What movement in history would you consider to be the furthest on the right?

But the right is pro-equality? When will this meme die?

Left is fundamentally pro-equality amongst humans.

The right sees inequality as necessary or inevitable

>most right wing
Ideologue: Evola Julius
Movement: Iron guard

>most left wing
Ideologue: Amadeo Bordiga
Movement: Anarchist Aragon

And yet the Left consistently wants to empower the state to have a legal/ideological/cultural monopoly to enforce this vision. Not that equal to me.

The far left does this because they need a strong state to ensure extreme equality.

I know, it's a crock of shit and just an excuse for a huge power grab

>Furthest to the right - Early USA

Really? Do you even know where the left and right definitions originate from?

It was used to describe the French political scene right after the revolution.

The right wanted a theocratic monarchy and the left wanted a republic.

At the time, the USA was seen as centre left as it had no king but maintain some sort of aristocracy

Jesus fucking Christ you're retarded.

National Socialism on both accounts.
Freedom and Equality can only be reconciled upon this basis.

Early on, it absolutely was.

Sunni Islamic Fundamentalism

Anarcho-Communism

Containing state power isn't remotely right-wing.

At the time of the American revolution, liberals like Jefferson and Hamilton were pretty far to the left. Constitutional monarchists like William Pitt were centrists in the late 18th century, with the right-wing desiring a return to feudal economy.

Until the 1930s, every single right-winger on the planet desired more stare power. This didn't change until Marxists and Keynesians started using state power to reduce the power of the ruling class.

Left: The French Revolution
Right: Bourbon Restoration

Then why do they challenge attempts to create equality whenever they can?

Historically, the right has opposed every single movement toward equality. They fought back against liberalism in the 18th century with brutal force. Pretty much every European power invaded France after liberals seized power.

This is objectively the best answer desu

>Furthest to the left - Maoist China
>Stalinist
>Furthest to the left

>Historically, the right has opposed every single movement toward equality.

That's because we define "right-wing" as anti-equality.

/thread

I am pretty sure that ISIS is the most right wing as you can get.

Most left wing would be Pol Pot or something like that.

In the classical sense absolutely

They make Joseph de maistre's original far right seem like hippies

On one hand pol pot was the most far leftist ever because his revolution was so fucking extreme

On the other hand, he was super nationalist and was basically a Khmer supremacist

>right
Nietzsche
>left
Stirner

Since philosophy determines the evolution of all other forms of culture we should consider only it, and not simply the implementations of philosophy by the rabble.

The reality of course is that you can't even find historical implementations of these two, the most extreme forms. That's because their philosophies are so profoundly lacking in self-deception, which is a core part of humanity, and few people of political power are that honest, even with themselves. Just look at the the kind of contradictory garbage that passes instead: These are the End Game. It will be centuries before left/right mass movements have the strength to authentically represent these, it might never happen at all (and I'm sure those philosophers wouldn't mind that).

>Islam
Whoever is shocked at the actions of the IS clowns only needs a refresher of modern history to realize that, even in pure aggressiveness and brutality, the Arabs are no match for us any more than any other subhuman race. "Hitler vs. al-Baghdadi" is all you need to say to realize the cosmic gap in power and effectiveness that separates our races. Compared to us they are children playing cops and robbers. — "Why are we tolerating them then, if they are so comically weak and ineffective?" — Precisely for this reason: because they are comically ineffective. If they were causing any real damage they'd be long crushed. (And note that this goes also for every other reactionary group ever: from hippies to real criminals. It's part of the richness and greatness of Western civilization that it can tolerate the existence of so many millions of losers and retards, while still forging full steam ahead with its goal — the creation of the Overman — without skipping a single beat. The degenerates call this steamroller effect of our culture — the marginalization of all groups not contributing to our culture's goal, and their reduction to clown- and freak-show status by our media — "social alienation", "materialism", "globalization", "desensitization", or any number of other nasty names; while between us it is known as simply "power".)

>But the right is pro-equality if you're rich, white, Christian, and male

ftfy

They are fucking retards that's no doubt what happens when you run with an idea and take it to the absurd extreme

In a classical sense: Right is ISIS, Left French Revolution

In a modern American sense: Right is Early America, Left is Mao China

FPBP

>Democratic control of the means of production means exploitation and alienation are no longer an issue.
>See:The USSR

Good job,retard.

fuck white people

>What movement in history would you consider to be the furthest on the right?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restoration_(England)

>Which movement would be the furthest in the left?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peoples_Temple

>all these retarded answers
A very far right society would have clearly defined castes or classes (whether they're academic, economic, hereditary, religous, etc.). Having a hierarchy with inferiors and superiors is a crucial component of right-wing ideology. To modern moderate right-wingers this simply translates into the existance of the economic lower/middle/upper classes. Leftism is characterised by (often forced) egalitarianism.

>A very far right society would have clearly defined castes or classes (
aka feudalism

>Everything I don't like is feudalism
>The emotional /leftypol/ guide to political discussion

This.

>I dont understand feudalism or liberal governments: the image macro

left wants equality of outcome, right wants equality of choice/rights

left is globalism combined with radicalized neo-liberalism while right is nationalism + libertarialism

see

>Everyone I disagree with is /leftypol/
This is why nobody likes you, /pol/

>Furthest to the right
Something like Wahabbism perhaps, a radical restoration movement

>Furthest to the left
Transhumanistic society for singularith

I don't think the person who made this chart knows what feudalism is.

Ones complaining about central bankers tend to be Alex Jones types

Jewish Set-tlements are completely peaceful!

QFT

BUT, they are a people utterly unafraid to commit outright atrocity for all the world to see. They have been scrambling to find every atrocity yet unfilmed and commit it to HD.

The nazis at least contrived of a way to make themselves victims. Not so with IS