Recommend me some right wing philosophers

Recommend me some right wing philosophers.

Literally Evola is all that you need.
Maybe read Alfred Rosenburg.

>Right wing
Get off my Chan REEEEEEEEEEE

>Economics
-Adam Smith, Pareto, Marshall, Malthus, Ricardo, Thomas Sowell, Schumpeter, Hayek, Mises, Friedman, Rothbard

>Culture / Political
-Dalrymple, De Maistre, Edmund Burke, Hobbes,

Apparently this list is shit but its what all the stormfags use.

You could also try the Greeks

Restrain yourself from always mentally categorising philosophers into categories like left or right. For most good ones it's hard and often pointless and reductive. To me at least the phrasing often implies a kind of doctrinaire or discriminatory approach to ones thinking. So unless they're explicitly political philosophers who have actively involved themselves in politics, I prefer to avoid labelling then.

Anyway, here's some I can name off the top of my head:
>Carl Schmitt
>Leo Strauss
eh
I'd feel bad listing most suggestions. I hate implying that one political orientation "owns" a man's thought. Strauss and Schmitt have too broad an appeal even to reduce ourselves to describing them the way we describe officials we want to cast votes for.

>Getting so triggered because your feelings are hurt when someone has a different viewpoint from yours
wew lad

Frederic Bastiat - The Law.

Small, sexy, easy to read, full of charisma, logically sound and a great starting point.

>Anthony Malcolm Daniels
>implicit support of the war on drugs

Bruce Lee. His entire philosophy is about personal attunement and personal responsibility.

fuck off stormfag. Veeky Forums is for /leftypol/

Ann Coulter

> implying people don't go between many boards

There have always been polsters among you, now they speak & you shit your long johns.

Donald Trump's The art of the deal, such an underrated book. Also Ann Coulter and Sara Palin.

Thomas Aquinas

Ortega y Gasset, Revolt of the Masses

>Adam Smith

Do people not even read the wikipedia page on Smith. Fucking meme right wingers have killed conservatism as an intellectual tradition.

This.

Of you want the MODERN right. Nick Land and NRx.

Heidegger

>Adam Smith, Hayek, Mises, Friedman

Fuck off liberal.

Check the archive.

We have this thread every day.

go to church lol

Categorising any philosopher as "right" or "left" today is pretty difficult.

A 19th century liberal would've been considered "left-wing" then but right-wing now. It's also important to recognise that America was founded upon Liberal Enlightenment principles, and (positions similar to the oirginal Left of the French Revolution). Consequently, every American "conservative" will always be 'liberal' in that respect.

It's probably best to start with De Maistre, to get an understanding of the Continental Right, and Burke to get an understanding of the Anglo-Right (within the context of the 1688 revolution and Whiggism).

>All pre-Enlightenment philosophers
>Hegel
>Nietzsche
>Kierkegaard
>Kant
>Hobbes
>...

Note that most philosophers exist outside of your proposition, and some can be used as tools as they are fairly neutral. Empiricists can never answer Hume's problem, for example.

Left constitutes as revolution, equality and all things surrounding it. The compulsive lies, jewlousy, violence of the group; pacifism of the individual, submission to desire, kindness as virtue etc. Before Friedman, capitalism was in theory right wing. Right now the problem is that humans became property once again. This, of course, happened through the leftist sphere so it is a Universal standard as of now. Of course, the left is against property rights.

You know there is this thing called "freedom of speech" right?

Shut the fuck up

Nice argument sweetie ;)

>tfw you have to samefag reply to your own shitty falseflag larping
Go outside, user. It's beautiful.

>Confessions of a mask
>fascist
kek

Which is why he's allowed to tell you to fuck off.

best answer in thread desu

If you want justification for fascism, misinterpreting Spengler or reading Oswald Mosley has always been fun, otherwise you are just reading progressives from their own time.

I wonder how many unsuspecting /pol/acks read that
would have loved to see some reactions

Also there can never be an authentic Fascism in either the Anglo-sphere or even France, as they are derived from Continental Counter-Enlightenment schools of thought.

The best the UK could do is go full Tory Monarchism.

The best the France could do is go full Bonapartism or even Royalism (likely impossible)

The US is fucked when it comes to "Rightism", as it was founded upon Liberal Englightenment principles. I suppose Hamltonian Federalism is closer to Tory Monarchism, but it's still within the American Liberal tradition.

The only thing an authentic "Rightist" American movement could do would be to repudiate the Revolution and swear allegiance to the British Crown again.

The "Mishima as Fascist" argument is terrible. He was obsessed by aesthetics and physical beauty, and when he drifted towards the political he tended to give massive credit towards the aesthetics of traditionalism (Golden Pavilion, the loyalty shown in Patriotism and Runaway Horses).

But if you read Sun and Steel and Decay of the Angel, you would know that in the end he was not will to become a decadent old man, and his action was planned to fail to give himself a perceived glorious and aesthetic death. This is certainly a kind of insane conservatism, but far-right? He had no economic or political ideas, just an obsession with martial and masculine beauty, which of course /stormfags/ would love to appropriate, but is much more of bizarre sidenote than anything else.

Why? Shouldn't you know them if you're right wing, or did you decide the answer before the arguments?

Sir Roger Scruton

EVERY. SINGLE. DAY.

Normally I don't straw man based on identity, but if you can't even use the archive, you're a fucking retard.

Bump.