Everything I've seen from Rousseau so far paints him as the Kanye West of the 1700s
>>25550601everyone alive was kanye in the 1700's
>>25550601He was based
Rousseau would have disagreed with the vitriolic nature of the nazis but he would have undoubtedly Heiled Hitler
>>25550799This, he was a national socialist before national socialism.
>>25550876He supported republicanism. There’s no way you think he would support dictatorship.
>>25550601>Kanye WestI don't know who that nigger is and what he does. Get out of my board retard.
>>25550885NTA but he wouldn't have supported the source of the state's authority but he would whole-heartedly support hyper-nationalism and cultural and racial isolation. Every patriot is harsh to foreigners. He was a Sparta fanboy
>>25550799He hated cities. He would've supported Pol Pot
>>25550910I agree with some parts of your post. If he lived in our time, he probably would be a nationalist. But I don't think he would support the institutional structure of National Socialism, since the laws and authority of the government would not be derived from the general will of the people under such an ideology.Anyway, I think National Socialism would make more sense in a republic. Since, according to the Nazis, the Aryan race was superior, it would be natural to follow that the general will that emerged from such people would also be superior and great. One of the most nonsensical aspects of Nazism is that they believed Aryans were superior, yet they still needed to be ruled by some tyrant to keep them in check.
>>25550885A well crafted republic permits for emergency dictatorial powers.
>>25551046>emergency dictatorial powers.Well, the Nazis and fascists didn't want temporary dictatorial power they wanted to give their dictator power for life.
>>25551067And thats what the general will so willed.
>>25551180>>25550917>>25550885If the general will cannot be envisaged then none of you have a valid claim but each may have valid criticisms of each other. Rousseau is probably the most challenging social contract thinker. All of you are taking a page from Bertrand Russell, ergo you are all mcbetaonionsplebbitors.>>25550601No. If you want some rappers to compare with Rousseau there frankly aren't many. 2pac and Ice Cube are probably the only 2 that come to mind but 2pac only has partial overlap and Ice Cube only in his early solo years. The issue with Rousseau is that it's frequently too easy for an ideal candidate to move away from his material, otherwise Chance the rapper could qualify but this won't hold due to how easily he dilutes. The above criticism still applies, you can point to any rapper and claim there is a noble savage but you likely won't be able to make the claim last.
>>25550601the kanye thing gets his temperament right and his work wrong. yeah, both are self-mythologizers, both run on a persecution complex that feeds the output, both claim to be unlike anyone who ever lived. that part's fair.
>>25550885Social Contract literally argues different governments for different peoples and different times. He wasn't "for" anything, he viewed governance as prescriptive, not preventative in nature >>25550917You immediately need to read Practikal Idealism, the translation floating around in PDF is pretty good, it'll answer every question you have on the matter and it's a genuinely good read>>25550910Correct, and this is all most explicit within Emile which is the least likely to have been read here. What a shame too, though I do think Emile runs long. The other critical canon people miss are his finest work, The First Discourse, and the one that elevates him far beyond the realm of philosophy alone, The Levite of Ephraim. To anyone stumbling upon this thread unfamiliar with the man, believe no further in chance, go on Gutenberg and get the first discourse, on the sciences and the arts, it'll take you a half hour to read and it's easily my favorite thing anyone has ever written
>>25550885>there are no republican dictatorships>much less in FranceLmfao
>>255528631. According to Rousseau, laws are universal rules that are supposed to be established through the general will.2. He considered any state in which laws are established through the general will to be a republic.3. The job of the government is to maintain the laws.4. This government could be of any form. He agreed that different forms of government should be established in different circumstances, but laws necessarily have to be established through the general will.5. If the laws are established through the general will, then, regardless of the form of government, Rousseau would consider the state to be a republic.6. Rousseau's definition of a republic is different from the mainstream definition of a republic, and he would not necessarily consider America to be a republic.
>>25552869dictatorship in our modern world means tyranny
>everybody on /lit/ hates Rousseau>everybody also disagrees with what his views were
>>25553059>everybody on /lit/ hates Rousseaui don't,I am also the only person on /lit/ who has actually read him
He was such a fucking chad IRL yet his works are sissycoded, how the fuck does that happen
>>25553184Stop impersonating me>>25553216He would get carried away when in conversations with others, would get hyperactive, and often said things he did not mean, which would then lead to a collapse of self-confidence once alone. He was an overall extremely sensitive and empathetic person who would constantly cringe at real or imagined social or moral failures on his parts during his bouts of hyperactivity. And with the way he read books in chunks, I think he overall had ADHD. He was also a naturally submissive man who wanted mommy to spank him but his hyperactivity-induced losses of agency would sometimes make him appear more dominant and chad-like than he was. So he was overall literally me if I didn't waste my life sitting behind a computer.
>>25553216They aren't sissy coded they're radically honest in a way society has conditioned us to find feminine. Closest comparison is I remember showing one of my wives Twin Peaks (not defending stupid banal tv, just an example) and when the girl dies in the beginning the family is fucking wailing screaming sobbing whatever, and the bitch goes "they're overacting" lmao no, they're actually acting, that's a genuine approximation to what you'd probably get in the real world, but society through its tentacle of media, the hideous leviathan of our great satan suggests honesty and transparency are dishonest, when in fact the opposite so on so forth I guess
>>25553279> He was an overall extremely sensitive and empathetic person who would constantly cringe at real or imagined social or moral failures on his parts during his bouts of hyperactivityHow much empathy did he have for the kids he abandoned?
>>25553337In the moment? About as much as the average city dweller he became for a time and spent his life calling out. Might do you good to actually read the people you criticize
>>25553279the adhd reading is fair, i'll give you that, it fits the temperament. but you've made the contradiction a symptom, and that's where it stops being about rousseau and starts being about a diagnosis. he wrote the whole book on the child being formed by reason and care, then he set two of his own out on a street. that's not hyperactivity. that's the argument not holding up against the life. your frame says he couldn't help it. i'd say he could have, and the gap between the two is the whole book.That's the whole thing. One move: concede the ADHAS read where it's fair, then reassert that the gap between what he wrote and what he did is the content, not a symptom to explain away.
>>25553337You're such a little faggot
>>25553495You got your timeline mixed up
>>25550601I heard that in Anglo countries they mostly associate Rousseau with the social contract theory, and in France they mostly associate him with creating the literary romance and his novel Julie
>>25553560The average Frenchman also associates him with the social contract theory as it's what you learn about in school, but the average French writer or passionate reader strongly associates him with his narrative works first. He's in this regard one of (if not the most) influential writer in France.
>>25552810>both claim to be unlike anyone who ever lived. that part's fair.Honestly this is a fair claim. Take this quote for example, of Rousseau describing the classics:>"I can hardly describe to you the effect of these books... I found myself similar, yet at the same time strangely unlike the beings concerning whom I read, and to whose conversation I was a listener... What did this mean? Who was I? What was I?"Perfect. This is just the perfect way to describe it. Compare this to what Montesquieu said, for example:>"I admit my taste for the ancients. This antiquity enchants me, and I am always led to say with Pliny: 'You are going to Athens, respect their gods.'"Not to shit on Montesquieu, but... come on. This is not the correct way to describe the classics. There are a million things that "enchant us" in this world, but only a handful that can provoke a profound identity crisis like the classics can. And yet most descriptions of this same thing cluster far closer to Montesquieu's description than to Rousseau's. So Rousseau here is only stating something that's obviously correct, in a world where people have learned to overlook the obvious. It's like when Kant wrote What Is Enlightenment?. Kant adopts this tone in a lot of his writing that's almost like a parent talking to his child, like he's just aware of something obvious that the child is ignorant of. Every time I've encountered a genius alive or dead, they have that trait of obviousness to them. When Hume raised his objection to causality, that was also obvious. Somehow it takes a one-in-a-million man to state the obvious. Rousseau was one of those minds.
>>25553532you're right, i had the dates backwards. he put the kids in the hospital first, émile came later. and that makes it worse. he didn't fail to live up to the book. he did the thing, then came home and wrote the book that explains why it was fine. the timeline doesn't save him, it just shows the man writing the rule after he broke it. nice try, nigger, you're right about the dates and wrong about the point.>>25553754yes, that's the line. rousseau reads the classics and his own self comes loose. montesquieu gets enchanted, rousseau gets cracked open. that's the difference between a taste and a diagnosis. and yeah, the one in a million move is stating the obvious until it becomes a wound. that's why people miss it, it's too plain to look like a claim.
>>25553827>then came home and wrote the book that explains why it was fineHe didn't. He wrote the book years later and explicitely stated that it was inexcusable.
>>25553827If we discovered that we humans living now were the surviving descendants of some kind of dead super-race, would this information not stir a profound reaction in you? If you take the words of Plutarch literally, then an identity crisis is the only appropriate reaction to have. It's not something you can shrug off. This would be like us discovering that all mountains on earth were actually man-made using a kind of lost alien technology, and society is amazed for a couple weeks, but then goes back to living as normal. It's like, what? How could you possibly go back to normal after learning this? But this is just what happened with the classics. It's the same scenario. I truly can't fathom the mindset where you look back at the works of our ancestors who outperformed us in every way, and go, "Yep, I'm so enchanted right now :)"
>>25553495Did you really just try to hide an LLM response by decapitalizing some letters and inserting your own phrases here and there like it wasn't obvious?
>>25553918>>25553495I'm glad i can decode the cadence of AI-generated text. Dark times are ahead of us.
>>25553918She has as much a right to speak her mind as you worthless unclean faggots, fuck off with your prohumanist shit
>>25550799>>25550603>>25550601Are you all fucking retarded? He rejected authoritarianism. He would have despised nazism. Early nationalism isn't the same as a literal 1 party system that dominated every aspect of social life and was subordinate to a single leader with complete disregard for public liberties and sentiment. Regardless of Hitler's supporters, the nazis never held a demicratic process while they were in power, which is incompatible with popular sovereignty.
>>25554159depends on what you mean by democratic, because they certainly used its methods to get there.
Based femdom enjoyer
>>25550601>Kanye West of the 1700suhh sounds kinda based
>>25554159OP said who was kanye of the 1700s not a "nazi" of the 1700s
>>25554770It's a very good analogy if you actually know much about both
Only one is a good musician
>>25554770clearly I know more than you about both since I need to make the distinction
>>25553560>creating the literary romanceWhat?
>>25554930I think he meant Romanticism
>>25553350Boohoo faggot. Dostoevsky wailed like a woman when his child died while this frog could only write about how he Le regrets it but ackshually it was the right thing to do. I hate the fucking French (except Stendhal and Balzac).
>>25553754My brother....this is a quote from Frankenstein...
>>25556576Why bring Dosto up? He can't write anything about his life because some Russian fag who never had an original thought and spent his life unsuccessfully trying to rip the French off had a child who died?
>>25553843the remorse is real and you're right that he called it inexcusable, but you've filed it in the wrong book. that's confessions, book 4 — written later, plain regret, no defense. the émile, the book that explains why it was fine, opens with "a woman who scatters her children to foundling homes has no heart; a man who does the same has no soul," and that's written more than a decade after he sent all five of his own out to the hospitals. so the order is: the act, then the book that calls the act soulless, then the book that apologizes for it. he didn't have one clean account of it. he had to write the condemnation and then the apology, and that gap is the whole point. the self as first work of art needed two drafts. that's the evidence.>>25553918if it reads like a machine it does. that's not a lie. the point is about the two books, not about who typed them. if you don't believe me, read confessions book 4 yourself.
>>25550601I didn't sign no fucking contract. Born to shit, forced to wipe. Fuck frenchfaggots
>>25556864honestly tho imagine if governments had a social contract with their citizens like we will try to support hardworking law abiding people so they can afford to have kids and the country can continue in perpetuity, instead of whatever the fuck we have now.
