And what he says is absolutely fine

i think his ideas on radiacal freedom are pretty anarchist imo

encouraging others to reject how Capitalist society defines them and to realize their absolute freedom is not contradictory to Communism

How do you reconcile existentialism and marxism?

https://www.marxists.org/archive/novack/works/history/ch12.htm

He did become an Anarchist

i think he was jealous of camus

His existentialism did not contradict material analysis lmao

Nah, he just broke with the Marxist movements of his time, he was always p anti-authoritarian

the freakin intro to being and nothingness asserts his materialism and opposition to idealism

"The confrontation of existentialism with dialectical materialism is a genuine case of “either-or.”"

but can you seperate an ought from an is?

@danman1950 In what context?

@Deleted User in memes

that article says camus is an existentialist lol

He said he wasn't, but in effect p much was

i find absurdism to be distinct from existentialism

could just be because camus was more literary than philosophical tbh

I always thought of Absurdism as a sort of branch of Existentialism

fair

mfw Heidegger was a good philosopher in an apolitical sense but his politics were literally as bad as possible

What do y'all think of state capitalism

ew state capitalism

heidegger is fucking hilarious in how bad his politics are

>government can plan the economy
Sounds comfy to me desu

state capitalism is gross

workers don't own the means of production >: (

😡

I mean I realize that analyzing ML states as State Capitalist definitely defends on your definition of socialism obviously

whether you view it as a transitional phase of the reversal of class repression or as worker's control

What happens when the scientific guide of Diamat conflicts with the 'be yourself' model of existentialism? Do you explode?

yeah

in all seriousness thats the whole paradox of human existence isnt it. we're self-aware freely choosing beings who are also driven by our material circumstances

There's a difference between scientifically analyzing how material forces and class drive history and encouraging individuals to act without forgetting that they are ultimately free, and encouraging them to be free

@not_matt 'we're self-aware freely choosing beings' Only subjectively.

exactly

being a subject is like exactly what existentialism is all about

being for-itself rather than in-itself and all that jazz

And if the objectivty of diamat informs our subject, it is no longer a choice.

Sartrean existentialism never says that you control your situation, but you do have absolute control over how you react and what you do with those situations

And Sartre said that he was never more free than he was in prison, because he still had the freedom to interpret life, his situation and his own thought