Is existentialism a leftist ideology?
Is existentialism a leftist ideology?
Other urls found in this thread:
infowars.com
marxists.org
marxists.org
newbooksnetwork.com
marxists.org
twitter.com
Emma Goldman really liked both Nietzsche and Stirner and Camus was an anarchist, so I'd say so.
Is hegelianism a leftist ideology?
Left Hegelianism is. Right Hegelianism isn't, but they don't exist anymore (unless you count Fukuyama).
Also, Nietzsche and Stirner weren't existentialists. Kierkegaard and Heidegger weren't really either, although they're sometimes given the label or said to be influences on existentialism.
Check'em
Nietzsche and Stirner were existentialists dude
stirner was hegelian proto-postmodernist
Nietzsche wasn't an existentialist. He influenced existentialists, but he wasn't himself one. He advocated for a rule by a spiritual aristocracy of a sort which would overcome the slave morality inculcated by Jewish/Christian morality. That is many things, but it isn't existentialism.
Stirner wasn't either. He was influenced by the Left Hegelians and post-Kantian philosophy which focused strongly on the ego (following from Fichte's development of Kant).
I know Beauvoir and Sartre were socialists, they even went to Cuba and hung with Che after the revolution
...
No.
Existentialism is basically the idealism of today and a petty-bourgeois philosophy, perhaps an "idealism without idealism".
While I like something of what existentialists say, a lot of it is based on idealism of such elements like "the mind is immaterial and separate from the body".
While the famous French existentialists(Simone, Sartre, Camus) were leftists, they had many petty-bourgeois elements in their works, for example, humanism. I don't know much about Heidegger, but he was in the Nazi Party, Kierkegaard was pretty religious, and Stirner and Nietzsche weren't existentialists.
>Gyorgy Lukacs on existentialism - marxists.org
Honestly most of you are likely just pseudomaterialists and would agree with existentialists a lot, especially the anarchists and such.
quints of truth
Existentialism is a very broad category. There are theistic existentialists and atheist ones. The atheist ones are typically, though not exclusively, materialists
No, not necessarily.
I wouldn't consider Kierkegaard a leftist.
Hegel is a mindfuck so I don't know for myself, but hasn't the authoritarian Hegel meme been debunked?
I wouldn't say he's authoritarian. It doesn't really have to be "debunked," though. History, for Hegel, is the development of true human freedom. That isn't authoritarian, whatever else he thought about the state (e.g. advocating for constitutional monarchies).
I don't think they are, especially not Heidegger or Kierkegaard. Sartre was a humanist, thought consciousness wasn't material but merely linked to it in some way, heavily criticized material dialectics and aimed to replace them with existentialism, etc.
No.
He advocated for the liberation of a spiritual aristocracy.
Nietzche was a anti-rationalist troll fam
He'd changed his opinions to get a rise out of people and this was before the syphilis ate his brain
Existentialism was all downhill after Kierkegaard. Camus was a likely retard stringing together aphorisms so he could get laid.
Sartre is a leftist, and so were his cabal of idpol lackeys, but his philosophy is dogshit. Existentialism is dead as a school of though anyways.
...
WRONG WRONG WRONG
if you think he advocated for rule over anything
Nietzsche actually was the opposite of an anti-semite. He ridiculously fetishized Jews as being the strongest race
In The Gay Science he said Jews made better arguments because it was the only way anti-semites would take them seriously.
Not related to existentialism, but anyway.
I like very much Schopenhauer, an idealist and pessimist who hated Hegel, but I'm still politically leftist. Is it contradictory? Is it possible to be a pessimist and a leftist?
You haven't read a non-Kaufmann version I can tell. (Kaufmann tends to 'explain' Nietzche's passages when he's trying to be a teensy bit honest, or downright twist and omit words when he's not)
He praised jews generally when he wanted to compare them to Christians like in the Gay Science. When he actually discusses them separately he goes on to describe them in incredibly unflattering terms, I paraphrase here, "whose spirit have never felt a noble sentiment in their life" and that, quote, “the youthful Jew of the stock exchange is the most repugnant invention of the whole human race.”
He does mock bourgeois anti-semites then present in Germany but then goes on to write even more virulent things about Jews, stating they're inherently "priestly", and then goes on to say that priests are "the most evil of enemies". He literally drew a parallel between Jews as a people and everything he hated about Christianity, the vaunted slave morality.
Well just because he has bad personal views on Jews (and women, which I find strange that you didn't mention) doesn't mean his ideas aren't useful and good for us as leftists.
this
for everyone
It's not like these shitty views which we must call shitty are central to any of their philosophies
He was against constitutional monarchies(why he hated Britain so much) and advocated for absolute monarchies like Napoleon.
I somewhat like some of the claims of existentialism i.e no philosophy can ever be "totalizing" and cover the entire range of human experience; no matter how much (vulgar) historical materialism claims otherwise much of what happens in life is pure contingency, there are no "laws of dialectical motion" or whatever that helps us predict what happens next in life.
Having said that I do acknowledge existentialism opens the door to relativism and liberalism in politics, to "feels > reals" so to speak, I still believe it is possible to marry existentialism and historical materialism somewhat, by having existentialism cover what cannot be cover by materialism, and I say this even as an anti-humanist, I see human subjects as an aggregate of processes without a subject, even though we as humans perceive the world and our existence as "subjects", the ultimate purpose of a materialist existentialism would be "feels don't real, even tough we will always experience them as such and this is unavoidable"
Perhaps this is not what you think of when you think of existentialism, nonetheless even if I were to call this philosophy by another name it would still be married to Marxist Existentialism somewhat.
I think it can especially lead to leftism due to its individualism. Just combine existentialism with the Soul of Man Under Socialism and The Conquest of Bread and it works. Both of these writings represent societies in which individualism reigns supreme and people live passionately rather than under the unauthenticity of commercialism.
Plus you can combine alienation with angst and absurdity
Oh, and the transvaluation of values and all the shit about rejecting "spooks" goes hand in hand with Marx's theories of ideology.
What about existential nihilism?
listened to this podcast the other day about existential philosopher Benjamin Fondane.
newbooksnetwork.com
He was anti-communist and believed in the religious doctrine of salvation. So would not say that existentialism is always left wing.
marxists.org
I wish i had skill and time to translate this chapter too you.
...
After Marx most non-Marxist philosophy is just shilling for the bourgeoisie.
...
that's literally cancer