[Oxymandias]

Here are some ideas that may be appealing to people on the left (I hate using the word "leftist"):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Hegelians
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_idealism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Wil ... el#Freedom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Wil ... l#Progress
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialism (not Hegel but based on Hegel's philosophy)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicism

I highly recommend that you don't just read these links but also read his works and books as well. Hegel is a fantastic philosopher.

[Potemkin]

You might be interested in reading Lenin's Philosophical Notebooks, Oxymandias. Lenin engaged in a close reading of Hegel's work, just before the October Revolution. His ultimate conclusion was that "It is impossible completely to understand Marx’s Capital, and especially its first Chapter, without having thoroughly studied and understood the whole of Hegel’s Logic. Consequently, half a century later none of the Marxists understood Marx!!" Conspectus of Hegel’s Science of Logic

[The Immortal Goon]

His ultimate conclusion was that "It is impossible completely to understand Marx’s Capital, and especially its first Chapter, without having thoroughly studied and understood the whole of Hegel’s Logic. Consequently, half a century later none of the Marxists understood Marx!!"

I would add Epicurus to the philosophers needed to understand Marx. Marx's dissertation was about Epicurus, a materialist, and this is the other component of dialectic (Hegelian) materialism (Epicurianism). At least how I contextualize it.

The other trouble with Hegel, I think, is that you need to contextualize a lot of what you're reading into early 19th century Prussia. I have found that it's easy to slip into thinking that one can make a contemporary association to something like the issue of Church in State that didn't exist in that form for Hegel.

[Oxymandias]

@The Immortal Goon @Potemkin

It is often said that Marx deconstructed Hegel and revived him. Do you two agree with such sentiments? Why?

[The Immortal Goon]

@Oxymandias

I think that's a fair thing to say for the reasons that have kind of been laid out.

Marxism is the use of Hegelian dialectics on material items. I suspect that were it not for Marx making Hegel a little more universal in that way then he may have been stuck in his time and place, a Prussian philosopher stuck explaining specifics to specialists.

I'll admit, it's been a while since I've cracked open Hegel so you and Potemkin may have differing views. But that's what's cemented in my head.

[Oxymandias]

@The Immortal Goon

In my opinion I don't think that Marx made Hegel anymore universal than he already is. Marx deconstructed and reconstructed Hegel in such a way that was relevant to him and industrial society particularly relevant to laborers and he did this through using dialectics and historicism. However there is nothing new added to dialectics or historicism, Marx simply applied them to different problems to get a different solution.

If you want to see a philosopher that does contribute to Hegel's line of philosophy look up Gilles Deleuze and read his works. At first it may seem that Deleuze is actually a critic of Hegel and there may be little similarities between the two on the surface but after you read his works, read about Deleuzo-Hegelianism and then everything will come together to form a cohesive whole. Then, and only then, will you finally understand.