ITT: your favorite reactionaries

ITT: your favorite reactionaries

It's impossible to read one of his novels without cringing at yourself and your past actions. I've yet to read anyone who cuts deeper into the human psyche than this man.

Attached: Vasily_Perov_-_Портрет_Ф.М.Достоевского_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg (3200x4000, 3.7M)

Other urls found in this thread:–49#The_Palatinate

read Jim "The Rock" Davis

Attached: a book can really grab you.jpg (632x603 53.06 KB, 67.93K)

I like Carl Schmitt.

They are all worse.

Reading Crime and Punishment in high school was one of the things that poisoned me on liberal/traditional ideology the most

Attached: 1422495336111.jpg (854x859, 143.34K)

Attached: D.João I.jpg (723x824 373.63 KB, 197.63K)

Attached: Schopenhauer.jpg (300x358, 14.19K)


Was really mindfucked by these people.

Attached: 099e7aeaa014ea47453d199ca3348833c2dceb0f87a6bdc0c37d7ec53138657f.jpg (800x800 95.4 KB, 528.6K)

Post the one with gucci shapiro pls

Do pre-Marxist philosophers count as reactionaries? Most of them were ahead of their time. I have a hard time seeing Thomas Aquinas as a "reactionary".

Richard Wagner was a massive piece of shit, but I'll be damned if Tristan und Isolde was not magnificent and utterly ingenious.

Attached: richard-wagner-9521202-1-402.jpg (1200x1200, 125.86K)

This really made me thunk about life.

Attached: 4849c5b381bc6c9fb373366bf709deb259bbd3b5f7b2d5e6ae53931861732301.jpg (720x739, 74.73K)

Ah American "conservatism" , because trying to mix up tories with liberalism would work just fine .

It depends. Plato was definitely a reactionary, even by the standards of ancient Greece but Aristotle wasn't.

Special mentions: Sorel, Evola (Too much of an idealist though) & the madman that wrote Might is Right

Attached: oswald_Spengler.jpg (200x200 11.44 KB, 15.97K)

Also Heidegger

Land for me, he's fun to read, although I still haven't tried reading him while drunk or on drugs.

good taste user

Heinlein I guess.

When did this ironic garfield fandom start? I don't have a problem with it but it's just too weird.

It doesn't count if you're a nazi


Heinlein's pretty cool.

Julius Evola 100%
holy shit fucking spooked piece of shit, full of ideology bullcrap.

Attached: jewstirners.png (500x437 136.63 KB, 193.09K)

Jünger isn't a reactionary. Read all his works moron. smh

He like most people in Zig Forums rn changed a lot through the years. He matured, he was always a leftist but the reactionary ideology like nationalism, he got rid off later on in his life. Never liked the 3rd Reich either.

I know all of this because he is my favorite author, still to this day.

Attached: junger.png (600x600 28.53 KB, 18.68K)

Attached: 111fc82beab614b86934c2087b739ae3a778f53cb433952130cd9756d6803a2b.png (476x359, 361.75K)


Attached: 27e2139d0e3fc663b280bb41ae0fc9bfc43fe05e5561ce3a755b617e65310583.png (750x608, 266.14K)

I have too many

Attached: Hassan_Nasrallah_flag.jpg (800x682 45.61 KB, 38.59K)

Attached: J Barg 6.PNG (820x420 83.87 KB, 173.74K)

No, I’m going to have children, and those who oppose it can go fuck themselves.

We need more TPUSA memes.


Evola was right about some stuff though. Also him walking around during a bombing raid “pondering the meaning of life” gives him Chad points in my book.

Dugin isn’t a reactionary. He’s just a Marxist-Leninist who understands that Marxist-Leninism is incompatible with Marxism, and fully compatible with nationalism.


Attached: 4thGenerationWar.png (200x320, 113.88K)

I respect your like of all these people except Land, Evola, and the madman that wrote Might is Right.

Unfortunately, his idea of 4th generation warfare is the only good thing to come form Lind.

It’s a good concept because we can use it in class warfare. The goal of organizations should partially be to destroy capitalist political culture spooks that haunt so many prols.

Does it count?

Attached: Theodore_Kaczynski.jpg (555x414, 138.5K)

Jünger wasn't a reactionary. I like the aphorisms of Nicolas Gomez Davila, because he's actually self-aware and realizes he's fighting for a lost cause and pisses on neoreactionary movements.

Attached: gkc.jpg (646x724, 133.62K)

Serioulsy? He's one of the guys responsible for the cultural marxism conspiracy.

Bill Hicks Alex Jones

Attached: commissar Jones.webm (458x476, 4.68M)

Who edits these things? It's so well done

Wagner wasn't really a reactionary.

He supported social-democracy mixed with German nationalism, both of which were firmly leftist by 19th century standards. Anti-semitism was also not only present but actually common in the 19th century Left.

Third-Positionism is not reactionary.

For favorite reactionaries, I don't really have any. I guess I like Charles the I and II's goatee as well as the all-around cavalier style. I think the Tyrolean rebellion was pretty good, and I do think the decentralized, direct-democratic (in the forest cantons) ancien regime in Switzerland was superior to the attempts by the bourgeois liberals to centralize the country into a liberal democracy. So in that sense, I would support some sort of reactionaryism in Switzerland. To restore the landsgemeinde and a more confederal government. I also found the abolition of guilds in the French Revolution to be abhorrent.

This is all despite being a full-on supporter of guillotines and radical republicanism.

Then again, wouldn't that extend to say restoring the economic power of labor unions in America? What is the difference between a revolution and a restoration then? Wouldn't the entire old Left be "reactionary" in the sense that they want a return back to the traditional worker's movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries?

Regardless, I have to say that despite liking the republicanism and symbolism of the French Revolution, I end up sympathizing and seeing more true republicanism in the Tyrolean and Swiss peasants who resisted the rule of a bourgeois republic.

Attached: Franz_von_Defregger_Heimkehrender_Tiroler_Landsturm.jpg (236x342 16.74 KB, 19.17K)

I'm surprised no one's mentioned Nietzsche yet since he at least held some reactionary positions. Other than him, I've liked Nick Land and Carl Schmitt.

After the mid-century revolutions, nationalism started becoming a conservative position. Certainly it was still associated to some extent with popular democratic, anti-monarchic movements (it hadn't yet exhausted its progressive content in the West), but nationalism was also associated with the German unification effort by Bismarck's Prussia.

It was a popular liberal position, when liberalism could still be regarded as historically somewhat progressive, but I wouldn't call it "leftist" per se.

Any source for this? Typically, anti-Semitism marked turns to the right for thinkers on the left during the time you're talking about (for example, the case of Bruno Bauer).

This (I don't have any clue about what his political positions were though)
Also Hermann Hesse, Steppenwolf has to be one of the best novels I ever read

Also Camus (if he counts as "reactionary" for being anticommunist) and Nietzsche are alright. And i guess we can all agree on dostoyevsky

god I hate those fags. the first a gloryfied tzar cock sucker, who said that the peasants were little shits for not just accepting jeebus and quietly take tzar cock up their ass. His whole "deep human psychology" meme is wholly based on the emotional blackmail of christianity (if you hate seomeone for whatever motive you hate FREEDUMBZ). I will never understand his fame.

On a serious note. Why so many "classic" writers are reactionary? We all know the leftist art meme. But If I look at what are cnsidered absolutes of western classics there are quite a lot of right wingers. Dostoevskij, Balzac, Mann, Hesse, Kipling, pirandello, all considered big "classic" writers. Am I wrong in thinking they are somewhat overrepresented?

On Pain and The Worker: Domination and Form. Eumeswil (althrough this one is fictional he tells his views on Stirner here which are amazing), are all great books of him.

Miguel Serrano: Not my "favorite", but this man poisened me with cringeworthy views that made me feel like I had a holy duty to fulfill.

Attached: serrano-f.jpg (1024x645, 101.24K)

I mean were "left wingers" even really a thing before quite far in the 19th or even the 20th century?

Attached: 4f824bfd53630d01ad095cb67f91437763dbadb99515e3ba8a0c7bf93edc1dfd.jpg (435x435, 114.8K)

His theory of Fourth Generation War is perfect though. It’s so good that it gives him a pass on his Cultural Marxism nonsense.

In 1948 and 1849 German Peasants and Prols lead a guerrilla movement to establish a Communist Pan-German National Republic. Sounds pretty leftist to me. And a tragedy they failed.–49#The_Palatinate

You've never read dosto. He was one of the greatest critic of liberalism of the 19th century, only second to Marx. That's not even talking about how good of a writer he was and how good his characterizations are.

Why did ya pick a bunch of losers?

Good taste. Easily the most intellectual Nazi.

Attached: stigler.jpg (274x363 54.93 KB, 11.79K)

He is the closest real human being to Big Boss.

Attached: big_boss__mgs_v__by_teuf_el-d8zpogf.jpg (500x649, 58.95K)

I have read the grand inquisitor and notes from the underground; my criticism stems mainly from the reading of the former. I didn't say he was a libera,l but it was too easy being a critic of liberalism by being a supporter of the fucking tzar. The jeebus phreebumb is something I read in the inquisitor and a classic theme of christianity, so when I read it I never even for a second thought he was supporting "liberal" freedom, istead I understood it as the classic reactionary christian point of "the freedom of choosing love": the part where the inquisitor accuses jesus for not accepting to turn stones ito bread is the key imho, it shows Dosto condemning material needs (which the great inquisitor supports) over spiritual need of love. I have no problem in admitting I'm a brainlet and have read only these two books and will be glad if you or someone points out if I'm wrong, honestly I know that if he is so admired I probably am wrong about him but cannot help feeling this way from what I read from him.

Old Dugin maybe, modern Dugin is pretty much a pro Putin shill. But not really, his understanding of M-L is on a textbook level, he has always been clear that his influences are the German conservative revolutionaries, Heidegger and the traditionalists (Evola and Guenon). That his brand of traditionalist anti-americanism is 100% compatible with Marxist-Leninist anti-americanism is a coincidence.

I'm old enough to remember the Garfield show from the 90's. Good stuff.

Attached: Chaos-10202007.png (220x210, 16.5K)

Every time a tankies unironically uses the phrase the Great Satan to refer to murrica Dugin becomes stronger

Attached: 29595114_566807980384804_2579034260001289913_n.jpg (500x526, 48.83K)

I know. That's why I said:

Poor taste

No one likes modern Dugin. Everyone who praises him is referring to Old Dugin.

He was a liberal individualist, for what I can get of his novels, although I remember reading he was enthusiastic about the Spartacist uprising.

Could anyone recommended any actual leftwing/Marxist 'old' Dugin books. I've read through a lot of 'Foundations of Geopolitics' and I remember not enjoying it at all.

You can comb through his old website, is not much but here you go:

I do like hesse though