/lit/ - Literature

>Rousseau
>Favored Direct Democracy

Literal retardation. :3

Remember, the french political philosophers were always more like scientists. Rousseau, Tocqueville, think of even Leon Walras. There was something good in their water, they were always very nonbiased and mathematical/methodical. I can't even really see what Rousseau's favorite political system was, if he had one, after reading multiple of his books.

>>18498115
>Rousseau was pessimistic about the prospects of democracy. “It is against the natural order for the many to govern and the few to be governed,” he wrote. “It is unimaginable that the people should remain continually assembled to devote their time to public affairs.” Adopting a view common among critics of democracy in his time, Rousseau also held that “there is no government so subject to civil wars and intestine agitations as democratic or popular government.” In a much-cited passage, he declares that, “were there a people of gods, their government would be democratic. So perfect a government is not for men.”

So kinda since democracy to him is an ideal?

Hobbes is objectively correct about what government is, and what it's for, but he's wrong about it being good. Locke is actually fucking retarded, and you should feel bad if you like him

>>18498159
Agreed on all points.

>>18498147
Even here, he doesn't have a favorite government. People will always be corrupt, or have the potential to be so. He is a realist.

I think you'll find the best political philosophers were more like scientists. Hobbes was like this somewhat as well, his favorite government, monarchy, was just because he was a very old, ancient political philosopher.

>>18498159
Locke would have a word with you there. Pic related.

>>18498100
Can you speak a single sentence without using memespeak buzzwords?

>>18498178
I see what your saying about Rousseau.
Funny what you say about Hobbes. You think he was just stuck in the past too much?

>>18498191
I only speak in memetics. Keep seething.

>>18498100
rousseau. the other two are really cringe, despite unfortunately being more influential

Hobbes was a fucking retard and wrong about literally everything. He's one of the few philosophers that reading him made me physically angry.

Nearly all political philosophy was written by men who were shilling for the own political system they happened to live in.
Aristotle lived in a Greek polis, and shilled for a Greek polis. The medieval Christfags lived in a theocracy, and shilled for a theocracy. Hobbes lived in an absolute monarchy, and shilled for an absolute monarchy. Instead of using philosophy to achieve the perfect political utopia, they used the society they lived in as a framework and tried to use lawyer jargon to work their way back to proving that their society was the best all along and they proved it with "logic and reason."
Political philosophy basically doesn't start until Rousseau and everything before him can be disregarded.

>>18498100
The patrician ranking is
Hobbes > Rousseau >> Locke

>>18498308
Go on then, refute Hobbes you retarded commie

>>18498204
He was just a product of his times. It's like saying why we don't support the great ideology which will draw our civilization into the next age. We just haven't heard of it yet. :3

>>18498100
Giambattista Vico

>>18498349
Easy. I don't need some random guy with a crown to tell me what to do.
Also anyone who promotes censorship should unironically be executed by firing squad. Lack of public availability of knowledge is what has held humanity back for like 1800 years.

Hobbes was right about man in nature, and Rousseau was right about man in society.

>>18498381
Man is a savage being that needs to be disciplined by a social system that corrupts his inherent nobility?

>>18498351
You've never read Hobbes. You haven't even bothered to read his Wikipedia. No one finds this amusing.

>>18498100

Tyranny: Hollywood suffering. Liberty: art house suffering. The latter is the vital ingredient to Yaldabaoth's most relished dishes. Forcefully burdening one with a bottomless money and work pit that weighs a ton is tasteless, whereas giving one a car is exquisite.

>>18498408
Meant for >>18498364

>>18498364
>I don't need some random guy with a crown to tell me what to do.
>should unironically be executed by firing squad.
I hope this post was written ironically, because I seriously burst out laughing reading these two statements in succession

>>18498364
>Also anyone who promotes censorship should unironically be executed by firing squad
Civil society literally exists to stop people like you obtaining power

>>18498337
Plato lived in a democracy and shilled for his own brand of monarchical authoritarianism. Dante lived in rebellious oligarchic Italian city states and shilled for the Holy Roman Empire, causing him to be made an outcast. It's also a massive oversimplification of Christian and Aristotelian philosophy in general. Rousseau is mostly garbage.

>>18498178
Hobbes was a far more modern philosopher than Rousseau. Rousseau was very classical and Aristotilean in his thought, whereas Hobbes was a Copernican turn in political philosophy. The structure of government each supported is superficial to the core of their respective philosophies.

>>18498337
Hobbes wrote his work during the English Civil War and Commonwealth. He also doesn't advocate Absolute Monarchy. Nice try though.

>>18498447
>He also doesn't advocate Absolute Monarchy.
He does and you know it. He allows the possibility for the sovereign to be something other than an absolute monarch but he thinks absolute monarchy is the best.

>>18498443
There's nothing you can do about the fact the people, and philosophers, are just products of their times. Hobbes had nothing to say about Democracy because the only thing that existed was monarchies.

The statement you make about Rousseau was somewhat correct, somewhat false. Really there is a difference between Platonism and Aristotleianism. Surely, if you've read Rousseau you would say that he is a Platonist, not an Aristoleianist.

Furthermore, Rousseau is the most misinterpreted political philosopher is in the history of humanity. His views are extremely different than those presented by the people who have 'studied' him. He didn't even believe in the 'noble savage' bullshit and certainly wasn't pro-democracy. :3

>>18498414
Explain the irony. The two are completely unrelated.

>>18498408
Retard, you don't need to read a 700 page book to understand someone's argument. Hobbes' argument can literally be summed up in about 10-20 pages max. If you disagree with this basic logic, you suffer from incurable autism.

>>18498465
You lack the discrimination to make any positive contribution, good day.

>>18498100
Rousseau but for reasons absolutely unrelated to his philosophy.

>>18498476
You haven't even touched his thought in any recognisable way. If you aren't trolling, I genuinely pity your comprehension.

>so many seething monarchfags in this thread

You retards realize that if you lived in a Hobbes society that you would be fucking miserable right?
4chan wouldn't exist, so you couldn't even tell people how much you love being oppressed.
Books wouldn't exist because whoops the sovereign controls censorship. Here's your government rationed KJV and Book of Common Prayer.
Peoples' occupations would be parcelled out like in ant colony because Hobbes operates on the (false) premise that all humans are part of some weird sci-fi hive mind, so any passion or dreams you may have had are gone because you were told you need to work as a guy who inspects nails on railroad tracks for the rest of your life.

>>18498484
I did though. I'm sorry you read a 700 page book that I summed up in 2 sentences. Sucks to be you.

>>18498496
STOP TAKING ABOUT AN AUTHOR YOU HAVEN'T READ. SHAKESPEARE EXISTED DURING AN ABSOLUTE MONARCHY. THE GRAMMAR SCHOOL SYSTEM WAS FOUNDED DURING AN ABSOLUTE MONARCHY. SHUT THE FUCK UP SHUT THE FUCK UP SHUT THE FUCK UP SHUT THE FUCK UP
READ BOOKS OR SHUT THE FUCK UP
IM NOT EVEN A MONARCHIST

>>18498535
Lol cry more

>>18498510
upvoted

>>18498159
I prefer Lockes epistemology

>>18498496
But i'm miserable now

>>18498220
I will, troglodyte.

>>18498541
You genuinely deserve death, I am being 100% serious. Only the modern world could allow for people as arrogant and meaningless as you. You're a scrap of filth in a vast ocean and soon you will gone, and you choose to be mediocre. Disappear, do me and yourself a favour.

>>18498590
Imagine getting this irrationally angry because someone you never met doesn't like the views of some philosopher who's been dead for 400 years. Seriously reevaluate your life lmao.

Just finished Locke's Political Essays. He unironically endorsed wagecuckery starting from the age of 4, and if you don't like it you should be sent to a gulag. Also
>You need a loicence to beg here sir.

>>18498620
That's not why I'm angry. You fail to even grasp why I'm angry

>>18498652
Nah I think I roughly get why. I disproved Hobbes' retardation in a 4chan shitpost and dismantled your entire worldview in about 45 seconds and you don't know how to deal with it. It's OK man, it gets better.

>>18498476
>hasn't read the book
>proud in his ignorance
I hate you illiterate, overconfident morons so much. Go back to /pol/. You have no idea who Hobbes is or what he thought and you would rather lie than bother putting in any effort into rectifying this. Kill yourself.

>>18498656
Find another way to spend your day, seriously.

>>18498656
You strawmaned Hobbes and completely ignored every single argument he made.

>>18498468
it's one of those "you claim to be tolerant yet you won't tolerate my calls for genocide!" type things

>>18498699
I support free speech but not hate speech. Sharing Plato's political views is hate speech btw.

>>18498673
Explain a single point that I got wrong on Hobbes. Please, enlighten me.

>>18498646
Both sensible policies.

>>18498468
>>18498699
The irony lay in the fact that you evidently do need someone telling you what to do, as this anon >>18498422 pointed out, because you have murderous tendencies.

>>18498771
Literally everything is wrong. There is no basis in reality in that post so nothing to be refuted. Read the book or stop posting. You don't deserve to have opinions if you are not willing to put in the effort.

>>18498100
>social contract theorists

>>18498846
Thank you for explaining why I'm wrong by not explaining why I'm wrong. Completely as expected though.
If we debated in person, I would make you burst into tears.

>>18498889
>Lies about what Hobbes believed in and why
>refuses to cite him, admits to not having read him
>b-b-b-but you must prove a negative or you are BTFO hahahaha
I just realize you were baiting. I just don't understand why you find it amusing to make fun of autistic types like me who will believe you.

>>18498410

Also, all of the alleged good provided by rights is not only not imposed but even MORE imposed than the negative value thereof: it is not that a car satisfies one's implicit desire to drive at the cost of being a bottomless money and work pit, but that after having a bottomless money and work pit perfidiously imposed onto one's self as what one allegedly desires, one then further imposes the desire to drive onto one's self to alleviate the initial imposition, which in turn makes it even worse.

>>18498918
Me not having wasted countless precious weeks of my life reading Leviathan does not take away that I have a flawless understanding of his philosophy. The two points are irrelevant.

>>18498940
Holy pseud

>>18498940
Imagine being so pathetic that you spend your free time trying to trigger anonymous browsers of a Vietnamese basket-weaving forum.

>>18498100
Denying the Divine Right of Kings doesn't make it any less true.

>>18498940
The cause of the collapse of culture and our very society summed up in one 4chan post

>>18499677
>the collapse of culture is because a retard won't read
You're as much of a pseud at that guy.

>>18499709
Its not just him, its a prevailing mood of the masses. The abandonment of intelligence and the pride in retardation. He's just an example of the culture wave.

>>18499731
>the masses
The masses shouldn't read so I don't see the problem that they don't read

>>18498296
Rousseau is far more influential today. You can thank him for our modern definition of "freedom" today.
>freedom = "doing whatever you want to do"
All thanks to Rousseau and the reason we have modernity and the radical left.

>>18498405
That's not necessarily contradictory. savages can have some virtues, accidental or not. They may be disciplined by a social system that corrupts their few virtues while quelling their savagery.

>>18498159
t. libtard

>>18498159
Not understanding and liking Locke is unamerican

>>18498656
At this point you are just a snide bug man. An upright walking bug that imagines itself a butterfly yet will get gored by wasps in a generation worth of time or less.

>>18498940
>Doesn't read
>Still smugly says he has a flawless understanding of his philosophy
Lmao this is peak /lit/.

>>18498159
> he's wrong about it being good.
He doesn't so much state that it is good so much that it is necessary to keep everyone from getting at each other's throats. And he's for the most part right about that.

>>18500069
Just look at what happens when a government collapses. You get Somalia or the Russian or Chinese civil war, multiple armed paramilitary factions battling it out, mass executions of civilians and ethnic cleansing, banditry and looting, total chaos . Government may suck but its the only thing keeping away the war of all against all.

>>18499983
I thought liberals loved locke

>>18500111
No, they love cock.

>>18500069
This

>>18500114
Not more than you

>>18500951
Okay, now this is epic.

>>18499992
this, embracing locke will make your nation the most powerful on earth

>>18501072
That's China though

>>18501083
how the fuck does china respect or pay any credence to natural rights, also they are way weaker than america

>>18498100

I ride that line down between Hobbes and Locke.

>>18498159
You can't say that love exists if Hobbes is correct so good luck grappling with that world view; he was obviously afflicted with a serious complex and every adjective in the famous quote "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" are all easily contested. You don't get a solitary human being in this universe. doesn't happen. where there are people there are families of people, every time. poor, as opposed to what was "rich" at the time he wrote this? are you fucking kidding me get out of here.


Further to refute this, Hobbes neglects the fact that life WITH governments is poor nasty brutish and short, arguably or he would not even know poor, not even have poor in his fucking vocabulary since he lived his whole life with a "commonwealth" as he calls them. more men are massacred and in greater numbers than ever in the name of governments. fuck off and all.

maybe you can say life was short for more pre civility human beings but we didn't need governments for a lot of that shit and definitely not monarchies.

rousseau was pro-constitutional monarchy, where does he write about direct democracy?

>>18501877
His 'brutas y brevitas" quote is referring to pre societal and pre government societies. So Hobbes would argue way more heads were getting iced pre government.

His point was both the self and family unit were way more vulnerable pre society and pre government.

>>18500017

Snide is absolutely the funniest descriptor you could put in front of bug man. God that kills me.

>>18499929
no