Is this a legit/good guide if want to be redpilled?

So I want to be redpilled. I mean, I am redpilled already, I just want to take it to the next level. What are your opinions on these books/this guide? What would you change? Why?

Other urls found in this thread:

mega.nz/#F!B4dB2SzQ!h_pMC30v2a_y31iD0dy0sg
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Part 2

The order is all messed up

Why is meditations on the same tier as those other difficult texts for example?

a lot of these books are really good essentials. They probably won't 'redpill' you though- in fact, after you've read some of them you might learn that the 'redpill' is a mostly inconsistent and sometimes nonsensical view which serves the sole purpose of fueling the elitist's ego

Why religious texts? And why Aristotle?

Both are useless.

This guy is right.

You sound dumb as hell.

It makes very little sense as a lit and forgets many essentials so the reader will be oblivious to both historical context and basic ideas. The author probably didn't read half of those and it's just name-dropping. Reading Augustine for political philosophy for example is mostly a waste, not only because it is mostly theology and to a lesser degree philosophy, but it requires extensive understanding of Church as an institution and platonic, neoplatonic and stoic philosophy. I'm unsure to where the list is supposed to lead, there's no coherent pattern. As something which leads you into political philosophy it does nothing but gice a few popular titles, it forgets the metaphysics behind much of it, it has no order and the ideas in it are for a large part impossible to coherently connect within a single even loosely connected school.

>Be me
>Student of Platon
>Continueing the work of my master by forming the Western politics
>Be called useless after 2500 years by someone who probably never read a book of mine

Dude, don't spoil the surprise :^)

>forgets many essentials
Can I ask you to name of few, please?

Well for starters not including at least a large part of Plato such as Symposium, Timaeus, Laws, Republic and Phaedo and at least Politics and Metaphysics from Aristotle is extremely odd, as they are the foundation of Western philosophy in general and far more relevant within reactionary circles.
Then there's the whole middle ages thing which has Aquinas if nothing else, Suarez as the thinker behind Hugo Grotius, Tocqueville as essential liberal philosophy, Locke as the main influence on the American revolution and so on. It's completely unsystematic. Philosophy is done from beginning, not from Hobbes.

>no marx

0/10 Honestly, whoever made this should be ashamed.

>become politically literate, but you can only choose right-of-centre authors
Lmao

>Reading Kant's Critiques without reading Prolegomena Foundations on the metaphysics of morals
>No Judgment

Thanks /pol/

Here's your (You)

>expects coherency from a /pol/ack

>KJV
>Not Douay–Rheims

Protips:

Men have more teeth than women.

Heavy objects fall faster than light objects.

Men's blood is hotter than women's blood.

There are people who are naturally born to be slaves, and it is just and right to enslave them.

The earth is the center of the universe.

The earth and everything in it existed for all eternity and will exist for all eternity.

Some animals spontaneously come into being from mud and earth; they don't reproduce.

The natural state for all objects is to be at rest; they require constant application of force to move.

There are a total of seven heavenly bodies, which are perfect and never change.

The heart is the organ of reason and intellect.

The function of the brain is to cool the blood.

>Be me
>Read Aristotle in Greek
>Utterly useless
>Warn others
>Get greentexted
>No argument
>Useless comment defending useless philosopher

go more esoteric

cool, the luddpill

Oh my, look at that.

the 'tiers' make absolutely no sense
one of the most haphazard lists ive ever seen

>When an autist reads philosophy

the neo-platonists carried on the work of Plato, not Aretardstotle and the peripatetics

>There are people who are naturally born to be slaves, and it is just and right to enslave them.
>The earth and everything in it existed for all eternity and will exist for all eternity.


Both correct

Just read the Bible, instead, you twink faggot.

t. Schlomo Shekelstien

dropped as soon as I saw Ted K

kill yourself

>Why religious texts?
The Torah and the New Testament are part of western canon. Almost all of the Great Books refer to them.

Its really bad
>Hobbes' Leviathan recommended alongside Animal Farm as something entry level
>recommending The Republic and Aristotle's Politics without any prior Greeks
>Marcus Aurelius' Meditations recommended after fucking City of God and Capital and alongside Kant, Hegel, Heidegger and Adorno+Horkheimer
>that whole "libertarian right" section
>that fascism + nazism section including Spengler (and not even his work Prussiandom and Socialism!) as well as Dugin, Sorel and including Cioran as a core text for whatever reason
>reactionary right barely having as many staple texts as it could have (Spengler belongs here), including too much fiction and obscure shit like biocentric worldview instead of something relevant like historian John Lukacs or Friedrich Reck as a contrast to Nazism + right-wing populism

yikes

The ultimate redpill.

Part One is really uneven. If the focus is a broad understanding of philosophy (minus the "red-pilled" books saved for the second part), then you don't need to read Calvin or Adorno/Horkheimer, but you should read other key theorists like Bentham, Wollstonecraft, Bakunin, Weber, Lenin, Arendt, Sartre, de Beauvoir, Rawls, Fanon, Foucault, Marcuse, & Habermas. The goal of being red-pilled is to be "enlightened," which you cannot do if you are ignorant of the arguments of you opponents/critics. Also, The Genealogy of Morals is far more important than Twilight (of the Idols), the Philosophy of Right is more important than Hegel's Encyclopedia, and it misses Rousseau's second discourse.

Part 2 is even worse. It contains the spectrum from serious scholarship (Burke, Hayek, Schmidt) to irrelevant (Paul, Rand, Tolkien, Mosely, Goebbels)

>Reading Aristotle's Politics before the Nichomachean Ethics

>no Evola

-3/10 trolling attempt

Marx was included in the first photo

The first is okay for some essentials. There's no books there I'd say aren't worth reading (except maybe Orwell) but the order is a bit fucked.

Like Das Kapital is less difficult than Meditations? Seriously?

This one absolutely sucks though.

Here's a proper guide to reactionary/fascist literature. I couldn't help you with libertarianism though (not that libertarians are redpilled anyway).

I'd also advise looking into the writings of Ayatollah Khomeini.

The End Game isn't so bad. Evola is some of the greatest works I've ever read in my entire life.

>/pol/
>redpilled
Topfuckingkek

Muh dik
Who is this semen demon

mega.nz/#F!B4dB2SzQ!h_pMC30v2a_y31iD0dy0sg

I'm moonman, representing white power.
I stack bodies higher than Trump Tower.
Control the memes, control the planet,
Facism is back and the left can't stand it.

do you really not see the flaw with this argument? everybody gets some things drastically wrong but to focus on that instead of what they say correctly is just silly

>dugin at the bottom of the fascist / natsoc tree
is this a fucking joke

The books themselves are fine, but it's just a generic list of classics with no focus at all.

Why the fuck would you go

Republic -> New Testament -> The Prince

As a starting point?

>So I want to be redpilled. I mean, I am redpilled already, I just want to take it to the next level. What are your opinions on these books/this guide?
It's bad.

Reading books will de-redpill you immediately. Just stick with /pol/ and hate-fapping to blacked.

>Rothbard, Hoppe, Paul and Rand

Why would someone who knows none of the good libertarian authors make a list like this?

Because the guy who made this list obviously read few if any of the books on it.

not bad but could be a little more patrician, kaczynski is overrated as hell and if you take him as "redpilled" on anything you're essentially wanting to be wrong
nice but still needs work, not enough virilio

Redpilled means something someone likes. When /pol/ asks if /ourguy/ is redpilled they are asking if they like the person. When someone on /pol/ says that someone is redpilled they are saying they like the person. A lot of the books on that list are good though.

>Men have more teeth than women.
If your woman talks back, there's a good chance this is true

>There are people who are naturally born to be slaves, and it is just and right to enslave them.
Correct

>The earth is the center of the universe.
Since we don't know of any real center, we might as well consider it to be the place we observe from. Just like things are to the right and left of us, you know?

Several of those suggestions with their attached labels are no better than

not enough plato

it's so funny how stupid this guy is.

"Democritus predicted atoms, but he got other stuff wrong so therefore our things aren't made of atoms"

is this one about land value taxes?

>/pol/
>reading

part 2 is terrible, while part 1 requires so much study i doubt anyone on pol has read more then 2 books out of tier 3.

All books in part 1 are books that are the ultimate magnus opus of every respective writer, and every writer is the most famous writer in his discipline or era, which is how you know whoever made the picture just compiled this shit by reading wikipedia instead of books.

>Religious texts
>Useless

Ohh dear.

Pg. 2, at the bottom. No RATMW, though.

>leviathan next to le animal farm
terrible

>Veeky Forums
>reading

>... participating into any discussion about politics.
>participating into

have the first two critiques and not the third.

faggots

If you want to discuss redpills, whatever form they might take, keep it on the board dedicated to politics. There are enough faggots shitting up discussion by bringing politics into everything as it is, and cancer like this is what draws them to this board.

I also came up with a neat pseodo-intellectual quote to go along with my elitist post: There is a Veeky Forums in politics but there is no /pol/ in literature.

Now go back to your containment board.

These lists make no sense. I can guarantee whoever made them has not even read half of these texts.

Too lazy to repost because I misspelled pseudo, so I'll just pretend that it's a meta-commentary on pseudo-intellectuals, because they are the sort of people who would use words they can neither define nor write.

Retard doesn't know that Orwell was a socialist. Try again leftist faggot

This really is the final red pill. Educate yourselves.

Just read the bad goy trilogy of Revolt Against the Modern World, The Bell Curve, and The Culture of Critique.

>the most red-pilled book ever

Would buy the "CHILD TRAFFIKER" one desu

Feel free to refute any of his premises about why Industrial society is harmful to man then

Accurate

What the fuck if the call to read Foucault's Pendulum on about?

Tier 2 looks boring as shit. It is stuff that one tangentially picks up while they live their lives and are covered in courses on the subject You can pick up all that stuff without explicitly reading any of it.

Tier Most of tier three is good reading. Kant Hume and Hegel are dense as shit. You're better off taking a philosophy course that covers them.

>George Orwell
>red pill

/Pol/ is a special kind of stupid, huh?

They're retards.

His work permeates contemporary (plebby) political thought. One should read it just so you know what people (plebby ones) are on about.

It's supposed to be standard babby's first political commentary, that you read in high-school.

This is all assuming you're taking some real university level courses on history, philosophy, and economics.

My point was George Orwell was a fucking libertarian socialist. He was against totalitarian socialism and Marxism, not socialism as a whole.

>>Not Douay–Rheims
Fucking pedos.

Proof otherwise?

Aristotle didn't predict anything. Or contribute anything.

Do you see the flaw in your conjectures?

Democritus was 1/8 right about a thing, so... what? Read his treatise on politics?

What did Aristotle contribute?