MLRL_Commie [comrade/them, he/him]

Marxist-Leninist-Rondeyist-Losurdoist, the only correct combination of names.

Life motto: If Deng didn’t do it, did it even happen?

  • 2 Posts
  • 939 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: November 10th, 2024

help-circle














  • As I said in my previous comment to someone else, reading any old slop will get you nowhere. But there is still a basis upon which the thinking generally arises, and that can be analyzed. Carl Schmitt, piece of absolute shit, was a very good philosopher (derogatory). And understanding him is vital, imo, to getting fascism. And Nietzsche too. I think Losurdo describes Nietzsche well enough that reading him directly might be unnecessary, but seeing how aesthetics lies at the bottom of his justification right next to goodness is really something that you only get from reading Good and Evil.


  • I agree to an extent. The vast majority of right wing slop is post hoc justification and not forward-thinking.

    But there are some VERY useful right wingers to understand to get the basis of their philosophy. Reading g Carl Schmitt was legitimately perspective changing, and (though you absolutely don’t have to hand it to him) he had a consistent rigorous method to analyze how the world worked and should be. At least he had some interesting claims and justifications that get to the core of society how he sees it. I came away much more knowledgeable about how fascism arises and is justified.

    I think reading Nietzsche is similar, though it’s a little too easy to be placate by him and think ‘eh, hes not so bad’ so I would recommend reading Losurdo’s book on Nietzsche immediately before or after any reading of Nitezsche. But Nietzsche really did just have a reactionary response to growing trends based on his aristocratic class interests and says that pretty plainly. Right wingers today are similar but with slightly changed class forms (labor aristocracy, imperial core, white supremacy, petit bourgeois, etc)