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

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 93 KB, 815x1120, burckhardt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4214538 No.4214538[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Our five-thread long discussion of traditionalist / conservative / reactionary literature continued.

Last thread: >>4205977

A spectrum of cranky old reactionaries to discuss:
>Knut Hamsun
>H.L. Mencken
>Jacob Burckhardt
>Oswald Spengler
>Fyodor Dostoevsky

Link to previous posts:

http://fuuka.warosu.org/lit/?task=search2&ghost=&search_text=&search_subject=Traditionalist+%2F+Conservative+%2F+Reactionary+&search_username=&search_tripcode=&search_filename=&search_datefrom=&search_dateto=&search_op=op&search_del=dontcare&search_int=dontcare&search_ord=new&search_res=post

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: Thanks for your continued support.

>> No.4214549 [DELETED] 

>Knut Hamsun
>H.L. Mencken
>Oswald Spengler
>Fyodor Dostoevsky

ALL HIGH FUNCTIONING AUTISTS.

>> No.4214551
File: 44 KB, 600x451, marinetti.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4214551

Futurism is the best way to go for any right wing movement, since it keeps the essential values without getting stuck in unrealistic anachronisms and a sentimental longing for an irretrievable past.

>> No.4214553

Why and in what way do you consider yourself "conservative"?

Serious question

>> No.4214557

Why has the "Right" become so marginalized in recent times? Can anyone explain?

Two questions arise for me when I ask myself this question: Are we seeing the natural progression of ideology alongside advances in science, or is the Right's marginalization a result of power struggle--which they ultimately lost?

>> No.4214566 [DELETED] 

>>4214557
>Why has the "Right" become so marginalized in recent times?

"THIRD POSITIONISM", AND "RIGHT WING" POLITICS ARE NOT PROPITIOUS FOR THE DEBAUCHERY, AND "GENERAL" DEGENERACY THAT "CULTURAL MARXISM" INSTIGATES/PRODUCES & FOSTERS; "LEFT WING" POLITICS ARE PROPITIOUS FOR "CULTURAL MARXISM".

>> No.4214580

>>4214566
>THE DEBAUCHERY, AND "GENERAL" DEGENERACY THAT "CULTURAL MARXISM" INSTIGATES/PRODUCES & FOSTERS...

Explain. How is willing for general economic and social equality "degeneracy" and "debauchery"?

>> No.4214583
File: 217 KB, 1200x938, roerich-armaged-1936.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4214583

>>4214566
>Cultural Marxism
I hate this term so much. It's usually used as a catch-all term for degenerate ideologies, instead of referring specifically to the ideology of the Frankfurt School.

>> No.4214591

>>4214551
Who are the canonical Italian futurist authors? Perhaps more immediately relevant, are they available in translation? I know that many of the Soviet futurists aren't available in English, for example.

>> No.4214594 [DELETED] 
File: 86 KB, 600x586, AREIZOO III.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4214594

>>4214580
>How is willing for general economic and social equality "degeneracy" and "debauchery"?

EXPLAINING ANYTHING TO YOU WOULD BE FUTILE, SINCE, APPARENTLY, YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF EXERTING CRITICAL THINKING.

ARE YOU A TEENAGER?

>>4214583

THAT IS IDIOTS' FAULT, NOT THE "TERMS'".

DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT "CULTURAL MARXISM" IS?

>> No.4214601

>>4214566
>>4214594
Look it's the gimmick poster who posts pictures of hot dogs with every post that's his gimmick it's a gimmick therefore it's worth the effort because all gimmicks are worth it

>> No.4214609

>>4214601
Rei is a more valuable poster here than you've ever been.

>> No.4214616

>>4214609
gibbis

>> No.4214619

>>4214594

Is cruising on cap locks one of your gimmicks, too?

>> No.4214624

>>4214601
>not savouring the koz

>> No.4214666

>>4214594
>Please respect all global rules. Keep civil. Refrain from...shit-posting...

I see that didn't last long. I hope these threads start getting deleted again.

>> No.4214681

>>4214666
Yes because every other type of thread on /lit/ that devolves into shit-posting is automatically deleted, right?

>> No.4214682

>>4214616
le ironic autism sufferer face

>> No.4214703

>>4214681
These /pol/ threads are on thin ice. That was my point. Not that threads should be deleted solely because of shit posting.

>> No.4214707 [DELETED] 
File: 11 KB, 100x100, AREIZOO 100x100.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4214707

>>4214703

WHY?

IS IT JUST BECAUSE THIS BOARD IS "MODERATED" BY "LEFTIST LIBERALS", AND "CULTURAL MARXISTS", AND MOST OF THE USERS ARE "LEFTIST LIBERALS", OR "CULTURAL MARXISTS"?

IF SO, THEN DELETING THESE THREADS MERELY BECAUSE OF THE TOPICS DISCUSSED IN THEM, IS UNWARRANTED.

>> No.4214709

>>4214703
Threads about reactionary/traditionalist /literature/ are not "/pol/ threads" they are /lit/ threads. Or is this board called /lit/ - literature that doesn't hurt my feelings?

>> No.4214718

>>4214707
Get b&

Your antics are really shitting this place up.

>> No.4214721

>>4214707
>>4214709

The attitude is primarily what makes them /pol/ related; hostile, obnoxious, subtly racist, etc., etc. The fact is that there is a board already set up for this type of thinking to have free reign. I only stated that if shot posting continues in these threads I'd like them deleted. It had nothing to do with the content.

>> No.4214723

>>4214721
*content meaning that which is discussed relating to literature.

>> No.4214733 [DELETED] 
File: 78 KB, 350x342, AREIZOO IV.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4214733

>>4214721

THESE THREADS ARE NOT RE POLITICS; THEY ARE RE LITERATURE, AND AUTHORS; IT IS NATURAL THAT AT SOME POINT IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE THREAD, THE POLITICS INVOLVED IN THE WORKS DISCUSSED AND THE POLITICS OF THE AUTHORS DISCUSSED, ARE GOING TO BE ADDRESSED; THE SAME OCCURS IN "MARXIST"/COMMUNIST/"CULTURAL MARXIST" THREADS, AND YOU DO NOT SEE REACTIONARY/FASCIST PERSONS DEMANDING THAT THEY ARE DELETED.

IF THESE THREADS HURT YOUR SENSIBILITIES, DO NOT READ THEM, AND/OR HIDE THEM –WHY DO YOU THINK THAT THERE IS A "HIDING FUNCTION" FOR THREADS?

>> No.4214740

>>4214733
>all caps
>that little girl with every post

What the fuck is wrong with you? You're turning this thread into a freak show.

>> No.4214742

>>4214721
>hostile, obnoxious, subtly racist, etc., etc.

Wow, you mean the same attitude that is at the core of 4chan?

/lit/ is not a place for some "type of thinking" to have free reign. It is a place to discuss literature. If it has to do with literature it is allowed here. Get over it.

How many times does moot have to tell you to hide the threads you don't like and move on before you stop squealing for him to censor people at your wim?

>> No.4214760

>>4214721
>The attitude is primarily what makes them /pol/ related; hostile, obnoxious, subtly racist....

OP here.

It's hard for me to believe that you've been following these threads; you're repeating the same accusations that others aired previously.

In each thread we've had, someone invariably arrives claiming they've "monitored" high levels of racism, shitposting, etc.

My guess is that these posts coincide with reports to the Janitor, in the hope that s/he'll take your post at face value and delete the tread in its entirety.

That tactic worked once, days ago, at the very start of this discussion. It hasn't happened since.

If you find the discussion of right-wing authors distasteful or disturbing, my advice would be to hide this thread and move along.

>> No.4214780

>>4214760

Addendum:

I think we've been doing an excellent job at reining in conversations that veer from the topic at hand, especially when they stray into questions about race.

The vast majority of shitposting that I've witnessed has originated from those who seem angry that right-wing literature is being discussed openly and civilly on /lit/.

>> No.4214838

it boggles my mind that any time either school of thought [liberal or conservative] is discussed it goes immediately to it's most broken and extreme form. On the left [I'm talking from the american perspective] we have people who jump right to the central state-less dictatorship of the proletariat or worse some haphazard altruistic "It works for Sweden, Finland, and Norway so it can work everywhere because every place is exactly like them." nonsense, then on the right there's the group that think "if we just quash all those people we're superior to our [place] will be so much more successful"

>> No.4214848

>>4214760
Well, these threads are consistently racist. They're polite and intelligent and reasonable about things, and I am broadly pro these threads, but they still consistently have tons of racism. Because racism is an ideological center point of a lot of people who post in these threads. It's not surprising. I kind of wish it weren't that way, because I think I agree with a lot of what you guys are saying about most things except the racism and the sexism, but it is what it is.

>> No.4214868

>>4214721
>I'm glad that there are measures in place to sequester and ostracise thought and speech I personally find distasteful

how is it that right wing nazi psychopaths are the last bastion of free speech in this dying culture

what a sad state of affairs

>> No.4214869 [DELETED] 

>>4214848

IF YOU THINK THAT "RACISM" IS SOMETHING DETRIMENTAL, OR UNDESIRABLE, YOU ARE IGNORANT; YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT "RACISM" IS.

THERE IS NO "SEXISM" IN THESE THREADS.

>> No.4214870

>>4214721
But you can't start these threads on /pol/ because no one there reads.

>> No.4214880

>>4214870
/pol/ has had a couple good mirrors of these threads for the past little while

Surprisingly civil, supportive, etc. Higher ratio of enthusiasm to knowledgeable contribution, but still cool. Someone started spamming pics of dead Wehrmacht for some reason at a certain point, but other than that.

>> No.4214885

>>4214869
Well, yes, this is precisely what people ITT think and why they keep saying racist things.

>> No.4214911
File: 173 KB, 1719x852, 678568775685.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4214911

Why don't we see Animal Farm with allegations of pro-democracy and pro-capitalism? Why is it only the right-wing that is bad in fiction?

>> No.4214935
File: 50 KB, 245x360, tumblr_mtjyi6ibzl1qbuyb7o2_250.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4214935

>yfw you realized the people in these threads never went to college

>> No.4214938

Shouldn't leftist writing also be considered reactionary. As marx was largely reacting to the development of capitalism.

It makes me wonder what these labels are even based on. Take the rise of fascism, which is considered right- but only likely so because of their rejection of communism. Further, fascism/nationalism doesn't even have a long historical precedence- it just makes itself seem to. Pre-ww1 you had empires which weren't nation-states, just states.

So traditionalist wouldn't have to mean something like a return to empire, but exclusive of the nation-state? Unless you want traditionalist to mean something like an embracing of nationalism, which is actually a pretty new phenomenon so traditionalist/nationalist can't mean that. Unless it does?

in other words what the fuck?Is this thread just everything not Marxist?

>> No.4214940

>>4214911
It's a proTrotsky novel and this is widely mentioned in discourse. Personally I don't see why he couldn't have called Snowball Trotsky instead because it would be the cutest pig name.

>> No.4214954

>>4214935
It's hilarious how leftists reinforce their beliefs by deciding that the people they disagree with have never been educated.

It's all based on emotion and authority. "Facts" seem to have very little influence on your typical leftist's decision-making process.

>> No.4214959

>>4214938
"Traditionalist" and "reactionary" both have well-established and understood meanings in the context of literature and political thought. Stop embracing your own ignorance. Any piece of language is, in any case, just as arbitrary as any other. It's your responsibility to educate yourself.

>> No.4214961

I hate these threads. They're just name dropping.

>> No.4215000
File: 50 KB, 245x360, tumblr_mtjyi6ibzl1qbuyb7o3_250.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4215000

>>4214954
it's hilarious how schoolfags cover up their insecurities by deciding that the people making simple observations about them must be emotional leftists

>> No.4215007

>>4215000
Shhh, child, no more tears.

Go back to sleep now.

>> No.4215015
File: 338 KB, 1800x2492, Kristen-on-set-of-Sils-Maria-kjs90-ff-fans-forever-35624983-1800-2492.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4215015

>>4215007
>back to sleep
but i wanna post more kstew

inb4 ban

>> No.4215017

>>4214961
*this board

>> No.4215141

>H.L. Mencken

I love this guy, so much. One of the best satirists ever.

>> No.4215164

>>4214848


its inevitable, the faith in equalitarianism is the lode-star that capital P Progressivism derives from, it is the prior that its analysis is based on, that its normative conclusions rely on.

accepting that different people are infact different and not universally fungible brings the whole house of cards down.

>> No.4215169

>mods deleted all Rei's posts

lel

What is it with you butthurt normies? Rei is one of /lit/'s best tripfags. If you're going to report him at least contribute something of your own to this board that isn't totally fucking banal.

>> No.4215173

>>4214870
actually there are decent threads about evola or spengler every once in a while. they have a lot of people who have never heard of them but are interested, sure, but they tend to be pretty civil and actually branch off into other related discussions.

>> No.4215179

So why exactly does there seem to be a lack of great authors today?

>> No.4215182

>>4215179
Because of all the reasons Pound said, except the bits about the Jews.

>> No.4215259

>>4215179
A lack of values and sincerity imo.

>> No.4215301

Just to note, janitor, longtime posters here actually appreciate REI
i don't know what bullshit he posted here, but he's the only tripfag i've ever liked and should be given the benefit of the doubt

>> No.4215319

>>4215179
Which contemporary authors have you read?

>> No.4215682

>>4214961

As someone who mostly lurks /lit/ for recommendations, I like "name dropping."

>> No.4215715

when are you nitwits going to make a proper infographic?

>> No.4215718

>>4215301
He's a waste of internet.

>> No.4215733

>>4215718
He's performance art and one of the greatest posters this board has to offer.

>> No.4215736

>>4215733
He's not doing anything new, just playing a boring and irritatingly in-your-face persona.

>> No.4215739

>>4215736
His posting does evolve and change over time and it ties in beautifully with his visual art, poetry, short stories and music.

>> No.4215869

>>4215715
Proper in what way?
It's made pretty clear that the current one consists of very different right groupings and one or two books from non-rightwing authors that deal with the same themes.
There's one or two erroneous tags but that's only natural since OP is a bit new to the literature to begin with.

>> No.4215893

You might want to look up Roger Scruton. He's on the right and has written a ton of books.

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

>> No.4216039

>>4215893

What's his most representative work?

>> No.4216046
File: 367 KB, 464x619, scruton_roger.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4216046

>>4215893

Scruton on Moral Relativism:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5BXyvMU80Q

>> No.4216098

>>4216046
why does he suppose moral relativism is individualistic with moral absolutism being the opposite?
The selfish and short sighted bastards in the world can be the ones who believe they're following absolute morality

>> No.4216101

>>4214538
Don't overdo it with these. General threads are cancerous.

>> No.4216132 [DELETED] 

>>4216098
I haven't finished watching it yet myself but I get the impression that he considers moral relativism individualistic because it devalues the notion of collective/shared values.

>> No.4216138

>>4216098
I haven't finished watching it yet myself but I get the impression that he considers moral relativism individualistic because it devalues the notion of objective shared values.

>> No.4216228

>>4216039

Probably The Roger Scruton Reader, since it's basically a collection of his thoughts on political-cultural topics. Along with his book on sexual desire it's the only work of his I've read.

>> No.4216299

>>4214583
What do you excpect from nazis?

>> No.4216315

>>4215893
Man writes damn sharp philosophy introductions.

>> No.4216323

>>4216039
>>4216228
I would recommend reading the book on beauty he did for the very short introductions series.

>> No.4216358

>>4216323
also I'll share these.

https://mega.co.nz/#fm714HmKiA

A few of the very short introductions whose subject matters pertain to these threads.

>> No.4216362

>>4216358
Link seems to be broken.

>> No.4216368

>>4216299

>five threads deep
>each thread racing toward its bump limit
>all of them attract knuckle-dragging leftist shitposters whose idea of wit is shouting either "hurr get back to /pol/" or "u r nazis"

If you don't like the thread, hide it. Stop shitposting.

>> No.4216380

>>4216362
seems I fucked up

https://mega.co.nz/#F!ygADQThR!IfUmiE4XMe9uVPqqPjSLvw

>> No.4216760

Any good reactionary film or music?

>> No.4216800
File: 137 KB, 572x447, hlm.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4216800

Mencken was hilarious. A crank for sure, but this joke epitaph he wrote for himself proves that he a degree of warmth and kindness to him:

“If, after I depart this vale, you ever remember me and have thought to please my ghost, forgive some sinner and wink your eye at some homely girl.”

Also, pic related. Funny bastard.

>> No.4216851

>>4216800
Mencken was great like that, yeah. A real born contrarian with wit enough to cut himself and others on.
>>4216760
Would love to hear more of this as well. I'm not all that knowledgeable in film matters and I don't know of any decent musicians who aren't either apolotical or incredibly liberal.

>> No.4216887

>>4214538
Didn't Dostoevsky have some sympathy for socialist ideas tho? if you're a good reader you'll notice it and he was even exiled because of that.

Just because he was christian doesn't mean he was a 'reactionary' as some of you understand it. That definition is uber simplistic and retarded to use in a person like him

ps: i hope mods do something to stop these shitty threads

>> No.4216901

>>4216887
the book "Demons" in particular, one discussed in the previous threads and the one on the infographic, examines the dangerousness of socialist idealism. no one is claiming that christianity=right wing.
If you've read any of the other threads you'd know that the only thing making these threads shitty are retards like you coming in with your wikipedia-blurb knowledge of an author listed and your biases against the ideology. Hide the thread or don't post, cancer.

>> No.4216902

>>4216887
>In his youth, Dostoyevsky enjoyed reading Nikolai Karamzin's History of the Russian State, which praised conservatism and Russian independence, ideas that Dostoyevsky would embrace later in life. Before his arrest for participating in the Petrashevsky Circle in 1849, Dostoyevsky remarked, "As far as I am concerned, nothing was ever more ridiculous than the idea of a republican government in Russia." In an 1881 edition of his Diaries, Dostoyevsky stated that the Tsar and the people should form a unity: "For the people, the tsar is not an external power, not the power of some conqueror ... but a power of all the people, an all-unifying power the people themselves desired."

>In his incomplete article "Socialism and Christianity", Dostoyevsky claimed that civilisation ("the second stage in human history") had become degraded, and that it was moving towards liberalism and losing its faith in God. He asserted that the traditional concept of Christianity should be recovered.

Yeah bro, how inappropriate to include him in a list of authors with reactionary or traditionalist views.

>> No.4216927

>>4216760
>>4216851
Here's a fantastic silent short film directed by and staring Mishama called patriotism (rite of love and passage), based on his short story of the same name.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJyzoFWNAy4

The only other film that I can think of at the moment as reactionary would be Metropolis.

>> No.4216932

>>4216927
*Mishima : /

>> No.4216994

>>4216800
Mencken was a great and funny cunt. Too bad his interpretation of Nietzsche is lolbertarian bordering on Ragnar Redbeard though.

>> No.4217034

>>4216046
knock knock

who's there?

scruton

i didnt order any salad

>> No.4217233

>>4214868
>right wing nazi psychopaths a bastion of free speech

I'd say you need to rethink your understanding of the spectrum of ideas if you really believe neutering the more extreme right wing views is some major blow to intellectual exchange.

>> No.4217266

>>4217233
If only we could neuter it.

>> No.4217268

>>4214868
But that anon is following your philosophy of "free speech" by voicing his opinion.

>> No.4217274

>>4217233
[I]t has been a truism for years, indeed centuries, that it is precisely in the case of horrendous ideas that the right of free expression must be most vigorously defended; it is easy enough to defend free expression for those who require no such defense.
Noam Chomsky

They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin

Strange it is, that men should admit the validity of the arguments for free discussion, but object to their being “pushed to an extreme;” not seeing that unless the reasons are good for an extreme case, they are not good for any case. Strange that they should imagine that they are not assuming infallibility when they acknowledge that there should be free discussion on all subjects which can possibly be doubtful, but think that some particular principle or doctrine should be forbidden to be questioned because it is so certain, that is, because they are certain that it is certain. To call any proposition certain, while there is any one who would deny its certainty if permitted, but who is not permitted, is to assume that we ourselves, and those who agree with us, are the judges of certainty, and judges without hearing the other side.
J.S. Mill

You are the philosophical and political equivalent of a gamer girl. Go actually read some stuff some time so you can see how the exact contrary to your awful opinion is the cornerstone of our entire society.

>> No.4217526

>>4217274
Your rebuttal would carry more weight if these ideas deemed "extreme" were new and in unchartered waters, but as it is they already had their time of mainstream acceptance and eventually were pushed to the wayside for one reason or another.

I guess my question to you, or anyone else ITT is, what idea(s) of the far right do you feel that the (american)left and centrists did not give their due and still have merit?

>> No.4217550
File: 52 KB, 438x600, thomas carlyle.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4217550

Don't forget Carlyle, king of reactionaries!

>> No.4217723

inb4 Bioshock Infinite

>> No.4217738

>>4217526
>what idea(s) of the far right do you feel that the (american)left and centrists did not give their due and still have merit?

Cultural ideas are rarely like scientific ones, they don't get examined, proved false and then moved on from never to have merit again. As genetic research progresses and we're able to manipulate biological makeup I feel confident saying that eugenics and the morality around it will be making a comeback. The right has different ieas of healthy life, morality, dignity, virtue etc. which I guess can't be reduced to "tolerate others and avoid harmful stereotypes about them".

>> No.4217739

>>4215739
rei has nothing on progressive poet.

>> No.4217787

>>4217526
>what idea(s) of the far right do you feel that the (american)left and centrists did not give their due and still have merit?
The stabilizing effect of ethnic homogeneity and the balkanizing effect of the lack of it.
The intellectual coherence of negative rights. (just look at the identity politics movement choking the left right now)

>> No.4220068

>>4217787
What do you mean "choking" it? The left is quite politically healthy right now, especially the "identity politics" branch of it. I'd say it is the only branch of the left that has any mainstream appeal.

>> No.4220077

>>4217526
>but as it is they already had their time
So lets censor them amirite? God /lit/ is stupid.

>> No.4220188

While we are discussing the nature of the left vs the right, I have a serious question. Why is it that anarchism is considered a far-left movement and fascism considered far-right? My, admittedly limited, knowledge of the left-right system is that the left wing wants more government while the right wing wants left.

>> No.4220198

>>4220188
less* sorry bout that

>> No.4220228

>>4220077
The prevailing norm among "intellectuals" (scare quotes necessary) these days is a preference for censorship.

I like asking philosophy PhDs and professors their opinion on it. Dystopian replies by far the norm.

>> No.4220650

>>4214938
Yeah, the revolutionary/reactionary dichotomy is troublesome.

The way Marxists explain it is that reactionaries react against any perceived change to the status quo, whereas they are revolting against it.

>> No.4220656

>>4220188

Are you by any chance American?

>> No.4220846

>>4220068
>The left is quite politically healthy right now, especially the "identity politics" branch of it.
The New Left and only those parts of it that buy into Globalist Libertarianism and at least part of Neoliberal views. The rest of the Left is doing about as well as the fascists.
>I'd say it is the only branch of the left that has any mainstream appeal.
Then you're likely rather sheltered from the public. Identity politics is easily the most hated, by the other groupings within it as well as the public, and it doesn't have a very wide reach outside it's very vocal minority to begin with.
>>4220188
The Left/Right scale isn't consistent and really not that useful for real political purposes outside the rhetoric arena.
Libertarians tend to base their arguments regarding it entirely on centralization vs de-centralization, which isn't anywhere near accepted in many parts of the west.

>> No.4220848
File: 16 KB, 677x677, equal.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4220848

>>4220188

For me it's difficult to say, but I don't characterise left and right using the big gov/small gov yardstick.

I've always found that attitude to equality a better indicator of how leftwing or rightwing a philosophy is, which is to say the leftwing tends to embrace equality, while the rightwing tends to embrace hierarchy.

If you're socially and culturally rightwing, you think some cultures are better than others and should be favored above others by the state, while if you're leftwing you think people and cultures should be viewed with equality and avoid elevating one above the other. Or if you're economically rightwing you're willing to allow the free market to take its course and see hierarchies of wealth and power develop from it, whereas if you're economically leftwing you want a more equal access to resources.

It helps explain why leftwingers react so instinctively against, say, IQ tests, since such tests lend themselves to hierarchy. Rightwingers perhaps prefer heterosexual marriage or think western culture is just better than other cultures and want it promoted, while leftwingers would be more wary and uncomfortable about saying something like that. It's all about attitude to equality/inequality in my opinion, moreso than attitude to big government/small government.

For anarchism, I'm not sure. I suppose you could say it conceives of everybody as equally free and nobody has a right to impose judgements of "better and worse" on each other, but on the other hand there's going to be a natural hierarchy arising in anarchist society. Anarchism is a difficult one to locate definitively as right or elft imo, but I think anarchist's attitudes to people being equally free would be stronger and more active than their acceptance of natural hierarchy developing out of people's free behaviour, which I guess is only accepted as a byproduct.

There are some difficulties though with using attitude to equality as an identifying marker. I mean the Stalinist regime had a lot of hierarchy going on, but its theoretical attitude was the promotion of equality. So you would end up categorizing it as leftwing even though in actual practice it had so much in common with authoritarian rightwing regimes. There are times were rightwing/leftwing is a useful tool of distinction, and times when it's better to admit right/left is a crude model that only imperfectly maps to the reality.

>> No.4220898

>>4214938
>>4220650
You guys are retards.

Conservative = keep the status quo
Revolutionary = change it, move forward
Reactionary = fuck change and the status quo, we need to go backwards

>> No.4220927

>>4220846

The mainstream left is composed of 'moderates' who are essentially neo liberals who think state intervention can mitigate the ill effects of capitalism and the 'liberal' wing, who essentially think the same thing but with identity politics bullshit and greater emphasis on the state as a counter measure to the negative effects of capitalism.

The revolutionary left is on the fringes.

>> No.4222919

How to Think Seriously About the Planet: The Case for an Environmental Conservatism.
The Uses of Pessimism: And the Danger of False Hope.
A Political Philosophy: Arguments for Conservatism.
All by Roger Scruton.

For a classical conservate view I would really look to him first.

>> No.4222925
File: 1.86 MB, 4000x3549, right-wing lit.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4222925

Bumping the old traditionalist thread for those interested in keeping the conversation alive.

>> No.4222928

>>4220077
>so lets censor them

Criticism is not censorship.

>> No.4222934

>>4222928
People in this thread were literally advocating censorship and sequestration of thought they didn't like on the grounds that it had "had its chance to be heard" or that it was "too extreme" or some shit.

Criticism is not censorship, but then demands or requests or emotional entreaties to stop saying what you're saying or say it somewhere else are not criticism. They're hot air and ATTEMPTS at censorship by people with weak intellects.

>> No.4222935

>>4222925

WHY DID YOU DELETE THE OTHER THREAD THAT HAD A SPECIFIC PURPOSE, AND WHICH ALREADY HAD OVER TWENTY REPLIES?

YOU ARE "STUPID".

>> No.4222938

>>4214557
In order of importance:

1. Because we are living in a golden age, mostly free from poverty and other ill-fate. The worst things we have to worry about are things like arriving to work on time, or keeping our boyfriend/girlfriend happy. History has shown that when a society gets fat and happy (i.e. a golden age), they become decadent and "leftism" becomes the dominant way of thinking.

2. The stigmatization of the far right after WW2.

3. The fact that leftism has become so engrained into modern society that to say you think something that's against "equality" or "tolerance" is social suicide. Somewhat totalitarian, I think.

>> No.4222941

>>4222925
Books to add to that image:
The Problem of Democracy by Alain de Benoist
2083 by Anders Breivik
Modern World Crisis by René Guenon
Democracy: the God that Failed by Hans-Hermann Hoppe
Eumeswil by Ernst Jünger
Siege by James Nolan Mason
Into the Cannibals Pot: Lessons for America from Post-Apartheid South Africa by Ilana Mercer
Might Is Right by Ragnar Redbeard
>>4222935
I deleted it because it became a lightning rod of shit-posting. Also, I wasn't aware of this thread at that time.

>> No.4222945

>>4222941
>Also, I wasn't aware of this thread at that time.

HOW IS THE EXISTENCE OF THIS THREAD RELEVANT TO THE OTHER THREAD?

>> No.4222957

>>4222919
>>4222925
Just mentioned Scruton with a bump if that wasn't clear. He definitely belongs on the list as one of the few non-liberalized old Conservative writers that deals with the modern world without saying the same things as the New Right or similar movements.
He had a rather interesting bit here on nationalism as well, where he dubs the left's views on it oikophobic:
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1126

>> No.4222963

>>4222925
Also, where the fuck is Edmund Burke?

>> No.4222970

>>4220188
This is an extremely limited definition commonly held by inhabitants of the US.

Arguably a better distinction between left and right would be that the first has an horizontal view of society and the second, a vertical view. It so happens that a verticalist hierarchic society is a more natural development as it is based on power and domination, so less organization (government) tends to correlate with right wing, and horizontal with more organization.

But this isn't an absolute either; see how fascism or militarism (high control, centralization) are considered right win gand worker's self management or anarchism (little control) are considered left wing.

>> No.4222975

>>4222941
>2083
Isn't that just his manifesto?
If it is I recall reading some of it and i'm not really sure that it belongs, since it doesn't deal much with the politics themselves beyond some talk about his earlier party, israel and the camp.
It's mostly just a diary of his planning of the attack from what I recall.

>> No.4222979

>>4215182
What did he say?

>> No.4222983

>>4222919
>>4222957
Good recommendation. I'd add "Culture Counts: Faith and Feeling in a World Besieged" to that list.
>>4222963
Yeah Burke should definitely be on there.
Particularly his "Reflections on the Revolution in France".

>> No.4223002

>>4217787
>intellectual coherence of negative rights
but that's not a thing

>> No.4223008

Burke, Montesquieu, Tocqueville, Voegelin, Strauss are all missing from the top of my head.

>> No.4223027

>>4223002
Yeah, it is. Negative rights are things that simply put requires no action and only no action on the part of the other. Freedom from impingement upon your freedom essentially.
Positive rights quickly get into the nitty gritty world of resource re-allocation.
Mind you i'm not against the latter, I merely think a fair bit of things elevated to such a 'right' have logical, often conflicting, issues.

>> No.4223033

>>4223027
but the idea that action and omission are different in any significant way isn't really justified

>> No.4223043

>>4223033
>but the idea that action and omission are different in any significant way isn't really justified
Depends largely on your viewpoint I suppose, and may be more of a semantic quibble in any case.
Still i'll hold to the statement that the latter tends toward more logical issues.
Probably because the former's requirement of inaction has a harder time to conflict with other cases of inaction. Unlike the EU's seemingly ever growing list of politicized positive "human rights".

>> No.4223312

>>4222934
Perhaps people have the reactions they do because they've paid attention to history and made note of the dark road where some of these ideas eventually lead to. They didn't come about in a vacuum.

The suggestion that so called "extreme" right wing views are just innocent expressions amongst the crowd is disenginuous at best.

>> No.4223312,1 [INTERNAL] 

>no WB Yeats in poetry