Existentialism on a Political Level

Existentialism as far as political ideals go seems to operate by extremes, either that by the far right in the case of philosophers such as Heidegger (to such an extent that he was a member of the Nazi party), or the far left in the case of those like Sartre, who was himself a Marxist. It is easy to explain the extremes of such a philosophy, as given the core aspect of existentialism is the absurdity of existence and that we can only affirm our existence once we recognise the necessity of individual representation, then those following its teachings have everything to gain from placing themselves staunchly within a particular doctrine. However his philosophy stated that we also have become complacent and forgetful of what it truly is to be and simply focus upon existing in general, thus it could be argued that his membership in the Nazi party was part of the ideal of having a firm sense of what it is to truly be an individual. Many philosophers would contend his political views but they typically appreciate his reasoning behind where he stood.

An important aspect of political existentialism is that it is workable within all circumstances and allows for forcefulness within existence. This is why it was an effective philosophical standpoint to have during the 1954 -62 in Algeria, as Franz Fanon, a key thinker for this period of existentialism as well as a member of the FLN, encouraged the use of violence, essentially being a form of anti-Martin Luther King in this respect, stating that the only way towards freedom and identity, which were two of the key causes of the rebellion, the subjugation of the Algerian culture and its replacement with the French culture, was for the Algerian people to fight tooth and nail to attain it. Fanon urged for the Algerians to keep fighting as violently as possible until they had what they wanted.

Ultimately existentialism only works within the realms of politics when taken to extremes. The purpose of it is to recognise the absurdity of existence and that there is no meaning to it other than the one we create for ourselves, thus mediums are not possible for once things are taken lightly, the philosophy begins to undermine itself.