[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 97 KB, 659x807, stalinnews.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11682674 No.11682674 [Reply] [Original]

Since people are posting Evola, Jordon Peterson and other hacks, lets talk about Stalin's works, philosophy and prose. From "Anarchism vs Socialism":

"Metaphysics recognises various nebulous dogmas, such as, for example, the "unknowable," the "thing-in-itself," and, in the long run, passes into empty theology. In contrast to Proudhon and Spencer, Engels combated these dogmas with the aid of the dialectical method (see Ludwig Feuerbach); but the Anarchists — the disciples of Proudhon and Spencer — tell us that Proudhon and Spencer were scientists, whereas Marx and Engels were metaphysicians!

One of two things: either the Anarchists are deceiving themselves, or else they do not know what they are talking about.

At all events, it is beyond doubt that the Anarchists confuse Hegel's metaphysical system with his dialectical method.

Needless to say, Hegel's philosophical system, which rests on the immutable idea, is from beginning to end metaphysical. But it is also clear that Hegel's dialectical method, which repudiates all immutable ideas, is from beginning to end scientific and revolutionary.

That is why Karl Marx, who subjected Hegel's metaphysical system to devastating criticism, at the same time praised his dialectical method, which, as Marx said, "lets nothing impose upon it, and is in its essence critical and revolutionary" (see Capital, Vol. I. Preface).

That is why Engels sees a big difference between Hegel's method and his system. "Whoever placed the chief emphasis on the Hegelian system could be fairly conservative in both spheres; whoever regarded the dialectical method as the main thing could belong to the most extreme opposition, both in politics and religion" (see Ludwig Feuerbach).

The Anarchists fail to see this difference and thoughtlessly maintain that "dialectics is metaphysics."

To proceed. The Anarchists say that the dialectical method is "subtle word-weaving," "the method of sophistry," "logical somersaults" (see Nobati, No. 8. Sh. G.), "with the aid of which both truth and falsehood are proved with equal facility" (see Nobati, No. 4. Article by V. Cherkezishvili).

Thus, in the opinion of the Anarchists, the dialectical method proves both truth and falsehood.

At first sight it would seem that the accusation advanced by the Anarchists has some foundation. Listen, for example, to what Engels says about the follower of the metaphysical method :

". . . His communication is: 'Yea, yea; nay, nay, for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.' For him a thing either exists, or it does not exist; it is equally impossible for a thing to be itself and at the same time something else. Positive and negative absolutely exclude one another . . ." (see Anti-Duhring. Introduction)...

>> No.11682684
File: 101 KB, 675x807, stalin and lenin.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11682684

>>11682674
"How is that? — the Anarchists cry heatedly. Is it possible for a thing to be good and bad at the same time?! That is "sophistry," "juggling with words," it shows that "you want to prove truth and falsehood with equal facility"! . . .

Let us, however, go into the substance of the matter.

Today we are demanding a democratic republic. Can we say that a democratic republic is good in all respects, or bad in all respects? No we cannot! Why? Because a democratic republic is good only in one respect: when it destroys the feudal system; but it is bad in another respect: when it strengthens the bourgeois system. Hence we say: in so far as the democratic republic destroys the feudal system it is good — and we fight for it; but in so far as it strengthens the bourgeois system it is bad — and we fight against it.

So the same democratic republic can be "good" and "bad" at the same time — it is "yes" and "no."

The same thing may be said about the eight-hour day, which is good and bad at the same time: "good" in so far as it strengthens the proletariat, and "bad" in so far as it strengthens the wage system.

It was facts of this kind that Engels had in mind when he characterised the dialectical method in the words we quoted above.

The Anarchists, however, fail to understand this, and an absolutely clear idea seems to them to be nebulous "sophistry."

>> No.11682697

Take it to Reddit.

>> No.11682713
File: 330 KB, 497x526, tory voters.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11682713

>>11682697
Fuck off Peterson/harris/orwellfag. Stalin was an actual philosopher who wrote 13 volumes of academic works rather complete and utter easily debunked horseshit and books about talking animals.

>> No.11682905

>>11682713
An actual philosopher that became a tyrannical despot.

Who gives a fuck about his philosophy? Burn it.

>> No.11682919
File: 101 KB, 900x675, stalin.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11682919

>>11682905
>tyrannical despot
LOL Stalin was a champion of freedom.

>> No.11682924

>>11682919
Also, why the fuck does morality matter? People discuss Machiavelli, does anyone talk about how immoral he is?

>> No.11682986

Stalin didn't read Sorel did he

>> No.11682994

>>11682674
autist dictator is blind to metaphysical truths, really gets those pistachios percolating

>> No.11683251

>>11682986
>Stalin didn't read Sorel did he
>was a French philosopher and theorist of Sorelianism. His notion of the power of myth in people's lives (in particular, national myth) inspired socialists, anarchists, Marxists, and Fascists.

>> No.11683287
File: 37 KB, 333x499, 51BNDF5lgtL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11683287

Was the Soviet Union the most perfect example of Plato's Republic manifest? Is this why it was destroyed by those who hate the west and connive and scheme for its downfall every waking breath?

>> No.11683290

I'LL SHOW YOU A DIALECTIC

>Engels + Hegel = Hengles

>> No.11683298

>>11683290
woke

>> No.11683308

>>11683290
Marx + Post Modernism + Neo (from the matrix(trans propaganda)) = Post Modern Neo Marxism

>> No.11684453

>>11683251
yeah he didn't because sorel wiped the floor with marx get epicly roasted retard tankie

>> No.11684464

>>11682713

>Stalin was an actual philosopher

Lol he didn't even finish the Seminary, which was one of the lowest forms of available education in Tsarist Russia. He was an uneducated lumpen bank robber that literally didn't understand Genetics and Cybernetycs and allowed Lysenkoism and other pseudosciences to flourish under his rule. All these 13 volumes are 100% ghost written by some jewish nerds that got a bullet from a Nagant into their noggin for their troubles.

>> No.11684471

>As a former Marxist in his early years, Goebbels once stated "how thin the dividing line" was between communism and National Socialism, which had caused many Red Front Fighters to "switch to the SA". Goebbels expressed that sentiment in a 1925 public speech, declaring that "the difference between Communism and the Hitler faith is very slight".

THIS IS THE REAL REDPILL

>> No.11684477

>>11683308

Marxism + a tricycle = historical materialist trialectic

>> No.11684480

>>11682924
Yes. That is specifically the connotation attached to his name.

>> No.11684559

>>11684464
>Seminary, which was one of the lowest forms of available education
No it wasn't.

>> No.11685333

>>11684464
imagine preferring bloodless academics over the ex-bank robber who clawed his way to the top of a revolutionary party and forcibly industrialized a whole nation

>> No.11685771

>>11682905
>An actual philosopher that became a tyrannical despot.

Stalin was what Plato had in mind when he thought up the philosopher king, absolutely based.

Look into his poetry too OP, in Georgia his works were considered minor classics of their era before he even gained prominence in the party.

>> No.11685779

>>11684464
Except Stalin's works were not ghostwritten and he was actually a literary figure acknowledged for his talent with poetry before he even killed anyone.

His minor fame as a poet helped him get away with robbery at least once in fact.

>> No.11685786

>>11685771
>Stalin was what Plato had in mind when he thought up the philosopher king, absolutely based.

imagine actually believing this.

>> No.11685817

Russia couldnt have been perfect, because of the weather, but how close to aim, and how

>> No.11686001
File: 360 KB, 634x423, C4F5ecLVYAApHbr.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11686001

>>11682713

>> No.11686165
File: 149 KB, 864x864, conspepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11686165

>>11685771
>Stalin was what Plato had in mind when he thought up the philosopher king

>Look into his poetry

>> No.11686344
File: 97 KB, 500x499, 1532411344407.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11686344

look at this thread, stalin a philosopher? brainletism at it´s finest

>> No.11686691

>"Metaphysics recognises various nebulous dogmas, such as, for example, the "unknowable," the "thing-in-itself," and, in the long run, passes into empty theology.

Typical troglodyte.

>> No.11686724

>>11682905
>An actual philosopher that became a tyrannical despot.
So someone who realised what he wrote about instead of some faggot in a circle jerk?

>> No.11686993

>>11684464
t.trotsky

>> No.11686999

>>11686993
Also, "ghost written"? lol OPs passage was writtin in 1908 when he was the editor of Ishkra.

>> No.11687004

>>11686344
Stirner is pure shit and got BTFO by marx. There's a reason no-one cared about him for 150 years.

>> No.11687034
File: 122 KB, 644x598, 1535131917212.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11687034

>>11687004

>> No.11687042

>>11687034
Makes about as much sense as Stirner; that is to say, none.

>> No.11687055
File: 176 KB, 1124x1118, (b)eter.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11687055

>>11687042
marxists seething

>> No.11687162

>>11687055
Egoists seething because at the end of the day, their relationship to the means of production dictates their lives.

>> No.11687255

>>11682674
>One of two things: either the Anarchists are deceiving themselves, or else they do not know what they are talking about.
>At all events, it is beyond doubt that the Anarchists confuse Hegel's metaphysical system with his dialectical method.
How silly to even talk about Anarchists, anarchists simply want pure freedom, but the law cannot all them to, because the source of evil is pure freedom