Conservatives/Reactionary in the arts

[Anonymous No.15881391]

There's been something of a surge in right wing news these past few years, but in the arts right wing people are still incredibly underrepresented.

Could you please recommend me dramatists, poets and authors who are of the conservative persuasion? If you know any British ones particularly that'd be preferable.

Both established leftist apostates like David Mamet and newer guys like S. Craig Zahler if you could.

[Anonymous No.15881410]

>>15881391
Man on man bareback sex is more reactionary than any of the shit you've listed here. If you want to return to tradition go give your best mate an oil rub and kiss his neck.

[Anonymous No.15881485]

>>15881391
That list is terrible. Pound and Eliot were modern poets. Dante is a pain to read, completely inferior to Petrarca in style, and totally irrelevant unless you're a traditional catholic. Evola didn't understand the tradition that he spent all his life studying.

Why isn't the Iliad there? Besides the fact that Western history starts with Homer, I can't think of another book that better embodies traditional values.

[Anonymous No.15881506]

>>15881410
>>15881485
Oh my god guys I just used that picture because it's tangentially related to my question. The picture wasn't the point. I asked for recs for modern conservatives in literature.

Can anyone help?

[Anonymous No.15881520]

>>15881391
Conservatives are simply the dead weight of progress. Art is as impossible for them as it is unnecessary.

[Anonymous No.15881701]

>>15881506
You broke one of the basic unwritten rules of this site: never post a picture more interesting than the post itself.

[Anonymous No.15881706]

>>15881701
Guess once this thread dies I'll just repost it just with a blank wojak.

[Anonymous No.15881725]

>>15881391
What's the third book on the worldview section?

[Anonymous No.15881738]

>>15881391
Some of Mishima's last thoughts, which I count sincere, and think shows his political actions to have been more than egoism.

[Anonymous No.15881741]

>>15881520
this, they don't value arts, as what it means: práxis; they value objects and thats why they get cucked by jew-object-traders every fucking time.

[Anonymous No.15881766]

>>15881485
>Pound and Eliot were modern poets
Your point? You're literally a retard if you think modernist poetry = spiritually unconservative. And they both obviously had strong sympathies for tradition.

Furthermore...
> Dante is a pain to read, completely inferior to Petrarca in style, and totally irrelevant unless you're a traditional catholic.
Don't take this the wrong way, but your iq is necessarily sub 100. I don't know how you could know nothing about the original italian and just find a cheap translation, or even still find that a "bad" or "useless" if you're not a Catholic. It wonders me.

[Anonymous No.15881780]

Barzun the Culture We Deserve.
Also his The Use and Abuse of Art.
And why not his From Dawn to Decadence.

While he was an old school liberal in all other topics, in art he was despondent at its state in the last third of the 20th century. But he held onto hope that technology might revive artistry. And while pop music is worse thanks to it, the avant-garde of electronic music have had pleased him since he loved the heterodox melodies of Berlioz.

[Anonymous No.15881781]

>>15881725
Essays on catholicism, liberalism and socialism by Juan Donoso Cortes

[Anonymous No.15881787]

>>15881781
Ahh yes, I know it anyway. It seems like something only intelligent Catholics would know as "the GOAT".

[Anonymous No.15881798]

>>15881766
Modernism is literally the rejection of tradition.
I've read Dante and Petrarca in Italian, since I'm Tuscan myself.
Pleb.

[Anonymous No.15883351]

>>15881485
>When you desperately try to create a critique and fail.

[Anonymous No.15884706]

>>15881410
greeks fucked each other's thighs, they didn't do anal sex except to slaves

[Anonymous No.15884710]

griffin's book modernism and fascism has everything you need

[Anonymous No.15884804]

>>15881798
>Modernism is literally the rejection of tradition.
Stylistically, yes. Spiritually/philosophically? That is completely dependent on the author.

[Anonymous No.15884826]

>>15881798
Not at all true. Modernism is multifaceted. It can just as easily mean the shrugging off of MERE adherence to tradition in order to SEIZE upon, embrace, and develop tradition at a higher level than ever. That's what Pound and Eliot wanted to do and they are arch-modernists you wop fag.

[Anonymous No.15884831]

>>15884706
>greeks didn’t do anal except for when they did

[Anonymous No.15884836]

>>15881485
>Pound and Eliot were modern poets
And conservatism is a result of modernist thinking.

[Anonymous No.15884937]

>>15884831
they saw penetration as denigrating and didn't do it to free men, only to slaves
nice try though

[Anonymous No.15884974]

>>15884937
>they saw penetration as denigrating so they only did anal sometimes

[Anonymous No.15885006]

Imagine still being political. Can we please just start cutting the still beating hearts out of pedophiles and junkies on top of our newly built 1km tall pyramids while we all trip out of DMT already.

[Anonymous No.15885068]

If you want to be a true reactionary, both in a philosophical sense and in the sense of living out a traditional lifestyle in a contemporary context, neo Reformed evangelicalism is the strongest option. I am not aware of really any other tradition minded communities that are as thriving and vibrant and as committed to the Western canon.

[Anonymous No.15885072]

>>15881485
>Evola didn't understand the tradition that he spent all his life studying.
Evola is probably the most unfairly dismissed philosopher ever mentioned on /lit/. No one ever articulates a valid criticism, and having actually read him, I put it down to most people literally not being able to understand him.
He has a very broad and often archaic vocabulary and uses so many languages and reference points that it can seem like he's hoodwinking the reader. But that's more of a reflection of his writing style and his analytical method, not the philosophy he is trying to express.
The traditional/modern dichotomy perfectly explains history, myth, religion, philosophy, everything. Without this outlook, one can only ask "why were most people just exploited for most of human history?" - because that's the only conclusion you can come to if you only have the modern materialist paradigm in the forefront of your mind when looking back. And the irony is we have more degeneration and exploitation now more than ever.

[Anonymous No.15885080]

>>15885006
>he thinks things can be separated from the political
Oh no no no

[Anonymous No.15885082]

>>15884831
>>15884974
got em!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous No.15885101]

>>15885072
Wrong, material analysis makes the traditional/modern dichotomy largely irrelevant, as it's simply the result of increased material prosperity under capitalism. Degeneration is simply capitalism causing that which is solid to disintegrate into thin air, which is why Liberalism has always been the favored ideology of capitalism.

[Anonymous No.15885116]

>>15885101
>material analysis makes the traditional/modern dichotomy largely irrelevant, as it's simply the result of increased material prosperity under capitalism.

.....

Evola responded to that. It's easy to tell who didn't read Evola based on when they put forth arguments that they would have known that Evola refuted, had they only read him. Many such cases. Sad!

[Anonymous No.15885134]

>>15885116
I never claimed to have read Evola, I've never been interested in reading him. What's his response to historical materialism demonstrating how capitalism undermined traditional orders?

[Anonymous No.15885144]

>>15885134
>Spoonfeed me

Nah, read books faggot.

[Anonymous No.15885147]

>>15885134
>I've never been interested in reading
ftfy

[Anonymous No.15885157]

>>15885144
>>15885147
Samefag, I've never been interested in Evola because all Evolafags have been intolerable and I haven't heard anything interesting about him from other sources.

[Anonymous No.15885161]

>>15885157
cope

[Anonymous No.15885163]

>>15885157
Also Junger snubbed him multiple times, so that further gives me a reason to do the same.

[Anonymous No.15885164]

>>15885157
>S-s-samefag!

Lol, it wasn't samefag you fucking faggot. You were just being retarded, so we called your shit out. Now fuck off.

[Anonymous No.15885168]

>>15881391
>Leopard
>Reactionary
holy filtered

[Anonymous No.15885170]

>>15885164
>>15885161
Ok, it's two retards then, never mind. Go walk around in an air raid and get paralyzed.

[Anonymous No.15885171]

>>15885157
>Evolafags have been intolerable

If you think I was being intolerable towards you then good, that's what what I meant to come off as. I hate people who discuss an author without having read him.

[Anonymous No.15885178]

>>15885170
>G-go walk around in an AIR RAID and get p-paralyzed.
Nice tryharding faggot. Siphon liquid shit out my greasy ass.

[Anonymous No.15885185]

>>15885171
Most Evolafags haven't read Evola, it's not like I'm entirely unfamiliar with him, I just never found any interest in him or Guenon. His influence on philosophy after him was pretty minimal compared to other rightist thinkers like Schmitt.

[Anonymous No.15885190]

>>15885178
Again, Junger found reason enough to snub him, so I don't feel bad about doing the same.

[Anonymous No.15885196]

>>15885185
No wonder since he didn't do much philosophy

[Anonymous No.15885199]

>>15885190
>incapable of forming his own opinions, instead simulates others'

[Anonymous No.15885200]

>>15885134
>>15885157
This is exactly why I made this post
>>15885072
Evola is unfairly dismissed by retards who have never even read him, not to any level of real comprehension, at least.
It's a shame that /lit/ is so conformist.

[Anonymous No.15885210]

>>15885200
If I'm a materialist, why shouldn't I dismiss Evola, who's beliefs had no small component of mysticism?

[Anonymous No.15885220]

>>15885210
You should not dismiss any author prior to reading any of their work you fucking absolute mong.

[Anonymous No.15885221]

>>15885200
>Evola is unfairly dismissed by retards who have never even read him

I know right, just look at that one guy spewing his asscancerous opinions in the thread right now. Dismisses an author because another author "snubbed" him, what a childish behaviour. I think this might be what you get from people who go around imagining themselves "critics" and "intellectuals".

>>15885210
>I'm a materialist

Pic related is you then.

[Anonymous No.15885234]

>>15885220
I do not have time to read every other who ever wrote anything, and there are a number of resources online (i.e. lectures and shit like that) that can give you a good overview as well as things other authors wrote on that author. Given these two things, I have not found any reason to read Evola.

[Anonymous No.15885241]

>>15885234
see >>15885199

[Anonymous No.15885243]

>>15885221
>complains about people dismissing an author unfairly
>dismisses an entire method of analysis

[Anonymous No.15885245]

>>15885234
Dude. Stop posting. Your just embarrassing yourself even more.

[Anonymous No.15885256]

>>15885234
>i listened to the first 5 minutes of a podcast about it while taking a shit so i'm basically an expert

[Anonymous No.15885259]

>>15885245
Cope, admitting to have read Evola is the real embarrassment. Now go back to casting spells or whatever the fuck you people do.

[Anonymous No.15885260]

>>15885243
You're proving your retardation further. I haven't dismissed historical materialism, neither did Evola, he discussed it and put it where it belongs, in the context of traditional / modern dichotomy. So you really don't know what the fuck you are talking about here. Actually i changed my mind, go ahead and respond, I will be waiting because I want to be amused further, this doesn't cost me a dime and I am being entertained.

[Anonymous No.15885272]

>>15885256
Wasn't a podcast, I read one of the few people he actually influenced and found it to be the far weakest part of his philosophy.

[Anonymous No.15885280]

>>15885272
>i read a totally different author and base my opinions by proxy
You're the absolute perfect example of a pseudo-intellectual.

[Anonymous No.15885281]

>>15885260
>I haven't dismissed historical materialism
You literally did with this post >>15885221

[Anonymous No.15885291]

>>15885281
I said your head was holow because you called yourself a "materialist". Materialism and historical materialism are two entirely different things. Not to mention, I don't have to dismiss an "ism" just because I think it's retarded to go and call yourself an "ist". God you are stupid, haha. Why are you here on /lit/ anyway?

[Anonymous No.15885295]

>>15885280
>reading one of the most prominent people influenced by Evola who discusses Evola at length and then forming a broader opinion of him based on that is pseudointellectual.
Pseuds don't read period, this is like complaining about someone having an opinion about Schmitt when they only read Strauss critiquing Schmitt, it's retarded.

[Anonymous No.15885300]

>>15885291
>Materialism and historical materialism are two entirely different things

[Anonymous No.15885307]

>>15885295
>this is like complaining about someone having an opinion about Schmitt when they only read Strauss critiquing Schmitt
You're legitimately a moron.

[Anonymous No.15885308]

>>15885300
You literally think those two are the same, kek. Thanks for the wojak. Consider suicide.

[Anonymous No.15885317]

>>15885307
Giga cope, you don't have to have read an author to have a general opinion if you have at least some idea of what that author wrote about.

[Anonymous No.15885325]

>>15885308
>two things not being the same exact thing makes them entirely different

[Anonymous No.15885326]

>>15885317
>you don't have to know anything about a person or their opinions to hold opinions on them
People like you are the reason people still propagate lies about Caligula. You think it's sufficient to have some fucking second hand nugget of information. You're a total mental dead end.

[Anonymous No.15885336]

>>15885325
Kys, retard.

[Anonymous No.15885337]

>>15885326
I never once claimed that I had an exhaustive knowledge of Evola, only that I had a general opinion based on reasonable information, which gives me enough cause to be able to have an opinion on him, which is true. Pretending otherwise is hypocritical.

[Anonymous No.15885338]

>>15885325
Kys retard

[Anonymous No.15885342]

>>15885336
>>15885338
>Kys, retard.

[Anonymous No.15885346]

>>15885337
>I never once claimed that I had an exhaustive knowledge of Evola
>I hole absolutely no knowledge of Evola and only know of him from internet forums
I don't even believe you've read Dugin. You most likely watched some youtube videos and scoured wikipedia.

[Anonymous No.15885348]

>>15885342
Multiple people are telling you to kill yourself Anon, maybe it's time to stop posting.

[Anonymous No.15885352]

>>15885342
Kill yourself

[Anonymous No.15885360]

>>15885346
Fourth Political Theory is about 200 pages and easily available online, you can choose to believe whatever you want. He's also done many lectures and 4PT.su has a ton of stuff written by him. He's not exactly a difficult read as long as you've read Schmitt and Heidegger.

[Anonymous No.15885365]

>>15885348
>Multiple people are telling you to kill yourself Anon, maybe it's time to stop posting.

[Anonymous No.15885373]

>>15885352
>Kill yourself

[Anonymous No.15885380]

>>15885365
>>15885342
So fucking embarrassing to witness the level of cope when you have entirely lost every argument you ever tried to make, and decide to resort to dumping your neckbeard ad-hominem folder.

[Anonymous No.15885381]

>>15885360
The Evola you believe yourself to be against is a total figment of your imagination. You are arguing with a brick wall. You are a moron. Like a limp wristed low effort Don Quixote without any of the redeeming qualities.

[Anonymous No.15885386]

>>15885342
>>15885365
>>15885373
>I have 50 terabytes of basedjacks therefore I am correct

[Anonymous No.15885389]

>>15881738
Which book is that?

[Anonymous No.15885394]

>>15885380
There's been no argument lmao, only reeeeing over the fact I haven't read an author and still have a general opinion on him. This could have been a real discussion if the other party had decided to actually provide quotations or essays by him instead of autistically screeching.

[Anonymous No.15885396]

>I have 50 terabytes of basedjacks therefore I am correct

[Anonymous No.15885397]

>>15885394
Or; You could have fucked off and read him, like we implored you to at the very beginning of our exchange.

[Anonymous No.15885399]

>>15885386
See pic related. What's even being argued over? It's simply a shit flinging contest at this point, something the wojaks are perfect for.

[Anonymous No.15885403]

>Or; You could have fucked off and read him, like we implored you to at the very beginning of our exchange.

[Anonymous No.15885406]

>>15885397
I'm not gonna read an entire series of books by an author I have a low opinion of. If you want me to read a book, give me a quotation and a book to read.

[Anonymous No.15885410]

>>15885394
There's no conversation to have. You're an idiot. You hold no opinions of your own and only parrot the opinions of others in an attempt to posture yourself as some sort of intellectual. Shut the fuck up.

[Anonymous No.15885411]

>>15885399
It's not a contest. You've already lost .That's why you are the only guy flinging shit across the room while everyone else is telling you to go drown in the nearest body of water.

>>15885406
No, fuck off faggot.

[Anonymous No.15885412]

>>15885403
Kek that's not even me, good work anon.

[Anonymous No.15885415]

>There's no conversation to have. You're an idiot. You hold no opinions of your own and only parrot the opinions of others in an attempt to posture yourself as some sort of intellectual. Shut the fuck up.

[Anonymous No.15885416]

>>15885406
>I can't read a 100 page book let alone formulate my own opinions on said book

[Anonymous No.15885419]

>>15885410
>There's no conversation to have. You're an idiot. You hold no opinions of your own and only parrot the opinions of others in an attempt to posture yourself as some sort of intellectual. Shut the fuck up.

[Anonymous No.15885420]

>It's not a contest. You've already lost .That's why you are the only guy flinging shit across the room while everyone else is telling you to go drown in the nearest body of water.

[Anonymous No.15885423]

>>15885416
What 100 page book? I ain't reading 5+ books by him to try to figure what argument he made an autist refused to quote.

[Anonymous No.15885424]

>>15885423
>read for me I can't read on my own

[Anonymous No.15885425]

>>15885411
>That's why you are the only guy flinging shit
>conversation literally started with a brainlet wojak
>(you)

[Anonymous No.15885429]

It's not a contest. You've already lost .That's why you are the only guy flinging shit across the room while everyone else is telling you to go drown in the nearest body of water.

[Anonymous No.15885430]

>>15885424
>I can't cite something from an author I claimed to have read for the sake of an argument that would have vindicated me

[Anonymous No.15885440]

>>15885430
I'm not going to cite an author just because you have ADHD and can't read more than half a page without having an episode.

[Anonymous No.15885445]

>>15885440
Cope, you've never even read Evola

[Anonymous No.15885456]

>>15885445
The purpose of you asking for a citation isn't to interest you in reading his writings, but instead it is so you can take his words out of context and try to argue against them with snide comments and empty platitudes.

[Anonymous No.15885468]

>>15885456
How do you know that? You're assuming a motive that you have no way of knowing. If you were able to provide a citation (which you can't because you haven't read him), then your entire argument would be vindicated, yet you refuse anyway.

[Anonymous No.15885476]

>>15884804
>>15884826
>>15884836
You're like those people who try to argue that feminism is about equality. Nobody with even half a brain takes you seriously.
Plebs.

[Anonymous No.15885478]

>>15885468
You've already proven that you formulate your opinions on nothing but second hand hearsay in all your posts. If you have any genuine interest in reading Evola (which you've already stated multiple times, you don't) one of his shortest works, and the one I was referencing when I said 100 pages, is Men Amongst the Ruins. I won't be replying to you anymore.

[Anonymous No.15885488]

>>15885478
>Men Amongst the Ruins
I'm not him, but good taste though. I first listened to an audiobook and was surprised that the book was written so long ago, still remains relevant to a large extent.

[Anonymous No.15885502]

>>15885488
My copy has a foreword written by some progressive faggot double the length of the original text, and an afterword the same length written by some other progressive faggot.

[Anonymous No.15885513]

>>15885502
Kek. I always skip forewords, no exceptions. I got the book to read the book, written by the author, it just nags me that someone felt the need to write an "inb4" and place it there as a foreword.

[Anonymous No.15885523]

>>15885513
The last foreword I read was 5 years ago. Book on Prussia from the library I forgot it's name. The guy spends the whole thing talking about how Germans are a threat to the existence of other people and should not be allowed to assert their identity, slobbering over Churchill's cock throughout.

[Anonymous No.15885545]

>>15885523
Crushing "Prussian militarism" was part of the regression of power from the caste of the warriors to the merchantmen (vaishya).

[Anonymous No.15885546]

>>15885478
>second hand hearsay
>one of the primary contemporary writers influenced by Evola
Lmao, I've already heard of many of his works, I'm solely interested in the one where he addresses historical materialism and its role in the disintegration of traditional orders. Do you actually have that one and a quotation to go along with it?

[Anonymous No.15885563]

>>15885545
Based and Evolapilled

[Anonymous No.15885572]

Current Questions by Talèva, very underground and more extremist than conservative, but accurate about todays issues in the US

[Anonymous No.15885581]

>>15885563
I've thought about it and I am pretty sure that with the establishment of liberal democracy, the 2nd caste has been soundly defeated. But I do not think that the 4th caste has come fully into power yet. Because i think that when they do, that will be the end point of involution. That's why I'm thinking that bolshevism wasn't actually the furthest point to which we could, and would eventually fall so to speak. I think that the real revolution of the 4th estate is at hand. Guenon said something about the end of a whole manvantara.

[Anonymous No.15885591]

>>15885581
That's actually something Dugin addresses in Fourth Political Theory, though he comes down on the side that they were simply wrong on that point.

[Anonymous No.15885594]

>>15885546
Both Men Amongst the Ruins or Revolt Against the Modern World. I'm not going to transcribe for you out of context quotations from physical text you aren't going to bother reading anyways. To refute your claims that I have not read him, the 1st word of the 147th page in Inner Traditions' publication of Men Amongst the Ruins is "Napoleonic". Anyone with this copy can confirm.

[Anonymous No.15885609]

>>15885591
I'm pointing out that the Soviet Union was not really the victory of the fourth caste. At one point, it had to potential to become that. Which is the time when Evola was writing.

[Anonymous No.15885627]

>>15885581
We're way past end point. This is Kali Yuga on crack. All the end times predictions in Peter Berresford Ellis' Celtic Myths and Legends are totally spot on. Worse than Iron Age, fucking Putrid Diarrhea Age. We've managed to produce a more lowly caste than the Worker.

[Anonymous No.15885631]

>>15881391
>over 100 posts
>almost no recommendations

Nice thread, retards.

[Anonymous No.15885649]

>>15885631
Thank the belligerent faggot who trundled in here with his unsolicited opinions on not needing to read to understand authors.

[Anonymous No.15885660]

>>15885649
>Thank the belligerent faggot who trundled in here with his unsolicited opinions on not needing to read to understand authors.

[Anonymous No.15885727]

>>15885200
/x/ seems to appreciate his work more. Makes sense, since they're more sane than most of /lit/

[Anonymous No.15886456]

>make thread only wanting some recs for lit that I'm unaware of
>off to a bad start, anons more interested in unrelated shit about the picture
>come back the next day
>see 100+ posts
>get excited
>it's devolved into an argument about Evola

[Anonymous No.15886531]

I'm so confused. Maybe it's my inner midwit speaking, but isn't this chart a few years worth of reading? I mean, how much more do you need besides it?

[Anonymous No.15886565]

>>15886531
lol, it's a couple of months

[Anonymous No.15886580]

>>15886565
I have such a backlog of books you have no idea, even starting one feels like a daunting task.

[Anonymous No.15886589]

>>15886580
just get in the habit of reading everyday

[Anonymous No.15886807]

>>15886580
I've never used these charts as an indication to read every single book on there. I just pick out one book that catches my eye, read it and then progress from there. In the case of OP's picture I was curious about Parzival by Wolfram von Eschenbach and it turned out to be one of my favorites.

[Anonymous No.15886820]

>>15886456
Sorry anon

[Anonymous No.15886836]

>>15884831

[Anonymous No.15886842]

>>15885006
>just start cutting the still beating hearts out of pedophiles and junkies
>Posts book written by a Satanist pedophile organization

[Anonymous No.15886855]

>>15881391

[Anonymous No.15886875]

>>15881798
>modernisic metre = reactionary marxist
Very big brain here.

[Anonymous No.15886883]

>>15885006
Yes, morality is totally going to remain if this satanic order took over, children definitely wont just be raped and murdered and it will only be slightly away from social norms.

So fucking dumb these people.

[Anonymous No.15886925]

EVOLA IS AN ABSOLUTE HACK
COMPLETELY ANTI-TRADITIONAL
COUNTER INITIATION AGENT
>>>/POL/

[Anonymous No.15886950]

>>15886855
Wasnt' that book co-written by Engels

[Anonymous No.15886967]

>EVOLA
>DUGIN
>SPENGLER
LMAO IF THIS IS REACTIONARY I'D RATHER BE REVOLUTIONARY YOU PSEUDS THIS BOARD IS LATRINE.

L A T R I N E

[Anonymous No.15887262]

>>15886967
Cringe and retardpilled

[Anonymous No.15887275]

>>15887262
ALL OF THOSE PSEUDS PUT ACTION OVER CONTEMPLATION YOU CRINGE-MAN

[Anonymous No.15887292]

>>15887275
Who cares who put what over what? Doesn't mean jack shit. I'm contemplating how fucking inbred you are right now.

[Anonymous No.15887300]

>>15887292
TYPICAL OF THOSE WHO ARE SUBJECT TO THE WILL AND NOT THE INTELLECT

[Anonymous No.15887313]

>>15887300
>SUBJECT TO THE WILL AND NOT THE INTELLECT
Schizoposter get ye gone

[Anonymous No.15887330]

>>15887313
>>>>>>>>>>>>/POL/

MUH HERMETIC TRADTION MUH 4TH POLITICAL THEORY EURASIANISM OH NO AMERICAN EMPIRE MUH ORGANIC DECLINE

[Anonymous No.15887335]

>>15886836
"Being gay" was never a thing in ancient times. Men did fuck each other but it wasn't an identity thing like with the modern homosexual movement. Theban band were lovers but they weren't gay in the modern sense, might be hard for modern faggots to understand that you can be homo without turning homo into an identity.

[Anonymous No.15887351]

>The Leopard

I was just thinking of starting this today, is it really reactionary lit?

Also do I need to know a lot about Italian history to understand it?

[Anonymous No.15887396]

REMOVE SPENGLER ADD BELLOC
REMOVE EVOLA ADD HUIZINGA
REMOVE SENECA ADD PLUTARCH
REMOVE NIETZSCHE ADD GILSON

YOU CAN MAKE A GOOD LIST WITH CARLYLE, GILSON, BELLOC, PLUTARCH, TOLKIEN, MAISTRE ETC

THEN PUT OTHER MEDIEVALISTS. PERNOUD, LE GOFF, DUBY, DUMEZIL. IF YOU ARE NOT A MEDIEVALIST BY HEART YOU ARE NOT REACTIONARY

[Anonymous No.15887440]

>>15887396
Kill yourself my man, not just for writing in all caps but also for having retarded opinions.

[Anonymous No.15887451]

>>15887440
>>>>>/POL/

[Anonymous No.15887468]

NOOOOOO YOU CANT HAVE THIS THREAD
/LEFTYPOL/ TOLD ME /LIT/ WAS LEFTIST
THIS CANT BE HAPPENING

[Anonymous No.15887486]

>>15887468
STOP IMITATING MY STYLE THANK YOU

[Anonymous No.15887502]

>>15887486
hey hey hey lets calm down a bit, alright? Make some green tea

[Anonymous No.15887593]

>>15885006
>ONA founder turns to Islam because it's easier to understand and you get a nice wife

[Anonymous No.15887655]

>>15887335
I'd rather compare greek buttsex to man-on-man rape in jails or Carl Panzram modus operandi.Penetrations happened as a form of humilation and to enstablish one's power

[Anonymous No.15887807]

>>15885068
I live in the American South and I've met a shitload of evangelicals. They do not give the slightest fuck about tradition, books, or education in general. Most are openly hostile to such ideas. I don't understand how you can have such an uninformed opinion on American Protestants unless you're a European who's never met any.

[Anonymous No.15887849]

>>15884706
>Not inserting it into your friend's ass in the heat of passion after thighplay

[Anonymous No.15888064]

>>15886456
Sorry, bro.

[Anonymous No.15888165]

>>15881506
there's nothing good anon

conservatives aren't creative

[Anonymous No.15888230]

>>15881391
My bet on whoever made this image didn't read even half of these books except fiction section

[Anonymous No.15888240]

>>15881485
Dante is fun to read if you only read Inferno

[Anonymous No.15888301]

>>15881391
Charles Peguy, Montherlant, Paul Claudel, François Mauriac, Proust, Bernanos, Jacques Chardonne, Paul Morand, Roger Nimier