Where do you think he situates himself politically?

Obviously a far lefty. And a proper one at that. He seems pretty focused on the cultural, historic and materialistic parts of society, and not so much on identetypolitics as it seems is what the left has degraded itself to. Actually, his contempt for that whole branch of the left is what I think makes him hard to "place" politically. But that's just a sign of how much the modern left sucks.

I'm happy to see that somebody else is reading his work.

>>8646876
>Obviously a far lefty.

What the fuck are you smoking, nigga?

>>8646876
>implying the id-pol "left" is not a creation of the alt-right to discredit the actual political left

>>8646885
Nothing, I'm reading Sloterdijk.

>>8646889
Probably. I don't care. The thing is that the left is idle in all other forms, so then; it's nothing?

>>8646885
this

File: fedora.jpg (64KB, 1382x922px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 1382x922px

>>8646876
This is so unbelievably wrong I have to just tip my cap to you. Well played, sir. I almost took that bait. Have a fedora.

ITT: people saying "wrooong", and not intellectually capable of explaining why.

just FUN

>>8646889
The identity-politicking left predates the alt-right.

>>8646889
>teenagers on /pol/ invented intersectionality just to make us look like retards, which we totally aren't
Do you actually believe this?

>>8646997
Sigh.

The man in the picture was described as a fascist by a founding member of the Frankfurt School, for an essay he wrote entitled 'Rules for the Human Zoo.' If you think Jurgen Habermas calling you a fascist can somehow be squared with being on the political left, you clearly need to go back and re-read the material.

That is *one* example of why it would be hard for anon to justify their claim. There are many others. There is also a difference between 'not intellectually capable' and 'really not worth my time.' This falls into the latter category.

>>8647051
did you read the wikipedia article just now?

>oh wow he was called a fascist by liberal-superstar habermas!!!

read some of his own words if you can fucking anglo

http://www.fr-online.de/kultur/peter-sloterdijk--das-megathema-unserer-zeit-heisst-migration-,1472786,34310942.html

>>8647051
Sigh.

This isn't a game of Magic the Gathering, it's not like you summon a Habermas quote, and suddenly Sloterdijk looses his ability to be left-wing. Habermas essentially refuses to engage in posthumanistic thought. But it's not at all difficult to subscribe to posthumanism and be left-wing.
In the essay you mention, he's literrally doing the opposite of arguing for fascism. He's arguing, that the disapperance of humanism as a civilicing process has left the field open for a variety of possible ways to lead the non-civiliced impulses of people. He simply brings up the subject, that we have to think about this vacuum, instead of just letting the thing flow by itself. He's not arguing "for" anything, but trying to pinpoint an area of thinking that he thinks need to be adressed.

I really like Habermas, but in this case he was simply frightened by the mere mention of buzzwords like "eugenics" and "the shepherd of the people", and reacted by gut.

So please, enter the conversation with reasoning and not appeal to authority.

File: Ssymbolism_Ganesha.png (468KB, 715x572px) Image search: [Google]

468KB, 715x572px

>>8647051
"Human Zoo" = "animal Farm", ergo it's communism.

It's kind of a wry admittance that he thinks of himself as one of the better animals who is called to make the rules for the others. It's still socialist and egalitarian.

His goal is "therapheutical" as he often calls it.

All I know is that he writes big books with big words. For who? It is extremely tiring to go through and so I stopped reading "You Must Change Your Life ".

Sloterdijk has a youtube interview where he praises capitalism, albeit a slowed down version of it. He also agreed, a few years ago, with Fukuyama about the end of history being the worldwide spreading of liberal democracy. Even Zizek calls him a conservative and they're friends. Why even bother calling him a leftist at all, regardless of your esoteric notion of leftism?

>>8648906

>He also agreed, a few years ago, with Fukuyama about the end of history being the worldwide spreading of liberal democracy.

So we can agree he is a retard then, as is anyone who agrees with Fukuyama's stupid theory.

What we're currently witnessing is liberal democracy in a very precarious position, worldwide. Certainly, as far away from 'inevitable' as one could possibly imagine.

>>8648921
Not sure if Sloterdijk backed away from that, but Fukuyama (at least as Zizek tells it) certainly did. Zizek recently said tgat he now sees the future as played out between nations under a form of stalinism and nations developing some different form of communism. It might sound silly now, but maybe it's plausible for a more distant future.

File: WAR.png (434KB, 1015x1527px) Image search: [Google]

434KB, 1015x1527px

>>8648953

Zizek is kinda right, but his idea of a Communist resurgence sounds like his own wishful thinking as opposed to something possible.

I imagine what we'll see, realistically, is the rise of Old-School Nationalism vs Hyper-Capitalist Globalism.

>>8647051
Habermas is one of the most disgusting avatars of the modern "left" though. Anybody that rotting piece of shit dislikes is probably worth reading.

>>8648906
>Even Zizek calls him a conservative and they're friends. Why even bother calling him a leftist at all

You can be a conservative (not in the American sense of the word obviously) and a leftist. See Orwell.

>>8648965

>Old-School Nationalism vs Hyper-Capitalist Globalism.

I got news for you kid. They'll be on the same side, and they always have been.

>>8648996
There are some limits to labels obviously, but I don't see the point in calling someone a conservative just because he wants to preserve some very select and specific values. By such criteria even Zizek is a conservative. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but the thread started with someone calling Sloterdijk a "far" leftist.

>>8648997
Pretty much this. It's a really odd situation, I've seen a /pol/ thread a few weeks ago about young people not wanting to work and many answers were "I don't want the Jews exploiting me" as if an Aryan™ boss makes all the difference.

It's just sad that many only understand politics in terms of Degenerate Left vs Traditional Right.

If you care about politics enough to care what others think or believe in some left/right bologna you are a pseud. No memes. No joke. You are a pseud.

>>8649035
They want a fucking businessman to rule the US.
People always talk about capitalism appropriating the left, but it did the same for the right.

>>8648997

I got news for you, kid. They're fucking not. I know you Marxists just love to boil everything down to class conflict, power relations and so on, but the real world isn't as simply as your precious material dialectic implies.

The fact that Jews have been persecuted throughout history in many more nations than not, is but one of many testaments to the fact that nations are by no means in league with capitalism/globalism by default. Specifically Jews have been, almost without exception, associated with the dark/Globalist side of Capitalism in all the aforementioned nations (that is, capitalists with no the state in which they find themselves, or even competing loyalties) - hence their persecution.

Whether that was a fair association is of course up for debate, but the implication of the association is what counts. Nation states have, with the exception of broadly 'national' capitalism (as opposed to international/globalist), been at odds with capitalism - and as we enter into an age when Globalism threatens the continued existence of nation states in any meaningful sense, expect that opposition to get worse.

File: Irony intensifies.jpg (30KB, 480x314px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 480x314px

>>8649044

Pic related is you.

>>8649035

The Jews = the bourgeois but they're too stupid to call it what it actually is. I am assuming they would also not want to be exploited by an Austrian retard too, hopefully. Anyone at all, for that matter.

The Jews are, once again, a scapegoat for a society people support.

>>8648997
No. you can argue one considers the other as a useful idiot to attain their ends but they are certainly not on the same side.

>>8646847
center-right
/thread

>>8649053
What exactly is the conflict between nation states and global capitalism, what does it look like? I know some conservative sociologists emphasize how traditional values (associated with religion, but not reduced to it) were means of keeping the tendencies of capitalism (accumulation, careerism in some form or another, etc.) at bay, but is that enough to call it a conflict?

While I admire the conservative logic of subject, interiority, morality, etc. over object, exteriority, formalism/laws and norms, I don't think it's enough today. Even if these traditional means of coping were enough at some point, these days they are co-opted into capitalism or made difficult to attain by it, resulting in a superficial conflict and accusations without effect, unless I'm misunderstanding the point (I'm not that familiar with right wing solutions to globalism).

>>8649053
Nationalism was an invention of modern capitalist society. They are hand-in-glove.

>>8649274
nigga you foreal?