Scan barcode
A review by ilovegravy
God and the State by Mikhail Aleksandrovich Bakunin
3.0
tldr: “god bad, state bad, actually everything’s pretty bad, but don’t get me started on the god and state…”
Horribly incoherent and all over the place which makes it impossible to put down. Not because it’s so gripping, but because to take a break from it equals to completely lose the plot (in the literal sense, this time). But it’s okay because it’s sincerely apologised for, first by both authors of the 2 introductions (did it really need 2?) and then by Bakunin himself. He’s very passionate you know. So it’s alright to go on a wild ramble which won’t have an actual conclusion but somehow spill into another point which is not really a point it’s an ostentatious statement and now I’m reading a footnote which has been breaking through 4 pages continuously and now I don’t know what it was referring to oh an anecdote and here we go again through all of this from the start…
Anyway, I quite enjoyed this butchering of religion. And he wasn’t exactly wrong on many occasions, but then the occasional slight tint of racism or something along the lines of “IT’S JUST ABSURD, IT JUST IS, IT’S THE BIGGEST ABSURD EVER” felt too fervent. But I guess fervour is what drives speeches like this so maybe it’s a me problem.
There were quite a few quotes that I felt were an original thought (or at least were worded originally), which ensured this book some flavour:
"All the metaphysical systems have been nothing else than human psychology developing itself in history.”
“Therefore, if God existed, only in one way could he serve human liberty—by ceasing to exist.”
“Nothing, in fact, is as universal or as ancient as the iniquitous and absurd; truth and justice, on the contrary, are the least universal, the youngest features in the development of human society.”
But then the author also said things like the widespread of christianity was achieved through “propagandism” and was “the first intellectual revolt of the proletariat” which makes you go “I mean sure, but when you put it like that… (:DD???)”. Lots of moments where the natural instinct is to consume it with irony, but then it doesn’t make sense, and you realise you once again let go of the context that’s been set 4 pages ago (but then obviously moved on to something else) and here we are again yes it makes sense go on what now ah yes
Horribly incoherent and all over the place which makes it impossible to put down. Not because it’s so gripping, but because to take a break from it equals to completely lose the plot (in the literal sense, this time). But it’s okay because it’s sincerely apologised for, first by both authors of the 2 introductions (did it really need 2?) and then by Bakunin himself. He’s very passionate you know. So it’s alright to go on a wild ramble which won’t have an actual conclusion but somehow spill into another point which is not really a point it’s an ostentatious statement and now I’m reading a footnote which has been breaking through 4 pages continuously and now I don’t know what it was referring to oh an anecdote and here we go again through all of this from the start…
Anyway, I quite enjoyed this butchering of religion. And he wasn’t exactly wrong on many occasions, but then the occasional slight tint of racism or something along the lines of “IT’S JUST ABSURD, IT JUST IS, IT’S THE BIGGEST ABSURD EVER” felt too fervent. But I guess fervour is what drives speeches like this so maybe it’s a me problem.
There were quite a few quotes that I felt were an original thought (or at least were worded originally), which ensured this book some flavour:
"All the metaphysical systems have been nothing else than human psychology developing itself in history.”
“Therefore, if God existed, only in one way could he serve human liberty—by ceasing to exist.”
“Nothing, in fact, is as universal or as ancient as the iniquitous and absurd; truth and justice, on the contrary, are the least universal, the youngest features in the development of human society.”
But then the author also said things like the widespread of christianity was achieved through “propagandism” and was “the first intellectual revolt of the proletariat” which makes you go “I mean sure, but when you put it like that… (:DD???)”. Lots of moments where the natural instinct is to consume it with irony, but then it doesn’t make sense, and you realise you once again let go of the context that’s been set 4 pages ago (but then obviously moved on to something else) and here we are again yes it makes sense go on what now ah yes