How is it possible to follow Albert Camus's thought?
I just finished reading "The Rebel" by Albert Camus.
I really like Camus's critique of Marxist communism and how it is just a different kind of Christianity with a promised land.
While it is a great book, there are some questions that are not addressed.
In the book, Camus said that human must rebel, but revolution is bad because it kills people and lead to social control. While this sounds ideal, I don't understand how this can be applied to the real world.
For the slaves under control of their owner, or the citizens oppressed by a tyrant, rebellion is a matter of life and death.
Camus implied that codifying killing is bad, which would imply that death penalty is wrong all the time. But surely there are situation when the death of a person would be favorable to the whole? What about Stalin?
Also, without the French Revolution I am not sure if democracy would exist in France.
Camus wrote that there are constraints to freedom, and that freedom is paradoxical, but it doesn't really discuss the situation when different kinds of freedom clashes with each other. The book seemed to imply that freedom is inherently good, but what happens when some people think their freedom is to step on the rights of others? What kind of social control is optimal?
Camus's criticism on totalitarianism is good but doesn't really provide any alternative social structure. So readers are left thinking: What do we do now? Rebel against the absurd? What exactly does that mean? Now I think I understand why Sartre had a split with Camus over this book.