>>24808510 (OP)
Most classics are "right wing" in the sense that they put forth values different from the current neoliberal ones. It's the reason why the narrative being pushed for the last couple of decades was around how "problematic" and "dangerous" old works were that didn't view humans as interchangeable economic units. As the ontological evil to the neoliberal order is some vague term like "far right" or "fascist" that means absolutely nothing outside of a dictionary, those classics would likely count.
Recently as a result of younger generations pushing into acceptance of allegedly "far right" behavior, the narrative has been shifted to reimagining and spinning the classics in order to fit the morality of current-day neoliberalism. Christianity was demonized as a religion for white supremacists, now people who know nothing about Christianity are throwing around curated snippets of religious text in order to shut people up when they object to the current zeitgeist. In that same vein literature, and especially the interpretation of literature, has been firing on all cylinders to make sure that when pundits call anyone ontologically evil or accuse them of misunderstanding a seminal work, they can point to some meaningless reinterpretation made by a "scholar" as proof. They don't care if the homosexuality the Greeks sometimes displayed amounted to pedophilia and was controversial even at the time, since they know that the main utility of the ancients in the modern day is as a set of funny names that help give weight to whatever lie they choose to tell.
So, classic works of literature, edited before the 1960s and read with a discerning eye, can count as "right wing", regardless of its content. Mostly since the term is an accusation more than it is a belief, like the 21st century version of calling someone a witch. Either way, the world of great works before the great infiltration of academia made everything into postmodern newspeak is refreshing no matter what political ideology you believe in or claim to believe in.
