/lit/ - Literature

>>20575660
Nietzsche would be trans if she was alive today btw, sorry chuds. Coal thread btw.

>>20575660
I'm still not reading that gypsy's book, no matter how much you shill it here

OP here. Forgot to mention, I’m trans.

>>20575672
Your loss dude

>>20575674
This is NOT me! I am a straight male!

>>20575660
Nietzsche is reddit, Stirner is 4chan.

>>20575660
BAP is a funny way of spelling Hitler

>>20575674
>>20575697
Neither of these are me, I'm not a troon but I'm not a cischud either. Ass taste good man or woman

>eceleb thread disguised as Nietzsche-for-nonreaders /pol/ thread
three layers of shitposting

>>20575660
>has done more
Self-publishing a memefesto doesn’t actually count as “doing anything”
Nietzsche has been seen as de facto rightwing since mid 20th century

Quit shilling this grecophile homo

>>20575660
>BAP has resurrected the false notion that Nietzsche was rightwing

The actual left, as opposed to the poltard smear campaign, funded by security state, aren’t all soilatte vegans with dildos stuck up their asses (that’s just the average trans-nazi boibussy chaser FROM pol). ACTUAL left aren’t described so easily. They’re anyone and everyone. They’re inclusiveness is what disturbs you fragile people. You know it’s true.

Nietzsche isn’t either right or left, but he’d be welcomed to the left. He would not be welcomed by the conformist jarhead skinhead right.

>>20575791
>conformist jarhead skinhead right.
Dude, your idea of the right today is a fiction from the 1990s

>>20575783
>Self-publishing a memefesto doesn’t actually count as “doing anything”
imagine still lending credence to "institutions" such as big publishing houses in the year of our lord 2022. I guarantee you more people have read his self-published memefesto than 90% of big publisher books

>>20575826
Ah the coveted mass shooter seal of approval

>>20575660
Thread about Nietzsche. Has potential to be interesting. Open it. First 9 replies are completely meaningless, zoomer tier, reddit tier, twitter tier drivel that is completely unrelated to the subject. /Lit/ moment.

As for your claim, I would say first of all, Nietzsche never really resonated with the postmodern "left" I would say. Typically, they have little reason to read Nietzsche when they can read Marx, Adorno, Althusser, Sartre, De Beauvoir, Horkheimer, Foucault, etc. Either way, "left" or "right" don't make sense anymore and as someone who (supposedly) reads books you should be smarter than to fall into a dogmatic trap of semantics. Left or right doesn't matter, what should matter is what works, what is preferable to us, what is group selective, not pointless quibbling about aspects of policy that are unrelated. What is "right wing" besides neocons and capitalism? Is this really how you want to define Nietzsche? >>20575783 is correct, BAP has not "done" anything and he doesn't vindicate Nietzsche, Nietzsche's philosophy does it by itself once read, understood and translated properly.

Anyway, the attempt to domesticate Nietzsche would never have really worked once Nietzsche started to be translated by people other than Kaufmann the seething Jew and Hollingdale. The entire reason Kaufmann translated Nietzsche in the first place is to mistranslate it as some sort of petty revenge against national socialism. It started to fall apart the moment other translations became available. I will not credit BAP at all for this, he wrote ONE book where he refuses to use citations, so how on earth has he "reclaimed" Nietzsche when he wasn't even there to be reclaimed?

>>20575791
>actual left, as opposed to the poltard smear campaign
>soilatte vegans with dildos stuck up their asses
>that’s just the average trans-nazi boibussy chaser FROM pol
is this really a hill you want to die on?
>ACTUAL left
kek
>They’re anyone and everyone. They’re
>they're
2 digit verbal IQ spotted
>is what disturbs you fragile people. You know it’s true.
perhaps you're just a woman, or just low IQ. Psychologizing your "opponent" is not an argument, all you are doing is some inane Freudian clutching thinking you discredited him
>Nietzsche isn’t either right or left, but he’d be welcomed to the left
which Nietzsche books have you read, by the way? I'm curious, I want you to discuss with me exactly why you think this
>He would not be welcomed by the conformist jarhead skinhead right.
what are you talking about? This is such a ridiculous absurd mischaracterization I can't tell if you're insane, 2 digit IQ or baiting

>>20575830
what a thoughtful argument there

>>20575830
writing a book that ten thousands of people have read is not "doing anything" but publising some drivel about how white people suck through simon & schuster that will be read by 50 people is definitely a big achievement, I agree.

>>20575791
>the ASKHUAL left aren't this brand of dysgenic slave morality ridden mutants but this other one!

>>20575783
Grecophilia is based tho

>>20575832
>how on earth has he "reclaimed" Nietzsche when he wasn't even there to be reclaimed?
by popularizing the "barbarian Nietzsche" without the millions of disclaimers or disapproving words (Russell) that usually come with this interpretation of Nietzsche. BAP is a popularizer, you can't deny this. Ludovici has some of the earliest English translations of Nietzsche and if you know anything about his politics, well... But the point is that BAP is a contemporary and he's objectively done more to propagate this image of Nietzsche than anyone else at this time.

>>20575803
Naw. I’m just being brief. I actually like some types okay.

>>20575832
I built my castle on this hill. The liberals aren’t leftists. This isn’t a team name, this is a set of ideologies. They excuse naziism, they have more in common with Lenin. And he wasn’t leftist either.
>they’re
As in “they are”
>IQ
Ah, a fine example of our school system
I am kind of psychoanalyzing a certain subset I suppose.
>trails off into nu-uhs

>>20575858
Ok sodomite

>>20575832
I am OP. I want to have a conversation with you:

BAP and the whole twitter sphere has in fact reclaim Nietzsche in that they channeled his philosophy towards Vitalism, away from hedonism of the French kind. When I speak of Left or Right (and I’m sorry for not pointing this out earlier) I don’t mean it in a ideological sense,i.e conservatism vs progressivism or any dumb stuff like that. I mean it in a temperamental, psychological sense. Master morality (Right wing value), Slave morality (left wing value) or Strength and Power as virtue (right wing value) vs Victimhood and Weakness as virtue (left wing value). Right vs Left wing is the manifestation of Psychological temperament and Values deeply embedded in the human psyche that can’t really be changed.

>>20575851
They’re liberals.
You’re not very observant

>>20575660
>dude no facts only interpretations
How retarded to you have to be to call yourself right-wing and Nietzchean. The absolute state of the right

>>20575903
The problem with that quote is it's become very popular in its own right so midwits like you who haven't read Nietzsche will think it means he's a relativist

>>20575894
>I don’t mean it in a ideological sense,i.e conservatism
But you do! Later in the very same post you bracket all your labels with what direction you associate them with. Your brain is completely fried .

>>20575913
Are you dumb? Explain to me how my brackets were wrong, go ahead and show me Left wingers who advocate for Strength and Powder as virtue. I am talking about Values as the basis for political leaning. Human hold certain values embedded in their psyche, these values are largely (you said person is an idealist and not a pragmatist) dictate whether they consider themselves left or right.

>>20575907
You're still in that midwit phase of your philosophical development where you think there's anything more to these thinkers than these clichés--there isn't. These clichés exist for a reason. And regarding Nietzsche, it was no accident that he was considered one of the 3 maîtres du soupçon by the soixante-huitards (leftists), along with Freud (leftist) and Marx (leftist).

>>20575865
Nobody on the left reads Russell (I assume you mean Bertrand) anymore, not since the 60s. I don't know if you've ever read Russell but I don't know what you think about his readers, but they are all old men and logic professors. Regardless, Russell can hardly be taken as an authority on Nietzsche when he is an analytic philosopher and what you call "leftists", not only do they not read anyways, but the ones that do will just read continental philosophers, usually French, instead.

Besides, Russell's account of Nietzsche is a few pages long and barely worth reading, he literally says "I dislike Nietzsche because he likes the contemplation of pain, because he erects conceit into a duty, because the men whom he most admires are conquerors, whose glory is cleverness in causing men to die." This obviously sounds like it was written by an actual child, a golem, or someone with the most superficial, misinformed reading of Nietzsche ever devised. If he read a single Nietzsche book at all instead of forming his opinion based on hearsay (which I doubt) then I assume it was a Kaufmann or Hollingdale translation, which is not even worth reading. Likely he formed his opinion from what he was told by Wittgenstein anyways. I doubt Russell could even read German, and being an analytic he was a soulless golem.

>BAP is a popularizer, you can't deny this
I can. I just simply refuse to accept it and haven't seen any evidence to suggest that. Tell me what BAP says exactly in his book about Nietzsche, with page numbers, and also tell me just exactly how and when BAP popularized Nietzsche.
>Ludovici has some of the earliest English translations of Nietzsche
Yes, and they are extremely good, unlike Kaufmann or Hollingdale.
>if you know anything about his politics, well...
Well what? Elaborate, because this inferred point says nothing at all, except some sort of weak suggestion that you find him scary like a pleb
>BAP is a contemporary and he's objectively done more
I don't see how this is remotely objective. The natural rise in popularity of national socialism has led to an intertwined rise in the popularity of Nietzsche, starting before BAP was well known. Ludovici genuinely did more to rehabilitate Nietzsche.

>>20575887
Nobody said the liberals are leftists. I do not even subscribe to a left-right dichotomy because it lacks nuance. However, you have not defined what is "left" and have tried to strawman your conception of nazis as trannies and boy chasers who drink onions, so if you really believe that and aren't just an insane, spiteful golem, why don't you provide some stats about what trannies and gays actually identify with politically and the test levels of "liberal" vs "conservative" men?
>As in “they are”
Yes, the problem is you wrote "They’re inclusiveness is what disturbs you fragile people" which seems to indicate to me that you are ESL or just stupid (which isn't far off judging by the rest of the disingenuous grifting you wrote)
>Ah, a fine example of our school system
so, no argument? At least you admit you are psychologizing. Psychologizing isn't a real argument, it's a substitute, so do you actually have anything to say or are you just going to grift with pettiness and reveal your intellectual capabilities?
>trails off into nu-uhs
I don't do that, I have actual things to say.

>>20575957
I said they’re liberals. Because they’re miseducated liberals.

Hey, I got work. Learn to read, kid.

>>20575903
>Implies Nietzsche is either definetevily left-wing or non-political
>Didn´t get Nietzsche

>>20575891
I could bet my life on the fact that you are far more of a faggot than me and walk away breathing. So stop throwing stones from a glass house retarded homo.

>>20575927
Yes leftists co-opted Nietzsche in the 60s and 70s, what else is new? The Nazis also co-opted him. So which is it?

>>20575932
I mentioned Russell because (for better or worse) his History of Western Philosophy is the first philosophy book many will read and it will thus be their acquaintance (or first "serious" acquaintance at least) with Nietzsche.

>I can. I just simply refuse to accept it and haven't seen any evidence to suggest that. Tell me what BAP says exactly in his book about Nietzsche, with page numbers, and also tell me just exactly how and when BAP popularized Nietzsche.
"do this laundry list of things for me and maybe I'll reconsider my point (actually I won't)"
No thank you Anon.
>Yes, and they are extremely good, unlike Kaufmann or Hollingdale.
And no one reads them. Exactly my point.
>Well what? Elaborate, because this inferred point says nothing at all, except some sort of weak suggestion that you find him scary like a pleb
I meant to say that Ludovici's politics are the opposite of Kaufmann and Hollingdale and yet no one reads him. Your entire point in this discussion is that Nietzsche isn't somehow co-opted by leftists in 2022 and one of my counterarguments to that is that this rightwing translator of Nietzsche isn't read at all, while BAP objecitvely is (you can infer the sales numbers of his book from his Amazon reviews (and don't try to reply with "sales don't mean anything" please))
>I don't see how this is remotely objective. The natural rise in popularity of national socialism has led to an intertwined rise in the popularity of Nietzsche, starting before BAP was well known. Ludovici genuinely did more to rehabilitate Nietzsche.
I just think BAP's sales numbers speak against you and perhaps you harbor some personal animosity towards BAP because quite frankly pretending like BAP is in any way more popular than Ludovici in 2022 is just ludicrous

>>20575924
You're the one injecting platonism into Nietzsche and calling all politics a struggle between the based and the cringe, who have some eternal dualistic essence in them that is necessarily expressed inalterably. That wasn't the point he was trying to make, he was launching an attack on the entirely of then-contemporary European morality and its genealogical origins in Judeo-Christianity, which your pseudo-Platonism retroactively participates in (Christian theologians borrow extensively from Plato). Since you are a teenage neo-nazi who doesn't read I will make this easier for you. "Master" values are those of a sovereign individual, someone who does not externalize what impedes them as an evil to be plotted against and demonized. "Slave" values are to take whatever makes one feel inferior or wounded and turn it into evil. This is what Nietzsche believes Pauline Christianity did and that it has influenced both the socialists and nationalists (both mass-demotic movements) of his day. To claim "strength and power" as "right wing" or "victimhood and weakness" as "left wing" means we must assume no "right wing" values exist anymore (in which case why politicize them as right or left?), because the "right wing" that actually exists on a political level is very obviously engaged in a "left wing" discourse of protecting victimized people's rights from being infringed by an overreaching and cruel, cancelling, domineering, interfering, nebulously wicked left wing cosmic evil, which is the impression one can very easily come away with from having any exposure whatsoever to the current "right wing" discourse. I will say nothing further on the left since we can just flip the scrip and see they are doing the same slavishly moralizing battle against the cosmically evil and nefarious right wing specter. The question is not which values are right- and which are left-wing, unless you have stepped in some sort of midwit bear trap and refuse to cut off your foot to escape. Go back and read Nietzsche more carefully, and not just quotes from WTP either, and you'll see he was comprehensively against direction brained cattle-wrangling, and thought of such people as basically the manure to his garden

>>20575894
Good, I want a conversation. I am not >>20575913 btw, but he's right.


>BAP and the whole twitter sphere has in fact reclaim Nietzsche
No. Do not pretend to be a serious person when you are referencing the "twitter sphere"
>channeled his philosophy towards Vitalism
Nietzsche was always about Vitalism
>away from hedonism of the French kind
Nietzsche was never about hedonism
>When I speak of Left or Right (and I’m sorry for not pointing this out earlier) I don’t mean it in a ideological sense,i.e conservatism vs progressivism or any dumb stuff like that
We'll see
>I mean it in a temperamental, psychological sense
Right
>Master morality (Right wing value)
Saying "wing" really betrays your intention here
>Slave morality (left wing value)
Again, saying "wing" betrays your intention
>Strength and Power as virtue (right wing value)
Again, "wing"
>Victimhood and Weakness as virtue (left wing value)
Again, "wing"
>Right vs Left wing
Again, "wing"
> the manifestation of Psychological temperament and Values deeply embedded in the human psyche that can’t really be changed
Does not explain why you are saying "wing", or why directionism is even relevant if you're (apparently) not referring to modern politics post 1945. If you are not referring to party politics, what is the "wing" referring to, and what is "right" or "left" referring to?
>>20575924
>Are you dumb?
Why're you lashing out at valid points?
>go ahead and show me Left wingers
Again, you're referring to party politics left-right directionism
>Values as the basis for political leaning
Okay, and? What you're doing isn't remotely original
>Human hold certain values embedded in their psyche
Again, irrelevant to you employing directionism
>these values are largely (you said person is an idealist and not a pragmatist) dictate whether they consider themselves left or right.
AGAIN, you're using "left" or "right" to determine values and politics, NOT referring to Nietzsche in any way because Nietzsche never used right wing or left wing as actual descriptors

>>20575903
>How retarded to you have to be to call yourself right-wing and Nietzchean. The absolute state of the right
Not an argument, but I don't expect more from people who can't think
>>20575927
>You're still in that midwit phase of your philosophical development where you think there's anything more to these thinkers than these clichés--there isn't.
Wow, you are so smart
>it was no accident that he was considered one of the 3 maîtres du soupçon by the soixante-huitards (leftists), along with Freud (leftist) and Marx (leftist).
No, it was no "accident", you are correct - it was gross misappropriation, vengeance, and subversion for political purposes. You can read into any philosopher and derive the wrong conclusion if you try hard enough, this isn't an achievement. I can just easily counter that it was no accident that Nietzsche is considered essential reading to people like Ludovici

>>20575972
Every time, like clockwork, disingenuous braindead fags like you will bow out with a snarky comment like "learn to read kid" because you do not actually possess the knowledge to read or discuss
Also, don't say learn to read when you misuse "they're", you 2 digit IQ dimwit. Learn to read, learn to argue, dilate, seethe and cope, mutant

>>20576011
>I mentioned Russell because (for better or worse) his History of Western Philosophy is the first philosophy book many will read and it will thus be their acquaintance (or first "serious" acquaintance at least) with Nietzsche.
No. The "leftists" you refer to will not read Russell at all.
>"do this laundry list of things for me and maybe I'll reconsider my point (actually I won't)" No thank you Anon.
I literally just asked you to explain how BAP has actually reclaimed/rehabilitated Nietzche, as you believe, and you can't even do that. You can be dismissed without evidence
>And no one reads them. Exactly my point.
Incorrect, Kaufmann was the eminent translation from after WW2 for decades, and provided the readings for pretty much the entire Anglosphere, and there are those today who rabidly advocate for Kaufmann. You are a petty grifter who cannot even mention how BAP reclaims Nietzsche in a book you've supposedly read though, so I wouldn't expect you to know this.
>I meant to say that Ludovici's politics are the opposite of Kaufmann and Hollingdale and yet no one reads him.
And?
>Your entire point in this discussion is that Nietzsche isn't somehow co-opted by leftists in 2022
He just isn't, and you haven't provided any examples of it either. Misappropriation of him by Foucault and ilk doesn't translate to 2022.
>this rightwing translator of Nietzsche isn't read at all, while BAP objecitvely is (you can infer the sales numbers of his book from his Amazon reviews (and don't try to reply with "sales don't mean anything" please))
As I already said earlier, show me where in BAP's book he references Nietzsche and how this has reclaimed him if you expect me to believe BAP reclaimed him at all. Btw, BAP's book is from 2018 and Nietzsche has been seen as "right" since far longer than that
>I just think BAP's sales numbers speak against you
You can think what you want, measuring sales of what is essentially a pastiche of Nietzsche means nothing whatsoever. Do you think that the majority of buyers of BAP's book 1. already have even ONE Nietzsche book 2. were aware that Nietzsche was even appropriated by the "left" 3. have some sort of previous philosophical background before 2018 which actually studied Nietzsche?
>perhaps you harbor some personal animosity towards BAP
This is just psychologizing, no different to what the endless trannies and Marxists on this board do, in lieu of actual arguments. I don't dislike him at all, I'm disputing the idea that he could even be "reclaimed" at all because the idea he was "leftist" in some way didn't even stick in the first place at all

>>20576011
>quite frankly pretending like BAP is in any way more popular than Ludovici in 2022 is just ludicrous
strawmanning is done by people who can't make a proper argument. I said Ludovici's translations of Nietzsche are extremely good, because they are. I didn't say he is more popular in 2022. You are right, it would be ludicrous, and it wasn't even said or implied.
I said the natural rise in popularity of national socialism (and traditionalism, etc) in general led to an intertwined rise in the popularity of Nietzsche because Nietzsche has never been able to shake off the label of association with national socialism, no matter how much French "philosophers" tried. This is demonstrably true on its own because plenty of people advocated reading Nietzsche if they were anti-modernity in outlook far before 2018, something you are pretending to be aware of.

I said Ludocivi did more to rehabilitate Nietzsche, I didn't say "more popular in 2022". Ludovici's translations, being non-Jewish and faithful, have done more to reclaim Nietzsche because anyone today who is on the "right" will have most certainly read Ludovici over Kaufmann. If we're being honest, you have probably bought Bronze Age Mindset and not even read it since you refuse to tell me exactly what BAP has even said about Nietzsche in the book. You have also refused to address the fact that rising popularity of traditionalism and national socialism did more to popularize Nietzsche. There were a lot more people advocating Nietzsche pre-2018 than BAP, and the reason BAP's book sold so well is that these same people who were familiar with Nietzsche advocated it to their readers/fans/viewers.

>>20576024
>Go back and read Nietzsche more carefully
He hasn't read any of Nietzsche, at all. It's quite obvious that he's young, probably a teenager, and it's baby's first zealous ideology. I doubt he's even read BAP either. Probably just watched the latest AA stream where they discuss a BAP podcast. You're being generous, most people don't read anymore

BAP?

more like

WAP

>>20575699
you’re so deep in the fucking cave you’ve created caves within caves. you will never be free

>>20575832
>thread about Nietzsche
Who the fuck do you think you're fooling?

>>20575891

>>20576210
You're right, it's /lit/

>>20575990
Based on what nigger? You’re a bitch.

>>20576024
This is some good mental gymnastics. Indvidualism, independence and personal freedom is what people mean when say right leaning or right wing. I understand that Nietzsche is not on any wing per se but previous anon take is simple and understandable. If you must put him left or right it's not even the question.

>>20576901
>If you must put him left or right
The other anon's post consisted of listing which "values" he thought were "left-wing" and which were "right-wing," values he believes are innate to the people who have them on a mystical level. I guess you are also an illiterate neo-nazi teenager since that went over your head. That "his take is simple and understandable" says nothing about it being correct. People do not mean "personal freedom" by "right wing" either, given that the current right is typified by wanting to restrict people's behaviors, especially sexual, reproductive, movement, etc. And that just further underscores the slow-wittedness of the directionbrain—in treating relative tendencies of demo[cra]tic ideologies as absolutes he outs himself as a moron with each further explanation attempted as to why what yesterday's liberals believed is the immortal truth of conservatism.

>>20575731
You are just a degenerate

>>20575894
>When I speak of Left or Right (and I’m sorry for not pointing this out earlier) I don’t mean it in a ideological sense,i.e conservatism vs progressivism or any dumb stuff like that. I mean it in a temperamental, psychological sense. Master morality (Right wing value), Slave morality (left wing value) or Strength and Power as virtue (right wing value) vs Victimhood and Weakness as virtue (left wing value). Right vs Left wing is the manifestation of Psychological temperament and Values deeply embedded in the human psyche that can’t really be changed.

>>20575660
Nietzsche was always appealing to both lefties and rightwingers. Rightwingers love his takes on life-affirmation and anti-nihilism, while lefties always loved his anti-christian takes and relativism.

>>20577088
Perfect. Was looking for that image

>>20576994
It's difficult to have conversation of right vs left as terms are way way too broad. My point is just that when we say "right" we usually mean indvidualistic idealogies. And Nietzsche is for sure not a socialist.

>>20577186
>when we say "right" we usually mean indvidualistic idealogies
Then why are all the anarchists progressives and the nationalists conservatives? No thoughtful person can use these labels for anything more than voter-cattle wrangling, and if that is your chief concern it has nothing to do with Nietzsche.

>>20577109
>anti-christian takes and relativism.
This is why and everyone else ITT are stupid who don’t understand the first thing about Left vs Right while espousing these kind of talking points. The left is not anti Christian, certainly not in the Nietzschean sense. Neither are they relativistic, they hold many platonic ideals rooted in Christianity

You know what a real anti Christian take would be?
>Human Rights are not real
>Morality is made up; Might Makes Right
>The notion that humans are equal is a spook; subjugation inferior people to slavery, if it serves the powerful, is desirable
>A Great War can justify any cause
>the end justifies the means
>Nothing is true, everything is permitted
Etc

80% of people ITT are peuds who either straw man my argument, misinterpret me or are legit retarded. You cannot reconcile Nietzsche with the Left, if any of you think so you don’t understand him in the slightest.

>>20577088
Not a single argument here. I bet you don’t even understand my position to begin with. Kys you double digit IQ retard

>>20575791
The "left" is one hive mind, a school of fish. Notice how there are no leftists who disagrees on any single important point of doctrine, even if it goes against their supposed values. Find me a single lefty who is against gay, trannies, abortion, muh heckin niggarinos, etc. Not one has an unorthodox opinion on any of them.
The left is a tiny bubble. It is the "not left" that is indescribable and everyone else- anyone not within the increasingly tiny bubble of unreality.

>>20577210
I think you're confusing the takes they espouse against rival ideologies and the views they actually hold. Of course they're not consistent, of course it's a "rules for thee but not for me" sort of deal. But the left is definitely anti-christian and relativist because historically the conservative elements in western societies were christian and had a lot of takes that included words and phrases like "should" or "X is...", which are prime target for being deconstructed. That deconstruction doesn't deconstruct everything but rather redraws the map in accordance with whichever ideologies are under the aegis of a group, ideology, or state powerful enough to make them immune to criticism and erase everyone who lacks such support is a different matter. It is exactly this reason that deconstruction has been coopted by the powers that be.

>>20576994
I’m am that OP, talk to me you coward bitch. Nietzsche was a biological determinist, so am I. Values are indeed inherent, it comes from blood. I don’t buy your “we all bleed red” bullshit here, you’re on 4chan and not Reddit you subhuman freak.

>>20577217
left vs right as a political distinction should be disregarded entirely since it´s stupid to base politics in a binary form, real life is more complex than playing the game of black vs white, there´s a reasony why in the current crisis of the 21st century (plagues, famines, wars, social divisions, etc...) neither the political groups who claim themselves to be "left" or "right" have the solution to these problems, they´re just circlejerking trying to claim more power to themselves

it doesn´t help either that the anglo-american establishment is trying to prop up these ridicule social conflicts in order to assert more of their authority throughout western civilization

think for yourself, schmuck

>>20577244
>the left is anti Christian
The left is ONLY anti Christian insofar as they hate Christianity as a form of organized religion that controls and subjugated human behavior.

Do a Geneology of the Morality of the Left and it traces itself right back to the Book of Genesis “humans are made in the imagine of God”, this is where the idea of equality comes from originally.

A real relativist would never care for morality or “human rights” or “equality” or “justice” or any of that

>>20577244
>But the left is definitely... relativist
Leftists aren't relativists, they deny the reality of any kind of origin point for anything to be relative to, and they deny the entire concept of an immaterial relationship.

>>20577210
With the exception of the human equality bit all of those apply to Christianity. An actual anti-Christian ideology would look something like
>polytheism
>biological inequality
>spiritual inequality
>rejection of mind-body dualism
>belief in an immanent order
>firm belief in objectivity, rejection of subjectivity

>>20577247
Again, I said it already before: I DO NOT SPEAK OF LEFT VS RIGHT IN A IDEOLOGICAL OR POLITICAL SENSE. Left vs Right is a psychological temperament (like the 5 big personality traits), so you understand the difference or do I have to run the argument down further?

There have been temperamentally Left vs Right people throughout all of history, from all parts around the world. Spartacus would be a person with Left leaning psychological temperament, Caesar would be a person of Right wing psychological temperament. I’m employing the term Left v Right in this sense, not in your stupid American political sense

>>20577245
>values come from blood
alright then I assume you are destined for "progress" as an English speaker who believes in politics as a religion. enjoy your moral prolapse and shopkeeping mentality

>>20577294
Anti Christianity can take many forms.

>polytheism
>biological inequality
>spiritual inequality
>rejection of mind-body dualism
>belief in an immanent order
>firm belief in objectivity, rejection of subjectivity
This sounds a bit like Plato honestly

>>20577308
your hermeneutic is bad and you should feel bad. needing to retconn a bunch of other people as good guys and others as bad guys is slave morality

>>20577323
Who did I imply was good or bad here? Your attempt to straw man doesn’t even make sense

>>20577322
I was thinking more Indo-European religion in general, but sure yeah, Plato works. To be clear, by "Anti-Christianity", I don't mean just finishing the tip of the fedora and ditching Jesus and Yahweh AND Zeus and Indra and so on. I mean a rejection of the intellectual body that is "Christianity", which is composed of various beliefs and ideas.

>>20577342
How is nihilistic atheism not also a rejection of the whole body of Christianity?

>>20577332
I think it's obvious you are using "right wing psychological temperament" vs "left wing psychological temperament" in reference to slavish mass-political concerns about mobilizing against an "evil" adversary to advance oneself. Perhaps I am wrong, but if I am, why are you using terminology associated with such concerns?

>>20577353
You can still believe a lot of the the body that constitutes Christianity if you believe that you're just a meat robot animated by neurotransmitters that only exists to watch Rick & Morty. The list I gave can be reverted
>rejection of polytheism
>biological equality
>spiritual equality
>mind-body dualism
>rejection of immanent order, belief in a transcendent order
>radically subjective epistemology
This describes both Christianity and LGBT nothing-matters-because-atoms-therefore-gay atheism. The only difference is that the latter takes the rejection of polytheism to its logical conclusion, has an atrophied sense of the spiritual, and rejects the idea of order entirely (But acquiesces to the idea that if it WAS real, it would be transcendent, and monotheistic; "Simulationism" is this as a hedge).

>>20577356
>Perhaps I am wrong, but if I am
Yeah, you are wrong. I don’t believe people decide on what politics they like. People have ideals and values deeply embedded in their psyche, from this they use political action and power to manifest these ideals and values in the world.

Caesar and Hitler would be temperamentally right wing in whatever age or time he lived in, this I believe in.
>b-but what do you mean by temperamentally right wing..?
I mean values, preferences and ideals that people on the right share like: Anti egalitarian sentiments, lust for strength and power, hierarchical structures like a caste system, low disgusting sensitivity leading to aversion to degeneracy, no aversion to subjugation other people to your will etc.

Now, if you disagree with ANY of the common shared values I brought up as characteristic of temperamentally right wing minds (human minds; people) you will have to demonstrate Left wing minded people who hold any of the values and ideals that I just presented

>>20575674
>>20575697
>>20575731
Don't listen to these faggots!
I'm the real OP, and I'm not trans, though I like to fuck them.

>>20577371
But as I said earlier, the LGBT “nothing matters” do not actually believe that nothing matters. They are fundamentally deriving their worldview from Christianity, the idea that human rights exist and that we should all be equal etc. these are Christian values that the Left uses all the time.

>>20577400
>values, preferences and ideals that people on the right share
That you anchor this at all in the ideological taxonomy of popular mass movements is just proof of what I've already said so I'm not going to repeat myself at length. You will have to deal with the very real problem that all the "right wing" people today are in fact "left wing" and you are then stuck with a stupid label that makes you sound stupider for promoting it. There is more will to power in the progressive bourgeois activist sitting on the board of a corporation and using it to dismantle the power of xhir enemies than there is in some emaciated zoomer posting pictures of cathedrals on twitter.

>>20577411
Oh, I absolutely agree. Leftists will happily uphold your right to abortion, or to be some bizarre flavor of queer. Despite being nihilists, they'll still throw a fit if you suggest that nihilism means that it's not immoral to murder people. The nihilism of the Leftist is just taking Christianity and increasing the intensity of some of its constituent beliefs. The fact that this generates a stupid ideology should not be surprising as Christianity had to wear itself down to be able to survive long-term.

>>20577434
>popular mass movements is just proof of what I've already said
What popular mass movement, what political movement???????? Stop straw manning me. I said time and time again that I employ Left v Right in a non-ideological sense. Caesar had never in his life heard of the term Left v Right, still he was temperamentally right wing whether he knew it or not; he shared values with Hitler and Trump rather than Marx and Bernie Sanders.

>There is more will to power in the progressive bourgeois activist sitting on the board of a corporation and using it to dismantle the power of xhir enemies than there is in some emaciated zoomer posting pictures of cathedrals on twitter.
I agree, but it is also easier to exert your will when the whole system stands behind your back and doesn’t threaten your livelihood for being politically active. I agree that the Left has a stronger will right now but this could change in the future

>>20577465
>I employ Left v Right in a non-ideological sense
If it doesn't reference the ideologically based politics at all why bother with those labels? Should we call Stalin a McDonald's personality and Hitler Wendy's, since we're just being arbitrary? Or what about Coca-Cola vs Pepsi? What allusion are you trying to make if not a political and and ideological one, in using political and ideological vocabulary? It doesn't work, since you are obviously invested in the political angle, and want to psychologize, for lack of a better term, various antecedent figures as being part of your movement and others as its equally time- and space-transcending enemies. It's obvious which of this board's darling polemicists you've dumbed this down from, there are only a handful. But it remains slave morality to be "putting together a crew" in order to take down "the essentially evil and immutable forces of the left" simply because they've achieved more power than you have and you feel wounded by their pursuit of it.

>>20575887
Ah correcting grammar the last bastion of someone with know arguement

BAP said something about how it's the West's duty to wage war on China so it can be looted and raped to death as that's the Pagan thing to do or some shit. If that's the future of the right then I'm joining the PLA.

>>20576024
/thread

Its slave morality for these losers all the way down.

>>20575887
this has to be a bait, kek.

>>20577308
>There have been temperamentally Left vs Right people throughout all of history, from all parts around the world. Spartacus would be a person with Left leaning psychological temperament, Caesar would be a person of Right wing psychological temperament. I’m employing the term Left v Right in this sense, not in your stupid American political sense

a stupid thing to do is applying contemporary worldview to the past, grow up kid

>>20577270
dig deeper, that idea is probably waaaaay older and originates in prehistory, as an archeology major, I would compare it to morphology of pottery, as in all general forms (decorations and shapes etc.) are pre-established from almost inception of the ceramic crafts as a phenomena and then throughout what we today would call history they either emerge in a certain way or cease to be, akin to fashion or trends. The Eternal Return.

>>20577400
>Caesar and Hitler would be temperamentally right wing in whatever age or time he lived in, this I believe in.

Lenin also seized power, is he temperamentally right wing too???

>>20576176
>Probably just watched the latest AA stream
Probably the worst way to engage with politics imo.

>>20577400
Youre clearly very young. Heart is at a right place, but you sound foolish. Since we are on the topic of Nietzsche and you clearly havent read full body of his works, then let me just say this; psychological temperaments are another "belief" another "idol".The thing about death of God, is that humans dont just start believing in "nothing", theyll believe in anything, and whatever that belief may be, it is again nothing more but another mere "idol", another obscurantist tendency of metaphysicians. This was the entire concern of 20th century western philosophy, some attempted to reject the notion of it through exposing Nietzsches flaws, be it attempting to reduce his concern to struggle with language, or him misinterpreting the Greeks or him even being the Anti-Christ himself. The thing about Nietzsches thinking is absolute refusal to postulate anything. The fundamental question of his is: "Who is the one asking?". This is why his work is filled with contradictions, this is why he writes in aforisms, which are hardly ever dependant upon each other or form any form dependancy. His thinking is more of a set of principles rather than a system of understanding. Nietzsche exposes entire body of western philosophy as mere craftsmen of goods, only capable of inventing new goods (metaphysics). This instance remains unsolved, not even by the Man himself, which in a way allows for infinite ways of interpretations of Nietzsches body of work, the only correct truly correct would be that of Nietzsche himself (and even that is questionable), but as he is no longer with us, weve only got ourselves to ask.
Neitzsches brightest pupils predicted for Europe only continuation of nihilism, and as in so far, it is the only thing we are witnessing to come true. Correct me if Im wrong anyone, I just wanted to help the young man out, its been a while since the last time Ive read Nietzsche (like 5 yrs).

>>20577788
>Lenin also seized power
where did I say that seizing power is right wing? This is why I hate engaging in online debates, reading comprehension is fucking 0. I said that POWER is seen as a VIRTUE, a moral Good on the Right:

>What is happiness? Seeing ones power increaseth, that resistance has been overcome - Nietzsche

>>20577908
>I said that POWER is seen as a VIRTUE, a moral Good on the Right:

you don´t think Lenin also view Power as a virtue? he saw it as a means to end oppression, he fits into your notion of "psychological right wing" whatever the fuck stupid theory you have

>>20577915
>you don´t think Lenin also view Power as a virtue?
No.

>he saw it as a means to end oppression
Exactly.

Nietzsche was Power as the end itself, not a means to an end. Everything is Will to Power, there is nothing else besides Power. Gain Power to beget more Power. Commie want Power to empower the Powerless.

>>20577919
>Commie want Power to empower the Powerless.

they don´t, they view Power as a way to empower themselves, they use the working class a way to advance themselves and self-imposed themselves as the new elite

>LE PSycHoLOGIcal RiGth WIng???????

read a book dumbass

>>20577915
>"psychological right wing" whatever the fuck stupid theory you have
The only stupid idiot here is you. You literally have to deny the existence of personality and inheritance of presences, values and ideals themselves. All I've been saying is that a personals Values and Preferences dictate their Political ideals. How is this controversial you? People seriously are either retarded or have 0 reading comprehension here.


All bodies of scientific evidence are against you buddy

>>20577927
>they don´t, they view Power as a way to empower themselves
Them going against their own ideals, literature and political theory; i.e being hypocrites doesn't disprove anything I am saying. For all I know, Lenin maybe used Communism as a Mask to gain power for himself and in that case he's not really following the principles of communism but something else

>>20577927
>LE PSycHoLOGIcal RiGth WIng???????
How are you this retarded? Are you denying that Right wing people share common values, preferences and personality traits and vice versa for Leftist? You're a fucking joke man, seriously get go away before you embarrass yourself

>>20577936
>he's not really following the principles of communism but something else
early life

>>20577931
>personals Values and Preferences dictate their Political ideals.

it´s the other way around, ideology works similar to religion and if you really like X ideology, you want to fit into their dogma, regardless if is true or not

you don´t have that much real life experiences, that´s why you like to hide behind pseud-psycological terms

>>20577936
>For all I know, Lenin maybe used Communism as a Mask to gain power for himself and in that case he's not really following the principles of communism but something else

he fits into your notion of "psychological right wing" then, congratulations, you end up btfo yourself

>>20577942
>Are you denying that Right wing people share common values, preferences and personality traits and vice versa for Leftist?

people who tend to adhere to ideology have the same basic impulses, the notion of wanting to spread the ideology, wanting to impose themselves as the new elite, is sort of a mindvirus, don´t ya think?

Lenin and Hitler did that because they were ideologues, serving to their ideological cause, Caesar didn´t because he only believed in himself so when he took power, he created a monarchy

read a book dumbass

>>20577955
Yeah, he was a Jew. So he subverted the goyim and used communism to undermine the West. It is a tale as old as Christianity itself

>>20577931
>>20577942
man, are you baiting or are genuinly this retarded? I wrote a whole as guide to Neitzsche somewhere above in this thread and you still dont comprehend jack. Science is another "idol", another construction metaphysique, hello you pubescent degenerate, use your brain.

>>20575832
What is the best translation of Nietzsche?

>>20577966
>it´s the other way around
You're absolutely retarded, LOL I cannot take you seriously anymore. The Mind predates ideology. The fact that a person is either receptive or not to an ideology is a fact of psychology and ones genes.

Fucking retard. Genes >>>>> you're retarded Marxist/Liberal belief in tabula rasa bullshit

>>20576024
/thread

>>20577981
but genes are just another idol

>>20577989
the thread isn't over until I get some good responses to >>20577979

>>20577973
Science is a tool. A tool that can be used for what ever end you desire. You're low IQ dummy who thinks he's going to "teach this guy a little lesson". I've done my research, I've studied Nietzsche more than you think.

The fact that you think Nietzsche would deny the genetic basis for psychological temperament, values, desires, ideals and INSTINCT just goes to show you don't know the first thing about him and his beliefs.

pic related is nietzsche, SEETHE YOU DUMMY

>>20577991
>another idol
You're a gas lighting kike. I'm done with you.

>>20577919
>Nietzsche was Power as the end itself, not a means to an end.
t. never read Nietzsche
The Nietzschean will-to-power is not specifically about political power (ruling over other people). It's about exerting influence on the external world to achieve some kind of a goal. The will-to-power can express itself in all kinds of artistic/scientific/athletic/other pursuits, in reproduction, or literally just survival.
"dominating other people is le good" is one of the most braindead interpretations of Nietzsche. Sadly it's also one of the most popular.

>>20577981
>The Mind predates ideology. The fact that a person is either receptive or not to an ideology is a fact of psychology and ones genes.

well if you want to know why people adhere themselves to ideology, it´s more than psychology or genes, it could be his socioeconomical status or dissatisfaction in life, it could also be propaganda by the system that he tends to belief in a particular dogma

but your theory that personality chooses ideology is retarded, a single individual can go from anarcho-syndicalism to eco-fascism in their lifetime for example, there are people who don´t stay in the same lane forever

if you read about history you would know that someone like Mussolini was a socialist before becoming a fascist

read a book dumbass

>>20578004
>political power
Idiots like you who have such terrible reading comprehension that through your own self gratitude and assertiveness display how ignorant you actually.

Where did I ever say that political power is the only expression of the Will to Power?

>specifically about political power (ruling over other people)
Never said specifically, but it can be about political power.

>>20578006
>if you read about history you would know that someone like Mussolini was a socialist before becoming a fascist
Genes react differently to different circumstances and environments. What did you think you achieved by taking Mussolini as example here? Lol. You think I would deny that a person can grow and change personality (and their values) through lived experience? You haven't refuted anything. My theory still stand strong and you're just looking like a retard for not having been able to refute it still kek

>>20578017
>Genes react differently to different circumstances and environments


the most retarded statement i have ever read on this site, i will no longer argue with you, you´re too stupid, once again i will say this so you can remember this advice


read a book dumbass

answer my question >>2057797 please

>>20578001
gaslighting* and no, Im not Jewish lmao.
>>20577999
Science is a form of metaphysics, I dont assume youre too familiar with works of Kuhn or Popper, but there is no universal agreement on what science even is (philosophy of science has not even remotely come close to any form of conclusion, in fact conference is alike to ecumenical council of the middle ages, thats why researchers hold conferences to reach a consensus). However the difference is that there is no God and no church to interpret Gods (and therefore no objective social facts, see Durkheim) word to the people, scientific facts are just whatever a few shmucks over at whatever university decide and are thus just another idol, illusion. There is no truth from above.

>>20577992
My own
/thread

>>20578032
kys you actually commie trannie. your leftist infiltration of /lit/ will fail time and time again. we will never lose an inch to you faggots.

>The expression of genes in an organism can be influenced by the environment, including the external world in which the organism is located or develops, as well as the organism's internal world, which includes such factors as its hormones and metabolism.

https://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/environmental-influences-on-gene-expression-536/

>>20578038
>There is no truth from above.
I don't bother with "Truths". You think you have actually got me with your "idol" talk, lol.

I am a Pragmatist. I don't care for what's true, only what works. I will use science to my advantage as long as I can reap its benefits. But keep talking to a wall about meta psychics and Popper like I care, lol

>>20578051
>>The expression of genes in an organism can be influenced by the environment, including the external world in which the organism is located or develops, as well as the organism's internal world, which includes such factors as its hormones and metabolism.

how do you link genes with ideology then? first you say personality chooses ideology, so why the fuck people changes ideology then? you literally dumbfuck schizo

>>20578061
>so why the fuck people changes ideology then?
Because their personality changes, retard? Are you the same person you were 20 years ago and thought the same about the world?

I actually think I'm talking to a child here, I literally have you walk you through every piece of the argument like the retard you are

>>20578011
>Where did I ever say that political power is the only expression of the Will to Power?
>Never said specifically, but it can be about political power.
You're backpedalling now. Earlier in the thread you said:
>Nietzsche was Power as the end itself [...] there is nothing else besides Power. Gain Power to beget more Power. Commie want Power to empower the Powerless.
which is pretty clearly suggesting that, in your opinion, the accumulation of "political" power (dominance over other people) is the main goal in Nietzschean philosophy. Which it is not. If it was, then you'd expect Nietzsche to be a supporter of absolute monarchy or other totalitarian systems, while in reality he spoke out against both monarchism and imperalism - his views were pretty liberal/libertarian for his era (late 1800's Germany).
The problem is that the concept of "will to power" is dead by translation. In the English language, the noun "power" is heavily associated with dominance/oppression. While the original German term was "Macht" - from the verb "machen", meaning "to do". So the term "will to power" isn't about dominating other people. It's about being active (rather than passive) and pursuing your goals, whatever they may be.

>>20578064
>Because their personality changes, retard? Are you the same person you were 20 years ago and thought the same about the world?

the majority of population doesn´t have their personalities changed, only few outliers have

you don´t have that much real life experiences because you know shit about psychology (which isn´t a empirical science to begin with)

>muh nietzche muh psychological right wing!!!!

literally kill yourself plebeian, you only say stupid meme stuff, the fact that you still believe in left vs right shows how much of a stupid person you, did you even read the greeks? of course not, you couldn´t handle the pre-socratics to begin with

>>20578084
>the majority of population doesn´t have their personalities changed, only few outliers have

I'm not the guy you're debating - I'm an outsider, but this, along with the rest of your post might be the dumbest thing I've read all day. Nice one baitfag

>>20578057
well my point was to show you that you havent really understood the general gist of Nietzsche at all. I am well convinced of you not having read a single full book of his, but ay. Youre a miscariage of modernity, and with modernity your kind shall perish (that is if youre not baiting or youre not 15yo child, in that case either well-played or youll grow out of it).

>>20578089
keep coping faggot, your worldview is fucking retarded

>>20578091
Whenever I come to visit /lit/ I get more disappointed with the fact that I used to be a frequenter here.

Look at what you just wrote, this is literally a more sophisticated, philosophical version of a twitter hoe whining like a thot when someone says Abortion should be banned.

Literal moral faggotry.

Yes, tell me more about how I haven't read Nietzsche. Yes, tell me more about how I'm a modernist, yes, tell me more about what you would do if you had power.

fucking jew boys

>>20577931
>All bodies of scientific evidence are against you
Ok if you were trolling the entire time you did a good job. I kneel, pop-psych sama

>>20575791
falseflag

>>20578099
either you´re a glownigger or a leftist pretending to be a nietzsche supporter, either way your bait is up, kid

>>20578099
huh?

>>20575783
>Nietzsche has been seen as de facto rightwing since mid 20th century
lmao

>>20578108
My guy, you're stuck in 1600 politics.

You have no genuine understanding of how politics functions, evolves, develops and its underlying goal.

You're a moral fag as much as the average liberal.

If I just asked you a few questions you'd fold like a retard because your worldview is just aesthetics - that's it. It hasn't been relevant ever.

>>20578099
in which of my statements do I appeal to morality? None of the things I called you have any negative moral connotations unless you actually see them, where there are none, which in fact makes you the moralfag, opposing morality of the day is not neceasarily immoral. If you believe in quite literally anything in 21st century, you are by this or that instance falling back to "God", I dont blame you, we are not Ubermensch. Instance of Dasein without God is a difficult one, and as of so far you are failing miserably. You only replaced christian God with some obscure personalized form of genetic determinism, youre no different to marxists who replace God with dialectical materialism. The death of God is scary, isnt it?:) No footing, NONE. Nor science nothing. ONLY NIHILISM

>>20578128
>My guy, you're stuck in 1600 politics.
>You have no genuine understanding of how politics functions, evolves, develops and its underlying goal.
>You're a moral fag as much as the average liberal.
>If I just asked you a few questions you'd fold like a retard because your worldview is just aesthetics - that's it. It hasn't been relevant ever.


lmao, do leftists really??? what a retard

>>20578132
>how can i make my opponent look like a leftist/jew

go back to /pol/

>>20578131
Cringe

>>20578128
Well if you take that approach to left or right dichotomy, the "right" aestheticizes politics and its the "left" that politicizes aesthetics, but then again thats just another arbitrary definition. Fuck Walter Benjamin, another kike

>>20578131
Okay, perhaps moral faggotry was not the best terminology here.

What I mean is that you're too blinded by aesthetic.

You seem to have the same behavioral tendencies as moral fags.

"You haven't read Nietzsche"

" You haven't read marx"

"you're a modernist!!"

"You're a liberal!"

"you will get eradicated once I gain power..."

"bash the fash"

As it comes to all beliefs being a form of theology, I don't disagree with this.

However what is important is moving beyond ideology. Understanding how biology forms, and understanding that biology is a functionality/byproduct of one's circumstance in society.

This is not my theology. I do not make any moral deductions from this. It's an observation. Trying to say this is like believing in god is ridiculous.

There is no faith, beyond faith in the existence of the material world. That's it.

>>20578136
>muh psychological right wing!!!!!

you´re the pol tard here, get the fuck out

>>20578141
oh look das Mann. wassup waste of oxygen?

>>20578147
>Understanding how biology forms, and understanding that biology

fuck I meant to say Ideology, sleep deprivation is hitting in.

>>20578147
read what youre replying to again.

>>20578147
stop spacing like this, thanks

>>20578155
Also, why are you trying to group right wing Nietzscheans with left wing Nietzscheans? The eradication/subsidization of god with something else is a tool. It's not a politic

>>20577221
It is absolutely not. You’re thinking only of soldiers in some state socialist nation like North Korea. There’s a lot of disagreement. They’re famously split between statist and libertarian socialism (tankie and anarchist) let alone the hundreds of other niche doctrines. You need me to list them all?
> Find me a single lefty who is against gay, trannies, abortion
AS I JUST SAID ABOVE. Famously inclusive and very concerned with freedom (oh, not so much with the paternalist state-tards. But even they claim they’ll bring communism and freedom someday)
You are a narrow minded biggot, but though narrow there it seems quite empty.
Get that fixed

>>20577686
HE WAS TRYING TO CORRECT ME.
I guess he thought “their” was the appropriate word, but maybe he’s ESL