Looking for good literature to get into monarchism. The book should preferably make a case FOR monarchism.
My list atm:
>Hoppe's Democracy: The God that Failed
>Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn's Menace of the Herd, Liberty of Equality, Monarchy and War (a shorter piece)
Other urls found in this thread:
cnqzu.com
ia800502.us.archive.org
lawrenceglarus.wordpress.com
ia800301.us.archive.org
anacyclosis.org
socialmatter.net
sophiaperennis.com
warosu.org
actionfrancaise.net
twitter.com
De Maistre
Thanks. Moar?
De Jouvenel, On Power
ia800502.us.archive.org
Glarus, The Cephalization of Man
lawrenceglarus.wordpress.com
A personal favorite:
ia800301.us.archive.org
Not OP but thanks man, cool shit.
that de Jouvenel text is a good one.
Sir Robert Filmer's Patriarcha is a powerful defense of absolute monarchy and the divine right of kings, Locke's First Treatise of Government is dedicated to "refuting" it so be sure to read that as well.
Hoppe is great but only goes so far as to demonstrate how monarchy is superior to democracy but ultimately makes the case for why an anarcho-capitalist society is superior to both.
Read de Maistre, his collected works span ~400 pages. He offers perhaps one of the most powerful cases for a Catholic monarchy. Read old Jacobite pamphlets distributed during the Glorious Revolution like "The Shortest Way with the Dissenters". Read Hobbes' Leviathan, chapter's 17-20. From what I remember of On Power, de Jouvenel does not explicitly defend monarchism but demonstrates how divided sovereignty (republicanism) increases the power of the State rather than limiting or decentralizing it. He is making the case for absolute sovereignty and on that note, Carl Schmitt's attack on parliamentarianism is worth a read as well.
Pike the Whigs, Stuart restoration now!
What is the sociology of traditionalism, anyway? How do you deal with masses, and a proletariat that hasn't seen production other than capitalism eating its own tail for 200 years? Overpopulation?
good stuff user
also posting this for your patrician af consideration gents
wanted to chime in here and say that it depends on who you ask
the umbrella term 'reaction' includes tech-secessionists (nick land), tradition-esque esoterics (guenon, schuon), great man devotees (moldbug), manosphere types (a very mixed bag, but jack donovan is interesting), and many, many others of highly various quality
they all have different takes on things, so atm i don't get the impression that there is any one standard protocol. brett stevens has something like one at amerika.org but i think he needs to remove the neetch's dick from his mouth just a tiny tad
social matter is a good blog for a lot of this, and seems to be going relatively strong
socialmatter.net
my own hot take would be that the best thing NRx could do would be to restore the concept of integrity to human morality and discourse. i think peterson in a way is doing this, and a shift from freud/lacan to jung would also not be a terrible idea & even if i'm inwardly still a lacanian. but we can't go on being pseudomarxist aestheto-critics forever. even dfw said you can't build a literary culture on irony
irony is fucking anathema at this point imho
sorry for shitting up this excellent thread with a textwall, carry on lads
A sovereign has strong incentives to defend tradition as it is the very basis for their authority and the market economy undermines social trust and the civil institutions that are the precondition for its success. You are not going to find many monarchists with a favorable opinion of capitalism Im afraid.
No, good post, and thanks for the reply. I'm semi-traditionalist myself and fairly familiar with the Guenon side of it, but I only get the Schuon stuff from completely fucking batshit Muslim friends.
I get the impression from the Schuonians that they really would be content going back to some feudal order and that they think they'd be in the ulemma anyway so it wouldn't matter. So I wonder if the fellow-traveller Evola types are similar, just assuming they'd be among the solar brahman caste, and that mass politics is an aberration that can be solved politically.
I just don't know what to make of it personally. I tend to integrate the hero-worship from political and esoteric traditionalists, and I certainly want the metanoia and "nootic" society of the traditionalists. But I agree with you completely, we've reached the exact cul-de-sac DFW was talking about, the hyperreal irony-eating-its-own-tail Kojevian end of history. I want the metanoia to encompass and sublate the masses without simply being a reversion.
I even like some of the manosphere types as you say -- late Foucault was interested in askesis/phronesis as an escape from finitude, I think. And Heidegger's interest in the same is obviously big. But I have to admit I'm up against the wall of how we can deal with a lot of things, aside from (let's say) "deep ecological solutions."
No I definitely agree and I think capitalism is a cancer as well. But I am wondering whether you think tradition abrogates the problem altogether, or whether traditionalists see a kind of Hegelian sublation of capitalism's contradiction in a forward-oriented way.
>inwardly still a lacanian
Yeah I'd also appreciate an explanation of how Lacan factors into it for you. I've always given him a wide berth because I hate reading authors just to poach half-understood insights from them, like people tend to do with the major obscure philosophers (Lacan, Wittgenstein, also Heidegger, Hegel), to the point that caricatures of them are all that exists.
But my professor recently suggested I read that Romanian lady's biography of him and judge for myself. If you have any tips I'd appreciate it, since you seem to have a good handle on this sort of milieu.
i've read that guenon/traditionalists are very similar to islam. guenon is an amazing author but like so many he's easily misinterpreted (or just selectively interpreted to the point of absurdity)
i think another part of it for me is just a kind of rapprochement with religion, which is anathema to postmodernity (and exactly why it is necessary). nu-atheism was obnoxious garbage but it was there for the tail end of the deconstructivist 90s. religion is a human phenomenon, it's not a bad thing. what we all hate is when it gets weaponized v/ideology and loses the esoteric dimension which is the most important part...
>we've reached the exact cul-de-sac DFW was talking about, the hyperreal irony-eating-its-own-tail Kojevian end of history. I want the metanoia to encompass and sublate the masses without simply being a reversion
...but obv you know this
>I have to admit I'm up against the wall of how we can deal with a lot of things
me too. deep ecology is interesting stuff tho. it has no political teeth but that's hardly a knock against it. check out arne naess
or, for that matter, based lord northbourne, who is such a good look
sophiaperennis.com
i know, i know. i shouldn't have said anything. i've been following peterson and i mean to get to reading jung eventually. nothing lasts forever. we'll see
i'm OP and a good chunk of this thread. i do a passably good exegesis of lacanian theory halfway in, but i was helped by having a way cool hegelian to talk to as well, and so the thread is dope. have a gander
warosu.org
as indicated in the thread, i've recently discovered this handsome motherfucker and it is for that reason that i have mellowed ever so slightly on religion. not going fullbore yet but i'm picking up what RG is laying down
plz note that i am not an academic, not a scholar, not anything. i am a fuckface recluse who lives under a stone and i have a mcjob. i am not a guy to be taken seriously. i just have a lot of time to read and shitpost on Veeky Forums
i'm assuming you mean the roudinesco biography. i have it but i haven't read it. most of my serious reading got shelved to stare into the trump-abyss for the past year or so. i've mostly been too fucking confused to know what i believe
i have to head out for a bit now, but i'll be happy to offer a ten-cent hot take on any questions you might have
long story short lacan is what i think crowbars people out of postmodernity but i think even the sniffler knows that without something to *believe* in afterwards it's all capitalism and desirous-tail chasing forever. something like religion is going to be required i think. even if it's just understanding why it is that humans need it and why we continually flounder without an alternative
peterson made a good point about this, v/neetch: who the fuck says it is even *possible* to create new values? it's a point worth remembering. the values don't have to be created, maybe they just have to be rediscovered
the revolution is not going to happen. basically we have to make it happen here by going through capitalist disneyland one way or the other or it's not going to happen at all, just the slow entropic heat-death of failed hopes
even lacan says the only thing that a person can really be held guilty of is compromising their desires
or how about this goddamn line? jesus fuck
anyways we def need something more than capitalism that's for shit sure
I have the exact same painting at home
this
>De Jouvenel
also this
>Read Hobbes' Leviathan
also this
plato, de tocqueville, francois furets later work, and actionfrancaise.net
good stuff user
>Leviathan
uhh...yeah, i guess that would be a good idea to read. mildly embarrassed that i didn't think of this
Bump for interest
>Liberty of Equality
10% Actual writing from the author about monarchy, 30% quotes from other better writers, 60% Warhammer 40k fan fic of Lutherans.
>60% Warhammer 40k fan fic of Lutherans
Wad
>John Knox -> Anglicanism
Uh what?
Girard is still only the tip of the iceberg tho.
Have you read the summa?
Not yet. I have a copy of the Summa Contra Gentiles and it is near the top of my to-read list.
bump
What about some works on Republics? I'm readying Discourses on Livy, The Republic and the works of Cicero
Patria, by Filmer.
see
>OP asks: looking for good literature to get into monarchism. The book should preferably make a case FOR monarchism
>user: what about republics?
>mfw
Yes, but I don't give a shit about what OP wants, I want republican books
you sound totally awesome and not like a lazy & selfish retard at all. plz talk more about things you want, i'm sure you are in the right thread
see