Hitler, according to my own philosophy of politics, was most definitely left as as opposed to right wing. I understand the previous quote (see forum responses for previous post and relevant information) from a reputable source saying he was Right Wing, but all I am telling you is that THIS IS A DEFINATE POINT OF CONTENTION, with implications and ramifications for the way we view our own political truths (I apologize for prattling on). If you aren't following this train of thought-Imagine that your beliefs about things generally coincided with essential ideologies behind atrocious fascism. You would say that vis a vis these beliefs were false or at least ethically wrong, therefore subject to re-appraisal.
It's only logical. This comes up for me in my readings of conservative philosophy, and marxist philosophy. Many of the German Philosophers in the 1900th century get associated with laying the seeds of totalitarianism. Hegel begot marx- Hegel the german idealist- and it has been said by such notable scholars as Robert Solomon (RIP) that he was a proto nazi- that his radical idealism lent itself to:
a) subordination of the individual to the state. an inconsistent or indeterminate statement of principles. c) radicalism, nationalism, and...
...an integral relationship between the master and the slave.
Marx himself early on in his academic career identified himself as one of the 'young hegelians' of prussia- also refferred to in certain circuits as the LEFT HEGELIANS (who I will argue are FAR FAR more prone to the brutal techniques of dictatorial power than the Old Hegelians, but more on that later).
Hegel, it has been said by commentators, was an 'automoton of the state'. He had a definite ethics of conformity, as illustrated by some of his characterizations of the master slave relationship between the powerful and the weak, the rich and the poor, the living and the dying. But he really emphasized the relationship of the individual to society as residing in communication and community- a very good way of uniting the individual with the universal, which is what I think Hegel ultimately set out to do. The young Hegelians (marxists) were hopelessly idealistic and really appropriated and plaigarized Hegels methodology in service of left wing ideals such as communism, socialism, and radical liberalism.
Now I'm no nationalist and I'm certainly aware that the cold war is over- however, philosophically the idea's of marxism still have salience today. Not purely in the realm of removed academia, but in the way that our ideas interact with VERY REAL ethical Being.
Now the question of Right Wing fascism remains, yet I have of yet read no 'Old Hegelian' commentators that fall victim to Marxism, Nazism, nor Fascism of any kind. Rightwing philosophers with their tireless dialectical scalpel have all but extracted any remnants of this kind of totalitarianism, leaving the essential structures of what Heidegger called 'Dasein'.
This German Pragmatist said that:
"DASEIN COMPORTS ITSELF TOWARDS AN UNDERSTANDING (vorstanden) OF ITS OWN BEING."
This is entirely opposed to Descartes Cogito Ergo Sum.
Reading and References
Hiedegger Being and Time Hegel Phenomenology of Spirit Robert Solomon In the Spirit of Hegel
Have a nice cup of coffee, smoke some fine tobacco products from Winston-Salem, N.C. (I recommend Lucky Strikes), and settle into my plethora of Conservative tirades. I try to blend a bit of Philosophy in with politics, as Philosophy is central to understanding the ethics involved in political thought.
On Location in