/lit/ - Literature

>Authoritarian personality
Did it never really occur to Adorno or many of the leftists that cite him that everything they attribute to fascism can also easily be attributed to communists and anarchists?

Adorno looks a lot like Spengler. Both are bald germans with glasses.

I just finished Negative Dialectics and there's something about Adorno that seems off. I get the feeling that his approach to dialectics is a lot different from what most Young/Left Hegelians did, and closer to a right interpretation of dialectics, in that some contradictions necessarily cannot be overcome.
Now im curious, why have the right hegelians been mostly forgotten, and was Adorno really a crypto-rightist like those student protesters thought he was?

How good is his aesthetic theory? Also aesthetics general.

>Forgotten, Spengler takes his revenge by threatening to, be right. His oblivion in the midst of confirmation endows the ominous idea of blind fatality which emerges from his conception with an objective moment. When, at the time, seven German academicians joined forces in the periodical Logos to finish off the outside, their philistine zeal provoked derision. Today their zeal seems less harmless; it testifies to an intellectual impotence comparable to the political impotence of the Weimar Republic faced with Hitler. Spengler found hardly an adversary who was his equal; his oblivion is the product of evasion.

>>13436618
How far theyve fallen. If only they had listened to him, and not to jizz.

Has anyone ever offered decent criticism of Adorno? And with 'decent' i dont mean 'bully him until he dies of a heart attack' like some German cunt students did.

>mfw i realize that Adorno was actually a conservative
So why does the right hate him and the left love him?

Was he wrong about anything or was he right about everything?

>>12911495
Remember when leftists took Spengler seriously and saw his merit despite his flaws?

I'm looking on books about fascism, whether they are sympathetic towards it or not. Almost all modern left-wing sources just describe fascism as a response to economic changes, which seems completely inadequate to me. It's like they don't even attempt to understand any deeper societal issues, and they go straight to the old mantra of 'fascism is capitalism in decay', and that's where they get stuck.

I heard Adorno is good, but i dont know where to start.

Was he a pessimist? If so, how did he reconcile that with his belief in socialism?

>extremely pessimistic, to the point that he sees almost all progress as self-defeating
>even goes so far as to say that Oswald Spengler (who was one of the few people even more pessimistic than Adorno) was correct in his views of western decline
>still believes that socialism will somehow escape all this and usher in utopia
what the fuck was his problem? Can anyone explain to me how he could come to this conclusion without total cognitive dissonance?