serious conservatives and liberals intellectuals

[Majed]

in his last two videos leo gave: jordan b peterson and dennis prager as serious intelligent conservative commentators, and also noam choamsky, daniel schmachtenberger and ken wilber as serious liberal and progressive philosophers, how can we add to this list ? 

[Majed]

@Majed i think robert greene and teal swan fit well in the liberal category of serious intellectuals 

[Oeaohoo]

The conservative equivalent of Ken Wilber would be the Perennial Traditionalist school of René Guénon, Frithjof Schuon, Martin Lings, Titus Burckhardt and various others. This school is represented today by people like Huston Smith, Seyyed Hossein Nasr and Charles Upton. Wilber basically took the perennial metaphysics and mixed it with Darwinian Evolutionism, progressive leftism and his inane predecessors like Teilhard de Chardin.

The conservative equivalent of Noam Chomsky would be Jewish libertarian theorists like Milton Friedman, Murray Rothbard and Ludwig von Mises. They are represented in the present-day by the Mises Institute. Some Paleo-Conservatives like, for example, Paul Gottfried, who has written very importantly on the uses and abuses of so-called “Anti-Fascism”, could also he considered here.

The conservative equivalent of Schmachtenberger would be the so-called Neo-Reactionary Right: Spandrell, Curtis Yarvin (Mencius Moldbug), Nick Land and many others. See, for example, Spandrell’s blog and it’s articles: We Need a New Religion, The Game Theory of Leftism, Bioleninism, IQ Shredders… The guy who used to run Rebel Wisdom did an interview with someone from this sphere, demonstrating the affinities and differences between them.

I appreciate that you are quoting Mr. Gura, but the idea that Jordan Peterson and PragerU are serious conservative thinkers is laughable. Jordan Peterson’s recent “Conservative Manifesto” is the absolute quintessence of mediocrity, revealing a complete lack of engagement with the actual conservative tradition in the name of the most vacuous pseudo-libertarianism. No wonder people around here have such a low opinion of conservatives if they are the reference point.

[axiom]

Christopher Hitchens was the best of both. A natural contrarian able to rip anyone to shreds on either side of any debate just for his own amusement.

His secret weapon was a near-perfect knowledge of history. He understood the enormous demonstrable hypocrisy of those claiming moral superiority on the left or the right.

Political jousting for him was a sport.

No one has ever equalled him really. An actual genius.

Today, Douglas Murray is probably smarter than JBP and would certainly be considered right wing. Some consider him an heir to Hitchens, but I don’t think so - he’s not really a contrarian and genuinely believes his own arguments.

[DocWatts]

The history podcaster Dan Carlin, a 'political Martian' as he likes to call himself, is someone who sits at the fulcrum of being the best of both.

Listening to him, it becomes clear that he believes in the promise of America, while also not being naive about how the country fails to live up to its own ideals. And that he's very good at perspective taking, and in learning from what other cultures can teach us.

Edited December 18, 2022 by DocWatts