Talk:Ludwig Gumplowicz

message: Can he be considered a racialist?!
Not really.
--Well, the question is one entangled in semantics and linguistic demagoguery. "Racism/racialism" carries no essential meaning except as ideological thought-block. If we define racism intelligently and scientifically, then whether Gumplowicz was "racist" follows from our presuppositions of thought...
Really, the question is simply a form of reactive emotionalism instead of Platonic inquiry. 
Gumplowicz was incisively perceptive about the significance and role of inter-group conflict and group-identity and the "ethnic sense" as primary determinants of human history. If he is correct in his theses, the appellations of neo-Trotskyite anarcho-millenarian ideology Gumplowicz does not deserve to be demonized and minimized and trivialized with, in occult Gramscian "cultural war"... 
Why not recognize simplicity is nonexistent in life, existence is permeated with tragicomic irony, and accept Gumplowicz as he is, instead of carrying modern political polemics into the dialogue. Gumplowicz forthrightly proclaimed certain inarguable anthropological verities, although his insights are sometimes hidden in his imperfect paradigm of Darwinist-materialist sociology... 
Giving Gumplowicz due and rightful credit as a thoughtful and philosophically top-notch social thinker, is inescapable if one upholds internal intellectual integrity of conscience.
If G. is a "racist/racialist", then the subject should be dispassionately covered and analyzed, void of modern agitprop of pop-Marxism and moralistic mendacity. I honor his Jewish scintillating prowess of intellect, nevertheless acknowledging the truths he states are intermittently infected with corrupt decadent ideology... Semantics is meaningless here... 
If G.'s formulations of thought are "unpopular" to the self-complacent crowd-culturati, -- SO WHAT. Truth reigns above ALL... Hitler brutalizing and barbarizing intellectual elements inherited subconsciously from the Gumplowicz streamlet of social philosophy, IS UTTERLY IRRELEVANT. Populist moralism is devoid of any rational meaning. 
Every decent human heart condemns the massacres of Jews and others of Nazism; yet these tragedies do not somehow epistemologically delegitimize whatever degree of realistic truth Gumplowicz (and other "unpopular" thinkers) postulated...  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.52.186.148 (talk) 22:47, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Ludwig Gumplowicz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20010217033611/http://www.relst.uiuc.edu/durkheim/Texts/1885c.html to http://www.relst.uiuc.edu/durkheim/Texts/1885c.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080120192756/http://www.evergreen.loyola.edu/~tward/gp/libros/horas/horas19.html to http://www.evergreen.loyola.edu/~tward/GP/libros/horas/horas19.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:21, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified