Philosophy of Right

[Anonymous No.13227967]

What does it mean to be right wing as opposed to be left wing? Is there something interesting and original coming from the right?

[Anonymous No.13227984]

>>13227967
1. To be reactionary.
2. Interesting - yes. Original - not really.

[Anonymous No.13228016]

>>13227967
>Reject decadence
>Reject degeneracy
>Promote Tradition
Basically to be right-wing is to follow the path of the Übermensch

[Anonymous No.13228034]

right wing: believes the ideal society exists in the past
left wing: believes the ideal society exists in the future

dont even begin to debate this. im a fucking galaxybrain

[Anonymous No.13228054]

>>13227984
Portraying right wing philosophy as reactionary is a typical leftist projection. Think about it. Rightism is an attempt to conserve the past so, it is simply maintaining the absolute and original truth. Whereas, leftism attempts to react to the right wing philosophy.

[Anonymous No.13228068]

>>13228034
Is Hegel a time traveler?

[Anonymous No.13228088]

You know that that book wasn't intended as a "philosophy for the right wing," right OP?

[Anonymous No.13228093]

>>13228016
>Ubermernsch
>Promote Tradition
are you on crack or are you just retarded

[Anonymous No.13228108]

>>13228054
If you want a different perspective, think about "leftism" as the ideological justification of rapidly changing economical and technological conditions. I.e. "leftism" is by definition always on the right side of history.

[Anonymous No.13228110]

>>13228088
Enlighten us then

[Anonymous No.13228115]

>>13228016

t. Seething redneck retard

[Anonymous No.13228116]

>>13228093
Tradition promotes a higher consciousness, leading one closer to the Übermensch. Am I getting something wrong?

[Anonymous No.13228117]

>>13228068
he must be. how else could you justify teleological history?

[Anonymous No.13228133]

>>13228108
What do you mean by the right side of history? An inevitable telos?

[Anonymous No.13228137]

>>13228016
t. degenerate

[Anonymous No.13228151]

>>13228088
this
10/10 bait OP, made me reply

[Anonymous No.13228157]

>>13228133
I just unironically mean that (socio-economic) reality has liberal bias.

[Anonymous No.13228164]

>>13228157
No, liberalism is an irrational rejection of ecological power relations. We should be getting eaten by bears not turning each others transsexuals.

[Anonymous No.13228183]

I think the difference between the is their attitude towards the value of human life. The left sees life as having the utmost value and believes its protection should be the ultimate concern of society. The right sees things outside of human life (the state, property, god, etc.) itself as being of a greater value than the human life itself.

I tend to agree with the latter. State-oriented civilization is more than worth its human cost.

[Anonymous No.13228200]

>>13228183
How do you explain leftism's fetishistic love for killing unborn people?

[Anonymous No.13228202]

>>13228054
Imagine actually believing history as far right wingers interpret it isn't actually an elaborate web of fictions meant to glorify the in group.

[Anonymous No.13228212]

>>13228016
Mussolini was a fat dumbass and Hitler was a high functioning autistic methhead.

[Anonymous No.13228219]

>>13228202
What you're describing is a triple inversions of reactions. The absolute is lost yet it is tangentially known. Yes, an ingroup is preferred but it is teleogically justified.

[Anonymous No.13228298]

>>1322796mu
While left wing is "change is always better", right wing is "no change is sometimes better". The right wing is the left wing critic, ironically left wing is much about critical theory, that's really just about """deconstructing""" the West. Ancaps can be viewed as the latest thing right wing, surpassing Utopic left wing anarchy.
>>13227984
You really should reevaluate your views.

[Anonymous No.13228370]

>>13227967
based retard

[Anonymous No.13228528]

>>13228116
The creation of new values. A good chunk of Zarathustra is him just shitting on old values. Yes, you are getting something wrong. Have you actually read Zarathustra?

[Anonymous No.13229108]

>>13227967
that's not what he meant by "right" in the title

[Anonymous No.13229137]

>>13227967
>Is there something interesting and original coming from the right?
The Revolutionary Conservatives were based.
Also my diary desu

[Anonymous No.13229142]

>>13228298
holy fuck who still believes this fucking drivel unironically? how stupid or bored are you?

[Anonymous No.13229144]

The traditional split stemming from the French Revolution is that the right believe that people are fundamentally inequal and the left believe people are fundamentally equal.

[Anonymous No.13229170]

>>13228016
>Promote Tradition
kek, facism is just another product of the 'enlightenment'.

[Anonymous No.13229189]

>>13228183
>the left values human life more then the right
How does that explain abortion then?

[Anonymous No.13229280]

Right and left aren't equal intellectual traditions. They were merely roughly equally powerful in political power at key times.

The left is a tradition of actual intellectualism and thinkers. Right is instinctual normie thought. Right is fundamentally emotional and therefore has never had and will never have deep philosophy. Right is the instinctual drive to believe whatever society you were born into is right, just, the one true way. It is the drive for safety and order over novelty or big dreams. It is acceptance of suffering and imperfection to make peace with what is. It is obeisance to power.

Left wing thought is whatever under the sun isn't covered by right wing normie thought.

[Anonymous No.13229296]

>>13228054
>conserve the past
this is the working definition of reactionary, anon. the left tries to change things, the right tries to keep them the same. the side that tries to keep the status quo is the reactionary side.

[Anonymous No.13229309]

>>13228108
Thank you leftists for nuclear weapons, mass species extinction, climate change, and the new panopticon.

[Anonymous No.13229316]

>>13227967
>What does it mean to be right wing as opposed to be left wing?
These are floating signifiers. Their meanings are themselves political. See: this thread. As such they are useless for communication unless you are speaking with some one who already agrees with you.

[Anonymous No.13229328]

>>13229296
That's a conservative. A reactionary wants to wind shit back all the way to monarchy or something, not maintain the status quo.

[Anonymous No.13229345]

>>13228164
t. Kaczynski

[Anonymous No.13229346]

>>13229328
>imply the harbingers of the 'enlightenment' and their descendents aren't the original reactionaries

[Anonymous No.13229349]

>>13229346
Some of them were reactionary(Hume for example) others were more revolutionary.

[Anonymous No.13229350]

>>13229328
status quo ante bellum

[Anonymous No.13229359]

>>13228183
Stop posting shit you came up with in 5 seconds

[Anonymous No.13229371]

>>13229346
>applying a single label to a broad group of people and expecting it to fit
what the fuck were you trying to achieve

[Anonymous No.13229393]

>>13228034
As a right-winger, don't necessarily agree. There is no 'ideal society'. Mankind is hopelessly flawed and could never create said society.

[Anonymous No.13229394]

>>13227967

right wing politics are typically hierarchy-driven and left wing politics are typically driven by being against hierarchy. that's as simple as it gets.

[Anonymous No.13229407]

>>13229394
Right wing politics, ideally, should be liberty driven - left wing politics are tyranny driven.

[Anonymous No.13229415]

there was a particular time in french parliament when left and right were convenient labels so now we are going to try to pigeonhole every political belief across all time and space into these two categories so we can talk about our beliefs like sports poopoo peepeee mommy poopoo peepee mommy mommy!

[Anonymous No.13229419]

>>13229407
you have to look beyond what concepts the language is couched in. right wing politicians sometimes hold left wing ideas and left wing politicians sometimes hold right wing ideas, but they frame it in a way as to appear ideologically consistent.

[Anonymous No.13229422]

>>13229407
the distinction between left and right comes from the French revolution where the liberal revolutionaries sat on the left side of the gym and the the royalist monarchists sat on the right

[Foundation Questioner !Jk7mgrgQRo No.13229424]

Hegel is a fool, like all other enlightenment 'philosophers' he takes for granted that courts are good

[Anonymous No.13229425]

I hate this left right shit. I am an anarchist but every anarchist I know is a cringey materialist nihilist faggot because they have to swallow the whole lefty pill.

[Anonymous No.13229429]

>>13229422
Neat!

[Anonymous No.13229435]

>>13229407
Not even that anon but could you try not being disingenuous for a bit? Or are you that faggot Ben Shapiro?

[Anonymous No.13229445]

>>13229280
This is your brain on liberalism

[Anonymous No.13229447]

>>13229359
It’s my only hobby, and I don’t have the willpower to change.

[Anonymous No.13229463]

>>13229280
Meanwhile bring up race differences and the left turn into hysterical children calling for the entire subject to be banned and all research halted.

Truly the side of reason and intellect

[Anonymous No.13229646]

>>13228034
What about all those nostalgic leftists like Foucault, Debord, Fisher?

[Anonymous No.13229676]

>>13229646
I can't speak to Foucault but Debord and Fisher both thought the ideal society was in the future. Debord was all about the creation of new form of society which revolve around different conceptions of time, and Fisher was depressed that shit wasn't changing fast enough, he was basically a futurist.

[Anonymous No.13229695]

>>13229676
Sure but they talked about some things we did right in the past and how we were doing things wrong in the present. The right wing is basically the same, do they want to return to the past even though technically they want to do it in the future?

[Anonymous No.13229709]

>>13229695
In the broadest sense, the right thinks social change is a negative, the left think it's a positive. Think about it anon, just because Marx wrote in the past doesn't mean it's right wing to be a Marxist.

[Anonymous No.13229728]

>>13229309
communists are against all of those things. you should be thanking capitalist imperialism

[Anonymous No.13229739]

>muh left and right
It doesn't matter either way. Nothing will ever change, and you are trapped in a void with no escape. This world won't get any better, it will only get worse. This world is Kali Yuga, but without a Kalki to save it. You are living in hell and will die. That is it.

[Anonymous No.13229783]

>>13229445
killing nazis and ousting them from positions of power is objectively good, you dumbass. now if only it was as acceptable to stigmatize capitalist pig dogs but their time is coming to be sure

[Anonymous No.13229802]

>>13229783
youre a faggot and your revolution wont happen, youll be killed by nonwhites or white fascists

[Anonymous No.13229859]

>>13229783
>being a footsoldier for neoliberal overlords is an objectively good thing
Lmao okay

[Anonymous No.13229870]

>>13229783

not a nazi but youre a fag

[Anonymous No.13230098]

>>13227967
The right values social duty before individual freedom.

The left (circa liberalism) values individual freedom before social duty.

The left/right dichotomy doesn’t touch on economics very much, but one might observe that the left is more materially-focused, hence why the left uses economic reasoning so much (regardless of whether they are Communist or Capitalist).

We live in an era where the values of left reign supreme and it is very much capitalistic with little regard for social duty.

[Anonymous No.13230118]

>>13228116
you have no understanding of Nietzsche

>>13228528
he has not read Zarathustra, or anything else by Nietzsche.

[Anonymous No.13230237]

https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/06/olxi-truth-about-left-and-right/
Left is antinomial and right is pronomial, that's basically it

[Anonymous No.13230264]

>>13228183

>left sees life as having the utmost value

You have to be joking.

[Anonymous No.13230526]

>>13228016
>wrong.

[Anonymous No.13230570]

>>13229445
Ironically I'm pretty alt-right these days. But I stand by everything said.

The only real hope for western humanity to progress at this point is for free thinkers to realize modern "progressive" liberalism is a failure and in some ways the new mindless status quo traditionalism. I'm personally not holding my breath.

[Anonymous No.13230582]

>>13229393
This is what actually being a right winger means, and this is why fascists are arguably left wing.

right wing = mankind is flawed, utopias are impossible, we should take responsibility for ourselves and strife to be good
left wing = mankind a victim of circumstance, if man is born in ideal conditions, man is good; we should create these ideal conditions to achieve utopia

[Anonymous No.13230886]

>>13228116
t. baiter

[Anonymous No.13230897]

>>13228016
>tradition
>ubermensch

anon please tell me you are kidding

[Anonymous No.13231105]

My basic economic associations are
Right:
>hierarchical
>social darwinist (at least lightly)
>economically individualist
>employer focused
>supply sider
Left:
>anti-hierarchical
>democratic
>economically collectivist
>worker focused
>demand sider

I consider even libertarian type right wingers to be hierarchical in mindset. From what I can tell, to speak very loosely, is their only problem with feudalism is that the kings only inherited the throne, but didn't "prove their worth" in the market. For them it doesn't matter if the top 1% has more wealth than the bottom 92%, because they think those wealthy people are the only things holding everything together. Competence should determine everything and the market is the best way to determine competence. Or so their idea goes.
Fascists are more direct. They believe hierarchy should be state instituted and state enforced, and that the best way for production to be organized is for those of a pre-determined better stock lead those of a lesser.

The state shouldn't be the determining factor of an ideology is right or left either. Libertarian socialists for example believe we should collectively organize production without a state.

[Anonymous No.13231563]

>>13231105
The problem with feudalism (from a libertarian perspective) is that the king collect taxes from the people who truly own the land by homesteading.

also, from the libertarian perspective:
>natural hierarchies occur and they are fine as long as there is freedom of association
>social engineering is unethical
>the employee and the employer doesn't have antagonical interests
>supply and demand (and other economic laws) shouldn't suffer intervention