Right wing book suggestion

[Anonymous No.19465183]

Give a list of right wing authors
You guys think are worth reading?

[Anonymous No.19465187]

>>19465183

On Human Naure by Roger Scruton
Why Liberalism Failed by Patrick Deneen

[Anonymous No.19465319]

>>19465183
a family isn't right wing idiot, shit like the John Birch Society is, though

[Anonymous No.19465328]

>>19465183
You identify as a right-winger. You probably lament the decline of western civilization. Have you ever considered reading the great works of that civilization, rather than reading crappy polemical works saying what you already think?

[Anonymous No.19465335]

>>19465328
lol this is what I always think

[Anonymous No.19465376]

>>19465319
>a family isn't right wing
Read The Communist Manifesto, which has a section about how the family is a bourgeois concept. You cannot be a leftist if you want a family.

[Anonymous No.19465378]

>>19465376
Marx had a family... oh no no no leftbros...

[Anonymous No.19466016]

>>19465183
The canon, now fuck off and come back after you've read

[Anonymous No.19466027]

>>19465183

[Anonymous No.19466042]

>>19465183
wdym by right wing?hereditarianism?classical liberalism?or some other crap?

[Anonymous No.19466244]

>>19465378
He fathered children but he was a trash "father". His kids starved while he got drunk in England on Engels money.

[Anonymous No.19466264]

>>19466244
This isn't true.

[Anonymous No.19466319]

le idealist 50s painting meme

[Anonymous No.19466330]

>>19465376
He was trying to be provocative, his complaint was about family relationships under capitalism

[Anonymous No.19466336]

>>19465328
He doesn't care for any of that. He just wants a different kind of simulation, one based on publicity from the 50s. He even showed us what he wants.
The west was already decaying by then, btw

[Anonymous No.19466345]

>>19466330
>He was trying to be provocative
No he wasn't. I can't exactly quote it rn but the way I recall the manifesto was along the line of
>well yes, we do want to abolish private property, destroy the nuclear family, and take everything away from you, but capitalism is already doing that anyway and I don't see you complaining

[Anonymous No.19466353]

>>19466264
Retard

[Anonymous No.19466356]

>>19465376
brainworms, complete and utter mental depravity on you. your genes need to be a dead end, please do your part for the good of humankind

[Anonymous No.19466358]

>>19466345
>this is not provocative

[Anonymous No.19466368]

>tfw 30+ years old and still don't know what right wing and left wing means

[Anonymous No.19466502]

>>19466042
literally called liberalism
/pol/ right wingers consider it RIGHT WING.

these /pol/tards are herded like cattle online by alphabet agencies and (((them)))

[Anonymous No.19466551]

>>19466358
It's not a provocation if you actually believe it. It's a political manifesto, not a satiric pamphlet

[Anonymous No.19466766]

>>19466345
Literally a double digit IQ, he was pointing out that accusations against communism are already happening under capitalism, ie projection. Child workers have a higher IQ than you

[Anonymous No.19466782]

>>19466368
It's doesn't mean anything. It's incoherent.

[Anonymous No.19466790]

>>19466766
>he was pointing out that accusations against communism are already happening under capitalism
And not correcting them. He was saying it to prove that communism was inevitable and that trying to fight it was pointless

[Anonymous No.19466909]

>>19466345
The nuclear family is not the concept of family itself, it is a manmade idea. stop being retarded

[Anonymous No.19467084]

>>19465376
how fucking stupid can you be, Marx is saying that under capitalism the family deteriorates; the bourgeoisie are the ones attacking the institution of the family, Marx is defending it:

"The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation."

"The bourgeois clap-trap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parents and child, becomes all the more disgusting, the more, by the action of Modern Industry, all the family ties among the proletarians are torn asunder, and their children transformed into simple articles of commerce and instruments of labour."

[Anonymous No.19467411]

>>19467084
>Marx is defending it
Meanwhile, Marx:
>On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form, this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution.
>The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital.
He sees the entire concept of a family as being a bourgeois invention. He wants it to be destroyed:
>Abolition [Aufhebung] of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous PROPOSAL of the Communists. [emphasis mine]
You should genuinely be embarrassed. I'm not even a leftist and I have a better understanding of Marx than you.

[Anonymous No.19467462]

>>19466244
>german santa claus had more children than everyone on /lit/ combined

[Anonymous No.19467472]

>>19467411
I bet the tail wags the dog too.

[Anonymous No.19467510]

>>19467084
You're either ignorant of Marx and Engels' views on the "bourgeois" family or deliberately deceiving and gaslighting, which I've seen a lot with Marxists as a strategy. Some of them go so far as to lie about their own beliefs just to make a "convert" or persuade someone to take them more seriously, because they figure the person will come around to the true belief later anyway, so all that matters at this stage is making the belief system as a whole seem harmless to spark the initial interest.

Marxism was infected with utopian socialist ideas of socially engineering families and women into their "proper" forms (liberated polyamory, orgy fantasies) from a very early stage.

[Anonymous No.19467529]

>>19466368
left wing - kill all white people
right wing - kill all white people more slowly

[Anonymous No.19467554]

>>19465183
Daily reminder that the nuclear family is a americunt 1950s invention that literally was not a thing anywhere in the world 200 years ago. Real traditional family values means a multigenerational household or even a communal lifestyle where multiple families live together like a a celtic clan or slavic zadruga. The nuckear family was literally invented to sell cars and washing machines hence the tard using what is probably some 1950s advertising lol

All you “right wingers” yearn for a community and world of meaning which was long destroyed by capitalism. Now all you have is markets, profit making and wage slavery lol enjoy. But do read some Jordan Peterson I’m sure he’ll give it to you straight

[Anonymous No.19467594]

>>19467554
>blaming capitalism instead of big government and welfare state
Brainlet take

[Anonymous No.19467946]

>>19467411
>He sees the entire concept of a family as being a bourgeois invention.

I've never read Marx but it sounds like both quotes are referring to bourgeois and proletariat family strictly as they exist under capitalism, with the vanishing being done stricly to the capitalist manifestations of the family rather than the family in its entirety.

[Anonymous No.19467959]

>>19465183
I can guarantee that image wasn't made by a person resembling anyone in it.

[Anonymous No.19467965]

>>19467959
I can guarantee you're cringe.

[Anonymous No.19468006]

>>19467965
Whom in the picture do you resemble the most?

[Anonymous No.19468018]

>>19467594
>NOT REAL CAPITALISM
Taxes were so high back during le epic newcleyear family days that you would think it was communism.

[Anonymous No.19468026]

>>19467946
he is. the bourgeois family model, subsequently adopted by the proletariat, is 100% shaped by capitalism. rightoids either know this and are disingenuous about it, or they're just stupid

[Anonymous No.19468041]

>>19467594
>muh big guvment
come on son. welfare didn't destroy your community. a class of parasites set on extracting wealth at any cost did.