Many atill think Rousseau was an enlightenment thinker, but his legacy lives through Kant, Hegel, and Marx. Why? Because at its core, Rousseau’s philosophy promotes the idea of unlimited Man and unlimited government—a radical departure from Enlightenment liberalism.
2. Enlightenment liberalism focused on limiting government to protect individual rights. Rousseau flipped this: he saw government as the instrument to bring about a moral transformation, where individual freedom is subsumed into the “general will.” Sound familiar?
3. Rousseau's belief in unlimited Man laid the groundwork for Kant’s moral philosophy and Hegel’s idea of the State as a manifestation of Spirit. For Rousseau, man's freedom isn’t about limiting power; it’s about achieving a higher moral unity through the collective.
4. This idea evolves in Kant's philosophy, which proposes that true freedom comes from aligning with universal moral laws. Rousseau’s “general will” becomes Kant’s moral imperative. The individual is bound not to a limited state but to an infinite moral ideal.
5. Enter Hegel: he takes Rousseau’s vision of moral unity and Kant’s universal laws to the next level. For Hegel, the State is not just a collection of individuals but the realization of universal Spirit. Rousseau’s unlimited Man becomes Hegel’s unlimited State.
6. Rousseau’s roots are not Enlightenment rationalism but something esoteric: his philosophy is deeply gnostic, seeking hidden truths about human nature and society. His concept of the "general will" has a religious, mystical quality—a kind of social alchemy.
7. This gnostic-alchemical thinking persists in Hegel and finds its way into Marx. For Marx, history is a process of transformation, where the “material” world will eventually reflect humanity's true nature—an echo of Rousseau’s vision for remaking man and society.
8. Rousseau’s ideas aren’t about practical governance or protecting rights; they are about an idealistic transformation of the world. This is why his legacy flows into German Idealism. He sought not to limit power but to channel it towards “moral ends.”
9. In contrast to Enlightenment liberalism, which stresses the limits of human reason and government, Rousseau promotes a philosophy of “unlimited potential.” Man is infinitely malleable; the State is infinitely perfectible. That’s the root of his break from the Enlightenment.
10. Rousseau’s vision of the “general will” is not a call for Liberalism—it’s a call for a transcendent unity where the individual will dissolves. This idea flows into Hegel’s view of the State as the embodiment of Spirit, and Marx’s concept of Man's "species-being."
11. Rousseau is often considered a champion of liberty, but it's a very different liberty than the Founding Fathers envisioned. His liberty isn’t about individual rights but aligning oneself with the “true” collective will—a spiritual liberation from self-interest.
12. Rousseau, in essence, introduces a gnostic worldview to political philosophy: society is fallen, and it can only be redeemed through a hermetic, alchemical process where the individual merges with the “general will.” This leads to Kant, Hegel, and ultimately Marx.
13. The Founding Fathers viewed government as a necessary evil—a limited institution to safeguard individual liberty. Rousseau sees it as a means of achieving a higher, almost mystical, moral unity. It’s a philosophy that lends itself to unlimited government, not limited power.
14. Rousseau is not an Enlightenment liberal. His thought leads directly to the idealism of Kant and Hegel and the revolutionary socialism of Marx. He envisions a total transformation of society—a gnostic-alchemical process that rejects the liberal tradition.
15. Rousseau’s legacy is not one of liberty through restraint but of liberation through the dissolution of the self into a collective ideal. That’s a direct path to the philosophies that would later challenge and reject Enlightenment liberalism altogether.
Bookmark thread: Rousseau
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is 5th-Generation Political Warfare. I talk quite a bit about it because very few know what it is or how it works. We must understand it to deliver on the overwhelming mandate America just handed Trump.
Let's dive into an example of what it looks like on the "right." 🧵
A 5GW psyop usually begins with a seemingly grassroots online movement promoting things like "authentic conservatism."
It uses vague, non-threatening language that appeals to traditional values and everyday people frustrated with the way things are going.
But it's all a façade.
A fake account network is deployed. Bots and paid influencers amplify the message. Memes, tweets, and TikToks flood the timeline.
These posts highlight relatable frustrations (e.g., rising costs, cultural decay) and tie them to the movement.
Critical Race Theory has many central arguments. People have forgotten them, but they would be wise to refresh because 1.) CRT is still everywhere, especially education 2.) The framework is being adopted by fringe elements on the Right that will subvert MAGA.
A 🧵
1. Racism is normal, not aberrational
CRT argues racism is the norm because it's embedded in the very fabric of society. There is no such thing as a "not racist" person.
2. Interest Convergence
Racial progress often aligns with the interests of the powerful. Change happens when it benefits those in power, not solely because of moral or ethical concerns.
Some argue America was created for an ethnic group. This claim doesn’t align with the Founders’ principles or historical evidence. Let’s examine why. 🧵
America’s founding documents focus on universal principles, not ethnic identity. The Declaration of Independence states, "all men are created equal," with Rights endowed by their Creator—not by race or ethnicity.
The U.S. Constitution doesn’t privilege any ethnicity. It establishes a government to protect liberty and justice for all, emphasizing individual rights over group identity.
The fact that many have smuggled in collectivism through mystifying jurisprudence doesn't negate this.
Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971) is one of the most influential U.S. Supreme Court decisions in employment law. It introduced the concept of "disparate impact," and its implications reach far beyond the workplace. Here's why it was a mistake. 🧵
In Griggs, Duke Power required employees to pass IQ tests or have a high school diploma to qualify for certain jobs. The Court ruled these requirements were discriminatory because they disproportionately excluded black workers, even without discriminatory intent.
The Court held that practices neutral on their face could still violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964 if they resulted in disparate outcomes for protected groups, unless the employer could show the practice was "job-related and consistent with business necessity."
How did we end up with these massive, unreadable omnibus bills in Congress?
Let’s break it down. 🧵
Omnibus bills are huge legislative packages that combine unrelated provisions into one bill. They often span thousands of pages. Most members of Congress can't/don’t read them before voting.
Insane.
Congress wasn’t always this dysfunctional. For most of its history, it followed a system called "regular order." Each area of government was funded by a separate appropriations bill.
I’ve seen various content claiming that “Woke Right” is a stupid name because “Woke” just means “awakened to and forwarding critiques of social power."
Woke is much more than that. I can't tell if they still don't know that, or they're aware...
Let's define "Woke" again.
🧵
“Critical Constructivism” is the technical term for Woke. “Critical” for the Critical Theory of the Frankfurt school and offshoots (there’s a million “critical theories” now, Critical Race Theory and Queer Theory being the ones people are most familiar with).
To quote Woke educator Joe Kincheloe, "Critical constructivism is grounded on the Frankfurt School's formulation of critical theory."