There are many bright spots in Hegel’s reasoning, but his conclusions always seem to fall into error. He praises renunciation and sacrifice, basing his reasoning on a mixture of logic and morality, and then proposes that both have to be done uselessly and automatically, not because of an individual manifestation of self-denial, detachment, kindness, empathy, or whatever, but because of the duty to fulfill an order of the State. What a conclusion! Following the philosopher, what is certain is that the disciple, practicing them in this way, will never know the real value of renunciation and sacrifice. It is as obvious as it is stupid to explain it: he who sacrifices a good to his neighbor when the latter is in need, is performing an action of immediate effect, and the sacrifice is therefore fruitful and virtuous; he who, on the other hand, sacrifices a good to the State, that is, to this corrupt, authoritarian, greedy and usurping organization, whose resources it plunders are largely used to maintain and expand the domination it exercises over individuals, the sacrifice is not only useless, but it also takes on the shape of an insult. How is it possible not to realize this? Not to mention that such sacrifice, in the latter case, is made by imposition, and that failure to comply with it implies punishment. Once again, since I am benevolent, I will not draw a conclusion.
Hegel’s Conclusions
