So, was nazism really a central aspect of this guy's life/philosophy?

>it's just a conspiracy
it's established fact, and Hitler tried to solve it. Now we're left with degeneracy and racemixing as the world collapses from sin and liberal values, all of which Hitler would've stopped if it weren't for brainwashed morons like you

Nah, it's college politics. His "naziism" was basically not giving up tenure.

Nazism was the wrathful avatar of the death knell of German culture, the cornerstone of which is basically the maxim "Take life seriously." German culture had been slowly crushed, depressed, and dispersed under the weight of bourgeois existence since Germany'd industrial revolution, and it built up enough pressure to release one explosive manifestation of pure Germanness, before fading out into bourgeois nothingness.

Like it or not, Mann, Hesse, Heidegger, Spengler, even Wittgenstein, the entire fin de siecle generation and milieu in Germany, were all breathing the same air as Nazism. Nazism wasn't an isolated, merely political phenomenon. It was the spiteful last stand of one of the great Geists of Europe. They all felt it and they all knew what it was.

The reason why Heidegger tragically displaced Husserl is because Heidegger knew 1933 Nazism was Germany's last, desperate attempt to regain an active posture, and stop the pallbearers from bearing it any further into the tomb. The reason he tragically displaced Husserl was because Husserl was a Jew. The Jews have their eye on a different kind of melancholy, and it wasn't the one Heidegger and Hitler and German humanists all had their eye on. The Jews have their eyes on a perennial melancholy, they have the sense of already being in the tomb-world, but the Germans still had one last hour of blood pumping through their veins, and they didn't want to become merely historical, as they knew they had.

praise Kek

So? Levinas wrote an essay called "Metaphysical Violence" which Derrida and scores of other important philosophers like Nancy have responded to.

>I have no idea what the black notebooks are

Heidegger wasn't just some abstract footnote-writer. He tried to formulate a concept of a being unto death. If you formulate a concept of a being unto death and you're such a lily-livered coward imbecile that you fall for Nazi propaganda, it calls your notions of being unto death into question.

He ended his life by throwing himself into Augustine. Think through that.

>NAZISM IS BADD GUYIS!
Please go to reddit if you can't handle the redpill

t. bluepilled cuck

The true redpill is understanding that National Socialism was degenerate and opened the gates for liberals and cultural marxist (and their modern variant: the SJeWs)to take control of Europe and subjugate the White race.
Read Schopenhauer's "On Nazis".

Were being genocided

None of whom were nazis. The original point was that Heidegger acknowledging this would somehow mean nazism is to be found in Sein und Zeit.

>So?

Hitler wasn't a white nationalist or a fascist.

>So, was nazism really a central aspect of this guy's life/philosophy?

i don't know but it does show that he must have been a god damn next level genius because if he was at all ordinary he would have been called a madman, imbecile, scumbag, etc. and be purged from history, the fact that this dudes philosophy was so dank that he could get away with being a nazi shows he was a genius, other former nazis like paul deman got kicked out the canon

You're right. He was an Aryan nationalist, and most people considered "white" today would have been relegated to slave status in Greater Germany. It still doesn't change the fact that the specter of Adolf Hitler killed white nationalism and fascism.

No. I found Being & Time and his essays to be very against Nazi ideology. His relationship with it, it seems to me, is very very complicated. In his Der Spiegel interview, he claims that he adopted it solely because he was forced to; that ought to be taken with a grain of salt, obviously, but it's also very convincing.

He did dedicate Being & Time to Husserl after all, and the Nazis punished him by making him dig ditches later on. It's also known that the Nazis didn't appreciate B&T at all, likely because it can be easily interpreted as humanist (despite Heidegger's dislike of that term), critiquing group think and group solidarity.

>Cultural Marxism
This is the worst meme

nigga if they published your porn history right now. the notebooks are anti-semitic, but his enthusiasm for nazis was rather understated. it's about as good proof that he's madly in love with hitler as palestinians bombing jews proves them nazis. the vast bulk of his philosophy doesn't jive with nazi tenets, and being antisemitic doesn't make it work better with it. you have to have a really simplisitic definition of naziism for it to stick, and really low expectations of how much work heidegger would put into a cause he was behind for it to seem like he's a nazi. the man used draw his own water from a well and hang out with country farmers, if he wanted to be a good nazi he could have shown up for a few more meetings because he's not exactly a man who didn't put effort into philosophies he resonated with. pretty much everyone agrees the biggest influence on his philosophy was his war camp experience shoveling rocks not the nazis offering him a pay rise. compared to the allied influence, the nazis got nothing for their money out of him. hitler should have given him a hole to dig and refill, not tenure.

Since there is already a Heidegger thread, I want to ask some stuff. If no one replies I will make a thread, killing another thread. Said thread could be one you created, so you better reply.

I've read the intro of Being and Time like 4 times. The first two I didn't make it to the end, I couldn't handle the last part where he talks about phenomenology.
The third read I actually finished the introduction and it made sense. The forth time was a much easier read, the text seemed like non-sense now was almost water clear. He makes you "see through" the words. (does this make sense, did I get it?)
English is not my native language, so I don't know how the weird concepts he crafts are translated in english, so I can the fastest way I can explain my understanding of the text (just the intro) is using metaphors, I guess.
Before starting, I want to remark that the translation I was reading was the first translation into my language of Being and Time, which is known to be too literal and obscure. I wasnt aware of this, now I have a "better" translation which I recently started reading.

Ok, now I will try to explain what I got from the book, lol. Please bare with me.
When I was a teen I "realised" (I didnt have any kind of idea of what philosophy was in this time) there is a difference between bet the "mind" and "consciousness". Now I guess I noticed this because I was really depressed in this time of my life. This made me try to "isolate" from my "mind" (or better said it this context, my internal monologue/stream of consciousness), since it was making me "see" life through a really pessimistic and hurting way. I got the sense that what we call "mind" is not so much under our control, it just "passes" in front of us, in the way a movie in tape passes through the projector's light bulb (this being some kind of metaphor for "consciousness"), more or less.
Is Heidegger trying to making us understand that, for all of the philosophy tradition, we have been just trying to understand what happens in the "movie", when we should be first trying to understand why we are in a movie theather, what is the movie theather, and mainly, what is the projector and how does it work in the inside, like how and engineer would understand all the parts of it? Or something like that? Did this make any sense?

Isn't, in it's most ethimological way, schizophrenia defined as "mind split" or something like that? I'm pretty sure that what I was experiencing in my teen years was something known as "derealization".

What do you guys think? If this is non-sense I apologize for making you waste your time, if you made to this point.

Also, I'm pretty sure this guy had some kind of substance induced psychedelic experience. I can't think of any other way in which someone could approach the problem of the meaning of being related to time like he does. But thats a discussion not really worth getting into, I guess.

Sorry for the typos and the shitty prose overall.

Bump

He was not a nazi in essence, he was part of the nazi party just as 90% of germans were at that time
He saw that the movement had a good way of relationship between technology and dasein, then, shortly, he realised they were all retards, and stayed in the party so he could still teach in university. At his classes he was very openly critical agaisnt tha nazis
The only times he expressed full on adherence to Nazism was when he had to keep it cool with the authorities

this whole thing sounds like a philosopher pretending to be a neuroscientist, which is why i haven't invested the time to read it

So this is the true redpill.....

Thats my fault, read him, he is legit

>Adolf Hitler killed white nationalism and fascism.
he really didn't, America winning WW2 and spreading consumer culture through the world killed nationalism.

Autistic post guy here again

All the terms I used and the pseud psichological way in which I tried to express my very general idea of what I understood, are one big (flawed) metaphor, since I don't know the correct and standard way in which his thought has been understood/translated in english

The mind and consciousness distinction I made is related to the understanding of "Logos" in his (Heidegger) thought. His thought is really focused on language, not the mind, but is easy to see the relation imo, thats why I used it

I hope someone understands what I tried to convey, but, because of the lack of (You)s it seems like I failed to express myself.

What did he mean by this

as a jew he didn't want guys with giant uncut white dicks in his porno

This kind of comments shouldnt surprise me but they don't stop to amuse me
Made my night, dude
I was about tight up the noose but your comment made me look at the window, and the trees looked different, as did everything else. Life isn't as I expected it as a kid to be. Sometimes everything is bitter, you just know it doesn't get better, but are things like this that remind of the comic side of the tragedy
Probably I should watch cartoons from time to time
Anyways, thanks

You missed the point. Being and Time specifically says, in the introduction, that starting from "consciousness," whatever that means, is already too burdensome of a term to have any sort of ontology. Being and time is not a book about the structure of experience like you would find in Husserl. Consciousness is not the point for Heidegger and it is specifically this term that he breaks from in Being and Time to demarcate the scope of 'fundamental ontology.' Just take the book at its word. It is a book dedicated to an understanding of the being of the being of a particular kind of being named Dasein. What you've written above fully glosses over the most important part of the introduction.

So literally no one is saying that Heidegger woke up in the morning and saluted Hitler and thought Mein Kampf was gospel. The whole problem of the black notebooks and his allegiance to the nazi party is whether or not Heideggerianism (whatever that means) is inherently fascistic or what parts of Heidegger's philosophy could even for a brief moment shepherd Heidegger into such a relationship. For instance the 1935 lecture series is the most obvious example of Heidegger's more fascistic tendencies, but the question still remains why, for all of his anti-Hegelianism, Heidegger could have possible seen something 'world-historical' happening in Nazism even if he saw right through it (which is clear in those same '35 lectures)? Yeah the obvious answers are there but the nuanced ones are not. Does fascism, as Levinas suggest, arise out of ontology's basic drive to 'obey' the command of Being? Is the late Heidegger the godfather of ecofascism? Was Heidegger ever able to wrest himself or his philosophy from the fundamental gestures of domination? These questions abide and the black notebooks do not make them any easier to answer.

I understand exactly what you are saying, I was trying to make a reference of the way in which he approaches and crafts the question that asks about being
I know that he is destroying, but at the same time he is creating, or better said, showing "estructures" as a result of the destruction, from which be able to "see" the answer instead of obscuring it with a definition that associates and explains "being" related to a "system"
Like, if ask someone what a piece of chess is, before you know what chess is, and they explain you what it is, explaining it's relation with the game (this is what he DOES NOT want to do)

someone asks*

this is an epic non argument from an obvious communist. you here because you read das kapital?

what an epic argument from a conspiracy theorist. you here because you read some post on /pol/?

>mfw I was just reading Das Kapital after working for 12 hours and effectively participating in an extended period of workers' self-management while the proprietor of the business was on vacation and demonstrating his own merely symbolic necessity in the maintenance of his business
Cultural Marxism is a meme, these people aren't Marxists, they're just insane.

>i expect well-sublimated political opinions from Veeky Forums, not babby's first reactionary "hitler was right" bs
What was Hitler wrong about? He mostly just exaggerated.

hey lol your ideology sucks and is a failure. you will die and nothing will ever change. give up.

>Read Schopenhauer's "On Nazis".

I don't think anyone says that Lovecraft's views invalidate his work, just that he shouldn't be on an awards statue. Lovecraft himself would probably be mad that an award with his likeness was given to the kinds of people he didn't like.

Metaphysics ----------> Politics

He even had an affair with Arendt and still maintained correspondance with her after she flee Germany. Heidegger said plenty of times how his own life was in danger if he didn't accepted nazism, curiously he had a few essays in which he criticizes National Socialism before Hitler ascended into power, one of such essays is The Age of World Picture. In the black notebooks however he does have some anti semitic remarks which make the puzzle of his personality more ambiguous, mostly because he was still receiving and sending fondly written letter to Hannah Arendt. Now, Heidegger's idea of philosophy, as ontology, was apolitical and amoral due to the fact that he desired to explore the existential structures in which human beings determine a meaning of being, specifically a Jemeinigkeit, that is the-being that- belongs-to me (I haven't read Heidegger in english so I don't know how his work is translated). All this structure are pre phenomenological, they are pre political or pre ethical.

you're proving my point here by spamming this otherwise articulate thread with your leftypol memes. feeling particularly stupid today? don't have enough images to make your arguments for you?

>Cultural Marxism is a meme

most of the more mainstream ideological "left" political platforms in the west (specifically the U.S.) have been almost entirely subjugated by frankfurt philosophies concocted by marxist intellectuals. you could actually say that these platforms were subverted and are in turn being used to subvert, as cultural subversion is something marxists aren't historically apprehensive to try. this is the entire concept behind cultural marxism: contradictory culture being consumed by frankfurt marxist "problem solving" by jewish intellectuals.

anyways, what problems are these intellectuals attempting to solve exactly? what are their ideological, philosophical, and other inevitably political mindsets that motivates them to believe that the west, as it traditionally is, needs "fixing"?

marxists attempt to solve the problems that conflict with their so-called revolutionary marxism, so one of the biggest problems of which they have to address can simply be described as inequality. they wish to inspire and condition the idea that all people, cultures, income classes, etc are all/should all be identical, which (not coincidentally) is something communism (another genius marxist idea) relies heavily on.

what exactly is equality other than the subjective choices of people who get to make the choice in the first place? some choices people have made in the past have been more harmonious with nature than others - but anything from the frankfurt school of thought is about as defiant of nature as it could be. eventually, their ideas all become as monarchic as the ideas they tried to revolt against, except in the case of marxists everyone dies as a result. pretty cool huh?

marxists try to subvert western societies and their fundamental values because said priorities contradict their own, standing in the way of their power. that is cultural marxism. it is very real and happening all around you. i suppose you could read philosophy of praxis to get your bearings but it's a more pro-marxist work, so remember that when going into it. i wouldn't buy it

'Cultural Marxism is a meme' is a meme.

>Victim blaming.
kys.

>I refuse to address the obvious phenomena of spirit turning into materia turning into culture.
Well that's brainlet for you.

lefty-heidegger out-heideggered heidegger

>The whole problem of the black notebooks and his allegiance to the nazi party is whether or not Heideggerianism (whatever that means) is inherently fascistic
It's not. You'd know that if you read any of his philosophy including the black notebooks. Like I said, you have to have a very weak definition of naziism for him to qualify, and it has to be so simplistic that it makes /pol/ look smart and affable. >For instance the 1935 lecture series is the most obvious example of Heidegger's more fascistic tendencies,
You mean the year that he split from systematic thinking and went to historical description? God, I can imagine how retarded your definition of a nazi is going to be. I'm sure they hated the bureaucratic state just like Heidegger. imagine an anime girl laughing at you

>seen something "world-historical" happening in Nazism
you might want to think about how retarded you sound

You sound like a fantasist who was taken in by fantasists with bigger words, tbph, man. If some lecturer is telling you this, you need to start paying a different university.

Well he's not wrong. Nazism's end goal is the destruction of the state and all financial institutions like banks. It's pure racial anarchy. Hitler just used fascists policies to achieve his end goal, but he was always going to abandon them.

>Nazism's end goal is the destruction of the state and all financial institutions like banks.
Nah mate. Nazism only cares for the eugenic survival of the German race and will to that end utilise the state and finance. If anything it strives for the solidarist grounding of state and finance in race.

There is no problem here at all. He supported Nazi Germany. So what?

>Whether or not heidegger's philosophy is in line with his politics, and how, is a pretty serious question that needs to be answered.

How? Why?

>it's established fact

>he was a METAPHYSICAL philosopher
bruh.... read more Heidegger.

I mean, it is clear to see how Heidegger could fancy/be taken romantically aback by national socialism from his philosophy (not necessarily tied up with the 'gas ze jews' part), yet nazism doesn't follow necessarily from philosophy.

The interesting post-heidegggerian scholarship are those people who try to rethink the political THROUGH the consequences that Heidegger himself ended up with, but in the end didn't follow through with. I'm thinking Nancy & Lacoue-Labarthe.

from HIS* philosophy

I think, ultimately, if you look at the whole orchestration of the Endlösung from a heideggerian perspective, it is clear that nazism, beneath it's rhetorical smoke screen promises of a new Beginning, was just a continuation of Ge-stell. I mean the extermination camps are like an archetypical materialization of the type of thinking that Heidegger vigorously warned about.

The Jewish Question is well established fact. It happens to be taboo these days because of 'the holocaust'.

interesting, care to explain what you mean by 'tomb-world'

because hes scared of agreeing and then finding out he agrees with nazis, he isn't man enough to make his own mind

Dasein includes race and ethnicity

youtube.com/watch?v=beRNIxYsxcw

No, it doesn't. Dasein precedes all particular modes of being and the determinations of the They.

Race is phenomenological, endemic to Being, just as language structures it

Cheap appropriation of concepts for a political end, on your part and on Ahmed's, even if from opposite intentions.

Fuck off.

You fuck off, a black person living in a fully white society experiences deep heimatlosigkeit and alienation from Being.

>alienation from Being

Using phrases like this in relation to Heidegger immediately exposes you as a dilettante cunt.

Ich bin Doktor im Heideggerismus, Brudi

How fucking high was Heidegger's power level?

I don't think you've actually read Marx, you don't seem to know much about what you're talking about.
I wish it were that simple.

>concepts for a political end
>le metaphysics are just ideas and apolitical in nature

confirmed for not understanding heidegger

I've actually talked with a Marxist about their conception of knowledge and I think I've seen how the whole po-mo crowd connects with Marxism, it has to do with the entire class ideology thing. Since man's knowledge is rooted principally in his means of production and the interests of the ruling class, it follows that there is no overarching truth that can be appealed to, except class interest. The problem is that postmodernists place their carriage in front of their horses, so to speak, they think that simply by relativizing knowledge they'll the conceptions of society, without altering the means of production (which is what should be altered, according to Marxist theory).

>ince man's knowledge is rooted principally in his means of production and the interests of the ruling class, it follows that there is no overarching truth that can be appealed to, except class interest.
You'll have to make your reasoning more explicit, I don't understand how anything follows from anything else in this mish-mash of poorly defined terms whose meanings you seem to have gleaned from conversations with self-proclaimed Marxists rather than by seriously interfacing with Marxist theory in a meaningful way. This may seem like a complex epistemological problem that Marxism cannot surmount but you actually have no idea what the terms involved mean. You think Marx himself was postmodern? You really are daft.

>so one of the biggest problems of which they have to address can simply be described as inequality. they wish to inspire and condition the idea that all people, cultures, income classes, etc are all/should all be identical, which (not coincidentally) is something communism (another genius marxist idea) relies heavily on.

It's sort of funny that Adorno, the Frankfurt School "cultural marxist" par excellence is diametrically and unequivocally opposed to uniformization, something that you describe as his goal, and that this theme runs clear as crystal through most of his thought.

But could you link me one of the youtube videos you took your thoughts from? I'd like to watch it.

>I've talked with one silly bitch who calls himself a Marxist, so I can pretty safelly say I have a firm grasp on both Marxist and post-Marxist theory as wel as political pragmatics, and am totally not a deluded faggot liccing my own taint for the taste of it.

kys yourself at the soonest opportunity, my friend.

>doesn't know how to read nor interpret meaning through context clues

why are you here?

>muh Adorno
>

>the cornerstone of which is basically the maxim "Take life seriously."
Would anyone care to expand on this? Seems like an interesting take

1

The plot twist is that his politics did matter, and that it's not a bad thing

LMAO

anti-natsoc Veeky Forums pseuds btfo by history in finding out that yet another one of the greatest minds of the XX century was a fervent natsoc.

will you ever realize that your political beliefs are a product of your own intellectual inferiority? you should focus on hobbies more affordable for your intellect, such as comic books or feminazi tumblr activism.