Kurt Eisner, born on this day in 1867, was a German socialist revolutionary and radical journalist who was assassinated by a far-right nationalist while serving as head of the People's State of Bavaria.
Kurt Eisner, born to a Jewish family in Berlin, was a revolutionary German socialist, radical journalist, and theater critic. Before leading the People's State of Bavaria, he worked as a journalist in Marburg, Nuremberg, and Munich. In the early 1890s, Eisner served nine months in prison for writing an article that attacked Kaiser Wilhelm II.
In 1918, Eisner was convicted of treason for his role in inciting a strike of munitions workers. He spent nine months in Cell 70 of Stadelheim Prison, but was released during the General Amnesty in October of that year.
Following his release from prison, Eisner helped organize the revolution that overthrew the Bavarian monarchy, declaring Bavaria to be a free state and republic. Despite Eisner's socialist politics, he explicitly distanced the movement from the Bolsheviks and promised to uphold property rights.
On February 21st, 1919, while on his way to deliver his resignation to Parliament, Eisner was assassinated in Munich by a far-right German nationalist. Eisner's murder made him a martyr for left-wing causes, and a period of lawlessness in Bavaria followed his death.
On the night of April 6th-7th, 1919, communists, encouraged by the news of the communist revolution in Hungary, declared a Soviet Republic, with Ernst Toller as chief of state. The Bavarian Soviet Republic was crushed by the right-wing German Freikorps.
Some of the military leaders of the Freikorps, including Rudolf Hess and Franz Ritter von Epp, would go on to become powerful figures in the Nazi Party. Ironically, Adolf Hitler himself marched in the funeral procession for Eisner, a Jew, wearing a red armband as a display of sympathy.
"Truth is the greatest of all national possessions. A state, a people, a system which suppresses the truth or fears to publish it, deserves to collapse."
- Kurt Eisner
https://spartacus-educational.com/GEReisner.htm
Megathreads and spaces to hang out:
- π Come listen to music and Watch movies with your fellow Hexbears nerd, in Cy.tube
- π₯ Read and talk about a current topics in the News Megathread
- β Come talk in the New Weekly PoC thread
- β¨ Talk with fellow Trans comrades in the New Weekly Trans thread
reminders:
- π You nerds can join specific comms to see posts about all sorts of topics
- π Hexbearβs algorithm prioritizes comments over upbears
- π Sorting by new you nerd
- π If you ever want to make your own megathread, you can reserve a spot here nerd
- πΆ Join the unofficial Hexbear-adjacent Mastodon instance toots.matapacos.dog
Links To Resources (Aid and Theory):
Aid:
Theory:
- β€οΈFoundations of Leninism
- β€οΈAnarchism and Other Essays
4000 word essay due on Monday. I am looking at the material for the first time. The classes were useless because the lecturer just read off a script and didn't say anything of worth. Also he spoke in that really dense academic language where you say shit like "Kant poses the question: what are the conditions of possibility for the experience in general of an object? The practical is the transcendental explication of the conditions of moral action." (direct quote from his script). Why do philosophers talk like this. What the fuck do you mean. Talk like a normal person. Also there were no notes given to us, just him reading his papers out loud.
I'm so fucked man I thought I would like philosophy but I hate this shit. I can't wait to be done with it. I can't believe how little I understand after three years in college.
Either there is a word missing after "practical" or your lecturer is using the word in a highly idiosyncratic way, because I agree, that sentence doesn't make any sense. And in any case, Kant's Critiques are some of the densest philosophical works I know; I don't see how anyone could properly understand one of them without spending, like, a full year on it and nothing else.
Well presumably you read the 1st critique and some of the practical philosophy/ the Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals over the course? I ask because that quote is perfectly understandable, if a bit disconnected. As for why they talk like that? Well hard things are hard... There are plenty of analytic philosophers who fuss over clarity of language (even then this is being unfair to Kant) and they don't really end up being much better.
Nope this module is not about Kant at all lol
Gotcha. Yeah in my opinion philosophy should be taught with a focus on historicaly situating thinkers, and going through their works so as to understand not only why they came to the positions they do but also why, on a deeper level, did their concerns lead them down the path that it did.
Kant as reacting to the French Revolution, or doggedly trying to place God amidst skepticism and reason itself. Nietzsche can be read as reacting against the angst of the precarious petty-Beourgeois intelligensia of the German State, etc.
It's unfortunate really as Kant is a remarkably systamtic thinker, and most of the claims / positions extracted into some lecture are in principal explainable with the text themselves. It's just that a lot gets lost when hurrying from topic to topic as I've experienced.
Uh... If you haven't used https://plato.stanford.edu/ I highly recommend it. Good luck lmao