Outlines of the Philsophy of Right

[Anonymous No.16693815]

How does Hegel's Outlines of the Philosophy of Right fit into his broader philosophical system? A lot of political philosophy by the big names often rests or is justified by deeper metaphysical and epistemological beliefs. I've read some reviews and comments on the book saying that it is simply Hegel fitting politics and society into his broader philosophical system. But, not having read PoS or his Logic, i don't understand why.
For example, one of the most puzzling aspects of the book is the last section where he endorses what is basically prussian moranchism, which doesn't seem to follow from his earlier discussions. He says something about the world spirit and it went straight over my head. I don't think he means anything mystical here, but it is still very confusing.
I know there are some Hegel fans here, if you would be kind enough to explain the role of his metaphysics in his politics i would be very grateful.

[Anonymous No.16694239]

I suppose the percentage of people that could actually answer this is pretty low. Let's hope I get lucky.

[Anonymous No.16694243]

>>16693815
why don't you just read it

[Anonymous No.16694256]

>>16693815
Read this instead

[Anonymous No.16694328]

>>16694243
I have read it. Have you?

[Anonymous No.16694671]

>>16693815
Hegel was an agent of the Prussian state and his political work is just a justification of its reign. The Right Hegelians were right in that for Hegel, Prussia had achieved the end of history.

[Anonymous No.16694701]

>>16694256
It's not on Libgen.

[Anonymous No.16694870]

>>16694256
>Kojeve

[Anonymous No.16694885]

>>16694870
Why? He's very erudite and you don't have to agree with him on everything

[Anonymous No.16694920]

>>16694885
I want to understand Hegel, not Kojeve.

[Anonymous No.16694944]

You have an opinion but you don't want to put it into words. Then you want to talk shit about Kojeve? That's exactly why Hegel wants monarchy. Because a system that allows you is meaningless. You're now scrambling like an idiot and will stop scrambling when you find a position to stand on (you'll think it's stable enough to stand on but you'll look like a moron either way). This is why monarchy is important. For us to understand each other, we have to culminate on an agreement. The logical conclusion is the ultimate agreement. The state. And the state has to be one for everyone. Again monarchy.

[Anonymous No.16694951]

>>16693815
It's trash. Nearly every political philosopher coming after him has debunked this alleged "end" of political philosophy.

>>16694671
This.

Hegel's BS has also been used to justify fascism.

[Anonymous No.16695273]

>>16694944
i, uhh... i don't quite get it. So the monarch is representative of the culmination of agreement in the state? something like rousseau's general will?

[Anonymous No.16695330]

>>16695273
Yes. For example, 4chan can be seen as a monarchy. It allows the function of the community. The state is a function to maintain the cohesion and growth of a community. The most optimal way to do this is to centralize the rules for everyone and have one common reference for authority that ensures the plurality of the citizenry doesn't consume itself or puts itself in unnecessary danger. Hegel probably said Prussian monarchy because of bias but the idea lends itself for further abstraction. For Hegel the monarchy is a reflection of the people. There's no actual king to lead.

[Anonymous No.16695445]

>>16695330
I see. thank you.

[Anonymous No.16695473]

>>16694944
>>16695330
How does Hegel compare to Hobbes or King James VI?

[Anonymous No.16695485]

>>16695330
Can you give an example of something that isn't a monarchy?

[Anonymous No.16695493]

>>16695473
I over simplified a lot but my point was that Hegel's idea of the state is not really dogmatic. Hobbes I take to be more dogmatic but other than that, I got nothing
But bump because i want to know too

[Anonymous No.16695502]

>>16695493
Yeah Hobbes set out to make a logic framework for political theory. That’s why he comes across as dogmatic.

[Anonymous No.16695551]

>>16695485
The monarchy is tied to the dialectical. So anything that stands in the way from doing dialectics is not a monarchy. A kingdom is formed through the perpetuation of dialectics. Like Tolstoys the kingdom of God is inside you.

[Anonymous No.16695568]

>>16695551
Can you define dialectical for me? How can you create a state without logic?

[Anonymous No.16695706]

>>16695568
Broadly speaking, dialectical for our concern is a resolution of tension. You're a person insofar as you can resolute tension. You have certain inalienable and innate abilities to resolute tension. Outside factors can influence how you resolute tension. The monarchy is supposed to provide an equal barrier for each individual so they can resolute tension on an even playing field free from outside factors. If the state doesn't extend this protection to everyone, then you have the unfortunate who resolute tension for others. These new slaves start to work under the command of the masters. Now you have two states. The master and the slave. This isn't the type of monarchy Hegel had in mind. The master become an autonomous state. The slave becomes beholden to the master until the slave can overcome the master.
Logic is always there. What changes is that in a monarchy, everyone works for the same goal.

[Anonymous No.16695953]

>>16695473
Completely different aims