/leftylit/

[/leftylit/ No.8370618]

Why are there literally no right wing intellectuals?

Also /leftylit/ general.

Who's your favourite leftist author?

[Anonymous No.8370622]

my diary desu

[Anonymous No.8370625]

>>8370618
>Why are there literally no right wing intellectuals?

Fuck you, libcuck retard.
Off the top of my head:
>Peter Hitchens
>Nick Land
>Milos Yiannapolous
>Stefan Molyneux

Now go back to your continental 'muh feels' """philosophy""", you brainwashed sheep.

[Anonymous No.8370628]

>>8370625
>Peter Hitchens
>Nick Land
>Milos Yiannapolous
>Stefan Molyneux

fucking lmao just kys hun, now run along to /pol/

mods, please ban this fucking imbecile

[Anonymous No.8370632]

>>8370628
>can't handle rational fact-based thinkers because it hurts your libcuck feefees

The Left, everyone

[Anonymous No.8370634]

Only someone who is deeply ignorant of history, philosophy, art, literature, et cetera could seriously claim that there are no conservative intellectuals or that being conservative somehow precludes intellectualism.

[Anonymous No.8370639]

>>8370625
Kek

[Anonymous No.8370651]

>>8370634
>Only someone who is deeply ignorant of history, philosophy, art, literature, et cetera could seriously claim that there are no conservative intellectuals or that being conservative somehow precludes intellectualism.

kys.

[Anonymous No.8370666]

>>8370651

Thank you for your contribution.

[Anonymous No.8370704]

>>8370651
You first, cuck.

[Anonymous No.8370719]

>>8370632
>rational fact-based thinkers

[Anonymous No.8370723]

>>8370618
>>8370625
>fuck off libcuck

That's why

[Anonymous No.8370725]

>>8370618
Burke
de Maistre
Bonald
Donoso Cortes
Schopenhauer
Dostoyevsky
Freud (yes, really)
Julien Benda
Strauss
Schmitt
CS Lewis
Oakeshott
MacIntyre
Bloom (Allan, not Harold)

There you go. Two hundred years of right-wing intellectuals, from several religions, countries, and political positions (from reactionary monarchism to neo-conservatism). One reason there are fewer popular right-wing intellectuals is that right-wingers study the great thought of the past and don't feel the need to create an endless wankfest circlejerk about how to build the perfect society. But, by all means, go back to your thinkpieces about how Zizek is a fascist. I can't wait until the braying mob of your fellow left-wingers gets hungry for blood and hangs you for not being revolutionary enough.

[Anonymous No.8370727]

>>8370618
> no right-wing intellectuals
You might think their intellect is flawed, but you can't wish away the fact that they're intellectuals buddy

[Anonymous No.8370729]

>>8370625
>2 pseuds, an internet cult leader, and a professional troll
woah

[Anonymous No.8370732]

>>8370625
>Milo Yiannapolous
>Intellectual

Kek

[Anonymous No.8370739]

>>8370725
>CS Lewis

[Anonymous No.8370742]

>>8370739

>he's memeing about CS Lewis because that's the only name on the list he's ever heard of.

[Anonymous No.8370743]

>>8370725
>go back to your thinkpieces about how Zizek is a fascist
left/lit/ loves sniffman what are you even on about

[Anonymous No.8370744]

>>8370618
Probably because it's extremely difficult to conceive of that a person could spend thousands of hours in serious contemplation of things and then conclude that the status quo of now (or X years ago) was perfect and as good as it's going to get.
Right wing "intellectuals" literally just make excuses for and defend other people's rosy retrospection

[Anonymous No.8370745]

>>8370739
Some people like him, I was being ecumenical in my selection. Unlike the left, the right doesn't conduct show trials for those who claim to be its allies.

[Anonymous No.8370747]

>>8370742
>he's being wrong

[Anonymous No.8370748]

8370725

[Anonymous No.8370754]

>>8370745
He's saying Lewis isn't an intellectual. At least a very low tier one.

[Anonymous No.8370755]

>>8370745
That's because right wing politics are just a distraction for the overfed.

[Anonymous No.8370756]

>>8370618

Plenty of right-wing intellectuals.

Fact is that the best intellectuals are apolitical or anti-political.

[Anonymous No.8370758]

>>8370744
Probably because it's extremely difficult to conceive of that a person could spend thousands of hours in serious contemplation of things and then conclude that the flawed rational abilities of now (or X years from now) will be perfect or at least getting better all the time.
Left wing "intellectuals" literally just make excuses for and defend their own barely-acknowledged resentment against the essential unfairness of human life.

[Anonymous No.8370762]

>>8370755

And what, left wing politics are just a distraction for the underfed?

[Anonymous No.8370764]

>>8370758
>essential unfairness of human life
Nice alienation.

[Anonymous No.8370765]

>>8370744

It's actually not that difficult to conceive.
Otherwise how do you explain the solidity of the status quo?
Most people conclude that it's as good as it's going to get. Let me guess they're just not as smart as leftists and need to be guided by their all-knowing, seriously contemplated loving hand, kek.

[Anonymous No.8370767]

>>8370762
A struggle for food.

[Anonymous No.8370768]

>>8370764

Nice ressentiment.

[Anonymous No.8370770]

>>8370756
>the best intellectuals are apolitical or anti-political
PURE UNDILUTED

[Anonymous No.8370771]

>>8370758
>muh unhappy consciousness

[Anonymous No.8370773]

>>7628174

If you want to discuss politics, go to /pol/.

Fucking cibervoluntarios.

[Anonymous No.8370774]

>>8370758
>Probably because it's extremely difficult to conceive of that a person could spend thousands of hours in serious contemplation of things and then conclude that the flawed rational abilities of now [...] will be perfect or at least getting better all the time.

That's a very dumb imagining of what Leftism entails, but putting that aside you do realize that the observable trend is an increase in literacy, education, and understanding over the course of history?

[Anonymous No.8370776]

>>8370618
Nice bait post. The only reason you don't think there exist any right wing intellectuals is because you have lumped "anything I don't like" into right wing. You don't respect anyone's opinion or intelligence if you don't like their ideas, so there are no "right wing intellectuals" in your world view. Just sample bias.

>>8370744
There are plenty of times when you can think "this is pretty good", but because you are okay with it, you don't feel the need to write about it or slander other people. Hence, you have no evidence for people spending seriously contemplation.

There are plenty of respected philosophers and intellectuals who are "right wing" (nice dichotomy); so many mathematicians and scientists too (e.g. von Neumann, Newton, Godel). You are committing the same fallacy you accuse others of.

[Anonymous No.8370777]

>>8370768
Nice humblebrag.

[Anonymous No.8370778]

>>8370770

Sniffling Slovenian detected.

Stay political, pleb.

[Anonymous No.8370779]

>>8370768
Nice ressentiment.

[Anonymous No.8370780]

>>8370618

Ey! Cyber-Volunteer! go to >>/pol/

[Anonymous No.8370782]

>>8370778
>Stay political
I will, as will you.

[Anonymous No.8370784]

>>8370782

Whatever you say.

[Anonymous No.8370788]

>>8370618

.......J
.......A
.......M
F R E D R I C
.......S
.......O
.......N

[Anonymous No.8370791]

>>8370776
>Newton
>Gödel
>Right wing

[Anonymous No.8370792]

>>8370782

>everyone is political

Wrongo.
All politics is merely disguised anxiety about obtaining and the concomitant desire to control women and their sexy bodies.
Those of us who have transcended the women meme no longer feel this anxiety and can quite easily exist apolitically. It is not in our natures to attempt to order society.

[Anonymous No.8370794]

We just had a thread about this but I'll repeat myself.

Right wing "thought" has already been predetermined, by Jesus/God and requires no more analysis. Anything else is opening your mind up to the Devil.

"leftist author" is pretty much redundant.

Right wing authors usually hire leftists as ghostwriters.

[Anonymous No.8370798]

>>8370792
>>>/r9k/

[Anonymous No.8370801]

>>8370792

MUCH LIKE sexuality, politics is not something you are free to chose not to participate in. opting out is opting in for your own class.

[Anonymous No.8370802]

>>8370774
>observable trend is an increase in literacy, education, and understanding

More literacy and education does not necessarily entail greater literacy or education. Most college graduates today and, I would wager, many PhDs, have merely the fraction of the education even a mediocre graduate from a German gymnasium had 150 years ago.

Also, would like to know how you measure understanding.

[Anonymous No.8370805]

>>8370625
>Nick Land
>Milo

AYYYYYYYY NIGGA WHAT YOU DOIN

[Anonymous No.8370806]

>>8370802

>makes snowball estimation based on nothing but his own preferred narrative of history
>asks for "measurement" of understanding

posicucks are this stupid

[Anonymous No.8370810]

>>8370625
>Peter Hitchens
>Nick Land
>Milos Yiannapolous
>Stefan Molyneux

I was literally in tears by the end of this list. Hysterical.

[Anonymous No.8370824]

>>8370801

>opting out is opting in for your own class.

This is why Marxist theories of society/history will never not be shit. They cheapen the entire Human experience by reducing everything to economics.

[Anonymous No.8370829]

>>8370806
You misunderstood my point. I was not asking for a "measurement" of understanding but was implying that understanding is non-quantifiable. The guy I was responding to was the positive who thinks that "more information = better information."

As for "snowball estimate on preferred narrative blah blah blah" how many languages does the average university graduate know today? In America, one, in Europe, maybe three. A 20 year old gymnasium student would have known Latin and Greek, possibly also Hebrew, certainly French, and probably also Italian too. He would have been conversant in multiple languages with both his contemporaries and the thinkers of the past. He would, in addition, also have had a rigorous training in music and athletics, because of the German love of Bildung.

Do you know anyone who comes close to any of this, let alone while still in his or her youth?

[Anonymous No.8370830]

>>8370802

This. Modern education is terrible, what I'd give for a Prussian education. In the 1800s, people used to come from as far away as America to Prussia in pursuit of a proper education.

Nowadays people are essentially 'big children' - right through their 20s and possibly beyond.

[Anonymous No.8370831]

>>8370829

>Tfw we will never have an education system/tier devoted to the creation of polymaths

[Anonymous No.8370834]

>>8370831
that's because of there's no fucking need for polymaths

people love to jack off over jack-of-all-trades but the sciences have developed so much you gotta focus on one thing

[Anonymous No.8370836]

>>8370824
>muh heavenly ecstasies of religious fervour, of chivalrous enthusiasm, of philistine sentimentalism

[Anonymous No.8370838]

>>8370834
Congratulations, you've discovered one reason why everyone today is unimaginative, stupid, or both.

[Anonymous No.8370841]

>>8370836

>Nothing is ever done for non-economic reasons

Reducing the whole of Human history to religious fervour/chivalrous enthusiasm/philistine sentimentalism/etc would be just as stupid, though.

The Marxist propensity to find economics at the heart of everything is a symptom of autism.

[Anonymous No.8370842]

>>8370834

>need

L'ART POUR L'ART.

[Anonymous No.8370849]

>>8370841
>>Nothing is ever done for non-economic reasons
The reasons don't change the outcome.

[Anonymous No.8370853]

>>8370824
you have no idea what you are talking about do you?

[Anonymous No.8370854]

>>8370842
well go ahead and do that, but if you want to actually do something for your field, you'll need to spend less time studying other things

[Anonymous No.8370858]

>>8370854

The ideas that polymaths can have no expertise in a given field is fundamentally flawed.

[Anonymous No.8370863]

>>8370830
>eople used to come from as far away as America to Prussia in pursuit of a proper education.
now people come to America from as far as Dubai to receive one
whats your point?

[Anonymous No.8370867]

>>8370618
the left/right paradigm is like 200 years old at most.

most philosophers lived way before that?

[Anonymous No.8370870]

>>8370858
Your genital organ is flawed.

[Anonymous No.8370872]

>>8370863
They don't come for the education, they come for the paper that says they went there.

[Anonymous No.8370878]

>>8370863

>He thinks the allure of Ivy League schools is down to a quality education, rather than the mere prestige

[Anonymous No.8370886]

>slaughterdyke
>not a radfem
What a waste.

[Anonymous No.8370888]

>>8370625
enjoyed reading this post

[Anonymous No.8370893]

>>8370801

>he thinks appetites are controlling

What's it like to be a materialist psychopath?

[Anonymous No.8370897]

>>8370618
Sloterdijk, leftys are also pretty much anti establishemtn so they have a lot to whine, right wing intellectuals tend to stay in the status quo

[Anonymous No.8370907]

>>8370841

That would be a good criticism if that was what Marxists actually did. But they don't so it's not. Using a concept to understand events is not "reducing" those events. If it is, historians of every single stripe do it. The totality of history is unknowable.

[Anonymous No.8370909]

>>8370618
>Who's your favourite leftist author?

Susan Sontag. Brilliant writer, although probably insane and a racist as well.

[Anonymous No.8370917]

>>8370907

To which mythical Marxists are you referring? Because in both formative theory and actual practice it's exactly what they did. Do you even know what dialectical materialism is?

[Anonymous No.8370918]

>>8370907

>Using a concept to understand events is not "reducing" those events.

It is.

>If it is, historians of every single stripe do it. The totality of history is unknowable.

Wrong on both counts.

[Anonymous No.8370930]

>>8370907
>Totality of history is unknowable.

What's the comprehensive, meta-historical perspective you've reached such that you know that comprehension and meta-historical knowledge are impossible?

[Anonymous No.8370968]

Implying Dugin's eschatology hasn't changed the intellectual landscape of Eurasia

[Anonymous No.8371114]

>>8370917

you certainly don't. Marxism has not since the 70s in English and the 60s in French and German been guilty of the mythic economism you're falsely preaching. the economic has for a long time been understood as but one simultaneously determinate and determining branch in the overall structure of social totality. in explaining the interactions of these overdetermined phenomena (which include also ideology, culture, politics, religion, the law...) marxists are for the most part interested in the forms of alienation and reification—colloquially "oppression"—which they perpetuate on the basis of their involvement in the capitalist mode of production. i'm not going to explain to you why it is a safe bet that they will be alienating and reifying—that's why marxists read Capital.

[Anonymous No.8371115]

>>8370618
Right wing intellectuals
Hilaire Belloc
Thomas Aquinas
Carl Schmidt
St. Augustine
Alasdair MacIntyre
Peter Geach
Edward Feser
Edith Stein
G. K. Chesterton
These are some of the ones I like a lot. I'm sure the French rigt wing anon will post some of his

[Anonymous No.8371119]

>>8370834

and we are told my our wage-payers that this sort of willing blindness is a good thing. when will class traitors become conscious of themselves?

[Anonymous No.8371131]

>>8371114

>Marxism in the 70s and 60s
>LITERALLY irrelevant

Ok, we'll just define "Marxist" by whatever meme book you read instead of by those who formulated the theory and actually held power.
Just changing what your label means to avoid actual history is a way to avoid your past flaws; unfortunately for you it's also the first step towards dissociation and dissolution. Sorry about your failed ideology and its aborted attempt at evolution.

[Anonymous No.8371148]

>>8370918
>It is.

If you're an idiot and a bad reader, maybe it is. but no comprehensive analysis merely reduces antagonism to class violence. each facet of the subject is comprehended according to its own internal necessity—however long that takes—before the crucial leap to (in culture, at least) ideological criticism, and from this, class, is made. this practice is not reductive but expansive. it extends minutely individual phenomena ("the experience of the religious," "sexuality," "literature") into their socio-historically determined totality, dragging up with them them all the baggage they would like to hide, and which you are trying to hide right now, in the name, presumably, of ignorance for its own sake.

>>If it is, historians of every single stripe do it.
>Wrong on both counts.

Actually, dude, no, history (as a genre of writing) is always produced by the reading of historical texts, be they documents or artifacts or whatever is of interest, and reading is always already informed by concepts and categories to which, according to your perspective, the object is "reduced." but a comprehensive analysis sensitive to the overdetermination of cultural production is not reductive, it restores life to the petrified remains of history by banishing the accumulated dirt of our own ideas of them and elevating them into the social totality of which they are at once a cause and an effect.

>>8371131

>>8370930
he was parroting your own position. Marxism attests precisely to the opposite.

>>8371131
it's really astounding that you're accusing me of re-labeling something, where you are the one who exerted actual effort to change what i said from "since the 70s and 60s" to "in the 70s and 60s," in order to change the meaning of what I said to some sort of periodism or preferential reading. but if you think marxism is a dogma, that it's something like the biblical exegesis whose methods and doxa are regulated by a governmental body (the church here, presumably, according to you, the ussr for marxism) then you're just wrong, and are rapidly revealing yourself to be either a redditor, or a wikipedia scholar. please leave, or start reading, which will require you to leave.

[Anonymous No.8371155]

>>8371131

The guy you're arguing with strikes me as an acolyte of the Sniffling Slovenian.

Don't bother desu.

[Anonymous No.8371156]

Nick Land is right about literally everything btw

[Anonymous No.8371165]

literature

[Anonymous No.8371166]

>>8371155
The Sniffling Slovenian is very, very far away from a ~defender or marxism desu senpai~
He like, claims that there must have been a perversion in it right from the start (so that it ended up as Stalinism), calls himself a "very critical Marxist" and kinda advocates a (partial) return to Hegel from Marx

Still that anti-Marx guy is retarded, Marxist-Leninist dogma has pretty little to do with contemporary (or good from the past) Marxist theory. Not to say that it isn't Marxism or that there aren't plenty of people today who cling to it.

[Anonymous No.8371180]

>>8371166

He sleeps with a portrait of Stalin over his bed.

Back to the drawing board with you.

[Anonymous No.8371188]

>>8371180

is this a troll, or do you earnestly believe that what you saw in a youtube is a substitute for reading books?

[Anonymous No.8371193]

>>8371188

Neither and both.

[Anonymous No.8371196]

>>8371148

Your explanations are absurd and filled with the garbled groans and convulsive nouns that always marks Marxists in the post-mortem period; thus it's little wonder that you can't manage a stable definition other than "intangible force that solves everything."

Those of us who aren't mystified by it account for it by the way it was actually wielded, nothing else. That way was a practice called dialectical materialism.

You've already joined the cult so of course you see your petty cult readings as magical urtexts capable of spawning infinite expansion, and somehow it's our fault for not being able to account for your confused gibberish. What you've written here is so detached from reality that it wouldn't be a stretch to describe it as nearly schizophrenic.

[Anonymous No.8371197]

>>8370743
No they don't, unless you're counting tankies and those lads barely count as lefties anymore

[Anonymous No.8371199]

>>8371197
How fuckimg new are you?

[Anonymous No.8371223]

>>8371196

Society could rightly be called intangible, though not quite a force. It structures everything you are able to chose and yet is nowhere empirically present. This knowledge—that as an individual you will never achieve anything more than what it is already possible for you to achieve, given the conditions of the society into which you were born—is frustrating, and you can rest assured that the "garbled groans and convulsions" that you're now experiencing and projecting on to me have been experienced and projected by countless before you, and will continue to be experienced and projected, as the mind finds itself with nowhere to turn against the dual choice between absolute positivism and the possibility that being—all being, the total sum of human being, society-as-such—is not empirical. i invite you to take the dialectical leap beyond this false quandary but if you are unwilling to we have nothing more to say to each other. but you can be comforted in the knowledge that your assessment of the illegibility of my writing is not wrong, but you should also know that it isn't true, either.

[Anonymous No.8371312]

>>8370794
>right wing is conservatism and nothing else

[Anonymous No.8371333]

>>8371197
Tankies hate Zizek, they're the ones making thinkpieces calling him a fascist. Post-marxism to them is revisionist evil

[Anonymous No.8371338]

>>8370618
The spectre of marxism is still with us.

[Anonymous No.8371341]

>>8370917
>>8370918
>>8370930

>What is the incompleteness of the historical record for $2000, Alex

That's literally entry level History. You are morons.

[Anonymous No.8371427]

>>8371197
have u even read zizek

must suck to be a public intellectual desu senpai, everyone feels obliged to misunderstand the provocations

[Anonymous No.8371512]

>>8371341
doxa at best, ideology at worst.

[Anonymous No.8371581]

http://thephilosophicalsalon.com/a-reply-to-my-critics/

[Anonymous No.8371606]

>>8371333
Exactly. I'm in some tankie fb groups for fun and this shit is a daily occurence.

[Anonymous No.8371618]

>>8371341
Have you ever even watched Jeopardy?

[Anonymous No.8371672]

>>8371581
>Zizek responded to a reddit post

[Anonymous No.8371715]

>>8371672
Zizek is the reddit of left wing "intellectuals"

[Anonymous No.8371725]

>>8371338
Nice hair.
>>8371341
God knows everything tho.

[Anonymous No.8371776]

>>8371606
I used to troll them on twitter, they've aped a lot of SJW positions so I love to see them perform mental gymnastics in regards to Soviet cleansing/genocide of Tatars and Chechen muslims.

Phil Geaves, Molly the Playboy magnates daughter, fucking freaks

[Anonymous No.8371810]

>>8371672
no way

>looks it up
>it's true
>it's fucking gamerghazi
>links to the mobile version
>also uses the word Kafkaesque
>also talks about how you should be allowed to marry animals and that animalfucking was common in the 60s

pic very related

[Anonymous No.8372476]

>>8370794
>Pas d'ennemis a gauche, pas d'amis a droit

[Anonymous No.8373471]

>>8371776
>Molly the Playboy magnates daughter
?

[Anonymous No.8373482]

>>8370628
>Milo
>intellectual

[Anonymous No.8373485]

>>8371776
lol just fucking kys lmao.

You obviously know fucking nothing about stalin. you fucking IDIOT.

[Anonymous No.8373799]

>>8370725
This. OP is a fucking dolt.

[Anonymous No.8373961]

I think a lot of people are smarter, or at least a bit more critical, on this board and above the retardation that is "right" and "left."

[Anonymous No.8373972]

>>8373961
>mfw bourgeois relativism

[Anonymous No.8374008]

>>8373471
Molly Klein aka RedKahina
https://twitter.com/RedKahina

Her father made the Playboy channel, she grew up in a Californian mansion. She proposed a motion at the Left Forum a few years ago that Zizek is a CIA plant/psyop. It's mind boggling stuff

https://thecharnelhouse.org/2015/06/14/no-tears-for-tankies/

[Anonymous No.8374011]

>>8373485
Phil?

[Anonymous No.8374042]

>>8374008
>žižek on permissive liberal fathers...

[Anonymous No.8374150]

>>8370618

Because they're systemically discriminated against and thrown out of academia, and who sits on the golden throwns in universities is what forms your understanding of intellectualism. And that's why you're a pleb.

[Anonymous No.8374655]

>>8370968
i love wacko's like this

[Anonymous No.8374765]

>>8371810
it's only a matter of time until someone links him here

[Anonymous No.8375534]

>>8374765
You really think senpai will notice us?

[Anonymous No.8375654]

>>8374150
Exactly this.

[Anonymous No.8375662]

>>8375534
I actually think Zizek would love 4chan. I mean we're pretty much right up his alley, in terms of free expression and overall resistance to harmful ideology.

[Anonymous No.8375725]

>>8370802
>>8370830
>More literacy and education does not necessarily entail greater literacy or education.
Of course it does. But you're ignoring the point: maybe your mediocre gymnasium graduate of class 1866 is well educated but, first of all, he's a member of small minority of persons, second of all, he's living in a time where it was still possible to be reasonably knowledgeable in all fields of collective knowledge. In 2016 collective knowledge is so expansive everyone first of all, HAS to be educated, second of all, is necessarily a specialist when they pursue higher education. In 1866 space exploration was an idea. Keep your romanticism to yourself, you wouldn't have benefited from it anyway.

[Anonymous No.8375761]

>he's not a "stalinist"

[Anonymous No.8375763]

>>8375725

>Of course it does.

[Citation Needed]

>he's a member of small minority of persons

What's the problem? If everyone is highly educated, no one is highly educated.

>he's living in a time where it was still possible to be reasonably knowledgeable in all fields of collective knowledge

Arguably more achievable now than it has ever been.

>In 1866 space exploration was an idea.

So were world wars. Your point?

Change =/= Progress.

[Anonymous No.8375772]

>>8375662
>overall resistance to harmful ideology.
anon, just because he doesn't like political correctness it doesn't mean he doesn't think that "the jews are running the world in secret" or "transgender people are mentally ill", and so on, aren't harmful

[Anonymous No.8375892]

>>8375761
>tfw you were a Trotskyist when you started learning about socialism
>tfw you start agreeing with Stalin more and more every day

[Anonymous No.8375899]

>>8375892
Well if your point of reference is Trotsky ...

[Anonymous No.8375961]

>>8375892
Accept your liberated mind, comrade.

[Anonymous No.8375965]

8375763
Terrible.

[Anonymous No.8375990]

Fuck, Marry, Kill?

[Anonymous No.8376023]

>>8375990
Fuck Bakunin, marry Kropotkin, kill Proudhon

[Anonymous No.8376131]

>>8370794
Although there's a large amount of right wing thought that eventually goes back to Logos and two-world theories, there are just as many who are non and even anti-religious in their thought; Friedrich Nietzsche, Arthur Schopenhauer, Jünger, and Lovecraft just to name a few.

Christian does not imply right wing, plenty of leftist Christians around. Maybe you watch too much Jon Stewart.