Lots of seemingly novel and radical worldviews are purposed to deal with the mind-body problem. Neutral monism, property dualism, and any number of panpsychist views are entertained, but I don't see discussions of idealism.

It's surprising to me that idealism isnt discussed more among analytic philosophers working on problems of consciousness, considering how important it has been historically to the field of philosophy. It would seem on the surface that idealism would bear on problems such as "the hard problem" and the interaction problem. The perceived extravagance of a view doesn't seem to be a problem either.

My YouTube recommendations keep showing me this guy, Kastrup, who articulates this non-subjectivist idealist view he calls "analytic idealism", but his work never comes up in SEP/IEP articles or in papers or books published by analytic philosophers like Goff, Chalmers, Nagel, etc.

There seems to be a few plausible explanations for this:

1. Kastrup (or idealism broadly) is taken seriously by analytic philosophers, and I have missed citations to both his work and idealism more broadly
2. Kastrup isn't taken seriously, due to bias against work that's done outside the academic milieu
3. Kastrup isn't taken seriously, due to a lack of rigor or other fundamental issues with his work
4. Idealism more broadly is rejected by analytic philosophers for reasons not obvious to me