Traditionalist / Conservative / Reactionary Literature

File: 70 KB, 217x320, Oswald+Spengler+-+Obamicon+(Decline).png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Traditionalist / Conservative / Reactionary Literature Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:17:04 2013 No.4188487 [Reply] [Original]

Last thread was sadly deleted.

I'd like to continue our discussion about traditionalist / conservative / reactionary literature.

Some of the authors discussed:
>Oswald Spengler
>Julius Evola
>Rene Guenon
>Carl Schmitt
>Jorge Luis Borges
>Yukio Mishima

DISCLAIMER: Please respect all global rules. Keep civil. Refrain from racism, shit-posting, /pol/ meme-spamming, etc. This thread is intended as a forum to discuss and recommend traditionalist/reactionary authors, literature, and philosophy.

NOTE TO JANITOR: The last thread was posted in good faith, for the purpose of discussing a large subset of literature and philosophy. Threads on anarchist and socialist literature appear fairly regularly on /lit/. Any shitposting should be the responsibility of those who shitpost, not those seeking civil conversation. Thanks.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:20:03 2013 No.4188492 >>4188487 Seriously hope this thread isn't deleted, too. I've just started getting into more conservative authors, and I'd like to hear more recommendations, etc.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:23:03 2013 No.4188500 For those interested, this extensive (if obscure) list of right-wing authors was posted in the last thread: http://ironmarch.org/index.php?/topic/653-reading-list/

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:23:03 2013 No.4188503 I don't really understand Traditionalist/Conservative philosophy but I don't think that these threads should be deleted anymore.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:24:04 2013 No.4188507

>>4188487
What if I disagree with the "destroy everything" pomo crowd and think traditions are needed, but disagree with a lot of self-proclaimed traditionalists because I don't have some previously existing tradition to which I think we all ought to return?

In other words, what if I look to both tradition and rhetoric for ideas but don't consider myself a conservative or a reactionary at all?

I think a synthesis of traditionalism and modernism is possible, and feel that nationalism is the enemy of culture rather than the defender of it.

I am an anarchist, but I essentially reject all Marxist influence.

I'm not shitposting, by the way, or if I am, it's not intentional. I'm seriously just expressing some ideas and suggesting it's possible to have a stance on the matter of tradition other than the wholesale acceptance of traditionS (as in, actually existing traditions) and the rejection of tradition (as in, tradition as a concept).

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:26:03 2013 No.4188508 >>4188507 I shouldn't have used the word "modernism." I didn't mean to suggest modernist philosophy. I suppose what I mean is adaptability and the willingness to change traditions -when there is a good reason to do so.-

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:28:03 2013 No.4188518 File: 847 KB, 1682x2260, Ironing.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >mfw perceived intolerance is censored /lit/ is pretty capable of discussing this end of the spectrum as well as the other, I don't see why it should be a problem.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:28:03 2013 No.4188519 >>4188507 This feels like a rather confused post to me. For the sake of discussion, could someone well read in this type of literature explain to us what is meant by "Tradition" in the sense of "Traditionalist" lit?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:28:03 2013 No.4188521 >>4188503 Did /pol/tards flood the last one or what? We've had traditionalist threads here for a long time. I'm ideologically as far away as you can go but I've never found these threads to be anything but interesting.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:30:04 2013 No.4188523 i think traditionalism is dumb but there's no reason for these threads to be deleted.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:31:04 2013 No.4188527

>>4188503

OP here. I agree.

I'm very new to this side of literature, which often seems neglected. I've read a ton of left-wing / anarchist authors, including Victor Serge, Tolstoy, Orwell, le Guin, Babel, et al., and I really enjoy their work. But now I'm trying to fill this other gap in knowledge.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:31:04 2013 No.4188528 >>4188521 It was a shitfest of /pol/ memes, let's see if Cletus can contain himself in the woodwork this time?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:33:04 2013 No.4188534 >>4188528 Coming from a leftist perspective, how about you stop stereotyping poor white southerners?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:33:04 2013 No.4188535 >>4188521 yes, there were posts about "good goys" and such a shame, really

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:34:03 2013 No.4188536 >>4188518 OP again. I was pretty shocked that the thread was deleted. If the janitor wants to ban /pol/ shitposters, that's awesome. But why delete the entire thread?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:37:04 2013 No.4188544 >>4188536 I think it's the old /pol/ maneuver of deleting your own post and call repression, like they did with the "shut it down" meme.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:37:04 2013 No.4188545 >>4188535 Figures. >>4188536 Janitors can't ban, so I guess he took the only way out. Not really proper procedure though. he should just report it to the mods.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:38:20 2013 No.4188549 >>4188544 Thread*

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:39:20 2013 No.4188553

>>4188507
The nice thing about traditionalism being fringe is that it still has the privilege of being eclectic. I'm a national socialist "except for the bad parts". Try to figure out what the fuck that means, bro. I know an anarcho-syndicalist who is insanely well-read and who hates cultural degeneracy and thinks there are ways around it. Be eclectic, nigger, there's no shame in that. No one agrees 100% with any school, viewpoint, or author.

>>4188535
You know the people posting that shit were trolling & self-reporting to get the thread deleted. It happens in every single /lit/ thread because there is a small core of bored FORUM VETERANS who know exactly how to shitpost in order to cause a derail.

If the janitor or mod wants to improve the board and actually (holy shit!!) start something new and interesting on /lit/'s stale circlejerk, I suggest he put in a minimum of effort every once in a while to prune the thread of obviously garbage or off-topic posts, but leave the thread intact. You could be the guy who helped civilise /pol/!! Who knows!

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:40:20 2013 No.4188554 >>4188544 Maybe, but traditionalists don't seem to be the type to scream "prosecution!" But we should abandon the topic and talk books instead. Nowhere this conversation can go.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:40:20 2013 No.4188556 >>4188534 Is Cletus exclusively a poor white southerner's name? How about YOU stop stereotyping them.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:41:20 2013 No.4188565

>>4188536
>>4188544

Nope -- I was the OP, and I certainly didn't delete that thread.

I don't really know what janitors can and can't do, but I did see a post from someone saying that the thread had been reported.

I saved a copy of the thread and took a few screenshots to show that there were legitimate discussions taking place -- but it might have been an accident on the part of a mod or something, so I'm not going to report it. (As long as this thread stays up, too.)

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:42:19 2013 No.4188571 >>4188553 Yes, those clever JIDF ki- shitposters. Or maybe traditionalism does attract some of those people?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:42:20 2013 No.4188567 Anyone read Nazi-era Schmitt? Is his neo-Hobbesianism actually "Hobbesian" on any deep level?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:43:19 2013 No.4188574 File: 130 KB, 1234x540, Screen Shot 2013-10-16 at 7.09.30 PM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4188565 *Forgot to attach one of the screenshots.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:44:20 2013 No.4188579

>>4188487
As a Marxist and Anarchist poster on /lit/, these threads are pretty good.

What do you think of Solzhenitsyn's project to recapitulate a peasant based orthodox Christian mystical response to Stalinism?

On a political sense, as a Marxist, I think it is futile intellectually, but actually presents a praxis of proletarians. However, within its own ideology it appears to make sense in terms of the suffering of the mass beneath an "foreign" order, like the Khans.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:47:05 2013 No.4188589 I refuse to say Mishima was a traditionalist. Perhaps his writing when it comes to short stories shows it but taking into account his lifestyle and actions And confessions from a mask, ffs I would say Mishima is not a traditionalist at all.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:49:05 2013 No.4188595

>>4188574
Speaking of Junger, anyone have an interpretation of On Marble Cliffs?

I read on Wikipedia (lol) that he said it's "a shoe that fits different feet". It seems like it fits the thuggish NatSoc regime really really well though, with the treatment of the town, the behaviour of its officials, and its "old guard" of decent men and orderly conservatism slowly losing ground. But maybe there's something 2deep4me in there.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:49:05 2013 No.4188597

>>4188553
>If the janitor or mod wants to improve the board and actually (holy shit!!) start something new and interesting on /lit/'s stale circlejerk, I suggest he put in a minimum of effort every once in a while to prune the thread of obviously garbage or off-topic posts, but leave the thread intact.

I couldn't agree more.

What the previous thread needed was the constructive pruning of shitposters, not wholesale deletion.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:50:05 2013 No.4188598

>>4188589
He wanted to return to a militarist authoritarian culture and he staged a coup and demanded people start venerating the emperor as a god again when he wasn't an actual monarchist or religious, and he was a homosexual poet

Think he might have liked tradition a bit

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:52:05 2013 No.4188605 >>4188579 >marxist >and anarchist How?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:54:06 2013 No.4188615 >>4188553 >You could be the guy who helped civilise /pol/!! Who knows! lol why would you want to do that?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:55:05 2013 No.4188619 >>4188605 Not hard, marxism is just an analysis of capitalism, not a political project.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:55:05 2013 No.4188620 >>4188605 Those two ideas can coexist, just like you and being a faggot m8 ;)

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:55:05 2013 No.4188622

Was Borges really a "conservative" in the sense of these guys, or was he just a member of the conservative party because the alternative in Argentina was batshit semi-fascist populism? Asking out of genuine curiosity (but Mishima in particular on this list probably had more in common with Peròn than Borges)

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:57:05 2013 No.4188626 >>4188605 1. Read Marx 2. Comprehend Marx 3. Reject authority It's really easy.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:57:05 2013 No.4188627 >>4188622 Borges was basically a classical liberal. But he had many interests which coincide with those of classical traditionalists.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:58:05 2013 No.4188629 >>4188619 >>4188620 >>4188626 Sorry. I have leninism and bolshevism wired to my head when the word "marxism" comes up.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:58:05 2013 No.4188631 >>4188627 One of the arch-reactionaries (and a great writer) was Donoso Cortes, and he was an arch-liberal as well There was some quote of his about "better the sabre of the aristocrat than the dagger of the pleb"

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:59:06 2013 No.4188633 >>4188554 /pol/ aren't traditionalists, but like to identify with them

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:59:06 2013 No.4188634
File: 9 KB, 280x400, knut_hamsun_portrett_1192604744.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I'd like to start compiling a list of notable reactionary authors and their most representative works, with the intention of creating a spiffy infographic. Everyone's welcome to contribute.

Few to start:

Knut Hamsun - The Growth of the Soil
Dostoevsky - The Demons
Conrad - The Secret Agent
Bulgakov - Master and Margareta
Ezra Pound - Cantos
Celine - Journey to the End of the Night
Junger - On Marble Cliffs

Need more.

Also... >tfw you will never be as crabby an old man as knut hamsun

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:59:06 2013 No.4188635 >>4188579 >Marxist But dialectical materialism is wrong.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 19:59:06 2013 No.4188636 >>4188553 >>4188597 And yet none of you report posts or do anything productive in that regard at all.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:01:06 2013 No.4188645 >>4188635 Are you really going to attempt to sit in front of your computer and pretend like your job, living conditions, and society at large have no effect on you?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:01:06 2013 No.4188646 >>4188598 >militarism >traditional this is where you're all wrong

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:01:06 2013 No.4188647 >>4188556 No, it isn't. But that's clearly the implication that's being made.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:01:06 2013 No.4188649 File: 43 KB, 614x599, I+match+your+doge+with+doge+doge+_59cc3695836f2fdef41a20a5b545c60b.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4188598 >Think he might have liked tradition a bit

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:02:06 2013 No.4188653 >>4188634 He had plenty to be crabby about. >tfw wrote my thesis on Guenon

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:02:06 2013 No.4188655 >>4188634 Wasn't Conrad a socialist?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:02:06 2013 No.4188656 >>4188556 yes it is janitors pls delete these threads are nothing but a shitstorm /pol/ exists to contain this kind of shit

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:02:06 2013 No.4188657

>>4188605
Look into Platformism, Autonomism, Council Communism, Left Communism, IWW, Situationalism, Anarchism as practiced today.

It is common to reject Marx's contributions to the political movement of his time through the use of tools developed by Marx. Marx-against-Marx is the first step of becoming an independent proletarian thinker, and encouraged by Marx himself who rejected the idea of "Marxism".

>>4188619
It is more that the political project of Marxism exceeds the trite exemplars in the First, Second, 2.5th, 3rd and 4th Internationals. The project of class emancipation existed before, during and after Marx.

But my contribution was about Solzhenitsyn as a conservative thinker.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:02:06 2013 No.4188658 >>4188635 u wot m8? explain this shit

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:03:05 2013 No.4188662 >>4188631 >"better the sabre of the aristocrat than the dagger of the pleb" So aristocrats had bigger dicks, and he was a real cockslut.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:04:05 2013 No.4188666

What does this thread think of authors who associated with pagan "traditions", and held many traditionalist values but rejected Christianity and conventional right-wing politics (or conventional politics altogether), like Ted Hughes and Robert Graves?

What does this thread think of Christopher Lasch (later in his life)?

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:04:05 2013 No.4188667

>>4188658
Well Diamat is demonstrably wrong compared to Historical Materialism. Read critiques of Stalin's writings, Kolakowski on Marxism, and for that matter attacks on Althusser and Engel's attempts to universalise the dialect outside of social relations of human beings.

Historical Materialism, of course, is still viable.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:04:05 2013 No.4188668 >>4188662 le freud faec.jpg

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:05:06 2013 No.4188670 >>4188579 >>4188658 >>4188667 attention derail in progress derail in progress

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:05:06 2013 No.4188672

>>4188645
>have no effect on you
Marx's claims are a little bit bigger than "things outside of people have an affect on them" and more akin to "human history is not only deterministic, but can be predicted."

Whether it's deterministic or not, there are too many details, too many individuals who, while they are a product of their culture, are not -in line with- the values of their culture, too many variables that can't be calculated but are still relevant.

Engels was wrong. Socialism is not a science.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:06:06 2013 No.4188676

>>4188656
> janitors pls delete these threads are nothing but a shitstorm /pol/ exists to contain this kind of shit

I'm trying to find the shitstorm in this thread, friend, but I'm having trouble. People are being decent and respectful.

Please allow people with similar interests to discuss those interests.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:06:06 2013 No.4188680 >>4188666 The only thing Ted Hughes contributed to literature is driving Sylvia Plath to suicide.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:07:06 2013 No.4188681 >>4188680 I'd consider that a major contribution.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:07:06 2013 No.4188682 >>4188670 Fuck mate, I wasn't trying to derail. Hell, I cited Kolakowski whose work was an extended critique of German Idealism as radically insufficient. And I want to keep talking about Solly's project of an authentic new mystical peasant Orthodoxy.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:08:06 2013 No.4188686 >>4188672 That's a rather small part of Marx' claims. The core of his claims are on how the wage labor and private property systems function in industrialized capitalism.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:08:06 2013 No.4188687 >>4188666 That's pretty much the European New Right in a nutshell, friend.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:09:06 2013 No.4188689 >>4188680 Have you actually read any of his poetry? or essays, plays, or translations

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:10:06 2013 No.4188692 >>4188680 >implying she was driven by anything other than her planned legacy bitches be conniving

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:10:06 2013 No.4188694 >>4188687 what does the New Right think of matriarchy, medieval (as opposed to absolutist) social values and the environment?

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:11:06 2013 No.4188696

>>4188686
I think, while he didn't go on about it a lot, the part I mentioned was pretty significant to his actual claims. As for the part you just talked about, I do agree with a lot of his criticisms of capitalism. I just think proclaiming that you're a "Marxist" has a bit more meaning to it than "I agree with Marx's analysis of capitalism."

I mean, shit, you could be a radical traditionalist, advocating the abolition of industrial society entirely and a return to small agricultural communities and agree with his complaints about capitalism.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:12:06 2013 No.4188700

>>4188655

Good lord, no.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Conrad#Politics

He was born into an aristocratic family, traveled the world, had exposure to almost every type of person imaginable, and came to the conclusion that 95% of them were savage cunts.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:13:06 2013 No.4188703 >>4188694 The New Right are considerably more 'liberal' (in the American sense of the term) with social values. As far as the environment goes I think they are very green in their approach. Seriously, check their stuff out.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:15:05 2013 No.4188710

>>4188676

sorry but your "interest" is intrinsically disrespectful and counter to the whole of western thought. thats what "reactionary" means if you get into the meat of these works you're provoking a bees nest, thats what the authors intend and thats why they're relegated to the fringes. and thats why this thread should stay relegated to /pol/ where i have seen many identical ones to it and where you'll get the responses you're looking for.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:17:06 2013 No.4188719 >>4188696 That man is conditioned by his society is a pretty big deal and a 100 times as scientific as the aristocracy having better souls or being descendants of Atlantis.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:18:06 2013 No.4188725

>>4188696
>I mean, shit, you could be a radical traditionalist, advocating the abolition of industrial society entirely and a return to small agricultural communities and agree with his complaints about capitalism.

Probably not, because Marx's complaints about capitalism aren't "moral" in nature, they're relational and material. Marx's analysis of capitalism exposes that the threat to capitalism comes from the working class itself; and that workers will master and control the productive forces in the transition from capitalism.

A radical traditionalist would reject the self-discovery of the working class, particularly as this (in Marx) involves a radical shift in cultural forms, as monumental as the one emerging from the French and Industrial revolutions.

A radical traditionalist would abhor and loathe these. This is one reason why futuristic reactionaries, such as the Italian Fascists retreated into an attempt to keep capitalism going while wrapping it in Italianism.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:19:06 2013 No.4188728 > 2013.8 in the year of our lord Dawkins > not believing in dialectical materialist conception of history topkek

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:20:06 2013 No.4188734 >>4188703 >I think they are very green in their approach. True. Environmental conservation plays a major role among most of the New Right. So does self-reliance and family cohesion.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:20:06 2013 No.4188736

>>4188710
>Western Imperialism as radical liberalism
Go join Paul Patton in his attempt to resurrect the bourgeois state after Foucault.

Around here, we analyse a variety of discursive practices including Western, Christian medieval, Jewish medieval, Daoist, Buddhist, Hindic, Proletarian autogestation, and Western Reactionary.

Go die in a fire you bourgeois shill.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:20:06 2013 No.4188739 >>4188710 >sorry but your "interest" is intrinsically disrespectful and counter to the whole of western thought Who cares? Freedom of speech, boyo. If you don't like it, hide the thread.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:20:06 2013 No.4188740 >>4188703 whoa this actually sounds cool, and I'm mostly a leftist I thought you were just talking about the "remove kebab" types at first >tfw North American and clueless

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:22:23 2013 No.4188745

>>4188719
>That man is conditioned by his society is a pretty big deal
Of course. It would be stupid to argue otherwise.
>and a 100 times as scientific as the aristocracy having better souls or being descendants of Atlantis.
"It's more scientific than bullshit" doesn't actually mean it's science.
>>4188725
Point made, but I still don't think agreeing that workers -might- do that automatically means they -will- do that. My problem is with the whole "it's inevitable" aspect of Marxism.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:23:22 2013 No.4188750 >>4188710 let me get this right: you're implying that this thread, which has been extremely civil, has the potential to derail /lit/? is this what you're afraid will happen?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:23:22 2013 No.4188751 >>4188740 Yeah, despite the name (which de Benoist despises) they aren't 'Right' in any sort of took our jobs or racist sense. Pretty interesting stuff, and certainly worth intellectual debate and consideration.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:24:22 2013 No.4188753 >>4188750 He's just shit-flinging, ignore him.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:25:23 2013 No.4188757 >>4188745 >"It's more scientific than bullshit" doesn't actually mean it's science. It's a method of obtaining valid knowledge that is coherent with human perception of reality. That's science.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:27:23 2013 No.4188762

>>4188745
>Point made, but I still don't think agreeing that workers -might- do that automatically means they -will- do that. My problem is with the whole "it's inevitable" aspect of Marxism.

If you follow Marx's writings and accept the core findings as:
1) Demonstrated in relation to empirical data
2) Correctly formed theoretically in relation to theorised relationships that express the empirical data's relations
3) Cogently connected in terms of the conclusions of the relationships amongst theoretical relations

Then you have to follow his conclusion that the working class will eventually seize control and transmogrify capitalism.

And again, I'll recommend Kolakowski on whether Marx's writings were cogent. Attacks on the transformation problem are specious given that there are viable readings of Marx that render all relationships politically imposed (in the sense of Marx's "political"). Other attacks have been weak, and essentialist in nature, often without reference to empirical data.

I'm not sure that truly conservative writings can respond to Marx in a positive way, largely due to the relational rather than essentialist depiction of humanity in Marx. Solly might, but he's placing a relationship to God as a central key, and then evaluates all other relationships in ideal terms on the basis of that. For a reactionary like Solly, all worldly relations are mere appearances except to the extent they crush the yearning for God.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:27:23 2013 No.4188763 >>4188757 What valid knowledge can we obtain via dialectical materialism?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:28:22 2013 No.4188768 >>4188757 >It's a method of obtaining valid knowledge that is coherent with human perception of reality. That's science. ALTHUSSER PLS GO. UR WAIF IS CALLAN.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:30:23 2013 No.4188772

>>4188682
whoops sorry. I should have read more carefully before targeting your post, it just seemed to be the source of all the Marxist/anti-Marxist shitposting. mention Marx at all on here and the entire thread will turn into a Marxism thread, go figure

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:31:22 2013 No.4188778

>>4188740

If you're interested in learning more, I'd suggest reading Pentti Linkola. He's a deep ecologist with ties to the New Right.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentti_Linkola

K.'s Industrial Society and Its Future, despite the idiocy of the violence it proposes, provides a pretty exceptional critique of the contemporary left.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kaczynski#Industrial_Society_and_Its_Future

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:31:22 2013 No.4188779 >>4188772 >mention Marx at all on here and the entire thread will turn into a Marxism thread, go figure Undergraduates gonna undergraduate. Reading Stalin as a reactionary can be viable. Ðilas does so.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:31:22 2013 No.4188780 >>4188775 I doubt the predictive value of Marx's "science."

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:31:23 2013 No.4188775 >>4188763 You can build a lot of good hypothesis from the synthesis' which you can then test by experiment or observation. Works best when studying people I guess. It's a pretty good way of looking at things.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:33:22 2013 No.4188787 >>4188780 >predictive >humans Lel

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:34:22 2013 No.4188790 >>4188787 But that's been my point all along.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:35:22 2013 No.4188792 But "Marxism" is only good because of the writers who came after Marx #realtalk

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:36:23 2013 No.4188796 >>4188792 I do like Gramsci.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:39:22 2013 No.4188806 >>4188778 >and opposes democracy, which he calls the "Religion of Death," Doesn't mince words, this dude.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:39:22 2013 No.4188809 Anyone here read Mencius Moldbug? I've been reading some of his work and have enjoyed some of his critiques on democratic government (I just wish he'd hold back on the ridiculous extended metaphors he uses)

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:39:22 2013 No.4188810
File: 36 KB, 448x293, rudyard-kipling.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>4188634

>not including me on that list

his best works are his weird short stories, imo.

other weird conservative authors from that era:

> yeats
> lord dunsany
> saki (probably as reactionary as they get)
> arthur machen

and a little further:

> evelyn waugh
> kingsly amis

The latter was quoted as having said: "I’ve finally worked out why I don’t like Americans … Because everyone there is either a Jew or a hick.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsley_Amis#Personal_life_and_political_views

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:40:22 2013 No.4188814

How do you deal with the obvious crazy mysticism found in a lot of traditionalist literature, like in Guenon and Evola?

I try to follow Carl Jung, Mircea Eliade and Joseph Campbell and just see shit like "aryan race came from Hyperborea" as archetypes.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:40:22 2013 No.4188815 >>4188806 He's actually well respected in Finnland, and is a really intelligent individual. >tfw some Marxists are shitting up this thread. Please...

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:41:22 2013 No.4188821 >>4188809 I just downloaded a pamphlet he put out (recently?). Somewhat taken aback by the title of its first chapter: "The Red Pill." (Really?) But, yeah -- so far so decent.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:43:22 2013 No.4188828 >>4188814 You embrace it. Unless you're not Aryan. Then... well... good luck?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:44:23 2013 No.4188833 >>4188814 See it as myth and embrace it as such.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:44:23 2013 No.4188835 >>4188815 They're fine; they're talking among themselves. I don't mind having cross-discussions in one thread.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:45:23 2013 No.4188838 >no one even mentioning Miguel Serrano or Savitri Devi They're the most next level, especially Serrano.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:45:23 2013 No.4188839 >>4188814 I don't think they mean it literally. But it's hard to tell. Savitri Devi probably was serious, though.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:47:22 2013 No.4188852 >>4188821 If anyone's interested, here's a link to the pamphlet in question: http://lexarchy.com/gentle_introduction_to_ur It was first published in 2009, I guess.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:47:22 2013 No.4188854 >>4188838 That's who i really thought when i said "crazy mysticism".

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:47:23 2013 No.4188849 >>4188815 And at least one person who doesn't like Marxism.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:48:22 2013 No.4188856 >>4188821 like I said, he's uses some lousy metaphors (including the red pill analogy)

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:49:22 2013 No.4188861 >>4188828 Is that really how these politics work? The basis of their theories essentially rests on the foundation of white supremacism? No wonder these threads have been deleted; racist trash.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:49:22 2013 No.4188862 >>4188838 I read Serrano's "Jung & Hermann Hesse" before I knew who Serrano was. (I just liked Hesse.) Pretty blown away when I learned the details of his life.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:50:22 2013 No.4188867 >>4188833 But isn't it political philosophy? It sure is used to justify politics? Isn't it a bit shitbrained to base reality purposely on obviously ridiculous myth? It seems way more retarded than any edgy revolutionary leftist.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:50:22 2013 No.4188871 >>4188861 They aren't racists in any way you'd recognize it. They're cultural racists - blood and looks couldn't matter less to them.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:53:22 2013 No.4188881 >>4188871 Cultural racists meaning their theories include discrimination of cultural "races"? How does this tie into the Aryan racial mysticism that was mentioned above?

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:53:23 2013 No.4188878
File: 34 KB, 275x248, 1315123327407.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Are thhere any con/trad/reac writings on economics? What is you fashes ideal economy?

What are you guys opinion on this article?: http://caffeinatedthoughts.com/2013/04/how-to-save-social-conservatism/
Because I reall like it.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:55:23 2013 No.4188888

>>4188871
Yes, and Horthy's culturally racist fascism acted as a fridge, keeping the Hungarians who happened to have culturally Jewish backgrounds on ice, until the blood fascism of Arrow Cross and Hitler took them off to camp; depriving the Magyar nation of fundamentally Magyarised jews.

…

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:56:23 2013 No.4188889

>>4188861

It's not all based on mysticism, bro; don't be histrionic.

I'm actually fascinated by the strong connection between mysticism and certain movements on the far-right. These cabals tend to pop up in odd places: e.g. Story of O and The Turner Diaries.

Speaking of right-wing books: I'd argue that Story of O is probably one of the most reactionary works I've ever read.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:57:22 2013 No.4188896 >>4188878 Economy is materialist and unworthy of serious thought, it's for the lower castes. Like work.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 20:57:23 2013 No.4188894 >>4188878 I'm not a social conservative (though I'm not a social "liberal" either) but I find it less shitty than most neocon shit (which I assume it is because it talks about the Republican party like something good).

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:00:23 2013 No.4188901
File: 187 KB, 500x374, rayofhope.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

OP here.

Not to get awkwardly sentimental or anything, but I'd like express my gratitude to everyone who's contributed to this thread.

It shows that civil discussion of controversial topics can be discussed openly on /lit/. That's important.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:01:22 2013 No.4188910 >>4188901 >It shows that civil discussion of moronic ideals can be discussed openly on /lit/. That's important. FTFY

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:03:23 2013 No.4188916 >>4188910 >Moronic ideas >Fucking order >Moronic

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:04:23 2013 No.4188918 >>4188916 >Fucking order Okay, okay, shit. Uhh... I'll have the General Tso's with fried rice, and an order of pot stickers. And a drink.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:05:22 2013 No.4188924 >>4188918 A fucking order ought to involve at least one prostitute.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:05:22 2013 No.4188925 >>4188923 On the side? Hell yeah.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:05:23 2013 No.4188923 >>4188918 Extra sauce?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:06:22 2013 No.4188927 >>4188924 The chicken has a decent texture and is warm, and I can't get arrested as long as I take it home first.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:07:22 2013 No.4188933 >>4188925 Here you go, sir.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:09:24 2013 No.4188934 >>4188927 My prostitute is always cold and soggy when I get home after a long day of arrestation.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:09:24 2013 No.4188935 >>4188933 Thanks. So, what do all you traditionalists think of Rudolf Rocker?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:10:24 2013 No.4188942 >>4188888 A lot of hungarian jews remained. Mátyás Rákosi, György Aczél and György Lukács. They were in charge of communism in Hungary and hardcore stalinists. It is really a pity not all of them were killed.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:11:35 2013 No.4188947 >>4188579 Hey, if you're still here, do you consider the petit-bourgeoisie to be an ally or an enemy to the proletariat?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:12:35 2013 No.4188951 >>4188942 György Lukács especially. Dude was an apocalyptic madman.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:13:23 2013 No.4188952 >>4188947 Enemy, they are proles who let themselves be bought off they are class traitors.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:14:23 2013 No.4188954 >>4188947 >petit-bourgeoisie >allied with proles toppest of tip top keks

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:14:23 2013 No.4188957 >>4188952 But they've just succeeded at what the proles have been trying to do since capitalism came into existence.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:15:23 2013 No.4188960 >>4188947 >>4188952 >>4188954 >>4188957 Never mind that shit. Vanguard. Yes or no?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:16:22 2013 No.4188962 >>4188942 Don't forget bolshevik leaders of the aftermath of World War I like Béla Kun, who imposed a Red Terror on hungarian people. And then the guy claims hungarian jews were fundamentally "magyarised".

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:16:22 2013 No.4188968 >>4188957 Wut? Are you saying they are emancipated? They are proles that are gets a little better payed

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:16:23 2013 No.4188961

>>4188942
>A lot of hungarian jews remained.
>Mátyás Rákosi,

Wintered Horthy in Moscow.

>György Aczél

IIRC Moscow.

>and György Lukács.

Moscow.

>They were in charge of communism in Hungary and hardcore stalinists.

Hitler didn't quite get to Moscow did he?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:17:22 2013 No.4188971 >>4188960 Marxist-Leninists can eat a dick

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:18:23 2013 No.4188977

>>4188968
I didn't say they did what was best for themselves. I said they did what they were trying to do. There's a difference.

And if they're just proles that get a little better paid, then they certainly aren't -real- bourgeoisie, so why are they enemies? Out of bitterness?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:18:23 2013 No.4188978 >>4188971 Yes, I'm sure most of them could.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:18:23 2013 No.4188980 >>4188960 Never again it just leads to fuckers who's just as insane as the fuckers discussed ITT.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:18:23 2013 No.4188982 File: 231 KB, 547x852, y-smfl.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4188957 Comrade, this talk sounds suspiciously like something kulak would say. Tell me: How many horses are owned by your family?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:19:23 2013 No.4188985 oh boy, here we go with da juice again once again, these threads belong on /pol/ because they inevitably attract this riff-raff

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:20:23 2013 No.4188991 >>4188985 What the hell are you talking about?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:20:23 2013 No.4188994 >>4188960 >anarchist >vanguard Shouldn't need explicit revulsion. Sure, there's Bakunin's whole secret brotherhood of guarding the revolution thing, but that was sort of different.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:20:23 2013 No.4188998 >>4188977 They identify with the bourgeoisie, and think it's just a matter of time before they'll join the club, so they act against their own and the interest of the proletariat.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:23:22 2013 No.4189005

>>4188985
Considering how many influental authors (like T.S Eliot, Dostoevsky, Celine and Ezra Pound) were anti-semites. Anti-semitism belongs on /lit/. Not as a practice, of course, but as a study of it's origins and purposes.

To understand the nature of judeo-bolshevism is to understand how could anti-semitism take place, this is a discussion that belongs here.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:23:23 2013 No.4189007 >>4188998 This happens in America even among the regular proles.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:24:23 2013 No.4189010 >>4189005 >judeo-bolshevism Lel gb2 >>>/pol/

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:24:23 2013 No.4189011 >>4188991 I like how idiots pop their head in here and accuse everybody ITT of causing a board-wise shitstorm. It's happened about three times now. Hats off to wishful thinking, I guess.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:25:23 2013 No.4189014 >>4188998 >tfw all americans have this attitude, even the prolest of proles

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:25:23 2013 No.4189015

>>4188947
There are no allies or enemies except tactically.

>>4188960
>Vanguard
ffs mate. You cannot substitute an external force, or a portion of a whole, for the whole. Subsitutionalism is sick. "The Universal Class" acts universally.

>>4188985
If you can't deal with Magyarisation, and Horthy's conception of Hungarianness how will you graduate to the nSk on Europeanness?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:26:23 2013 No.4189019 >>4189014 I think it would be better to say that this attitude permeates all areas of American culture, not that literally all Americans have this attitude. There are some in America who don't. It's just that there aren't a lot.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:26:23 2013 No.4189021 >>4189005 >Considering how many influental authors (like T.S Eliot, Dostoevsky, Celine and Ezra Pound) were anti-semites. Anti-semitism belongs on /lit/. brb making a thread on alcoholism

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:27:23 2013 No.4189023 >>4189019 That's what I meant, excuse the sloppy.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:27:23 2013 No.4189024 >>4189021 Not that anon, and not necessarily saying that he's right, but the tendency for a lot of well-known authors to have an alcohol problem is totally a thread that could be fine on /lit/.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:28:23 2013 No.4189027 >>4188962 >Loves Hitler >Never looked into Horthy Fascists have gone down hill since OP left the thread.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:28:23 2013 No.4189030

>>4189011
>>4188991

"A lot of hungarian jews remained. Mátyás Rákosi, György Aczél and György Lukács. They were in charge of communism in Hungary and hardcore stalinists.

It is really a pity not all of them were killed."

If that's not /pol/ tier shit posting then I don't know what is, but you guys probably agree with him anyway...

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:29:23 2013 No.4189033

>>4189005

OP here.

I'd encourage everybody to keep talk of Jews to a minimum, considering the volatility of the subject. If you want to discuss the ways in which certain ethnicities helped lead the 1917 Revolution, /pol/ is the place to do it. That topic isn't necessary here.

Let's talk literature.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:29:23 2013 No.4189034 >>4189024 Plus, if there's anything we'll manage not to shit up, it's gotta be a thread about Grain and Grape. At least that.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:30:23 2013 No.4189036

It's telling that Spengler and Schmitt were both deeply connected with the Nazi party, Evola with the fascists, and that Borges supported the Junta, and Mishima wished for the return of fascism in Japan.

Some of these people were good writers and good thinkers, but all were guilty of terrible political judgement.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:30:23 2013 No.4189037 can someone explain to be me the part in Spengler's theory that suggests the shift from introspective pursuits (like art and philosophy) to outwardly focused pursuits (like politics and economics) is apocalyptic?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:30:23 2013 No.4189038 >>4189030 >but you guys probably agree with him anyway... I don't agree at all. It's just that one isolated post isn't the shitstorm of epic proportions that you seem to think it is.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:30:23 2013 No.4189041 >>4189030 It is, but paying it attention's exactly what he wants, you doofus. >implying you're not both those anons

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:31:22 2013 No.4189043 >>4189030 Stop please, you are the one making lots of posts that have nothing to do with the thread.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:32:22 2013 No.4189045 >>4189036 It's telling? Of what?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:32:22 2013 No.4189047 >>4189005 >judeo-bolshevism Straight out of mein kampf. Nazism has no place on /lit/, because the Nazis were the most prolific book burners of all time.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:33:22 2013 No.4189050 >>4189030 Nice attempt to pigeon-hole me as an anti-Semite. Sadly for you, a wide spectrum of commentators have derided György Lukács advocacy of mega-death to achieve a global Marxist state. The man was an advocate of apocalypse.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:33:22 2013 No.4189051

>>4189030

I couldn't give a shit about Jews, but to see what sparse literature discussions we have here degenerate to >2013>reading a Jew author/reading Jew philosophy would be terrible

>Considering how many influental authors (like T.S Eliot, Dostoevsky, Celine and Ezra Pound) were anti-semites. Anti-semitism belongs on /lit/.

No.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:33:22 2013 No.4189052 >>4189045 He's suggesting they're the baddies.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:35:23 2013 No.4189058 >>4189052 Well it's hardly telling that they supported parties they ideologically were aligned with, is it? It's just natural.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:36:23 2013 No.4189062 >>4189036 Most french philosophers from the 1960s were maoists with a hard-on for the Cultural Revolution and the Khmer Rouge and you don't see people automatically despising them for it.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:37:00 2013 No.4189070 >>4189062 I despise them for it. They weren't entirely aware what the Khmer Rouge was doing, though.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:37:00 2013 No.4189071 >>4189033 >If you want to discuss the ways in which certain ethnicities helped lead the 1917 Revolution, /pol/ is the place to do it. Lol can you please stop insulting our intelligence with your miserable attempt at subtle propaganda/redpilling ?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:37:23 2013 No.4189066 >>4189051 CS Lewis as a reactionary. GO!

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:38:58 2013 No.4189075 So, do you people only drop names and don't discuss the actual content of people's writing?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:39:58 2013 No.4189083 File: 107 KB, 711x743, 1377506875472.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] > this thread > the previous two attempts to talk about muh pure white culture

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:40:59 2013 No.4189085 >>4189071 Stop baiting. Move on.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:40:59 2013 No.4189087 >>4189075 This thread consists of; left-wingers who are interested in their political opposites; shit-posters; and OP.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:40:59 2013 No.4189088 >>4189070 The Khmer Rouge was doing exactly what they fought for.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:40:59 2013 No.4189089 >>4189075 We can't agree on whose writing is worth discussing, I guess, though there was a bit of a discussion about Marx earlier.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:41:59 2013 No.4189091 >>4189088 Please stop

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:42:59 2013 No.4189100 >>4189088 Muh Bolshevik conspiracy muh red scare >>>/pol/

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:42:59 2013 No.4189101 >>4189075 OP again. Like I said above, I'm pretty new to literature on the right side of the spectrum. While a deeper discussion of the content of the authors' works would be appreciated, I'm happy adding to my list of writers to read later.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:44:00 2013 No.4189106 >>4189087 OP here. Pretty accurate.

>>	OP Wed Oct 16 21:45:00 2013 No.4189110 >>4189106 I should just change my name, shouldn't I?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:47:59 2013 No.4189118 >>4189101 Why don't you cut the crap and read Hobbes.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:47:59 2013 No.4189119 >>4188778 >He advocates eugenics, genocide,and abortion as possible means to combat overpopulation. I like how he thinks

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:47:59 2013 No.4189122 >>4189110 Tristan Reinlandt would be great for a Traditionalist /Conservative/Reactionary.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:49:59 2013 No.4189128 Thomas Carlyle is interesting. Hero-worshipping proto-existentialist conservatism.

>>	OP Wed Oct 16 21:50:59 2013 No.4189130 >>4189122 Noted, thanks.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 21:56:59 2013 No.4189144

>>4189091
>“To shoot down a European is to kill two birds with one stone, to destroy an oppressor and the man he oppresses at the same time: there remains a dead man and a free man”

SARTRE, Jean-Paul.

Change "european" for "intellectual" and you have Khmer Rouge ideology.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 22:36:21 2013 No.4189242 File: 154 KB, 639x355, Screen shot 2013-08-06 at 11.44.34 AM.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >reading up on all the recs in this thread I'M GOING DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 22:42:17 2013 No.4189260 >Refrain from racism you cant refrain from 'racism', incompleteness, abstraction, and judgement are all integral to cognition. anyone who says they arnt 'X-ist' is a liar.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 22:46:18 2013 No.4189273 >>4189101 http://unqualified-reservations.blagspot.com/2011/06/slow-history-extravaganza.html have fun

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 22:52:34 2013 No.4189282 >>4189273 Historian here. The works cited are so far out of date it is as if someone is attempting to do fluid analysis using phlogiston.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 22:55:34 2013 No.4189287 >>4189282 >period sources >out of date u avin a giggle m8?

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 23:00:33 2013 No.4189294

>>4189287
The blog claims that these sources are useable by non-experts as direct historiography. Historiography is time dependent, to read historiography in 2013, one must read historiography reasonably current to the standard of research in 2013. Those texts fail that criterion.

They may be adequate primary sources for those who can read historiographically, but the blog does not suggest you need training in reading primary sources, it suggests that any modern can read them naively.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 23:04:34 2013 No.4189302 >>4189294 im not sure i understand you, youre saying that commentaries on commentaries are preferable to reading from people who actually lived there? what better source can there be?

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 23:04:34 2013 No.4189303 >>4189260 das deep

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 23:26:49 2013 No.4189345 >>4189302 Go read a basic historiography book. There's a reason historians write histories, and why you're not reading a ledger from 1840 instead.

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 23:33:49 2013 No.4189362 >>4189345 i think what you ment to say is 'let us induct you into the discourse first so you dont derive any conclusions that might contradict the narrative'. >these arnt ledgers either.

OP Wed Oct 16 23:38:49 2013 No.4189372

>>4189273

>Naturally, we've dubbed this Action Pak, our original and still most popular, the Imperial Reaction Instant Red-Pill Super Victorian Headcharge. The Super Victorian Headcharge contains (in this order):
>Sir Henry Maine, Popular Government (1886)
>James Anthony Froude, The Bow of Ulysses (1888)
>Thomas Carlyle, Latter-Day Pamphlets (1850)

I love it. Thanks.

OP Wed Oct 16 23:44:49 2013 No.4189384

>>4189294

Didn't Foucault asplode the notion that contemporary history is more meaningful than any previous age's history, by demonstrating that any commentary on previous ages only serves to reflect the age of the commentary itself, by artificially reshaping the past to conform to the normative standards of the present?

Please reply in the form of a haiku.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 23:48:55 2013 No.4189392

>>4189362
No, you're arse backwards.

History's discourse is one of fundamental distrust.

Allow me to induct you into a discourse that proposes firstly that any conclusions drawn must be validly demonstrable by reading from texts that can be shared; and, secondly, that the highest prize you can attain is to destabilse fundamentally and devastatingly any narrative that holds that it is unassailable.

Historiography is the chisel aimed at the plinth of an edifice, not the edifice itself.

(Also, if the 19th century texts can't survive a modern critique from a reactionary historian intact, while not producing in turn a 21st century reactionary narrative, then they weren't fruitful sources to begin with, were they?)

>>	Anonymous Wed Oct 16 23:49:52 2013 No.4189393 >>4189384 Autumn undergraduates come Like a shower of santorum Over bathhouse semen

>>	OP Wed Oct 16 23:51:52 2013 No.4189396 File: 33 KB, 255x216, 1341286708711.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4189393

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 23:52:52 2013 No.4189399

>>4189392

academic historians are tools, sorry. their livelihoods depend on validating orthodoxy, and Deconstruction is easy if its validating orthodoxy.

the extend to which you can categorically trust contemporary scholarship is the extent to which it is removed from contemporary political implications, proximately or temporally.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 23:55:51 2013 No.4189403

>>4189396
Amusingly you'll note that the seasonality is human rather than natural, and the transformation towards nature is the transformation towards the body as nature, or in fact, the body without organs or BwO as ejaculate.

The reference to Foucault's own timeliness is expressed as a scatography that through self-referentiality becomes doubly so: the santorum is in fact AIDS.

Finally, the dismissal of Foucault's seminal claims is made with both a gay slur _AND_ a biblical reference to him as a self-absorbed wanker. Onanism here, not only being wanking in the Western sense of being a masturbator, but wanking in the biblical sense: Stalinism died, and Foucault failed to fill up the wife of Stalinism, the proletariat, with life giving semen; instead spurting his load on the dust and preventing the birth of revolution.

–Muon, commentaries on the Koan of Foucault's Anus.

Anonymous Wed Oct 16 23:59:52 2013 No.4189412

>>4189399
>their livelihoods depend on validating orthodoxy
You've not actually read any serious journals have you? Since I entered undergraduate, the turn to language has been overthrown, social history has been attacked from the right by cultural history and from the left by class historiographies, there's been a turn rapidly to environmental themes and transnational themes. This is within 20 years. Historiography demolishes "orthodoxy" mate. Also you might want to look up what "ortho" means, history is a lot more crooked and sinister than orthodox.

Secondly, historians rejected "deconstruction." You know nothing about contemporary humanities. I'd suggest you look at the rain of shit showered on turn to language cultural historiography.

Finally, your use of "categorical" in relation to trust indicates you have no understanding of induction or inductive fields.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:11:52 2013 No.4189422

>>4189412

social history as a specific movement failed for the same reason the politics of people who liked or did such things fail. that they were predicated on and in pursuit of a certain set of normative conclusions that, while often disagreed over in implementation, are not in principle, which *is* the orthodoxy.

indeed, the sinful nature of past leaves its offerings suspect, as you say, does it not?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:13:51 2013 No.4189425 >>4189050 I've read a tiny bit of History and Class Consciousness and am curious about this apocalypse you speak of. Where can I find it in his writings? I'm not doubting you, for the record. I believe you. I just want to see with my own eyes.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:16:52 2013 No.4189428 >tfw we are observing democratic societies failing to respond effectively to the exception, making it only a matter of time before a true sovereign emerges

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:23:51 2013 No.4189435 >>4189428 So where's the best place to start reading Carl Schmitt?

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:27:52 2013 No.4189439

>>4189422
While the past is sin, sinful man can with the faculties of reason given him by God produce that which while sin is sin within the realm of reason in the use and enjoyment of the faculties provided. Go fuck yourself —Spinoza.

Social History had massive in principle distinctions, chiefly between revolutionaries, tankies, social democrats, labourites, progressives and liberals.

When the liberals started to think that they were in fact the ones benefitting from keeping the working man down, they fled into cultural history.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:37:52 2013 No.4189447 >>4188595 Thats essentially it, its his dissatisfaction of where the world was going.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:42:52 2013 No.4189453

>>4189435
Read him in order as his publications exist in English, his development is REALLY fucking interesting and even puzzling in places. It might be worth getting Gottfried's monograph on him. His 1920s stuff is basically critiques of parliamentiarism and popular sovereignty, and really formative groping attempts at a bedrock for the wavering political order. His Nazi stuff appears incredibly suddenly and he goes rapidly into overdrive with it from 1933.

I don't know if The Dictator is available in English but it would be a good starting point. You don't have to read the really minor shit, like his articles. Or even Constitutional Theory, really, which is one of the longest works.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:45:53 2013 No.4189460 File: 34 KB, 303x271, youaskedforthis.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4188487 In my opinion, reading leftist work is more important to right-wingers as to understand the concepts of your political 'enemy'.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:46:53 2013 No.4189461

>>4189453
Cool. I'm yet another one of those fucking leftist pricks who wants to get his toes wet in conservative philosophy, but I haven't really gone further than (if they count) Hobbes and Strauss. But from what little I've heard about Schmitt he sounds really, really goddamn interesting.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:48:51 2013 No.4189463

>>4189435
>>4189453
What do you think of the argument that his work during the Nazi years was strongly influenced by political conditions? For instance, that his profound anti-semitism in Leviathan In The State Theory of Thomas Hobbes is mostly a reaction to / attempt to fit within the Nazi political context, not something that's intrinsic to his own views.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:50:51 2013 No.4189466 >>4189461 You'll probably like him. It seems like Schmitt is the one conservative that leftists always really, really love. It's funny.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:50:51 2013 No.4189468 >>4189463 Not the person you're replying to but I don't buy it. The intellectual community in the Reich by the time of even the 1920s was entirely turned against Jews and leftists with the exception of academia and certain socialist enclaves.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 00:59:26 2013 No.4189485

>>4189439

i feel like we are talking past each other at this point.

>Social History had massive in principle distinctions

youre simply not looking deep enough.
>revolutionaries, tankies, social democrats, labourites, progressives and liberals.

all of whom can be said to accept the same basic axioms (and the extent to which they selectively renege in practice can be seen as the extent to which theyve been practically successful).

how best to describe the modern cathedral? let me refer to hegel:

>if the theory disagrees with the facts, so much worse for the facts

this is the modern (read, gnostic/progressive) popular sentiment in a nutshell, and in a way the perfect political formula. what better way to utilize the populace into permanent revolution then by revolting against reality itself? and how successful politically? the revolutionaries have already been dominant for decades, something that causes no small amount of cognitive dissonance to the more genuine ones (assuming they are aware/self-aware).

to the point, history is one of my favorite things, historiography a stimulating exercise. and it is precisely because of this that i ask you how you can in good faith tell someone to first turn to a body that can, for example, so unilaterally deny realities of human biodiversity, among countless other obfuscations of sociological phenomina.

granted, things have gotten somewhat better since the turn of the century (likely due to both the internet, and the increasing difficulty in keeping up the old myths), but much of mainstream 20th century scholarship is practically a criminal offense against mental health (and some of it definitely is).

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 01:01:26 2013 No.4189487

>>4189461
You might want to check out Georges Sorel, who was a Syndicalist. His ideas influenced Italian fascists, and they're considered proto-fascist for the whole idea of galvanising the "spirit" (or psychology) of a community (in his case the left revolutionaries) so that it can shoulder any burden, act with perfect solidarity and camaraderie, etc. He just wanted to do it for different reasons than Hitler.

A lot of right wingers agree with guys like Marx or Bakunin too. I mean, most people would say "Third Position" is code for "I want to gas the Jews!", but a good deal of people earnestly believe in the Third Position. Mussolini was a hardcore, active socialist for a long time.

>>4189463
I mostly agree with >>4189468 in that it's simply not necessary to conclude that. It's perfectly possible to me that he was flirting with certain ideas for a long time but didn't write on them, or maybe didn't repressed his own interest in them.

But specifically on the antisemitism, it's so goddamn sudden and so virulent, I wouldn't be surprised. I think I read on his wikipedia once that even fellow Nazis were dubious of it, he doth protest too much etc.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 01:01:26 2013 No.4189488 >>4189461 conservatism isint a position, its an epistemology. to wit, contemporary conservatives are simply another form of progressive.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 01:06:27 2013 No.4189498

>>4189466
Really? Weird. Could be a desire to pick a token somebody as a "No, look, I really can take conservativism seriously!" gesture.

I actually do really like Leo Strauss, but as I said, I don't know how well he fits. But he appeals to my love of classical thought and such.

But I'm really not sure where to dig deeper. I've got Voegelin and Burke on my reading list, but after growing up with an anti-intellectual right-wing evangelical Christian environment, I've got a bit of a gag reflex that I'm trying to get rid of.

>>4189487
Cool, thanks. This sounds really interesting.

>>4189488
Elaborate?

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 01:14:27 2013 No.4189513

>>4189498

what does the modern conservative claim to conserve?

democracy? equality? freedom+democracy?

both revolutionary, left wing memes, and the other a contradiction in terms.

why did liberals love will buckley? because he didint disagree with them in principle, only in practice, he was their troubleshooter. 'conservatives' in the west legitimize the narrative by defining the scope with which you can disagree with it (outside of which lie the 'dangerous radicals'), while also serving as a totem of the struggle, something that can be pointed to to say 'the great work is not yet complete', to keep the permanent revolution alive.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 01:15:28 2013 No.4189515

>>4189485
>all of whom can be said to accept the same basic axioms
Yeah, nah. 5/6ths of that group support capitalism. 1/2 of that group support the unmitigated bastardry of the boss.

>i ask you how you can in good faith tell someone to first turn to a body that can, for example, so unilaterally deny realities of human biodiversity, among countless other obfuscations of sociological phenomina.

I'm sorry you're engaging in strawmanning, because you're conflating unlike elements under a common head. Most social history is situated, located, and doesn't talk, for example (from the Hammonds, 90 years out of date methodologically, but still having learn situation) beyond their scope of the English Village Poor between 1700 and 1830.

This situated research, as EP Thompson so clearly says, is the basis of historiography's attack on "theory" in general.

>much of mainstream 20th century scholarship is practically a criminal offense against mental health (and some of it definitely is).

I'm sorry, tinfoil is available in aisle 7.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 01:24:26 2013 No.4189528 >>4189498 Moldbug, I suppose.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 01:25:26 2013 No.4189530

>>4189515

as an aside, you dont 'support capitalism' or not, catallaxy simply *is*, and to the point, under this context these too are simply practical disagreements, the idealized ends are the same (the bosses, too, will always be with you, including under 'popular government' [see also, edward bernays]).

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 01:29:26 2013 No.4189537

>>4189530
Tankies demand the reimposition of capitalism under central control. If that isn't the "support" of capitalism I don't know what the fuck is. It is only to liberals that capitalism "is" so the air surrounding that it needs no comment, and a phlogiston of theory is required to account for man's willingness to bastardise man.

Under this context there is nothing of a practical disagreement. Go ask the Hungarian dead.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 01:37:26 2013 No.4189545

>>4189537

you dont understand, catallaxy is simply another way of saying gestalt rationality, ie, the ways which dissimilar ideal frameworks recursively account for each other to best achieve their ideals (as applicable to our own cognition as it is to, say, socio-economic dynamics).

>Go ask the Hungarian dead.

but why did the hungarians have to die? to achieve the ideal of 'Communism' of course.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 01:42:26 2013 No.4189548

>>4189545
>but why did the hungarians have to die? to achieve the ideal of 'Communism' of course.
Precisely the wrong answer. Your empirical foundation isn't really present is it? Lomax _Workers Councils_.

>gestalt rationality
I call eisegesis. Aisle 7 is that way.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 01:47:26 2013 No.4189551 >>4189513 Speaking just about America here, but the funny thing is that America was (to oversimplify) founded on (classical) liberal principles (Locke, etc.), so when one wants to hold to tradition, and one's traditions come from the likes of Locke...

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 01:47:26 2013 No.4189552 >>4189548 their idea of communism was the true Communism(tm), so they had to be stopped. if someone is acting in contradiction to your ideals, do you not have a duty to stop them?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 02:24:01 2013 No.4189615 This thread isn't very relevant to traditionalism any more...

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 02:26:01 2013 No.4189618 File: 267 KB, 1073x521, up.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Based Victoria confirmed for Traditionalist

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 02:37:00 2013 No.4189641

>>4189615

historian anon is having trouble admitting that the reason he doesnt want people reading period sources 'naively' is because they might catch crime-think from them.

i share his faith in reason however (i certainly wasnt taught the way i am now in school, at home, or in media), and indeed also his wariness of the fruits of reason mired in 'sin' as it were, but i would charge this applies much more readily to the contemporary discourse, rather than the near past (ie, the victorian age works in question).

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 03:00:01 2013 No.4189673

>>4189641
When I say I'm against Crimethink, you'll hear me say it. For example, Fergusson's methods are fucked—but, that's mainly because he does a lot of survey works. I've checked some of his specialist works and they're not readily assailable.

So I'll recommend to you crimethinking by reading Fergusson's specialist works. Because they're the results of reason reasonably applied.

Regarding survey works, I have said in the past the same thing about Hobsbawm. I like his Bandits though.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 03:05:01 2013 No.4189676

Also reactionaries may wish to read Hammond and Hammond, 1911, Village Labourer on the English Aristocracy's destruction of their own rights of control to cultivate them to the highest level. The factory and the poor law are in reflection of the enclosures, both the triumph of the manor and the destruction of it.

For what is Reactionary politics except the ideology of the manor writ under a modern state? What is Fascism except the politics of the manor writ in machine?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 03:06:01 2013 No.4189677 >>4189641 jesus christ you are full of yourself aisle 7, etc, kill yourself, fuck off, whatever

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 03:30:07 2013 No.4189706

>>4189513
Liberalism of this kind is a misnomer, like you say, a left-wing thing.

But Liberalism was never 'left wing'. Outside of America liberals represent the center between nationalists and socialists. In America classical liberalism is to the far right of 'Racial Progressives'.

Liberalism is, according to Spengler, the social construct of the Anglo-Saxon and works for him.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 03:32:08 2013 No.4189711

>>4188680
>not liking his poems

Crow's Song Of Himself

When God hammered Crow
He made gold
When God roasted Crow in the sun
He made diamond
When God crushed Crow under weights
He made alcohol
When God tore Crow to pieces
He made money
When God blew Crow up
He made day
When God hung Crow on a tree
He made fruit
When God buried Crow in the earth
He made man
When God tried to chop Crow in two
He made woman
When God said: 'You win, Crow,'
He made the Redeemer.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 03:35:08 2013 No.4189717

>>4189677

your tears sustain me.

>>4189673

you still havent given a cogent reason as to why period commentators providing living history are somehow inferior to commentators centuries after the fact. coupled with the fact that youve referenced marxist historians twice now (im assuming by fergusson you mean adam fergusson [or maby nial]), makes me think that the specter of crime think really isint that far from the thought process here (you cant just dive into history comrade, you need to have the right *interpretation* of it!).

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 03:47:09 2013 No.4189745

>>4189717

but to be honest, i actually agree with the latter sentiment, certain people ARE more equipped to interpret works then any average joe, and it should be that way also, to prevent the spread of bad ideas.

the only difficulty is, i see marxism/universalism/leftism (ie, the various expressions of the gnostic sentiment throughout history), as some of those bad ideas (and never mind the irony inherent to having a leftist authority on something, but contradiction is inherent to leftism).

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 03:59:08 2013 No.4189756 >>4189706 i think i can accept that, by my reckoning, if you dont believe in equality, youre not left wing. hence the possibility of right leninism and the like (ie, soviet russia, before gorbachev cocked it all up).

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 04:13:07 2013 No.4189767 >>4188626 But Marx Didn't reject all authority...

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 04:27:57 2013 No.4189790 File: 48 KB, 318x460, Martin_Heidegger.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >analytics accuse me of being insufficiently clear >accuse them of Being insufficiently

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 04:35:57 2013 No.4189802

>>4189767

how else can we speak of communism, if not the dissolution of all class into a single class? of course i would argue that this is impossible a priori, but perhaps youre right there anyways: certainly we have plenty examples of hierarchal societies that also called themselves communist, so an ideological justification mustve been had somewhere (concealing the hierarchy through propaganda works best in democracy, where the informers and directors of propaganda are in fact the hierarchy).

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 04:59:45 2013 No.4189825 >>4189802 He saw authority as necessary for achieving communism. >hierarchal societies that also called themselves communist They were in socialism but descried them as communist (they meant they were marxist).

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 05:27:01 2013 No.4189859

>>4189825

ah i figured that would be the case, we must sin to defeat sin. but i suppose thats what separates the true communist from the mere fashionable solipsist when faced with cognitive dissonance, all politics, history, and instrumentality must be made pawn to the faith in providence, right, if the vision is right.

liberal pluralism cannot provide such conviction by definition, as it is predicated on the leveling of conviction. the modern alternative to communism is less than communism.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 05:53:00 2013 No.4189888

>>4188814

Eliade was a student of Evola's. If you read Eliade you'll notice that something is missing in the center-- that thing is actual staunch belief in an objective metaphysical reality. Evola also read "Hyperborea" as being more or less metaphorical, but metaphorical for the abstract world that this world depends on.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 05:56:00 2013 No.4189892

>>4189037

Spengler saw cultures as having two stages: a first "Kultur" stage where the introspective arts you describe were paramount, and then, once the inventory of forms that were "baked in" to the culture were exhausted, a "Zivilisation" phase where outward pursuits became important. This is rather like the lifecycle of a main-sequence star.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 05:58:01 2013 No.4189894 >>4189294 That's not a fact, that's a theoretical construct

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 06:59:22 2013 No.4189981 File: 29 KB, 575x480, Ps5yEfl.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4188634 >Bulgakov >reactionary Wat? Other than mocking socialists, I'm not seeing how Master and Margarita is a reactionary work.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 09:05:00 2013 No.4190241
File: 145 KB, 498x760, rotting-hill.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>4188634
I'll post it again. Wyndham Lewis is a great modernist writer who I believe is too often ignored not just because of how far right he is but how politicized his writing is as well.

Here's a collection of stories entitled "rotting hill" from later in his career.

http://www.mediafire.com/download/0hh651l46wszm5c

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 09:14:00 2013 No.4190264 >>4188634 >>4188810 Why does everyone forget Mishima? Also Lawrence.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 09:26:01 2013 No.4190286 >>4189859 >as it is predicated on the leveling of conviction this emphasis on leveling is my strong felt conviction as a democrat. Democracies are not perfect, theres definately room for improvement.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 09:34:01 2013 No.4190300 >>4188527 >Tolstoy I think this is why you need to define what you mean by 'traditionalist'. In what ways is Tolstoy, with all his emphasis on the spiritual over the material and specifically on Christianity, not a traditionalist?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 10:39:05 2013 No.4190404 >>4189618 Easy to criticize other women for not wanting to be subjugated when she was the only woman around who wasn't. Her lack of empathy is hilarious.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 10:44:04 2013 No.4190415 Can everyone in this thread who's conflating liberalism and leftism please stop it?

>>	OP Thu Oct 17 10:48:05 2013 No.4190419 >>4190241 Thanks. Added to my list. PS. What's the fastest way to make an infographic like the ones on the /lit/ wiki? We're getting close to assembling a nice collection.

>>	OP Thu Oct 17 10:49:05 2013 No.4190420 >>4190264 What's Lawrence's most representative work? Mishima is listed in the OP.

>>	OP Thu Oct 17 10:50:05 2013 No.4190423 >>4190300 Good point. You're right: Tolstoy is a traditionalist. >tfw harvesting wheat w peasants

>>	OP Thu Oct 17 10:56:05 2013 No.4190429 File: 801 KB, 1988x2085, Novellas_1.3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4190419 e.g. this list How make? Photoshop? Or can it be done through some online program?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 14:41:08 2013 No.4190875 >>4189790 This made me laugh; thanks. I'll have to remember it for the future.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 14:45:08 2013 No.4190882

>>4190423
Traditionalist and an anarchist at more or less the same time. Pretty interesting guy, in my opinion.

And it's funny how Dostoevsky's writings are weirder and less traditional and feel a lot more radical in style, and yet his actual views were a lot more reactionary than Tolstoy's.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 15:20:56 2013 No.4190939 >>4190429 photoshop is the only way dl all the covers and get to assembling, *whip crack

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 15:30:56 2013 No.4190956 >>4190429 paint.net, it's free

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 16:29:55 2013 No.4191074 >>4190415 One problem is that non-working class socialisms, such as Leninism, are simply Leftism. The emancipation of the working class is the task of that class itself.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 16:31:56 2013 No.4191079 >>4189894 >That's not a fact >fact Go read Hume you pathetic specimen.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 16:36:56 2013 No.4191089

>>4189717
>you still havent given a cogent reason as to why period commentators providing living history are somehow inferior to commentators centuries after the fact. coupled with the fact that youve referenced marxist historians twice now (im assuming by fergusson you mean adam fergusson [or maby nial]), makes me think that the specter of crime think really isint that far from the thought process here (you cant just dive into history comrade, you need to have the right *interpretation* of it!).

You can't just dive into history, comrade, you need to learn how to fucking read history for itself.

And that method of reading isn't ideological:

* Doubt your sources
* Provenance doesn't equal content
* Simplest explanation is the best
* Don't needlessly multiply postulates
* Have a large n=# of texts
* Read multiple texts on the basis of the veracity of their content
* Situate your reading strategically in other reading.

It is a method derived from reactionary theology, by the way.

And I'm referring to Niall's abortions.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:01:01 2013 No.4191130 >>4190404 Well, this summarizes the whole deal with reactionaries, fascists and capitalists too.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:03:02 2013 No.4191135 >>4189260 He meant "refrain from being explicitly retarded since it might end up with the whole thread deleted".

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:09:01 2013 No.4191141 >>4189260 Learn to suspend judgment you kretin.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:14:01 2013 No.4191148 >>4189036 >It's telling not really? wht does it tell?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:16:02 2013 No.4191150 I recommend checking this site out: http://www.gornahoor.net/

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:20:01 2013 No.4191155 >>4191148 That even smart people can be stupid as fuck.

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:23:01 2013 No.4191162

>>4191155
I wouldn't call any of those stupid.
You can expect to agree with someone just because he's intelligent. They might just be your enemies: your enemy isn't necessarily stupid, bad, ugly, degenerate, etc. It's just your enemy, and sometimes even your enemy can do something that inspires you respect.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:25:02 2013 No.4191166 >>4191162 >You can can't*

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:26:02 2013 No.4191170 I for one, welcome our new /pol/ overlords not really though, I still don't understand why you wouldn't post this there

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:27:02 2013 No.4191171 reactionary lit is just all 'it's habbening' anarchist lit is better it's not people that are corrupt and degenerate. it's the office.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:34:01 2013 No.4191188 >>4191170 I'm not a conservative, but spend twenty minutes on /pol/ and you'll see that actual discussion doesn't happen there.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:35:01 2013 No.4191190 http://orgyofthewill.net/

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 17:58:51 2013 No.4191229 File: 1.21 MB, 2000x2000, litguide.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] here's a WIP infographic tell me what to add/delete

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 18:00:50 2013 No.4191234 >>4191190 Thats not reactionary thats just stupid.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 18:02:51 2013 No.4191240 >>4191234 It fits the ideologies discussed ITT well.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 18:19:53 2013 No.4191269 >>4191240 Aren't you going to write "pol pls go" as well?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 18:21:53 2013 No.4191270 >>4191229 help me out here guys, what should i add

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 18:24:53 2013 No.4191276 Can someone recommend some left wing reactionary lit?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 18:27:52 2013 No.4191279 >>4191074 Are simply _not_ leftism. Fucking hangover.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 18:31:53 2013 No.4191283 >>4191270 I thought it was a great start. Why did you delete it?

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 18:36:53 2013 No.4191290 >>4191283 >>4191280 I made a new thread

>>	Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo Thu Oct 17 18:48:54 2013 No.4191311 Thread's reaching its bump limit. New thread: >>4191302 >>4191302 >>4191302

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 18:49:52 2013 No.4191315

>>4191170
Because you can't have intelligent discussion of your interests there, it'll all get derailed into namecalling, greentexted 2 liners and "lol nerd u got trolled" and I fear threads like this will ruin this board as well, since it will attract these retards.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 18:55:52 2013 No.4191323 >>4191315 OP here. Not if we keep it civil. I'm hoping the Janitor culls all gutterposts from both /pol/tards and SJW types.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 19:00:52 2013 No.4191331 >>4191323 Yeah, I'm not convinced though, they might come hear to learn about their ideological roots and think this is a place with the same degenerate culture as /pol/, since it's the same site.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 19:01:52 2013 No.4191332 >>4191331 Here* damn autocorrect.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 19:11:54 2013 No.4191346 >>4191331 As long as they keep the conversation civil, I don't see a problem with that. New thread here: >>4191302 >>4191302 >>4191302

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 19:28:42 2013 No.4191390 >>4191346 That /lit/ turns into /pol/ why don't you take your crap posts there then?

>>	Marxist Thu Oct 17 20:22:25 2013 No.4191559 >>4191390 Erudite and well read Fascists is a /lit/ meme mate. They've been here longer than you have. I prefer them to your sort. The well read Fascist is well read.

>>	Anonymous Thu Oct 17 20:36:53 2013 No.4191604 >>4188487 Don't call out /pol/ and expect us not to show up and play. We are always watching

Anonymous Thu Oct 17 20:57:41 2013 No.4191671

>>4191315
/pol/ here :3

/pol/ has civilzed discussion for the most part, it's just that we are so tired of liberal ideolgies being every where else that when liberals come we only have the energy to say fuck off.

Nothing wrong with being a liberal though.

>>	Anonymous Fri Oct 18 09:38:18 2013 No.4192899 Has anyone got a good ebook of The Decline Of The West?

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature