I read this book while learning French, but even at my intermediate level of French skill, it was clear that I hated this book. Sorry, I know it is classic, but still:
I am sure I reviewed this in French a few years ago, but maybe it was elsewhere, on Livraddict or Vimeo, so I’ll have to search and find my original review and translate it when I have time and energy. Suffice it to say that I hated this book because it sank my hope in Humanity.
His cynical list of different types of Humanists, all either hypocritical or simply stupid, was so depressing that the book itself left me feeling nauseous. I suppose I ought to read it again, but do I have to, really?
Can’t we human beings do any better for ourselves?
Shira
*****************
Click here to read, if you like:
B5, Hakan: Muhafiz/Protector, Lupin, or La Casa de Papel/Money Heist Reviews
Thoughtful Readers, if you are on Twitter, please consider following #Project Do Better.
Shira
Shira Destinie Jones’ work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Inspiring Critical Thinking and Community via Books, Lessons, and Story 
Hi Shira, I don’t see how to see the blog post, so I will try responding to the email! Maybe you can teach me more about navigating the blog someday!
I would say, no, you don’t have to read it again. Your body and psyche gave you clear information last time you read it. You could always take a taste of it, and see if it still nauseates.
Lots of “classics” are inculcating us in the old paradigm (or régime). If we grasped the concepts before and don’t buy into them, why put ourselves through that again? We can spend our precious time and life energy in better ways, IMHO.
The only value I would see is if a person didn’t grasp the concepts or wanted to revisit what not to do to see if they could gain a new perspective. I am guessing that’s not the case here.
I have learned that suffering does not serve me or my goals, and so I aim to actively end it when I experience it. I prefer to spend my time on concepts and ideas and creative expressions that inspire and uplift. That gives me more energy and strength and clarity to contribute, as well as to enjoy my days on Earth. But that’s me.
Juliette
On Fri, Aug 5, 2022 at 9:27 AM Inspiring Critical Thinking and Community
LikeLiked by 5 people
Thank you, Juliette!
Merci, Juliette !
Ce qui se passe c’est que j’ai mis tout les reponses sur ‘moderation’ et donc ils doivent m’attendre jusque au temps que je les regards et relachs-les en le blog.
(What’s happening is that I put all comments in moderation and so they have to wait until I look at them and release them on the blog.)
LikeLiked by 3 people
I often despair for humanity but in the end, the little things I see that are good about humanity draw me back in.
Martin Luther King, Jr., reminded us that “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”
LikeLiked by 3 people
Very good points, thank you for this reminder, Patti. With the lack of interest from Americans in Project Do Better, I really need that hope.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Reblogged this on Ned Hamson's Second Line View of the News.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Merci, Ned !
Shira
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hope this got posted:
“The Honorable Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher
California House of Representatives
1350 Front Street
Suite 6022
San Diego, CA 92101
Tel: 619-338-8090
Fax: 619-338-8099
your name
address,
city, state zip
email
your phone
Dear Assemblywoman Gonzalez Fletcher,
I would like to request a bill which would benefit California residents. The state of Maryland has recently passed a law prohibiting lawsuits on any debts which have passed the Statute of Limitation (https://www.dllr.state.md.us/finance/advisories/advisory-debtcol.pdf ). While California requires notification if a debt is expired, many debtors are not able to use that information. And while debt buyers are prohibited from suing on expired debts in California, original creditors are not. Many creditors, like exploitative landlords and lenders, never sell their debts, waiting years to sue, until details of the situation are less clear. Most lawsuits are won by default, even on invalid debts. The key injustice is that proportionately more poor debtors are sued than well-off debtors (due to the fact that the Statute of Limitation must be explicitly raised as a defense by the debtor in CA). This growing numbers of illegitimate judgments against those who do not have either the time or the ability (due to illness, etc) to defend themselves. Debt, credit reporting and court action can have a direct bearing on citizens’ abilities to access employment and housing. Disallowing suits on all expired debts could correct this injustice.
Respectfully,
sig “
LikeLiked by 4 people
I meant to post this years ago! I’ll have to search my posts…
LikeLiked by 3 people
Suits on expired debts? Unheard of in Denmark, expired is expired.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Here, in most states, expired is merely ‘unenforceable’ except that you have to defend by showing the court that the debt is expired. That is why so many suits win by default, as people rarely show up in court to defend, and so that expired debt then gets a loss by default, followed by a money judgement.
Unfair and injust, but frequent.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Here it is the other way around. A creditor has once a year to remind his debtors of their debts to keep them “alive”. If he forgets or does it too late, he can wave his debts goodbye.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow!
That makes sense, for a system built to protect vulnerable people rather than exploit them.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Forgot to finish: two states do ‘extinguish’ the debts after some years (13 yrs, if I recall correctly, in the case of MS), but an expired debt is not extinguished, just legally unenforceable. The problem with that is the need to defend on the unenforceability.
I find it incredibly obviously stacking the deck to require a defendant to appear in court just to say that the debt is expired, and so cannot be enforced!
(some states now allow that to be stated in ‘The Reply’ to the summons, so that the case can be dismissed, due to clogged courts, but even in those jurisdictions, people have to know to do this, and most folks don’t know…)
LikeLiked by 1 person
These comments should be a new post.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’s where Project do better comes in … ❤
LikeLiked by 1 person
I was never a fan of Sartre or Camus or the other existentialists. They have this attitude that one fully lived life is worth more than other people’s life that THEY consider not fully lived.
Cynics think they are so very clever (cleverer than others), but they lack in the empathy and kindness department.
Why read what makes you feel bad?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Maybe that was what I could never put into words as I read. That sense of superiority with absolutely no empathy or kindness, and it was really disturbing.
Thank you, now I no longer need to read Camus, either!
🙂
(I wonder if I should delete my ‘avecCamus’ bookshelf on GoodReads?)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha, you decide … 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
I haven’t read it. Based on your take on it, I think I’ll pass. Too many good books out there begging to be read.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’d normally object, as my opinion could vary wildly from your’s, Janet, but thanks to Birgit’s agreement, I’ll just be happy to have saved you the suffering!
🙂
Shira
LikeLiked by 1 person
Les Damnés de la terre: preface -Sartre…
(Sept. 9th…)
LikeLike