/lit/ - Literature

>>22539298
Has anyone ever been so completely correct? Read Spinoza, Nietzsche, and Deleuze. inb4 anyone argues that being impotent is actually le good because a wizard will give you presents after you die

>>22539314
no faggot. nigtzsche was a 5'9" manlet who had no real power, had to settle for prostitutes to get his power kicks, and inevitably got syphilis. its the kind of degeneration that is the generic fate of decadent idiots who think power is the root of happiness. see the french

excuse me i forgot to mention he went insane from the syphilis at that. perfect example of an idiot who worships power

>>22539314
Why would I argue that impotence is good? That would make Spinoza, Nietzsche, Deleuze, all "good."

>>22539340
such a criticism agrees with Nietzsche lol. You’re just calling him weak

>>22539298
Mfw
The will to power is not applicable to normal people
Only outcasts outcast by their ambition

>>22539357
no it doesnt. he thought power is the source of happiness. my post unarguably disproves that

>>22539365
You literally said he had no real power

>>22539367
youre not even thinking clearly from your stupid attempt to poke holes. if he has no power why should anyone take his assertions seriously

>>22539340
>who had no real power
He influenced nearly every major politician, artist, and writer in the 20th century, you fucking retard.

>>22539376
> if he has no power why should anyone take his assertions seriously
Are you implying that you would be unable to analyze Nietzsche’s works without knowing anything about the author? Isn’t it possible for the most detestable people to speak the truth at times, and the most upright people to speak falsely at times? To ignore the work itself and judge the author is either stupidity or cowardice.

>>22539380
>one Nietzsche fanboy says anon is WRONG because Nietzsche was actually POWERLESS
>another says anon is WRONG because Nietzsche had power over the whole WORLD
Which do I believe?

>>22539385
The former isn't a fanboy and is historically ignorant. Nietzsche knew he was ahead of his time, anyway.

>>22539380
but no political power, which is real power, stupid. he was just a sad larper who was resigned to write incoherently about it and let other people take the reins.

>>22539392
yeah, the germans sure took his ideas to their logical extent with the results of ww2. ahead of his time indeed, idiot.

>>22539394
"Real" power is any power that influences the external world. Nietzsche influenced the external world of the 20th century to an extraordinary degree compared to the average human.

>>22539385
Let me draw a picture, retard.
>anon 1: but Nietzsche was powerless
>anon 2: even if that were true, why does that matter? And aren’t you proving his point by making this criticism?
>anon 3: well you’re actually wrong, Nietzsche was powerful enough to write those books and influence the world
either way, anon 1 is retarded

>>22539403
name the single most successful nietzschean ideologue

>>22539340
>another dummy who thinks Nietzsche’s will to power is just domination and pleasure

>>22539408
>either way, anon 1 is retarded
you're retarded for saying i said he was powerless. obviously he had enough power to be a professor

>>22539413
thats what he is at the core

>>22539340
>not realizing that for Nietzsche power is something to be valued and respected, held as a treasure
>being so clueless on Nietzsche that you think his idea of power is just that stupid
the most powerful people are those who willingly share their power with others.

>>22539385
Anon 1 has never read him and doesn’t know what he’s talking about, anon 2 is correct because N had a big influence on philosophy and the western world regardless of what you think of him.

>>22539427
>the most powerful people are those who willingly share their power with others.
that just means theyre weak and unable to accumulate it for themselves, ie, bad in the bugman philosophers eyes
youre only proving nigzsches incoherence

>>22539409
Stop moving goalposts, dipshit. You'd be hard-pressed to find a musician in the 20th century who didn't have a copy of The Birth of Tragedy on their bookshelf, or a psychologist or professor of philosophy with one of his books.

>>22539408
You didn't draw a picture.

>>22539433
You clearly haven't read Nietzsche so I'm done with you

>>22539429
>N had a big influence on philosophy and the western world
cutthroat power existed before him. to exaggerate that he was that culturally influential shows historical ignorance

>>22539435
no youre the one moving goalposts. where are all the political nietzscheans you claimed? theyre just following the rules of power, which exist in spite of a random german
just a decoration for virtue signalling look at me i am very smart. same reason they had buddhist shit. is that was nigzsche is? just a prop?

>>22539444
ur done bc ur incapable of real critical thought and are historically ignorant.
nietzscheans in a nutshell everyone.

>>22539447
>literally talking about this guy on a mongolian basket weaving forum over a hundred years later
>claims he wasn't influential

>>22539457
i didnt say he didnt have influence and i also talk about obscure poets who didnt have any real power so whats your point.

Why do you engage with these insects based anon defending Nietzsche
There is no other name for these vile creatures and it is going to be glorious when we have an ant-lighting party.

>>22539447
>where are all the political nietzscheans you claimed?
Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin all read and were influenced by Nietzsche. Do you need more names, retard?

> One would make a fit little boy stare if one asked him: “Would you like to become virtuous?”— but he will open his eyes wide if asked: “Would you like to become stronger than your friends?”—
I witnessed this firsthand tonight lol. My nephew randomly asked, “WHO’S STRONGER?” referring to my uncle and grandfather, I guess. But we are taught to unlearn this valuation in favor of traditional moral rules. And that’s why men are so confused when women don’t care how nice and kind they are. Because women’s sexual instincts are not so easily uprooted by the programming.

>>22539467
youre an ant

i pointed out nietzsche was weak and his writing stemmed from weakness
that nietzscheans are weak (because to be mortal is weakness) and band together out of weakness
you faggots are too dumb to see through his cultish brainwashing but at least lurkers will know better than to drink the koolaid

and the fact that you cant silence me or counter my exposure of nietzschean incoherence is resounding proof of your weakness. weak ass faggots

>>22539476
nietzsche was opposed to wagner and effectively the nazis
mussolini played second fiddle to the germans
prove stalin was influenced by nietzsche. hint: you cant
all your examples are terrible

keep making flimsy attempts at defending the dead syphilitic german. your actions proceed from weakness because otherwise youd just silence me.

>>22539491
>all your examples are terrible
Not terrible in regards to making you look like a goalpost moving clown.

>>22539447
You never read him and you don’t understand the impact

>>22539505
no. again youre the one moving goalposts. prove stalin was influenced by nietzsche and dont just beg google search results to help your historical ignorance (a form of weakness) again.

>>22539511
Do your own research, retard.

>>22539516
the onus is on you for making the claim or are you historically ignorant about the rules of debate etiquette too?

>>22539491
> that nietzscheans are weak (because to be mortal is weakness)
By this logic everyone is weak and it makes no sense to single out Nietzsche with this criticism

>>22539517
>debate etiquette
You have to be 18 to post here.

>>22539521
he gets singled out for his blithe incoherence. i mock stirner too.

>>22539517
No, the onus is on you for making the baseless claim that Nietzsche didn't have any real power. Do your own research.

>>22539527
You keep saying he’s incoherent, but which part of his writings were incoherent?

>>22539531
which i supported by pointing out theres no proof stalin was influenced by nietzsche, which is self evident bc no one can find a stalin quote or anecdote about him doing that

now prove your claim faggot

>>22539535
the fact that he needs to be defended online by misshapen mentally ill weak faggots

>>22539543
If Lenin read Nietzsche then it's a safe bet Stalin did too.

>>22539418
I’m saying you fundamentally do not understand WtP. Nietzsche’s conception of power is much more broad than what you’re describing.

>>22539547
oh wow great someone else read him that proves he was significantly influenced by him.

by this shitty logic the quran is one of the most popular books, that means almost every major politicians was influenced by muhammad. guess that makes muhammad more likely to be directly influential in thought than nietzsche. the kicker? muhammad had real power in his own lifetime

>>22539543
> the fact that he needs to be defended online by misshapen mentally ill weak faggots
So you would never defend your own beliefs? And you think your attacking Nietzsche isn’t some validation of his power and influence? Anyway, you didn’t answer my question directly. You said that he was incoherent, but you still haven’t given a single example of this. You deflected the question and you will do it again.

>>22539558
You act as if Nietzsche's books weren't in circulation across virtually all academic, political, literary, and artistic circles during the 20th century. There is a mountain of scholarly literature on this exact topic, go check it out.

>>22539556
no its just incoherent at its core and his explications are just cope

>So you would never defend your own beliefs?
obviously i have but thats okay because weakness is an eternal fact of life. youre obviously also ignoring your own weakness

by the way, to the obviously german autists itt, go suck circumcised jewish dick like your precious hitler and nietzsche

>>22539570
> no its just incoherent at its core
and you haven’t explained why. As I said, you would deflect the question again. How embarrassing.

nietzcheans cant stop a random anon from shitting on him!

this is the real "power" of nietzscheans

>>22539575
except i did. youre too blind to see it when a reasonable man would have

>>22539580
> except i did. youre too blind to see it when a reasonable man would have
then why did you spend two posts trying to answer the question instead of already using this excuse? Your retardation is only proving that people judge Nietzsche without having read and understood him, which is the only reason why I’m continuing this conversation

>>22539340
>>22539349
>being weak is bad that's why i disagree with Nietzsche on power being good
huh?

>>22539402
>the germans sure took his ideas to their logical extent
oh wow look someone who hasn't read Nietzsche and on /lit/ too imagine that

>>22539588
power being a positive quality is self evident and isnt a thought unique to nietzsche dummy

as i pointed out nietzsche was weak and his entire system of thought stemmed from his weakness, which is why by his own view, he was weak and bad.

>>22539570
Ok it’s incoherent and you don’t understand it. My weakness? What are you babbling about? Stop projecting, it’s clear Nietzsche scares you boy, which is why you’re lashing out. You don’t have to engage with his ideas if you don’t want to.

>>22539587
bc i needed to spell it out for u

mistreating nietzsches legacy is a form of power and by his own thought a good.

>>22539601
>bc i needed to spell it out for u
excuse me its more accurate to say ur too dumb to see it and u needed me to spell it out for u. my mistake but hopefully this way ur mediocre intellect (which was too weak to go to a good university) can understand it

>>22539433
>unable to accumulate it for themselves, i
SLAVE SPOTTED! Power must be radiated and given without gain, like the explosions of the sun. Anything less is constipation, obesity, ressentiment. You cannot stockpile it endlessly like some peasant turned banker.

>>22539601
Why did you never address this? >>22539382

>>22539596
What argument can you even use to say he was weak? He wrote multiple masterpieces that are widely read and his ideas are so well engrained in western thought that you don’t even realize it, all through a debilitating sickness that gave him a lot of issues.

>>22539606
Do you disagree with N, then?
>How does one become stronger?— By coming to decisions slowly; and by clinging tenaciously to what one has decided. Everything else follows.

>>22539607
bc thats an argument stemming from weakness and cowardice and Retroactively Refutes itself

seriously why are nietzsche fanboys who never read him so dumb?

>>22539596
>power being a positive quality is self evident
not to christlarpers, who are the chief opponents of Nietzsche on this board and who are wholly ignorant of both Nietzsche and non-video game forms of Christianity

>>22539609
>through a debilitating sickness that gave him a lot of issues.
>how can you say the multiply sick man was weak
nietzscheans everyone

>>22539617
christians are the members of the most powerful religion. any thinking christian realizes that power is a good quality. nietzscheans seethe because they lack the power that christians use to swat them down like the ants they are.

>>22539615
>By coming to decisions slowly; and by clinging tenaciously to what one has decided. Everything else follows.
Clinging to what you have decided means following through with your actions. It doesn't mean power is bean counting. You'd know this if you were active/affirmative rather than reactive/nihilist.

>>22539616
So then if Nietzsche had said the opposite—that being weak is good— you would still disagree? Where exactly did Nietzsche say that we should never listen to someone who is weak by our standards?

>>22539618
>unga bunga strong means smash big rock

The anons who originally responded to your shitty bait are retards too though. You idiots really let this lone shitposter come this far, none of you have read Nietzsche and it shows.

>>22539621
>the power that christians use to swat them down
delusional, seek help, also read Nietzsche (and Deleuze while you are at it), slave power is a resentful form of power, it is a nihilistic willing, we can see this in your obsession with lashing out at people who are better than you

>>22539630
youre a weak retard like them too for even responding. and youd be a weak coward by being too afraid to respond too

the incoherence of nietzsche is a never ending comedy lmao

>>22539633
deleuze is a pseud and a perfect example of mediocre philosophical ressentiment. deleuze was just a failed politician turned writer as a cope for having no real power just like nietzsche

>>22539634
Wasting time on ignorant tards is definitely a huge weakness, and yes you’ve already wasted too much of my time.

>>22539639
yes wasting time on reading ignorant tards like nietzche

one day youll wise up autist, otherwise youll just be a pathetic old man clinging to dreams of power at the end of his existence. remember my shitposts if and when that happens weak ass faggot

>>22539637
>just a failed politician turned writer as a cope for having no real power just like nietzsche
if you read any of these people you'd know they were self-aware of this behavior and came to reject politics, you on the other hand have taken up politics as a religion, a sort of post-atheist version of Christianity shaped by Crusader Kings 2 and the legacy of conservative talk radio which exists only to stitch together culture war issues as an act of coalition formation, not unlike old Saint Paul himself

you angry response came from weakness
it being full of holes giving me an opportunity to insult you incisively showed lack of forethought and weakness
everything you do comes from weakness and by your own conception, bad

>>22539644
idiot, philosophy is an attempt to influence and invariably coextensive with politics. youd realize this if you actually thought about things.

>>22539648
philosophy is critique, any philosopher who stops shitting on society and politics out of some sense of having achieved power is highly suspect

>>22539642
Lul at you thinking you made absolutely any penetrating arguments or observations. You’re seething, Nietzsche has already mind raped you and that’s why you’re throwing a fit and stamping your feed like a little kid. It’s okay there’s no need to be scared.

>>22539655
it necessarily involves a form of power, which is also shared with politics. are you saying they dont overlap or are you really that stupid

>>22539657
nietzsche is a parasite of actual power and will be a footnote

oh wait no thats actually wrong. he is a footnote already. thats why his biggest translators mistranslate him and allow his ideas to be misrepresented since he was too weak to protect his legacy

i bet none of you even know german and know nietzsches naked thought

>>22539661
you are making it sound as if philosophers are merely failed electoral candidates and power is getting voted for, but that is to be expected from people stupid enough to believe things without a shred of evidence whose only motivation for arguing is to defend a nihilistic fantasy

gettin voted into power comes from weakness stupid. the truly powerful just seize it.

he tried to raise funds which is inevitably a political act. he was just extraordinarily bad at that, being a weak faggot

>>22539665
>hah you're DEAD and the people who control your legacy distort you what a loser
impressive intellect among Nietzsche haters, little do they realize this is the entire situation of western civ and has been for about 1600 years

>>22539671
do you feel in charge?

>>22539677
why yes i do feel like a big man from shitposting online ty good sir do the needful

>>22539298

Nietzsche is a cumguzzler and everything he said is absolutely worthless.

>>22540421
neither is true. he still had impressive insight into existence and at best his thought clarifies real knowledge.

>>22540421
>porngraphic vocabulary
>seethes at the mere mention of Nietzsche
gee I wonder who typed this post, couldn't have been a xitter tradcath

>>22539596
You're just mad that Neetch saved Good from slave morality, by showing us what Good really meant and how it got warped.

>>22539314
All 3 of them were refuted by the Christian Church. You just pretend like that never happened, or you don’t know about it because you’re not a serious student of philosophy like they weren’t. The Christians are closer to the Greek knowledge seekers than Nietzsche ever was.

>>22539365
To be fair, it’s not happiness but “the good”. Nietzsche thought the powerful life was the good life, but not necessarily the happy life. He was wrong either way.

>>22539382
> even a broken clock is right twice per day!
> that’s why I use it to check the time every minute of every hour everyday!
You’re just a retard, my man.

>>22539618
It’s a quasi-religious cult, my man. They’re worse than Marxists.

>>22540723
thats true in some sense but nietzscheans dont exert nearly as much influence as marxism does, which still has china as a potential world power.

>>22539665
What is Nietzsche's endgame according to your correct interpretation of him? What did he wanted for the world?

>>22539556
>>22539413
Can you elaborate on the WtP? Or is there an essay for that anywhere? In what sense is it more broad?

>>22540706
>you’re not a serious student of philosophy
neither are you christer, "the church already refuted this" means nothing

>>22541535
It’s more broad in the sense that it is something to put onto everything in the world. Even a rock has WtP, just very little. So if we imagine the world is a collection of WtPs clashing and fighting for more assertion we get a better idea of this. For humans it’s not just domination or conquering, although that could be part of it. But you need to be able to conquer and command yourself, it goes hand in hand with the notion of becoming who you are in the fullest sense. You could be a gardener or cook and fulfill your WtP, and it gets deeper when he talks about an individuals competing drives and such. On that note Nietzsche really was one of the first to start psychologizing. You can read BG&E for more, but it’s important to remember Nietzsche doesn’t systematize any of this. He refrains from giving us some kind of blueprint for life, it’s not the point of his work.

>>22539298
sperg

>>22541571
Modalism, atheism, pantheism, and so on have all been refuted by various patristic writers and at councils. This is a matter of fact. You have to cope and ignore these, and you will ignore them we all know that, because you’d have to confront the fact that you accepted bullshit as gospel

>>22541870
>you’d have to confront the fact that you accepted bullshit as gospel
i accept your Gospel as bullshit, yes

>>22539298
>Happiness is the feeling that power is increasing
Not impressed, N.

>>22541931
>actually, overcoming things makes me sad
>blessed are the devoured

>>22539617
Completely wrong. Power is a positive quality to Christians. God is powerful. It is not necessarily wrong to want to be powerful. The problem is that humans are fallen creatures who suck major ass at using power properly. There's also the fact that any given human being, like everything else in creation, is totally dependent on God for their sustained existence. Yes, it is good to be powerful and perhaps God will add such power unto you. But it all proceeds from Him. The idea that you can somehow will yourself to become independently powerful and/or self contained is laughable, insane, and literally how actual fucking demons think.

>>22541951
Happiness is fake and gay and fleeting.

>>22542006
>The problem is that [inane schizo babble]

>>22542006
>The idea that you can somehow will yourself to become independently powerful and/or self contained is laughable, insane
so yahweh is nuts huh?
>>22542024
ok doomer

>>22542072
>so yahweh is nuts huh?
God is not a contingent creature like you and me. He isn't a creature at all. God is the fundamental source of being, completely sufficient in Himself. I AM. Theologians (at least the educated ones) aren't talking about some sort of "sky wizard", but ultimate reality. That's what God is. Ultimate Reality.

>>22542728
>That's what God is. Ultimate Reality
cool story... so you agree with Spinoza then?

>>22539298
Spending an entire summer reading his work chronologically and coming across that aphorism in Will to power in late August was so kino

>>22541325
>What is Nietzsche's endgame according to your correct interpretation of him? What did he wanted for the world?
Pre-Socratic Greece to make a comeback

>>22539588
I don't disagree with Nietzsche, I just don't think about him

>>22542037
What schizo babble? I didn't see a single mention of N.

>>22539606
>Power must be radiated and given without gain
That doesn't sound like the blonde-haired Aryo-Celtic beast.

>>22543433
the celts are some of history's biggest losers so this must be some amerimutt cope-derived misreading of the blonde beast metaphor, in Europe they were absolutely buck broken by mediterranean bulls, whose norman protegès went all the way to Ireland to finish the jobs mr fitzgerald

>>22543459
>in Europe they were absolutely buck broken by mediterranean bulls,
Yeah, except for that one time the Celts sacked Rome and cucked the entire patrician class out of their rights

>>22542037
>>22542072
>>22542733
What were Nietzsche's thoughts on truth? How do your witticisms have any basis in a reality that is merely a
>conceptual crap game "truth" means using every die in the designated manner, counting its spots accurately, fashioning the right categories, and never violating the order of caste and class rank. Just as the Romans and Etruscans cut up the heavens with rigid mathematical lines and confined a god within each of the spaces thereby delimited, as within a templum, so every people has a similarly mathematically divided conceptual heaven above themselves and henceforth thinks that truth demands that each conceptual god be sought only within his own sphere.
At least the Christian conceptual god allows for a structure in which to engage with dialectical pursuits of reason and logical metaphors to pursue truth. Writing a clever one-liner could have an ontological basis of truth! Otherwise endlessly being a clever reductionist feels so pitifully small to the potential instilled by Nietzsche.
I find too many of Nietzsche's followers to be tag-alongs that cling to his coat tails in order to feel a sense of superiority over others. Nietzsche's will to power metaphysic solely becomes an insular conceptual system in which to scorn and deride others as inferior and deluded. But this is to promulgate... what? That's a personal question only you can answer.

Nietzsche's philosophy has become a petty game. I hope the ubermensch, if such a construct could exist, would be so terribly tyrannical and willful that all of Nietzsche's sycophants would beg for his downfall. I hope, as a saving grace before they were trampled beneath his tread, the sycophants could laugh at themselves.

>>22543629
>At least the Christian conceptual god allows for a structure in which to engage with dialectical pursuits of reason and logical metaphors to pursue truth.
this terminates with the atheism you find in all the major historically Christian countries—the quest for truth as you frame it, the abolition of falsehoods and false gods, will eventually require you to deny even Christianity, which even now you are merely pretending to believe in in order to spite the Nietzsche appreciators, who you are wishing an overpowering third party would punish so that you might enjoy their tormented screams. That's some real patristic energy there

extremely elementary

>>22543666
The quest for truth is found in non-Christian cultures almost universally, at least those that aren't literally tribal. It's not that the quest for truth is specifically Christian, it's that the atheistic tendency caused "truth" to be interpreted in a particular, flawed way.

>>22543708
>the atheistic tendency caused "truth" to be interpreted in a particular, flawed way
as opposed to the priestly tendency to deny that you are making shit up?

>>22543666
What a snake. Nice digits by the way.

Get thee hence.

>>22543782
Making what up? Would you deny that truth is considered among the highest values in Hinduism (sattva) and Islam, even as far east as Confucianism? You'd have to be either maliciously deceitful or entirely ignorant to think Christianity is the only culture that values "truth."

>>22543807
Why would an atheist "quest for truth" be more or less flawed than a Christian or Hindu one? You are of course lying about bodily resurrection and talking snakes and that sort of thing

I've found more pleasure and happiness from making myself laff with funny voices than increasing my power.

I swear conflict adverse men will do anything but actually fight or be vital.

reading books full of the ideas of weak men seesh

>>22543832
Consider that your skill in using your voice to perform these characters were a form of power you exercise as such. Now imagine you came down with a bad case of laryngitis. This has decreased your power of expression and affirmation, a surely unhappy, and maybe "bad" thing for you, yes? Or on the contrary, does your incapacity to act make you "good" while those who can perform are "evil" for having what you lack? This is what is at stake for Nietzsche. Thank you for stopping by to say you don't care, your contributions here are invalauble.

>>22539298
>just be urself :)
wow epic "philosophy" germcucks

>>22543872
>become who you are
>epic german philosophy
this but unironically

>>22541634
Only anon itt who actually read and understands Nietzsche. The WtP being inherently political is a leftist misreading of Nietzsche. And yes, Nietzsche was the forebear of Freud and psychology.

Is happiness what we should aspire to? Is happiness what truly fulfills a human?

>>22543823
>Why would an atheist "quest for truth" be more or less flawed than a Christian or Hindu one?
Atheists have virtually zero notion of what truth actually is. The meaning of the term is just a shell and has no possible justification for the atheist, unlike the Christian and Hindu traditions which had comprehensive theoretical elaborations of the nature of truth, what it is and isn't. The entire atheist epistemology is built on probabilities and hypotheses, which means they have themselves denied the reality of truth, because hypothesis and probability is not the same as truth, and that is all atheists are capable of claiming as "truths." This is starkly demonstrated by the atheist's absolute inability to prove the non-existence of God, whereas theists can easily provide proofs. Therefore the atheist really has no quest for truth, only a quest for technique (that is, development of machines to create pleasure, which has little to do with truth). None of this matters though, my main point was only that arguing Christianity is the only culture which values truth is false.

>>22543954
>theists can easily provide proofs

bump. Interesting thread.

>>22539380
Neetchcels will say this but then seethe how none of those people had the correct interpretation of his ideas

>>22539606
How do the bankers do it?

>>22543666
>this terminates with the atheism you find in all the major historically Christian countries
This atheism isn't sustainable, obviously, nor do I see it as an inevitable end of Christianity. Not to say it couldn't end, but it's still too early to call it.
>which even now you are merely pretending to believe in in order to spite the Nietzsche appreciators
This is quite spergy and tunnel visioned. Is your Nietzschian appreciation a means to spite Christians? I wouldn't think so, so the why do others need to pretend to believe in something that is seemingly at odds with yours?
Think about it. You could pretend to believe in Nietzsche's will to power as a means to feel better about your shortcomings, to feel your ego inflated by Nietzsche's powerful, striving rhetoric. I imagine you're more complicated than that though.
Again I don't see how your Nietzschian appreciation is any different from other seemingly arbitrary belief structures that Nietzsche would denounce. To use it as an ontological or epistemological system to denounce others seems absurd, in that I see Nietzsche's will to power as a mode of action and being, not a mode of reductionist argument.
I know somewhere in Thus Spoke Zarathustra Nietzsche calls for the great men to make their own path, I wish more Nietzsche supporters didn't keep him boxed in like they do. At least the French pedos and necrophiliacs did something different with him.
>who you are wishing an overpowering third party would punish so that you might enjoy their tormented screams
Is it possible that a poster could use an illustrative example that they would never actually wish for? I don't truly wish that on you or any other Nietzschian appreciator, anon. I would even call myself a Nietzsche appreciator. It was an implicit reminder that your power striving might be a sycophantic relationship with what you've construed as powerful.

>>22547115
Especially those that rely on computers. They literally expend no energy unless they find a way to do busywork.

>>22543433
You mean when he's pointing out Germans arouse mistrust when they come to power due to past misdeeds? You read that as an endorsement of said misdeeds?

>>22543629
Sounds like you just want gawd to kill people. That's ok, so do I.

>>22547116
>I don't truly wish that on you or any other Nietzschian appreciator, anon.
>>22543629
hope the ubermensch, if such a construct could exist, would be so terribly tyrannical and willful that all of Nietzsche's sycophants would beg for his downfall
hmmm, do you always lie this much?

>>22547115
>>22547135
since you are obviously unfamiliar with what is being referenced, read Bataille, The Accursed Share vol 1. It's short, you can ignore the chapter on Stalin. But consider how "bankers" operate during a "recession"—they destroy their own wealth at a scale so enormous some of them collapse. And while there is no longer any aristocratic sensibility to this sacrifice, the principle survives that one cannot accumulate forever. Nietzsche has a similar idea in saying healthiness is not merely not being sick. A healthy person can tolerate being sick. You not being sick is just your luck, it does not automatically make you healthy. As for power, power can be measured in a sense, in what you are capable of destroying, whether that is your own investment portfolio or the spice melange, and still be left standing versus the other contestants who cannot hope to match your expenditure.

If a thing you "own" comes with demands, like maintenance then who is the master? This dead thing you're telling yourself you have power over is demanding to be pampered like royalty with special soaps and oils. If you own things you're a submissive cuck.

>>22547197
This statement,
>I don't truly wish that on you or any other Nietzschian appreciator, anon.
is the truth. I am not lying. Please read my question again:
>Is it possible that a poster could use an illustrative example that they would never actually wish for?
I would posit this is possible. For example, a poster might shitpost by saying "kys" but they don't actually want the anon they're conversing with to kill themselves. I wouldn't actually want the ubermensch to crush you beneath his tread or to hear your screams in such a situation, but I believe that kind of hyperbolic and fantastical illustration might be the penny on the track that derails your mental train (or another anon who is passively reading our dialogue). Maybe not though I'm trying to get better at that skill.