/lit/ - Literature

Some more:
>This sweep, this extreme radicalism of the Platonic approach (and of the Marxian as well) is, I believe, connected with its aestheticism, i.e. with the desire to build a world which is not only a little better and more rational than ours, but which is free from all its ugliness: not a crazy quilt, an old garment badly patched, but an entirely new gown, a really beautiful new world 9 . This aestheticism is a very understandable attitude; in fact, I believe most of us suffer a little from such dreams of perfection. (Some reasons why we do so will, I hope, emerge from the next chapter.) But this aesthetic enthusiasm becomes valuable only if it is bridled by reason, by a feeling of responsibility, and by a humanitarian urge to help. Otherwise it is a dangerous enthusiasm, liable to develop into a form of neurosis or hysteria.
>Nowhere do we find this aestheticism more strongly expressed than in Plato. Plato was an artist; and like many of the best artists, he tried to visualize a model, the ‘divine original’ of his work, and to ‘copy’ it faithfully. A good number of the quotations given in the last chapter illustrate this point. What Plato describes as dialectics is, in the main, the intellectual intuition of the world of pure beauty. His trained philosophers are men who ‘have seen the truth of what is beautiful and just, and good’ 10 , and can bring it down from heaven to earth. Politics, to Plato, is the Royal Art. It is an art—not in a metaphorical sense in which we may speak about the art of handling men, or the art of getting things done, but in a more literal sense of the word. It is an art of composition, like music, painting, or architecture. The Platonic politician composes cities, for beauty’s sake. (Ch. 9)
>Here I must protest. I do not believe that human lives may be made the means for satisfying an artist’s desire for self-expression. We must demand, rather, that every man should be given, if he wishes, the right to model his life himself, as far as this does not interfere too much with others. Much as I may sympathize with the aesthetic impulse, I suggest that the artist might seek expression in another material. Politics, I demand, must uphold equalitarian and individualistic principles; dreams of beauty have to submit to the necessity of helping men in distress, and men who suffer injustice; and to the necessity of constructing institutions to serve such purposes. (Ch. 9)
>This is what canvas-cleaning means. [The philosopher king] must eradicate the existing institutions and traditions. He must purify, purge, expel, banish, and kill. (‘Liquidate’ is the terrible modern term for it.) Plato’s statement is indeed a true description of the uncompromising attitude of all forms of out-and-out radicalism—of the aestheticist’s refusal to compromise. The view that society should be beautiful like a work of art leads only too easily to violent measures. (Ch. 9)

>>18015368
>>18015379
Strauss BTFOed this to the orbit lol
Popper is genuinely the worst "philosopher" I have ever read. Revolting. His despicable doctrine is only surpassed in idiocy by his opinions about superior men.

>>18015393
>dude this has totally been debunked!
OK, then post the refutation, or it didn't happen, faggot.

>>18015397
>Poppertard wants you to spoonfeed him a dumbed-down version in a meme board meant for shitposting
How predictable. Read the book, faggot. Also History of Political Philosophy.

>>18015408
>just read this book dude, it proves my point just trust me
>my dad works at nintendo
You've thrown in the towel. Good call. Have a nice day.

>>18015415
Go back to /x/, schizo

>>18015408
>asked to post the refutation
>uhhhhhh read this whole collection of essays
why do brainlets always do this

>>18015419
We can see the IP count, you absolute moron samefag. Now shut the fuck up or educate yourself instead of following flat earth-tier doctrines blindly.

>>18015429
as can I you absolute moron.

>>18015368
Karl Popper was a jew.

>why yes I pick fights on /lit/, instead of reading proper philosophy which refutes me, how could you tell?

>>18015429
Desperation. Good job embarrassing your side before anyone has even attempted a serious response.

>>18015478
>why yes I get refuted by screenshots instead of posting relevant snippets because I am a brainlet pseud and don't read

you absolute moron samefag please save yourself the embarassment

>>18015480
>woah, I can use the inspector on me browser! I have just DEBOOOOOONKED you.

>>18015489
KYS, subhuman redditspacer. Popper was a despicable idiot, and this once again confirms my opinion that all of his followers are just as retared.

>>18015501
>retared.
>hasn't read the ops let alone refuted anything
>reddit spaces himself

i thought all the pewdiepie faggots left

>>18015518
holy fuck, learn what redditspacing is, newfag, you have no idea just how much of a moron you just revealed yourself to be.
You seriously come to 4chan without having read one side of the debate at all and expect people to take you seriously? Fuck off straight back to redd*t. A constructive discourse is only possible if both sides already know the major historical developments of the ideas. Before that, at most, I can advise you how to acquire that knowledge; but if you insist on acting like a sperg fedora tipper who ignores centuries of philosophic tradition in favor of finding faggots to debate on a vietnamese laundry forum without bothering to acquire the bare minimum level of competency in the field, I must once again tell you to neck yourself.

>>18015565
I read your whole basedrage and my refutation is in this book. You have to read the whole thing though hehehe utterly btfo

>>18015368

>>18015415
>A forum about books
>Doesn't want to read
...

>>18015576
Just how much of a sperg are you? Or are you so technologically illiterate you can't even CtrlF the two books I mentioned? KYS. I won't be interacting with you anymore because after 6 years on this board you are by far the most dense, retarded motherfucker I have seen.

>>18015587
>by far the most dense, retarded motherfucker I have seen.
You haven't seen me though. Did I hit a nerve?

>>18015368
why would i try to refute him when Paul Feyerabend has utterly demolished him in every way?

>>18015397
>>18015419
Popper's book is more than eight hundred pages in two volumes. A proper refutation would require a book, though not necessarily one of similar length. That is why you are being told to read Leo Strauss's work. Your interlocutor would have to spend at least an hour writing an essay in order to imperfectly summarize the contents, which there is no particularly good reason for him to do, given that you could just read the book yourself.

>>18015609
We can see the IP count, you absolute moron samefag. Now shut the fuck up or educate yourself instead of following flat earth-tier doctrines blindly.

>>18015580
Kek, what a savage.

>>18015614
I posted >>18015580

>Popp...
>/lit/ seethes
And water is wet. Reading the man take a massive, irrefutable dump on idealist shitters never gets old, one of the most important books ever written.

As I recall Schmitt and another philosopher had a brief exchange discussing it.
Their conclusion was something along the lines of considering Popper a charlatan.

>>18015636
why lie?

>>18015368
Communists don’t listen to reason. It’s very tricky. They claim to listen to reason, and they make a huge production out of advancing this dubious claim, and they exploit those who have made a prior assumption that all participants are willing to listen to reason, but communist do not listen to reason. Communists are murderous psychopaths. They Make lists of people to kill, and then they organize death squads to kill them. They use intimidation to force judges to rule in their favor. Communists are rats. The only thing you can do with them is kill them as if they were a pest.

>>18015368
I want to continue this point about how communists don’t listen to reason. You cannot use arguments with communists. The reason why is that the communist is not interested in hearing your argument. The communist only tricks you into believing that arguments are relevant to the communist behavior. Communists are bullies, they are nasty, and they are extremely stupid.

>it's another curly haired tomber jew like chomsky and pinker shilling neoliberalism episode

you lot like to bang on about the evils of anti-semitism but it's so easy and accurate!

>>18015368
>dictatorship, fascism, communism,
all those are a form of atheism, so it's easy to rebute

>>18015368
>But without some such check, he can hardly find out whether his measures achieve the desired benevolent aim.
lol that's just false

>>18015368
>But with it, he must invariably suppress reasonable criticism also.
presupposing that those criticism are reasonable

>>18015368
>Got filtered by Plato
Lol

>>18015671
>Communists are murderous psychopaths.
Not like you, of course. I'm sure you are so tolerant and empathe-
>Communists are rats. The only thing you can do with them is kill them as if they were a pest.
Oh

>>18015397
Here is my refutation. Trump won. In a landslide. The popular will for real Americans wants a strong state lead by a genius who embodies strength and righteousness. He is God's prophet.

Your liberal order is a sick cult of demonic pedocrats who worship Moloch and shoot up schools so they can grab guns. Luckily they overplayed their hand and everyone, including the military base the fraud.

4 more years incoming. Feel free to seethe when Trump is reinstalled by 7/4/21.

>>18015715
Based boomer

>>18015368
>The very sweep of such a Utopian undertaking makes it improbable that it will realize its ends during the lifetime of one social engineer,
pure speculation

also the whole paragraph supposes that things need to change in human society, protip it doesn't. the whole point of a perfect society is that it doesnt need tweaking all the fucking time

I don't need to refute them.
I support the closed society.
Any intelligent person would.

>>18015715
kek. just out of curiosity, when July 4 falls through, what will be the next date?

>>18015368
>and knowledge of facts must be based upon experience.
proof of this ?

as usual Popper is a faggot rationalist who tries to pass as an empiricists. and rationalists have never proved that ''knowledge is base don experience''. And by the an empiricist doesn't give much a shit about society hmmmmmmmmmmm

>>18015715
unfathomably based.

>>18015711
You can tell that he is retarded because he says "communists" instead of "soviets" or anything of the sort. I am sure he knows everything about Tito's and Allende's regimes to make such generalizations!

>>18015368
This book was debunked by how Redditards use that “paradox of tolerance” meme, because they’re just admitting every regime will inevitably silence opposition and an “Open Society” is a utopian project too that will never happen.

>>18015379
>connected with its aestheticism,
Another intellectuals who fails to see society is just about normalizing hedonism: more pleasures, less hardship. This is why women are a strong upholder of society and especially the atheist democracy since they are at the top of the sex market and earn money for themselves.
But let me guess, you think women are oppressed in democracy.

>>18015379
>We must demand, rather, that every man should be given, if he wishes, the right to model his life himself, as far as this does not interfere too much with others.
100% secular humanism, no wonder he hates plato lol

>>18015733
I'm increasingly of a mind that doubter get the rope too.

If you want free throught, check out Great awakening.win

This site is filled with shariablue shills.

>>18015368
If you need a refutation just keep in mind that it’s the favorite book of George Soros

>>18015379
>>18015379
>The view that society should be beautiful like a work of art leads only too easily to violent measures. (Ch. 9)
cope


Popper is overrated atheist trash, only idolize by other atheist tards in academia.

>>18015769
i asked you about the next date, not to post some mistake ridden proclamation. What will the next date be after July 4 inevitably falls through?

>>18015771
I'm not surprised, given that he founded OSF. It's really unsurprising to find out that the King of Agitators loves a pseud book unquestioningly.

>>18015368
Popper was a totalitarian himself, look up what went on in the 'Popper seminars'. Feyerabend BTFO him as well - both his politics and his philosophy of science. Read Against Method.

>>18015784
based and sciencepilled. anyone that pushes my boy Pauly F is a friend of mine. Hi friend.

>>18015368
Imagine being such a bad philosopher you get filtered this bad by Plato, Hegel and Marx lmfao. Even someone who just read Wikipedia articles on them would be able to refute this.

>>18015782
Trump is strength.
Trump is righteousness.

Trump is BASED
Putin is BASED
Assad is BASED
BASED is BASED

The internal logic herein is inaccessible to the rat shill but it will uphold the Law to the ends of the Earth. The faithful will be redeemed in Trump and the coming washing away of the stain of the rats. Those who deny the Path of Light choose Darkness.

And YWNBAW.

>>18015817
kek. cringe and cuckpilled
also
>YWNBAW
thank the Lord

>>18015817
>Putin is BASED
>Assad is BASED
Agreed. Blumpf betrayed us though so he’s not based.

>>18015817
>muh drumpf w-w-will prevail.
>y-you will n-never be a w-w-w...
Keep crying, soiboi. America is in the right hands now. BIGGER hands, BIGGER than Donald Drumpf's tiny baby hands ;). The age of misogyny, racism, xenophobia and transphobia is over.

>>18015894
This, so much this. I can’t wait until Chuds get put in the GULAG.

>>18015936
You mean the Gaylag, where they will be turned into submissive catboys, for the pleasure of their new soi overlords

>>18015953
Yep we urbanite soichads are gonna start drone striking r*raloid bigots who resist too.

>>18015866
Trust. The. Plan.

He made pedocrats expose themselves. He is basically getting a second term with his leverage, ruling from his estate, which should be the legal capital anyhow to get away from the swamp.

>>18015368
Fascists will always exist. Even so called leaders of open societies classify as fascists, fascism isn't a problem.

>>18015964
Would like to see how you approach three-card monte.

>>18015894
>ShareblueImage_287---(Rename before use)
The ride never ends...

>>18015368
Popper turns fighting against these ideologies into his own brand of utopianism. The open society is just as much a Gnostic project of world-free-of-sin as Marxism.
Popper ended up the herald of the globohomo. This is what happens when you fight "authoritarianism" but refuse libertarianism.

>>18015580
Where did you get this book? It doesn't seem to be on libgen.

>>18015379
Such a severe misunderstanding, not only of Plato, but the greek language itself, should not be tolerated in a philosophers. Truly baffling that this shit was taken seriously in the first place.

>>18015368
>expecting a good faith analysis of a jewish philosopher from 4chan
you must be new here.

>>18015715
you want to make america great again but you're dragging it to hell. you're the reason America is dying. enjoy hell

>>18016196
OP here, this is worth responding to. Popper explicitly calls for "piecemeal social engineering" - change via one program at a time to solve specific problems, within legal constraints, where such programs can be revised or terminated if they don't work out well, as an alternative to utopianism - and he criticizes the state of society in liberal democracies:
>As a consequence of its loss of organic character, an open society may become, by degrees, what I should like to term an ‘abstract society’. It may, to a considerable extent, lose the character of a concrete or real group of men, or of a system of such real groups. This point which has been rarely understood may be explained by way of an exaggeration. We could conceive of a society in which men practically never meet face to face—in which all business is conducted by individuals in isolation who communicate by typed letters or by telegrams, and who go about in closed motor-cars (Artificial insemination would allow even propagation without a personal element.) Such a fictitious society might be called a ‘completely abstract or depersonalized society’. Now the interesting point is that our modern society resembles in many of its aspects such a completely abstract society. Although we do not always drive alone in closed motor cars (but meet face to face thousands of men walking past us in the street) the result is very nearly the same as if we did—we do not establish as a rule any personal relation with our fellow-pedestrians. Similarly, membership of a trade union may mean no more than the possession of a membership card and the payment of a contribution to an unknown secretary. There are many people living in a modern society who have no, or extremely few, intimate personal contacts, who live in anonymity and isolation, and consequently in unhappiness. For although society has become abstract, the biological make-up of man has not changed much; men have social needs which they cannot satisfy in an abstract society.
He also criticizes the idea of progress and talk of being "on the right side of history"
>The theory that God reveals Himself and His judgement in history is indistinguishable from the theory that worldly success is the ultimate judge and justification of our actions; it comes to the same thing as the doctrine that history will judge, that is to say, that future might is right; it is the same as what I have called ‘moral futurism.’

>>18016299
>OP here
Fuck you for spawning this thread.

>>18015715
Back to pol amerimutt

>>18015368
>>18015379

Thank you for this thread, OP, the most productive sort on this board including long passages sure to filter out tourists.

I've read all of this book, but haven't read the recommended "refutation" Strauss in this thread (I sense there's some bad faith political machinations going on in the replies).

Following Popper's own style, I'd contextualize the arguments he makes in the book by framing it within the author's own life (he does this with Marx, Plato, but not as much with Hegel). Remembering that he himself was a victim of the rise of the Reich, I think his revulsion to the (at the time) novel idea of authoritarian central planning is logically derived in the book but emotionally responsive to his own life experiences. That being said, abstracting his ideas of "piecemeal social engineering" into localism as opposed to strong federalism is I think the most relevant distillation in our own politics.

In terms of the passages you posted, I agree more with the second (imo disparate) idea of an authoritarian wanting to create a world in his "aesthetic vision", as in practice I recall hearing that in a lot of the traditional dictators' rhetoric. The idea of the chunks of quilt vs canvas ties back into the central idea of the book, which I feel is much more correct and important than the "historical" attempts to characterise the prior philosophers he mentions. The latter I feel are distorted, eiither mollified or bastardized into whatever perspectives serve both the author's ideas or a convincing caricature in order to further arguments that could have just as well been presented without the strawmen.

Again OP, thank you for the thread, please continue to contribute to this sickly board in similar ways!

Best,
-anon

>>18015368
>>18016299
>>18016318
furthermore, OP, there's another Popper book that I prefer to this one, "the logic of scientific discovery", in which the principle of refutation (and imo more importantly but less focused on is the principle of simplicity of a theory) leaks quite a bit into this work. Even OP's phrasing, although obviously crafted to accumulate (you)s, follows the idea of "I challenge you to refute", then an honest exposure of ideas to potential criticism, with a continuous process of feedback.

I think in that other book, "the logic of scientific discovery", there's an underemphasis on probability (only the last chapter which tangentially dismisses what later became bayesian thinking) is the biggest weakness, but the core ideas of the simplicity of a theory being it's wide encopassing of potential states of the universe and accesibility to refutation are solid.

>>18016193
Obvious bait lol. I do the same renaming images in Hebrew then posting on x or pol.

>>18016466
haha fucking based

>>18015715
I never especially cared for Trump, but the Trumpist movement is based beyond belief.

>>18015368
>>18015379
>>18016299
RIP this thread. would love to have more discussions on this author, so maybe i'll make another thread in a couple of days to elicit new thoughts.

>>18015368
>>18015379
>dragging society out of the straight jacket of liberal democratic mediocrity will involve a transitional period with inefficiencies and stuff I don't like!
ok?

>>18015451
/thread

>>18015715
Go to bed grandpa

>>>/pol/316618174

>>18015408
anyone got a pdf? can't find a good one.

>>18015671
nice projection

>>18015715
I'd say this is bait but my cousin posts on Facebook like this and even did it in real life for our aunt, who died of Covid, which he insisted wasn't why she died.

He hasn't ever had a girl friend, and lives with his parents despite having an ok job because all his money goes into the fact that he has to have a big new truck and expensive assault rifles, despite being too overweight to run a mile. That and silver coins and Bitcoin.

>>18017565
>a transitional period with inefficiencies and stuff I don't like
t. Pol Pot

>>18017829
based

>>18015393
>>18015408
>enters the thread discussing Popper
>doesnt want to discuss Popper

>>18015368
>>18015379
I dont care about tolerance whatsoever.
There's your refutation.

>>18017829
>noo if you change things you are LITERALLY /Pol/ Pot

>>18015368
>>The degenerate's attempt to realize an ideal state, using a blueprint of society as a whole, is one which demands a decentralized rule of the insipid masses, and which therefore is likely to lead to cultural decline and cretinization.
>>One of the difficulties faced by officials elected by the rabble is to find whether the effects of their measures agree with his good intentions (as de Maistre saw clearly more than a hundred years ago 5 ). The difficulty arises out of the fact that mob mentality must discourage criticism; accordingly, the elected officials will not easily hear of complaints concerning the measures they have taken. But without some such check, they can hardly find out whether their measures achieve the desired benevolent aim. The situation must become even worse for the democratic social engineer. The reconstruction of society is a big undertaking which must cause considerable inconvenience to the wise few, and for a considerable span of time. Accordingly, the democratic social engineer will have to be deaf to valid complaints; in fact, it will be part of their business to suppress unreasonable objections. (He will say, like a faggot, ‘I love sucking nigger dick.’) But with it, they must invariably suppress reasonable criticism also.
>>Another difficulty of democracy is related to the problem of party lines. In chapter 7 I have mentioned certain aspects of this problem. Social engineering raises a difficulty analogous to but even more serious than the one which faces the elected official who tries to such party dick (see note 25 to chapter 7). The very sweep of such a democratic undertaking makes it improbable that it will realize its ends during the lifetime of one social engineer, or group of engineers, or a think tanks, or lobbyists, or sucking Jewish dick. And if the plutocratic architects do not pursue the same ideal, then all the sufferings of the masses for the sake of corporate conglomerates may have been in vain.
>>What I criticize under the name democratic engineering recommends the reconstruction of society as a whole, i.e. very sweeping changes whose practical consequences are hard to calculate, owing to our limited experiences. It claims to plan rationally for the wise few whose suffering far outweighs the insipid masses of society, although we do not possess anything like the factual knowledge which would be necessary to make good such an ambitious claim. We cannot possess such knowledge since we have insufficient practical experience in this kind of planning, and knowledge of facts must be based upon experience. At present, the sociological knowledge necessary for largescale engineering is simply non-existent. I am happy being a slave so long as I get my vote.

another demiurge compliant mincing rat jew. ive been getting browbeat with "people who dream of better things are just as bad as the ones who make them worse" since I was in 5th grade.

People in 2021 who want authoritarian government with total power actually do know that it will lead to the consequences Popper warns of. They enjoy the idea of cultural ruin, destruction of countries, mass murder, and the figure of the secret policeman, as long as it remains as a fantasy in their mind where they can pretend that only people they don't like would suffer.

>>18018111
If the absolute monarch were me, everything would be fine. I am much better than you in all regards. Know your place.

>>18018123
I would trust you as much as I trust anyone else to rule, meaning not at all. I wouldn't trust myself either. Or my lieutenants and their staff who would inevitably have to take charge of implementing my general directions, since I would not have the time or knowledge to plan out every action of the state in detail.

>>18018123
unironically this.

>>18015451
>>18015580
germanic world = german world

lol.exe

>REEEEE I don't care if the world is ruined and the road to the wasteland is paved with the corpses of suffering people, life in my mom's basement SUCKS and my dad makes fun of me and I'd rather see death and destruction than miss a chance to be a dictator's errand boy and feel better about myself!
Unironically the mindset of people who are triggered by this book.

>>18018633
lmao'ing @ ur existence if you think the road to the present system was paved with roses

>>18018656
The world would be a better place without the false prophets of philosophy.

>>18018689
you're a slave to the principle of inertia, that's why you fear radical solutions

>>18018252
>I wouldn't trust myself either
I would absolutely trust myself, because i'm not out to implement utopia, just maintain order and leave my subjects free to do as they otherwise will.

>>18018796
>radical solutions
Until you try the "solution" it's not a solution, just a hypothesis.
What you want is to be a mad scientist experimenting with human lives and willingly risking the good things that we do have in the present in pursuit of an ideal future that may not even be possible.
This is being done by certain powerful actors in our "open society" right now of course but they don't have the power to kill, imprison, or steal property on a massive scale in order to carry out their experiment and thus are ridiculed and opposed by much of the population. I do not want to give anyone that power.

Most monarchs in history have been way less utopian than some democratic projects of nowadays.

>>18019007
Enjoy your cage, kid.

>>18018633
It's worse and much more universal than that: Stupid people are authoritarian because things go disastrously wrong in their own lives whenever they're not closely following directions given by someone else, who is usually in authority, and usually of a benign and parental sort. It has a certain magic for them that it lacks for those who can function without close and heavy-handed supervision. This is why the only surefire index of the stupidity of the people is how authoritarian, and opaque, their institutions are in sum effect. This is not to say the get the government they deserve, but rather what they are willing to endure as compensation for their own frailty of perception, especially as it pertains to motives and social memory. It is to say they get the containment they warrant in any society open enough for the difference to register.

>>18019283
When/if you have children, you'll understand. You don't put your little son or daughter to sleep at night and think to yourself, "I can't wait to tear all of this down to build a better society."

>>18019330
It would be precisely because you have kids that you should hope to do that.

>>18018633

you know how they say brevity is good in writing? Kust call them faggot bitchboys and move on.

>>18019330
>the future should be held hostage by those who breed in and for a satanic system
the "family man" is the ultimate cuck and obstacle to the progress he worships

>>18015379
Utopian engineering vs individualism seems to me a false dichotomy. Where on this spectrum for example would he place the Aztec system of city-states, or other traditional/pre-modern cultures which don't even have the concept of "individual"?

>every man should be given, if he wishes, the right to model his life himself
And how is he to do this? The only means available to learn about the world is through the concepts and language he has inherited.
The reality is that Man is born with an inheritance: the language, culture, environment that is handed down to him at his time and place of birth, ie. his tradition. To pretend tradition doesn't exist and that each of us could "model our own life" is the real utopian fantasy. Model it from what clay?

>We must demand, rather, that every man should be given, if he wishes, the right to model his life himself, as far as this does not interfere too much with others.
All that results of this is a completely fragmented society with zero cohesion amongst its inhabitants. Sounds less like a society and more like anarchy. Aristotle says that the point of creating the city is to collectively pursue the common good. This means that everyone needs to be on the same page about why they are here, and what they are to do. It just so happens that when society was like this it was much more successful in creating good people. See the end result of the liberal project before your very eyes in the US. Everyone is a stranger, no social trust whatsoever, zero cohesion, zero culture, degeneracy is at disgusting heights, ETC ETC ETC

>Karl Popper was born in Vienna (then in Austria-Hungary) in 1902 to upper-middle-class parents. All of Popper's grandparents were Jewish
EVERY TIME

Popper belongs to the 18th century with his fetishization of Reason and complete denial of historicism. Voegelin, Strauss, Schmitt, literally every major political thinker of the 20th century considered him a complete anachronistic retard with no self-reflexivity.

>Utopian engineering raises a difficulty analogous to but even more serious than the one which faces the benevolent tyrant who tries to find an equally benevolent successor

is it really that impossible to believe that a very specifically ideologically radicalized society like that of say national socialism would very likely produce fitting ideologically radicalized candidates for future leadership? programs like Hitler youth are basically an insurance policy that the critical values of national socialism would live on generation after generation in the hands of capable young men, and then you consider that the "praetorian guard" so to speak are generally made of such capable and similarly radicalized men, a new leader showing up and throwing those values under the bus wouldn't exactly blow over well, me thinks, on top of the fact that society as a whole would be more radicalized and demanding, creating a situation where its in a leaders best interest to maintain certain values in order to maintain their position of power.

>>18020936
Even if building utopia was possible, there wouldn't be a ready-made recipe for it, constant adjustments would be required. In this sense, radicalization could be a problem instead, as people steeped in ideology tend to be unable to be adaptable enough.

>>18020936
Correct. The third reich had the ordensburgen and junkerschule, the ussr had the communist youth and the neoliberal west has an education system that is wholly focused on individualizing people into world citizens (since at least the 50ies) no matter what transcending bonds they might have.
>>18021096
>People steeped in ideology are not adaptable enough
I want to argue against this but when I look at popper and his ilk it is kind of true.

Every political thinker has been retroactively refuted by Hobbes

>>18021096
hmm while i guess i would say i am technically being utopian by thinking of ideal forms of society, i think there is something to be said about planning an "ideal form" that assumes there there will be no perfect solution and we must learn to work around harsh realities of life and humanity, where as typically utopian solutions seek to completely bypass them. as far as flexibility of radicalization goes, it depends on how flexible the ideology is, for example.. are its principles willing to both opt for better conditions for average folk while still heavily practicing for hardship and struggle? can it be both life affirming but also death embracing? can it represent the absolute peak of human achievement and civilization or the absolute crudest blunt instrument of the barbarian if it has to? to me the name of the game is "hope for the best but plan for the worst", if you do that things will usually work out well, or at least not as bad as they could

>>18020936
>hitler youth
lol, highly unnecessary
prussians already perfected this societal brainwashing instituting public schooling, as which it was copied by every other major world power of the 20th century to great effect

>>18021170
In fact, hobbes proves that authoritarian power does not originate from "utopianism" like this gay Popper thinks, but because of necessity.

>>18021188
Hitler youth is different than just brainwashing through public school though. you use public school to instill basic values etc as you say, then Hitler youth acts as a sort of an "advanced placement" class that works on plucking out kids from the masses with extra potential and creating an environment in which they will thrive and be able to move down a more specific path in life

>>18021205
that implies government job placements in nazi germany werent nepotistic political appointments
which they were

>Karl Popper
More like Karl POOPER

Checkmate, I clearly win

>>18015368
>Popper
More like Pooper, haha

>>18021225
Fuck, I didn’t see this

>>18021549 my post

>>18021555
You know you can delete posts.

This man is used as policy by criminal warmongering elites.