/lit/ - Literature

>The old masters were more capable in every aspect of life. They were stronger, more intelligent, etc. Weakness inverts common values, which is derieved from a position of strength, and usurps power through deceit, causing widespread misery, both physical and existential, for everyone involved. However, weakness IS the new power and everyone opposed to it is merely resentful.
Those living in the Anglosphere and those in the middle of philosophy and academia tend to ignore human history before the Greeks and Jews. But humans have existed in our current form for a very long time. The way we envison ourselves, as cavemen, simply following instinctual programming and circumstantial selection, hasn't been the case for a very long time.
The master class has always been composed of intellectually superior people. Nietzsche has mentioned this fact many times, but only to allude to the fact that the priests (Jews) are intellectually superior. I mean it in a different way, in which it refers to the capacity for internal organization. The master class has always been exceptionally good at organizing themselves, being secretive, never revealing their methods to the public. They have always been steadfast in looking out for each other first.
Before you accuse me of being an anti-Semitic tinfoil hat nut, we know that Nietzsche was a Freemason. And as he grew older, he spoke very favorably of Jews. Almost like he got wise to his real masters in some way. Personal records are entirely erased. All that is left are records of his sudden death, mental illness and simping.
But what is the purpose behind all this you ask? Why go to such lengths and create an entire philosophy, if the purpose was only to misdirect?
I think the reasons are threefold, both psychological in nature:
1. What do you do if you are unhappy with your present station? You pick up a hobby, don't you? Some watch sportsball and drink beer. Others go to the gym. Yet others socialize and party. You chose philosophy. In all cases, are you trying to get ahead? Trying to organize yourselves in non-meme ideological ways? In the ways that are as old as forever, that involving banding together, looking out for one another and claiming more resources in whichever way is appropriate to the time you live in? No. You are satisfied by the intellectual clarity you think you've gained by reading these philosophies. Before you accuse me of "you're just parroting what Nietzsche says" and "ha ha dumb man of action don't read book hahaha", think carefully about the effect these books have on you. Initially, they helped you improve your intellect, follow complex arguments and made you sharper. But now, it is a hobby. You feel good. That's all. You don't change anything, neither do you not change anything.
contd...

The most dreaded thinker in academia. Even Freud pales in comparison to the level of squeamishness Friedrich stirs in people.

>>19511070
>The profound reverence for age and for ancestral tradition - all justice stands on this double reverence - the belief and the prejudice favouring forefathers and working against newcomers are typical in the morality of the powerful, and when, by contrast, the men of "modern ideas" believe almost instinctively in "progress" and the "future" and increasingly lack any respect for age, then in that attitude the ignoble origin of these "ideas" already reveals itself well enough. However, a morality of the rulers is most alien and embarrassing to present taste because of the severity of its basic principle that man has duties only with respect to those like him, that man should act towards those beings of lower rank, towards everything strange, at his own discretion, or "as his heart dictates," and, in any case, "beyond good and evil."

So from what I gather, Niet wanted a society where the aristocratic class ruled with absolute power over the slave class without any mercy, restraint or mediation, and that from this class would arise the ubermensch, correct? How the fuck did he think such a thing would even be practical? That sort of stratification would obviously to an uprising, with two very negative outcomes: a brutish socialist society, or the destruction of all parties involved.

>>19196767
I just skimmed the thread, lots of retards ITT, as expected. Just wanted to say OP is right. If you’ve actually read Nietzsche, (Ecce Homo, Antichrist, Twilight, Die fröhliche Wissenschaft, the aphorisms) you’d realize he loved and honored Christ.

His vitriol was reserved for those who abused Christ’s words and image for their own petty ends.

Was he gay?

>>18759092
Picrel, only because he’s history ultimate sperg. Nietzsche would be either be a user or victim of Kiwifarms if he existed in 2021 and I can’t decide which.

Post writers and philosophers who destroyed Anglos and their "culture"

Freud stated “that [Nietzsche] had a more penetrating knowledge of himself than any man who ever lived or was likely to live.”

So basically he believed we should live in a city with an aristocratic class dedicated to creating beautiful works of art supported by a low IQ caste of mongrels and brutes?

Is that true? Should we truly live like that /lit/? What do you think?

Nietzsche thread

Fight, or die tryin'

What are some life lessons learned through reading Nietzsche that are useful in other parts of life?