[Anonymous No.12465825]

>>12465632
You only think this because you don't realize all liberalism is on the left.

[Anonymous No.12466221]

>>12465636
He's not right wing, you imbecile. Read between the lines.

[Anonymous No.12466223]

>>12466221
how dare you

[Anonymous No.12466238]

>>12465292
you realise the upper classes are generally the most perverse yes? aristocratic virtues ha, the guillotine was used for a reason

[Anonymous No.12466249]

>>12465825
american

[Anonymous No.12466269]

>>12466249
Everything modern is on the left

[Anonymous No.12466276]

>>12466269
>>12466249
when you guys die you'll be subjected to an eternity of a Marxist and a Reactionary yelling at each other over whether the RIght-Left divide is primarily about capitalism or monarchy as penance for your sins

[Anonymous No.12466280]

>>12465292
Frankfurt Schule were very much German idealists, most of them could be referred to as Left Hegelians more than they could be called Marxists.

[Anonymous No.12466289]

>>12466223

[Anonymous No.12466296]

read De Maistre

[Anonymous No.12466300]

>>12466276
It's neither. The real left-right divide is Protestant-Catholic

[Anonymous No.12466312]

>>12466269
>Everything civilised is leftist.
FTFY

[Anonymous No.12466317]

>>12466300
>>12466269
Moldtards.

[Anonymous No.12466330]

>>12466317
I'm one person, and I've never heard of moldbug until today. I have no interest in restoring any monarchy. There is no reason why the leaders of men must be the rulers of men.

[Anonymous No.12466338]

>>12466312
Civilization is an illusion. There is only righteousness and unrighteousness.

[Anonymous No.12466342]

>>12466238
See
>>12466296

[Anonymous No.12466344]

>>12465309
welcome to the club, nigga

[Anonymous No.12466375]

>>12466300
big think

>>12466317
small think

>>12466330
read moldbug

[Anonymous No.12466380]

>>12466375
I am disinclined. Convince me.

[Anonymous No.12466386]

>>12466380
"An Open Letter to Progressives" and "How Dawkins Got Pwned" are two of the best political essays I've read, it's high-tier unreliable narration and irony

[Anonymous No.12466402]

>>12466386
I hope the second is about how Dawkins' "meme" theory completely inverts any materialist perspective and reestablishes the foundation of being in the ideal.

[Anonymous No.12466418]

>>12466338
You need to go back.

[Anonymous No.12466422]

>>12466386
Cringe and YIKES!
>>12466380
He's a blogger who blogs about blogging and how this somehow ties into zionist theories of liberalism.

[Anonymous No.12466430]

>>12466418
I'm trying. But I can't unless you all come with me.

[Anonymous No.12466436]

>>12466422
checked
isn't yarvin's quote delicious? his level of irony is truly impressive

[Anonymous No.12466440]

>>12466436
t. Alanis Morisett

[Anonymous No.12466456]

>>12466440
...she does alternative music ... and moldbug influenced the alternative right! i get it!

[Anonymous No.12466457]

>>12466456
Ironic, no?

[Anonymous No.12466548]

>>12465632
Only reason that leftist critiques are "better" is because leftists and liberals spent a large amount of time killing their enemies and seizing power for the better part of two centuries to the point that your major enemy (capitalists) are now "woke". You'd say the same thing about the church having better critiques than the pagans, because you guys are in power (while ignoring the fact you are in power, because you continually relegate the last version of leftism 10 years ago as something to be overcome and improved upon). You see this sort of dynamic in play right now with the whole "just build your own website" where leftists and liberals squash anyone that dares speak out against them.

[Anonymous No.12468453]

>>12465292
bump

[Anonymous No.12468471]

Guenon and Evola

>In our time it is fashionable to exalt work of whatever sort and no matter how it is accomplished, as if it had some superlative value in itself independently of any consideration of another order. Contrary to what the moderns think, any work that is done indiscriminately by anyone solely for the pleasure of acting or because of the need to ‘earn one’s living’ hardly merits being exalted, and indeed it can only be regarded as something abnormal, opposed to the order that ought to regulate human institutions, to such a point that, in the conditions of our age, it only too often acquires a character that without any exaggeration qualifies as ‘infra-human’. What our contemporaries seem to ignore completely is that work is not truly valid unless it conforms to the very nature of the being that accomplishes it and results therefrom in a spontaneous and necessary way, as it were, so that it is no more than the means for that nature to realize itself as perfectly as possible.
- "Glorification Of Work" Guénon

[Anonymous No.12468693]

>>12465292
Spengler's appropriation of Aryan Hindu cosmology fits with this. We cycle through rule by priests (early civ), to rule by warriors (feudalism), to the current rule by (((merchants))), and soon by the dalits (niggers). Nothing to do but ride the tiger.