Left Wing Literature

Why is there a huge disparity between the amounts of left and right wing literature?

It seems like leftists tend to produce alot of written material.

hoppe, murphy, (((friedman)))

you are like little babby

>tfw my dream in life is to become a right wing writer under a pseudonym

I don't quite like how my field has been overtaken and corrupted by leftist trash.

Education.

Leftist have higher verbal reasoning skills than the right.

Left talks
Right does

Joseph de Maistre, Louis de Bonald, Edmund Burke, Friedrich Hayek. Also, I hear Hitler wrote a book.

because the left only talks about a theoretically better world but the right acts

check em

>Hitler
>National Socialism

So you're saying that Hitler wasn't a socialist?

That's a pretty blatantly false claim.

So is the claim that there is a huge disparity in literature.

The left usually has so much contrived bullshit that they need to write tomes to justify it. The right is based more on tradition and instinct, so it comes about through common agreement.

Also, right wing people are out there making money (not you).

I would argue that it has to do with what it means to be on the left and on the right. When you look at, for instance, how Nietzsche was invoked by the right and those folks who flirted with fascism, and have subsequently been adopted by the alt-right today, you'll notice their emphasis on the notion that politics isn't about 'reason' in some grand enlightenment sense, or the type of thing one makes a 'programme' out of. The justification for wars and the pomp and circumstance of everything was made more aesthetic and -felt.- As if intuition was supposed to guide peoples and nations. As if, to understand fascism, you need not read a book, but simply know what it's like to fight in a trench, be a father, or have listened to Wagner.

On the other side, the Left is obsessed with 'deconstructing' or 'critical theory' or what have you, and I think that lends itself to publishing a lot more literature. Moreover, they are all about uncovering the 'hidden meaning' in the canon of Western literature, so you have endless volumes of Leftist literature which feels compelled to revisit once familiar narratives, whereas I feel the Right is not concerned with as great a breadth and depth of reinterpretation compared to the Left.

Not that the right doesn't have intellectuals who wrote a lot of shit, but when I think about what one might feel compelled to do once they've gone 'far right' or 'far left' are quite different. For a leftist, your heroes are largely intellectuals, there is a big established discourse which universities entertain, and so on. For the right, you read some Jünger, Spengler, D'Annunzio, or whatever, and you might be more prompted to want to fight and this that and the other thing, whereas going off and publishing in some journal seems stuffy and unsatisfying.

In general, the Left has a history of trying to make out a 'Doctrine' the dream of making a 'Science' out of their philosophy, whereas the Right had no such aspirations in general.

Most left are humanities people.

Humanities people love blabbering.

The classics were never left.

The left can provide reasons for their beliefs, so they do it.

The right cannot provide reasons for their beliefs, so they remain silent or just shitpost on Sup Forums, where reasons aren't necessary.

Thank you for taking the time to type out a well reasoned response.

I would agree with alot that you wrote but I would like to mention that the during the fires of the russian revoltion a huge volume of leftist literature was written. In particular the writings of anarchists that were betrayed by the communists is deliciously passionate and militant.

Yeah, I mean it's not a hard and fast rule. It was perhaps silly of me to think that the right has a monopoly, or even an edge, in the sense of being militant. Or that the leftist literature lacks it, or that being an intellectual and a militant is exclusive.

Maybe it would be better if I said that the left feels more compelled to translate its actions into proper "theory."

José Antonio Primo de Rivera has a good quote which I will attach that even I as a Leftist think makes a good critique and contribution:

"The class struggle had a just motive, and Socialism at the beginning was in the right. What has happened is that instead of pursuing its original path of seeking after social justice among men. Socialism has turned into a mere doctrine, and one of the chilliest frigidity, and it has no concern, great or small, for the liberation of working men. Karl Marx was a German Jew who sat in his study and watched, with horrible impassivity, the most dramatic happenings of his age. He was a German Jew who, with the British factories in Manchester before his eyes, and in the middle of formulating inexorable laws about the accumulation of capital, in the middle of formulating inexorable laws about production and about the interests of employers and workmen, was all the time writing letters to his friend Friedrich Engels, telling him the workers were a mob and a rabble, which need not be bothered with except in so far as they might serve to test out his doctrines."

Good post, there is also a clear lack of wisdom in the left, the right tends to have an affinity for the organic and essential, while the left just loves to add information and constructs after constructs.

Yeah, that's another interesting point. When it comes to wisdom, mysticism, and so on, I haven't seen that on the left except for some of the Frankfurt School like Benjamin who was into Talmudic stuff.

Otherwise the emphasis on sort of 'unspeakable truths' and inexpressible essential vital 'realities' is something the Right is more in on. Not that the left doesn't agree about, say, the failings of language, they just go on about it at great length, especially because they have the institutions, universities, to finance and publish their papers, and the environment encourages it.

I doubt the ease with which the right could shoot for the same on anywhere near the same scale. not to mention just the numbers difference among academics.

Are there any surveys on political leanings for particular departments in different nations over time? Like can we put numbers to this? Im willing to wager, in academic departments the Right has just been btfo by the left over the years.

I wonder what literary presence and publishing volume was between left and right in the 20s and 30s in Europe. Before the right was by and large banished in many spheres.

I would peg the spanish civil war as the last modern conflict that produced a large volume of quality literature for both left and right.

Because Jews are smarter and they're mostly to the left.