I read the anarchist cookbook and it sucked! I tried Uncle Ted’s book but everyone’s read that already. De Sade is just porn spam that’s not even gurochan tier. Lolis are banned in my country. I need some recommendations.
Fascism: 100 Questions Asked and Answered. 90% of it is just establishing a new parliament based on interest groups(e.g one for the steel industry, one for agriculture, etc.), holding foreigners on a tight leash, and forcing capitalists to use local labor. I think he mentions something about expanding pensions and welfare, but my memory is shoddy. Honestly not much even a normie would disagree with minus the anti-Jewry.
I read Sayyid Qutb. He really isn't that bad. It's basically, dictatorship is bad, people should be free, religion commands us to fight for freedom. That's literally it. I'm disappointed. CNN told me this guy was the philosopher behind ISIS. It's all a lie as usual.
I read Bin Laden’s Letter to America. I don’t see what the fuss is about. It’s just him carefully explaining why he attacked America and most of the points were pretty reasonable and not the “he just hates our freedoms” thing. Turns out Bin Laden doesn’t like America propping up Israel or dictators or the Saudis and as a weeb he didn’t like the nuking of Japan. There’s a whole section where he complains about US corporations polluting the earth with toxic chemicals. He also claims AIDS was spread by America, which, looking at the state of online discourse, was probably right.
I read one of Stalin’s books. He actually wrote philosophy. He’s surprisingly erudite and knowledgable and not the foaming at the mouth lunatic you’d expect. But he sees the world in a very mechanical top down way like you’d a communist dictator naturally would.
>>5
Which one did you read in particular, Anon? Maybe you could talk about it in the Lenin-Stalin thread?
>>6
Dialectical and Historical Materialism. Its supposed to be a textbook intro to Marx’s philosophy. Stalin advises readers to just ignore Hegel and his understanding of dialectics is actually closer to Fichte and then he makes it all about biological development. Lenin and Stalin literally think that every physical thing has two basic contradictory elements inside it that are opposites and studying the struggle between them gives you the key to understanding the development of that thing. They take this method and think they can apply it to literally everything, from the history of society to how to read a book and manufacture cars. Its like a crystal ball that can do everything. They consider it objective science.
None of this actually matches up with anything Hegel or Marx actually wrote, except for when Stalin quotes them like a Bible thumper at a Sunday school. It actually explains a lot about communist countries and why they were so fucked up. These people think their geniuses that figured out the truth about the universe and everyone has to obey them because muh dialectic material analysis.
I tried reading Crowley's books.