Reactionary books

[Anonymous No.5267955]

I recently bought these three books from amazon. I read "Way of Men" in about 2 hours and am working on Men amongst the ruins.

Can anyone direct me toward quality reactionary literAture to read after I am done with these?

[Anonymous No.5267985]

>>5267955
I envy you so much for having a physical copy of those works.

It is dangerous to go alone, take this

[Anonymous No.5267988]

>>5267985
Also,
>inb4 flawed chart
All charts are flawed, who cares?

[Anonymous No.5267992]

Everything on the right.

[Anonymous No.5267999]

>>5267985
Thankyou, that is exactly what I needed.

[Anonymous No.5268002]

>>5267988

why make them then?

[Anonymous No.5268007]

>>5267999
No problem, kameraden.

Also,
>those trips

>>5268002
To make broad generalizations about what you might be interested, so you know which book to read next.

[Anonymous No.5268011]

>>5267955
anything by houellebecq
anything by evola
anything by carl schmidtt

[Anonymous No.5268017]

what is all this shit? seems like hipster nazism

[Anonymous No.5268031]

>>5268017
>nazi
>2014 and still using slurs for national socialism
reaction is not national socialism, nat soc is left of radical tradition

[Anonymous No.5268032]

>>5267992
>>5267985
Has anyone actually read "The Way Of Men"? It looks rather... strange. Only a few reviews on goodreads by a couple of weirdos - looks like the author keeps a bunker with canned food for the end times.

Plus, it's published by a publisher who's published only 3 books, on Amazon.

[Anonymous No.5268034]

>>5268017

>n-n-n-nazi!!

tumblr pls

[Anonymous No.5268039]

>>5268032

Reading it right now.

[Anonymous No.5268041]

>>5268039
How is it?

[Anonymous No.5268042]

how do you read so fast. i read like 30 pages an hour

[Anonymous No.5268046]

>>5268039
>go to author's homepage
>first article is a really uncomfortable, and rather stupid rant on...I think hippies and hipsters?

I mean, I hate hippies and hipsters as much as the next person, but this is weird.

http://www.jack-donovan.com/axis/

[Anonymous No.5268055]

>>5268046
jack donovan is a homosexual so it's reasoned that he is a bit off mentally..

his book breaks down in the simplest terms what it is to be a man

[Anonymous No.5268061]

>>5268042
it's an incredibly easy read

[Anonymous No.5268064]

trads gonna tard

[Anonymous No.5268065]

Is The Way of Men any good, then?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPZXodUoCoM

[Anonymous No.5268066]

>>5268032
In this day and age is dangerous to go alone defending traditionalism, reactionary literature, etc. That's why you see that people who give five stars to Mein Kampf or that novel by Mussolini without dropping a letter about it. We don't want to be known in most cases, we just want to go with our lives trying to be honorable by our ancestors' standards.

>>5268055
Donovan may be a homosexual, but he is not an effeminate. Keep that in mind.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkxDEDEYOsU

[Anonymous No.5268075]

>>5268066
He reminds me a lot of Bart Ehrman for some reason.

[Anonymous No.5268079]

>>5268065
>is it good
I was a bit underwhelmed, however I am coming from a place where I have been exposed to the manosphere for some time.

If you however are a lost puppy with no true sense as to what it is to be a man, those core values and principles not bound by time or culture than this book would probably be good for you.

[Anonymous No.5268085]

>>5268066
Oh don't get me wrong I am ok with Jack. He is providing an example for homosexual men. androphilia for ex

[Anonymous No.5268087]

Reactionary literature is the best kind

What does this say about me?

[Anonymous No.5268092]

>>5268087
that you are riding the tiger and if you lean their lessons your genes will live on until the next golden age

[Anonymous No.5268094]

>>5268087
That you're aware of the existence of white privilege and patriarchy, but you don't give a fuck about them and you respect the will of most of your ancestors.

[Anonymous No.5268095]

>>5268087
That you're an US-American, white male, reasonably well educated (but not very original in thought), reasonably well off (but not rich), with a need to belong somewhere, a need that has not been reciprocated by society.

[Anonymous No.5268105]

>>5268095
>original thought
isn't it accepted that if your IQ isn't above 160 or so you won't have original thoughts?

[Anonymous No.5268107]

>>5268087

>Reactionary literature is the best kind
>What does this say about me?

You soar too high because you are afraid of your own wings.

[Anonymous No.5268126]

>>5268092
First I'll need a wife

>>5268094
I contest many facets of white 'privilege' but I assume you would be right in saying that I don't give a shit anyway.

>>5268095
>That you're an US-American

Nah

>white male

Yeah

>reasonably well educated

I only have the equivalent of a community college diploma if you consider that to be well educated. I do consider myself to be a learned person in my own pretentiousness though.

>reasonably well off

Hardly

>with a need to belong somewhere, a need that has not been reciprocated by society.

Perhaps but I don't consider my problems to be society's fault

[Anonymous No.5268136]

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B2OOm3YHr1WIRklHd1U2R3RNeVE&usp=sharing

[Anonymous No.5268146]

>>5268136
Best post I've come across on 4chan, salve anon

[Anonymous No.5268156]

>>5268087
That dont read many books

[Anonymous No.5268157]

>>5267955
I'm a bit new to this political philosophy. How different are they from Edmund Burke?

[Anonymous No.5268158]

>>5268105

[Anonymous No.5268165]

>>5267955
>all this modern shit
>calls himself reactionary

get a load of this counter-revolutionary scrub

[Anonymous No.5268181]

>quality reactionary literature

You mean Honoré de Balzac, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, G. K. Chesterton, Léon Bloy, T. S. Eliot, Ezra Pound, Wyndham Lewis, Mikhail Bulgakov, François Mauriac, Paul Valéry, William Butler Yeats, Rainer Maria Rilke, Ernst Junger, Julien Green, Flannery O’Connor, Georges Bernanos, Paul Claudel, Miguel de Unamuno, Gerard Manley Hopkins, Graham Greene, Evelyn Waugh, Charles Péguy, Hugo von Hoffmansthal, Hermann Broch, Gertrud von Le Fort, Giovanni Papini, Giuseppe Ungaretti, Henrik Sienkiewicz, José Maria de Pereda, Yukio Mishima?

Or the Evola fanboyism that took over /pol/? I admit i have no patience for Hyperborean Aryans from Atlantis.

[Anonymous No.5268188]

>>5268041

Not crazy, it makes a lot of sense.

[Anonymous No.5268192]

>>5268156
I'd wager I've read more than you.

[Anonymous No.5268218]

>>5268181
>implying Rilke was reactionary
that man was as apolitical as a potato

[Anonymous No.5268222]

>>5268136
Thanks mate quality post

[Anonymous No.5268258]

>>5268157
pls respond

[Anonymous No.5268282]

>>5268258
Burke is a leftist progressive in comparison

reaction or the modern form Neoreaction believes that the ideas spawned by the Enlightnement were wrong and we must rediscover our traditional pre-enlightnement ways..

radical tradition

[Anonymous No.5268324]

>>5268282
pretty much this. while Burke is conservative, he's still a Whig who believed in democracy and supported the American Revolution. Reaction is Tory to Burke's Whig

[Anonymous No.5268393]

>>5268157
You might want to look up de Maistre, who was a near contemporary of Burke's and an inspiration to the 20th century Traditionalist school.

[Anonymous No.5268645]

>>5267985
I don't understand
Doesn't reactionary just mean "back to the good ol' days"? As in, are they not all different in what they're reacting to and suggesting as an alternative? How can something like this be clumped together? Unless I'm confused - which I probably am - this is like clumping all books supporting the current regime together, creating a list full of pro-naziism, pro-marxism etc.

Please educate me /lit/, the public system never did.

[Anonymous No.5268685]

>>5268645
You're perfectly right. I guess whoever made that graph clumped books together that somehow, vaguely, expressed the need to return to a previous system, doesn't matter what system exactly for the graph.

On a sidenote, I've never seen a reactionary political system that was actually well-thought out, or interesting. For example, France's Vichy was reactionary, and those guys just existed to suck Hitler's dick. Not even the trains ran on time.

[Anonymous No.5269072]

>>5268181
This man knows.

[Anonymous No.5269341]

>>5268218

A fair few entries on that list make me question the definition of 'reactionary' being applied. Yeats, for example, was peripherally involved in an actual anti-colonial uprising. He may have bordered on the palingenetic, but there was a legitimate case to be made that an 'authentic' (loathsome word that it is) 'Irishness' had to be re/discovered/created.

And then there was the chart early in the thread with Nietzsche, which is like lolno.

[Anonymous No.5269363]

>>5267985
> The Leopard
> Reactionary
what

[Anonymous No.5269372]

search piratebay for "right wing lit"

a /lit/izen uploaded some stuff there

[Anonymous No.5269762]

>>5267985
>reactionaries using Nietzsche

well it's not your fault, nietzschean thought is really individualist

[Anonymous No.5269765]

>>5268087
that you don't give one flying fuck about serious philosophy and that your thought is as immaterialist as it can be

[Anonymous No.5269795]

>>5267955

Read this and you'll be cured.

[Anonymous No.5269886]

>>5268105
No, that's ridiculous. IQ is not genius. Richard Feynman had an IQ of 123.

[Anonymous No.5269905]

Friendly reminder that reactionism is a mental disorder.

[Anonymous No.5269920]

Modernism doesn't even exist anymore, so what exactly are the babby hipster Nazis reacting to?

[Anonymous No.5269932]

>>5268146
>salve
wut, nigger that means Hello

[Anonymous No.5269938]

>>5269932
It's used as a greeting but the meaning is actually closer to "health"

[Anonymous No.5269974]

Is radical traditionalism the new edgy? Seriously, do you guys actually support these ways of thinking, or are you only trying to differentiate yourselves from the masses?

[Anonymous No.5270004]

>>5269974
Just trying to be contrarian. Only retards would want to step backwards in time instead of looking up and above towards the future.

[Anonymous No.5270019]

>>5268105
>>5269886
Iq means nothing. It has never meant anything and it is not even as rigid and invariable as other tests.

The best way to prove your intelligence is to be accomplished.

Only those who are truly fools and have no accomplishments brag of an IQ

[Anonymous No.5270035]

>>5269974
Unfortunately /lit/ is filled with people who have recognised that atheism is on the rise and have then immediately in an attempt to remain edgy turned back to religion and now go around spouting buzzwords like "muh theology" and "muh aquinas" in order to seem more intelligent than those fedora-wearing atheists, ironically not realising that they are at least just as annoying with their pseudo-intellectual pretentions. It is worth noticing that these people will always bar any chance of reasonable debate by calling people who disagree with them as either 1) ignorant about theology and thus too stupid/unworthy to talk about religion, or 2) fedora-wearing edgy neckbeard atheists who no one should listen to anyway.

It's sad.

[Anonymous No.5270037]

>>5270019
>Only those who are truly fools

The phrasing of this sentence deserves a tippy.

[Anonymous No.5270041]

>>5269974
Yes, we are the counter-culture now. Deal with it. The youth will be on our side. We are going to recapture the West and then put every single traitorous progressive faggot to the sword.

[Anonymous No.5270046]

>>5270035
So basically, reactionaries being reactionaries.

Criticisms of scientism and positivistic rationalism have existed since the beginning of the 20th century. See: The Frankfurt School. This isn't a new phenomenon.

[Anonymous No.5270063]

>>5270046

There is a different between academic criticisms of scientism and positivism, and the sort of misunderstanding of science you see around here on /lit/ where the mere mention of science leads a bunch of philosophy-majors to stick their heads out and scream "YUO CANT KNOW NUFFIN!!!!", primarily because they feel threatened by science and they simply are not able or willing to change their minds about anything.

In their own heads these people are hyperintellectual giants who are so far ahead of everyone else in understanding about the world that they simply think calling others "ignorant" and pointing out the flaws in their way of thinking is enough, whereas they never, ever stop to examine themselves and realise what pretentious nimwits they are.

Now, notice that this last paragraph can be about both the religious contrarians and the atheist ones.

[Anonymous No.5270075]

Are you, sir, besmirching the good name of the hyper-religious saviors of Christianity from the evil reddit fedoras? I've a good mind to tip my hat to you.

[Anonymous No.5270103]

>>5270063
What a dumb strawman.

[Anonymous No.5270109]

>>5270103
Do you know what a strawman is?

[Anonymous No.5270122]

>>5270109
Yes.

[Anonymous No.5270141]

>>5270063
One should feel threatened by science, though. Or at the very least disenfranchised with it. It always fails to meet actual human needs and it rationalizes oppressive ideologies (namely capitalism).

[Anonymous No.5270155]

>>5270122
Then you're welcome to explain how that was a strawman.

[Anonymous No.5270164]

>>5270103
>work in a textbook store
>we've been getting a lot of a book in with this on the cover recently
>can't stop staring at that girl
>fall in love with her portrait
>only find peace from it when I'm away from work
>get on /lit/
>see this

Kill me

[Anonymous No.5270174]

>>5270155
OK

Here is where you set up and mocked a strawman with no basis in reality:

>There is a different between academic criticisms of scientism and positivism, and the sort of misunderstanding of science you see around here on /lit/ where the mere mention of science leads a bunch of philosophy-majors to stick their heads out and scream "YUO CANT KNOW NUFFIN!!!!", primarily because they feel threatened by science and they simply are not able or willing to change their minds about anything.

>In their own heads these people are hyperintellectual giants who are so far ahead of everyone else in understanding about the world that they simply think calling others "ignorant" and pointing out the flaws in their way of thinking is enough, whereas they never, ever stop to examine themselves and realise what pretentious nimwits they are.

Hope that helps!

[Anonymous No.5270182]

>>5270174
>no basis in reality
>there is a whole meme devoted to it
>happens regularly on /lit/

[Anonymous No.5270192]

>>5270182
>memes reflect reality

[Anonymous No.5270196]

>>5267955

Read Revolt Against the Modern World first if you actually want to enjoy Men Among the Ruins and not miss out of half it.

[Anonymous No.5270197]

>>5270192
not that guy but are you fucking serious now

[Anonymous No.5270261]

>>5269974

I'm afraid retards will flock to this way of thinking and poisoning it, as they did with Marx. Don't get me wrong, socialism is poison as well but at least it had it's points.

I am aware of that there needs to be a new culture war. We need to come to realize that modern values of consumerism, materialism and general "I can do what I want, it's muh body" attitude is of detriment to society.

I found religion in a way Kierkegaard talked about. Not that I believe in a old bearded man granting wishes but more of sensing that something was missing from today's society and religion fits that purpose I guess. I am doing this in Sweden, the most godless country in the world. Sounds super edgy but don't really care.

[Anonymous No.5270309]

>>5270261
>I'm afraid retards will flock to this way of thinking and poisoning it

This is a fear of mine as well. I'm not sure reactionaries should actually be attempting to engage with the masses one way or another. It seems far more likely that they'll corrupt us than that we'll ennoble them.

[Anonymous No.5270324]

>>5270261
>>5270309
But reactionary thinking has always been a bastion of retardation.

>tings r difrent and i no like dat! difrent bad! no more difrent!
That's your "philosophy" in a nutshell.

>oh no the retards willl ruin it!
Ruin what? There's nothing to ruin. It's just complaining that candy bars no longer taste as good or cost a nickle anymore. It's a load of bullshit.

[Anonymous No.5270329]

>>5270041
Nice! Just like the sandniggers in the East!

[Anonymous No.5270334]

>>5267955
>quality
>reactionary

There's no such thing. I say this without malice: please reevaluate your mental life.

[Anonymous No.5270344]

>>5270334
>I say this without malice
lol riiiggghhhtttt


eat shit tumblr tard

[Anonymous No.5270366]

>>5270261
The only socio-political ideology that actually emphasizes scientific analysis, criticism, theory, and practice and the only other one that continues to exist outside of WWII is "poison", but a pseudo-philosophy (actually a collection of axioms that, when tried, resulted in the worst horrors the world has known) that couldn't last a decade in practice, and now exists only on the un(der)educated fringes of liberal societies, is your great hope?

[Anonymous No.5270391]

>>5270344
>lol riiiggghhhtttt
>eat shit tumblr tard
The best you can do is assume I fit into this conspiracy theory about a website. This is the very best that you can do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3elwDp1tC0

[Anonymous No.5270400]

>>5268066
poor babby ur so oppressed ;_;
let mama hold u make u feel safe protect ur fee-fees from dose mene nasty untermenschen

If there were any truth to your idiotic posturing, wouldn't it give you the strength of will and courage to stand out in public and proclaim it?

[Anonymous No.5270472]

>>5270261
>I am aware of that there needs to be a new culture war. We need to come to realize that modern values of consumerism, materialism and general "I can do what I want, it's muh body" attitude is of detriment to society.

And thanks to free speech you may explain why you disagree with modern society and provide you own arguments in debate.

Something you wouldn't be able to do in the feudal societies pre-enlightenment were a noble could take your head if he felt like it.

[Anonymous No.5270498]

what is reacotionary lit exactly

[Anonymous No.5270500]

>>5270261
>consumerism, materialism and general "I can do what I want, it's muh body" attitude is of detriment to society.

Consumerism and (non-philosophical) materialism I can see, but within the general Western frame of reference that's like speaking out against armed robbery and eating yellow snow.

The third one is what interests me. I'd be curious to know what you mean by it and why and how you think it's detrimental.

[Anonymous No.5270513]

>>5270400
>using le Freudian strawman

[Anonymous No.5270514]

>>5270472
lol

People get sent to jail for racist tweets in Europe and you're talking about "free speech"?

pls get a grip you deluded ox.

[Anonymous No.5270526]

>>5270472
>free-speech
Tell that to Vikernes.

[Anonymous No.5270592]

Reactionary philosophy and literature per-se does not exist as a term, it does not have any real cohesion, what are you reacting against? What are you proposing as the means of replacing what you oppose?

Furthermore, how can something be traditional if it was written after said idealised traditional times and with the very nature of tradition always moving evolving?

The modern turn of the fringe uneducated masses towards the right shows the degneration of culture of late-capitalism.
Everything can be mashed together in our crazy post-modern world. Racist factoids enmeshed with new-age jargon along with the insane ramblings of bankrupt "intellectuals" like Evola that were so much in harmony with the overall irrationalism of Fascism and Nazism.

It is literaly so impossible to imagine a world createvily independent of heredetary hierarchies, apeals for blind traditional mores and the defence of financial privilege that return to calls of violence and fanaticism only augment the status quo of market relations that depend and have depended so much on this degenerate and static culture of the Spectacle and Opinion.

[Anonymous No.5270630]

Flannery O'Connor looked like Seth MacFarlane in drag.

Say I'm wrong.

[Anonymous No.5270657]

Why is a middle ground such a foreign concept to people

Culturally-bankrupt broken democracy and retarded Nietzschean anarchy/dictatorship aren't the only two options, fags.

[Anonymous No.5270692]

>>5270592
Yawn. The modern turn of the uneducated masses is towards the left. You are trapped in the eternal left-wing underdog/victim mentality if you truly believe otherwise.

[Anonymous No.5270699]

>>5270692
What is the Christian Right?

[Anonymous No.5270701]

>>5270699
An irrelevant and impotent force.

[Anonymous No.5270720]

>>5270701
Strange the sway they have on American politics considering.

Same with the Tea Party, right? I imagine they're irrelevant and impotent even as they get their candidates into the House?

Or how about the hordes of jabbering goons who are unaffiliated with any particular political movement but "know" that Obama is a "socialist"?

I think you're wrong and have nothing but weak rhetoric to support your position.

[Anonymous No.5270732]

>>5268157
IIRC, Edmund Burke favoured parlimentary democracy and restricting the monarch's power

[Anonymous No.5270734]

>>5270692


If you think that Obama and Elizabeth Warren compromise what is the "left", then you are part of the uneducated masses I was describing.

[Anonymous No.5270737]

>>5270720
Maybe stop spending so much time on panicky left-wing blogs. The American religious "right" has no influence whatsoever on American politics. The fact that you can continue to claim they do after the way homosexuality has gone in the US beggars belief.

>Same with the Tea Party, right? I imagine they're irrelevant and impotent even as they get their candidates into the House?

Again, barely right-wing. Can you actually name a single right-wing thing those House politicians have done? It's amazing that the Tea Party supposedly has massive influence when the media is completely hostile to them and their politicians haven't actually passed any right-wing legislation.

>Or how about the hordes of jabbering goons who are unaffiliated with any particular political movement but "know" that Obama is a "socialist"?

These people only exist in your mind you tool. My God this is pathetic. It's pretty clear that you have recently migrated from plebbit or something.

[Anonymous No.5270742]

>>5270692
>in the eternal left-wing underdog/victim mentality

And here comes the Victim Olympics.

>The modern turn of the uneducated masses is towards the left.

It's pretty clear that at least one and possibly both of you just likes to think of themselves as 'distinct from the uneducated masses' and who am I to deny you such a humble aspiration?

I will say, though, in the UK 40 years ago you had the Winter of Discontent and a Labour party whose charter contained a commitment to nationalisation of all public utilities. In the US, before the Southern Strategy you had a lot of blue-collar Democrats voting on their unions' recommendation. Nixon and to some extent Reagan changed that. Then look at the tax structures of several decades ago and the policies people favour now (it took a global financial meltdown to get 'slightly higher taxes on the rich' even on the map).

But what I would say is that 'right' and 'left' have swapped a few policy emphases as they have swapped some constituents.

>>5270701
>An irrelevant and impotent force.

lol I figured it out, he's from the future.

[Anonymous No.5270757]

>>5270737
>The American religious "right" has no influence whatsoever on American politics.

Their influence has waned. They do vote en masse, however. Most of the progress on gay issues has been judicial, hence the decrying of 'activist judges' etc.

>Can you actually name a single right-wing thing those House politicians have done?

Well this is a dumb question. No-one's been doing much of anything for a couple of years now. But yeah, they've voted to repeal the ACA like ninety million times or however often.

But I sense in this talk of 'barely right-wing' that a No True Right-Winger effort is in the offing. Good stuff.

>These people only exist in your mind
>clear that you have recently migrated from plebbit

Ha. He sure is a doubleplusgood duckspeaker, unlike you, doubleplusgood duckspeaker that you are.

[Anonymous No.5270763]

>>5268034
it's no better than idiots using "leftist" for anyone that isn't racist or an antagonistic asshole toward arbitrary population groups

[Anonymous No.5270775]

>>5270737
> The American religious "right" has no influence whatsoever on American politics
Prove it. The fact that literally every American politician at the very least spends an inordinate amount of time paying them lip service suggests otherwise.

>barely right-wing
You're kidding, right? Nationalistic reactionaries the movement.
>Can you actually name a single right-wing thing those House politicians have done?
All legislation in the US is rightwing. I don't know what you're talking about. But a major accomplishment that aligned with Tea-Party politics was the government shutdown. Hell the fact that they even get those people into office is a major accomplishment for a supposed fringe movement.

>These people only exist in your mind you tool.
My mind must be producing auditory and visual hallucinations. I meet these people all the time. Maybe you need to get off lurking tumblr all day for your rage fix and go outside.

Like I said, nothing but weak rhetoric. Opinions discarded. Come back when you have something of substance.

[Anonymous No.5270780]

>>5270757
>No True Right-Winger is in the offing

Give me a break. The Tea Party is pro-democracy, anti-racist, pro-equality, and pro-feminist. Literally the only "right-wing" thing about them is that they want lower taxes.

Claiming this is a "right-wing" movement just demonstrates your own laughably myopic perspective. Here's a hint: politics existed before 1960.

In terms of back to plebbit, I really mean it. The quality of discussion on this board has been dragged down to unbelievably low levels.

[Anonymous No.5270790]

>this thread

It's like I'm really in a HuffPo comments section.

Summer cannot end soon enough.

[Anonymous No.5270809]

>>5270790

If you cannot stand dissenting opinions you are always welcome to go back to your containment board.

You won't be missed.

[Anonymous No.5270822]

>>5270514
>>5270526

Inciting hatred and violence isn't free speech and even if you disagree with certain laws you can always try convincing other people and try to have them changed.

[Anonymous No.5270824]

>>5270809
Nah, I'm gonna tough it out until September because I know once school starts you won't have time to shitpost your banal opinions here anymore :^)

[Anonymous No.5270839]

>>5270780
>The Tea Party is pro-democracy, anti-racist, pro-equality, and pro-feminist.
0/10

[Anonymous No.5270897]

>>5270780
>The Tea Party is pro-democracy, anti-racist, pro-equality, and pro-feminist.

None of those things are incompatible with being "right-wing". This is about as meaningful as asserting that Bernie Sanders wasn't left wing because he favoured private ownership of capital. Here's a hint: there are people to the left of you that are still 'right-wing'; you do not personally embody the dividing line, nor do you get to dictate where it lies.

[Anonymous No.5270985]

>>5270897
Being egalitarian is incompatible with being right-wing.

[Anonymous No.5271033]

>>5270985

Not by any definition the Tea Party would sign off on.

[Anonymous No.5271061]

get back to /po/ you piece of shit. this is our board

[Anonymous No.5271083]

>>5271061
Why do you hate people from the papercraft and origami board...? I get that environmentalism has become big but don't you think you're being a little harsh?

[Anonymous No.5271094]

>>5269762
Nietzsche liked aristocracy

[Anonymous No.5271114]

>>5271033


thats because moderns are deluded by a wildly shifted overton window, the ideology of yesteryears revolutionaries is now 'just common sense', and certainly not ideological (and dont you forget it, lest you be richwined)..

[Anonymous No.5271124]

>>5271094
Nietzsche liked horses.

[Anonymous No.5271132]

>>5271124
Did he?

[Anonymous No.5271134]

>>5268165
Preach nigger.

/pol/ tier reactionaries are worse than the teenage commies on /lit/
>Not knowing about Thomas Carlyle
>Throwing yourself on that Italian prick
ISHYGDDT

[Anonymous No.5271147]

>>5270004
>Only retards would want to step backwards in time instead of looking up and above towards the future
Oh yeah cause that's been working great for us so far hasn't it? To the stars!

[Anonymous No.5271149]

>>5271134
I'm pretty sure everyone who calls themselves a reactionary knows about Carlyle. It's just that Evola has kind of become a meme.

[Anonymous No.5271154]

>>5271149
>It's just that Evola has kind of become a meme
Which is cruel because that is the last thing he would want.

[Anonymous No.5271167]

>>5271114

You're using a silly definition of 'egalitarianism' that doesn't apply here.

[Anonymous No.5271174]

>>5271132
Yes.

[Anonymous No.5271178]

>>5271147

Well, yeah, it has.

You know what all the states of affairs of the past that you yearn for led to? The present state of affairs.

You're basically a LARPer that even other LARPers think is a bit too into it.

[Anonymous No.5271182]

>>5271178
>history is teleological

[citation needed]

[Anonymous No.5271186]

>>5271182
>noting causality entails imputing teleology

No citation needed as it's prima facie false. Thanks for playing.

[Anonymous No.5271207]

>>5270004
Only retards think reactionaries and traditionalist conservatives actually want to "step backwards in time".

Reaction arose in the late XVIIIth century and early XIXth century not as a institution opposed to any change, it was the opposite, while the whigs, liberals and other sons of the Enlightenment, inspired by Newtonian physics saw society as something which followed specific imutable laws and was subjected by reason for this motive, the reactionaries and traditionalists like Joseph de Maistre, François-René de Chateaubriand, Leopold von Ranke and later Jacob Burckhardt and Hippolyte Taine valued the element of change in history and the sense of historical time.

They weren't oppose to looking up and above towards the future. They were opposed to doing that breaking with the past through a mentality that saw society as something that could be planned and molded like some mechanism by "muh reason".

[Anonymous No.5271212]

>>5271147
Anyone else find these cherry-picked juxtaposition photos to be goddamn retarded?

You can literally--literally--make them up any which way you want. Pic related is one I just made.

Also, I don't see what's bad about the right photo, unless it refers to some Britbong event I don't know about. Just seems to be some people standing on a street. Nothing bad in and of itself unless you're going, "what a pity...they're not white..."

[Anonymous No.5271233]

>>5271207
That picture's quite a stretch. A good portion of the fascists and reactionaries I know are interested in financial policies libertarians would shed tears over.

[Anonymous No.5271236]

>>5271212
>Nothing bad in and of itself unless you're going, "what a pity...they're not white..."

DINGDINGDING

A lot of racists are too dumb to imagine not being racist, so they sometimes think stuff like that has persuasive power where it really doesn't.

[Anonymous No.5271238]

>>5271212
>"what a pity...they're not British..."

FTFY

[Anonymous No.5271239]

>>5271207
A good work on that is "Culture Wars Secular-Catholic Conflict in Nineteenth-Century Europe", by Wolfram Kaiser and Christopher Clark.

Catholic reaction in the XIXth century was not based in a simplistic nostalgia for "the good old days". It was a project for the future inspired by the lessons of the past that ultimately triumphed when radical secularism was brought to the end with the World Wars and the collapse of the Hohenzollern empire and the French Third Republic that sustained it, and the emergence of christian democracy and corporatism with Charles de Gaulle (a traditionalist monarchist) and Konrad Adenauer (a catholic), which in turn led to the so-called Golden Age of Capitalism and the creation of the European Union.

Later, the 1960s cultural revolution and the bureaucratization of the European Union turned this project upside down and now christian democracy lost it's roots in Europe, but the original thing was based in XIXth century catholic reaction.

[Anonymous No.5271243]

>>5271238
Define 'British'

[Anonymous No.5271250]

>>5271243
lol

[Anonymous No.5271253]

>>5271212
>Also, I don't see what's bad about the right photo
You don't see anything wrong with the English being a minority in England? If Kenya was host to a volatile white English minority that was threatening to overtake the native African population by 2066 there would international protests, blockades and the whole UN circuit losing their minds.

[Anonymous No.5271254]

>>5269938
It means literally "heil"

[Anonymous No.5271262]

>>5271207

I really love this macro because of the image it paints of the average /pol/tard. Life is an endless search for Clever Things to say that will annoy liberals and this image promises the despairing /pol/tard that "Traditionalism" will provide a Clever Thing SO clever that saying it will finally smash the liberals forever and /pol/ will win and /pol/ will be right and the liberals will have to shut up and so on.

Normally I'm first in line with a good old equivalence, but if there's an analogue of exactly this kind of fantasy among leftists, I haven't seen it.

[Anonymous No.5271270]

>>5271253
>You don't see anything wrong with the English being a minority in England?
You mean Anglo-Saxons?
Or Norsemen?
Or the French?
Or Romans?
Or Celts?

[Anonymous No.5271272]

>>5271238

How do you know?

[Anonymous No.5271273]

The only essential piece of literature relevant to neoreactionary thought is A Confederacy of Dunces.

[Anonymous No.5271278]

>>5271147
Definitely better.

[Anonymous No.5271286]

>>5271262
They wear these image macros and charts like giant "I AM RIGHT YOU ARE WRONG" medals around their necks and do not understand that their method of discourse, if you could even call it that, is not going to win anyone over who isn't exactly like them or incredibly weak-willed.

[Anonymous No.5271289]

>>5271212
W-what is on the left photo?

[Anonymous No.5271291]

>>5271262
>>5271286
Stop being so smug.

[Anonymous No.5271293]

>>5271262
What are you even talking about?

[Anonymous No.5271302]

>>5271270
>implying the people who fought 2 world wars for their island deserve to have it handed over for no reason
Yeah, fuck ya

[Anonymous No.5271304]

>>5271250
My point exactly.

[Anonymous No.5271309]

I dont understand racism as a concept, why would anyone devote themselves to such a backwards and easily disprovable ideal?

I think that if we ever made contact with life outside this planet a lot of those people may change their tune.

[Anonymous No.5271316]

>>5271302
That literally means nothing. The Anglo-Saxons put up a good fight against the Vikings, so they deserve the whole island right?

[Anonymous No.5271317]

>>5271270
This.

The only problems arise when immigrants refuse to adopt their new nation's customs and culture, at which point they have no business being there.

[Anonymous No.5271325]

>>5271316
Are you drawing some sort of equivalency between immigration and invasion?

[Anonymous No.5271329]

>>5271262
The whole point of the image was that the argument Joseph de Maistre mades against a universalist constitution relates to my point that the liberal project believes society can be subjected to rational laws immune to changes, and reactionaries/traditionalists opposed this with the argument that society was not something inorganic that didn't change like the laws of physics (that's was before Einstein, of course). So the whole argument that "but reactionaries/conservatives are afraid of change" is incorrect because the whole notion of "change" affecting historical processes was brought by them (Ibn Khaldun, Vico, de Maistre, Ranke, Taine, Huizinga etc)

[Anonymous No.5271330]

>>5271253
>You don't see anything wrong with the English being a minority in England?

I guess you can only be British if you're white. You know, for all the shit you guys give the USA about being backward and awkward, you guys are ten times so in some regards.

[Anonymous No.5271332]

>>5271291

Shan't.

>>5271293

Read the image. It's four quotes purporting to represent various schools of /pol/tardism. Underneath each quote is an example of a typical opinion espoused by a devotee and the anticipated liberal response.

Have a look at the liberal response to the fourth one. Truly there can be no resistance against the saying of such a Clever Thing as that.

[Anonymous No.5271334]

>>5271317
It's not their duty to adopt a culture. It's their duty to contribute to a culture.

But yeah, nonparticipation leaves immigration pointless.

[Anonymous No.5271338]

>>5271309
Slave moralist

[Anonymous No.5271350]

>>5271289
Mai Lai Massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre

[Anonymous No.5271352]

>>5271329

Your point in posting the image has nothing to do with the motives behind its creation, my assessment of which I stand by.

[Anonymous No.5271357]

>>5271317
Just like how the Romans adopted Celt culture.

[Anonymous No.5271361]

>>5271332
This is low hanging fruit. Stop engaging with an obvious strawman if you think its so laughable.

[Anonymous No.5271371]

>>5271338
Racism is an Enlightenment ideal, and is thus of no benefit to any ideology calling for a return to empires. Racism is for advocates of the nation-state.

[Anonymous No.5271373]

>>5271167


i wouldent know because im not that guy, what im saying is that modern conservatives are literally trotskyites.

[Anonymous No.5271374]

>>5271361
>stop laughing at something if you think it's so laughable

How about no?

[Anonymous No.5271382]

I hate /pol/ bait threads.

[Anonymous No.5271385]

>>5271371
Scientific Racism maybe.

[Anonymous No.5271388]

>>5271302
>decide to be an empire
>"Effectively enslaved populations around the world, who all together outnumber us 100000 to 1, will never rise against us and demand the complete independence and/or full participation in our economics and politics that we deny them! They'll just let us feast from their labor and their nations' resources amirite?"
>post WWII
>"boo hoo the brown people we used to oppress rose up and now they live amongst us as citizens and migrants with rights."

Time to grow up.

[Anonymous No.5271389]

>>5268032
>>5268032
>he doesn't like obscure books that are not worth to read
how pleb are you m8?

[Anonymous No.5271395]

>>5271371
>implying you need racism to justify slavery

most of the roman slaves were white bro

[Anonymous No.5271396]

>>5271374
Do you usually make self satisfied posts when you laugh about somthing?

[Anonymous No.5271401]

>>5271382
At least /lit/'s /pol/ bait threads are better than /tv/'s /pol/ bait threads.

So, you know, give them that.

[Anonymous No.5271403]

>>5267992
is The Hero with a Thousand Faces any good?

[Anonymous No.5271408]

>>5271388
>post-ww2

the jew age won't last forever, just like the last dark age it will end in a couple centuries and then whitey will be back to his old ways, if he hasn't been wiped out

[Anonymous No.5271409]

>>5271396

Often, yes. Do you usually lose your shit when someone finds something funny?

You didn't happen to... make the image in question, did you?

[Anonymous No.5271413]

>>5271401
>/tv/'s /pol/ bait threads.

Oh god.

>THIS CHARACTER IS BEING PLAYED BY A BLACKIE WHY IS THIS ALLOWED
(245 replies and 78 images)

[Anonymous No.5271425]

>Accepting the downfall of your country, race and culture

Spineless plebs

[Anonymous No.5271433]

>>5271409

No, but I think you might have just in order to post it in this thread as an example /pol/ thinking or whatever.

And yes I do lose my shit thanks to my autism, so be considerate asshole.

[Anonymous No.5271440]

>>5271433
>No, but I think you might have just in order to post it in this thread as an example /pol/ thinking or whatever.

Wow.

[Anonymous No.5271441]

>>5271425
>>5271425
>that pic
wow, Darwin was an idiot

[Anonymous No.5271446]

>>5271309
>I dont understand racism as a concept, why would anyone devote themselves to such a backwards and easily disprovable ideal?
Reactionaries are the subset of the population (always whites) that feels like society owed them something and went back on it. These people cry about welfare states and the non-desirables wanting "hand-outs", but really they just want a welfare state that gives hand-outs to themselves (which is what monarchies, aristocracies, and fascist and all hierarchical states promise).

[Anonymous No.5271453]

>>5271425
>>5271441
it's a wrongly attributed quote: darwin never said it, some white supremacist did

[Anonymous No.5271456]

>>5271453
prove it

[Anonymous No.5271460]

>>5271441
It's a falsified quotation, iirc, brah.

[Anonymous No.5271465]

>>5271441

The quote's fake, or anyway, misattributed, it's from a KKK fanfic novel written years after Darwin died. A sample quote from Actual Darwin:

>Dr. Grant took me occasionally to the meetings of the Wernerian Society, where various papers on natural history were read, discussed, and afterwards published in the 'Transactions.' I heard Audubon deliver there some interesting discourses on the habits of N. American birds, sneering somewhat unjustly at Waterton. By the way, a negro lived in Edinburgh, who had travelled with Waterton, and gained his livelihood by stuffing birds, which he did excellently: he gave me lessons for payment, and I used often to sit with him, for he was a very pleasant and intelligent man.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin

[Anonymous No.5271476]

>>5271456
Why don't you provide the citation for the quote attributed to Darwin?

[Anonymous No.5271492]

>>5271456
The falsely attributed quote originally is from Thomas Dixon, Jr., in his book "The Klansman - An Historical Romance of the Ku Klux Klan" (lol).

Here is the page: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=BBUunj-Lg_8C&pg=PA323&lpg=PA323&dq=since+the+dawn+of+history+the+negro+has+owned+the+continent+of+africa&source=bl&ots=Ngty9PqTPz&sig=YizbgtP-tlKkP9LDbDzaSCjdVkU&hl=en&sa=X&ei=f-3nU_35EZKE8gXsmIGoAg&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBzgK#v=onepage&q=since%20the%20dawn%20of%20history%20the%20negro%20has%20owned%20the%20continent%20of%20africa&f=false

[Anonymous No.5271497]

>>5271332
>Have a look at the liberal response to the fourth one

You are fucking retarded. You don't even belong on 4chan if you are incapable of recognizing such blatant irony.

The very worst kinds of people are the double digit IQ mouthbreathers who derive the idea that they are super-intelligent from the fact that they cannot engage with irony.Maybe go read a book instead of shitposting here.

[Anonymous No.5271514]

>>5271497
>You are fucking retarded. You don't even belong on 4chan if you are incapable of recognizing such blatant irony.

I think you're one of those men who find in Homer more than Homer ever wrote.

But hey, convince me.

[Anonymous No.5271529]

>>5271514

Jesus Christ.

I'm not going to try to convince you. You are the worst kind of cancer on this imageboard. I repeat: you don't belong on 4chan.

[Anonymous No.5271541]

>>5271529
>I'm not going to try to convince you.

OK. I will continue to regard you as obviously wrong. Peace out.

[Anonymous No.5271548]

>>5271541
Fuck off.

[Anonymous No.5271554]

>>5271541

Shan't.

[Anonymous No.5271648]

Try some Oswald Spengler, as in Decline of the West and Man and Technics.
I'd also recommend Otto Rahn, Stefan George, Wyndham Lewis and Ernst Junger to name a few.
Also try this youtube channel, if you look through the videos he has a video dedicated to certain authors who are in the sam ecategory as you search, as in Hanns Heinz Ewers and Ludovici.
http://www.youtube.com/user/HourOfDecision777

Most people don't even realize that the majority of the writers were not even pro nat soc, even anti nat soc, but from the "right wing" perspective.

[Anonymous No.5271652]

>>5267955
popular government by sir henry sumner maine

[Anonymous No.5271673]

Also to add, I'd recommend staying away from the newer "reactionary" writing, as the new authors at counter currents and arktos. I feel that they just rehash what has already been said by the original few in a dumbed down and accessible manner. But by all means use those sites a a way of finding relevant work.

[Anonymous No.5271700]

>>5268017
Ignoring the fact that pretty much all traditionlaist writers were not pro national socialist, as in Evola, Junger and the entire Secret Germany Cricle.

[Anonymous No.5271712]

>>5271700
traditionalism is so cringe worthy, can't you take these shit to some fedora friendly spot

[Anonymous No.5271723]

lel, you're a bunch of faggets aint yer

european civilization was built on principles and these principles are not to be ridiculed by this civilization's children for it is both immoral and plainly fucking retarded

instead of adapting you prefer to ditch the past look for a radical change and this I find absolutely disgusting

[Anonymous No.5271729]

>>5271712
>fedora friendly spot

C'mon, dog, this IS a fedora-friendly spot, let's not kid ourselves.

[Anonymous No.5271756]

>>5271446
>(always whites)
Don't be retarded.

[Anonymous No.5271770]

>>5271756

Not him, but I'll propose an amendment "almost literally always whites".

[Anonymous No.5271783]

>>5271770
Ethnic Europeans are the people who care about ethnic European ideology in ethnic European countries? You don't say!

[Anonymous No.5271802]

>implying white supremacy is bad
>implying chinks aren't doing the same shit in the east

self-hatred is a mental disease, /lit/

[Anonymous No.5271810]

>>5271783

So is it retarded or obvious? Make up your mind.

[Anonymous No.5271818]

>>5271783
they care about western ideology and it's protection by rejecting everything it stands for ( democracy, autonomy etc)
>You don't say!
cool story bro

[Anonymous No.5271819]

>>5271712
I don't see how it is, maybe if you're referring to the newer "reactionary" authors that counter currents publishes, then yeah sure it's a bit cringe worthy. But to say that natural order and concepts that were upheld by past civilizations are cringe worthy is a bit ignorant in my view.

[Anonymous No.5271824]

>>5271802

Take your dichotomies back to /pol/ you silly little newreader.

[Anonymous No.5271834]

>>5271810
Hey kid, I'm Anonymous, not Anonymous.

>>5271818
This post is too dumb to warrant a serious response.

[Anonymous No.5271838]

>>5271824
/pol/ is the only way 4chan will survive The Great Revolution of Customs

stop reading this AIDS-ridden idiot Foucault was and see for yourself

[Anonymous No.5271854]

wish jack donovan would fuck me and be my daddy

[Anonymous No.5271864]

>>5271838

>someone from /pol/ spouting off endless memetic bullshit

What a shock.

[Anonymous No.5271865]

>>5271834

See this?

>>5271770
>Not him, but

Yeah. That's a thing people can do.

[Anonymous No.5271889]

>>5271838

>describes a thinker as "AIDS-ridden"
>expects to be taken seriously in any epistemological arena

/pol/ will always be a joke precisely because of people like you

[Anonymous No.5271894]

>>5271864
>>5271865
>>5271889
>newfag cancer can't into 4chan culture

fuck off you disgusting immigrants. BACK TO PLEBBIT.

[Anonymous No.5271905]

>>5271894

Once you've been here for a few months, two things will happen. Number one, you will realise how new you sound right now and number two, you will stop caring how new or not people are.

[Anonymous No.5271906]

>>5271894

>trying this hard to be a maymay manchild

as i said, /pol/ will always be a joke precisely because of people like you

cope with yourself, spergking

[Anonymous No.5271927]

>>5271838
>The Great Revolution of Customs
>not "happening"

yo, erryone, this nigga actually PRETENDS to go on /pol/, of all things to pretend to do.

[Anonymous No.5271928]

>>5271894

>>newfag cancer can't into 4chan culture

Who the fuck even says this "pool's closed" shit in 2014?

I'm honestly embarrassed for you.

[Anonymous No.5271942]

>>5271927
>still believing in HABBENINGS
>not being aware of tGRoC

it's like you do not want to be truly red-pilled

[Anonymous No.5271965]

>>5271905
Speak for yourself.

[Anonymous No.5271970]

>>5271965

Well, I try not to speak for the stupid and/or emotionally crippled, yes.

[Anonymous No.5271982]

>>5268046
relax, this is just a human trying to be funny.

[Anonymous No.5271987]

>>5268011
Are you me?

This

[Anonymous No.5272003]

>>5271970
Yawn. Could you not act like such an arrogant condescending prick? I feel like you're the same guy who has been shitting up earlier parts of this thread. No-one can be as sure of themselves as you seem to be without also being extremely stupid, so it really reflects poorly on you.

[Anonymous No.5272023]

>>5272003
>Could you not act like such an arrogant condescending prick?

WAAAAAAAHHHHHHH

[Anonymous No.5272031]

>>5269920
Someone answer this.

[Anonymous No.5272037]

>>5272031
postmodernism, obviously

to deny all structure just for shits and giggles makes their dicks rock hard for the Vaterland

[Anonymous No.5272064]

>>5271408

>the jew age won't last forever

There's a good book that documents the extent of jewish infiltration called The Jewish Century, actually, by Yuri Slezkine who is jewish himself.

[Anonymous No.5272121]

>>5268136
>Endor/Russian
>Chunk and Dark Santa downing a Predator Drone with their harpoons as the operator goes to the fridge to get more Monster and check if his Gooey Facials Ultimate Compilation is done torrenting.

[Anonymous No.5272130]

we called the kikes human and thus we must repent and men our ways

race war now

[Anonymous No.5272142]

>>5270041
>we are the counter-culture now.
this is true
>The youth will be on our side.
Seen kids today?
>We are going to recapture the West
Does turtle island count?

[Anonymous No.5272154]

>>5270261
>but more of sensing that something was missing from today's society and religion fits that purpose I guess
>I found religion in a way Kierkegaard talked about.

top fucking kek mate.
Not only did you skim Kierkegaard, you are also identical to your "spiritual" parents in the sense that you pick a religion to "fit" your lifestyle because you need somewhere to belong.

[Anonymous No.5272156]

>>5268095
>but not very original in thought

as if there are any people less original in thought than the vast majority of leftists. i say that as a leftist.

[Anonymous No.5272171]

>>5268095
there is something plebby about the "need to belong"

[Anonymous No.5272188]

>>5272171
someone has been reading too much Nietzsche

[Anonymous No.5272195]

>>5268066
It's aight to have gay sex and LARP IRL

In ye olden days, men would penetrate the anuses of other men to show dominance over them or to form a secret bond (which is why "society" as a whole looks down upon homosexual acts.) between men that solidified the relationships. This was mostly done in the context of separation from females, such as warfare or incarceration. It fomented unit cohesion in ancient units. The men who had sex with men also likely had wives. Heterosexuality was public, while homosexuality was private and intimate.

[Anonymous No.5272197]

>>5269762
every group wants to claim nietzsche as their own.

[Anonymous No.5272212]

>>5272195
so traditionalism is basically just really convoluted way of making being a log cabin republican sound cool? gtfo out of here with that shit, fag

[Anonymous No.5272269]

>>5272212
>so traditionalism is basically just really convoluted way of making being a log cabin republican sound cool?

No, because first above all the log cabin republicans identify and make public their homosexuality. Learn to fuckin' read.

In old time homosexuality was esteemed precisely because it was secret and criminal. If two men had sex with each other it meant they trusted one another with each other's reputation. The concept of outing homosexuals is a judeo-feminist scheme to rob Aryan men of the cohesive social force which held them together in the past.

[Anonymous No.5272283]

>>5272269
m8, you sound like a Jewish shill.

[Anonymous No.5272655]

>>5270035
>Unfortunately /lit/ is filled with people who have recognised that atheism is on the rise
citation needed

It's a meme
It became popular because one 12 year old Reddit was such a faggot and said something dumb on the internet, and people found his pics and pics of other atheists that happen to be obese, messy, and wearing corny clothes.

It just spread like wildfire because it was funny, and let's face it, whether you agree with atheism or not, it has long since has this image of this teenage tool who thinks he is automatically "ahead of the game" because he decided to say no to going to Dad's church on Sundays.

Get over yourself.

[Anonymous No.5272841]

>>5272655
statistics say otherwise

[Anonymous No.5272862]

>>5272841
>citation needed

statistics say im the queen of england

[Anonymous No.5273718]

>>5268032
I'm reading it right now.
It is the like the edgiest LARP manual you will ever see. I'm not even fucking joking.
Pic related are unedited selections from the book.

>>5268046
Between the Way of Men and that article, I have this feeling that when JD talks about elves, he literally means elves. It isn't a metaphor. He is afraid of elves and dwarves.
Years ago, he started staying in character as Malebranche the Conqueror (his Level 13 Barbarian character). He started lifting weights and shaved his head, and now he's in so deep he can't get out.

[Anonymous No.5273729]

>>5273718
Haha, a LARP manual is the perfect description for that excerpt, kudos

[Anonymous No.5274108]

>>5270822
>Inciting rebellion against God and king is hardly liberty. One may always, through prayer and petition, ask for redress of grievances.

[Anonymous No.5274153]

>>5272655
>It's a meme
it really not. theres people who rally feel that way.

remember that quote 'a society that gets its kicks from being stupid will eventually be overwhelmed by actual idiots thinking they're in good company'

[Anonymous No.5274191]

>>5268181
>I admit i have no patience for Hyperborean Aryans from Atlantis.

Cretin!

[Anonymous No.5274743]

>>5274153
>it really not. theres people who rally feel that way.
Buddy, no.

The initial post comes across as some holier than thou faggot whining about fedora shaming, and it seems both you and that guy if you're different posters are a bit confused, the meme is against people like this pic and the faggots who pretend they're on a supposed higher ground by posting passive aggressive noise

You're not going to tell me that no one on here ever tries to be a pseudo intellectual, and you're not gonna tell me they don't deserve to made fun of for acting like a tool

Pretending to think otherwise, THAT'S sad.

[Anonymous No.5274801]

>>5274108

>Throwing some guy in jail for inciting masses towards genocide of a minority.
>A noble chopping a peasants head of because he feels insulted.

>the same

Is Whataboutism really the best you can come up with?

[Anonymous No.5274815]

>>5274801
They are exactly the same. In both cases you are being punished by an unaccountable elite for speech that they dislike.

>so-called liberals claim that "hate speech isn't free speech"

I wish these retards would just call themselves what they are: progressives. They're certainly not liberals.

[Anonymous No.5274818]

>>5274815
not that guy but the words have become synonymous