Materialism>idealism

I’m not trying to get into a whole debate, it’s just interesting to me the way some people cling to these idealist philosophers. Same w the stoics imo. As a guy who used to read all of them… they’re useless to actually understanding life. Like it can be helpful to read them in order to understand how the Western worldview evolved, but they really shouldn’t be taken as some sort of handbook - which many seem to do. (reactionaries). People who read Nietzsche or Plato and think they have some sort of secret insight is my biggest red flag irt pseudo-intellectual who is just going to waste your time… same with Dostoevsky btw.

Confucius is based af though.

Edit: Also, yes these kinds of people exist- my former mentor/boss who spent decades at a white shoe DC law firm would accept any idea if you found a quote by Plato to justify it lmao.

  • SpaceCowboy@lemmygrad.mlOP
    2·
    2 years ago

    I’m sorry if my other comment comes across as rude- I’ve had a long day. Allow me to be more precise. you’re right that fascism can be considered a case-by-case ideology which each nation’s bourgeoisie has adapted to their cultural and political landscape.

    So what I would say is that nietzsche provided some of the fundamental ideas regarding human nature which would go on to be folded into the cultural and political context of many nations. We generally refer to this marriage of Nietzsche’s ideology + the economic policies it justifies as “fascism” but each nation brings it’s own national identity/culture to the table. is that a more fair analysis.

    I think we’re in agreement here you are just pulling on the definition of the word fascism and it’s historical context.