Joseph de Maistre is in a sense 1 of the more honest figures in the post office of philosophical enemies of man's freedom. Many of his gag and shackle companions faked before the planet and before themselves individual they were not. Named friends of freedom, only that "originally" understood, which usually came down to simply calling them "freedom" of ordinary, vulgar murderism. Maistre is rather different – with an open visor he rejects the freedom of man and declares war on her. Although he tries to specify freedom and power from it as “evil” or “disgusting”, it seems to be a 19th-century variant of the alleged trolling, due to the fact that Maistre barely hides the awareness that he himself is the voice of evil and that he is fulfilling the function of advocate of darkness even delighted.
Imagine the most "chapped head" of the influence bubble of the American MEGA movement, take distant the modern "toys" in the form of smartphone, internet, tiktok or artificial intelligence (i.e. give him the writing that these "toys" deprived him of, surrounded by a certain amount of perfidential eloquence), take back 200 years in time and put him in the realities of Europe at the time, and here is Joseph de Maistre in front of you, in all its glory. This thinker was already seen by his contemporaries as an utmost dogma, a hardened and fanatical supporter of monarchial and medieval absolutism in the essence of the Papast, a theocrat based the plan of the state on 3 instances: an instance of a pope with an extended arm in the form of a local church, an instance faithful to the King's Church of absolute power and an instance of executioner for the remainder of the people. With these views corresponded to the explosive, damn nature, which all sign of opposition or effort to enter into a debate drowned in a scream, swinging hands, a red-faced mouth, and a fuzzy eyes.
Maistre was a man of the first generation of utmost conservatives to live in the planet of real advancement of the liberal reform. His writings were in fact the last and desperate effort to save the planet of dying feudalism. His rage, aggression and grief were products of consciousness that his squad was losing just in front of him a game about everything. Intolerance was the base code of his thoughts, so his Christianity had to be just a façade. In today's world, right-wing Christians pose as Christians, while at the same time spreading hatred and discrimination, opting for the harm of the weaker and practicing segregation, e.g. racial segregation, are commonplace. Maistre was their forerunner, but his contemporaries, frequently fellow believers, shocked the ocean of paganism and the utilitarian approach to religion as a political weapon, which hid behind the thin ornament of godly devotion. The major of many later acolytes of the various currents of the right pointed out the way from dogmatic assumptions to tragic conclusions in possible consequences, from fanaticism to real crime.
He was a Maistre besides a reactionary in the sense that his thought and demands were a reaction to the political events of the era: the first liberal reforms, leftist revolutions and advancement of the thought of a constitutional monarchy. So he demanded to destruct and erase everything that in politics brought the end of the 18th century, and in doctrine fundamentally all of this century. The culmination of his perfect formation was naturally the French Revolution, its attack on conventional values and order, the execution of the king and the Jacobin terror. The hatred of the revolution has shaped him to hatred anything liberal, free, emancipative or democratic. Interestingly, the least unwillingness was aroused in the thinker's Jacobini, due to the fact that although ideologically they came from a different universe than Maistre, he liked their methods, determination, the strength of their power and, above all, the panic fear they caused in the subjects. They “at least did something—at least killed someone.” Kat was theirs and Maistre's common denominator.
Eighteenth-century philosophers, both liberal and then enemies of freedom, devoted much of their reflection to the nature of things, including the nature of man. The generalizing postulates with respect to human nature have, of course, become poorly old, but to this day, they are inactive sympathetic to their presumption that man is naturally inclined to do good, or at least refrain from doing evil. After all, for specified a man it is worth crushing copies, fighting for his freedom, freedom, independency and space to develop. specified a creature deserves to live in freedom, not in captivity. But specified a image of the Man Maistre rejected with all determination.
To him, man is simply a being to be scorned by evil, corruption, weakness, foolishness, transgression, wickedness, and cowardice. The released self-belt will surely destruct everything, sleep, destroy. Maistre is based on historical cognition and points out that not without reason until the time of the alleged unfortunate enlightenment mistake all the regimes of power that arose on Earth were oriented towards complete submission and submission of man to superiority, holiness and authority. Man must be constantly controlled, punished, restricted, kept in check, clutches or shackles, even in a sense "channelized" in order to avoid to any degree any tragedies and destruction. However, they will happen anyway, as to this utmost pessimist Maistre there is no doubt. Wars, fire, death, extermination, suffering and poorness are inevitable. But the frequency of specified dramas increases with the freedom and cognition of people. Therefore, Maistre demands divine in his inviolability of the king's power, the power bound by the nimb of mystery and secrecy, a circumstantial mystery, to which approach by an average mortal immediately appears to be the worst sacrilege. He calls for the spread of ignorance and ignorance, cities of cognition and education, so that these average mortals will never be able to realize that they could have any rights, that they could even face their ruler or his officials at all, and formulate any expectations!
Nature is simply a scene of slaughter, and events flow in blood. War is so profoundly embedded in the nature of the planet that it constitutes 1 of its fundamental laws, which makes it something of the divine element. A rational approach would make wars avoid, but who follows it usually loses battles. Conflicts are resolved in their own favour by irrational, fanatical religion in their God, their king, full dedication to him. This interior certainty of self-righteousness pushes to triumph on the battlefield. People's lives, like wars, are not rational, trying to describe societies, national systems or organization organizations in a way based on reasonable reflection are a terrible mistake. The strategy of hereditary absolute monarchy, the belief that this very man in the crown is anointed God’s will that his descendants will besides be elected to power by God’s will cannot be considered rational. However, the historical experience shows that this strategy order turns out to be unchangeable and permanent, it has existed for centuries, while experiments with alternate systems (like the Polish elective monarchy) fall 1 by one. Everything rational yet falls, and everything irrational – it continues (the institution of monogamous matrimony Maistre indicates as another example).
So Maistre rejects the presumption that reason is the master of everything, that it is simply a good signpost. Reason leads to doubts, denial, questioning, forgery, demands for change. All that reason has built, the same head can at any time destruct by its further "discoveries," and that is unacceptable guile. Ignorance and ignorance, on the another hand, are pillars of a truly sovereign superior power that can truly unfettered rule. Full sovereignty must be based on accepting its infallibility, and truly and completely infallible can only be the word of God.
Social and political governance can only come from God. The liberals' thesis on the social agreement is absurd, as society would should be before it was concluded so that it could be concluded. There is besides no specified thing as nature and the laws of nature. All the laws that can be found to be come exclusively from humans or from God. So there is no point in discussing the realities of the alleged state of nature. It is absurd to presume that man is "born free." The only thing we know is that human state organizations come from the dark ages of antiquity, and everything created in the ancient centuries Maistre considered God’s work.
Social governance can only be maintained by 1 of 2 anchors: religion or slavery. The Christian Church advocated the abolition of slavery due to the fact that he was able to make a power so large and meaningful that he could rightly presume that he would keep people formally liberated from slavery. In a situation of weakening the authority of religion, however, it is essential to return to slavery, as in the Jacobin regime.
For this decision, the Maistre Jacobins showed much understanding. erstwhile the impenetrable, inconceivable and mysterious periphery of holiness around matters of power is lacking, the only way to halt people from questioning its authority is terror. average mortals must admire, respect and fear power. God’s fear here is the mildest solution possible and best. But erstwhile it is impossible, fear must be implanted with exemplary cruelty, arbitraryity with all its unpredictability and draconian means.
In order to cultivate human ignorance, we must avoid technological language and any another language that is clear, clear and understandable to people in public discourse. Latin is simply a good tool due to the fact that it is difficult, intricate and irrational in any ways. Prejudice, stereotypes and, above all, superstition must be promoted. They are all suitable for controlling social behaviour by power, and have besides grown completely wrongly by negative assessments and perceptions. Prejudices, superstitions and superstitions are centuries-shaped irrational views. Like all irrational things are permanent, and in addition repeatedly verified under many circumstances by life experiences of subsequent generations.
The planet of senselessness and superstition would have been perfectly durable and decorated if it had not been for the groups of people whom Maistre calls the “sect” he hates, fights, and whose “disposal” he demands. The thinker includes Protestants (especially Calvinists), lawyers, writers, journalists, scientists and intellectuals, and, of course, Jews. Further revolutionaries and others undermining power, reformers, atheists and agnostics, idealists, adherents of freedom or equality, emancipators, supporters of the rational organization of the state and society, all improvers. It is easy to imagine Adolf Hitler organizing his notes while writing “Mein Kampf” which red pencils crucial paragraphs in Maistre’s works, right? However, erstwhile the hatred of the Reich leaders primarily focused on the Jews, Maistre was surrounded by scientists and intellectuals, especially those who practiced their fields at a certain level of abstraction and generalization, trying to make rational norms to describe the planet and man.
Maistre, of course, violently rejected the thought of the sovereignty of the people, of citizenship, of any subjectivity of the human individual, not to mention. A typical comment for him about the sovereignty of the people was that even if this concept of the origin of power were true, right, or justified, it should be carefully hidden from humans.
The force fascinated Maistre, as all enemy of freedom was. He may have been much philosophically different from his companions from the gag and the shackles, but he yet met them at a common end: he who can gain power and strength has the right to usage them with all power and with God's blessing. His position in itself is proof that "God so wished" that he should wield and subjugate the people under his authority. Maistre's planet is simply a planet of darkness and secrets, utmost inequality of people, but besides a planet that puts stability, durability and certainty of next day on a pedestal. Maistre knows that inflicting suffering on people is evil, but due to the fact that he treats people as carriers of evil, this beating of proverbial whip after their proverbial ridges fills him with considerable satisfaction and even joy. Maistre willingly “stands” in the evil of his own philosophy. He loves to evoke horror and terror, but he himself is simply a man to the bone troubled by the spread of light of knowledge, science, reason and reflection among the people of his era. always since he felt that fear, he hates everyone liable for him. Under the corset of the integristic Catholicism, Maistre pushes the component of fascism, which he is an early apostle, and which will full make erstwhile he reconciles with his pagan nature, so by making the last and most likely only thought step that Maistre did not make, by which he was not yet a fascist in the full sense of the word. This, however, does not relieve him of his co-responsibility for wasting so many lives by the madness he implanted in his minds.
