Talk:Sorelianism

Politics Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Socialism Mid‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Anti-individualism

"It typically refers to the anti-individualist, anti-liberal, anti-materialist, anti-positivist, anti-rationalist, spiritualist syndicalism that Sorel promoted.^[1]" .^[2] Sorel believed that the victory of the proletariat would end democracy, individualism, liberalism, and compromise between workers and the democratic, capitalist society.^[2]

This refers to Sorel's ideology more towards towards his rappor with Integralism, assuming one can take the word of Zeev Sternhell. Sorel would not seem to have been anti-individualist before this.
https://books.google.com/books?id=ccgIu6oYkREC

Ideally, the page should reference documents regarding his actual writing.FourLights (talk) 20:18, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Sternhell et al., pp. 77-78.
^ ^a ^b Cite error: The named reference midlarsky93 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

work space

Sorel had problems with the philosophy of Proudhon, and might be said to have sought to detach it of it's idealism.^[1]FourLights (talk) 16:07, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ John Stanley 1981. p.14. The Sociology of Virtue: The Political & Social Theories of George Sorel. https://books.google.com/books?id=aUc0z-dREk0C&pg=PA245

In Sorel's own words preferable

The assessment given as to the sort of society Sorel prefers: i.e. "a world where the mentality of warriors and monks would prevail. The society would be dominated by a powerful avant-garde proletarian elite that would serve as an aristocracy of producers, and allied with intellectual youth dedicated to action against the decadent bourgeoisie." is not Sorel's own words but an assessment (albeit correct in my view) of what Sorel intends.

However it is unclear in the article as to what Sorel actually prefers for his future society i.e. how are these 'warriors', 'monks', 'avant-garde proletarian elites' and 'revivified (sic) bourgeoisie' meant to relate to one another? Not, obviously, in terms of economic function since that is already clear, but in terms of the power relations between them. What is the underpinning for such a society? Sorel's works are only partly translated into English so a definitive answer here on this very difficult author would, if at all, seem only to be available to a fluent French speaker with all the materials of Sorel available.

To help in this task to begin with we need in the main article a complete list of Sorel's publications and other writings, indicating whether an English translation exists or not. The connection of his writings with Nietzsche also needs to be made clearer as his thought obviously overlaps with German contemporary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.7.145.149 (talk) 13:38, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, nobody cares, post a source and maybe I will volunteer my time to write something. FourLights (talk) 00:50, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia uses secondary sources.FourLights (talk) 07:26, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorel and the French Revolution

I´m not sure that I would described Sorel, as being opposed to the entirety of the French Revolution, is he not himself partly an inheritor of it, in his explicit support of political violence as a means of achieving his ends. StrongALPHA (talk) 17:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody cares, I write about ancient China, post a reference and maybe I'll write something.FourLights (talk) 07:27, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Sternhell et al., pp. 77-78.

[midlarsky93-2] Cite error: The named reference midlarsky93 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[3] John Stanley 1981. p.14. The Sociology of Virtue: The Political & Social Theories of George Sorel. https://books.google.com/books?id=aUc0z-dREk0C&pg=PA245

[1]

[2]

[1]