[Serious] Any high-quality right-wing media, books, explainers?
I know Lemmy isn't normally the best place to search for this, but are there any high-quality right-wing explainers, or modern books, or media outlets?
I myself am ultra-left (quite literally communist, to the dictionary sense of the word), but I'd like to quit the bubble that inevitably forms around and look at good arguments of the opposing side, if there are any.
Is there anything in there beyond temporarily embarrassed millionaires and fears that trans people will destroy humanity? Is there rational analysis, something closer to academic research, behind modern ideas of laissez-faire capitalism and/or political conservatism?
I've tried outlets like PragerU, but they are so basic they seem to target a very uncritical audience.
I'd like to see the world in the eyes of an enlightened right-winger, and see where they possibly fail (or if suddenly they have valid arguments).
Frankly, anything explicitly marketed to American conservatives these days is mostly ragebait for stupid people and I doubt you'll find any of it the least bit convincing. As other have mentioned, Thomas Sowell is a great place to start if you want something serious but modern and clearly written. Milton Friedman's Free to Choose or Capitalism and Freedom are both widely recommended classics. If you managed to read Marx without dying of boredom you should also be able to get through Ludwig von Mises' Human Action or Socialism.
Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose or Capitalism and Freedom are both widely recommended classics.
Mr. Pencil Man, the guy who was convinced a command economy couldn't churn out writing implements because they had too many parts.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there’d be a shortage of sand.
Is one of my favorite Friedmanisms. My guy simply could not conceive of a central authority doing anything right (unless that thing was standing up military juntas in formerly democratic Latin American and Middle Eastern states).
If you managed to read Marx without dying of boredom you should also be able to get through Ludwig von Mises’ Human Action or Socialism.
Applying our theory to parents and children, this means that a parent does not have the right to aggress against his children, but also that the parent should not have a legal obligation to feed, clothe, or educate his children, since such obligations would entail positive acts coerced upon the parent and depriving the parent of his rights. The parent therefore may not murder or mutilate his child, and the law properly outlaws a parent from doing so. But the parent should have the legal right not to feed the child, i.e., to allow it to die.
Fair enough, don't start with that article! Pinning his guy's mistakes on the other guy is not a great look. I should have specified that his books on economics are where someone should look first, not his tabloid opinion columns. Friedman's point about pencils was not that a command economy would be unable to produce them but rather that the free market produces them spontaneously, at low cost and in great quantity, of good quality and variety, with everyone along the way acting voluntarily and better off for having participated in the process. I don't think an offhand comment about sand is really the best representative of his work. I think the quote from Children and Rights might actually belong to Murray Rothbard, but either way I disagree with whoever wrote it and think it's a perfect example of someone following a generally good principle off a cliff.
I haven't seen anything about children that insane since I saw that libertarian article pleading the case that we should be allowed to buy and sell children on the free market.
If youre being honest, then youre going to need to look at historical material like Locke & Hobbes to get a foundation.
Modern conserativism... aggitation... can bw traced through Gingrich in the House in the early 90s, I cant think of the book off the top of my head but theres a pretty decent record of how he did manipulative things with unmanned cspan cameras at the time.
It partly depends on whether you want to understand pre-9/11 "reasonable" conservatism or the more recent Tea Party and Trump conservative populism.
Ayn Rand expresses the fairy tale version of romantic, rugged individualism, which is pretty important to understanding modern right-wing politics, especially in North America. I think the main idea conservatives take from her work, directly or indirectly, is that progress is driven by individual work and achievement, and that any kind of forced wealth re-distribution (through social programs, for example) is effectively theft, and therefore immoral.
The modern populist right-wing movement was originally driven and disseminated by right-wing talk radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh. So, listening to right-wing talk radio or podcasts is also a good window into the modern movement. It puts on full display the resentment felt by modern right-wingers.
If you would rather not experience right-wing media directly, but would rather read rational analysis about it, then one good choice is David Frumm. He is an old school Reagan/Bush conservative, and has lived through the transition of the Repubs to populism. He is very critical of Trumpism, like most people, but he comes from the perspective of a reasonable and well-informed conservative insider.
Fareed Zakaria has a new book called Age of Revolutions, which views modern conservative populism as a very significant political re-alignment with similarities to various revolutions of the past, both successful and unsuccessful. Fareed talks about the conditions that lead to populism. In that sense, he treats Trump's popularity as a symptom and outcome of specific underlying societal problems.
Others have weighed in on the academic, but a lot of the American conservative braintrust is (literally) in think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, Federalist Society, John Birch Society, etc. These organizations vary from "pretty right wing" Heritage to "nearly literally fascist" John Birch Society, and they put out a LOT of papers and material they use to...I'll generously say "inform" the public discourse.
There’s an episode of Behind the Bastards touching on the subject - “How Conservatism Won”. Not a right-wing resource at all, obviously, but that’s where a lot of the money goes indeed.
Have you already read through Plan 2025? It's kinda the latest huge report from the Heritage Foundation, and I'd say it does a pretty good job of outlining modern right-wing ideology. It can definitely be a hard read though, some of the things they want are really stomach churning to me.
Here's an audio copy of Murray Rothbard's Man, Economy, and State. Murray is basically the father of "right wing" libertarianism (insofar as right v left is individualism v collectivism, not "right=racism is good,") he seems to fit the description you seek. Not saying you'll agree or love him, but he isn't some "lets kill the gays" nonsense.
Also try Milton Friedman, and Lysander Spooner. They're more "anarchism" or "libertarianism" as well, from that same individualist, rather than collectivist, standpoint.
Foundations of geopolitics by Aleksander Dugan. This is the basis of modern European, conservative actions and the Russian playbook for the last 30 years.
This would probably be better for an american reader. Theyre not gonna get the cultural underpinnings of 'Foundations' without reading an analysis and I dont think this is what OP is looking for. Foundations is Russian international relations theory.
Yup that's him. A Russian ultra nationalist who essentially wrote a game plan for Russia to dismantle the liberal world order of the west, and was/is highly popular in russian political and military leadership. Many of his suggestions are part of russian doctrine today (like the notion that Ukraine has no cultural identity or value and should be taken over). Quite eye opening.
This is not a right wing resource, but if you’re interested in learning about the arguments and historical evolution of ideas that underpin economic liberalism/neoliberalism, I highly recommend Geoff Mann’s Disassembly required : a field guide to actually existing capitalism. It’s concise, relatively short, and treats the ‘other’ side like rational actors (which is important for understanding, I think).
Ofc this would only help understand people who are quite well informed.
Please, explain how the left has gone crazy with their ideology, because leftists don't have much political power to actually mess anything up with, unlike conservatives.
If I recall from the Alt-Right Playbook's Origins of Conservatism video, some of the early founders of conservative thought you might want to read include:
I find the Austrian School of Economics really interesting.
Particularly books written by American economist Murray Rothbard, who talks about free markets, government (particularly government intervention) and inflation.
There's a very short book you can read called "What has Government Done to Our Money?”
I don't know if you like podcasts, but Know Your Enemy is a take on the right from two leftists who used to be conservatives who approach it from an intellectual POV.
I linked to the political magazine that helps support them since it gives some rundowns of their topics that might give you some of the sources that can be read instead of listening to their podcast, if you'd prefer.
I'm not sure of you'll find the academic research you are looking for, at least out of the US, since the modern Conservative movement seems to have eschewed academia as filled with Liberals.
I haven't read this book yet, but I'd recommend Hillbilly Elegy, a memoir about JD Vance's life in Appalachia, It came out in 2016, and I recall folks thinking that it was a good read, even if they didn't agree with Vance's politics, and partially explained Trump's appeal to rural voters whose lifestyle bears no resemblance at all to Trump. The book has to be somewhat compelling, since Ron Howard made a movie out of it. And Vance parlayed it into a Senate seat, after all.
Robert Nozick's Anarchy, State and Utopia is a solid philosophical foundation for a lot of right wing thought. If you want to engage further you can follow up with Michael Otsuka's critique in Self-Ownership and Equality: A Lockean Reconciliation.
Nozick provides an underpinning for what many think of as traditional conservative American values, without basing it in Christianity.
Then of course there's the Chicago school of economics (Friedman et al), which is just a somewhat naive and more it less completely discredited take on how the economy works. It's fundamental for understanding American politics the previous half century, but their ideas are not really worth interacting with unless you're particularly interested in economics. It's not like the idiot politicians who push it in front of them understand the theories either.
Thsee theories is not far right; there's no salvaging the far right, and their ideological basis is mostly just bigotry. You could read Ayn Rand to try to understand which hole these idiots crawled from. Or better, don't waste your time.
I see!
Actually, I think I should touch Ayn Rand at some point to get more popular sentiment - in modern times, her books, particularly Atlas Shrugged, seem to be the Bible of common liberals.
Yeah, you're probably right it's worth reading if you want to understand the American right. I just don't think Atlas Shrugged is anywhere near as interesting as Anarchy, State and Utopia from a history of ideas perspective, but that might not be the relevant dimension. :)
I will have to preface this with the fact that I have not read any of his books, but former British politician Rory Stewart is one of the people that comes to my mind when reading your description. I don't think that he comes to the right policy positions, of course, but whenever I listen to him he does seem to at least have a degree of empathy for all people. He seems to at least generally see the problem even if I think that his solution wouldn't work. He has an effective way with words in interviews and his writing is generally very well reviewed too.
He isn't really right wing though, he is from a different Tory faction which failed to tap into much of any power in the past few governments. Politics on the Edge gave good insight into his time as an MP and his roles during the period, but he didn't justify or go into much detail about what being on the right (centre right for him, really) truly means.
I'm not sure that makes him not right wing, surely that just means he wasn't the kind of right wing that succeeded in the political landscape of the UK in the past 20ish years? His voting record is generally in favour of less regulation (outside of a few issues), lower taxes, military intervention, isolation from the EU. He's pro-environmentalist, but that hasn't always been an exclusively left-wing thing. Similarly, anarchists and Marxist-Leninists are both left wing, even if they wouldn't necessarily get along well in a single political party together
Probably more right-wing than you're looking for, but The Concept of the Political by Carl Schmitt. Insightful on how these people think, and much more readable than works by some Nazi philosophers I could mention.
Also if you're interested in a good deconstruction of far right views, I highly recommend Neoreaction a Basilisk by Elizabeth Sandifer
Not a right-wing source in and of itself, but Corey Robin’s The Reactionary Mind explores the history and philosophical underpinnings of conservative thought from Burke/Hobbes on through the 21st century, on a variety of different topics. It’s a serious engagement with the ideas, and attempt to understand them and their origins
Maybe read something from Jordan Peterson? He's conservative, against gender politics or modern life. Sells 'simple truths' that look well reasoned if you're not too intelligent (or don't believe in equality...) I think he wrote several books and has lots of YouTube videos available.
I'm from Austria and in my early youth I wanted to work though the history of my family and country, especially because nobody wanted to really talk about it.
'Mein Kampf' really really disappointed me. It reads like a whiny, misunderstood dude thinks he got cheated and looks for someone at fault - and obviously it would be best, if everything would follow his ideas, because then he would never feel rejected/disappointed anymore.
Of course this is a more than subjective, and quite polemic, view on this book, but although I've always identified much more with anarchism, I really wanted to get what's so intriguing about this book and its ideas.
But it was just a series of whining autobiographic stories and some blaming for just someone to be at fault for his suffering.
I've found the more common books during the period of the Nazi regiment much more interesting.
There are quite some books about how girls should fulfill their role as a mother, when they are reaching adolescent.
Pretty much the same for boys who get indoctrinated into being some kind of selfless knight - but always with the motivation of social admiration
Every form of self fulfillment always needs to be for the good of the empire (read: in line with the Führer's will/ideology/order)
I can completely understand how a young person would join a moment with such promises and I think it's very dangerous to just ban those books.
Instead they should be part of the educational curriculum, so the actual problems and weakness (to put it lightly) of such systems can be discussed and understood early.
Moving to simple solutions in times of crisis seems to be part of human nature. So we have to take care, that we don't do stupid things in challenging situations
A lot of the academics associated (formerly or currently) with Chicago Booth are highly respected as economists but highly conservative. As influential and famous they may be, their personal blogs and twitter account are yikes.
Thanks!
If I'm not mistaken, Thomas Sowell, who is often cited under the post, changed to the right-wing after discussions with Chicago students - must be quite solid.
So I'm going to interpret your request broadly and recommend a couple podcasts. They aren't necessarily right-wing (honestly, probably center left to center right), but they're probably outside of what you'd normally consume and may challenge or intrigue you.
The New Liberal Podcast New liberalism is a rebranding of neoliberalism. I'd start by listening to a couple mailbag episodes and his past best books of the year episodes.
Conversations with Tyler Tyler Cowen is a conservative economist at the University of Chicago, but you don't actually hear his opinions that often on his podcast which consists of interviews with an eclectic variety of folks from a homeless man to a Calvinist theologian, from music producer Rick Rubin to Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales. He has a unique interviewing style that consists of a series of disjointed questions. He often poses challenging questions, but he gives them plenty of space to answer and doesn't debate. I would suggest skipping interviews with people you know you're going to hate (e.g., Peter Thiel), but instead look for interviews that pique your interest.
Center left to center right by American standards, I suppose?
(It's important to clarify as American center is way more right than normally considered, with Democrats normally considered center-to-moderate right outside of the US)
True, which is why I started my first paragraph with this :D
I came to Lemmy since it's the only such platform I trust to be inhabited by real benevolent people with useful recommendations. But the bias is obviously there.
I think this is a little disingenous. Plenty of leftists are academics who have studied economic/political theory. If you're already willing to put yourself through reading Marx, you're probably also the type who's willing to read Milton.
Ayn Rand is where modern right wing ideology started. You really don't need to read a whole book, she beats you over the head with the message repeatedly.
Fast forward to the Rush Limbaugh talk show and listen to some of his monologues.
Then jump back to Mein Kampf to see the future of the right wing.
It's all bullshit, and it's easy to fall down the rabbit hole of right wing talking points. Ask critical questions like what happens to the most vulnerable populations under that system and you realize quickly that it's Sparta all over again and they will be actively killed because they believe in eugenics.
Hard disagree with Rand, thats just a libertarian circle jerk.
Better would be anything from Jefferson.
If you really want to get into the weeds, the Anti-Federalists from the 1790's opposing the Constitution in favor of keeping the original Articles of Confederation that governed the US right after independence.
Jefferson sounds like a barely relevant choice from a very distant time, something that an average libertarianist will shove in people's faces without telling it fails to describe shortcomings of capitalism highlighted by later thinkers.
But as a starting point, I see how that may be useful. Thank you!