/lit/ - Literature

Come the hell on dude this is solved by searching "right wing" "topic of interest"

I read fiction. I don’t read non-fiction (anymore). You can assert that I’m “a pseud” or “a midwit” because I don’t read this or that psychoanalytical and economic over-intellectualism if that’s what you really want to do.

>>18815107
/pol/ is a retarded community. Other online fascists forums usually read things about history, masculine aesthetics, philosophy combat etc. Authors like Yukio Mishima, BAP, Evola, Hitler, Spengler and Schmitt are often circulated. But these are a minority of people

>>18815123
Discussion is good.

Start with picrel and Basic Economics by Thomas Dowell comrade :)

>>18815168
*Sowell
My bad, I'm phoneposting rn

>>18815107
>Whenever I read right wing pundits
Such as?

Bazooka joe comics

>>18815107
What other side, exactly? There are a billion mutually exclusive things that can be called "right-wing". And most modern political philosophies are derivative from many of the same sources anyway. Any person who engages with the liberal arts and humanities long enough will develop an organic familiarity with perspectives from every side of the political spectrum.

Burke and Hume are considered foundational influences on modern 'conservatism'. Oakeshotte is a recent conservative philosopher, as is Leo Strauss. Sloterdijk. I'd say engagement with Catholic thought might be fruitful: they're less keen on brutal economic liberalism than Protestant conservatives. It's worth noting that 'conservatism' originally constituted opposition to Whig liberalism and capitalism and the rationalistic treatises used to justify them.

You might find Zeev Sternhell's writings instructive, for information on the intellectual history of fascism and how it emerged from Marxist revisionism and syndicalism.
>>18815127
Please do not lump serious writers like Mishima, Spengler and Schmitt together with those other creatures.

>>18815107
What kind of right wingers? Most people on /pol/ are retards just reflexively doing the opposite of what the zeitgeist is telling them to do, there's not much substance there.

There's many different groups that are considered right wing, a lot of them don't have anything in common besides vague dislike for globohomo.

>>18815107
>im a libertarian socialist durrrr
>me watch vaush all day vaush is vewy smart

>What do right-wingers read?
My politics come from reality not theory, so I've never felt the need to read political theory books, I just read literature.

pick your flavour.
1/3

>>18815107
I solely read pre-trumpian fantasy.

>>18815340
2/3

>>18815340
>Rightwing socialism
>No Stalin, no Lenin
Anyway, as we can see, It’s just capitalism with a heftier state control

>>18815347
3/3
this one's too large for upload:
https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/4chanlit/images/8/85/Ted_core_png_compressed.png/revision/latest?cb=20200328005828
>>18815354
Socialism != Marxism-Leninism

>>18815340
I think this chart could be a lot better there is a lot of material missing here and some relatively irrelevant picks. Sorel is a good start but more National Syndicalism, neosocialism, etc. needed

Mishima, Evola, Cormac and Loli hentai books…

ideologues would be more honest if rather than making book charts they just listed their fave youtubers and twitter accounts where they get all their opinions from

>>18815107
Nietzsche, particularly: on the genealogy of morals, beyond good and evil and the will to power

Spengler's decline of the West and man and techniks

Maybe some kaczynski 'industrial society and its future' although some would say that's not right wing, it's anarcho-primitivism. I think it's right wing though.

Houellebecq's particules elementaires

Dalrymple's 'our culture, what's left' and 'life at the bottom'

HItler's Mein kampf

MacDonald's 'Culture of critique'

>>18815405
Sorry anon, not everyone's like you. I haven't watched a JewTube video in over three years, and soicial media is for bugmen.

>>18815107
Modern political theory, both right and left, is an astroturfed abomination created in the 50's and 60's. It has made most political writings and discourse arguments over surface level topics with the party divisions being along the line of personality-type. Ideally people would have certain principles and from those principles derive their answers to the political issues of the day. The small minority of rightists who escape this are going to be reading people like Burke, Kirk, and Strauss. It's also worth noting that the American right uses religion extensively, so it's important to familiarize yourself with the Christian doctrines.

>>18815443
Extremely based.

the true list:

reading:
>the jews in media infographic
>the black crime and iq infographic
>the fake Solzhenitsyn quote
>the fake Voltaire quote

viewing:
>the Greatest Story Never Told documentary (Bitchute)
>random E Michael Jones interview (Bitchute)
>the right wing guy versus left wing guy debate (Youtube)

culture:
>Wanderer above the Sea of Fog.png
>The Accolade.png
>50s Hot Dog Commercial.png

>>18815107
Start with Lasch, The Revolt of the Elites there's a couple of Marxoids gone conservative/populists in that vein.
Once you've stewed in upper-middle class leftoidism for a while you'll want nothing more than to burn it all down.

Brahmin Left versus Merchant Right is also a short and sweet introduction to contemporary politics and why the working class is actively siding against the """left""". Everyone who want to understand the populist phenomena in the West the past decade should read this paper.

t. former """leftist"""

>it all sounds sounds extremely stupid and full of shit like "oh yeah you want social reform? what about VUVUZELA?"
Here's the thing, even the sort of niche or pseudo-theoretical literature that is supposed to be the middle/highbrow of right-wing thought is essentially this as well. You read it expecting to find something completely unique, but after a few pages you realize you're basically reading ideas on the same level as Ben Shapiro's, just slightly obscured by the language of some philosophical trend at the time.

This is why /pol/lit/ always falls out of love with those meme authors they shill hard for a few weeks. They will find like a fringe 1910's Italian occultist reactionary or something and treat them like an absolute genius at first, but after some probing they realize they're just repeating shit their dad would say but with sorcery or eugenics added.

>>18815107
>Carl Schmitt Political Theology
>Carl Schmitt The Concept of the Political
>Carl Schmitt The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy
>Joseph De Maistre The Generative Principle of Political Constitutions
>Joseph De Maistre The Pope
>Joseph De Maistre St. Petersburg Dialouges
>Hegel
>Fichte
>James Gregor Mussolini's Intellectuals
>Right Hegelians,especially Gentile and the ones surrounding him
>A Criticism of Historical Materialism by Giovanni Gentile
>Resistance to Evil by Force by Illyin
>Hegel's philosophy as a doctrine of the concreteness of God and man by Ilyin
>Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera: The Foundations of the Spanish Phalanx by Nick W. Sinan Greger
>Georges Valois,Georges Sorel and other Cercle Proudhon writers for National Syndicalism
>The Philosophy of Fascim by Mario Palmeri.
1/2? this one is mostly hegelianism,maybe I'll do one focused on ''post-modernist'' ''right wing'' (or related) thinkers and writers
Also,I made the list expecting the reader to take interest in other works from each author,not just the ones mentioned here

>>18815541
>and why the working class (the Left) is actively siding against the """left""".
Is this how you mean it?

>>18815107
The Holy Bible

>>18815599
here are /pol/s reading lists I've collected over time

>>18815610

>>18815595
Post your feet already.

I've been reading the distributors off and on throughout the year. Other than that it's a mix of Ted Kaczynski and adjacent stuff, classical philosophy like Xenophon and Seneca, and some random shit published by Arktos

>>18815618

>>18815564
This is the only real list in the thread so far
>>18815494
kek

>>18815107
Read Chesterton

>>18815622
>Conservative (tory)
>Labor (Blairite)
>Lib-dems (more rightwingers)
>UKIP (batshit insane rightwing)
>why aren’t people voting so much?
Neoliberalism everybody. There’s no choice but to abstain.

>>18815645
>moving the goalpost
Also, you forgot to attach a picture of your bare feet.

>>18815645
Can you shut the fuck up like holy shit?
You ruin and derail every thread you enter.
There's a reason this board hates you almost unanimously.
You are a nuisance at best and actively halt meaningful discussion at your worst.
The worst part is the you use a tripcode, so obviously you like the attention to an extent. I just don't get it.

>>18815645
Don’t listen to them butters, I think your cool

>>18815690
Wrong image,sorry,I hate tranime and tranime posters

>>18815645
There is no true socially right wing party in either the UK or most of the Western World. We got Cuckservatives who are literally liberal (Liberalism is not right wing) and Economic liberals. We have no reactionary / monarchist party, so by definition of the Left-Right dichotomy which originated after the French Revolution we have no right wing parties

>>18815698
Do they have to be against social services to be a “true” rightwing party?
Yes, capitalism won two hundred years ago. They’re all a shade of liberal.
You a monarchist? Would you oppose a monarch who graced the people with a NHS, or only a cruel despot?

>>18815724
What? I am for a mixed economy and yes, indeed, I would not be opposed to Monarchism or a Technocracy. Capitalism has nothing to do with what was meant to be right wing.

>>18815107
Read Kaczynski for his take on left wing hyper socialization

read The Road to Serfdom

>>18815107
If you are interested in Right-Wing socialism you should look into fascism, which is inherently Hegelian, study the political thought of Hegel first. Then study Giovanni gentile’s work (mind as pure act should be a major work here) then read the work of Carl Schmit and heidegger's thoughts on technology, once you have these you can then study the post modern theories on fascism, so read baudrillard’s simulacra & simulation then hop into deleuze and study what he means about the cancerous BwO/fascist body without organs.

That’s what a lot of big brain fascist theory looks like, basically Hegelian and post modern capital critique which accepts and embraces the Fascist elements of capital. Most of the time people who study gentile today and are truly fascist don’t label themselves as such. look into Jiang shigong (who’s a fascist in all but name) and A. James Gregor for more academic material on Fascism.

Here’s some Blogs that talk about the policies of Third position systems, along with the Soviet and National bolsheviks, to Strauss etc.

https://arplan.org/2020/02/21/mussolini-corporate-state/
https://arplan.org/2020/06/23/fascism-in-britain-mosley/
https://arplan.org/2020/05/16/otto-ruhle-red-fascism/

>>18815739
>Capitalism has nothing to do with what was meant to be right wing

>>18815898
Are you one of those retards who think left-right wing means pro-capitalism vs anti-capitalism Cold War style?

>>18815177
we could tell

>>18815898
Read about the French revolution before you ever discuss politics here again, please.

Schmitt's Concept of the Political
Alain de Benoist's Problem of Democracy
Gotfried's Strange Death of Marxism
Strauss's Natural Right and History
Deneen's Why Liberalism Failed
Oren Cass's The Once and Future Worker
etc. etc.

If you want to read something about Fascism, read the related image and get beyond any misconceptions.

>>18815107
Here are two Mega-links I picked up during my /pol/-tard phase.
>General /pol/-canon:
https://mega.nz/folder/BkkAhCwS#I4oUFjfFiuwnOxRhJKRFZQ
>War and politics:
https://mega.nz/folder/x4JD1RzD#4_nIFmI2sBdSYg14j7pIdA

>>18815564
Didn’t Jose deny being a Fascist?

>>18815564
I am pretty sure no one on /pol/ is reading Hegel, even though he is thrown on some reading list infographics as intro/basics, whereas BAP is saved for advanced studies....

There are plenty of old school conservative intellectuals to read. I like Fukayama and Huntington.

If you're interested in the new, Trumpist right, you're kind of out of luck. The movement hasn't produced intellectuals. It's a movement for middle class people in the developed world who are seeing their standing fall due to increasing competition and who lack the ability to succeed in an economy where cognitive ability is increasingly important. It's essentially Boomerism, i.e. "turn back the clock to 1950 and gib easy life." Thus the solution to global warming is to pretend it is a conspiracy, challenges are to be ignored.

Tucker is probably the most important voice but you watch him. It's a movement of passive watching. Again, you're entitled to receive. You do have some books, Bronze Age Mindset, Harassment Architecture, Gothic Violence, but they are absolute shit. Which comes to think of it, makes sense because Ayn Rand is also absolute shit, knocking you over the head with extremely obvious allegory with absolutely no nuance for 1,000 pages st a time, and attracted similar people.

Just don't expect much. It's like the American Evangelical Christianity of intellectual movements.

>>18816074
Who the fuck is BAP?

>>18816074
Who the fuck is talking about /pol/? Nobody on pol reads, they're all 12 year old brown people.

>>18815107
These. Bill O'Reilly is a best seller too, and definitely YouTube Tucker Carlson.

>>18816074
>he is thrown on some reading list infographics as intro/basics, whereas BAP is saved for advanced studies....
Yes. Your point being?

>>18816111
I dont care what anyone says. I would 100% fuck Lauren Southern.

>>18816103
/pol/, Twitter, blogs, etc. play a huge role in the intellectual scene. I can't tell you how many times I've seen a spin on a given current event gain capital on /pol/, get capped, go around Twitter a bit, and then end up on Tucker.

Do you think all the conservative media folks coordinate to push common narratives? Or that their handful of writers come up with all the spin?

It grows organically on the internet, with natural selection for ideas that will gain currency with the desired audience. It's a model I still need to formalize but I've found tons of examples of Tweets turning into mainstream narratives a week later. It essentially follows the model of memes as self replicating and undergoing natural selection that is already in the literature. I think it will be a good publication.

Plus, we know this happens. One of Tucker's main writers got exposed frequenting Far-Right forums, far enough right to get him shit canned off a pretty far right program. He was picking up narratives from that landscape.

Not that it's /pol/ that is particularly influential, it's just one of many sources. Millions of people attempt to put an ideological spin on virtually everything, and the result is a continuous crowd sourced lens through which to view each and every world event.

There is no intellectual component because there is no one to organize coherent arguments. Instead it's more of a lens in which one can see themselves being oppressed from every angle, and events can be spun into this grievance.

The concept of "postmodernism" is so funny to me. Like "We decided now that we must take into account the opinions of women and Negroes, and it's suddenly been shown that nothing is real."

>>18815168
this is such a shit meme book. its been criticized countless times yet /pol/tards elevate it b/c they think worshipping a rich black guy makes them appear slightly less repulsive to the normal crowds. so weird how /pol/tards will wish death on black people in one breath then turn around and try to fit in with normies in the other

>>18816136
Lauren was hot but her weird weaboo sister was hotter.

>>18816138
Yeah but none of that has anything to do with the "intellectual scene", unless you're using a very realist meaning of it. What you're talking about is the media and mass politics spheres that have become common due the whole world being turned into mass liberal republican democracies, at least nominally.

>>18816162
Right, my point is the new Trumpism has no intellectual scene. It's a radical departure. The mass culture is the core of the movement.

It's like an intellectual movement that eats a diet of nothing but marshmallow and sweet tarts.

>>18816207
To be fair, can't the same be said of all mass movements? The actual "intellectual" (in the classical pretentious meaning of the world) part of mass movements has always been exclusive to its leaders. To most of the people involved its just a feeling or a lens at best or an opportunity to act out.

>>18816207
>It's like an intellectual movement that eats a diet of nothing but marshmallow and sweet tarts.
As opposed to Bidenism, AOC-ism or Romneyism you mean? You're describing all of US electoral politics, sadly.

>>18816266
Bidenism doesn't exist. No one worships him. But yes, his ideology does have an intellectual base. Rawls, Picketty, Krugman, Powers on foreign affairs, Pinker, etc.

Post-modern shit is chiefly an intellectual movement that people ape without really understanding.

Pre-2016 conservatism had plenty of luminaries.

No, Blumpism really is different in being not only anti-intellectual, but based on pure feeling. And indeed, what is the point of analysis when facts have no importance? The enemy is a global cabal of evil Satan worshiping pedos, and only a New York billionaire reality TV celeb can save us. Do we believe this? Maybe not really, but we FEEL it and share in our feeling. That's the root.

>>18816207
Nothing in American politics has any actual intellectual value, it's mass politics, it's a product like any else, simple, unhealthy and to be rapidly consumed without thought, this one has more important repercussions for the country than a bag of chips or Gay anime shit ever could.

>>18816309
I mean if you consider neo-conservatism and Billy Kristol luminaries sure. Also nice of you to presume Biden's """ideology""" even exists and isn't just what wall street lobbysts working at the DNC write for him to say in front of the cameras in between 12 hour naps.

>>18815231
There is nothing conservative about Leo Strauss.

>>18815107
I read a bunch of meme books by Evola, Spengler, Yokey, Jünger, Mosely and some others. Then I realized it was all retarded and started reading about scholasticism

>>18815107
Oh just the usual stuff

Jünger
Heidegger
Blanchot
Nietzsche
Plato
Dante
Machiavelli
de Man
Koselleck
Schmitt
Mann
Spengler
Sorel
Pareto
Kuhn
Strauss
Eliot
Wyndham
Pound
George
Cioran
Yeats
Eliade
Klages
Mishima
Dumezil
Celine

>>18816322
Joe Biden's ideology literally just does whatever the fuck the lobbyists tell the gubbimint to do while keeping up the narrative hustling and pushing the vax, and to be honest it would probably be the same with anyone else. Thank god I don't live in America. The country.

>>18816152
In the past few years /pol/ has been totally invaded by facebook boomers who think Ben Shapiro is a great pundit. The board is totally unrecognizable now. People still talk about /pol/ is if it's a national socialist board, but all the NS and fascist posters are long gone. It's basically a republican internet HQ now.

>>18815641
Chesterton is so dry and boring.

>>18816372
/pol/ used to be Ron Paul american-patriot lolbertarian, things have just come full circle now.

>>18815107
You'd be better off sticking to consuming your own side's propaganda. It's better to the soul than actually learning that your enemies are not 2d cutouts with views literally disconnected from reality in all ways possible (Which you can confirm via things and interactions you saw and had in the internet, which I'm sure they don't have of your side, which is correct), anyhow, shit bait nigga, This board is fucking becoming Nu/His/ and I hate it. There should at least be more /pol/tards to keep you faggots at bay.

>>18815107
Right-wing and left-wing are both ideological ecochambers which miss the forest for the trees. You have probably more in common with right-wing retards than you think.

>>18816400
>>boring
You don't read political and ideological philosophy and books for entertainment and excitement.

>>18816404
The GoP coopted Trumpism is a far cry from the Ron Paul libertarianism

>>18816409
If you can’t kill human beings while detesting yourself you won’t make a good Chekist. Dzhershinsky despised secret police. Voted against them. And made the most honest brutal efficient and admired secret police.

A communist ought to know he is killing a rational being exactly like him and that political contingency requires it. With fascists he should enjoy doing it.

>>18816455
I can totally imagine little scared Rand Paul sucking off Trump live, in the middle of the Senate chambers is Trump told him to though. The capitulation is total. What Trump says is truth and it is law, for better or worse.

Personally, I don't think it's been so bad and it had been fucking HILARIOUS. I hope he runs and loses again, and then makes the House certify him as the real winner. That seems increasingly likely and would make things nice and spicy.

>>18816461
>And made the most honest brutal efficient and admired secret police.
The Cheka wasnt efficient at all, unlike the Stasi for example. They were just murder squads.

And many commies couldn't really deal with the reality of killing rational people for a supposedly noble cause. It's also why the higher ups like Lenin were usually too cowardly to see any action themselves. They kept a safe intellectual distance, trying instead to dehumanize anyone as a bloodsucker or something similar.

>>18816442
I do

>>18816486
He died early and it went down hill. Gulag was nice before 32.
>murder squads
And?

>>18816477
>and then makes the House certify him as the real winner
Nah, not gonna happen. Didn't happen in 2020 even though there was a very popular demand for it. Trump's following has totally atrophied since that disaster. I doubt he'll run again. DeSantis is the guy who will run. He's a good stooge who stands up to meaningless rhetoric and then acts only to defend Israeli interests. If a republican wins 2024, it'll be DeSantis, with Trumps blessing i'm sure

>>18816526
Murder squads dont make effective secret police, anon. It's why the Stasi was much more effective than the Gestapo, despite murdering far less. Especially not when it's in the service of a rotting failed revolution that already started to collapse in on its own contradictions before lenin even kicked the bucket. If it doesnt fulfill its purpose of a socialist utopia, then it failed in its goal, and so you only ended up killing hundreds of thousands of people for nothing.
Fortunately, many of the Chekists were themselves killed because thats what commies always do, so there's a silver lining to this.

>>18816521
You'll be constantly disapointed then.

>>18816461
Ah yes, propaganda.
What does this say about my argument? something something fascism bad and ruthless comunism merely necessary evil for good wholesome utopia, I don't see anything relating to my argument here. It's propaganda, fascists believe the same, it's pretty common, the brutal and barbarous them, and the us that are just doing a necessary evil. I'll be the first to admit, I am not immune to propaganda, all my abilities to spot it go out the window because I wish to believe it. But neither are you.

Anyhow for every nazi gleefully gunning jews and slavs I can give you a revolutionary killing "reactionaries" and the like just as happily.

>Inb4 they deserved because XYZ
The protestants deserved it, the jews deserved it, the Hmong deserved it, the one who loses always conveniently deserves it. No one cares about the other others, they deserve it y'see. If the movement that controlled the media came into your town and executed your mom she would deserve it.

>>18816538
East Germany was a chad state, truly a pioneer in the art of many things, hat's of to them and their dictatorship. Though the Gestapo wasn't that bad either. though you can see the craft being refined.

>>18815494
Based

>>18816545
I'm usually not

>>18815494
>>50s Hot Dog Commercial.png
I demand to view this

>>18816598
Just look at any Norman Rockwell painting. Nothing even vaguely right wing coming from the United States comes even close to an abridged version of a single Charles Maurras or Benito Mussolini text. Maybe Lasch.

>>18816535
Because Democrats held the House. They likely won't in 2024.

>>18816619
Thats all just excuses. They didn't verify Trump because no american politician will ever admit their precious specially unique democracy is as flawed and decadent as anybody elses'.

>>18815107
Christopher Lasch is a good call for a left wing think who took a socially conservative turn, while still keeping a number of left wing assumptions.

His work is more often a critique of contemporary (to him) leftism than a positive expression of some kinda of political programme (the true and only heaven comes closest to outlining a positive view imo)

Maybe the closing of the american mind for a good conservative critique

>>18816619
The whole apparatus turned on Trump on January 6th. Even republican house members. His own VP basically staged a coup to coopt the rest of Trump's term. Even pentagon officials said they'd stop taking orders from trump. Not that they were ever listening to begin with

>>18816666
What the fuck are you talking about? Half the Republican caucus voted to annul the election results from the swing states and have the state delegations pick the new president (i.e. Trump). Maybe they only voted that way because they knew the Dems had control and it wouldn't pass, but a large portion of the party DID vote to overturn the election for him, and reasserted their voted after the retard mob got cleared out too.

>>18816726
As far as I remember those were the state legislatures voting on that. I don't remember the house on that issue

>>18816741
Well they did, on January 6th they held a vote to throw out the election results of PA, AZ, GA, MI, and a large proportion of Republicans voted for it. Obviously it failed because they lost the House in 2018.

>>18816763
Huh guess I missed that in the midst of the jan 6th excitement

>>18816763
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/01/07/us/elections/electoral-college-biden-objectors.html

It was just about half the Republican Party that voted to overturn the election and give Trump another term despite losing.

And they werent organized for it then. Pence didn't betray Trump, the constitution gives the VP no authority in the vote so the Court wouldn't back it. I do think he will run again and if he doesn't win but the GOP has the House I'd say it's 50/50 they annul the results.

Mix in some Thomas Carlyle and you should be good. Also Robert Filmer.

>>18816796
If Pence didn't betray Trump, what are all those people who crossed his name out angry about?

>>18815107
your intuition is right

there are some smart and/or well-educated chuds, but most (especially on the internet) are simply retarded

that's why it's impossible to seriously engage with online chuds. their view of "leftism" or "communism" is so far from what leftists or communists really think, let alone liberals, that there's not even a realistic starting place for debate. it's impossible to correct a misunderstanding that deep

>>18815667
>frogposter

>>18815107
Read The American Conservative and its racy counterpart Takimag

>>18816852
Even a frogposter is better than a tripfag.

>>18815107
>What do right-wingers read?
>So - what can I read to understand "the other side" better?

What's the point of reading dated, explicitly political philosophy? Is it just to edify your curiosity? You couldn't possibly be using it as a surrogate personality obtained through consumer goods in order to define yourself as a customer segment to data harvesting platforms, right? Your political views largely revolve around policy decisions made by your local bureaucracy and whether they help or harm you, right? No one is actually taking poopoopeepeeism vs peepeepoopooism seriously past the age of 19, right?

>>18815107
People naturally become more right wing by working and living in the real world instead of engaging in mental Masturbation

>>18816942
God save the King.

>>18816959
There's still a prince of Bavaria? That's a good joke.

>>18816942
You should think more carefully about these things. For one, consider that there is always a philosophy, explicit or implicit, underlying policy.

>>18816967
He is also the King of England, Scotland, and Ireland and by extension America, Canada, and Australia, and New Zealand.

>>18816970
I'm not that guy, but you understand most policy is written and made by people who in another life would be trying to sell you an used car at best, correct?

>>18816834
Trump was too pussy to cross the Rubicon so he wanted to have Pence make an ostentatiously illegal act to try to forestall his leaving office.

He also tried to get an angry mob to block the process but pussed out on going all in, and so ended up with less people than he needed.

They're mad because for them Trump cannot do any wrong so if he says the Constitution gives any sitting VP the right to unilaterally choose the next President, it must be true. IDK, they're retarded, it doesn't have to make sense.

>>18816970
Nothing that couldn't be reduced to a few paragraphs. And if you take any longer to explain you likely haven't valuable enough time as a person to be put in charge of something in executive fashion.

>>18815107
>libertarian socialist
So you believe in an oxymoron

>>18816980
>who in another life would be trying to sell you an used car at best
This is what happens you forgo true government for "democracy".

>>18816978
>king of america
Even better joke!

>>18816988
The American Rebellion will be put down someday. Mark my words.

>>18816986
True government is whoever you pay tribute/taxes to, sweatie.

>>18816844
You have to go back

>>18816995
>Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's

>>18816992
By who? The Comrade-Emperor of China?

>>18817008
Get lost christer, we weren't discussing your book

>>18817009
In the worst case, yes. Or the West could grow up.

>>18816959
>>18816978
Its weird that he's gay. Openly gay, even.

>>18816983
>>nothing that couldn't be recuded to a few paragraphs
You heavily underestimate how much of a mess and how badly made laws are.

>>18816980
How is that relevant? The philosophy exists, it is developed constantly by our institutions, and those who go through those institutions imbibe its conclusions and act on them.
>>18816982
I'm not sure if you're interpreting reality correctly.
>>18816983
No. I think you should try reading about political philosophy before trying to talk about it. Start with Leo Strauss.

>>18817018
Grow up to what? Gay totalitarian (or semi) techno Bugman dystopism?

>>18817018
>muh West
The last defense of the west will be fought by people with names like Bernando O'Higgins-Fujimori with a taupe complexion looking to protect their assets from a massive unemployed underclass mobilized by other taupe-colored agents. You'll be dead by then so I wouldn't worry about it. Those smart enough to have not fought to the end will quietly become the leaders of the new order, like the sons of balkan slave women in the Ottoman empire.

Is telling people to read Leo Strauss the new meme

>>18817035
Maybe we could start by accepting that absolute freedom for a moral people is not the same as absolute freedom for an immoral people?

>>18817019
Law is not political philosophy, perhaps a subset, but what I and wjat I am sure most people here and elsewhere are referring to by political philosophy is just book length ideology.
>>18817028
Strauss, the guy who thinks books are written to conceal a subtext? That's your political philosophy? He undermines the very notion of having a political philosophy! If we take his word for it, we ought to behave as others expect us to in whatever the conventional political paradigm is but sociopathically work to undermine and outmaneuver them. And that, is already how things are, except among the most stupid, that is to say the powerless who larp in preparation for the power they do not exercise, by reading political philosophy as something other than mere information.

>>18817054
I think you have misread Strauss. Go reread him and see if you can understand him better this time.

>>18817043
I guess you are going in an ethnic direction, I see.

>>18817064
What's the takeaway here? I don't have a high net worth. Nobody does what I tell them to because of who I am. I have no standing in any non-small community. What use is political philosophy to me.

READ
OLD
BOOKS

>>18815347
>right-wing
>culture
LMAOOOOO

>>18817085
Everything before the 50s is considered right wing now

>>18815347
>>Culture
>>Murray Rothbard
An american made this, as if considering "right wing libertarianism" as something that actually exists wasn't an clear enough indication.

>>18817077
Well, the issue is quite complicated, given that our situation is not that of the past. You should go read Leo Strauss's Persecution and the Art of Writing and Thoughts on Machiavelli, as well as Arthur Melzer's Philosophy Between the Lines. I can offer a few points.
1.The philosopher is a very rare type of person who is concerned with no more than the truth. If you produce something worth reading, they will search you out and read you.
2. As I mentioned earlier, there is always a way of thinking, or a set of values, underlying the policies that you see implemented around you. Look at the laws on family in the United States and compare them to those of Ancient Rome, and you will immediately see that each emerged from a fundamentally different view of man, the family, and its purpose.
3. Political philosophy is the attempt to gain universally true knowledge concerning political things. In the modern era, this is also simultaneously the attempt to have this universally true knowledge implemented in political life. In order to understand where we have been, where we are, and where we are going, you must read political philosophy. In order to produce any ultimately effective criticism of what you see around you, you must read political philosophy. As an example, there is absolutely no point in criticizing the desire to extend the suffrage to any group of people, including ever younger groups of people, without having obtained knowledge of the supposedly universally true knowledge concerning political life that underlies that policy. To put it another way, there is no way to make monarchy democratic. You must either reject the principle underlying monarchy in favor of that underlying democracy, or accept monarchy and all its consequents.
I hope this has been helpful.

>>18817174
>Political philosophy is the attempt to gain universally true knowledge concerning political things. In the modern era, this is also simultaneously the attempt to have this universally true knowledge implemented in political life
This makes no sense. Why would there be universally true political knowledge beyond "someone is in charge and it's not me"? Everything else is conditioned. Political philosophy is never about "truth," it is about politics, and politics involves ignorance in the distribution of information, which is needed to obtain and keep power in order to govern beneficially. Powerful people are very aware of the importance of signs and signification, that they must present as more than someone who merely eats and shits like everyone else. That the Romans and Americans have different values is all and well, but knowing that is no different than knowing any other historical data. It doesn't make political philosophy any more useful to someone who is not in a position of power. It could be an intellectual interest to be sure, but of all the things to pick, "how I'd run things if I were in charge" is as bad as playing video games.

>>18817210
You clearly have either neither read any of it, or have failed to understand it. Reread what I wrote, read the books I recommended, and maybe you will understand.

>>18815107
this is a friendly reminder to /lit/ that eternal life is the free gift of God. if you want to receive it and have the 100% assurance of going to heaven, watch this gospel video.

it's very easy to be saved from hell and get to heaven so don't miss out on it anons

heaven or hell, the choice is yours

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Dqw_fJeBD0&t=3s

>>18817227
Tell me more about the societies and organizations you govern to your benefit and that of your most illustrious house and I might take you seriously.

>>18817229
>click here to be personally immortal

>>18817246
I suggest that you try to understand the things that others say and write, and to see what the world would look like if they were right, before passing judgement, and especially before engaging in bluster.

>>18816844
Most people on the internet are retarded. It always amazes me how people will talk so confidently aboit things they've never done a lick of research on.
I don't even argue anymore. The more I've read and studied the more I've realized how limited my field of knowledge in. A midwit like me arguing with a halfwit on 4channel is a dumpsterfire of a thread

>>18817264
>you disagree with me because you didn't understand me
I disagree. There are areas of study one can feign expertise in or even master with a much greater return on time-investment than the impotent study of political philosophy

>>18815107
Socialists still have no argument to counter Venezuela so all they can do is turn it into a meme.

>>18816982
>ostentatiously illegal act to try to forestall his leaving office.
There are constitutional method that could have been undertaken. The electoral college wasn't supposed to be a mere formality

>>18815347
>Fist of the North Star is right wing
???

>>18816152
Could you give us a criticism of the book? or at the very least link to criticism of the book you think is good. Also be honest, have you read the book?
P.S.--Your race-baiting is irrelevant here, we are discussing ideas now shut the fuck up.