Crime and Punishment: A Critique of Individual Liberalism

A few days ago, I published a small article entitled "The Limitations and Transcendence of Structuralism", which mainly began as a critique of individualism and a response to the so-called reflection and infertility tendencies of the recent film "Chosin Lake". At that time, the problem was analyzed from the perspective of structuralism, and the structure was regarded as the defining frame of the individual, and man could not detach from the structure in which he was located.

In the past two days, looking at the interpretation of the works of classic Writers of Russian Literature, I found that Dostoevsky's 1866 work "Crime and Punishment" had already had a detailed description and a real criticism of this. Although the protagonist Raskolnikov faced the crime, he only experienced nearly a year of internal punishment before surrendering himself. But this literary condensation profoundly reflects the bankruptcy of individual liberalism, the so-called "superhuman" theory, and the civilian intellectuals of Russian cities. Transcending romanticism and realism, the question of the fate of intellectuals is explored from a philosophical and religious level: returning to the masses, believing in the morality of the people, with a highly selfless spirit of self-sacrifice.

The difference between the advocate of insoluble and the protagonist is that it takes a lifetime of reflection to balance the self-prejudice that is not a crime. If the protagonist lacks the courage to correct the deviation like the protagonist surrenders, it will be a long-term and continuous inner punishment. Although there are still opportunities to correct deviations in the process of mental punishment, or you can deliberately forget or fork in the past, as long as you calm down and face your own heart, this punishment will inevitably exist.

For women, due to the age limit of marriage and childbearing, the courage and time limit of this correction are even higher, which is still an inequality. Most of the world's civilizations are based precisely on this inequality. Only by recognizing and confronting this fact can we have the courage to transcend the prejudices of individual liberalism.

Whether married or not, procreated or not, women need courage. Therefore, respecting women, caring for women, and understanding women are indeed the proper meaning of men and the whole society. Of course, women with a personal liberal orientation also need a higher level of awakening, going to the people, going to the masses, and getting close to the soil, car, and structure in which you are rooted, in order to find your own one.

Advocates of the Chosin Lake reflector are also the ideas of individual liberalism. The critique of this kind of reflector is more difficult, after all, the timeline of history is longer, and history cannot be repeated or experimented with. The reflector himself only stays at the level of reflection, and the vast majority do not put it into action, so there are few natural consequences of punishment, and it is difficult to have the experience of mental punishment. Relying on external judgment, it is difficult for him to experience the inner judgment. Why? Is it because we have not yet found the soil of historical nihilism? What is the historic car? geography? In this way, the structure can be either a car or a limited frame.

What to do? I don't see a response from Crime and Punishment.

I hereby ask netizens for advice.

Read Crime and Punishment