/lit/ - Literature

1. Me
2. Hitler
3. Me (before meeting Hitler)
4. Somebody reading this post right now (we must meet)

>>15795005
you posted him

>>15795005
you know who he (pbuh) is

Heidegger

>>15795005
definitely not a guy who failed and killed himself.

>>15795049
This.
Also, Nietzsche died before the 20th century began, so I he could not pass judgment on anyone.

>>15795049
gee i guess nietzsche must have hated napoleon too

>>15795055
Didnt he die 1901

>>15795009
Haha, you seem cool

>>15795005
1. Hitler
2. Heidegger
3. Pound
4. Schmitt
5. Jung
6. T.S. Eliot

I can't remember anyone else.

This
>>15795068
and throw in Junger

>>15795049
uh Caesar kinda failed too right and Nietzsche still most likely busted a fat nut to him everyday, I think it has to do more with how they exerted their power during their lives

>>15795076
Yeah he'd probably be 7.

>>15795068
you started off ok but went south

1. Hitler
2. Lenin
3. Mao
4. Stalin
5. Mussolini

>>15795110
Nietzsche was still a philosopher anon, but yes I forgot about all of the other dictators. I would still say Heidegger is somewhere up there.

>>15795110
>Mussolini

>>15795005
the /lit/ schizoposter

Pippi

>>15795262
Cringe.

>guy who based his entire ideology on slave morality
"no"

>>15795280
>said the black tongue

>>15795333
>Post a retarded character from a mediocre children series books and present it as nietzsche's ubermensch when in reality that character is nothing more than a just a retarded brat.
Typical butterfly. You are 46 and yet you still act and think as an arrogant brat. That may explain why you like this stupid character so much. None of your posts have anything meaningful to say, so from now on I will filter all your posts

Pope Saint John Paul the Great

>>15795428
Not very close with your mother? Any siblings?
Just wondering why you can’t see it.

>>15795442
>Not very close with your mother? Any siblings?
Very close with mother, and family. They raise me as good person and not as a disgusting dyke that still acts like a fucking brat. This the last time I reply to you disgusting coprophile.

According to Nietzche? Guys like John Waters, Andy Warhol, Foucault, Frank Zappa, Robert Crumb, Picasso, Dali, Joyce, Captain Beefheart, etc. Keep in mind that the Overman is not simply about power or prestige, but the creation of new value systems and the courage to follow through with those systems.

>>15795005
>muh great man theory

>>15795640
Shut up soiboy.

>For if we will think of it, no Time need have gone to ruin, could it have found a man great enough, a man wise and good enough: wisdom to discern truly what the Time wanted, valor to lead it on the right road thither; these are the salvation of any Time. But I liken common languid Times, with their unbelief, distress, perplexity, with their languid doubting characters and embarrassed circumstances, impotently crumbling down into ever worse distress towards final ruin;—all this I liken to dry dead fuel, waiting for the lightning out of Heaven that shall kindle it. The great man, with his free force direct out of God's own hand, is the lightning. His word is the wise healing word which all can believe in. All blazes round him now, when he has once struck on it, into fire like his own. The dry mouldering sticks are thought to have called him forth. They did want him greatly; but as to calling him forth—! Those are critics of small vision, I think, who cry: "See, is it not the sticks that made the fire?" No sadder proof can be given by a man of his own littleness than disbelief in great men. There is no sadder symptom of a generation than such general blindness to the spiritual lightning, with faith only in the heap of barren dead fuel. It is the last consummation of unbelief. In all epochs of the world's history, we shall find the Great Man to have been the indispensable savior of his epoch;—the lightning, without which the fuel never would have burnt. The History of the World, I said already, was the Biography of Great Men.

>>15795262
Based

>>15795670
I suggest that you read Ellul, my friend.

Lenin. A theorist and politician of the highest order. Brainlets like Hitler cannot compete.

>>15795683
>read theory
You want me to go back to George Carlin or Woody Allen?

>>15795683
>Christian Anarchist
So what, he's like Tolstoy philosophy in the 20th century? Where does he "refute" the existence of great men?

>>15795690
>>15795699
Read his Propaganda. He does not deal with the question of great men, but careful reading of that work will show you why a great man cannot accomplish anything on his own in our time. He needs an apparatus with the ability to produce propaganda and mobilize large numbers of people, if only in terms of opinion.

>>15795110
Nietzsche would have hated communists

>>15795707
Well obviously anon, but this is just a stupid critique. It still remains a fundamental thing of them being great men. I or you could never in an immortal or soon-dead life create what Goethe or Beethoven did.

>>15795638
Retard

>>15795670
>My conception of genius. — Great men, like great ages, are explosives in which a tremendous force is stored up; their precondition is always, historically and physiologically, that for a long time much has been gathered, stored up, saved up, and conserved for them — that there has been no explosion for a long time. Once the tension in the mass has become too great, then the most accidental stimulus suffices to summon into the world the "genius," the "deed," the great destiny. What does the environment matter then, or the age, or the "spirit of the age," or "public opinion"!

>Take the case of Napoleon. Revolutionary France, and even more, prerevolutionary France, would have brought forth the opposite type; in fact, it did. Because Napoleon was different, the heir of a stronger, older, more ancient civilization than the one which was then perishing in France, he became the master there, he was the only master. Great men are necessary, the age in which they appear is accidental; that they almost always become masters over their age is only because they are stronger, because they are older, because for a longer time much was gathered for them. The relationship between a genius and his age is like that between strong and weak, or between old and young: the age is relatively always much younger, thinner, more immature, less assured, more childish.

>That in France today they think quite differently on this subject (in Germany too, but that does not matter), that the milieu theory, which is truly a neurotic's theory, has become sacrosanct and almost scientific and has found adherents even among physiologists — that "smells bad" and arouses sad reflections. It is no different in England, but that will not grieve anybody. For the English there are only two ways of coming to terms with the genius and the "great man": either democratically in the manner of Buckle or religiously in the manner of Carlyle.

>The danger that lies in great men and ages is extraordinary; exhaustion of every kind, sterility, follow in their wake. The great human being is a finale; the great age — the Renaissance, for example — is a finale. The genius, in work and deed, is necessarily a squanderer: that he squanders himself, that is his greatness! The instinct of self-preservation is suspended, as it were: the overpowering pressure of outflowing forces forbids him any such care or caution. People call this "self-sacrifice" and praise his "heroism," his indifference to his own well-being, his devotion to an idea, a great cause, a fatherland: without exception, misunderstandings. He flows out, he overflows, he uses himself up, he does not spare himself — and this is a calamitous involuntary fatality, no less than a river's flooding the land. Yet, because much is owed to such explosives, much has also been given them in return: for example, a kind of higher morality. After all, that is the way of human gratitude: it misunderstands its benefactors.

>>15795005
Adolf Hitler was the greatest man in the history of the planet.

>>15795670
>muh great man theory

>>15795638
This is dumb as fuck