BruceSotomayLeevsBrendaSurvivor

 The revolution is aimed at new arrangements, while the insurrection leads us to no longer let ourselves be arranged. It instead seeks to arrange ourselves, and set no radiant hopes on any institutions. Permanent revolutions are good because they change things in a manner where revoltions don’t take people by surprise since they are ongoing. 

It is not a fight versus the establishment, since, if this prospers, the establishment would collapse of itself. 

It is only a working of a person’s way out of the establishment. If they leave the establishment, it is dead and falls into decay. Since now their aim would not be the overthrow of the established order but their rising up above it, their intention and action would not be a political or social intention and action, but, since they are directed really toward themselves and their ownness, an egoistic intention and action

The revolution demands that a person makes arrangements; the insurrection demands that a person stand or raise themselves up

Jesus was not a revolutionary, but he was instead an insurrectionist, a rebel. To quote Max Stirner,

“The time [in which Jesus lived] was politically so agitated that, as is said in the gospels, people thought they could not accuse the founder of Christianity more successfully than if they arraigned him for 'political intrigue', and yet the same gospels report that he was precisely the one who took the least part in these political doings. But why was he not a revolutionary, not a demagogue, as the Jews would gladly have seen him? [...] Because he expected no salvation from a change of conditions, and this whole business was indifferent to him. He was not a revolutionary, like Caesar, but an insurgent: not a state-overturner, but one who straightened himself up. [...] [Jesus] was not carrying on any liberal or political fight against the established authorities, but wanted to walk his own way, untroubled about, and undisturbed by, these authorities. [...] But, even though not a ringleader of popular mutiny, not a demagogue or revolutionary, he (and every one of the ancient Christians) was so much the more an insurgent who lifted himself above everything that seemed so sublime to the government and its opponents, and absolved himself from everything that they remained bound to [...]; precisely because he put from him the upsetting of the established, he was its deadly enemy and real annihilator[.]"