/lit/ - Literature

>>18164891
It's long as FUCK but fairly prescient. Worth a skim, but not as essential as Rousseau or Hobbes or Locke or Mill

>>18164902
Retarded post

>>18164902
Rotfl. I would say Democracy in America is actually worth more than those books.

>>18164902
>Rousseau
KYS

>>18164998
Bet you thin Rousseau is a "leftist" or smth

He was a tragic hero who went down fighting the enlighteners

>>18165012
Not whom you responded to, but
>went down fighting the enlighteners
How so if he was one of the few who most influenced Enlightment thought?

>>18165106
Human intellectual history is retarded and sometimes contradictory. People are influenced by their enemies as much as their peers. Whoda thunk it

>>18165012
I don't care about muh wings but online quizes place me on the extreme left.
You are just a retarded tribalist. No wonder you like a propagandist pamphleteer like Rousseau. The Social Contract is without a doubt, the least rigorous, the most obnoxiously dumbed-down work of political theory to ever garner acclaim, save for The Communist Manifesto perhaps. But whereas Marx had other, superior works, Rousseau's political writings are without exception dumbed-down plagiarisms of superior men. There is not one original thought in his politics. The only good bits were stolen from Hobbes and Locke.
Now, seethe, sneed, cope, King of Midwits.

Is it worth reading in French for FFL?
I've heard his french is really idiosyncratic and really hard for nonnatives

>>18165217
>I dont care about politics, but I am a far left nutjob.

Just be honest, everything you people say is a trick somehow.

>>18165217
incredibly cringe post

>>18165012
>>18165217
Also Emile and Reveries are very good and insightful works from a literary perspective but they don't merit listing him next to the likes of Hobbes.

>>18165225
>I dont care about politics
Never said nor implied that. Keep being brainwashed by woke capital.

>but I am a far left nutjob.
Back to /pol/, faggot

>>18165226
The absolute state of /pol/tards

>>18164998
Rousseau is the best on that list after Hobbes. Hobbes > Rousseau > Mill > Locke

t. actually read them and not an extremist left/right guy

>>18165236
Hobbes > Locke > Mill >Rousseau

t. another guy who's read them but isn't a gigantic fucking faggot.

>>18165230
>calls everyone/pol/
Yup we got a bunkertranny

>>18165217
>You are just a retarded tribalist
Marxists are the biggest tribalists in existence today.

>>18165236
Is "actually read them" supposed to impress me? Is this arbitrary ranking without a word of explanation supposed to refute me? Or is it the calling me an extremist winger, after I specifically said I don't care about commodified ideologies?

>>18165247
This one is correct
t. wrote my dissertation on early modern philosophy

(see I can do it too)

>>18165252
Your previous criticism was "kys" so what kind of refutation you expect retard?

>>18165217
His concept of general will and the political arrangement of the sovereign as the active representation of general will was unique and not taken from anyone

>>18164902

>>18165282
Every shit I have ever taken is unique retard.

>>18165282
>not taken from anyone
That's because the concept of a general will is literally retarded. Rosseau was the only one dumb enough to consider publishing something that obviously retarded.

>>18165306
You seem the retarded one anon

>>18165310
No, no one in their right mind could take that rubbish seriously. It means literally nothing, except at best "will of the majority" on some binary issue. It's essentially an abstract figment of his imagination.

>>18165323
He explicitly says it's not the will of majority

>>18165326
Which thus makes it absolutely retarded, as I already stated.

>>18165342
K tard

>>18165370
>can't even explain why functionally attributing sentience, or even godhood, to an abstracted mass of people isn't retarded