As long as classes exist there can never be a state of the entire people, only serving society as a whole. In Feudalism, Capitalism and so forth the state is always the instrument of the ruling minority while in Socialism the state becomes the instrument of the ruling majority. Only in Communism when classes finally disappear completely can the state become truly objective. Ironically when that happens it also becomes unnecessary and withers away because the fundamental role of the state is to serve the interest of the ruling class whether it be the idle minority or the working majority against the interests of the opposing class. When classes disappear so will the state.
Karen de Boer is a genius philosopher.
As long as classes exist there can never be a state of the entire people, only serving society as a whole. In Feudalism, Capitalism and so forth the state is always the instrument of the ruling minority while in Socialism the state becomes the instrument of the ruling majority. Only in Communism when classes finally disappear completely can the state become truly objective.
Ironically when that happens it also becomes unnecessary and withers away because the fundamental role of the state is to serve the interest of the ruling class whether it be the idle minority or the working majority against the interests of the opposing class. When classes disappear so will the state.
jeez, FinnBol, wherever i go on youtube you follow me from the past
"As long as classes exist there can never be a state of the entire people"
That's a bold claim. Explain yourself.
vernünftig means reasonable rather than rational, therefore hegel never speaks of a rational state