[ 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: 164 KB, 800x800, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5448552 No.5448552 [Reply] [Original]

>mfw I found out Nietzsche was pro-anarchy

>> No.5448569

wrong

>> No.5448570

>being anti-anarchy
What are you, a fucking spook?

>> No.5448571

>>5448552
>muh best system yet

>> No.5448580

if you dont like philosophers who are inclined to anarchy, you are faggot.

>> No.5448582

>>5448569
Read "the new idol" in Zarathustra, assuming you have time away from your previous Wikipedia.

>> No.5448641

>>5448582
Being against the nation-state (which is of course a blight upon the world) doesn't mean being an anarchist

>> No.5448653

>>5448582
That's a very far-off consideration, only possible when everyone in the world is a Napoleon. Until then, Nietzsche supports the Napoleons running the states.

>> No.5448656

lol wat.

>> No.5449080

Nietzche was a nihilist, that doesn't mean he was an anarchist.

>> No.5449086

>>5449080
bruh

>> No.5449306

>>5449080
Not even close

>> No.5449307

>>5449080
kill yourself

>> No.5449311

>>5448552
>tfw whenever you reply to a thread it's always the last reply

>> No.5449327
File: 140 KB, 500x385, Max Stirner.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5449327

>>5448641
That's it by definition.

Mfw your thread, OP.
Going to have to read this FN now.

>> No.5449343

>>5449327
You're in over your head bb
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLuW-GBaJ8k

>> No.5449366
File: 23 KB, 600x600, 1379813646330.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5449366

>>5448552
>implying anarchy isn't amazing

>> No.5449376

>>5448552
>there should be no laws because all laws do is protect the weak

Yeah, Nietzsche was pretty dumb.

>> No.5449389
File: 60 KB, 499x499, ayyy lmao.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5449389

>>5448552
>there are people on /lit/ that lick the boot of their oppressors

>> No.5449400

>>5449389
>there are people on /lit/ who think wild wild west is a good idea

>i don't have a clever image

>> No.5449402
File: 89 KB, 726x590, 1387632127943.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5449402

>>5449389
>I want a stable government to regulate big business and protect the people of the nation
>HURRRURRDURR FUCKING BOOTLICKERS HURRRRRR

>> No.5449414

>>5449402
>I want the government to force the people to conform to a materialistic society where big corporations are allowed to exist and are seen as idols
Once anarchy kicks in, the first thing people would do is destroy their oppressors, and that includes the corporations

>> No.5449424
File: 84 KB, 1246x938, anarchy in a nutshell.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5449424

>>5449414
Yes, and then the nation will become susceptible to be invaded by other nations. Good job, you just invited in an even shittier government!

>> No.5449428

>>5449402
serious question, how do you think "big business" would exist without property law?

>> No.5449429

>>5448653
Nietzsche doesn't think everyone can be Napoleon though.

>> No.5449436

>>5449424
how do you expect to rule over someone who just overthrew their government? They would just rebel again, this time inviting the people of the other nation to do the same

>> No.5449438

>>5449428
Capitalists would hire thugs to protect their land.

>> No.5449440

>>5449428
Business still have their rights to property. I never said I want big businesses eliminated, just regulated so they don't become fucking monopolies

>> No.5449444

>>5449429
Not currently, probably not for hundreds or even thousands of years. He definitely thinks in the far future that's possible, though, when we look at men of the past as men of the past looked at apes.

>> No.5449448

>>5449438
>people buying things from someone who sells their goods with hired thugs protecting them
I would think they're smart enough to stay clear

>> No.5449452

>>5449424


but anon, if an anarchic apocalypse led to feudalism/theocracy, that would be a best case scenario.

>> No.5449459

>>5449436
I may not like my job that much, but it's vaguely preferable to a constant state of total war.

>> No.5449461

>>5449424
let me get this straight, you're reason for not wanting anarchy, is that a government might come back? That is a shitty fucking reason and you know it

>> No.5449466

>>5449459
don't worry anon, mob mentality will let you join the rioters

>> No.5449472

>>5449461
Not wanting to sacrifice countless lives in a revolution only to end up with a worse even more totalitarian government is a shitty fucking reason?

That really doesn't seem like a shitty reason to me.

>> No.5449478
File: 95 KB, 395x730, 1374809922262.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5449478

>>5449461
You fucking retard.

>We live in a benevolent capitalist system
>Anarchy occurs
>Nation is invaded by communists/fascists/muslims/any oppressive ideology with any semblance of a competent military
>The people finally get to experience what real oppression is like

Is this really hard for you to understand? When will you realize your dogshit ideology will only lead to the deterioration of government, instead of it's abolishment? Instead of trying to revolt against your government, how about actually trying to improve it like a fucking mature adult?

Is

>> No.5449480

>>5449472
how does another government take control?
>Oh these people just overthrew thier government, i guess now is a great time to tell them i want to rule over them with an iron fist, i'm sure some of them would loooove to join me

>> No.5449483
File: 14 KB, 203x209, 1401156152908.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5449483

>>5449478
>We live in a benevolent capitalist system

>> No.5449488

>>5449400
>there are people on /lit/ who think wild wild west was really cowboys and indians shit
you're not very smart are you?

>> No.5449491

>>5449478
>benevolent capitalist system
you've got to be shitting me, you can't seriously believe this

>> No.5449492

>>5449483
>Le ad hominem face

>> No.5449493

>>5448569
right

>> No.5449495

>>5449491
>He actually thinks the system he currently lives under is any way oppressive
>He thinks he knows what true oppression is like

Please move to Somalia if you want to experience true anarchism, keep your teenage ideology out of the civilized countries

>> No.5449501

>>5449495
but somolia was a failed socialist state you nigger

>> No.5449504

>>5449495
>somalia
>anarchist

no, they have a corrupt government
also niggers

>> No.5449506

>>5449478
>>>/pol/

>> No.5449507
File: 75 KB, 610x416, 13 out of 10.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5449507

>>5449501
>Implying I'm a socialist

>> No.5449509

people on here actually support and encourage their government's oppression of the people, by saying someone else has it worse.That's like saying i shouldn't see the doctor for my broken arm, because someone else has cancer and i should feel lucky

>> No.5449525

>>5449507
>implying he said you were
you're on /lit/ and your reading comprehension is this shitty?

>> No.5449528

>>5449327
>all states are nation states

>> No.5449536

>>5448552
Nietzsche's insight on general semantics before it was even a thing gives him validity.

OP is a faggot

>> No.5449542

>>5449536
Maybe in semantics, but his moral/political philosophy is juvenile and retarded.

>> No.5449544

>>5449525
I said he implied it. Not that he said it. Looks like you're the one with shitty reading comprehension here, friend :^)

>> No.5449551

>>5449544
not him, but where did he imply that you were a socialist? You said it was an anarchist state, and he told you it was a socialist one.

>> No.5449582

>>5449528
Not reading the rest of the thread. Do you have anything from Nietzsche that would imply what he wanted instead?

>> No.5449592

>>5449582
There is no such thing, Nietzsche went batshit before he could actually explain how his ideas could ever be applied socially or politically.

>> No.5449615

>>5449528
What is being referenced by the OP, "The New Idol," from Thus Spoke Zarathustra, impeaches states, period. It makes no national qualification.

>> No.5449625

>>5449582
Nietzsche wanted people to live according to how they wanted, rather than how authority or even Nietzsche wanted them to live. As he put it, to follow him, you follow yourself.

>> No.5449678

>>5449528
So what do you say to these?
>>5449615
>>5449625
It seems OP is right that Nietzsche has implied a stateless future in TSZ.

>> No.5449781

>>5449678
He does, but his anarchism is more a product of everyone being a Napoleon-like tyrant, than the abolition of tyrants altogether. Even in childhood, Napoleon had this will. In school, as a little boy, he was to be punished for insubordination by being forced to eat his dinner on his knees, while all the other boys were to sit at the table. The tyrannical child became furious, and screamed, "In my family we were taught to kneel only before God!" When effort was made to physically force him, he struggled so violently and angrily that he vomited profusely, and eventually the effort was given up.

To Nietzsche, it is not advisable to try to abolish that sort of personality from the world so we may be free of tyrants. It is better that we cultivate our tyrants, the people who have absolute will to dominate their environment. Now if everyone were like Napoleon, there could be no state, but where there are a few people like Napoleon, they become tyrants over all the other weaker individuals.

Thus Spoke Zarathustra is referencing a world where everyone is a tyrant, but Nietzsche does not think you can reach that simply by abolition of the state.

>> No.5449790
File: 5 KB, 452x496, 56789998.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5449790

>being well read on philosophy
>still supporting the State

>> No.5449815
File: 50 KB, 160x171, Eckhart2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5449815

>>5449536


>insight on general semantics before it was even a thing

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modistae

niggas betta recognize, beware renaissance disinfo.

>> No.5449829

>>5449790

You're doing philosophy wrong if you don't support the state. Think of Socrates.

>> No.5449901
File: 3.44 MB, 2083x2309, JohannHinrichGossler[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5449901

>>5449790
>Not a reactionary

Fucking plen

>> No.5449915

>>5449829
I think you mean Plato, and since every decent philosopher since Plato thought Plato is to be shit (including Kant), he's not a good yardstick.

>> No.5449998

>>5449480
*cough*that'sexactlyhwathappenedwiththebolsheviks*cough*

>> No.5450009
File: 86 KB, 500x793, bye bye trotsky-kun.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5450009

>>5449998
Go to bed, Trot.

>> No.5450016

>>5449424
>what is militia?
>implying that an anarchist revolution is limited only by a country

>> No.5450019

>>5450009
>implying Trotsky wasn't a Bolshevik

>> No.5450027
File: 86 KB, 384x288, 1269563531008.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5450027

>He isn't an anarchist

>> No.5450034

>>5449495
>somailia
>anarchist

Go fucking study, retarded.

>> No.5450049

>>5449495
>your benevolent capitalist system is probably responsible for the oppressions around the world

Someone has to make your iphone for a good price, mate.

>> No.5450054

>>5448552
Nietzsche is more anti-system than pro-anarchy. Anarchy is inevitably just another system, so you've misread him if you think he supports it.

>> No.5450056
File: 36 KB, 960x719, Kirk Smirk.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5450056

>>5449781
>Mfw I realize I have the same sorts of thoughts

>> No.5450716

>>5449461
⇒hurr durr I can't into human nature

I don't mean this as an insult, but do you often have problems understanding the motives of the people around you? Like when someone with a knife threatens you, do you think he's being friendly?

>> No.5450757

>>5450019
He was a Menshevik in all but name (and until the very minute before the Revolution, in name also) you silly goose.

>> No.5450765

>>5450757
The Bolsheviks took power from the SR's, not the Mensheviks.

>> No.5450775

>>5450765
The Bolshies were hotheads who felt like Marxism was cool and all but fuck that whole "waiting for the inevitable course of history" bollocks, lets just ramroad it through in an at-the-time barely industrialised society without popular support and oh what do you mean it's all gone a bit to pot?

One could argue that by giving Communism the hideous face it has nowadays with their tomfoolery, the Bolshies did steal the revolution from Mensheviks, or rather, they stole any hope of a 'proper one' from any 'patient revolutionaries'.

>> No.5450780

>>5450775
The Bolsheviks were more radical the Mesheviks (and thus less orthodox Marxism), but less radical than the SR's.

>> No.5450789

>>5448552

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without having to accept it."

>> No.5450790

>>5450780
Granted. I just waded in to point out that Trotsky was a Menshevik more than a Bolshevik: "Trotsky was initially a supporter of the Menshevik Internationalists faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party. He joined the Bolsheviks immediately prior to the 1917 October Revolution" Source: Wikipedia

>> No.5452360

>>5449781
you get it.

>> No.5452369

>>5449781
>>5452360
Forget to add, Nietzsche also praised Cesar Borgia.

>> No.5452398

>never read Nietzsche
>still lurking and posting in thread

>> No.5452634

>>5452398
>implying anyone on /lit/ reads books

>> No.5452997

>>5449376
And at another point he says that laws were made by strong to satisfy the ressentiment of the weak.
You can't reduce Nietzsche to a single quote of his. You can't even reduce him to a single reading. That the fun part of him, to come up with your own Nietzsche, as sensible and nuanced as possible.

>> No.5453015

>>5449389
>there are people on /lit/ that think they don't

>> No.5453045

>>5453015
i dont

>> No.5453071

>>5452997
>there should be no laws because all laws do is protect the weak

>And at another point he says that laws were made by strong to satisfy the ressentiment of the weak.

Are you perceiving some contradiction there? Those two statements both just go hand in hand, in fact he uses the second to justify the first since he thinks it was a mistake for the aristocracy to ever give any concessions to the poor or weak.

>> No.5453088

can anyone elaborate what advantages of anarchy are?

Most you fuckers would get your ass kicked, if you say you'd deserve it look for a doc conercing self esteem issues.

>> No.5453103

>>5453071
They way he explains it in GoM, that is my interpretation at least, is that the strong by this did not give in to the weak but established a masked power over them. Only later in history does there appear a decadence of the law.
With Nietzsche you have to be very careful and pay attention to the context. For example in BGE he'll sometimes use the word "morals" in negative way and other times in a sort of neutral way, applying the word also to a better alternative. The same could be said about his usage of the word "law".

>> No.5453106
File: 637 KB, 500x584, read a fucking book nigga.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5453106

>>5448552
>Being anti-anarchhy