Don't link me any nazi bullshit. I don't care for losers.
What should I read Sup Forums?
Asher Thompson
Other urls found in this thread:
m.youtube.com
lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com
teoriaevolutiva.files.wordpress.com
msdl.cs.mcgill.ca
gutenberg.org
archive.4plebs.org
twitter.com
Noah Hughes
Jackson Turner
Concept of the political. Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Paradise Lost. Flowers for Algernon if you want something lighter.
Mason Rogers
Hudson Cruz
Dune is a good series. You can start with the Butlerian Jihad. Just skip all the son's books after you hit the original Dune until you finish the original Dune saga, then pick up the final 2 that the son wrote. The ones he wrote in between the originals suck.
Noah Gray
Christopher Jenkins
Siddhartha, by Hermann Hesse
Nolan King
This is a good book, but I'd recommend studying war from the very ground up, start with the ancient classics.
Start with Plato, and then Aristotle. Studying philosophy chronologically is one of the best things you can possibly do, if you want to understand this civilization and its historical thought process. Trust me.
Justin Wood
>Evola in traditionalism
>I’ve heard the republic by Plato was pretty good
>The Prince is a must if you haven’t read it yet
>the chad “for my legionaries” is a good read
You’d probably be interested in all books pic related except for mein kampf
Lincoln Flores
Any non-hedonist greek philosophy.
For My Legionaries if you haven't already.
Eli King
>this.
Start from the beginning
There’s a good podcast called “the history of Rome” on Spotify that starts from the very beginning and is very good
Daniel Wilson
I would highly suggest you read the Bell Curve. I am linking it here because it is difficult to find a print edition that is not highly edited. This is a good book to read to introduce you to some more radical concepts you see tossed around on this site.
lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com
If that leaves you hungry, try out Charles Darwin's Descent of Man for a little more on the differentiation of homo sapiens.
If you want fiction, it's hard to go wrong with Count of Monte Cristo
msdl.cs.mcgill.ca
Ivanhoe is another classic that has held up quite well over time
gutenberg.org
And of course, read the bible. Join a bible study group to make it a little easier, but you might be surprised at the peace and wisdom you find in there.
Connor Baker
Also this
Leo Sanchez
Fascism is just a shitty imitation of monarchy, and those that call themselves traditionalists like Evola are anti-tradition. Absolute monarchy and an aristocratic society are as traditional as you can possibly get, none of these nationalistic and populistic "people's" movements are in any way, shape, or form traditional. Fascism is a mere revision of actual European tradition.
Benjamin Parker
The Social Contract by Rousseau
Leviathan by Hobbes
Dominic Cruz
>don’t link me to any nazi bullshit
If your not open to something then you’re clearly going against the purpose of knowledge. I read Karl Marx and I hate commies
Gabriel Nelson
I’m on the last four episodes, my dude. Commodus just became emperor. Good choice.
Wyatt Wilson
the Holy Bible
Elijah Nguyen
I mean, Mein Kampf was so shitty that even Hitler disavowed it after he became chancellor. There are some works of national socialists worth studying, but most of them are just full of circle jerking about how great the Third Reich is. Speer actually wrote a very good book on Nazi Germany, I would recommend it.
John Nelson
He disavowed it by using the power of the state to print it en-masse and issue it to every German soldier? Funny way of disavowing something.
Justin Bell
Hitler began to distance himself from the book after becoming chancellor of Germany in 1933. He dismissed it as "fantasies behind bars" that were little more than a series of articles for the Völkischer Beobachter, and later told Hans Frank that "If I had had any idea in 1924 that I would have become Reich chancellor, I never would have written the book."
Here ya go.
Alexander Cook
I mean I do agree with the circle jerk part. But I’m just pointing out that it is counter productive to only want to learn a specific field of politics
Jose Evans
Elaborate
Adam Ramirez
I commute ~2 hours a day. I need audio book suggestions! Help an user out.
Camden Rivera
>losers.
>flag
Julian Young
Death of the West - Pat Buchanan
Jacob Brown
Fascism tries to imitate monarchy, since 'mon' means one and 'archy' means rule, meaning the rule of one. One King, and monarchies have almost always had hereditary succession, this is one if the many aspects I which fascism fails, that it is not hereditary. It fails to imitate the most long-lasting and arguably best form of government, imitation being falsehood as we can both agree, I'm sure. The second aspect in which it fails to imitate monarchy lies in the dictator's right to rule. He derives it from the people, as his is a populist movement, the King on the other hand derives his power directly from God, and therefore he is the true monarch, as he rules as one in communion with God. The third aspect which I believe fascism fails in is the lack of support from the upper class, aka the aristocracy in most monarchies. Fascism relies on the 'people' to uphold it, that is the common folk, and they aren't exactly well known for being wealthy, intelligent, or much use to the state except for merely economic concerns. To sum up, I believe these are the three main aspects in which fascism fails - an unstable process of succession, lack of divine right to rule and a lack of support from the wealthy and intelligent aristocracy, since the dictator derives his power from the lower and middle classes for the most part.
Bentley Anderson
But why would you want rule to be hereditary? What if a spoiled brat idiot of a son makes it as king? Also would this system not just be a circle jerk for Aristocrats
? What’s in it for the people? How do they win?
Samuel Martinez
Intelligence and behavior is largely genetic, and if the King himself is intelligent and reproduces with an also intelligent queen, his child will likely also be nearly if not more intelligent than himself. The fact that monarchies have the longest lifespan out of any other form of government on the planet proves this to be the case. Aristocracy was defined by Aristotle as the government of the best, because there has never been an aristocracy that lacked in intelligence or wealth. I would also argue that, despite becoming more decadent in some countries over time, the aristocrats were considered the most noble and virtuous members of society by much of the common folk as well as the intellectuals of those times. Find me any pre-enlightenment philosopher that spoke ill of the aristocracy, protip, you can't. Therefore, the aristocrats should be given their dues for being the highest specimen in society.
Now, what's in it for the people, you ask? I ask, what isn't? Are the violent blood festivals known as revolutions that we put on golden pedestals really that good for any of the common people? Did the French revolutionaries make any significant steps in improving the lives of their people? Absolutely not. How about the Bolsheviks? Millions of their own people, Russians, Ukrainians and many others slaughters by the millions. How much blood had to be spilled to wipe out the so-called 'tyrannical' monarchies? Much more than even the most cruel of monarchs could've ever hoped to spill. Before you criticize a system, think of its alternatives, for they are in no way better than the monarchies. And that is what is in it for the common people - no genocides, no government-organized famines, no police states like Robespierre's France. Safety, stability, tradition and order. There is no monarchy that lacked these things until it's very end.
Joshua Baker
many others slaughtered*
Chase Sanders
>I don't care for losers.
Sorry.
Jaxson Allen
you can blame the whole of WWI on the monarchies and aristocrats. And we all know how that turned out. Also if you breed in a closed circle to much you get defects its not a stable system.
Ryder Martinez
Sounds pretty good. The only issue I have is the power from god aspect. Isnt it better to separate church and state? What if we get the whole “I’m going to make my church to do whatever I want senario again? While I do believe in an aristocratic republic post reactionary. I believe a mixture of natsoc and facism is the perfect reactionary government.
Dominic Rogers
Mein Kamph is actually really good and isn't technically nazi bs since it was written before national socialism existed..... lel
1/many
Nathaniel Hall
2/many
Carson Allen
3/many
Carter Perez
4/many
Michael Ortiz
5/many
Jack Gutierrez
6/many
Landon Garcia
7/turning this into a redpill/infordump now im out of books to link
Camden Ward
The war would've happened either way. The Entente wanted it, and the Central Powers had to defend their interests when a terrorist with connections to the Serbian government assassinated Franz Ferdinand. I don't see how you can put the blame on them, when they were provoked like they were.
Well if you have a monarch who doesn't derive his power from God, then you may as well not have a monarch. It is absolutely needed to maintain a true monarchy. The church itself does not need to be a major part of the government, but it should endorse the monarch. And yes, we may get that scenario once again, but whatever comes from it will surely end up being better than the systems we have today.
Again, the best form of government is hereditary monarchy. It has proven to be the most long-lasting one. Fascism and national socialism don't come anywhere near in comparison.
Matthew Campbell
The ultimate red-pill
Elijah Phillips
[ARCHIVE OF Knowledge Bomb THREADS(take the time to read all OP's)]:
Wyatt Foster
Lincoln Lopez
Kayden Miller
Luis Brown
>o shit waddup self check
Isaiah Thomas
>KEK IM LISTENING, WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT TO ME TO DO?!?!?!??!
Brody Baker
Off by six
Nathaniel Williams
>I don't care for losers.
Your capital isn't even British anymore.
Cooper Jackson
>i work 3 jobs btw
Brody Davis
and this is what i do for fun
Tyler Foster
Read the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant
Juan Ward
i rationalize this as not being sad AF by thinking im helping
Adam Kelly
read: john dies at the end. great book. enjoy
William Hughes
Andrew Diaz
mark rippletoes starting strength, or lawofone.info
Charles Ross
Jeremiah Ramirez
Thucydides
John Hernandez
Culture of Critique is the book everyone is talking about right now