Hell yeah. I'm a huge book fan. As long as we don't just do seriously depressing "classics" and such, I'm game.
Not saying I refuse to read serious books, but at the same time, I don't want all gloomy depressing stuff.
'Radical' is BS. There really is not much point in paying to be persuaded of some political point. Far more productive is a work that is actually informative.
Everyone here seems to already be conversant in a wide breadth of obscure fiction.
Some works will better equip you to deal with regressive nonsense.For example, if you are well-informed about the Crusades or the Inquisitions, you can humiliate every regressive who tries to parrot these as they always do.
A good(true) history book is radical in this climate. History has a strong reactionary bias. Name a good book on the Crusades or Inquisition and I shall read it, preferably something written before 1942.
A good(true) history book is radical in this climate.
I've read plenty good ones that are not 'radical'. A good work is based on evidence, and the evidence is apolitical. Unless you want to replace one set of myths with another set.
Name a good book on the Crusades or Inquisition and I shall read it, preferably something written before 1942.
I can give you two good books not written before 1942. And there's plenty of terrible stuff written before, by Enlightenment writers who regarded the Crusades as barbaric, or Juan Antonio Llorente.
Thomas F. Madden - A New Concise History of the Crusades
Henry Kamen - The Spanish Inquisition
The latter is just about a small sliver of the Crusades, but the radical left is generally too stupid to distinguish between the various InquisitionS that existed, and their ignorance will make them collapse into silence and show that they know nothing of what they purported to know.
Added both to my reading list. This article by Madden has made me excited for his book. He uses some very reactionary language such as calling the Crusades a restoration.
When the globalist theocracy is waging a war on reality, how is truth not radical?
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
I'd be for it. I read quite a bit but not as much as I should. I like the concept of it being fiction at least most of the time so it can be a little more on the fun side.
My nomination for first piece of fiction is Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto. (That's just a joke I actually don't want stuff like that)
Oh and don't expect me to read something like the entire Lord of the Rings in a week. Although I'd probably prefer a little simpler stuff than that anyway.
I won't be participating any time soon, but I support the idea.
If there is sufficient discussion and/or reviewing, I'd be reading the related threads. My book backlog is too long as it is, but I'm willing to add more titles to it if I hear about something interesting.
Oedipus Tyrannus (he was not a king but a tyrant) is not very weird. You'd have to expel from your mind all the nonsense that you inherit from Freud if you're going to read it.
If you want weird/terrible, try the House of Atreus, but there are no extant dramatic works about any before Agamemnon.
Speaking of which, you may like Iphigenia in Aulis, but sadly, unlike in other versions of the tale, she is saved by Artemis at the last moment.
I'd be in for it. I need to read more books and less internet.
Hell yeah. I'm a huge book fan. As long as we don't just do seriously depressing "classics" and such, I'm game.
Not saying I refuse to read serious books, but at the same time, I don't want all gloomy depressing stuff.
Alright, King Lear it is.
I am game, if you guys agree to something super fun next. Crichton or Orconomics or something utterly retarded.
Yup yup.
Speak of the devil, I just downloaded that last night, it's fourth on my "next to read" list.
Nice. It sounds so ridiculous, I am kinda curious how it goes.
Sounds good to me. Let's keep it to radical non-fiction. Everyone here seems to already be conversant in a wide breadth of obscure fiction.
'Radical' is BS. There really is not much point in paying to be persuaded of some political point. Far more productive is a work that is actually informative.
Not me.
>Not paying to be persuaded of some political point.
>Reading fiction in a total state.
Pick one
Some works will better equip you to deal with regressive nonsense.For example, if you are well-informed about the Crusades or the Inquisitions, you can humiliate every regressive who tries to parrot these as they always do.
A good(true) history book is radical in this climate. History has a strong reactionary bias. Name a good book on the Crusades or Inquisition and I shall read it, preferably something written before 1942.
I've read plenty good ones that are not 'radical'. A good work is based on evidence, and the evidence is apolitical. Unless you want to replace one set of myths with another set.
I can give you two good books not written before 1942. And there's plenty of terrible stuff written before, by Enlightenment writers who regarded the Crusades as barbaric, or Juan Antonio Llorente.
Thomas F. Madden - A New Concise History of the Crusades
Henry Kamen - The Spanish Inquisition
The latter is just about a small sliver of the Crusades, but the radical left is generally too stupid to distinguish between the various InquisitionS that existed, and their ignorance will make them collapse into silence and show that they know nothing of what they purported to know.
Added both to my reading list. This article by Madden has made me excited for his book. He uses some very reactionary language such as calling the Crusades a restoration.
When the globalist theocracy is waging a war on reality, how is truth not radical?
I’d be interested. What kinds of books?
I would be in. Sounds like a great idea.
I'd be for it. I read quite a bit but not as much as I should. I like the concept of it being fiction at least most of the time so it can be a little more on the fun side.
My nomination for first piece of fiction is Karl Marx's Communist Manifesto. (That's just a joke I actually don't want stuff like that)
Oh and don't expect me to read something like the entire Lord of the Rings in a week. Although I'd probably prefer a little simpler stuff than that anyway.
I would love this. Would it be solely for reading, or could we also discuss writing as well?
I suppose discussion of writing would be best, but occasional critique might be nice for a group of writers.
I won't be participating any time soon, but I support the idea.
If there is sufficient discussion and/or reviewing, I'd be reading the related threads. My book backlog is too long as it is, but I'm willing to add more titles to it if I hear about something interesting.
I think OP suggested that we read fiction, so those three are out.
Oedipus Tyrannus (he was not a king but a tyrant) is not very weird. You'd have to expel from your mind all the nonsense that you inherit from Freud if you're going to read it.
If you want weird/terrible, try the House of Atreus, but there are no extant dramatic works about any before Agamemnon.
Speaking of which, you may like Iphigenia in Aulis, but sadly, unlike in other versions of the tale, she is saved by Artemis at the last moment.
Literally none of these would have been my top 3. Thomas Sowell, Roger Scruton, Starship Troopers.