/lit/ - Literature

>>18935670
You don't? As Nietzsche correctly pointed out, socialism is idealistic non-sense.
>"On the other hand, the piping of the
Socialistic rat-catchers who wish to inspire you with foolish hopes is continually sounding in your ears: they tell you to be ready and nothing further, ready from this day to the next, so that you wait and wait for something to come from outside, though living in all other respects as you lived before—until this waiting is at length changed into hunger and thirst and fever and madness,and the clay of the bestia triumphans at last dawns in all its glory."
>"It is a disgrace for all socialist systematizers that they suppose there could be circumstances-social combinations-in which vice, disease, prostitution, distress would no longer grow.- But that means condemning life.- A society is not free to remain young. And even at the height of its strength it has to form refuse and waste materials. The more energetically and boldly it advances, the richer it will be in failures and deformities, the closer to decline.- Age is not abolished by means of institutions. Neither is disease. Nor vice."
How stupid can one be to believe that the triumph of the state would lead to the end of history and the social problems we face? Are not the failures of it in China and Russia enough for you to discard that stupidity forever? Not even the Anarchist profligate escapes this criticism - changing your flavor of idealism doesn't change the fact you're abandoning the corporal world for a spiritual one that will never cease to exist.