Most important right wing texts (for research purposes)?

From general conservatism and capitalism to far right fascist/nazi ideologies

My right-wing 'to read' list so far consists of

Leviathan (Thomas Hobbes)
The Prince (Niccolo Machiavelli) [May be satire I'm aware]
The Wealth of Nations (Adam Smith)
Conscience of a Conservative (Barry Goldwater)
Foundations of the Nineteenth Century (Houston Stewart Chamberlain)
The Doctrine of Fascism (Benito Mussolini) [Finished reading this recently]
Mein Kampf (Adolf Hitler)

What other (if any) right wing texts are really worthy of study, for those that want to become acquainted with "the enemy"? I'm aware that "right wing" is a very broad and relative term but its fine for the context of this thread.

Only the second part of Mein kampf is relevant. However, good list. Evola would be good to.

Yes, I am intrigued by Evola actually, was gonna check his stuff out just out of curiosity, not sure how significant it actually is (gonna check out Savitri Devi for the same reason). Gonna read Redbeard's 'Might is Right' also, though not yet sure if that is easy to box under purely right wing or not.

Revolt against the modern world

Throw in some de Maistre and Carl Schmitt.

Keep in mind, reading works like this, when you do not know how to anaylize Materialistically, may make you change your thinking to the right wing. The goals of the books are not to teach you about the right wing, but to persuade you of them. I would read as much communist works as you can and understand them before venturing to study the right wing.

You'll want to read some Edmund Burke and Thomas Carlyle, as well. If you're into literature, try some of the later works of Wordsworth, some Tennyson, some Yeats, Kipling, T.S. Eliot, Ezra Pound, Kipling, Dostoyevsky.

If we're going to learn to debunk reactionary thought, "pwning" tea-party mouthbreathers, or debunking Mein Kampf, isn't enough. Some of the greatest thinkers of all time were reactionaries, and we'd better be prepared to know, understand, and refute more eloquent and intelligent expressions of hate.

This is insulting to the OP's intelligence, like as if they're so feeble minded that they switch their ideologies based on the last book they read. If reading a few books could completely turn a communist into a conservative or even a fascist, my guess is they weren't much of a communist in the first place.

Know no bounds OP, read what you want, criticize everything.

Myth of the Twentieth Century is maybe more important to Nazism than Mein Kampf.

Anarcho-capitalist texts maybe? The Machinery of Freedom; The Ethics of Liberty.

I agree. I appreciate the sentiment Zanters but I'm confident in my own beliefs enough not to purposely brainwash myself prior to expanding my understanding. Besides, if I am convinced by a right wing text then fair enough, though I highly highly doubt that. But I wouldn't feel comfortable religiously drilling my head with so many communist texts that I can't see things from anybody elses perspective.

Thanks a lot for the suggestions folks, your input is invaluable to me.

Thanks especially for these suggestions.

It is much easier to become a reactionary than a progressive. If you read books meant to persuade, and you are weak in Marxist theory, then yes it will influence you. And I spoke nothing of OP, I warned him. Didn't say he wasn't up to it. So quit assuming and looking for something to complain about.

Just be vigilant OP, that's all I'm trying to say. Ask most fascists, they used to be communist at one time.

Ah yes I forgot about this, it's on my list too.

"Politics of Prudence" by Russell Kirk is probably the most influential piece of American conservatism from the latter 20th century.

Also, I would argue that Wealth of Nations is a Leftist piece if you apply it to the progression of classical liberalism into industrial capitalism. Smith was very clear about the potential horrors of unrestrained capitalism, but not very clear about what had to be done about it, as capitalism as we understand it, or even as Marx understood it, had yet to exist.

I really doubt that. And if fascism is so convincing (it isn't) then there may be, or there apparently is, some merit to it.

This sounds like some "you'll join the dark side if you interact with it too much" bullshit for me to take seriously.

It goes for any propaganda really. If you are unstable religiously, and read religious propaganda, you'll be easier to persuade.

And I'm not kidding about the "most fascists were communist at one point." Most were communist, just ask them.

Everyone has given great suggestions. I will add: anything by that vile person, Ayn Rand.

Also, some comments on the original list by the OP:

I wouldn't bother reading Mein Kampf. Other than a few radical splinter movements, it's hardly relevant to modern politics. Sure, if you're interested in political history, go for it, but it's not going to greatly enhance your understanding of modern politics. As Tim suggested, you might read Myth of the Twentieth Century because it is a little more focused on ideas than pursuasion, but that old Nazi literature is essentially just garbage that should've been relegated to the irrelevant bin long ago.

The Prince, by Machiavelli, is useless garbage as well. I read it, and I just don't get the hype. It was clearly written during a time when people weren't nearly as well educated, because it's primarily just stereotypically manipulative techniques with a few half-assed cynical observations about human nature. A lazy, angsty highschool kid could write an equivalent book.

Overall, I would encourage you to focus more on more modern, more relevant politics, because all that old historical fascist trash is not foundational in any way, it's just propaganda that you won't really get anything from. If you want to know about fascists, read books about modern fascism. Likewise, if you want to know about US conservatism, read something by a modern US conservative (as nauseating as that sounds). Modern conservativism is vastly different from Barry Goldwater's form of conservativism (though I will still suggest that you read Goldwater's work, because he is an influence on the US libertarian/Tea Party movements).

It's just funny that you say religious because when I was part of a christian youth group during my teens we were urged not to read texts that represented other belief systems, incase we became subverted by it. It's not the sort of mentality I like to live by these days. Bubble-world communism is not for me, I'm from the UK not North Korea.

If you apply this across the board, then surely Christians and Muslims would only read scripture and related works and never investigate atheism/secularism. Not a healthy mindset in my opinion.

Exactly