Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Need Authoritarianism reading suggestions

What are some good philosophers/books defending and laying out the groundwork for Authoritarianism? It seems like every philosophy school of thought I come across is liberal in nature. What philosophers really delve into talking about control and just/unjust authority. I figure more people into philosophy of law would know more aobut this sh*t than me.




PIato

I'm with OP, I'm sick of Western philosophers always prattling on about f**king rights and "omg everyone has a right to freedom" and all this liberal sh*t. What philosophers are fascism apologetics?

Peter Slotterdijk is kind of an a**hole...
But seriously OP, doesn't it kind of defeat the exercise of philosophy if you just read it to confirm your biases?

Hegel

Nietzsche, if you read it wrong.
Heidegger was actually a Nazi.

Leviathan
Locke
Kant

Peter Slotterdijk is kind of an a**hole...
But seriously OP, doesn't it kind of defeat the exercise of philosophy if you just read it to confirm your biases?

No, because liberals jack off to Foucault and Marx everyday, why can't I jerk off to someone who wants to throw dissenters in prison?

I'm with OP, I'm sick of Western philosophers always prattling on about f**king rights and "omg everyone has a right to freedom" and all this liberal sh*t. What philosophers are fascism apologetics?

I know. I've been forced to read about the French revolution lately. Their love for the patrie made them absolutely f**king bonkers.

Nietzsche, if you read it wrong.
Heidegger was actually a Nazi.

I don't think Heidigger believed in fascism 'as such'. He believed that only by anchoring yourself to your nation or a similarly large cause could you hope to influence history. I think that was the sole basis for his support.

The powerful do what they can, the weak do what they must.
You now know all that you need too about authoritarian philosophy.

Nigga best be trolling. Western philosophy is all "footnotes to Plato" and Plato's Republic, one of the most important works of ancient philosophy, is all about the authoritarianism. Specifically, a stratified society where everyone 'knows their place' and a council of self-declared 'wise men' run everything. It's more or less the same model as the USSR.
Also inb4 Machiavelli

Leviathan
Locke
Kant

>Leviathan
You mean Thomas Hobbes?

Notice a theme here OP? People who are smart and able to think for themselves support liberalism and freedom. Maybe that ought to clue you in to something...


>Leviathan
You mean Thomas Hobbes?

Yep, Hobbes was a staunch monarchist. He believed a tough and ruthless absolute monarch was essential for maintaining order in society. Bear in mind he wrote this in the Middle Ages.

Notice a theme here OP? People who are smart and able to think for themselves support liberalism and freedom. Maybe that ought to clue you in to something...

OP here
I disagree, people need to know how to follow rules and do what they;'re told


No, because liberals jack off to Foucault and Marx everyday, why can't I jerk off to someone who wants to throw dissenters in prison?

I think you're missing my point. You might want to start with some entry-level Platonic dialogues. Maybe study symbolic logic?


I think you're missing my point. You might want to start with some entry-level Platonic dialogues. Maybe study symbolic logic?

>entry-level Platonic dialogues
>He thinks Platonic dialogues are entry level!


OP here
I disagree, people need to know how to follow rules and do what they;'re told

So do you think that people should tell you what to do? If they didn't, would you be a worse person?
There's an interesting paper by Lacan called "Reading Kant with Sade" about how in a society of strict moral law or authority, people have no choice but to embrace the most depraved "Sadistic" elements of their personality. The more you try and tell people what to do, the more they rebel.

Leviathan
Locke
Kant

>Locke
Very no.


>entry-level Platonic dialogues
>He thinks Platonic dialogues are entry level!

I started reading them when I was 15, them sh*ts are simple dude...

Machiavelli's Prince would probably float your boat.
Also go to /lit/ you f**king ni**er.


So do you think that people should tell you what to do? If they didn't, would you be a worse person?
There's an interesting paper by Lacan called "Reading Kant with Sade" about how in a society of strict moral law or authority, people have no choice but to embrace the most depraved "Sadistic" elements of their personality. The more you try and tell people what to do, the more they rebel.

>implying Lacan


I started reading them when I was 15, them sh*ts are simple dude...

Some courses spend 6 months reading a single one of them. Try harder, bro.


Some courses spend 6 months reading a single one of them. Try harder, bro.

What a waste of time. They are the simplest pieces of philosophy ever written. Jesus.


>implying Lacan

Don't hate the playa.


OP here
I disagree, people need to know how to follow rules and do what they;'re told

Strict state control is not the only way to regulate people's behaviour.
You've obviously never read any philosophy or you'd know about something basic called Hobbes' social contract. People don't steal and murder because they realise that this is a very short-term survival strategy. If everyone did it you would never trust anyone, live in constant fear of death, and life would be "nasty, brutish and short."
It's far better for everyone if we all refrain from murdering and thieving of our own free will, and allow the state to punishm the minority who break this unspoken agreement.
Hobbes happened to believe an absolute monarchy was the best form of government because of the time he lived in. Democracy didn't exist. Since society and the modern concept of the rule of law have developed, this is no longer the case.

Leviathan
Locke
Kant

>Locke
Dear god no, did you even read the main post?
There was an authoritarian philosopher who was smacked down by Locke in his First Treatise, though:
>The False Principles and Foundation of Sir Robert Filmer, And His Followers, are Detected and Overthrown.

>name some weighty-sounding books I can cite to justify my current prejudices
OP is missing the point of philosophy entirely.
FACEPALM.jpg

Thomas Carlyle.
As recommended by the hands-down best authoritarian philosophy [and troll] blog on the planet, for you intellectually-aspirant rowboats, Unqualified Reservations of Mencius Moldbug [http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/].
Rules for Reactionaries:
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2008/07/olxiv-rules-for-reactionaries.html
How to occupy and govern a foreign country
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2008/09/how-to-occupy-and-govern-foreign.html
Why Carlyle Matters:
http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2009/07/why-carlyle-matters.html
arch-liberal anarchist here btw, I challenge you to test your wits against these.

No comments:

Post a Comment