/lit/ - Literature

>Hitler
kill zogbot neocons

>>22590845
>doesn't start with Locke
Straight into the trash.

isn't Hitler a right wing dictator

>>22591120
technically fascism/naziism and communism break the traditional left/right dichotomy
but i imagine the book is making the argument that fascism was influenced primarily by marxism therefore nazi = left

>>22590845
Anything that has references to Hitler and De Sade is obvious bullshit. It's pretty clear leftists aren't Hitlerites and don't espouse Hitlerism. If you want a descriptive account of what leftists believe, then it's obviously a pretty bad place to start.

Just read a leftist reader. I'm pretty sure they exist.

>>22591127
>fascism was influenced primarily by marxism
Not even close, its more like Orthodox Hegelianism

>>22590845
This type of genealogy, right or left, is always inaccurate. It ignores too much of the contingent circumstances of the thinkers and makes tenuous intellectual links between them. "Rousseau believed in a general will, that's kinda like Marxs dictatorship of the proletariat therefore Rousseau influenced Marx."

All that being said however these books are fun because it's intellectual candy and this particular one is my favorite right wing version of it, Leddihn is incredibly well read and theres not really intellectuals like him anymore. If nothing else it familiarizes you with thinkers from the other side.

>>22590845

>>22591106
He's a monarchist, braindead /pol/nigger

>>22591172
Perhaps 'primarily' was excessive

>>22590845
lol this title (or the one with Pol Pot rather) always amuses: so ameritarded

>>22591232
>>22591156
Because of his weird monarchist elitist worldview,he believed in the false notion that anything populist must be inherently democratic and leftist. Fascist movements (despite being far-right) differed from the old school far-right (reactionary neo-feudalist monarchism like Maistre and Franco) by championing populist rhetoric and the nation state model as defined by the Enlightenment (though fascist movements also rejected the Enlightenment in other regards as well like rejecting liberal democracy).

>>22591535
What makes something left or right? What’s wrong with the author’s assessment?

>>22590845
>learn about leftism
Just watch bbc cuck porn while chanting “I am an ally of the LGBTQIABCDLMNOP2S+ community” and trying not to cry

>>22591342
Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn was from Austria-Hungary you mindbroken eurotard.

>>22590845
Leszek Kołakowski. Main Currents of Marxism

fuck now listing Hitler as a leftists is just brainded factualy wrong propaganda if you want to learn about leftism Just fucking read the leftists And then can you read books like this otherwise your Just learning someone often biased opinions on shit. read the capital,read the comunist manifesto read the capitalist realism read fanon's stuff read this book is gay etc Just ask fucking leftists whnich books and other media shaped their beliefes and read them not shit like this

>>22591156
De Sade is very important as libertine, Rousseauean, and republican thinker. But really OP should simply read Kolakowski.

>>22594216
Sade as a political philosopher is just a fetish

>>22594227
Even that is an important political position. If, as Rousseau says, natural man is good, and political man is evil, then why should any natural impulse, like to rape and murder when based on a strong and irresistable natural impulse, be illegal? Very hard for a Rousseauean to argue against taking "once more effort" in a libertine republic. And liberalism ultimately did accept that following any natural impulse is moral, with a caveat of requiring contractual consent, and is now struggling to justify the illegality of incest, zoophilia, and pedophilia (although the discovery of power imbalances as a concept has saved them on the latter at the cost of making swathes of formerly conventional adult age-gap and career/class-gap relationships illicit).

>>22594216
>>22593551
>literally who pole
Why should I read him?

>>22594271
>literally who
there's only 1 who here and it aint him anon

>>22594310
Are you implying that Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn is a literally who? He's a world renowned political philosophy, who was published by the prestigious Mises Institute

>>22594444
>Mises Institute
>prestigious
A think tank largely relegated to the internet for support since they are more interested in ideology than economics

>>22590845
No, but pic related is

>>22594271
Because he wrote the definitive philosophical history of Marxism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Currents_of_Marxism

>>22594541
no one's gonna waste his time reading a 1000+ pages book about marxism

>>22594578
plus leftism goes far beyond marxism

>>22594578
>>22594585
Stay a dumb retard then.

>>22594578
I did

>>22591669
If we are speaking in terms of economic theory, then the left is regulated economy while the right is unregulated economy. The Nazis(national socialists) believed in a planned economy albiet not as planned as a communist would like. This makes Hitler and the Nazis leftwing. I mean think about it, they hated Jews. Why? They are greedy bankers. Sounds like the bourgeoisie exploiting the Proletariat through capitalist explotation to me....leftism

>>22594541
He wrote the definitive philosophical history of Marxism up to 1955 or so. After that, less so.

Also his thesis is interesting and his anti-communism is coherent. I say this as a communist.

>>22594578
Retard.

>>22596779
>Also his thesis is interesting and his anti-communism is coherent.
Elaborate

>>22594578
it's the best book on marxism ever written and if you want to know about it then there's no reason not to read it

>>22596848
Its largely that Marxism is a liberal german ideology and that it degraded in the face of poor quality practicioners using it politically. Basically its Frankfurt but instead of being right wing, it is right wing.

>>22596855
I seriously read the section on KAPD and divergent libertarian thinkers (for the obvious reason). The coverage was apt, the attacks on their reasoning cogent. But as I said above this views Marxism as an ideological project. The alternative version (Cleaver H "Introduction" _Reading Capital Politically_) views Marxism as an entry way into a praxic project of the proletariat. Still he bothered to deal with left communism. I guess someone needs to write volume 4 LARP covering 1945-2020.