What do you think?
Rate this book
Neither Victims Nor Executioners
A reprinting of a series of essays written by Camus originally appearing serially in the 1946 Fall issues of "Combat," a French resistance newspaper published during WWII. In the essays he discusses violence, murder & the impact these have on those who perpetrate, suffer or observe. (These essays, orginally written in French, were translated into English by Dwight Macdonald & were 1st published in the July-August issue of "Politics." With Mcadonald's permission, they were republished in this volume.) Camus' essays deal with the future of politics & human society in the era of modern warfare & totalitarian states.
64 pages, Hardcover
First published November 1, 1946
17 people are currently reading
725 people want to read
About the author
Albert Camus
1,080 books37.8k followersWorks, such as the novels
The Stranger
(1942) and
The Plague
(1947), of Algerian-born French writer and philosopher Albert Camus concern the absurdity of the human condition; he won the Nobel Prize of 1957 for literature.
Origin and his experiences of this representative of non-metropolitan literature in the 1930s dominated influences in his thought and work.
He also adapted plays of Pedro Calderón de la Barca, Lope de Vega, Dino Buzzati, and Requiem for a Nun of William Faulkner. One may trace his enjoyment of the theater back to his membership in l'Equipe, an Algerian group, whose "collective creation" Révolte dans les Asturies (1934) was banned for political reasons.
Of semi-proletarian parents, early attached to intellectual circles of strongly revolutionary tendencies, with a deep interest, he came at the age of 25 years in 1938; only chance prevented him from pursuing a university career in that field. The man and the times met: Camus joined the resistance movement during the occupation and after the liberation served as a columnist for the newspaper Combat.
The essay Le Mythe de Sisyphe (The Myth of Sisyphus), 1942, expounds notion of acceptance of the absurd of Camus with "the total absence of hope, which has nothing to do with despair, a continual refusal, which must not be confused with renouncement - and a conscious dissatisfaction."
Meursault, central character of L'Étranger (The Stranger), 1942, illustrates much of this essay: man as the nauseated victim of the absurd orthodoxy of habit, later - when the young killer faces execution - tempted by despair, hope, and salvation.
Besides his fiction and essays, Camus very actively produced plays in the theater (e.g., Caligula, 1944).
The time demanded his response, chiefly in his activities, but in 1947, Camus retired from political journalism.
Doctor Rieux of La Peste (The Plague), 1947, who tirelessly attends the plague-stricken citizens of Oran, enacts the revolt against a world of the absurd and of injustice, and confirms words: "We refuse to despair of mankind. Without having the unreasonable ambition to save men, we still want to serve them."
People also well know La Chute (The Fall), work of Camus in 1956.
Camus authored L'Exil et le royaume (Exile and the Kingdom) in 1957. His austere search for moral order found its aesthetic correlative in the classicism of his art. He styled of great purity, intense concentration, and rationality.
Camus died at the age of 46 years in a car accident near Sens in le Grand Fossard in the small town of Villeblevin.
Chinese 阿尔贝·加缪
Origin and his experiences of this representative of non-metropolitan literature in the 1930s dominated influences in his thought and work.
He also adapted plays of Pedro Calderón de la Barca, Lope de Vega, Dino Buzzati, and Requiem for a Nun of William Faulkner. One may trace his enjoyment of the theater back to his membership in l'Equipe, an Algerian group, whose "collective creation" Révolte dans les Asturies (1934) was banned for political reasons.
Of semi-proletarian parents, early attached to intellectual circles of strongly revolutionary tendencies, with a deep interest, he came at the age of 25 years in 1938; only chance prevented him from pursuing a university career in that field. The man and the times met: Camus joined the resistance movement during the occupation and after the liberation served as a columnist for the newspaper Combat.
The essay Le Mythe de Sisyphe (The Myth of Sisyphus), 1942, expounds notion of acceptance of the absurd of Camus with "the total absence of hope, which has nothing to do with despair, a continual refusal, which must not be confused with renouncement - and a conscious dissatisfaction."
Meursault, central character of L'Étranger (The Stranger), 1942, illustrates much of this essay: man as the nauseated victim of the absurd orthodoxy of habit, later - when the young killer faces execution - tempted by despair, hope, and salvation.
Besides his fiction and essays, Camus very actively produced plays in the theater (e.g., Caligula, 1944).
The time demanded his response, chiefly in his activities, but in 1947, Camus retired from political journalism.
Doctor Rieux of La Peste (The Plague), 1947, who tirelessly attends the plague-stricken citizens of Oran, enacts the revolt against a world of the absurd and of injustice, and confirms words: "We refuse to despair of mankind. Without having the unreasonable ambition to save men, we still want to serve them."
People also well know La Chute (The Fall), work of Camus in 1956.
Camus authored L'Exil et le royaume (Exile and the Kingdom) in 1957. His austere search for moral order found its aesthetic correlative in the classicism of his art. He styled of great purity, intense concentration, and rationality.
Camus died at the age of 46 years in a car accident near Sens in le Grand Fossard in the small town of Villeblevin.
Chinese 阿尔贝·加缪
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews
November 3, 2022
این متن را مرتبط با این روزهای خیزش مردمی در ایران و با کمک از تحلیل های کامو در همین کتاب نوشته ام:
قربانی یا جلاد؟
در جهان امروز حس قربانی بودن مختص یک طرز فکر یا ملیت و پرچم خاص نیست
امروز گفتمان گروه های افراطی چه از نوع برخی از درون جمهوری اسلامی که خود را قربانی تحریم های ظالمانه غرب میبینند
و چه از نوع برخی گروه های خارج نشین که خود را قربانیان 57 یا 67 میبینند یکچیزست آنهم توجیه خشونت به دلیل قربانی بودنشان!
ولی کارگرانی که حداقل حق زندگی اشان را همراه با آزادی و برابری طلب میکنند، کجای این وضعیت ایستاده اند؟
شخصا به سوسیالیستی باور دارم که تلاش دارد دغدغه های اصلی زندگی خود را با ارتقا از نیاز تنها فردی به جمعی، فراتر از قربانی بودن شخص خود ببیند
چراکه تاریخ ثابت کرده قربانی بودن خود میتواند به راحتی جلاد شدن را موجه سازد!
آنچه امروز باید با آن مبارزه شود ترس، سکوت و انزوای ناشی از آن است و آنچه باید از آن دفاع شود دیالوگ و ارتباط بین انسانی در سطح جهانیست
در شرایطی که همه چیز داخلی کشور ها بهم مرتبط است نمیتوانیم همچنان سر پرچم و هویت باهم بحث و دعوا داشته باشیم و جای نگرانی از فردای ایران، تنها نگران جایگزینی نوع افیون بعدی به جای افیون فعلی باشیم
لحظه طلایی کنونی که به بهای خون عزیزانمان حداقل تا اینجا منجر به رهایی صدای تاقبل این بایکوت بوده زبرزمینی ها شده لحظه تاریخیست تا اکنون همه با هم بیاندیشیم و قرارداد اجتماعی جدیدی را بنیان نهیم که اولین و مهمترین اصل آن
#نه_به_اعدام
آنهم برای هر نوع جرمیست
چه برای آزادی خواهان امروز که در زندانند و چه افرادی که فردا مثل ما نمی اندیشند
اگر ما امروز قدرت را در دست نداریم چه اعتباریست که فردا همین مخالفانی که امروز دم از اتحاد میزنند اما در عمل با برخورد های خشن هر نوع عمل غیر اخلاقی را در فحاشی بهم برای خود موجه میسازند، خود جا بر پای دیکتاتوری جدید نگذارند؟
قانون؟
قانون چه کسی یا گروهی؟
خیر ما اول از همه به یک قرارداد اجتماعی جدید مبتنی بر عقلانیت جدید نیاز داریم
البته که در شرایط بنبست کنونی برای رسیدن به این اتوپیا به اعتصابات علیه حکومت نیاز داریم
اما
اعتصاب اصلی ما در دور شدن حتی موقتی از خودمان است از آنچه بر "من" گذشته و تبدیل دغدغه اصلی به آنچه برای "ما" در اولویت است، مایی که در آن طبقات دیگر هم جا دارند
دلیل عدم امکان دیالوگ کنونی فقط از نبود آزادی بیان احزاب نیست
امروز فردیت گرایی ناشی از کالا شدگی ما از همه امان قربانیانی از نظام حاکم جهانی ساخته
قربانیان نظام رقابتی مبتنی بر تلنت شو
قربانیان نظام مصرفگرایی ارباب رعیتی
قربانیان نظام پایان تاریخ
اما دیگر نه
نه قربانی و نه جلاد...
قربانی یا جلاد؟
در جهان امروز حس قربانی بودن مختص یک طرز فکر یا ملیت و پرچم خاص نیست
امروز گفتمان گروه های افراطی چه از نوع برخی از درون جمهوری اسلامی که خود را قربانی تحریم های ظالمانه غرب میبینند
و چه از نوع برخی گروه های خارج نشین که خود را قربانیان 57 یا 67 میبینند یکچیزست آنهم توجیه خشونت به دلیل قربانی بودنشان!
ولی کارگرانی که حداقل حق زندگی اشان را همراه با آزادی و برابری طلب میکنند، کجای این وضعیت ایستاده اند؟
شخصا به سوسیالیستی باور دارم که تلاش دارد دغدغه های اصلی زندگی خود را با ارتقا از نیاز تنها فردی به جمعی، فراتر از قربانی بودن شخص خود ببیند
چراکه تاریخ ثابت کرده قربانی بودن خود میتواند به راحتی جلاد شدن را موجه سازد!
آنچه امروز باید با آن مبارزه شود ترس، سکوت و انزوای ناشی از آن است و آنچه باید از آن دفاع شود دیالوگ و ارتباط بین انسانی در سطح جهانیست
در شرایطی که همه چیز داخلی کشور ها بهم مرتبط است نمیتوانیم همچنان سر پرچم و هویت باهم بحث و دعوا داشته باشیم و جای نگرانی از فردای ایران، تنها نگران جایگزینی نوع افیون بعدی به جای افیون فعلی باشیم
لحظه طلایی کنونی که به بهای خون عزیزانمان حداقل تا اینجا منجر به رهایی صدای تاقبل این بایکوت بوده زبرزمینی ها شده لحظه تاریخیست تا اکنون همه با هم بیاندیشیم و قرارداد اجتماعی جدیدی را بنیان نهیم که اولین و مهمترین اصل آن
#نه_به_اعدام
آنهم برای هر نوع جرمیست
چه برای آزادی خواهان امروز که در زندانند و چه افرادی که فردا مثل ما نمی اندیشند
اگر ما امروز قدرت را در دست نداریم چه اعتباریست که فردا همین مخالفانی که امروز دم از اتحاد میزنند اما در عمل با برخورد های خشن هر نوع عمل غیر اخلاقی را در فحاشی بهم برای خود موجه میسازند، خود جا بر پای دیکتاتوری جدید نگذارند؟
قانون؟
قانون چه کسی یا گروهی؟
خیر ما اول از همه به یک قرارداد اجتماعی جدید مبتنی بر عقلانیت جدید نیاز داریم
البته که در شرایط بنبست کنونی برای رسیدن به این اتوپیا به اعتصابات علیه حکومت نیاز داریم
اما
اعتصاب اصلی ما در دور شدن حتی موقتی از خودمان است از آنچه بر "من" گذشته و تبدیل دغدغه اصلی به آنچه برای "ما" در اولویت است، مایی که در آن طبقات دیگر هم جا دارند
دلیل عدم امکان دیالوگ کنونی فقط از نبود آزادی بیان احزاب نیست
امروز فردیت گرایی ناشی از کالا شدگی ما از همه امان قربانیانی از نظام حاکم جهانی ساخته
قربانیان نظام رقابتی مبتنی بر تلنت شو
قربانیان نظام مصرفگرایی ارباب رعیتی
قربانیان نظام پایان تاریخ
اما دیگر نه
نه قربانی و نه جلاد...
April 29, 2020
Ziemlich aktueller Text, der im Feld des Politischen klar macht, wie sehr Camus das Absurde in der Unaufhebbarkeit von Widersprüchen gegründet sieht. Diese sind ihm freilich keine "objektiven" oder "historischen" Widersprüche, sondern solche, die dem Menschlichen entspringen, eine Haltung, die dem klassischen "Humanismus" widerspricht. Gern hätte der Autor die Menschen "gut", allein, sie sind es nicht, was man kurz nach WK II wohl umstandslos anerkennen musste. Inmitten dieser Hoffnungslosigkeit ist Camus dennoch nicht hoffnungslos; obwohl ihm das Absurde der Situation (damals Ost-West-Konfrontation/heute Russland/ China vs. EU/USA) nahe geht, ist er nicht bereit zu kapitulieren. Anerkennen, was ist, und tun, was jeweils geboten scheint- das ist sein Credo. Wie schon im "Sisyphos" komme es darauf an, das Schicksal anzunehmen und das Notwendige zu tun. Im Feld des Politischen bedeute das, nicht einem Ideal hinterher zu laufen und dafür "alles" (auch Terror, Revolution, Mord, Gewalt usw.) in Kauf zu nehmen, sondern realistisch zu entscheiden, wo man jetzt ganz konkret etwas zur Verbesserung einer gegebenen Situation leisten kann. Und genau das sei dann zu tun! Man muss sich Sisyphos als einen glücklichen Menschen denken! - Fünf Sterne für Camus und den erhellenden Essay von H.R.Schlette; ein Stern Abzug für den Appendix von Hans Mayer zu Camus und Hesse. Mayer hat bessere Texte geschrieben und dient hier wohl nur dazu, den Band um ein paar Seiten zu erweitern...
June 18, 2021
The Essays consisting of Neither Victim nor Executioner contain Camus' economic and political ethics. His apoliticism is interesting but haphazard; it is the brackish water that results from revering Dostoevsky but also being an Atheistic Materialist. Dostoevsky was the reason he did not become an advocate for Marxism and the Soviet Union, unlike his friend Sartre who argued no human rights would ever be violated under The Great Experiment in the North. It seems like this is one of the reasons Camus is widely read and Satyre is not today; Camus was vindicated in many of his political views he gained from Dostoevsky.
Camus, like Dostoevsky, saw Marxism, whether expressed in Communism or Socialism, as the result of a radically desacralized society that made itself the object of its own adoration; a blind self-deification. It is a metaphysical revolution, not merely political and humanitarian as it sees itself as. This is thoroughly Dostoevskian. Dost developed in him a recalcitrant suspicion of Marxism which was embraced by his contemporaries. His fascination with Dostoevsky saved him from falling into the popular insanity of his time. His apoliticism and critique of materialism and subsequent Sociopolitical ideologies (namely Utilitarianism and Utopianism) made him unpopular in the liberal press at the time, but history has vindicated his suspicions.
While advocating for a supernational advancement past Westphalian sovereignty, he does see the problems with Internationalism in that it cannot maintain a directly democratic basis. He does not really take dogmatic political stances; he simply regurgitates Dostoevskian politics into his contemporary revolutionary debates; he makes valid critical remarks but provides no clear answers. He writes:
"The goal, in short, will be to define the conditions for a modest political philosophy, that is, a philosophy free of all messianic elements and devoid of any nostalgia for an earthly paradise... Whatever the desired end may be, as noble and necessary as it conceivable is, and regardless of whether or not it seeks to bring happiness to humankind or to establish justice and freedom, the means to that end represent a risk so conclusive, so disproportionate to the likelihood of success, that we objectively refuse to run it."
He talks about the Marxist underpinnings of all types of Socialism, including the forms that try to be democratic:
"Therein lies the problem faced by French Socialists. They have discovered that they have scruples. They have seen violence and oppression at work, after having had only a fairly abstract idea of what those things were... Indeed, hope resides in this contradiction itself, because it is forcing or will force the Socialists to Choose. Either they will admit that the end covers the means, hence that murder can be legitimized, or else they will renounce Marxism as an absolute philosophy and limit their attention to the critical aspects, which is often still valuable."
His opposition to political violence has a lyrical foundation, not a moral one. He argues that the goodness of an individual must be rooted in an Absurd adherence to an illogical extemporal fantasy that they must stay in. Camus' writings are a nice thought experiment, but really have no philosophic value. He writes in Neither Victim nor Executioner:
"All I ask is that, in the midst of a murderous world, we agree to reflect on murder and to make a choice. After that, we can distinguish those who accept the consequences of being murderers themselves or the accomplices of murders, and those who refuse to do so with all their force and being. Since this terrible dividing line does actually exist, it will be again if it is clearly marked. Over the expanse of five continents throughout the coming years, an endless struggle is going to be pursued between violence and friendly persuasion, a struggle in which, granted, the former has a thousand times the chances of success than that of the latter. But I have always held that, if he who bases his hopes on human nature is a fool, he who gives up in the face of circumstances is a coward. And henceforth, the honorable course will be to state everything on a formidable gamble: that words are more powerful and munitions"
Sociopolitically, he is trying to return to a Hellenistic political ideology, but disagrees with the search for Goodness itself; he selectively applies the Platonic logic he likes, and uses The Absurd as an excuse to dismiss any Platonic logic that contradicts his semi-Nihilism. This tension in his thinking leads him to political Apophaticism. While Neither Victims nor Executioners is my favorite non-fiction from Camus and his writings are nice thought experiments, I don't think they have real value in moving these philosophic or socioeconomic debates forward beyond what Dostoevsky already argued.
Camusian Corpus
The Myth I: https://bit.ly/2SGlSWm
The Myth II: https://bit.ly/3yRNYOH
The First Man: https://bit.ly/3c67Vrj
The Stranger: https://bit.ly/2RXcRYQ
The Fall: https://bit.ly/3uGEmTD
The Plague: https://bit.ly/3vEpczB
A Happy Death: https://bit.ly/3i2n2WI
Neither Victims nor Executioners: https://bit.ly/2R8cMkJ
Camus, like Dostoevsky, saw Marxism, whether expressed in Communism or Socialism, as the result of a radically desacralized society that made itself the object of its own adoration; a blind self-deification. It is a metaphysical revolution, not merely political and humanitarian as it sees itself as. This is thoroughly Dostoevskian. Dost developed in him a recalcitrant suspicion of Marxism which was embraced by his contemporaries. His fascination with Dostoevsky saved him from falling into the popular insanity of his time. His apoliticism and critique of materialism and subsequent Sociopolitical ideologies (namely Utilitarianism and Utopianism) made him unpopular in the liberal press at the time, but history has vindicated his suspicions.
While advocating for a supernational advancement past Westphalian sovereignty, he does see the problems with Internationalism in that it cannot maintain a directly democratic basis. He does not really take dogmatic political stances; he simply regurgitates Dostoevskian politics into his contemporary revolutionary debates; he makes valid critical remarks but provides no clear answers. He writes:
"The goal, in short, will be to define the conditions for a modest political philosophy, that is, a philosophy free of all messianic elements and devoid of any nostalgia for an earthly paradise... Whatever the desired end may be, as noble and necessary as it conceivable is, and regardless of whether or not it seeks to bring happiness to humankind or to establish justice and freedom, the means to that end represent a risk so conclusive, so disproportionate to the likelihood of success, that we objectively refuse to run it."
He talks about the Marxist underpinnings of all types of Socialism, including the forms that try to be democratic:
"Therein lies the problem faced by French Socialists. They have discovered that they have scruples. They have seen violence and oppression at work, after having had only a fairly abstract idea of what those things were... Indeed, hope resides in this contradiction itself, because it is forcing or will force the Socialists to Choose. Either they will admit that the end covers the means, hence that murder can be legitimized, or else they will renounce Marxism as an absolute philosophy and limit their attention to the critical aspects, which is often still valuable."
His opposition to political violence has a lyrical foundation, not a moral one. He argues that the goodness of an individual must be rooted in an Absurd adherence to an illogical extemporal fantasy that they must stay in. Camus' writings are a nice thought experiment, but really have no philosophic value. He writes in Neither Victim nor Executioner:
"All I ask is that, in the midst of a murderous world, we agree to reflect on murder and to make a choice. After that, we can distinguish those who accept the consequences of being murderers themselves or the accomplices of murders, and those who refuse to do so with all their force and being. Since this terrible dividing line does actually exist, it will be again if it is clearly marked. Over the expanse of five continents throughout the coming years, an endless struggle is going to be pursued between violence and friendly persuasion, a struggle in which, granted, the former has a thousand times the chances of success than that of the latter. But I have always held that, if he who bases his hopes on human nature is a fool, he who gives up in the face of circumstances is a coward. And henceforth, the honorable course will be to state everything on a formidable gamble: that words are more powerful and munitions"
Sociopolitically, he is trying to return to a Hellenistic political ideology, but disagrees with the search for Goodness itself; he selectively applies the Platonic logic he likes, and uses The Absurd as an excuse to dismiss any Platonic logic that contradicts his semi-Nihilism. This tension in his thinking leads him to political Apophaticism. While Neither Victims nor Executioners is my favorite non-fiction from Camus and his writings are nice thought experiments, I don't think they have real value in moving these philosophic or socioeconomic debates forward beyond what Dostoevsky already argued.
Camusian Corpus
The Myth I: https://bit.ly/2SGlSWm
The Myth II: https://bit.ly/3yRNYOH
The First Man: https://bit.ly/3c67Vrj
The Stranger: https://bit.ly/2RXcRYQ
The Fall: https://bit.ly/3uGEmTD
The Plague: https://bit.ly/3vEpczB
A Happy Death: https://bit.ly/3i2n2WI
Neither Victims nor Executioners: https://bit.ly/2R8cMkJ
November 9, 2020
I may have read an earlier edition of this work than this one, but the cover is familiar and it is plausible that it was read as late as in 1972 despite my obsessive interest in Camus during high school. In any case, during high school and college I was very much torn between personal pacifist feelings and the fear that such tendencies were, under certain circumstances, immoral. Here, as in the collection 'Resistance, Rebellion and Death', Camus is nuanced and considerate in his treatment of such dilemmas.
October 10, 2016
the book focuses on what everybody has known to be true but dared not to talk about - how killing of men were legitimised over time - in the name of war, revolution, peace, terrorism , checking terrorism, racism & so on . But it leaves the solution of it feebly on the fact of " universal unity " !
November 18, 2023
joy boy camus💘
June 4, 2021
Camus asks his readers an impossible question while only providing impossible answers. The struggles Camus details in these essays are alive today while remaining unanswered and unsolved. Any hope offered in the international revolution seems further away today than it did in 1946.
July 6, 2024
„Das Elend hinderte mich zu glauben, daß alles unter der Sonne und in der Geschichte gut sei; die Sonne lehrte mich, daß die Geschichte nicht alles ist.“ (S.105)
Schönes, kleines, kurzes Buch. Perfekt um hoffnungslos in den ICE einzusteigen und drei Städte weiter zufrieden auszusteigen.
Schönes, kleines, kurzes Buch. Perfekt um hoffnungslos in den ICE einzusteigen und drei Städte weiter zufrieden auszusteigen.
December 19, 2018
"History is simply man's desperate effort to give body to his most clairvoyant dreams."
Insightful and interesting read.
Insightful and interesting read.
April 16, 2024
I only read an excerpt for school lol
Read
December 26, 2025stab me it’s rubber
September 17, 2019
it's interesting. 5 stars for Cumus essay & 3 for introduction.
May 18, 2016
A proper scolding by a master. "The revolution will be made on a world scale or it will not be made at all."
June 5, 2016
This edition has a great introduction setting the context for this seminal essay while also reinforcing its relevance.
November 20, 2020
The articles become better and better chronologically.
"A man who cannot be persuaded is a man who makes others afraid"
"We gasp for air among people who believe they are absolutely right, whether it be in their machines or their ideas", I would like to paraphrase that to ->"theirs beliefs and their ideas"
"Terror can be legitimized only if on adopts the principle that the ends justifies the means. And this principle can be embraced only if the efficacy of an action is taken to be an absolute end, as in nihilist ideologies (everything is permitted, success is what counts) or philosophies that take history as an absolute (first Hegel, then Marx: since the goal is a classless society anything that leads to it is good)"
"The twenty-one deaf men - future war criminals - who are discussing peace at this very moment are engaged in monotonous dialogues, quietly sitting in the middle of a torrent that is sweeping them towards an abyss at thousand miles an hour"
He talks about globalization and how connectivity has changed our societies
"There is no longer any such thing as isolated suffering and no instance of torture anywhere in the world is without effects on our daily lives"
"You cannot cure the plague with remedies for a head cold. A crisis that is tearing apart the entire world cannot be resolved without a universal solution"
Though he had the plague of political ideologies in mind this rings true today quite literally.
"What is required is simply that we reflect and clearly decide whether we must add to the sum of human suffering for still indiscernible ends, whether we must acquiesce while the world blankets itself with arms and brother again kills brother, or whether, to the contrary, we must economize as much as possible on bloodshed and pain simply to give other generations, better armed than we are, their chance" - combine this passage with an optimistic view on the evolution of human nature like the one seen in "The Better Angels of Our Nature" and a view on death and improvement of next generations in "Ascesis: The Saviors of God" by Kazantzakis
"I, for one, [...] I would never count myself among people of whatever stripe who are willing to countenance murder, and I would draw whatever consequence followed from this"
"We are being asked to love or hate one or another country or people. But a few of us only too well aware of our similarity to our fellow human beings to accept this choice. The right way to love the Russian people, in recognition of what they have never ceased to be - what Tolstoy and Gorky called the world's leavening - is not to wish upon them the vagaries of power but to spare them a new and terrible bloodletting after all they have suffered in the past. The same is true for the American people and of the unfortunate people of Europe."
"[...] we cannot escape from history, since we are in it up to our necks. But we can aspire to do battle within the historical arena to save from history that part of man which does not belong to it."
"In the midst of a murderous world, we must decide to reflect on murder and choose. [...] we will divide ourselves into two groups: those who if needed be would be willing to commit murder or become accomplices to murder, and those who refuse to do so with every fiber of their being . [...] Among five continents an endless struggle between violence and preaching will rage in the years to come. And it is true that the former is a thousand times more likely to succeed than the latter. But I have always believed that if people who placed their hopes in the human condition were mad, those who despair of events were cowards. Henceforth there will be only one honorable choice: to wager everything on the belief that in the end the words will prove stronger than the bullets."
"A man who cannot be persuaded is a man who makes others afraid"
"We gasp for air among people who believe they are absolutely right, whether it be in their machines or their ideas", I would like to paraphrase that to ->"theirs beliefs and their ideas"
"Terror can be legitimized only if on adopts the principle that the ends justifies the means. And this principle can be embraced only if the efficacy of an action is taken to be an absolute end, as in nihilist ideologies (everything is permitted, success is what counts) or philosophies that take history as an absolute (first Hegel, then Marx: since the goal is a classless society anything that leads to it is good)"
"The twenty-one deaf men - future war criminals - who are discussing peace at this very moment are engaged in monotonous dialogues, quietly sitting in the middle of a torrent that is sweeping them towards an abyss at thousand miles an hour"
He talks about globalization and how connectivity has changed our societies
"There is no longer any such thing as isolated suffering and no instance of torture anywhere in the world is without effects on our daily lives"
"You cannot cure the plague with remedies for a head cold. A crisis that is tearing apart the entire world cannot be resolved without a universal solution"
Though he had the plague of political ideologies in mind this rings true today quite literally.
"What is required is simply that we reflect and clearly decide whether we must add to the sum of human suffering for still indiscernible ends, whether we must acquiesce while the world blankets itself with arms and brother again kills brother, or whether, to the contrary, we must economize as much as possible on bloodshed and pain simply to give other generations, better armed than we are, their chance" - combine this passage with an optimistic view on the evolution of human nature like the one seen in "The Better Angels of Our Nature" and a view on death and improvement of next generations in "Ascesis: The Saviors of God" by Kazantzakis
"I, for one, [...] I would never count myself among people of whatever stripe who are willing to countenance murder, and I would draw whatever consequence followed from this"
"We are being asked to love or hate one or another country or people. But a few of us only too well aware of our similarity to our fellow human beings to accept this choice. The right way to love the Russian people, in recognition of what they have never ceased to be - what Tolstoy and Gorky called the world's leavening - is not to wish upon them the vagaries of power but to spare them a new and terrible bloodletting after all they have suffered in the past. The same is true for the American people and of the unfortunate people of Europe."
"[...] we cannot escape from history, since we are in it up to our necks. But we can aspire to do battle within the historical arena to save from history that part of man which does not belong to it."
"In the midst of a murderous world, we must decide to reflect on murder and choose. [...] we will divide ourselves into two groups: those who if needed be would be willing to commit murder or become accomplices to murder, and those who refuse to do so with every fiber of their being . [...] Among five continents an endless struggle between violence and preaching will rage in the years to come. And it is true that the former is a thousand times more likely to succeed than the latter. But I have always believed that if people who placed their hopes in the human condition were mad, those who despair of events were cowards. Henceforth there will be only one honorable choice: to wager everything on the belief that in the end the words will prove stronger than the bullets."
September 24, 2018
The 17th century was the century of mathematics, the 18th that of physical sciences, and the 19th that of biology. Out 20th century is the century of fear.
a man with whom one cannot reason is a man to be feared.
if the moral values extolled by the Socialist Party [the end does not justify the means] are legitimate, then Marxism is absolutely false since it claims to be absolutely true. [In the Marxian perspective, a hundred thousand corpses are nothing if they are the price of the happiness of hundred of millions of men.]
(...)
A hope that is grounded precisely in this contradiction, since it forces—or will force—the Socialists to make a choice. They will either admit that the end justifies the means, in which case murder can be legitimized; or else, they will reject Marxism as an absolute philosophy.
But today one can conceive only the extension of a revolution that has already succeeded. This is something Stalin has very well understood, and it is the kindest explanation of his policies (the other being to refuse Russia the right to speak in the name of revolution).
The forties have taught us that an injury done a student in Prague strikes down simultaneously a worker in Clichy, that blood shed on the banks of a Central European river brings a Texas farmer to spill his own blood in the Ardennes, which he sees for the first time. There is no suffering, no torture anywhere in the world which does not affect our everyday lives. (...) Today, tragedy is collective. We know, then, without a shadow of a doubt, that the new order we seek cannot be merely national, or even continental; ceitainly not occidental nor oriental. lt must be universal.
today frontiers are mere abstractions
When our Utopia has become part of history, as with many others of like kind, men will find themselves unable to conceive reality without it. For History is simply man’s desperate effort to give body to his most clairvoyant dreams.
Yes, we must minimize domestic politics. A crisis which tears the whole world apart must be met on a world scale (...) And if there are many today who, in their secret hearts, detest violence and killing, there are not many who care to recognize that this forces them to reconsider their actions and thoughts. (...) They will admit that little is to be expected from present-day governments, since these live and act according to a murderous code.
If he who bases his hopes on human nature is a fool, he who gives up in the face of circumstances is a coward. And henceforth, the only honorable course will be to stake everything on a formidable gamble: that words are more powerful than munitions.
a man with whom one cannot reason is a man to be feared.
if the moral values extolled by the Socialist Party [the end does not justify the means] are legitimate, then Marxism is absolutely false since it claims to be absolutely true. [In the Marxian perspective, a hundred thousand corpses are nothing if they are the price of the happiness of hundred of millions of men.]
(...)
A hope that is grounded precisely in this contradiction, since it forces—or will force—the Socialists to make a choice. They will either admit that the end justifies the means, in which case murder can be legitimized; or else, they will reject Marxism as an absolute philosophy.
But today one can conceive only the extension of a revolution that has already succeeded. This is something Stalin has very well understood, and it is the kindest explanation of his policies (the other being to refuse Russia the right to speak in the name of revolution).
The forties have taught us that an injury done a student in Prague strikes down simultaneously a worker in Clichy, that blood shed on the banks of a Central European river brings a Texas farmer to spill his own blood in the Ardennes, which he sees for the first time. There is no suffering, no torture anywhere in the world which does not affect our everyday lives. (...) Today, tragedy is collective. We know, then, without a shadow of a doubt, that the new order we seek cannot be merely national, or even continental; ceitainly not occidental nor oriental. lt must be universal.
today frontiers are mere abstractions
When our Utopia has become part of history, as with many others of like kind, men will find themselves unable to conceive reality without it. For History is simply man’s desperate effort to give body to his most clairvoyant dreams.
Yes, we must minimize domestic politics. A crisis which tears the whole world apart must be met on a world scale (...) And if there are many today who, in their secret hearts, detest violence and killing, there are not many who care to recognize that this forces them to reconsider their actions and thoughts. (...) They will admit that little is to be expected from present-day governments, since these live and act according to a murderous code.
If he who bases his hopes on human nature is a fool, he who gives up in the face of circumstances is a coward. And henceforth, the only honorable course will be to stake everything on a formidable gamble: that words are more powerful than munitions.
October 14, 2025
„Eine Welt, in welcher der Mord legitimiert ist und in der das menschliche Leben als wertlos betrachtet wird: Das ist heute unser wichtigstes politisches Problem.“
Wie begegnen wir diesem Problem? Eine mögliche Antwort liefern die internationalen Protestbewegungen, angeführt von der Generation Z. Jener Generation, die lange Zeit als antriebslos, faul und apolitisch abgestempelt wurde.
Dank des Internets u.a. erfüllt diese weltweite Revolte Camus’ Postulat: „Die Revolution wird auf internationaler Ebene stattfinden, oder sie wird gar nicht stattfinden.“ Man kann festhalten, dass dies in der hochgradig globalisierten Welt gerade geschieht: Menschen vernetzen sich über Grenzen hinweg, um gegen Ungerechtigkeit, Krieg und Unterdrückung aufzustehen.
Camus schrieb weiter: „Wir wissen also alle ohne den Schatten eines Zweifels, dass die neue Ordnung, die wir suchen, keine ausschliesslich nationale, nicht einmal eine kontinentale und vor allem keine westliche oder östliche Ordnung sein kann. Es muss eine universale Ordnung sein.“
Wir erleben diese Realität, wenn bei Palästina-Protesten wöchentlich die Strassen der Städte gefüllt - und dadurch unzählige Menschen im Zuge der Solidarität politisiert werden. Ebenso zeigen die globalen Gen-Z-Proteste, die sich symbolisch unter der Piratenflagge aus One Piece versammeln, dass sich ein neues, internationales Bewusstsein formt. Der junge Kapitän Ruffy und seine Strohhut-Crew fordern in der Serie die korrupten Mächte einer autokratischen Weltregierung heraus. Unsere Generation hat erkannt, dass von den gegenwärtigen Regierungen wenig zu erwarten ist, solange diese – ob im militaristischen oder neoliberalen Gewand – nach den Grundsätzen des Mordes leben und handeln: Wenn wirtschaftlicher Fortschritt, Selbstbereicherung und militärische Aufrüstung über allem anderen steht und menschliches Leid dabei nur als unvermeidlicher Kollateralschaden betrachtet wird.
Wie begegnen wir diesem Problem? Eine mögliche Antwort liefern die internationalen Protestbewegungen, angeführt von der Generation Z. Jener Generation, die lange Zeit als antriebslos, faul und apolitisch abgestempelt wurde.
Dank des Internets u.a. erfüllt diese weltweite Revolte Camus’ Postulat: „Die Revolution wird auf internationaler Ebene stattfinden, oder sie wird gar nicht stattfinden.“ Man kann festhalten, dass dies in der hochgradig globalisierten Welt gerade geschieht: Menschen vernetzen sich über Grenzen hinweg, um gegen Ungerechtigkeit, Krieg und Unterdrückung aufzustehen.
Camus schrieb weiter: „Wir wissen also alle ohne den Schatten eines Zweifels, dass die neue Ordnung, die wir suchen, keine ausschliesslich nationale, nicht einmal eine kontinentale und vor allem keine westliche oder östliche Ordnung sein kann. Es muss eine universale Ordnung sein.“
Wir erleben diese Realität, wenn bei Palästina-Protesten wöchentlich die Strassen der Städte gefüllt - und dadurch unzählige Menschen im Zuge der Solidarität politisiert werden. Ebenso zeigen die globalen Gen-Z-Proteste, die sich symbolisch unter der Piratenflagge aus One Piece versammeln, dass sich ein neues, internationales Bewusstsein formt. Der junge Kapitän Ruffy und seine Strohhut-Crew fordern in der Serie die korrupten Mächte einer autokratischen Weltregierung heraus. Unsere Generation hat erkannt, dass von den gegenwärtigen Regierungen wenig zu erwarten ist, solange diese – ob im militaristischen oder neoliberalen Gewand – nach den Grundsätzen des Mordes leben und handeln: Wenn wirtschaftlicher Fortschritt, Selbstbereicherung und militärische Aufrüstung über allem anderen steht und menschliches Leid dabei nur als unvermeidlicher Kollateralschaden betrachtet wird.
May 22, 2020
The essay written by Camus was actually pretty interesting. Seems to me that he argues for a global government and echoes the sentiment that "injustice anywhere is injustice everywhere." revolution somewhere relative must be applied to a greater level in order for it to truly matter. He tries arguing against the utilitarian view of ends justifying the means but I personally wasn't moved by his argument and felt that it needed more development.
The introduction was useless however. It grasps at applying his essay to a modern setting, specifically the US involvement in the middle east but ultimately just repeats itself multiple times without really saying anything worthwhile.
The introduction was useless however. It grasps at applying his essay to a modern setting, specifically the US involvement in the middle east but ultimately just repeats itself multiple times without really saying anything worthwhile.
August 18, 2022
Der Essay Ni Victimes Ni Bourreaux von 1946 hat bei mir heute nicht so einen großen Eindruck hinterlassen. Erhellender war für mich der Essay von Heinz Robert Schlette über Albert Camus' Hoffnung. Und besonders gefallen hat mir das imaginäre Gespräch zwischen Albert Camus und Hermann Hesse von Hans Mayer.
October 24, 2017
Se nota que no has sufrido, hijo mío.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
October 8, 2020
Not much to say about Camus that can actually match his brilliance, work as a writer and a man who wanted peace, freedom, brother of all men.
February 17, 2022
read for class
March 14, 2023
Only took me a few hours to read. One of my favorite works by Albert Camus.
November 1, 2023
the most relevant book i’ve ever read
January 31, 2025
I think I understood what was said and definitely the why it was said, but I am not onboard with every said.
September 13, 2025
“We live in terror because persuasion is no longer possible”
AHHHHHHHHHH
AHHHHHHHHHH
August 25, 2021
Quick read and shockingly relevant to today.
Camus both beautifully and simply addresses the modern globalization of the world and the challenges this creates in the application of peaceful ethics. Although this was originally published in 1946, its lessons on the potential destructive effects of zealous adherence to any political ideology remain relevant today.
Camus both beautifully and simply addresses the modern globalization of the world and the challenges this creates in the application of peaceful ethics. Although this was originally published in 1946, its lessons on the potential destructive effects of zealous adherence to any political ideology remain relevant today.
February 15, 2025
Speak up, revolt against the people making the decisions (But they must be reasonable) Don’t live in silence, do something about it and don’t let terror lead you to fear. And are these utopias really trying to make a harmonious society. I find that difficult to believe. The things said by camus in here are relevant to today’s world.
October 2, 2014
I enjoyed Camus’ treatment of History as an absolute end and his call towards sociability, ‘…that words are more powerful than munitions’ (55). On the other hand, I find his prescription towards international democracy troubling.
"We are being torn apart by a logic of History which we have elaborated in every detail—a net which threatens to strangle us. It is not emotion which can cut through the web of a logic which has gone to irrational lengths, but only reason which can meet logic on its own ground…. But the problem is not how to carry men away; it is essential, on the contrary, that they not be carried away but rather that they be made to understand clearly what they are doing" (52).
"We are being torn apart by a logic of History which we have elaborated in every detail—a net which threatens to strangle us. It is not emotion which can cut through the web of a logic which has gone to irrational lengths, but only reason which can meet logic on its own ground…. But the problem is not how to carry men away; it is essential, on the contrary, that they not be carried away but rather that they be made to understand clearly what they are doing" (52).
Displaying 1 - 30 of 42 reviews