Can Veeky Forums recommend any right-wing (but not /pol/-tier) literature? On philosophy, economic policy, etc

Can Veeky Forums recommend any right-wing (but not /pol/-tier) literature? On philosophy, economic policy, etc.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflections_on_the_Revolution_in_France
youtube.com/watch?v=iOk6HB609po
youtube.com/watch?v=JB_omHQwYh8
youtube.com/watch?v=4YqKf3v2aPs
thealternativehypothesis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/AltHypeReader.pdf
gutenberg.org/files/34901/34901-h/34901-h.htm
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Everything pre-20th century could be considered "right-wing" these days.

St. Petersburg Dialogues

stop being a memevermin

You probably need to clarify your request a bit more

We, the Living.
Shut up. Trump is bringing back German Idealism.

Indeed. And on this note, start with Das Kapital.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflections_on_the_Revolution_in_France

>pic related

people don't even know what left & right means in relations to politics etc

Marx was redpilled as fuck, he shits hard on black people in Das Kapital, even the left-wing people of that time were more conservative than right-wings these days.

Check out Foucault, an edgy reactionary flamboyant gay dude who triggers the shit out of Marxists. Basically the French milo.

Literally all of Thomas Sowell's written works.

class conflict takes president over other forms of conflict.

if you eradicate class conflict through a dictatorship of the proletariat then all other forms of conflict (ethnic, gender etc) will naturally solve themselves, thus, Marx was quite influential in keeping feminists and campaigners for racial equality out of nascent american communist organisations......they would divert attention from the main event (class conflict) and divide people up into particular interests.

and guess what? Marx was right once again.

>Basically the French milo.


Get out

Anything by Milton Friedman

>German Idealism.

Yes

That's why he is an advocate of degeneracy

pic related OP, ask about any author that you like from the list and i'll provide input if i've read it

do not choose like a retard, start with Plato

By What Standard by R.J. Rushdoony is a phenomenal critique of western thought from a hard right perspective, you might want to check out Cornelius Van Til and Herman Dooyeweerd while you're at it.

capital is the prime driver of deterritorialisation and the greatest destroyer of traditional values in human history though

Foucault is straight up a cultural Marxist though. That he disagrees with the economic and political theory of collective Marxism does not dilute that.

Thomas 'le based negro' sowell convinced me democrats are the REAL racists

>implying pederasty isn't trad

>Starship Troopers but not The Moon is a Harsh Mistress, AKA "How to Bomb the Terran Government"

>convinced
Doesn't take much convincing when the record shows that Democrats not only fought for slavery but also socially engineered the slave population to be willfully ignorant, welfare-dependent and prone to criminal behavior.

"M.F. I think I have in fact been situated in most of the squares on the political checkerboard, one after another and sometimes simultaneously: as anarchist, leftist, ostentatious or disguised Marxist, nihilist, explicit or secret anti-Marxist, technocrat in the service of Gaullism, new liberal and so on. An American professor complained that a crypto-Marxist like me was invited in the USA, and I was denounced by the press in Eastern European countries for being an accomplice of the dissidents. None of these descriptions is important by itself; taken together, on the other hand, they mean something. And I must admit that I rather like what they mean."

Okay so he's not outwardly a collectivist - may truthfully not be a collectivist at all.
Does not make him any less of a cultural Marxist.

>None of these descriptions is important by itself; taken together, on the other hand, they mean something. And I must admit that I rather like what they mean.

Typical Foucault, leaves us hanging.

What do they mean, praytell?

It's explained pretty well.

youtube.com/watch?v=iOk6HB609po

The right wing Zizek ladies and gentlemen.

Sure.
>Applied cuckholism for fun and profit
>A year in Costa Rica: Why abortion is for normies
>The Nieksch Diaries: No, he wasn't a character by Thomas Mann
>Those lovely men in their uniforms from Hugo Boss
>Among the hmong MEN, an observation of traditionalism initiation in the gay saunas of Portland

Check out a book called predisposed

I remember when that guy that printed the first handgun with a 3d printer quoted that in an interview (as if he thought it up about himself) and looked like the supreme edgelord that he was.

>cody "I'm gonna make you cringe" wilson

Read Maistre for God's sake. Realise that politics since the Enlightenment has been absolute cancer.

late baudrillard

You realize that half of the Frankfurt school would unironically be considered conservative by today's standards right?

>capitalism
>right-wing

HUELLENBACQUE

Huntington

this, postmodernism added to foucaultian ideals of power and oppression and then given to the masses =/= frankfurt school

Murray Rothbard's Betrayal of the American Right, Patrick Buchanan's Death of the West and Allan Bloom's Closing of the American Mind. This is going to chronicle a fair amount of the American conservative of the last 70 years. From people that are sympathetic (Bloom), involved (Buchanan), and in and out (Rothbard).
Good suggestions
This is very good. Start with Conflict of Visions and Visions of the Anointed and read what interests you after
Shit

>tfw I get a nod from famous actors doing a hilarious skit satirizing me and I actually find it hilarious and very well done

>tfw I literally benefited a famed actor in a TV series with my persistence

>falling for the right/left dichotomy

Well met, brainlet.

There is a right and left. There is also a spectrum of right and left. What people agree to classify as right and left will always be different though.

Well met, brainlet.

Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes

Not only is a must-read if you interested in political science, but also it defends the need of the state, the need of defeding something bigger than yourself, the importance of strict morals

Basically shits on everything that lefties believe in, which is mostly the autistic relative individual moral routine

>youtube.com/watch?v=JB_omHQwYh8

What version of Leviathan does lit generally recommend?

I'm a communist. The left/right bullshit is orchestrated by the bourgeoisie to keep the proletariat divided.

Evola

youtube.com/watch?v=4YqKf3v2aPs

A dumbass thinks that the best way to preserve capitalism is through less government interference and considers keynesian social democracy to be "socialism"
The true enlightened realize that keynesian social democracy (AKA "big gubermand") is the best way to preserve capitalism
see pic related

TIME TO RIDE THE TIGER BOYS

Fuck Bernie Sanders for changing the meaning of socialism, fucking Chomsky wannabe

Why not /pol/-tier? Having sound philosophy and economic policy depends on white influence, and preserving white influence and power is what "/pol/-tier" stuff usually is. They are completely correct about the primacy of race within each of these issues, so why not just read /pol/-tier stuff in the first place?

Read this to get started: thealternativehypothesis.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/AltHypeReader.pdf

Left right is literally just a simple way to illustrate where you stand on political and economical issues, it's not at all the reason the working class is divided.

The Turner Diaries.

youtube.com/watch?v=iOk6HB609po

How do you prove that class conflict takes precedent over other kinds of conflict? By what measure? The existence of wealth inequality in general?

Also, the proclamation that class conflict alleviation will alleviate every other conflict has no evidence. It's just some proclamation. You have no data showing that elimination of class conflict eliminates racial and gender conflicts.

Also, other kinds of conflict, particularly identity conflicts, are OBVIOUSLY way more prevalent and class conflict is something that nobody cares about as the politics of western Europe and the USA become increasingly racialized.

And it's also not clear that class and ethnic conflicts are different in practice, since ethnic conflicts are often driven by between-group outcome inequalities (including income or class inequalities); which are then argued to be fair or unfair depending on which side you are on.

>ctrl+f Vilfredo Pareto
>ctril+f Thomas Carlyle
>ctrl+f Oswald Spengler
>0 results
You used to be better, Veeky Forums.

I haven't heard of the first two, but Spengler is all romantic fluff and arguing using symbolic analogies and other bugaboo. It is a waste of time to read him.

Liberalism can't survive without a measure of government-regulated commons either, otherwise you just get feudalism.

>those names are actually real

someone gotta stop the Pinecone

Eh, if that's what you think of him, Carlyle won't impress you either. Spengler actually had some good points to make on fertility, immigration, etc, and the breadth of his historical knowledge is always a good palliative for an increasingly amnesiac culture. Vilfredo Pareto's theory of elites should be of interest to pretty much everyone, though, including liberals.

K but the right is only authoritarian on immigration policy and would want a smaller government than what currently exists as the status quo in the USA.

And the pro-white collectivism is touted as a measure to preserve economic soundness, expressive freedom, and quality of life supported by whites in general more than brown people. And the people who most often tout horseshoe theory and laugh about "right wing SJWs" are 99% white and would have all of their civic preferences voted away by brown people.

So, yes, the horseshoe equivocation is vacuous and is kind of like when people jokingly say that "Hitler had ears... and you have ears... are you like Hitler!?" In other words, horseshoe theory takes the most inane aspects of the modern extreme left and right wings and pretends that therefore their policy implementations are both equally deserving of scorn, contingent upon the vacuous comparisons.

> mengsk did nothing wrong but simultaneously can't keep getting away with it

>fertility, immigration, etc.
That would be considered "/pol/-tier" because in a modern context it wink-wink-nod-nods at brown people being giant buttholes. You might as well read data-based stuff on that, like The Alternative Hypothesis, one of several excellent HBD blogs (Chuck, HBDchick, Emil Kierkegaard, etc.) or researchers like Murray, Rushton, and Jensen.

Pety J

>excellent HBD blogs
>blogs

Good work in here everyone.

if you want to understand the tenants fundamentally of "liberalism" (and not the perverse way Americans use that word), you should read John Stuart Mill, the Federalist Papers, and Locke.

Thomas Sowell is probably a good choice.

If you want to grow a healthy hatred communism I would recommend Dostoyevsky's Demons.

Genealogy of morals
Revolt against the modern world
Turner diaries
Thom Sowell basic economics or whatever by him
White identity by Jared taylor

David Duke

Presbyterians have wack names

True, true.

This reading list is obviously in conflict with itself.

Choosing to read books at all is a reactionary act in itself.

What are some books that justify war and killing other people?

Your diary?

It's a diverse array of right wing opinions outside of the establishment of neoconservatism

Crime and punishment
Wasp factory

And completing the system, at that.

Kallocain by Karin Boye (publ. 1940). Often categorized as a dystopic novel, but I think of it as optimistic in that it presents a solution to the problem of totalitarian states: when people start speaking their minds (in the novel due to a sort of truth drug), the whole complex of political correctness and absolute power breaks down. And that is the essence of the modern term 'red pilled' from the Matrix movies. The active substance in 'the red pill,' is Kallocain.

Indeed. Replace "bourgeoisie" with "jew", and you'd be a Nazi. Both Marxism/Communism and National Socialism are overly reductive and misguided in their attempts to attribute the majority of the sociological, political, and economic problems that our civilization faces to a single group of people or social institution (e.g. the Jews, Capitalism, the Bourgeoisie, etc.).

To a large extent society sucks because humans "suck" - we're flawed beings. No rearrangement or reorganization of the human social system is going to change that. Of course improvements can be made, but no arrangement is going to achieve what Marxists or conservatives expect it to.

What we need is the classical liberalism of early British political philosophers and the American Revolution (along with a few laws to protect the environment, consumers, etc.).

>replace bourgeoise with Jew and you'd be a Nazi
Finally someone fucking said it. I swear it's been blindingly obvious for a long time now that the globalists, Jews, elites, and bourgeoise all refer to the same group. These ideologies, while far from being the same, aren't polar opposites like many consider them to be.

"cultural marxism"

the only difference is that the bourgeoise isn't composed entirely of jews, you can't prove every rich person is jew but you can prove every rich person is a bourgeois

>right-wing (but not /pol/-tier) literature? On philosophy, economic policy
Noone even mentioned Friedrich Hayek? His ritual murder of socialism is epic. The Road To Serfdom and The Fatal Conceit: the Errors of Socialism

>Trump is bringing back German Idealism.
is this seriously what /pol/ thinks?

It serves a purpose. You need a scapegoat to channel the resentment brought by memetic desire.
Check Girard

Rothbard*. Sowell's alright but a monetarist is a monetarist

This. Not sure why people cling to Friedman and Sowell so hard anymore.

that's why marx or some other 19th century dickhead said "anti-semitism is the socialism of fools" in the sense that you're trying to scapegoat a religion for the inexorable development of a mode of production, you can see this on /pol/ a lot, someone will call a classic wasp capitalist like Rockefeller or Bill Gates a "jew" meanwhile talking about how they love Android (created by Andy Rubin) etc.

Sowell wrote some interesting stuff about American culture, but I wouldn't look to a historian for monetary policy advice, for that you should consult a jew

It's true. The concept of the lumpenprolitariat is about as close to "Kill the fucking poor" as it gets, it's positively Hoppean by today's standards.

It's a kantbot joke. Nobody on /pol/ knows what German Idealism is, and they'd probably hate it if they did.

The difference is that the bourgeois doesn't exist, and Jews do.

As said before, all of Sowell. Also, check out Rothbard's Anatomy of the State, FA Hayek's Road to Serfdom, and John Stuart Mill's On Liberty.

gutenberg.org/files/34901/34901-h/34901-h.htm

Mill is a classic liberal, which is what conservatism in the US used to be about. Geo. Washington was absolutely correct about parties destroying the nation. Look at what we've become.

Read The Wealth of Nations. By the time you finish it you'll have died of age, and the question will be moot.

>Theory of elites
>just a pessimistic, industrialized take on the Great Man

i'm a libertarian and a huge fan of Rothbard, its very refreshing to see others recommend him. thanks.

The books that had the largest influence on me were "Rights of Man by Thomas Paine" and "The Death of the West by Pat Buchanan"