My Correct Views On Everything

by Leszek Kołakowski, Zbigniew Janowski

Very few academic philosophers can write about philosophy in a way that attracts the attention of those outside academia; even fewer can write with equal scholarly competence about something that transcends their narrow academic concerns; much less to have written about philosophy in such a way that it gave such a headache to Communist authorities or the leaders of the Western Left, as Leszek Kolakowski. In his title essay, "My Correct Views on Everything" (Kolakowski's famous rejoinder to E. P. Thompson's "Open Letter to L. Kolakowski"), the former Communist "High Priest" accounts for his apostasy from communism and explains why communism had to fail. Next, in a number of scholarly articles, he explains why communism assumed the pernicious form it had. There are two other sections, on Christianity and Liberal ideologies. Included are also two interviews with the author. Far from believing that the author has "correct views on everything," the reader is likely to be convinced that Kolakowski is right on more than one point. One's rejection of Marxist ideology does not have to lead, Kolakowski implicitly suggests, to the dismissal of the Marxist dream of a world without greed. Being critical of this or that item in the Church's politics should not have to make one reject Jesus's teaching. Finally, being concerned with liberalism's inability to generate moral values should not lead us past the compelling reasons to accept the liberal state as the only viable political alternative both to the follies of the movement in the twentieth century and the dangers of religious theocratic temptations. What Kolakowski offers in his new collection of essays is, in short, a "catechism" for non-ideological Marxists, Catholic Christians, liberals and conservatives alike. Once again, Kolakowski offers his readers pleasure without equal.

Genres: Philosophy, Essays, Politics, History, Nonfiction

284 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2005

About the author

Distinguished Polish philosopher and historian of ideas. He is best known for his critical analysis of Marxist thought, especially his acclaimed three-volume history, Main Currents of Marxism. In his later work, Kolakowski increasingly focused on religious questions. In his 1986 Jefferson Lecture, he asserted that "We learn history not in order to know how to behave or how to succeed, but to know who we are.”

In Poland, Kołakowski is not only revered as a philosopher and historian of ideas, but also as an icon for opponents of communism. Adam Michnik has called Kołakowski "one of the most prominent creators of contemporary Polish culture".

Kołakowski died on 17 July 2009, aged 81, in Oxford, England. In his obituary, philosopher Roger Scruton said Kolakowski was a "thinker for our time" and that regarding Kolakowski's debates with intellectual opponents, "even if ... nothing remained of the subversive orthodoxies, nobody felt damaged in their ego or defeated in their life's project, by arguments which from any other source would have inspired the greatest indignation."

Reviews

[Vladimir · Rating 5 out of 5]

In order to give this kind of title to the book you must be brave, bold and overconfident. In my opinion, Kołakowski rose to the challenge. Of course, he did not give the views on everything but rather on a relatively small corpus of topics. He is a subtle thinker and, somehow, he always gets into the core of the subject. Those who support ruling ideology of globalization and current trends of the political correctness could learn more from these writings. I particularly think on his views on historical consciousness. During the period of Enlightenment, a historical dimension of the human existence suddenly became obsolete due to strong development of the science and technology. They promised happiness and well-being to the humanity (while the past became less interesting and unimportant) . This trend continues ever since. History is important not because it will tell us how to engage into a political struggle, to avoid wars etc. It cannot be used as a manual. History is important to tell us who WE ARE. The historical understanding can bring purpose and meaning to the particular community. The problem is that this divides the humanity as a whole (this is not what we want, is it?). There are no "historical laws" but there are layers of reality (natural, technical, demographic, economic, intellectual), which change unevenly. History may not be able to help us to avoid problems that future bring us, but it can help us get rid of ridiculous hopes and set the boundaries, the boundaries that are determined by physical and cultural invariants and by the heavy loads of tradition. It is painful for me to see that we are not aware of the history of the ideas (or we are aware but we choose to ignore them). This is a sort of a new nihilism, which neglects everything that existed before touch screen cell phone. Anyone who comes out with criticism (no matter whether it is grounded or not) will be attacked. A huge number of political commissars (who probably as their communist colleagues have only a short course on the subject) are taking care that we all stay between proscribed margins. Meanwhile, the truth is, as always, somewhere in between. Even Kołakowski, when he talks about the ideas that constitute human mind, refers to Pierre Abélard and his famous "sic et non".

[Szplug · Rating 4 out of 5]

Tony Judt, an unabashed fan of Kołakowski, stated of the Polish intellectual's brief response to a lengthy epistolary haranguing directed against him by British Socialist E.P. Thompson in The Socialist Register in 1973—the titular essay in this collection—that it may be the most perfectly executed intellectual demolition in the history of political argument. I'm looking forward to assessing the superlative merit of the recently departed Judt's claim and getting to savor the sweet moves of a bit of intellectual jiu-jitsu delivered in a mild-mannered tone. Plus, there are a goodly number of essays that follow, doubtless of the same excellence as those contained within Modernity on Endless Trial .

And now I can see where Judt was coming from! That opening essay is a genteel but relentless intellectual thrashing. Having lived, with eyes firmly open, within the Soviet system imposed upon his native Poland, Kołakowski brought a straight flush of facts and wise lived understanding to counter two pair bloviated to a royal flush bluff by Thompson's passionately-held but disingenuous, equivocal, and armchair utopian belief in the perfectibility of the Communist system and, hence, of the perfectible nature of man, and concomitant willingness to selectively dismiss, degrade, and/or deflect any evidence that mitigated against that idealized dogma. Though skeptical in its foundation, Kołakowski's salvo yet proves affirmative through the reasoned and humane brio of its execution. Plus, who doesn't love a righteous smackdown?

[Jay Green · Rating 1 out of 5]

His Main Currents of Marxism is a fantastic work. This is not.

[Miguel Ángel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Crisp, intelligent and ironic. The perfect combo for a book, only slightly damaged by some repetitions and the passing of time

[Alberony Martínez · Rating 3 out of 5]

Por qué tengo razón en todo, del filósofo polaco Leszek Kołakowski, es una obra que desafía las etiquetas fáciles. Lejos de ser una provocación vacía o una colección de eslóganes ideológicos, este libro reúne ensayos de Kołakowski, en los cuales noté en su lectura un despliegue de su pensamiento con una mezcla de erudición y claridad. Este titulo, me llamó la atención, y aunque, irónico y seductor, es solo la entrada a una serie de reflexiones que oscilan entre la crítica mordaz al socialismo real y la defensa serena de la importancia cultural de la religión. Kołakowski no pontifica: desmonta, observa y escribe desde la experiencia de quien ha atravesado las contradicciones de su tiempo.

Lo que distingue este libro es su capacidad para pensar lo complejo sin diluirlo ni encerrarlo en fórmulas académicas. Cada ensayo parece escrito no para reafirmar certezas, sino para recordarnos lo frágil que es cualquier certeza cuando se convierte en doctrina. La distancia que toma respecto al marxismo corriente que estudió profundamente y luego abandonó, no es un rechazo visceral, sino un ejercicio de lucidez. Y eso, en un siglo donde las ideologías han reclamado ser verdades absolutas, es un gesto de honestidad intelectual que no pasa desapercibido.

Mi conclusión es que al leer a Kołakowski fue como reencontrarse con una escrito que no alza la voz para imponerse, sino que conversa, tantea, se permite la ironía sin perder profundidad. Una filosofía que no se atrinchera en sistemas cerrados ni en lenguajes crípticos, sino que se arriesga a ser entendida y por lo tanto, discutida. Para estos tiempos donde cualquiera se a trinchera en ideologías o discursos morales para llevar la cancelación. El autor se muestra con una postura de resistencia, la cual donde pensar no es domesticar la realidad, son mantener una dialogo abierto, incluso cuando se contradice nuestras convicción.

[Miguel Garzón · Rating 4 out of 5]

Combina una gran agudeza mental con un gran don expositivo y de claridad en el lenguaje, salpimentado con humor, ironía y rigor. Muy ameno y tremendamente interesante. Algunas partes recogidas en la colección sufren el paso del tiempo, la mayoría resisten muy bien. En especial, recomendaría la que da título al libro, con esa frase fastuosa y divertida.

[Gracie]

some good opinions, some not so good

[Vasil Kolev · Rating 3 out of 5]

Оплетените (доста грешни) размисли на стар човек, който смята своите възгледи за съвсем правилни и смята, че трябва да се съмнява основно в чуждите.

От друга страна е интересна храна за размисъл, ако го изтърпи човек - много често се усещах, че ме бута да си мисля за някакви съвсем различни неща.

[Algirdas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Skyrius "Politika ir šėtonas" išspausdintas kultūros almanache Proskyna, 1991, 9.