This was truly intellectually stimulating.

While nothing in it was entirely new to me, the way he masterfully assembled such a vast amount of history and his profound thoughts on the topic was truly impressive.

This work could serve as an excellent introduction to the thoughts of rebellion and revolution. It should offer a humbling force that compels the seeker of change to be more serious and better prepared.

Towards the end, he discussed art in interesting and erudite ways, but it didn't have a great impact on me. I believe this difference reflects the era in which he lived and the era in which I live. The priorities of aesthetics have changed.

It is highly recommended for those who are serious about rebellion and are seeking a good literary overview.

Overall, it is a thought-provoking piece that offers valuable insights into the complex themes of rebellion and revolution.

Whether you are a scholar, an activist, or simply someone interested in these topics, this work is well worth reading.

It challenges us to think deeply about the past, present, and future of social change and the role that art and ideas play in it.

Jesus,

I have truly never come across someone who contradicts themselves to such an extent. The rebel is actually the one who desires to be enslaved the most??? What on earth is this guy going on about?? I manage to pick up some零碎的bits and pieces here and there, but it's clear that I'm not trained in the art of philosophy. Instead, I'm trained in the art of being a lazy asshole who complains about famous books and is jealous because deep down in my dark, withered heart, I know I'll never amount to anything. Having said that, I just can't stop reading this该死的book! Seriously, half the time I have no idea what's going on, but then just when I'm about to hurl the book across the room, the clever Frenchman makes some intriguing statement. Anyways, I've been powering through it and I don't know why? What the hell is wrong with me.... (Could it be a lack of social life???)

I think I know what's wrong with me! He uses words that give me a thrill about revolt and revolutionaries and "taking down the man" and other such superficial stuff. Of course, anything related to the destruction of institutions gets me all worked up, and this is probably what it is. But according to Camus, I get this intense excitement because in reality I want to be part of the institution??? There's a lot of reference to the master-slave dialect and how the rebel is actually dependent on the system to maintain legitimacy...I don't even know what I just said...... Anyways, it's really deep. Mentally prepare yourselves; you institutionalized, indoctrinated, mindless rebels. This might actually inspire you to think critically, which is the most rebellious thing of all!!

What significance does another time have?

Pain is never temporary for the one who has no faith in the future. However, a hundred years of pain in the eyes of the one who predicts the appearance of the "eternal city" for the hundred and first year is no more than a blink.

The spirit of rebellion believes in that thought process that at its point of dignity, it has accepted the external nothingness of this world. The experience of nothingness is the individual's pain. But with the start of a rebellious movement, pain becomes a collective experience - the experience of all people.

This shows that the concept of time and pain is complex and relative. It depends on one's perspective and beliefs. The one who looks forward to a better future may endure pain more easily, while the one who has lost hope may feel that pain is overwhelming.

Moreover, the idea of rebellion can transform individual pain into a collective force. When people come together to fight for a cause, their shared pain becomes a source of strength and motivation.

In conclusion, understanding the significance of time and pain, as well as the power of rebellion, can help us better cope with the challenges and difficulties in life.

I can say that the book is truly wonderful. I have benefited a great deal from it. The book talks about the history of human rebellion and presents Camus' pure thought on examples from real or mythical history. These are examples that Camus' thought did not cover as commonly as other thinkers and philosophers did, and he popularized them. The book is a revolutionary and rebellious model against all previous ideas about those examples and the treatment of the rebellious negativity of ideas.

However, I can also describe the book as tedious and repetitive. Because Camus repeated the same ideas in different ways, and for this reason, I got very tired of it in the end. But even if the idea was repeated a thousand times, it would not change my first impression that the book is excellent and that it has given me a lot.

This is an essay that discusses human rebellion against its own existence as a justification for crime and violence, written after the two world wars.

It is true that it has cost me a bit, especially at the end, but I think it has very interesting reflections, especially in its temporal context.

The two world wars brought great destruction and chaos to the world, and people began to question the meaning and value of human existence.

This essay explores this issue from a unique perspective, arguing that human beings' rebellion against their own existence is a natural response to the absurdity and meaninglessness of the world.

However, this rebellion often leads to crime and violence, which in turn加剧 the chaos and destruction of the world.

The author believes that we need to find a way to balance our rebellion with our responsibility to society and humanity, so as to create a more just and peaceful world.

Overall, this essay is a thought-provoking piece that offers valuable insights into the human condition and the challenges we face in the modern world.

Reading this book was an extremely challenging endeavor, yet in the end, it proved to be well worth all the effort invested.

The message and core ideas presented within its pages are so profoundly poignant and raw that they far outshine what some might perceive as its overly dense and confusing prose.

Camus skillfully takes the reader on a captivating journey through the annals of philosophy and historical revolutions. In concise and engaging anecdotes, he traverses from the French Revolution to the Russian Revolutions, touching upon the ideas and contributions of Rousseau, Hegel, Marx, Lenin, Nietzsche, The Marquis de Sade, and Surrealism. With remarkable ease, he transitions between the grand historical context and the individual, and back again.

For the right kind of reader, I simply cannot recommend this book highly enough. It is a work that demands careful consideration and reflection, but the rewards it offers are truly invaluable.

Camus in the Rebel Man: Camus here is not a novelist but a technical personality with several aspects, including the philosopher, the critic, the researcher, the historian, and the political and economic analyst.

The General Idea: The book revolves around the idea of rebellion, which is essentially a denial of a certain type of injustice and servitude. (I rebel if we exist) The rebel moves towards the abolition of this tyrannical power that he bears collectively in its distant form. Camus wears the robe of nihilism to deny the divine sacredness and turn it into heresy (and we are alone) and find the religion of the individual human being alone in the form of existentialism and contrast it with nothingness.

Here we stand at points with the book:
- The debate with sacredness in the book forms a large part around Christ as the Christians describe him with the spirit that bore the pain and at the same time with those who consider themselves representatives of God on earth from the kings and what is known about their tyranny. These are of course not things we have.
- As Muslims, we look at all that is a struggle for the human soul in the form of a test from God, which requires patience and recompense on the Day of Judgment.
- We must be proud of this backwardness (according to the author, the religious East is backward or everyone who has a religion is backward) and thank God for it.

Personalities who have passed through the idea: The idea is not an invention of Camus, although it is one of his beliefs, but he passes through the thoughts of Max Stirner, Dostoyevsky, André Breton, Nietzsche, as Marx presented them and in a different way Hegel and others.

The Idea and the Revolution: When Camus launched the book in 1950 during a period of the dark ages of the world after World War II, it was preceded by revolutions such as the French and German ones, which had important implications in the book.

The Forms of Rebellion: Rebellion took different intellectual directions that led to different intellectual results, from Nietzsche's emphasis on power to Stirner's individuality, the crime of the Marquis de Sade, the romanticism of Hugo and Rambo, the revolution of Marx and Lenin, the terrorism of Nietzsche and his followers to the surrealism of Breton and the historicism of Hegel.

Rebellion and Contradiction: The idea of rebellion, when many people came out with it from the principle of human injustice, they returned with it to human injustice themselves, in exciting contradictions, as they move according to their theories from the principle of the sacredness of the idea, which led to the victory of Nietzsche's followers, for example, and the emergence of fascist and communist dictatorships. Camus says that we do not condemn them for the bad implementation for the sake of the safety of the principle in the end (only Russian communism), so that Nietzsche does not prevent the killing of his mother in the name of that.

The Confusion of Concepts: A new image of atheism in rebellion, where Camus talks about the misinterpretation that occurred from reading Hegel's philosophy and also in the understanding of Nietzsche, as he mentioned about the incomplete dissemination of Marx's thought due to the decline it faced in the name of preserving the idea of the revolution.

The Attitude towards Art: Art, as an image, should not take the pure and absolute image of reality or nothingness and escape, but it must touch reality with a complementary spirit.

New Facts in My Knowledge: The book as a whole represents new knowledge for me, but due to my poor knowledge, I thought that Daron Marx and the new thing I learned was that Marx tried in several ways to undermine Daron's theories and scientific theories as a whole, and that Marx's theory was only focused on capital, which would lead to revolution.

The Terrorism that was in my mind a new term for imperialism, I responded to it with the Islamic image, but I found it here represents the movement of the Russian youth before the 1905 Russian Revolution.

Criticisms of the Book: The excessive defensive attitude towards rebellion, the words that do not suit the divine self (he is an atheist but he must respect the religious), some of the far-fetched inferences to carry the idea of rebellion as in Proudhon and the repetition of many ideas between the lines of the book (but that was never harmful).

Reading philosophical ideas is tiring and requires concentration. I think I will reduce my reading of them a little during this period.

Quotations:
- I rebel if we exist.
- The rebel man is the one who refuses to be what he is.
- Real freedom has not increased in proportion to the increase in man's awareness of freedom.
- We can believe in ourselves against all things, but as for death, we remain like the inhabitants of a fortress with its walls destroyed.
- All individual ethics presuppose power.
- In the depths of the prisons, the dream dawns without limits.
- The blind intellect loses in terms of clarity and discrimination what it gains in terms of speed and militancy.
- Extreme pleasure corresponds to the highest degrees of destruction.
- Personality presupposes the existence of a crowd.
- Others are the mirror.
- If the intellect rebels with it, it ends in madness.
- If we cannot correct injustice by establishing justice, we prefer at least to drown it in injustice.
- Stupidity is also an attitude.
- There is no doubt that superstition is inseparable from stupidity.
- Love is the living ethics that was like a homeland for this exile.
- Every rebellion is a longing for innocence and a withdrawal to the canon.
- Every feeling is in its essence a desire to be recognized as a feeling by other feelings.
- Denial in itself is a positive act.
- Every revolutionary in the end is a tyrant or a schismatic.
- Art denies reality but does not escape from it.
- How can a person exist once in the world... he must lose his existence forever.
- We have been thrown in Europe a wretchedness in which more peoples die sacrificed, deprived of beauty and friendship.

The only original rule of life today is to learn to live and to die, and, in order to be a man, to refuse to be a god. This profound statement truly reflects the essence of life. It makes us realize that we should not only focus on living but also be prepared for death. And being a man means having the courage to face the real world and not pretending to be a god.

I'm shitting my pants because the scope of this book is so profound. It truly reveals the extent of how well-read Camus was. His works are not only intellectually stimulating but also viciously intelligent. They make us think deeply about life, death, and human nature.

My favorite thing about Camus is the conversations I have about him with others. These conversations allow me to gain different perspectives and insights into his works. It's amazing how his ideas can still inspire and influence people today, even though he lived decades ago.

When I started reading the book, we were all in the heat and turmoil of the government and judicial obstacles to the execution of those three young people. And the attractiveness of the book was that it started exactly from the execution. Khamo is very attractive and, without seeing left or right, presents any theory, clarifies its positive and negative aspects, and finally, based on reasons, rejects or accepts it. From the moment Khamo starts talking, he goes back 200 years and now we can see the unforgivable mistakes of governments and societies in our own society, which is ultimately painful. Khamo tries to speak. He says that all our joys and sorrows should be used to reach better days. He says that passing the present to the future or getting lost in the past does not relieve our pain. The important thing is that we can now, in this very moment, even if it is to the extent of epsilon, improve our own lives and the lives of the people, who we are not separated from, and move towards the ideals. But on the other hand, he also says that there is no such thing as a pure ideal. There is no such thing as pure freedom and justice! Freedom and justice must be maintained in a state of equilibrium in their interaction, otherwise the first ones to be harmed are the societies themselves.

This book was among those books that are 100% in need of being read again and again. A book that every line of it was valuable to me and taught me many valuable points.

This book has been one of the most challenging essays I've ever had to read. I've had to put it down on several occasions. Certainly, it's not because it lacks engagement. Instead, it's merely because I had to look up many of the concepts that Camus was referencing. So, as a heads up, this is not an easy read, but it's definitely worthwhile.

In this renowned essay, he describes rebellion and revolution from historical, metaphysical, and even artistic perspectives. He explores rebellion against creation, the human condition, for order, and the slave's rebellion against the master, and merges them in modern times, from the nihilistic Russian revolution to the Hitler regime. He studies why rebellions and revolutions in history have all led to tyranny, genocide, and why the oppressed eventually become the oppressors.

For example, this passage (one of my favorites): "Man's solidarity is founded upon rebellion, and rebellion, in its turn, can only find its justification in this solidarity. We have, then, the right to say that any rebellion which claims the right to deny or destroy this solidarity loses simultaneously its right to be called a rebellion and becomes in reality an acquiescence in murder." It shows the clear and logical thinking of a very decent man who is not afraid of his ambiguities and contradictions. Camus alluded to the catastrophic power of justice without individual liberty or liberty without justice to keep it in check. He scathingly criticizes the notion of a utopia and those who would revolt and go to any means to make it happen. Extremism in the name of some higher calling will never be a just revolution, and no utopia justifies violence and terror. Such words written at that time now seem almost prophetic.

Another passage that was a highlight for me was his connection of art and rebellion, something that most revolutionary movements have frowned upon. He said, "Artistic creation is a demand for unity and a rejection of the world. But it rejects the world on account of what it lacks and in the name of what it sometimes is. Rebellion can be observed here in its pure state and in its original complexities. Thus art should give us a final perspective on the content of rebellion." His passionate call for a balanced world should be heeded. He was a man far ahead of his time. And as he so eloquently said, "Real generosity towards the future lies in giving all to the present."

“The Rebel Man” is an essay published by Albert Camus in 1951, presented in the form of a philosophical-historical treatise through which he explores the concept of rebellion and the search for justice by denouncing all totalitarian regimes, considering the havoc that nihilistic and violent thought had wreaked on the European territory in the immediate previous years. After analyzing the main triggers of rebellious thought in the French and Russian revolutions, and including the dissident current of anarchist authors like Bakunin, cruel ones like Sade, the renunciation of Rimbaud, the nihilism of Nietzsche, the appeal to supreme justice through a character like Ivan Karamazov of Dostoyevsky among others; Camus tries to glimpse the human spirit and its motivation to rise up against God or its current masters. Through his main thesis, he seeks to break with the hegemonic thought in the intellectual circles of Europe at that time: Marxism and Russian communism to propose an independent notion of rebellion, different from that of “revolution”, the latter, after a literary and historical analysis, is outlined as an idea that leads to murder, repression, violence and the destruction of certain human principles. Neither the gods of yesteryear, nor the State, nor the ideologies, nor the religion serve as a model, since all of them collapsed with the world wars. True rebellion lies in the conquest of freedom, measure, justice and life.

Giving a low grade to a book by the master Camus is almost an audacity and this is just a subjective appreciation made with the greatest respect for one of the great authors of the 20th century. However, from time to time one has to be brave and lose the fear of criticizing the "classics". In this case, “The Rebel Man” was a text with which I could never connect and that I found very difficult to finish. The central thesis and the secondary ideas are overly prolonged, the author is excessively repetitive with his premises, many times he digresses through sentences that lose context and it is not known if they are part of the argument or are just loose aphorisms. After about three-quarters of the text, it becomes dense and not very substantial since most of the ideas and judgments are presented in the first two chapters, prolonging and stretching premises that would have been perfect in 120 pages to almost 400.

It is very inferior to other essays written by the author such as “The Myth of Sisyphus” and not even in the same league as Camus the novelist or playwright.

The Rebel is indeed the longest and, at certain points, the most challenging essay I have ever had the opportunity to read. I firmly believe that the very title of the book holds sufficient allure, not only for die-hard Camus fans but also for other discerning readers, compelling them to select this literary work.

But who exactly is a rebel? A rebel is an individual who dares to say no – to a master. He might have once been a slave, toiling away, perhaps even a mechanical iron man constructed of bolts and nuts, mindlessly following every command. However, in that decisive moment when he rises up and rebels, he becomes acutely aware of the surge of blood coursing through his veins. He experiences a profound sense of being alive. Despite this newfound vitality and freshness, in order to progress forward, he is confronted with a harsh reality – he needs to kill.

Atrocities can be attributed to two primary reasons: love and philosophy. Heathcliff, for instance, could mercilessly kill anyone without pausing to question the motives behind his actions. He was consumed by love. But there came a time when people resorted to killing because they believed they had a rational philosophical justification for it. They killed in the name of freedom, peace, equality, and the vision of a country devoid of social class. At this juncture, the truth became distorted. Where were they headed? Nobody had a clear answer.

In the 19th century, human beings effectively "killed" God. They presented arguments and evidence to prove that there was no real God at any given time. Nihilists emerged, riding their horses. A true nihilist either took his own life or inflicted harm upon others. With the absence of God and any discernible purpose for living, men endeavored to create their own set of rules.

In this book, only non-religious rebellion was explored. However, it is important to note that rebellion can also be based on religion. Although the ideologies may differ, I contend that they share numerous similarities. Both believe in a future, both uphold the concept of universality, and, unfortunately, both are capable of resorting to killing.

This book was penned 60 years ago, yet one cannot help but observe that the ideas it presents remain remarkably relevant and fresh even today.