[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 125 KB, 467x695, Nietzsche-the-Tragic.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13806911 No.13806911 [Reply] [Original]

How can his philosophy be sensibly reconciled in any other form of politics besides fascism? The Overman is the meaning of the earth, after all.

>> No.13806934

Incoherent post. Probably havne't read Nietzsche.

>> No.13806942

>>13806934
I've read 90% of his bibliography. What's incoherent about it?

>> No.13806954

>>13806942
Is the overman the meaning of the Eart ?

>> No.13806965

>>13806954
It's a line from Thus Spoke Zarathustra.

>Behold, I teach you the overman. The overman is the meaning of the earth.Let your will say: the overman shall be the meaning of the earth! I beseech you, my brothers, remain faithful to the earth, and do not believe those who speak to you of otherworldly hopes! Poison-mixers are they, whether they know it or not. Despisers of life are they, decaying and poisoned themselves, of whom the earth is weary: so let them go.

>> No.13806970

>>13806965
Do you think fascism is conducive to the production of overmen?

>> No.13806992

>>13806970
I think the Overman is conducive to fascism.

>> No.13806995

Anything short of becoming emperor of your own country is a misapplication of the ubermensch to politics

>> No.13806996

>>13806911
>How can his philosophy be sensibly reconciled in any other form of politics
It motly cannot

>besides fascism
Fascism is populist drivel, it's a bastard child of socialism, nationalism and corporatism. It is not overmanlike despite its strong LARPing tendencies.

>> No.13807001

>>13806992
What does fascism offer him?

>> No.13807005

>>13806996
this. monarchy with an aristocratic/feudalist basis is the only option ;)

>> No.13807024

>>13806911
Nietzsche was anti-political. He cannot be reconciled with anything, least of all fascism. I believe the only sort of thing Nietzsche would endorse would be a political science, if such a science was possible.

>> No.13807047

>>13807001
Unrestrained will to power. A monarch is heavily restrained, and Bonapartism is only preferable while the masses are still a threat. But if the Overman had access to technology that made him invulnerable to the will of the masses and could let him replace the undesirables with automatons, why would any political system besides fascism be desired?

>> No.13807063

>>13807047
Because fascism is proudhonian moralism applied to syndicalist economics and not a happy-go-lucky free-for-all for some wannabe ubermensch. The contrary inquiry necessarily follows: why would the Overman ever restrict himself to fascism?

>> No.13807079

>>13807063
Is fascism not authoritarian nationalism in a nutshell? The Overman has his race of hyperboreans he wants to raise and he needs a nation in order to do that. There is no restriction past this part, which isn't really a restriction.

>> No.13807095

>>13806996
>Fascism
>Bastard child of Socialism and liberal ideologies
Is this bait or are you actually this dumb?

>> No.13807103

>>13807095
>national --socialism--
>"ugh you dumb? muh nazis has no socialist influence at all durdurdurrrrr"

>> No.13807104
File: 69 KB, 846x396, rochelle-quote.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13807104

>>13807095
Not that guy but fascism objectively emerged from a nationalist revision of socialism. Also which liberal ideologies did he list?

>> No.13807109

>>13807047
>But if the Overman had access to technology that made him invulnerable to the will of the masses and could let him replace the undesirables with automatons
You seem to be confusing Nietzsche's Overman with Marvel's Doctor Doom.

>> No.13807113

>>13807079
>The Overman has his race of hyperboreans he wants to raise and he needs a nation in order to do that.
The overman needn't even care for any race or nation, and mentioning the hyperboreans unironially is peak cringe.

>> No.13807117

>>13807104
>>13807103
>durr socialism is giving the state power of private property instead of abolishing it
Why do you not understand this

also lmao at using the name of natsoc as an example when china and north korea larps as communist despite being state capitalist

>> No.13807121

>>13807113
>The overman needn't even care for any race or nation
Why does Nietzsche address his hyperboreans then and give them so much advice and encouragement? Zarathustra wanted his disciples to become good combatants for him in the end. Can't have that if everyone around you is weak.

>> No.13807124

>>13807104
Fascism is literally the antithesis of socialism

>> No.13807130

>>13806911
Wrong, the correct answer is quite obviously Determinism.

>> No.13807133

>>13807124
no it isn't, retard, it has socialist influences and that's a good thing, nazbol when

>> No.13807139

>>13807121
Zarathustra explicitly said his disciple had to learn to btfo him. He wasn't a political leader or a phalange officer. That kind of servility is preciely what Netzsche is arguing against.

>> No.13807140

>>13806911
Simplistic reductive thinking. His thought cannot be pigeonholed and fitted into a political framework.

He despised nationalism and collectivism, two mainstays of fascism. He believed in individualism when fascism subordinates everyone to the state.

His promotion of aristocratic values inclined more towards the superiority of the artist than race.

>> No.13807145

>>13807133
Socialist influence by putting all the power in the hand of the state?

>> No.13807150

>>13807124
You either have a lack of understanding of fascism, socialism, or both to make a post this retarded.

>> No.13807158

>>13807139
He wanted friends, who for him, would be his equals; i.e., he wanted enemies. Who's talking about servility here? How can you create an environment in which there are many formidable foes to do battle with if you don't have the foundation for it, which only a nation can provide?

>> No.13807163

>>13807150
Not an argument

>> No.13807166

>>13807145
no, because it cares about the interests of a racial society and wants to empower it

>> No.13807168

>>13807158
>Who's talking about servility here?
The anon trying to pretend Zarathustra was some kind of proto-fascist drill sergeant.

>which only a nation can provide?
Huge unsupported leap of reasoning here. The Greek did it way before the birth of the nation. And the very idea of the overman is purposefully way too vague to lend itself to any serious talk of political implementation.

>> No.13807182

>>13807168
>The Greek did it way before the birth of the nation.
Ancient Greece was full of nations, what are you talking about? Athens and Sparta were just two of the Greek nations.

>> No.13807188

>>13807150
But he's right lmao

>> No.13807190

The idea of the Overman can't be described as a political system, that defeats the purpose of it. The Overman would create a completely new system of morality and politics that we currently cannot properly comprehend, using whatever means available.

>> No.13807204

>>13807079
>Is fascism not authoritarian nationalism in a nutshell?

Not in its entirety. To say so would be to fall in with those who claim that fascism is an empty ideology without substance and without a positive vision for the common good. It contains that positive vision in its core, whatever the results of the experiment. The Overman has no use for that.

>> No.13807212

>>13807166
This is in theory right, because nazi economics were shit

>> No.13807222

>>13807117
>>13807124
No one is saying that fascism and socialism are allies. The point is that the ideological genealogy of fascism is heavily socialistic -- one need only refer to the socialist and syndicalist backgrounds of many fascist writers and fellow travellers. You are talking as if we are referring to these political concepts as Platonic ideals, rather than textual and political relationships with complex relationships.

>> No.13807226

>>13807222
> rather than textual and political relationships with complex relationships.
sprry im retarded

>> No.13807234

>>13807204
>To say so would be to fall in with those who claim that fascism is an empty ideology without substance and without a positive vision for the common good.
But those people are empty themselves, so what do they matter?

>It contains that positive vision in its core, whatever the results of the experiment. The Overman has no use for that.
Will to power is the most positivistic idea around. I don't see how being positivistic makes it something the Overman has no use for. And is there an alternative foundation other than authoritarian nationalism for producing a race of free hyperborean beings?

>> No.13807263
File: 537 KB, 1352x802, 9403FE4E-CB61-4731-AA9B-6F7A064173A5.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13807263

>I’m reading a bibliography
And aren’t getting what the übermensch is.
He says it (somewhere. I forget) outright. He’s thinking of a cross between an aristocrat and an anarchist.

>> No.13807283

>>13807263
>He’s thinking of a cross between an aristocrat and an anarchist.
aka a fascist.

>> No.13807292
File: 14 KB, 320x180, E52F7EFC-0AC3-4729-897C-081D9A4D4F9C.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13807292

>>13807283
I guess you don’t know what those things are.
Should I bother explaining?

>> No.13807295

>>13807292
Go ahead and share your thoughts on the matter.

>> No.13807299

>>13807283
a fascist is more like a cross between a comp-sci major and a prison guard

>> No.13807324

>>13807295
Fascists are retrograde pseudo aristocrats. At least the elites in the party are. The soldiers are just trained dogs. Above all, they want the state, an empire and all the power they can grab. They’re nothing like an anarchist. They’re the antithesis of anarchism.
So Nietzsche sees something seemingly contradictory for his übermensch. He describes it at some lengths and it’s probably mentioned plenty ITT already, So simply put; try to imagine Pechorin happy (A Hero of Our Times)

More in depth, I have an essay
https://www.confero.ep.liu.se/issues/2016/v4/i1/160111/confero16v4i1_160111.pdf

>> No.13807390

>>13807324
Nietzsche spit on the anarchists' Christian-like tendency to promote slave morality by dismissing all earthly authorities. What he admired about them was their penchant for Dionysian madness, and mixed with an aristocrat, that is someone who seeks to be all powerful and will pay any price for it. Given he also wanted to be surrounded by the hyperboreans, does this not fit the Nazi brand of fascism to a T?

>> No.13807410

>>13807263
I don't remember reading that but it is pretty accurate. I think you're thinking of Nietzsche's statement that the ubermensche was like "Caesar with the soul of christ."

>>13807324
And Nietzsche's philosophy is only compatible with some version of hierarchy or aristocracy. At the very least you need some sort of system of slavery. Of course fascism would have the sort of stogy confining morality that would restrict the radical freedom of the overman. The overman is a radical libertine and must brutally consume other people's lives for the betterment of their own.

>> No.13807418

>>13807390
>Christian-like tendency to promote slave morality by dismissing all earthly authorities
What on earth are you saying? You think Nietzsche wants you to submit to earthly authorities.

Also of course no one is saying that true anarchism, the removal of all domineering power relations in society, is what Nietzsche is saying. You're deliberately misreading butterfly.

>> No.13807420

>>13807234
The point is that fascism's vision of the common good has very little in common with the Overman's. What use does he have for mediation between labor and capital, or the construction of a producerist economy and society, or the evolution of vertical syndicalism into horizontal corporatism? It is so far removed from Nietzschian concerns that there is just no frame of reference by which to connect the two other than vague appeals to "authoritarian nationalism" as a meretricious stand-in for will-to-power, which is by no means exclusive to fascist societies and structures.

>> No.13807448

>>13807283
If you mean a fash dandy like Marinetti or Mishima (without the guilt tripping and self-doubt), then perhaps. But those never get to matter politically, they don't really mesh well with actual political fascim, and they're always minoritary.

>> No.13807451

>>13807448
In this world you're either a fashy dandy or a fashy daddy

>> No.13807459

>>13807451
Wha about fashy mommies and flashy commies?

>> No.13807480
File: 67 KB, 426x426, 80E868DD-A5A1-4BBA-AC76-E23D395A9ECF.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13807480

>>13807410
>you need some sort of system of slavery
Completely the opposite. A landless aristocrat. One needing no slaves or serfs. Needs no other, much less to consume them

>> No.13807547

>>13807480
all of life is consumption, competition, conquest, etc. To deny that is to deny life. If one is really a landless aristocrat then they have to spend their time scrounging for their own subsistence. Their will to power is wasted on the meaningless banalities of the day to day. You need slaves both simply as an aspect of power but also as a practical necessity for the aristocrat to focus on art, philosophy, beauty, etc.

I really find your attempt to remove all the controversial points of Nietzsche rather distasteful and just the sort of thing that Bataille wrote an entire book against.

>> No.13807551

>>13807547
After reading the essay I link above, you really ought to try reading Nietzsche sometime to straighten out these misconceptions you have in your head

>> No.13807600

>>13807551
That's a great quip but it doesn't address anything. I fully admit that Pipi is a great representation of the overman but you also can't shy away from the darker elements of the nature of power as well. Even in the story Pipi survives off gold coins that was procured by her pirate father. That requires of course violence and coercion. In essence slavery is just a systematized theft that would be necessary for the kind of independence Nietzsche and Pipi value.

>> No.13808383

>>13807418
>What on earth are you saying? You think Nietzsche wants you to submit to earthly authorities.
Inverse fallacy. Nietzsche criticized Christians for dreaming up a beyond in response to this life because they were at the bottom of the food chain in it, so to speak. He also criticized the anarchists as having a similar dream for a similar reason. From Twilight of the Idols:

>When the anarchist, as the mouthpiece of the declining levels of society, insists on 'right,' 'justice,' 'equal rights' with such beautiful indignation, he is just acting under the pressure of his lack of culture, which cannot grasp why he really suffers, what he is poor in–in life. A drive to find causes is powerful in him: it must be somebody's fault that he's feeling bad . . . Even his 'beautiful indignation' does him good; all poor devils like to whine--it gives them a little thrill of power. Even complaints, the act of complaining, can give life the charm on account of which one can stand to live it: there is a subtle dose of revenge in every complaint; one blames those who are different for one's own feeling bad, and in certain circumstances even being bad, as if they were guilty of an injustice, a prohibited privilege. 'If I'm a lowlife, you should be one too': on this logic, revolutions are built.– Complaining is never good for anything; it comes from weakness. Whether one ascribes one's feeling bad to others or to oneself–the socialist does the former, the Christian, for example, the latter–makes no real difference. What is common to both and, let us add, what is unworthy, is that it should be someone's fault that one is suffering–in short, that the sufferer prescribes the honey of revenge as a cure for his own suffering.

>You're deliberately misreading butterfly.
Doesn't seem that I am... the Overman, by nature, makes everyone unequal.

>>13807420
>What use does he have for mediation between labor and capital, or the construction of a producerist economy and society, or the evolution of vertical syndicalism into horizontal corporatism?
Do you know what the purpose of these things are? They are arbitrary to the Overman's goals insofar as they don't directly relate to the expression of his will to power, but they are vital to them insofar as they are means towards creating the world in which he can express his will to power in an unrestrained form. I think you're coloring fascism with time-sensitive political jargon as opposed to looking at the overarching political philosophy of it.

>> No.13808439
File: 232 KB, 792x1007, 4c444068cd8584c016809f2ef6aa9a7c.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13808439

>>13807551
>>13807600
The story of Connor MacLeod from the first Highlander is a much better depiction of the Overman and his values: an immortal swordsman who possesses in himself a multiplicity of drives (a lover, a mentor, a friend, a warrior, a tyrant, etc.), obtained from other immortals that he has dueled with, defeated in battle, and synergized in himself. The Pippi Longstocking story gets some things right, but also misses a lot of things, given that it's a story about a child.

>> No.13808461

>>13807109
fken hell my sides

>> No.13808780

>>13808383
You have to be either esl and dont know what half of the words you are using actually mean or you are an incredibly unique kind of idiot that I've never seen before.

I'm not saying that Nietzsche did not like political socialist anarchists. Obviously he did and you dont need to quote Nietzsche at me, I've read him. What I had a problem with was 1. You used the phrase "submit to earthy authorities" which makes absolutely no sense in relation to Nietzsche. Nietzsche does not want you to dream of a idealized afterlife but he also in no way wants you to submit to ANY authority. He constantly calls people who follow him free thinkers, free ones, etc. In other words people who are not under authority.

And yes obviously like I previously said in my last post there are different connotations and definitions of an anarchist. One is the political anarchist who rejects rules because he thinks they are unjust and make people inequality. This is the bad kind of anarchist. Then there are anarchists who reject all laws simply because they do not submit to authority and do not allow anyone else to inform their free will. When butterfly speaks of anarchist and anarchy this is what she was referring to.

Your last line in response to my post is what really solidified my guess that you were esl because that made absolutely no sense. What on earth was deliberately not understanding someone have to do with the concept of not being equal? It makes no sense and I can only conclude that such a sentence probably somehow makes sense when translated into your native language but honestly you have to be really misunderstanding this conversation right now.

>> No.13808846

>>13807182
It was full of citiy-states, not nations.The earlier nationalism starts in the Hundred Years Wars.

>> No.13809019

>>13807140
So Nietzsche was a libertarian?

>> No.13809183

>>13807047
Do you realize that, in Nietzsche's opinion, the man who got the closest to being an Overman was Goethe? Also do you realize that Nietzsche rejected the idea that the will to power could be used as a new principles for what concerns the radical transformation of our values?
Are you sure you're not taking your misreads from the ones of Gabriele D'Annunzio? He had a very similar, equally plebeian interpretation of Nietzsche's Overman

>> No.13810474

>>13809019
Nietzsche also hated capitalism

>> No.13810650

>>13808383
>Doesn't seem that I am..
No, you are.

>> No.13811882

>>13808780
>1. You used the phrase "submit to earthy authorities"
No I didn't. Read my posts again.

>When butterfly speaks of anarchist and anarchy this is what she was referring to.
Nietzsche doesn't make the distinction because it's splitting hairs. His criticism of anarchism is applied to all its forms. The idea that it is possible to reject all rules and rule-making is delusional. Nietzsche wasn't delusional in this way and he realized that the anarchist was just as much a dreamer of utopia as the Christian and the Platonist.

My point with the last sentence is that all anarchism is a prelude to the assertion of equal rights, but the Overman despises such an assertion. To think there is anything anarchistic about the Overman is simply ridiculous. If you believe all things are unequal, then there is a hierarchy, and there are rules.

>>13809183
He criticized Goethe as misunderstanding the Greeks. Just because he revered him as a potential Overman does not mean the man is a perfect reference guide for the concept.

>Also do you realize that Nietzsche rejected the idea that the will to power could be used as a new principles for what concerns the radical transformation of our values?
Source or explain, please.