/lit/ - Literature

>>21018508

http://www.fpp.co.uk/Hitler/Hewel/Tgb_1941.html
>11 July 1941 Friday
>Führer-chat about Kant, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche.
>1.) Kant. purpose-bound, practical reason. First step into freedom from religious thoughts. But practical philosophy for state governments etc.
>2.) Schopenhauer. The biggest, clearest spirit that every German should have read. Masterful in the argumentation. Writes the best German style. Political intelligence but there only rational tendency for defeatism. Also hyperbolic.
>3.) Nietzsche. More intuitive than analytical. Affirmation of the laws of nature and of the struggle. Positive instructions. Therefore, the actual philosopher of National Socialism. Also Mussolini is greatest worshiper of Nietzsche.

>>21018558
>Also Mussolini is greatest worshiper of Nietzsche.
But Gentile’s philosophy was based on Kant and Hegel
>Therefore, the actual philosopher of National Socialism.
Then where does the quote in pic related come from? Did he say both or is one of the quotes fake? This makes no sense.

>>21018576
forgot pic

>>21018576
gentile was just a hegelian who adopted fascism and wrote for fellow hegelians. mussolini was interested and wrote his nietzsche dissertation long before gentile wrote anything about fascism.

the "i can't really do much..." is from leni riefenstahl (memoirs?)
https://www.idrlabs.com/quotes/adolf-hitler.php

i think the hewel diary is more trustworthy together with all the other small bits that suggest that hitler didnt dismiss him completely, seemed to become more and more nietzschean towards end.

>>21018508
Hitler read Schopenhauer through Wagner. Tristan und Isolde, Siegfried, Parsifal etc. all have unique amendments of Schopenhauer's system.

>For it is a matter of demonstrating a path of salvation recognised by none of the philosophers, particularly not by Sch., the pathway to complete pacification of the Will through love, and that no abstract love of mankind, but the love which actually blossoms from the soil of sexual love, i.e. from the affection between man and woman. It is conclusive, that I am able to use for this (as philosopher, not as poet, since as such I have my own) the terminology which Sch. himself supplies me. The exposition leads very deep and far, for it embraces a preciser explanation of the state in which we become able to apprehend Ideas, as also of that of Genius (Genialitaf), which I no longer conceive as a state of disengagement of the intellect from the will, but rather as an enhancement of the intellect of the individual to a cognitive organ of the race itself (Erkenntnissorgan der Gattung), thus of the Will as Thing-in-itself; whence alone, moreover, is to be explained that strange enthusiastic joyfulness and rapture in the supreme moments of genial cognition which Sch. seems hardly to know, as he can find it [i.e. that mode of cognition] only in repose and in the silencing of the individual passions. Quite analogously to this conception, I then arrive with greatest certainty at proving in Love a possibility of attaining to that exaltation above the instinct of the individual will where, after complete subjection of this latter, the racial will comes to full consciousness of itself; which upon this height is necessarily tantamount to complete pacification. All this will be made clear even to the inexperienced, if my statement succeeds; whilst the result cannot but be very significant, and entirely and satisfactorily fill the gaps in Schopenhauer's system.

>>21018508

Likely as it fit his idea of a higher purpose more.

>>21018508
>Schopenhauer encouraged purging the will through asceticism and philosophy, while it seems like Hitler embraced the Will as a darwinian evolutionary principle and merely identified with the Race
sort of
he took both Schopenhauer and Nietzsche's ideas on Will in his own direction with the "Will of the Nation"
In a way, he did advocate for purging the lower ego-Will so the higher race-Will could be brought forth.
>Why did he prefer to convert Schopenhauer into a political system
the truth is he converted Wagner into a political system, which is why you see elements of Schop and Neetch in Hitlerism

>>21018592
That is what DeGrelle says too
Around 1936-37 or so he went from a Schop guy to a Neetch guy
>I have been fieed, after an intense inner stniggle, fiom the still living and childish imaginings of religion…. I now feel as free as a colt in the pasture.

>>21018508
He didn’t.

>>21018508
>So Hitler was a big fan of Schopenhauer
>picrel
discuss...

>>21022110
he meant individual laziness and weakness, not concept of nationalism. you can discuss this though

>the eternal jew Ahasverus is none other than the personification of the entire jewish people. he would like to put his roots down and gain a homeland, without which the people is like a ball in the air. - but until then he lives parasitically off other peoples and their lands, but nevertheless remains animated by the liveliest patriotism for his own people, which manifests itself in strong cohesion according to which "all stand for one and one for all", so that this patriotism without homeland is more zealous than any other. the homeland of a jew are the other jews: thus he fights for them like "for God and country" and no community sticks together as much as theirs.

>therefore it is absurd to want to concede to them a share in the government or administration of any country. Originally amalgamated and one with their state, their religion is by no means the main issue here, but rather merely the bond that holds them together, the point de ralliement [rallying-point], and the banner whereby they recognize one another. This is also seen in the fact that even the converted Jew who has been baptized does not by any means bring upon himself the hatred and loathing of all the rest [of the Jews], as do all other apostates. On the contrary, he continues as a rule to be their friend and companion and to regard them as his true countrymen, naturally with a few orthodox exceptions. … Accordingly, it is an extremely superficial and false view to regard the Jews merely as a religious sect. But if, in order to countenance this error, Judaism is described by an expression borrowed from the Christian Church as “Jewish Confession,” then this is a fundamentally false expression which is deliberately calculated to mislead and should not be allowed at all. On the contrary, “Jewish Nation” is the correct expression. The Jews have absolutely no confession; monotheism is part of their nationality and political constitution and is with them a matter of course.

t. schopenhauer, parerga and paralipomena vol 2, essay on jurisprudence and politics