A lot of those names thought that the age of consent in France was way too high - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_petitions_against_age_o...
Philippe Sollers later stated in 2001 that "there were so many manifestos, we signed them almost automatically"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situationist_International
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situation_(Sartre)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Il_est_interdit_d%27interdire_!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Society_of_the_Spectacle
This stuff almost literally destroyed the french government, they claim so close that Charles de Gualle fled paris: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_68
Or, a group of people that reflected parts of the zeitgeist that organically arose in a post war France over run by nazi's, collaboraters, struggle for existence and first hand witnessnes to horror?
Postmodernists and post-structuralists are used and cited all across the Arts outside of philosophy, particularly in literary theory.
Let's open up a random quote from one of the champions of the Pomo movement, Deleuze and Guattari, in their famous work "Anti-oedipus":
"we are all handymen: each with his little machines. For every organ-machine, an energy-machine: all the time, flows and interruptions. Judge Schreber has sunbeams in his ass. A solar anus. And rest assured that it works: Judge Schreber feels something, produces something, and is capable of explaining the process theoretically. Something is produced: the effects of a machine, not mere metaphors."
You might respond with "Oh this quote is out of context, they're satirizing freud and Freud's reading of Daniel Paul Schreber, a German judge, trying to go beyond him" except that their initial OG champion, Freud, was literally 100% wrong to the point that no one can find ANY experimental evidence for the actual existence of the Oedipus[1] OR Electra[2] Complex or any of the rest of the nonsense that Freud, Jung, Lacan, or any of their disciples peddled through the academy.
French post-modernism/post-strcturalism is so incoherent that trying to argue against it is a category error as it makes no claim to exist the same realm as reason (a hegemonic concept ignored by them), rather, it is poetry by another name - and it's particularly poor poetry. The academy would be better off disavowing it, as it's produced nothing of value except an army of unemployable ivory tower elitist "revolutionaries".
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oedipus_complex [2] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electra_complex