4chan archive /lit/ (index)
similar threads
2014-04-23 12:59 4806410 Anonymous (image.jpg 318x460 58kB)
Who is you favorite National Socialist philosopher and why is it Heidegger?

1 min later 4806413 Anonymous
>>4806410 there aren't really that many choices i dont think this will be controversial at all

2 min later 4806418 Zed
>>4806410 I like Neitzche better.

3 min later 4806422 Anonymous
>>4806418 Was waiting for that one. Also, not funny

4 min later 4806426 Anonymous
Karl Marx

5 min later 4806427 Anonymous
>>4806418 Sarah Palin. Spongebob.

5 min later 4806428 Anonymous
>>4806426 lel

7 min later 4806437 Anonymous
James Connolly.

7 min later 4806439 Anonymous
>>4806410 Frege was best.

8 min later 4806442 Anonymous
>>4806410 Not really a philosopher but Knut Hamsun dseserves some props as well

9 min later 4806447 Anonymous
Otto Weininger

10 min later 4806448 Anonymous
William Morris

10 min later 4806450 Anonymous
Bertrand Russell claimed Rousseau lead directly to Hitler in his philosophical history. So Rousseau then.

10 min later 4806451 EvolaKid (1368087784660.png 4080x2232 3579kB)
>>4806410 Not many philosophers where in the Party but Heidegger is great along with pic related

10 min later 4806453 Zed
>>4806427 >Spongebob That hit me right in the giggles.

11 min later 4806457 Anonymous
Douglas Young

15 min later 4806471 Anonymous
>>4806450 I would argue that Schopenhaur contributed more to Hitler's philosophy than Rousseau

15 min later 4806472 Anonymous (1395942686001.jpg 380x250 29kB)
>>4806451 >he keeps posting it you could at least fix the spelling errors

16 min later 4806476 Anonymous
>>4806440 I've never heard a liberal attack Heidegger with an argument grounded in liberalism. Only analytic fedoras attack him, because he had the balls to do a rigorous critique of modern technology (that is supposed to lead us to the promised land/rapture e.g. The singularity) and by doing that is a heretic. They are just New world garbage, not 'liberals'.

18 min later 4806483 Anonymous
>>4806450 >Bertrand Russell Why are the British generally so beta? They don't have guns, they're pretty much living in 1984, Laurie Penny is their prime minister, and then they have people like Russell who sat around like a pansy drinking tea (and is even known for his 'teapot' lol) interpreting master philosophers in the most beta way possible.

19 min later 4806485 Anonymous
because Heidegger wrote some really cool stuff ...is this a trick question

19 min later 4806486 Anonymous
>>4806483 I blame Hume

20 min later 4806487 Anonymous
>>4806451 >confusing Nazism with aristocracy you truly are a kid

20 min later 4806488 Anonymous
>>4806471 >I would argue >doesn't provide an argument Kill yourself

20 min later 4806489 Anonymous
>>4806450 I'm not that familiar with Rousseau but he doesn't seem like the kind of dude to advocate for strong central governments, imperialism, and genocide .

21 min later 4806497 EvolaKid
>>4806487 >>confusing Nazism with aristocracy >you truly are a kid >implying National Socialism isn't Aryan aristocracy you are truly a pleb

22 min later 4806500 Anonymous
>>4806488 HE said he would he didnt say WHEN nananananana

23 min later 4806502 Anonymous
>>4806489 No, not at all, that's why you don't understand him.

23 min later 4806503 Anonymous
>>4806488 The primacy of the human Will is a key element in Hitlerian thought. For example, Hitler authored the title to Leni Riefenstahl's film masterpiece, Triumph of the Will (Triumph des Willens). Schopenhauer, by the way, is referenced twice in Mein Kampf. One of the references quotes Schopenhauer's famous dictum that the Jew is "the great master of lying." Nietzsche, the other great philosophic apostle of the Will, is not mentioned at all, although the phrase "the Will to Power (Wille zur Macht)" is attibuted to him and often associated with Hitler. It is possible that Nietzche's influence on Hitler has been overstated by historians, and that of Schopenhauer understated.

23 min later 4806505 Anonymous
>>4806483 It's a good question. What's crazy is they don't realize how beta they are. It's like a part of their brain has been removed.

25 min later 4806509 Anonymous
>>4806476 Please tell us more

26 min later 4806511 Anonymous
hitler had no philosophy sorry to hurt your nazi feels but he was a pleb >but he read schopenhauer during ww1 >he read langbehn and nietzsche and julian apostata and chamberlain and... doesnt matter. never met a pleb with patrician book shelves before? he couldnt even understand basic perspective in his shitty postcards even though he "read hundreds of books about art". action talks louder than words and he left a giant shitstain. rosenberg was the only nazi philosopher with ambitions and hitler made fun of him like an insecure redneck. of course hitler's entourage would treat him like a great thinker, thats basic minionmode.

26 min later 4806512 Anonymous
Gotta be Carl Schmitt.

26 min later 4806513 Anonymous
>>4806503 >It is possible that Nietzche's influence on Hitler has been overstated by historians, and that of Schopenhauer understated. I feel this too, especially considering Nietzsche's pro-Semetic comments were considered more abnormal by contemporaries, and his dislike of national power structures.

28 min later 4806516 Anonymous
>>4806503 Your argument assumes Hitler's understanding of the Will was equivalent to Schopenhauer's conception. But anyway, Schopenhauer would have agreed with the title "Triumph of the Will" but because the Will always triumphs, that's his whole point. This is a kind of neutral statement when you think about it, though, because according to Schopy, the Will always triumphs, whether it's Hitler's will or the Will of a great shark.

29 min later 4806517 Anonymous
>>4806450 Russell's philosophical history sucks and nobody takes it seriously. His analysis on definite descriptions is neat, but most of his other stuff is dead wrong.

30 min later 4806525 Anonymous
>>4806511 This is a good point. Many people talk about this as if reading or owning a book were the equivalent of using the author's brain to fuel our body. People are prone to misinterpretation, especially when it comes to art school rejects.

32 min later 4806529 Anonymous
>>4806516 Heh, I repeated myself here. I'm a little drunk. Basically my point is that according to Schopy you can't go out there and *try* to assert your Will, I don't think. You don't have a choice.

32 min later 4806534 Anonymous
>>4806516 >because according to Schopy, the Will always triumphs And this isn't a good thing, he would add, which differentiates him from Hitler even more. You don't even need Schopenhauer to link some philosopher with Hitler when there's already Hegel.

36 min later 4806548 Anonymous
>>4806511 >>4806525 If Hitler revived and could read all the shit that's been written against him I'm think the people making fun of his rejection from art school would be the one to hurt him the most.

36 min later 4806549 Anonymous
>>4806534 >tfw hegel created hitler, stalin and freud

38 min later 4806560 Anonymous
>>4806549 >freud Ripping off Shopenhauer and Nietzsche constitutes like 80% of his theory.

39 min later 4806565 Anonymous
>>4806560 >Shopenhauer Forgib me Schopy. I typo'd

40 min later 4806569 Anonymous
>>4806503 You're an idiot. Schopenhauer's Will is the unity of all living things. It cannot seek power, because there is nothing outside of life that one can conquer. Schopenhauer's views are peaceful and surrendering. Nothing in there to spur violence. Nietzsche's Will to Power is the desire of individual objects to overcome one another. It continually seeks power in testing itself against others. Nietzsche's views are aggressive and conquering. Everything in there spurs violence.

40 min later 4806570 Anonymous
Why does Heidegger catch so much shit for being a Nazi, when Carl "let's fucking burn more jewish books" Scmitt gets off without any real criticism and is cited widely within law and philosophy?

41 min later 4806574 Anonymous
>>4806560 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freudo -Marxism

44 min later 4806582 Anonymous
>>4806569 >Nietzsche's views are aggressive and conquering. Everything in there spurs violence. Nietzsche is working off the Heraclitean idea of polemos. This has the connotations of war and strife but can also be read as a playful, joyous phenomenon. Nietzsche strives for man to be the dancing star star, the playful, innocent creating child. The violence of the lion gives way to the creating force of the child.

44 min later 4806583 Anonymous
>>4806570 Well, I think it's because Carl was always honest about his views. There's no "hidden propaganda" danger on his works.

45 min later 4806585 Anonymous
>>4806548 What exactly is Hitler's relation to art history? I don't get the impression that he was principally behind the Degenerate Art exhibit

51 min later 4806598 Anonymous
>>4806583 Heidegger's nationalistic emphasis on thought belonging to the soil that produced it isn't veiled at all, neither is it the slightest controversial from an existentialist point of view.

9 hours later 4808429 Anonymous
>>4806582 This. However, the child-phase was in Zarathustra's case close to death (the phase where one creates a new soul).

9 hours later 4808464 Anonymous
>>4806570 Schmitt is cited and discussed nowhere near as widely as Heidegger, and very rarely discussed in contexts where its possible to actually divorce his arguments from the fact that he was a literal Nazi. So, like, you can have some purely philosophical argument and invoke Heidegger without really knowing that he was a Nazi. And I think that really bothers people. Where if you're talking about Schmitt, it's about politics and everyone understands that he was a Nazi. And in my experience there's usually an unspoken codicil or an attitude when discussing Schmitt, of "Yes we know this dude was evil and we're only entertaining his ideas here because they're historically relevant, or important critiques, or whatever." He doesn't get off scot free. The difference between him and Heidegger is that everyone knows Schmitt was a Nazi so it's not controversial, whereas Heidegger is more ambiguous (both in terms of how much of a Nazi he was and how that tied into his thought) and so more controversial.

9 hours later 4808522 Anonymous
>>4808464 >we know this dude was evil What kind of people do you associate with who would stoop that low in a discussion about philosophers?

26 hours later 4809831 Anonymous (a225a.jpg 250x298 24kB)


26 hours later 4809848 Anonymous
>>4806497 National Socialism is populist as fuck. It hasn't much to do with actual aristocracy, it's demagoguery masquerading as elitism.

26 hours later 4809885 Anonymous
>>4806450 Bertrand Russell is reddit tier.

27 hours later 4809962 Anonymous
>>4806503 >Hitlerian Why do people do this? Why do people add "ian" or "ism" after every word? 4chanian Newfagism Shitpostian

27 hours later 4810009 Anonymous (1907166939.jpg 923x1360 316kB)
>>4809848 incidentally, evola actually wrote a book on this very subject.

36 hours later 4811170 Anonymous
Barack Obama

2.232 0.181