/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.4568469]

Hegel VS Marx
Who wins this great debate?

[Anonymous No.4568488]

Its not a debate because Marx didn't even bring any arguments.
Hegel is basically unrecognizable if you read accounts of him in Marxist literature

[Anonymous No.4568493]

>>4568488
You mean because of the complete disappearance of the absolute Idea?

[Anonymous No.4568497]

>>4568488
What's wrong with the young hegelians?

[Anonymous No.4568507]

>>4568493

No, they reduce Hegel to a caricature. The bullshit about "the dialectic" is a case in point: Hegel considers dialectical thinking only one of three major forms of philosophical reasoning.

[Anonymous No.4568856]

>>4568497
marxists are the cool guys now

[Anonymous No.4569182]

>>4568507
And you appear to be speaking past Marx. The 11th thesis on Feuerbach.

[Anonymous No.4569199]

>>4568497
see: Marx, Engels "Opposition of the Materialist and Idealist Outlook" (sc. "The Illusions of German Ideology")

funny thing is the posters claiming marx/ists have reduced hegel to a caricature are only reducing marx/ists to a caricature-- probably never having even read marx's actual works where he takes on the young hegelian outlook rather explicitly

[Anonymous No.4569576]

followers of hegel made concentration camps possible
followers of marx liberated concentration camps

looks pretty decisive to me

[Anonymous No.4569587]

Marxism is a direct result of the Hegalian philosophy applied to material phenomena.
Marxism relies completely on Hegel and his works.

[Anonymous No.4571229]

>>4569576
I Laughed

[Anonymous No.4571443]

That's like saying Plato vs. Aristotle

[Anonymous No.4571446]

>>4569576
what is a gulag for $200

[Anonymous No.4571455]

>>4571446
A work camp is not a death camp

[Anonymous No.4571466]

>>4571443
You might want to check out >>4569564

[Anonymous No.4572646]

>>4571455
What is a camp of confinement without the right to correspondence?

[Anonymous No.4572670]

>>4571455
Officially - not. By statistics of death - pretty yes.

[Anonymous No.4572676]

>>4569576
What the Soviets did was just as bad if not worse than the Nazis. Furthermore Marx was a follower of Hegel.

[Anonymous No.4572679]

Karl Popper

[Anonymous No.4572681]

>>4572670
Read Conquest and (if you're historically qualified) Archipelago. The camps without correspondence were liquidated in mid 1941.

[Anonymous No.4572691]

>>4572679
I Kuhn see what you're trying to do there, but I'm not Lakatosing your argument too well. Feyerabend of the boomerang mate: the man you cite's arguments are well out of date.

[Anοnymous No.4572700]

Hello OP! Hello fellow posters!

What a great day this is to be posting on /lit/, reading these awesome book reviews!

I came by just to inform you guys of a newly created /pol/-like subreddit called Factual Feminism! Don't let yourself get fooled by that name, it's actually a feminism-bashing focused subreddit, with the difference of the focus being on fact-based bashing instead of opinions, to form a strong base for anyone resisting feminism.

There is a public repository for the subreddit, accompanied by lots of facts and logical reasoning, for anyone to consult if any feminist troll decides to appear to ruin our day. Falacy-based logic is frowned upon (sorry, no nigger/kike/gook insulting allowed, leave it in /pol/), although instead of just banning the ofender, we incentive pointing out how he's wrong until he gives up on trying to troll us.

Well, please do join us, we're at http://www.reddit.com/r/factualfeminism/

Please drop a review to the repository on http://www.reddit.com/r/factualfeminism/comments/1y0bsg/first_post/

The repository can be found at http://github.com/WizardsWorkshop/factualfeminism

Have a nice day!

[Anonymous No.4572705]

>>4572700
Are you fucking serious

[Anonymous No.4572746]

>>4572691
It's normal, because scientific books age fast. But question was not about the edgiest shit. Question was who won Those Great Debate. Those Great Debate was won by Karl Popper.

[Anonymous No.4572774]

>muh gulags

[Anonymous No.4572780]

>>4572746
Not at all. Popper produces an unsustainable category, universalises it, and claims victory.

That's a deus ex machinae if I've ever seen one.

Popper's own metaphysics is even less valid than Hegel or Marx's: it lacks self-awareness. Popper and his advanced scientism is the open society's worst enemy.

[Anonymous No.4572789]

>>4572774
Given that there's only a spike in deaths during a military crisis, that's good evidence that the purpose of GuLag wasn't death.

[Anonymous No.4572805]

>>4572789
Of course. A bullet in the back of the head was the result if Stalin and co just wanted you dead, and vast numbers went that way.

[Anonymous No.4572824]

>>4572774
(citation needed)

[Anonymous No.4572830]

>>4568469
Stirner.

[Anonymous No.4572841]

>>4572805
>vast numbers
Except you're talking shit. Read Robert Conquest. Almost the entirety of deaths were processed through the interrogation and courts system, even with closed courts, and given a 58.

"Illegal" deaths in the judicial process were rare, and usually a result of failed interrogation or heroic suicide. Given what we know about how successful the interrogation system was, AND from reports of Lubyanka survivors, we know that the rate of death in the judicial process was low. We also know that the focus of the interrogation system was on the capital city party; and, that workers and peasants were much more quickly assigned their 58 tenner and their double.

This leaves the actual camp process, including wholesale camp liquidations. This also leaves special expropriations under the Uralo-Siberian method.

And of course the inefficiency of shooting individuals.

In the blood of Eastern Europe, illegal killings in the Soviet Union don't count as "vast" by any stretch. Perhaps you're confusing death sentences on 58s with illegal deaths. Oh, and as sentences we have numbers on 58s sentenced to death.

[Anonymous No.4572847]

>>4572824

[Anonymous No.4572872]

>>4572830
pls stop

[Anonymous No.4573091]

>>4569576
well done, comrade

[Anonymous No.4573174]

Adorno.

[Anonymous No.4573954]

>>4569199
this is marx and engels critiquing not only hegel but stirner (saint max)

[Anonymous No.4573959]

>>4572841
>Read Robert Conquest.

And even he's pretty full of shit compared to say, Arch Getty who has much lower numbers and a narrative more favorable towards Stalin, based on the Soviet archives released in the 90s that Conquest didn't have access to.

[Anonymous No.4573969]

>>4573959
Conquest demonstrates that the hysteria of the Cold War was illegitimate even by the hyperbolic source evidence of the time. I am sick and tired of people seeking to _overstate_ the GuLag's violence and horror.

The actual violence and horror of the GuLag is sufficient to condemn it morally. Invention merely weakens the moral force of actuality.

[Anonymous No.4574124]

>>4571455
he said concentration camps not death camps you revisionist communist scum

[Anonymous No.4574126]

>>4569576
what is the Holodomor for $400

[Anonymous No.4574134]

>>4574126
An invention of the national imaginary of Ukrainians, sold by Captive Nations (ie: CIA) funding; designed to obscure the actual horror and mass starvation of the 1932-1933 famine.

[Anonymous No.4574156]

>>4574134
Ditto. But for my grandmother it was looking half-starved at how your neighbors cook their children while cursing the "Muscowites".

The term itself may well have been picked by Ukrainian nationalist exiles somewhere, if you insist, in the CIA because it is sounds so similar to «holocaust». It's a portmanteau word of hunger (holod) + extermination or mass dying (mor). But the fact of a «famine-extermination» was addressed in the Soviet Union as well, by no one less than Khruschev in his 20th congress speech. Are you commie enough to claim that Khruschev was on the payroll of the CIA?

[Anonymous No.4574169]

>>4574156
The thing is, friend, that golodomor has been over laid with meaning other than mass hunger death, including the specific assertion that it was a genocide designed, intended and deliberately committed to destroy the Ukrainian nation.

You're misusing guillemet by the way.

As you can see from my clear reference to the 1932-1933 famine, I do not deny that mass deaths due to famine occurred. You shouldn't take Khrushchev's speech in 1956 as evidence: we have open PC archives on the subject that indicate that while the PC prepared an economic situation where scarcity would produce dearth, and reacted far too slowly to dearth, and reacted to dearth in a manner that concentrated famine in rural areas; that the PC acted as soon as the dearth itself was made known to it.

The idea of intentionality bound up in this is complex and multilayered, it isn't as simplistic as the holodomor narrative put by Ukrainian exiles. Who, incidentally, tried to get the definition of genocide changed as part of Captive Nations for political reasons.

Finally, Khrushchev tried to crush Poland in 1956, and crushed Hungary in 1956. While he may have been separated by faction from the CIA; they both acted for their national bourgeoisie.

[Anonymous No.4574185]

>>4574169
>golodomor
>g
та щоб ти здох, кацап клятий.
>Finally, Khrushchev tried to crush Poland in 1956, and crushed Hungary in 1956. While he may have been separated by faction from the CIA; they both acted for their national bourgeoisie.
зовсім спилися, москалі?

[Anonymous No.4574200]

>>4574185
Fuck your mother, mate.

[Anonymous No.4574203]

>>4572676
> What the Soviets did was just as bad if not worse than the Nazis
I take it you come from US?

[Anonymous No.4574234]

>>4574203
I'm Russian and I can confirm this.

[Anonymous No.4574239]

>>4574234
Because history is grounded in the random rantings of anonymous fuckwits online; not in scholarly monographs from archival sources.

[Anonymous No.4574247]

>>4568469
Stirner

[Anonymous No.4574249]

>>4574239
history is actually grounded on struggle and stubbornness

[Anonymous No.4574251]

>>4574239
The nazis did kill about as many people as the USSR. The greatest enemies of communism right now are people like yourself who try to vindicate it's butchers.

[Anonymous No.4574258]

>>4574251
Standing up for truth grounded in archives read by scholarly historians publishing under the vicious critique of scholarly historians is "vindicating butchers?"

Well then I'll have five pound of sausages and a leg of lamb.

[Anonymous No.4574259]

>>4574258
read the black book of communism if you find time between the zastoy era moskal scholars.

[Anonymous No.4574264]

>>4574259
I have. Courtois claims that Communism is fundamentally and essentially murderous because it isn't Roman Catholocism. Nicolas Werth attempted to withdraw his chapter. The research in almost every chapter except Werth's has been lambasted from head to tail. And Werth's chapter has been criticised for exaggeration and failures in interpretation.

[Anonymous No.4574279]

>>4574264
Their sources are legit, москаль недобитий.

[Anonymous No.4574281]

>>4574279
Compared to an anonymous fascist Ukrainian denialist, I'm taking the reviews in scholarly journals.

Feel free to enjoy your timecube.

[Anonymous No.4574292]

>>4574281
>anonymous fascist
>fascist
you guys should be given your own medicine.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psikhushka
>scholarly journals
Judging from your posts it's Juche quarterly.

[Anonymous No.4574311]

>>4574292
And now speculative ad hominem to defend an indefensible source? Please go on. You're your opponent's best advocate.

[Anonymous No.4574321]

>>4574311
first you shout me down as a fascist and then you accuse me of ad hominem argument. ha. are you that school child from australia?
the black book of communism is wonderful citable source much in contrasst to the otherwordly bullshit printed daily in the commie press. of course you can accuse a bourgeois conspiracy. that will render you twice as cute.

[Anonymous No.4574325]

>>4574321
>contrasst

>you can accuse a bourgeois conspiracy.
Not in English you can't.

[Anonymous No.4574333]

>>4574325
d'aww, poor thing. move to crimea now and join their communist party.

[Anonymous No.4574335]

>>4574321
>>4574333
Your interpretation defeated, your historiography noted as depraved, you move on to dull abuse.

Thank you for your concession.

[Anonymous No.4574344]

>>4574335
>dull abuse
and you never grow tired of that?
>Your interpretation defeated, your historiography noted as depraved
in what communist cell?

i have this theory that you are actually a stormfag trying to be as abrasive as humanly possible in his defense of stalinism. of course you will deny that and i advise everyone else to get a good look at this thread.

[Anonymous No.4575901]

This all started as a Hegel vs Marx debate

[Anonymous No.4575954]

Marx built his philosophy on Hegel.
That's what the picture says, anyway

[Anonymous No.4575966]

>>4568507
What are the other two?

[Anonymous No.4576090]

>>4574259
>read the black book of communism
Delicious cake. Could it be... German chocolate ;)

[Anonymous No.4576302]

>>4568469
>both communist fags who cares

[Anonymous No.4577009]

>Live in first-world
>Live in 21st century
>Take Communism seriously
Ha, ha. Oh, wow.

[Anonymous No.4577028]

>>4577009
Communism is not a 19th century movement, because I really don't think it would have been technologically or economically feasible back in that time period. Now though... that's a different story

[Anonymous No.4577168]

>>4574259
>read the black book of communism

Oh that book that even Harvard Press had to release an apology for since it was an entire load of complete bullshit?

[AnnieC !m9jxTLhLcw No.4578201]

>>4568469
Marx, obviously. Hegel can't even grow a fucking mustache.

[AnnieC !m9jxTLhLcw No.4578208]

>>4568856
They are if by "now" you mean "like 50 years ago".