[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 10 KB, 247x238, Right-Wing.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR] No.2187579 [Reply] [Original]

Hey /lit/,

I am a Socialist, so naturally I'm a strong left-winger, but I want to understand the right-wing perspective. Where I live, strong right-wingers are either gun-toting rednecks who "hate those god damn niggers," or they're Nazis, and to an extent those groups overlap.
But I want to read some literature that will make me reconsider my political views.

Recommendations?

>> No.2187586

Capitalism and freedom, milton friedman.

The wikipedia article on Objectivism and Atlas Shrugged.

>> No.2187589

>>2187579
haha
your gay

>> No.2187593

Oh no, you didn't read Atlas Shrugged did you? And you talk about it as well. You poor soul. What an empty life you must lead

>> No.2187594

Ayn Rand you fool

>> No.2187597

>>2187593
:)

>> No.2187604

>>2187579
Leftist Republican pig, show yourself and claim your right to a useless ideology that enslaves the minds of man.

>> No.2187637
File: 24 KB, 350x263, True Blue Fugate.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2187579
I was born and raised in that mindset, right-wing general that is. My dad was one who laughed WITH Archie bunker, not at him. But my mothers Christian charity influenced me in not becoming some insufferable bigot.

I don't recommend trying to understand some of the crazies in contemporary thought, instead, try people like Edmund Burke. Even Tocqueville has some conservative bent. For more modern I think William F Buckley was their last intelligent thinker.

>> No.2187641

read the bible OP

>> No.2187642

Kipling was a p cool conservative/reactionary intellectual. Check out some of his poems and other writings. Spengler is a good conservative historian. Buchanan's new books are about as good as you can get with popular conservative political writing, if you want something recent to evaluate.

>> No.2188526

Member of the Conservative Party (Høyre) in Norway. Although conservative here is considered liberal in the US.

Anyway, here are some of our key ideas.

- Limit the politicians.
- Privatize several public institutions and make it easier to go to a private school or hospital.
- less taxes.
- Strong military and police force.
- Higher education for teachers. (Finland model)
- Personal freedom with a greater responsibility.

Even though Høyre is the "conservative party", it's more of a Liberal Conservative party, if that makes sense. One of the things i disagree with is their support of gay marriage in churches. I dont have anything against gays and i'm an atheist, but i believe that the church is the church and it should make up it's own mind.

>> No.2188554

Danish libertarian conservative here.


I don't like paying 50% tax. I get NOTHING in return.

I get free medical care? Yeah fuck me, if I break a leg I can't expect to have it fixed within four months. I have to pay private institutions instead.

I get free education? My kids get free education? The public educational system is shit. I have to pay for private education.

I don't like being forced to pay almost 600 usd a year for tv-license even though I don't even use a tv.

I don't like being drafted into the army.

I don't like the state telling me what I can or can't smoke, what kind of food I can eat, or what kind of stuff I can do in my spare time.

I hate the state. I love freedom.

You dig, OP?

>> No.2188564

>>2188554
Not OP. What do you think of mutualism? The idea that people should make their own ways but everyone should have the opportunity to have some means of production?

>> No.2188565

>>2188554

I also want to live a country where I don't have to pay taxes and we can all go to the best schools and hostpitals all the time. so what if I want to make methamphetamine in my spare time? da gubernment has nothing to do with that

remind me why socialists and left-wingers are the naive ones again?

>> No.2188585

>Recommendations?
>>>/pol/

>> No.2188592

Non-religious republican here

We're a simple people. Like our food hot. Our bitches wet. Our wars won. Small government as large government is more likely to be corrupt. Capitalism over socialism with the understanding life isn't fair, but everyone still has it within their power to change their life anyway they see fit; its about personal responsibility, not handouts. We enjoy our rallies to be on a civil and lawful level instead of illegal gatherings. On either side I wouldn't trust the media, all agenda pushes in my eyes. We believe the merit of success should be based on the effort put forth and that people are entitled to their own profits; if you're mad about the rich bring rich, blame the people who give them money for product or service rendered, and not the producing establishment itself.


I'd go on, but typing this up from my phone is tedious at best.

>> No.2188598

read some mencius moldbug

>> No.2188614
File: 34 KB, 431x450, igotthisax.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

anarchist here.

It's actually kinda easy to understand the other mindset. it's all in the paradigm.

For most rightists in the U.S, the paradigm is between Communist tyranny VS Capitalist Freedom. That's how the media and Cold War have raised them. That's the paradigm. If you aren't for Capitalism, then your a dirty commie pig, and you support Stalin and all them.

Or look at it from the perspective of Ron Paul "libertarians". To them it's Free-Market Capitalism VS Centrally planned Socialism. There's no alternative. If you don't support the free market, you're a statist.

Marxists do it too. You are either on the side of the Bourgeoise or on the side of the Proletariat.

I suggest that when you argue with someone, you try to figure out what narrative they're working under. Normally it's a 2-dimensional "all or nothing" affair, where they're the good guys, and everyone else is the bad guy.

I don't know what you mean by Socialist, that word has become as meaningless in contemporary usage as "Facism". That said, I support the sort of Socialism that sees direct, participatory control of the workplace by those that work there.

>> No.2188627

>>2188614
I agree, it's not really hard to understand the different sides in politics, because they all come from simplified narratives. One example being the idea of government being a corrupting influence on business, or business being a corrupting influence on government.
I'd say you could get the basic policy differences from just one day of wikipedia, then you can look at the different emotional narratives, for which there are plenty of books by pundits. But if you really want growth in regards to political knowledge, it would be best to ground yourself in philosophy and economics first, and then wade into the swamp of punditry afterwards. Then you'll not only understand why they think the way they do on a particular policy, you'll also be able to discern when they're wrong and just indulging their preconceived narratives.

>> No.2188630

>>2188592

shut the fuck up dad

>> No.2188643

Why do you keep insisting making these not-/lit/ threads on /lit/?

>>>/pol/

>> No.2188647

0.32813167392769493 >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

>> No.2188650

>>2188592
>>2188526
>>2188554

*sigh* Okay, really, this is /lit.
The OP came looking for literature that would help him to question his political views, and expand his worldview. At least that's what I thought I read, I could have been mistaken. Did they post actually read. "Everyone state their political views in their best braggadocio manner."
Bumper sticker political dissertations, get thee to Pol. Or else, if you hold these cherished positions so firmly, please offer some text that will elaborate these positions more fully, cause I guarantee you, no one will be converted or convinced within the space of a post in this thread.

>> No.2188652

>>2187637
Not OP, but which philosophers are considered right wing?
I'm pretty moderate and get upset at hippies and fascists equally and would like to understand the right, as I'm surrounded by a pretty liberal crew most of the time and feel I get my fill of that as it is.

>> No.2188682

>>2188554
If your children need private education, they're fucking stupid. Why is our education system shit?

>> No.2188686

>>2188652

i probably shouldn't respond that "getting equally upset at" hippies and fascists is the falsest equivalency ever, as you might feel obligated to reply and i want this thread to die, and yet here we are

>> No.2188689

>>2188686
I was being glib. A thousand apologies. Fascists and anarchists, then, like the beloved childhood game.

>>2187637
Or anyone else,
how bout that answer?
Not up on my political philosophy.

>> No.2188699

0.27126650138318176 >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/ >>>/pol/
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

>> No.2188711
File: 236 KB, 450x900, kipling gotcbh.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2188689
Someone suggested Kipling earlier--he's a p good place to start for the more traditionalist, reactionary side of conservatism. See pic--it's a very good poem of his that's conservative in spirit. Nicolas Gomez Davila wrote books of aphorisms and a tract called The Authentic Reactionary (in the same vein as Kipling) that are worth looking up.

Evelyn Waugh wrote some p good socially critical novels with a conservative twist. Tom Wolfe is his neoconservative modern American counterpart in that regard. If you like novels, these two are your best bet.

>> No.2188722

>Socialist
> Natural left winger

Pick one.

Or don't you understand the distinction?