Why is all philosophy "left wing"? Every influential modern philosopher, Foucault, Sartre, Althusser, Deleuze, etc. Hell, the single most popular and arguably the only philosopher alive today is Žižek.While all "rightist" philosophers are disgraced sophists and pseudo theologians, mindlessly screaming about blood and soil with zero intellectual output of note. Not to speak of modern culture war larpers like Peterson who embarrassingly haven't read a single introductory text by those he is "critiquing".>inb4 ad homI'm not a leftard, enjoy shitting on the aforementioned figures, they'll still be infinitely more influential and respected than your daddy figure/pol/tards need not reply
>>18677277>Why is all philosophy "left wing"?It really isn't, it only became wholly left-wing/liberal after WW2. This is also when the modern culture war solidified in that leftist/liberal means someone who upholds the post-war consensus while right-wing means someone who tries to undermine it.
>>18677277The assumption is false. Academia in general leans left-wing but there are plenty of conservatives and libertarians in philosophy. Of course, if you only look at a very left wing section of continental philosophy, all philosophers will look far left.
>>18677277saw your /lit/ thread before it got banned anon, you said the rightist philosophers mindlessly screaming about blood and soil were>Evola, Spengler, Carl Schmitt, Duginbut you've clearly never actually read any texts by any of them
Continental philosophy =/= philosophy
>>18677295I've read them all save for schmitt who I read on second hand. Do you have an argument or just going to handwave?
>>18677277First you have to define left and right. Ludwig von Mises and Robert Nozick are the greatest philosophers of the 20th century but they could be considered either left or right depending on what exactly you mean.
>>18677301and here i thought OP was quality bait
>>18677277>Every influentialI mean, how do you measure that. The most prominent philosopher of 2026 has been Nathan Cofnas who's a gigachud
>>18677308?
>>18677277I don’t know who any of these pop culture psueds are or the irrelevant bullshit they think>NOOOO YOU HAVE TO CARE ABOUT THE HAIRY EASTERN EUROPEAN PSUEDhave sex incel
>>18677299care to post an excerpt of any of those people "mindlessly screaming about blood and soil"?
>Why are all scientists/historians/philosophers left wing?Because, unlike /pol/tards, they actually studied science/history/philosophy.
>>18677277Everyone is a leftist bcause leftism has prevailed so utterly since 1789 that even those people you call "rightists" are actually leftists by the proper definition of the term.
>>18677288>This is also when the modern culture war solidified in that leftist/liberal means someone who upholds the post-war consensusThe New Left in the 60s outright hated the postwar suburban conformity their parents built.
>>18677277People assume good intentions behind left wing thinking and poor motivations behind right wing one. Because the former is supposedly trying to achieve welfare of all, whereas the latter focuses on the welfare of the in-group. Neither type of thinking arguably increases welfare in any way, but that's how the optics are playing out. So that's what gets shown at the peak of the iceberg.>the only philosopher alive today>ZizekInshallah you are trolling.>Peterson who embarrassingly haven't read a single introductory text by those he is "critiquing"Peterson was criticizing a movement he observed on his own university and in the wider population and he got to name it - postmodern neomarxism. The name was quite unfortunate because people expected him to go to town on both postmodern thought (in all its variety) and on neomarxism. Even though he never argued 'posmodern neomarxists' were either legitimate postmodernists or well-read neomarxists. They were vaguely woke activits who liked to drop philosophical jargon to excuse their convoluted worldviews. There weren't (and I hope still aren't) really any introductory texts to read there.
>>18677277Because right wing philosophers are busy getting debanked and deplatformed and removed from academia (Just kidding, they were never allowed in).
>>18677277It really is not. Note how even the pop stuff you mention leaves out all the mainstream philosophy done at the time. Most philosophy is relatively value-neutral stuff, abstract epistemology and metaphysics, dry applied ethics looking at policies, like Stephen Mumford, Ernest Sosa and even accounts that seemingly are liberal but not like Manuela Gomez stuff on Mexican American Philosophy. There is a kinda cottage industry of non-political philosophy with politics but that is minute area. This is often focused on cultural issues but not really mainstream. Actual political philosphy ironically is much more disinterested and arguably a type of center liberal, as in the view of political economy. Below is an example. There are actual conserative philosophers too but they are not the internet conserative just like those philosophers you mentioned are being cherry picked as leftist, it is more like they copoted by. Some examples of conserative philosophers are Richard Swinburn, Roger Scruton, Robert P. George,Terence Cuneo. I say conserative because they may take positions you identify with conserativism like being aganist gay marriage or aganist a belief aganist the possiblity of transexuality.https://newbooksnetwork.com/justice-and-reciprocity
A fun example of a philosopher coopted by leftists is Althusser and Deluze. Althusser was a Marxist but not the cozy cultural stuff guy. The boring economic kind at least until he became mentally ill. The whole dialectical material system will naturally arise and we don't have to think about it and just ride the waves and state policy kind. Deleuze is literally a metaphysican focusing on how ideas are what are ultimately real. He was blunt about being seen as a metaphysican. Sartre was mainly a phenomenologist etc. There are actual leftist philosophers too but they are a bit different than what pop leftism is as well.
>>18677778Good post. I'm aware of this but they're still "leftists" in the popular conscious, a category I find reductive hence the quotemarks.
>>18677295>DuginLiteral "who?" within Russia, only hyped up by Western media who wanted a Rasputin type figure to gawk at
>>18677788I would suggest the apperance of leftist philosophers is actually deriative of people have heard of can understand. This is why ironically people ascribe positions like that to those figures but rarely egnage with actual leftist philosophers. A lot of those figures have the advantage as do figures coopted by the right but not actual right leaning figures as well. They are ambiguous enough to be read different ways. This is also why actual leftist philsoophers like Mysha Cherry, Andrea J. Pitts, and Jeffrey Kaplan have positions that trickle down and become reinterpeted into their words. For example, Mysha Cherry argues that anger is acceptable but appeals to Aristotle aganist the Stoics and connects it identity politics but we get a kinda poor man's version fo this ascribed to Frantz Fanon who is writing to a specific community and time with actual policies he holds. The reason being that Cherry is harder to read. In a weird way stereotypes influence the ascription of these views too.
A big issue is also that a lot of philosophers are neither right or left. There are a lot of anarchists and liberterians of various stripes. They don't subcribe to pop political views and have very specific complex positions. Examples are figures like John Tomasi, José-Antonio Orosco,Alexandre Christoyannopoulos, and Gerad Casey. They don't quite map onto popular views nicely.
>>18677277>Why is all philosophy "left wing"? Every influential modern philosopher, Foucault, Sartre, Althusser, Deleuze, etc. A lot of philosophy concerns the truth of propositions like how is X connected to Y or whatever, but when you get into political theory, a lot of it is connected to trying to make people capable of thinking beyond categories imposed by existing institutions. Like why do you we live this, or why do we believe this. And a lot of people who ask questions like that tend to be leftists of some kind.>culture war larpers like PetersonWell his philosophy is actually pretty old, it's an existentialist one from the 19th century and takes inspiration from Kierkegaard. Materialists think individuals are produced by material conditions which are then mediated through cultural and ideological systems. Idealists think the individual is produced the other way around (culture and ideology, mediated through material conditions). Existentials think the individual self-produces and is personally responsible for what they become. So obviously on left you have Marx the materialist while the Frankfurt School is more idealist. Curtis Yarvin is an idealist of the right. Most existentialists are on the right but you have some on the left like Sartre. Also there can be a return to spiritualism with existentialism because if we're just a product of material or cultural condtions then that's awful but if there's a God we can learn to hear what God wants and then make a choice whether to obey it and that can make us better people who own to our failures and read the 12 rules for life and so on.
>>18677277What about Nietzsche and Nick Land?
>>18677277OP in response to your rude speech to the left wing and to the girondins and st just fans I would hazard a reckon and claim if there is to be a new thinking or a new nous then part to that were that this where partly a hegelian thing, or that on occasion various factions of right and left wing hegelians have been been doing observed been doing something like the ‘writing of history’ and historiography, but that this is also all superfluous dialectic because the united states precedes chronologically and theologically maybe temporally hegel and the french revolution and this thing and matter of the divisions of the wings of the political and that a new nous is a thing that uh calls for out to the night or something that I think about the sources flowing from the united states revolution and the deist universe of the perspective or what the perspective is and also like the revolutions to the universes and solar systems and planets
>>18677277Baron Julius Evola is to the actual Trad Right what Karl Marx is to the Left.
>>18677277What do philosophers even fucking do? Do any of them do anything of their own accord or do they just shout out ideas that they hope one day an actual individual who is capable of an action besides loitering will absorb into their worldview and enact upon it? Is there a single philosopher from the last 2 centuries who became a "great man" and changed the course of history? Or are they biologically incapable of direct action?
>the single most popular and arguably the only philosopher alive today is Žižekdo commies really
>>18677965John Rawls and Charles Taylor were functionally the state ideal philosophers of the United States under Clinton and helped design the NDP of Canada. Jose Vasconcelos was the state philosopher of Mexico and basically created modern Mexican identity or the basic parts of it.>>18677950The actual rough equivalsent of Karl Marx to the right would be Yoram Hazony , the founder of national Conservatism. What characterizes political philosophy from political theory is the use arguments and empirical studies like economics, sociology and anthropology.
>>18678091A fun fact the pro immigration policies of the liberals in Canada arose to counter the NDP philosophy from Taylor. This philosophy was later also adopted in part by the conseratives with different economic views. The idea was basically to create a community of people and center the youth interest for Taylor unlike the Canadian liberals. Taylor interestingly was already critical of the Canadian housing situation.
>>18677853Nick Land is a communist
>>18678018Zizek is a well-read retard.
>>18677450The New Left wasn't against the post-war consensus. They were anti-racists, feminists, and such.
They keep shooting anyone that tries to establish freedom-based philosophy. Most modern right-wingers are religious anyway, and Jesus is the ultimate self-sacrificial lamb which blows all their arguments about private property out the water and makes them look limp-dicked. If Jesus died for the rest of us, why should we let you keep your shit? Ayn Rand was the last one with any actual balls.
>>18678637>Ayn RandLiterally who?A soviet-brained sheckel chaser who mirrored the communist propaganda.
>>18677277Any philosopher worth his salt doesn't even acknowledge muh left muh right.
>>18678642>literal who>proceeds to describe herShe exposed you as a ordinary bandit, you're gonna die mad about it.
Heidegger? Popper? Land?
>>18678701How is Popper right-wing
>>18678724He was strongly opposed to Marxism, which he viewed as an example of unfalsifiability, and was a founder of the Mount Pelerin Society? (Friedman, Hayek, Von Mises, rolling a bomb into that would've done future generations of workers a lot of good)Even found his way to the idea of imprisoning left-wing dissidents later in life, all to protect liberal "democracy" of course
>>18678736>Right-wing is when you're not a MarxistNigga...
>>18678759Either you hate humans and want to enslave them all to the collective, or you love humans and want them to live according to their own values. It's not hard. Communism and Fascism is two rival gangs fighting over your leash.
Because it’s “made” by state employees
>>18678759Yes? He lived in the 20th century, not the 19th, the political spectrum of his era was socialism on the left and the bourgeoisie on the right, and he strongly favored the latter. The old aristocracy died in WW1, before he started writing.>but he thought fascists went too far and didn't like them eitherso did Churchill, so did De Gaulle, so did half the dictators Hitler got rid of, etc.he was still very much a part of the liberal-conservative right
>>18678786Communism abolishes the state, class distinctions, and division of labor.The three biggest leashes in the history of humanity, and it does this through the decentralization of state power following the example of the French revolution (département). Claiming to have free will and personal liberty with these structures in place is pure ideology.>inb4 ussr china no iphone The USSR was never communist according to its own founder. The Russian revolution lost in 1919 when it failed to become international, everything from then until 1991 was cope
>>18678797>the political spectrum of his era was socialism on the left and the bourgeoisie on the right,No it wasn't. Popper was one of the most influential left-wing figures because his thought shaped the post-WW2 consensus which constitutes the left wing
>>18677301>Ludwig von Mises and Robert Nozick are the greatest philosophers of the 20th century So we're in a world where nothin matters and we can do and say whatever then? I'll go have sex with my mom and nut in her and then drop my burning hot coffee mug in the street and shit in it if everything is acceptable I can just say whatever Im gay Im gay viva hitler kim il sung woodstock 1928
>>18678786>freedom is when you're in the individualistic collective which makes you pick between other individualistic collectivesYour own values don't exist if you unironically believe that.
RW philosophy(Nick Land, Nathan Cofnas, Spandrell, Curtis Yarvin) is bigger than ever right now, and unlike leftist philosophy is actually effecting things in the world right now.
>>18679458Who are some currently active influential leftist philosophers?
>>18679472nobaldi give a fuk
>>18679458If you find Yarvin insightful I estimate your IQ to be in the low to mid 80s
>>18678091>Characterizing political philosophy Imagine Machiavelli writing the way about government that Evola did, in some ways the renaissance seems about five hundred years ahead of and behind the Dirty Thirties and the Bloody Forties of the Twentieth Century
>>18677277The Left has more explaining to do
>>18679568If you find ANY philosopher "insightful" you're a midwit at best
>>18679568What's your issue with Yarvin? I find only the people unfamiliar with his original blog share this perspective. He struggles to properly express his ideas in speaking appearances, so if you're more familiar with Yarvin than Moldbug, you won't have a decent impression of him.
>>18677295tzd
>>18677277this seems to be the post of someone who hasn't read much and gets their philosophy input from charlatans like Contrapoints. you can't possibly be this disingenuous and this is not a serious thread.
>>18677301they belong to the right, but are more or less libertarian right, not authoritarian right.
>>18677421disingenuous remark yet again its like how Marx stated: >The theoretical conclusions of the Communists are in no way based on ideas or principles that have been invented, or discovered, by this or that would-be universal reformer>"The charges against Communism made from a religious, a philosophical and, generally, from an ideological standpoint, are not deserving of serious examination."and>"The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class."The last point is especially telling, since revealed religion is no longer the guidestone for modern society. Instead scientists make claims to objectivity while acting like a prophet for religion. You can't argue against them because they rig the rules of the game. Most modern academia is not a serious thing at all if this is the kind of sophistry they practice.
>>18678091Rawls was shit, Charles Taylor was actually good.
>>18679814so, what's your alternative, buddy?
>>18679972Critical theory is a deviation and a bourgeois recuperation of Marxism. It's Marxism devoid of content.
>>18679990This isn't about Critical theory. these are literally laid out in the Manifesto. I read it years ago.
>>18679814And also the situation of if Philosophy and Metaphysics is overcome as the claim is occasionally created happens as then there is the need for something new some new dialectic or discourse that resists destruction by the elements which would have supposedly overcome Philosophy and the Idea of Substance and Matter and Metaphysics to the inquiry towards the Ideal and towards Bildung and Neoplatonism presumably and which is also something of the Blasted Heath of The Heideggerian Gnostic Pleroma Universe and which also deconstructed Philosophy as a discipline and also seem to me as this time as a thing conceptualizes of the mind and perspectives going back to the renaissance have been forced to address and deal with and all the while Renaissance thinkers like Ficino become all the more uncanny and strange
>Why is all philosophy "left wing"? Every influential modern philosopher, Foucault, Sartre, Althusser, Deleuze, etc. Hell, the single most popular and arguably the only philosopher alive today is Žižek.>While all "rightist" philosophers are disgraced sophists and pseudo theologians, mindlessly screaming about blood and soil with zero intellectual output of note. Not to speak of modern culture war larpers like Peterson who embarrassingly haven't read a single introductory text by those he is "critiquing".(you will never be a real woman btw)
>>18679993Marx's base & superstructure formulation isn't a call to philosophize, the opposite, it's a call for action.
>>18680025The reality that women and individuals have and possess is a topic that the medieval scholastics, the nominalists and realists, would at times write about
>>18680025I'm a 182cm/12% bf brown boi that can crush your deformed skull with one hand however
>>18680028banger quote
>>18679458>effectingESL shitskin
>>18679455>The individualistic collectivelmao, an actual drone
>>18678837Communists promise to abolish those things but then end up using those very leashes to declare themselves "the political class" and the rest worker bees. Then they replace prices with muh feelings and then shortages arrive because without prices industries are just flying blind. Prices are what actual people are willing to pay for shit, and therefore they signal what should be produced. This is immensely important for actually creating what "the people" want. Communism has never been anything more than intellectuals thinking they can manage the lives of billions of people for the greater good, just like emperors, kings and other cult leaders fashioned themselves of capable. What "the people" are left with is a history full of war, famine and slavery on every continent.
>>18679980Living life
>>18677277>Why is all philosophy "left wing"?>I'm not a leftard,I'm a leftist and you're a fucking retard.Ever heard of Hegel? Nietzsche? Heidegger?>they'll still be infinitely more influential and respected than your daddy figureLmao every single one of the above is more influential and respected than all of those you listed put together.Did you learn philosophy from Mickey Mouse or something?
>>18682602trying to plan an economy before computers was an incredibly ambitious experiment and the failure is understandablebut these days, price signals are basically obsolete, we have both the ability to acquire real-time survey data and tons of history with which to determine inputs, and even capitalist countries have all but abandoned them with monopoly capitalism (price still exists, but as an expression of market power and not a signal for production - it's a planned economy in all but name, with firms like Amazon doing the planning and reaping the rewards)
>>18677295>EvolaI heard somewhere that George Floyd's death has more influence on rightist philosophy than Evola and it couldn't be anymore true lol. Evola isn't some right wing Einstein, most fascists hated him.
Same reason there's no Klingon scientists. Right wing Izzat is gained by either being some sort of powerful will to power strongman (either physically or politically) or by making a bunch of money and leveraging it for economic power. Being some university dwelling intellectual philosopher gets you neither of those things really, so you only get a few weirdos in the court of rich patrons like Curtis Yarvin.
>>18677277All of the ones you mentioned are heavily influenced or reacting to Heidegger, who, we don't even need to explain how he is "right-wing", and Hegel, who, at least, is to the right of these figures.Also >>18677771 >>18677810 >>18678701>>18678637People are shouting down Ayn Rand because she was a cultist. Noone is shouting down right-libertarians in general.
>>18680045no one will fall for that bait you retard
The most important philosophers in modern MENA have all been hardcore rightwingers. See Sayyid Qutb for example
>>18679972>Instead scientists make claims to objectivity while acting like a prophet for religion. You can't argue against them because they rig the rules of the game.12-year-old detected.
>>18684159a computer will not predict whether you crave potatoes or pasta tomorrow
>>18685542No one takes them seriously either.
>>18685542Heidegger is mainly remembered for his contribuitons to hermneutic and existential phenomenology but Hans-George Gadmer generlaly repalced his accounts of hermeneutic phenomenology. His right wing elements are also a bit mixed with a lot of being career seeking. He lost alignment with the Nazi's and even older conserative movements of Germany. Pic explains how this and how he was even considered a type of occult liberal.
>>18685574Not really. The serious ones have all been a type of analytic philosopher who are more neutral. They do have some more in line with French philosophy, the same philosophers of Contiental philosophy in English Speaking literature but they are closer to the actual French interpretations. Examples of the analtyic current are figures like Hamdi Mlika and Aḥmad al-Šaybān. If you want to see contemporary Arabic philosophy try the journal Al-Mukhtabhat. A lot of it is also written in French and similiar to later French historical philosophers with Foucalt and Lacan like Ali Al-Nahabi. This strand resembles contemproary french philsoophers like like Pierre Machery, but otherwise it is very precise stuff like the first group.
>>18685827I agree that Heidegger was an opportunist, but I rate political action as at least equally important as theory. Ultimately, hermeneutics isn't even as popular as it used to be, because of folks like Habermas, let alone classical existentialism, but figures in OP were still influenced- eg. the titular Žižek started as a Heideggerian.
>>18684159You are retarded.
>>18677421I think it's a bad thing for leftists and their causes to argue that the entire ok intellengencia are all inherently left wing because then you come to the awkward situation where this same intellengencia of leftists are helping run and support right wing men in power. Either they know what they are doing is wrong and do it any ways or the right wingers in power are somehow tricking them.
>>18687200>Either they know what they are doing is wrong and do it any ways or the right wingers in power are somehow tricking them.Some autistic people can only count to two, and then apply that special knowledge to rhetoric.Not all autistic people are like that, though. What do you think, Anon?
Even Adorno had to admit Spengler bodied all his contemporaries, left or right
>>18677277I think it's just innate to the nature of philosophy. If you're thinking of alternative ideas then you're questioning the existing status quo and this often puts you in the "Leftist" category by its most traditional root definition (literal opposition to the 'Old Regime') A conservative, by definition, wants to conserve the existing status quo, there's not much more thinking to be done if they're satisfied with things as they are or already were and merely wants to keep things that way, otherwise he wouldn't be conserving anything to start with! >>18677295>Placing Dugin alongside SchmittWtf lmao Dugin isn't even taken seriously in Russia itself he's just a meme
>>18677277Charlie Kirk was literally a right wing philosopher that was around 2 years ago. The dude went around, espousing wisdom and thought experiments and influenced through using debate.
>>18685836I’m sure you have leftist Arabs in the universities but the powerful/influential philosophies of MENA like Salafi jihadism are as right wing as it gets. I suppose there was a left wing influence on the Iranian Revolution with the whole Black vs Red Shiism thing but among the Sunni mainstream it’s just right wing thinking.
>>18678132Nick Land talks endlessly about how much he loves immigration restriction and tariffs and how accelerationism, properly understood, requires tight labor markets. You could ask him about this tomorrow about this on xitter and he'd probably respond.
>>18687929I know you're trolling, but there are people that genuinely believes this
>>18679399If there is no God, afterlife or metaphysics for sake of argument (which I personally believe in because I hear voices in my head and see visions and have synchronicities) then yes you absolutely could do all those things and if you don’t get caught nothing bad would happen to you :)
>>18680045I genuinely have an 8 inch penis and come from a family filled with murders, rapists, drug dealers and schizos u lil bitch. “I-I’m 12% bf” I genuinely think all u tough guys are pathetic lol
>>18689579Metaethical realism is still a thing if you are an atheist. Even metaethical nonrealism of a cognitive variety allows for that.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdrNVLxmdQQhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaFRZe5vfRQ
>>18687922>I think it's just innate to the nature of philosophy. If you're thinking of alternative ideas then you're questioning the existing status quo and this often puts you in the "Leftist" category by its most traditional root definition (literal opposition to the 'Old Regime')>A conservative, by definition, wants to conserve the existing status quo, there's not much more thinking to be done if they're satisfied with things as they are or already were and merely wants to keep things that way, otherwise he wouldn't be conserving anything to start with!But the status quo isn't necessarily ideologically right-wing. In commielarper regimes for example the "conservatives" were the Lysenkoists in the USSR and Maoist hardliners in 1980s PRC. As for the current West, the prevailing ideological framework is the postwar consensus which is hardly "right-wing".
>>18685752>and then one day, for no reason at all, everyone lost interest in pastawhy are libertarian examples so removed from how the real world economy works?
>>18687929>Charlie Kirk was literally a right wing philosopherThe best thing we can say about him is that he managed to not say anything dumb for a whole year now.
>>18689780It's a basic example but the computer has to guess right every single time for billions of people for billions of products and services, it cannot be done at this time. You know this too which is why you have to seethe over the example instead of the principle.
>>18677277Philosophy is inherently a largely left-wing (ie. liberalist, rationalist, etc.) endeavour. This includes most of the Greeks, but of course also people like Peterson and pretty much everyone on the contemporary modern "right". There are exceptions, like Nietzsche, Evola, etc.The "right-wing" cultural output which is equivalent to philosophy are things like statecraft, classical art and indigenous religion. Homer being the best example off the top of my head.>>18677293>>18679957>>18687929>conservatives and libertarians >libertarian>Charlie KirkAll forms of liberalism are "left wing", including these. Otherwise the term is totally without meaning.
>>18677301Nozick only thing is being an open borders libertarian, there is nothing else there
