Hegel is not a philosopher to read in brief excerpts. If you are going to grapple with him, you have to immerse yourself in the texts in a pretty serious way, because only when you figure out the general structure of the argument do all of the particulars begin to make sense.
Part of the problem here is that these terms do not necessarily mean the same for Hegel as they do in contemporary Anglo-American usage. Thus, for Hegel, the state as laid out in the _Philosophy of Right_, a state which he understands to be an entirely rational construction [ie, is the rational kernel of existing states] is the embodiment of freedom, and the expression of the free will.
I don't want to defend this Hegelian view, because I believe it is seriously flawed in a number of ways, but it is also not easily understood. Popper's critique is of a rather vulgar reading of Hegel.
Leo Casey United Federation of Teachers 260 Park Avenue South New York, New York 10010-7272 (212-598-6869)
Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has, and it never will. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its waters. -- Frederick Douglass --
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20010405/edec8336/attachment.htm>