[ 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: 214 KB, 1280x799, 2018_35_nietzsche_new.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18043693 No.18043693 [Reply] [Original]

books that argue against capitalism from a Nietzschean perspective?

>> No.18043706

Shitty Fuckcunts by Arthur Schoppy

>> No.18043748

>>18043693
Max Weber

>> No.18043753

>>18043693
You'll only get Marxist shit.

>> No.18043915

so why should an economoy be dictated by what slaves like to throw their money at?

pretty dumb if u ask me tbqh

>> No.18043925

>>18043693
I dunno, but it would probably be a book that advocates for feudalism or some shit.

>> No.18043936

>>18043925
no it wouldn't, nietzsche did not want to go back in time. he wanted techno futurism and robots to kill shit.

>> No.18043946

>>18043936
Yeah but that's clearly capitalism. Capitalism is essentially a selective mechanism akin to evolution, so really it doesn't contradict Nietzsche at all.

>> No.18043961
File: 24 KB, 267x400, Wagner's Ring of the Nibelung.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18043961

>>18043693

>> No.18043964

>>18043946
capitalism doesn't put money into progressing society, it puts money into the places which will make the most money, which is decided by the consumption habits of slaves.

>> No.18044153

>>18043964
Evolution =/= "Progress".

And advancing society needn't be a goal. Advance yourself at the cost of society even, if you value your goal enough - why not? If money helps you get there, why would you hate money?

>> No.18044169

>>18043964
>which is decided by the consumption habits of slaves.
This is reductive, as capitalist society has more aspects than just the consumerist one.

>> No.18044171

>>18043964
>capitalism doesn't put money into progressing society

Capitalism is a perfect 1:1 system. A perfect modelling of human patterns. Every success and failure is an unavoidable part of the model, not a condemnation of the system itself. History proves this.

>> No.18044174

>>18043693
>Books that argue in favor of slave morality from a Nietzschean perspective

There aren't any. Shove it up your ass.

>> No.18044184

>>18044174
>NOOOOOOOOO YOU CAN'T DISLIKE TECHNOLOGICAL CORRUPTION THAT'S NOT NIETZSCHEAN NOOOOO!
And the problem with almost every Nietzschean (while being not true to Nietzsche) arises here, they don't have a will of their own as an individual.

>> No.18044209

my diary desu

>> No.18044287

>>18044153
evolution is progress, advancing society is my goal. if i wanted to put in a bajillion dollars into space travel I wouldn't be able to do this because our society is organized around consumers.
>>18044169
>This is reductive, as capitalist society has more aspects than just the consumerist one.
no it doesn't. this is what it boils down to.
>>18044171
it just puts money into what sells, that's all.

>> No.18044390

>>18044287
>this is what it boils down to.
So, what of individuals like Elon Musk then? Does capitalism not enable such men to have free range over other talent and employ them for their private projects, which can be completely indifferent to popular consumer interests?

>> No.18044464

>>18044390
That's still not a lot of power, at all. If your ambitions are large enough you will need the entire state backing you at a certain point dollars have nothing to do with it.

>> No.18044492

>>18044464
>That's still not a lot of power
I don't see why that matters regarding the point I made.

>> No.18044498

>>18044171
>Every failure is an unavoidable part of the model
That's exactly what makes a system condemnable.

>> No.18044504

>>18043693
Nietzsche was critical of capitalism for fetishizing manual labor, along with the dehumanizing nature of machine work dumbing down the average work. He however did not believe socialism was the solution. The Ubermensch is above libertarian and Marxist non-sense.

>> No.18044507

>>18044184
Do you think Nietzsche was a master moralist.

>> No.18044529

>>18044507
Not him, but yes. Nietzsche the cultural critic is a master moralist.

>> No.18044531

>>18044504
ok so how does the body progress itself
>>18044507
no he wanted the reevaluation of morality;

>> No.18044539

>>18044529
Retard

>> No.18044550

>>18044498
>That's exactly what makes a system condemnable.

Except that these things are unpreventable. Look at all the suffering that occurred under Communist regimes. It, too, was part of the model.

>> No.18044583

>>18044539
How do you interpret Nietzsche's method and mode of critique then? Is there not a difference between Nietzsche the cultural critic and Nietzsche the philosopher or artist?

>> No.18044591
File: 60 KB, 564x864, 978-0-8166-1225-3-frontcover.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18044591

Uh yes well this does it... I umm... I don't know if there are others, but uh... this one... it exists

>> No.18044629

>>18044550
For clarification, what things are you talking about

>> No.18044666

>>18043946
A long with wat the other anon said about how capitalism doesn't progress society i find it incredibly difficult to not see the obvious connections between herd mentality and capitalism. We are literally brought up since birth to be workers.

>> No.18044681

>>18044390
What? What would are u living in. Do you think if elon musk started to employ people for random shit his shareholders would allow that. No, he runs a business and so all aspects of the business will be centered toward making profit.

>> No.18044682

>>18044287
>if i wanted to put in a bajillion dollars into space travel I wouldn't be able to do this because our society is organized around consumers.
If you had a bajillion dollars to do with as you please, you could do it. Is your entire critique of capitalism that you are powerless in relation to the capitalist? That's not nietzschean at all.

>> No.18044691

>>18044504
I would argue that Neitzsche did not think utopian socialism was the solution. In this way he is in agreement with Marx. One could only theorize what Nietzsche would have thought if he read Marx. I think they would have found themselves in agreement with many things.

>> No.18044698

>>18044681
SpaceX was funded from his paypal money. Money is actually beside the point, what matters is who has the power. In a public company "shareholders" have power but really its more like the board has power while the majority of shareholder have jack shit influence over the board.

>> No.18044714

>>18044287
>advancing society is my goal
What slave morality, what non embracement of your own will.

>> No.18044730
File: 49 KB, 480x360, R8f9c5c08e20f1f9f4ea078ec5a206ea2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18044730

The Worker
>>18043147

>> No.18044738

>>18044698
How did u respond to my point at all? You say money doesn't matter, what matters is power. Where do u think that power comes from. Who do u think are the most powerful men in America right now (hint: they are all very rich). Replace shareholders with the word board and the message is still the same. The bottom line is that capitalism functions in such a way to direct all assets of the society to produce things for exchange value (how much something can be exchanged for). This is as opposed to use value which values things on how useful they are to people in an area.

>> No.18044749

>>18044629
Let's pretend for a moment that I start actually naming them -- are you going to do that typical Marxist thing where you deflect by mentioning Capitalism, U.S. embargoes/interference/imperialism, or even claiming that it wasn't real Communism?

>> No.18044761

>>18044682
Critics of capitalism strangely always tend to think that if it's not done for profit then the system doesn't actually condone it.

>> No.18044776

>>18044749
>it wasn't real Communism
That's right. We don't call someone a surgeon by virtue of their botched surgeries.

>> No.18044944
File: 18 KB, 480x360, Raaae01a5452c69bdf7773cd428c09f17.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18044944

>>18044730
Essentially there cannot be a Nietzschean attack on capitalism because there is no power in it. At most it is the herd instincts of the valueless, the nihilism which reverts to the domestic sphere because of technology. Which is of the same problem as the luddites, although strangely to a lesser degree. A Nietzschean attack on capitalism would look like Chaplin cooking with dynamite. This is why socialist organising is reduced to a feminine managerialism - the fool on the corner selling his rags was always a babushka street capitalist, selling domestic wares that are unwanted even by industry. Forever one with the deepest crisis.

This was already hinted at by Plato, blind wealth is a sort of 'herd instinct' of metaphysical laws.

>> No.18044962

>>18043693
Capitalism and Schizophrenia
Deleuze and Guartti

>> No.18044967

>>18044738
Typical of middle class morality, you conflate money with power. Money is power for the powerless because it is the most direct taste of power they can achieve aside from a family relationship like a father dominating the child, for the powerful, it is merely a tool among many and not even the most crucial one.

>> No.18045000

>>18044390
>what of individuals like Elon musk

Either you're ESL or you're just really really retarded. Do you not see the kind of connotation this question carries kek

>> No.18045031

>>18044944
is capitalism the most efficient method of growth?
i don't think so

>> No.18045054

>>18045000
There is no connotation, it was a question

>> No.18045059

>>18043693
Nick Land? If you mean a reactive position against capitalism, then >>18043753 is right.

>> No.18045086

>>18044944
Very based.

>> No.18045092

>>18045086
no

>> No.18045131

>>18044390
will to power in action

>>18044504
socialism =/= Marxism

>> No.18045143

>>18044666
slave morality isn’t just about herd thinking you pseud. Slave morality is based off inversion of previous values and hatred for the ones that imposed them (ressentiment)

>> No.18045156

>>18045131
I WANT GROWTH. MAXIMUM GROWTH. IGNORE THE MARKET.
what then?

>> No.18045494
File: 144 KB, 900x732, hermes-ordering-calypso-to-release-odysseus-gerard-de-lairesse.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18045494

>>18045031
>>18044944
I mean that there is neither power in capitalism nor the attack against it. Capitalism is only the domestic aspect of an era with much greater purpose than selling food in cans. At most it is only ever a means of power, its sustenance.

The question cannot be one of efficiency, great organisations of economy only arise because of the vast military operations of the modern era - they are like field kitchens in one moment, but must resort to desperate plunder in another. Efficiency is a bourgeois concern of security, and is seen as foolishness where there is immeasurable wealth. What is the wasting of a can of food, or even entire container ships, in the face of continents which are not yet turned to deserts?

The slightest waste is everything to the field cook, but also the starving soldier - only for each in their own way. Economics cannot answer such questions, nor can anything material answer what lies behind it. There can only be the outward appearance of forces, but never that which resides within. This contributes to the elemental destruction, the world-weakening.

The real question, from a nietzschean perspective, is where is the power? Without knowing this it can be neither supported nor attacked. Where one retreats into economic questions he has resigned himself against this, and stands for domesticity, the reordering of the smallest affairs. He abandons even the order of questioning. To attempt to force a civil war of this, which is what revolution really is (only unconsciously), is doomed from the start. To force the money changers out during the transitional phase is only to make a temple of their act.

If the failed revolutions of the communists (and I mean this in the sense that they fail even in their clownish attempts at organising for the revolution) have taught us anything it is that the will of the modern era is not economic in nature. For Nietzsche, the power of the modern era lies in the creation of a new species. Economics has never possessed this formative level of power, and never will. It cannot enter into the blood of man, and certainly not his essence, what gives new life. The economy is merely a mark of this essence, and is always limited to its era. The owl on the face of the coin speaks to athena, but also Hermes.

It is the life-giving power which is the question, and economics are always a step away from this - hence fasting in the Abrahamic religions, the fall into a nihilism of the guts was foreseen, perhaps due to their proximity to the transitional forces. Marx's economic contradictionism says less than the old Christian fables, the Carmina Burana, the Flemish Proverbs. Economy is domestic concern reduced to its technical aspects, or in other words, the sustenanceof law where it can only sense survival at its most austere - pain reduced to impoverishment.

https://youtu.be/RIq5FSPtPjM

>> No.18045576

>>18044171
>Every success and failure is an unavoidable part of the model
And models aren’t reality. Otherwise, the credit crisis of 2008 would’ve never happened

>> No.18045602

>>18045494
Or more simply...
The question is, 'what is the wealth of power?' (for Goethe it would be, 'what is the power of wealth?') Movements cannot answer this because the destruction of power is written into their very form. And neither capitalism nor its opposition can answer this because their concerns are not with wealth but the redistribution of austerity, the deepening impoverishment as the species is worn away.

Where the question of species creation enters the picture materialism is found to be without power. This only increases on the world stage, where economy is seen much in the sense of tectonic forces. It is only a capacity of power's mobilisation, not the thing in itself.

>> No.18045669

>>18043946
>Capitalism is essentially a selective mechanism akin to evolution
Where do I even start with this?

>> No.18046527

>>18044730
The only correct answer.

>> No.18046538

Georges Bataille - Accursed Share

>> No.18046550

>>18043693
My Kampf by Literally Donald Trump
The Gottfried Feder Manifesto by Literally Donald Trump

>> No.18046582

>>18043964
>progressing society
Define

>> No.18046888

>>18043964
>still believes in progress
ngmi

>> No.18047071

>>18045494
this is really good, some real talking points
recommend me books that are not Nietzsche or readings on Nietzsche that will make me think like that pls blessed anon

>> No.18047352

>>18044171
based, someone's been reading von Mises
>tfw leftists complain about rising X prices but they don't know it's a necessary spike to accomodate the structure of production to a new structure of consumption and it will soon be mitigated by an increase of supply

>> No.18047382

>>18044171
Imagine believing this.

>> No.18047449

>>18044171
ive seen some retarded defenses of capitalism on here but this is just delusional.
>>18047352
>b-but supply and demand guyse! econ 101!
do you people just not know that both supply and demand can be artificially manipilated? have you ever been outside? when housing supply goes down because it is more profitable for CEOs and investors to wait for (or cause) prices to rise, do the houses just disappear?
mfs really think they figured out the world by understanding 8th grade econ class subjects

>> No.18047461

>>18045494
>To force the money changers out during the transitional phase is only to make a temple of their act.
Why can't I just force the money changers out?

>> No.18047464

>>18047449
>do you people just not know that both supply and demand can be artificially manipilated?
yep by government price floors and caps and monopolies (fascilitated by the government)
> when housing supply goes down because it is more profitable for CEOs and investors to wait for (or cause) prices to rise, do the houses just disappear?
what does this have to do with the argument lol?

>> No.18047485

americans need to believe wagecucking is written into the fabric of Being or else they kill themselves lol

>> No.18047493

>>18044776
Typical.

>> No.18047512

>>18047464
>yep by government price floors and caps and monopolies (fascilitated by the government)
>its all the government bro its their fault
anon, who do you think the government serves? the government interferes in the market for 2 reasons: to keep the proles from revolting and to serve themselves, their own monetary interests. when they interfere in the market, they are operating perfectly within capitalist logic, even if some payd shill says otherwise.
and the government isnt the only ones to do this. whenever monopolies inevitably form, they have almost complete control over supply. demand can be artificially generated through advertisements (psyops)
>what does this have to do with the argument lol?
proving the point that supply & demand is an extremely simplified model that is thaught to high schoolers for a reason. it is not applicable in almost all real world markets, but gives people the illusion of understanding and makes it easy to handwave problems away.

>> No.18047610

>>18047512
>whenever monopolies inevitably form, they have almost complete control over supply
monopolies have a complete control over supply by definition. goods are not homogenous so Rolls Royce has a monopoly over suppy of Rolls Royce cars for example though not over production of cars or means of transportation in general. the whole question is how far are they able to exercise their monopolistic privilege without attracting competitors into their niche by artificially inflating prices.
>proving the point that supply & demand is an extremely simplified model that is thaught to high schoolers for a reason. it is not applicable in almost all real world markets, but gives people the illusion of understanding and makes it easy to handwave problems away.
I agree but then what model does a better job? LTV which treats variations of supply and demand as temporary?

>> No.18047623

>>18043946
>Capitalism is essentially a selective mechanism akin to evolution, so really it doesn't contradict Nietzsche at all.
You haven't read Nietzsche. He very explicitly argues that natural selection does not make species more fit.

>> No.18047629

>>18043693
Read Nietzsche and do it yourself you retarded pig

>> No.18047677

>>18043964
>capitalism doesn't put money into progressing society

That's up for the people to decide. Capitalism isn't conscious: the people affect where the money goes.

"Progressing society" is nebulous; and, often, it's just an emotional phrase that has no end. As Zappfe points out such people who believe in "progress" as a mantra are "spiritually developed" and can never be satisfied. The yearning to progress is spiritual for them.

>> No.18047716

>>18047610
>using rolls royces monopoly over rolls royces cars as an example of a monopoly
i genuinely cant tell if youre being disingenuous or retarded.
when talking about monopolies, i mean shit like microsoft. or the few telecommunications companies which through cartel deals hold monopolies over certain regions. they hold absolute power over a certain market and do not attract competitors since they are so entrenched and monolithing, they cannot be outcompeted.
by the way, it doesnt even take a monopoly to artificially inflate prices. why do you think diamonds are so expensive? because a bunch of companies got together and decided they wanted diamonds to be expensive, launching massive advertisement campaigns to influence culture in such a way people are expected to giftthousand dollar diamond rings nowadays, even though diamonds are neither rare, nor hard to work with.
>I agree but then what model does a better job?
none. thats why you analyse the material conditions and competing interests underlying such a problem.

this system is not working to your benefit buddy, and defending it on the internet will not convince your boss to give you a raise.

>> No.18047821

>>18047716
Pls giv me reading material in the vein of this post.

>> No.18047831

>>18047821
Not him but John Kenneth Galbraith refuted the idea of independent demand as if the thriving advertising industry doesn't exist

>> No.18047838

>>18047493
I accept your concession

>> No.18047932

>>18047821
pretty sure lenin wrote about monopolies in "imperialism, the highest stage of capitalism"
other than that i dont have anything specific, just browse around marxists.org or watch someone like Hakim (pbuh) on youtube.
baudrillar wrote some pretty good works on advertisements, those stories i picked up from news and stuff.

>> No.18048031

>>18047716
>when talking about monopolies, i mean shit like microsoft.
The people now saying microsoft can't be outcompeted would be the people saying ibm could not be outcompeted before microsoft gobbled up most of it's market share.

>or the few telecommunications companies which through cartel deals hold monopolies over certain regions
This is pretty much an US thing. In Portugal you can't take the train without having telecomm agents bidding for you to change service. In the EU, even electricity is non-monopolistic because you have different providers competing on the same grid. The US isn't market-friendly enough.

>artificially inflate prices
>>18047831
>refuted the idea of independent demand as if the thriving advertising industry doesn't exist
The notion that demand is more artificial because it is induced isn't coherent, unless you were to consider private conversations, including gossip, and public education a form of market manipulation, since product recommendations (such as reading lists) are part of those. Sending signals back and forth is one of the most fundamental functions of the market and there is precious skill to it. If people couldn't be trusted to parse through the information themselves, that would be less of an argument against the market, because the consequences of disinformation would be self-correcting as the least misguided people would accrue more purchasing power over the most misguided people, than an argument against democracy in it's centralist, majoritanist form because then a misguided majority would have more power to force the consequences of disinformation on the rest of society.

>> No.18048037

>>18043753
>You'll only get Marxist shit.
Funny how that works

>> No.18048195

>>18047071
Other than Jünger's The Worker and Maxima-Minima I don't think there are many dedicated works. There are chapters in his brother's books on technology and myth. there are fragments throughout Tocqueville's works, Goethe's aesthetics and his philosophy of wealth, Hölderlin, the Carmina Burana, anything on Roman militaristic wealth or martial economy, the Wisdom of Silenus, the Wisdom of Solon in Herodotus, Plato, Xenophon and Aristotle, and the myths of Hermes, Plutus, etc.
A lot of it was just years of working through the question of why economy is so prevalent as a dominant force of critique even though it should be obvious that it is not the source of power.

There were a few threads on Plato's blind wealth that have more discussion. If I think of any other books that are focused on the topic I'll post them
>>/lit/thread/S16118334
>>/lit/thread/S16153781

>> No.18048479

>>18047461
Because the money changers are only a means of a much greater destructive force. It is not the same problem as in the Bible because there is no corruption in our situation,the 'corruption' is a minor part of the very law of this society.
This is akin to the division of worlds between Shakespeare and Goethe. Goethe cannot write with Shakespeare's natural relation to character, because the character has changed and to approach it naturally would be to strengthen the corrupting effects (or at least work against the metamorphosis).
The conservative, or reactionary, sentiment to just toss the money changers out is perhaps correct on the surface, however it lacks foresight, and perhaps the recognition of its own defeat. there is a lack of recognition that the situation has changed - where the law is an austerity at the level of continents there can be no matural economy.
The opposition to wealth speculation, or wealth-creating techniques, on the ground of politics and organisation alone ignores that technical organisation is of a higher power than the economic. Socialism and conservatism are both blind here and do not recognise how they too speculate, only at a higher level where they become equal to liberalism. The great ideologies only succeed in replacing the state, their character remains of the workhouse, but it is mobilised at the level of continents. Hence why deatrucrion and impoverishment only increase where thwy come to power.

In another sense, how can a Crassus come to power where all that men see is the cutting out of gold from the belly or pouring it down the throat? This is the problem of communism, the vices which are turned to private interest of the state are freed in the revolution, they become collective, and the image of the Leviathan is replaced by a great effigy of Midas, who has the gold cut out from him.
This is seen in the stories of the Russian peasants who stormed the palaces and then stored the great plunder in their sheds.


------

Or more simply, how can the blind lead us away from blind wealth? If one does not even recognise that he is ruled by blind wealth how is he to see it, let alone lead the money changers from the temple and restore it to its former glory?
How does one who does not know wealth come to create it?
The money changers in our time are only the technical aspect of the corruption, not its cause.

>> No.18049179

bump

>> No.18049369

>>18047623
where does he argue this?

>> No.18049427

>>18043693
Schmitt

>> No.18049772

>>18045494
Thanks for posting this

>> No.18050468

>>18044730
Based.

>> No.18050652

>>18043693
Capitalism isn't real

>> No.18050682

>>18050652
We're talking about Nietzsche not Stirner

>> No.18050708

>>18050652
Exactly

>> No.18051557

>>18044591
Cringe

>> No.18051745

>>18043693
Emma Goldman

>> No.18052498

>>18043748
Kek

>> No.18053173

>>18048479
I think you are being too negative. All it simply takes is one plot of land, one town, one city, or even one country to cut it's ties with the international banking system. Thanks to the internet words can spread quickly and many other places around the world can follow and we can established decentralized publicly owned banks.

Sure the process will rustle up a lot Jimmies, fuck up an economy, or even lead to war- but that's the fun of it!

>> No.18053181

>>18045494
>>18048479
Please recommend me books on the subject of money changers and the baking system, preferably one with a hefty bibliography so it can lead me to other directions.

Please and thank you kind sir, and brilliant posts.

>> No.18053575 [DELETED] 

Bump

>> No.18053650 [DELETED] 

Bump

>> No.18053847 [DELETED] 

Bump

>> No.18053872

how unironic, you have capital you like capitalism, you poorfag you don't like capitalism and capitalists. no wonder so many zoomers are against capitalism.

>> No.18053880
File: 37 KB, 279x402, The_Iron_Heel.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18053880

The Iron Heel by Jack London. I don't know how well Jack London really understood Nietzsche, but Ernest Everhard is certainly inspired by Nietzsche's blonde beast, though less so than Wolf Larsen from The Sea Wolf.

>> No.18053932

>>18043946
I don't think so. ''Success'' on a free market society is achieved through the accumulation of capital, but the distribution of capital is mandated by the laws of supply and demand, hence, one ought to know supply and demand in order to gain capital. Now, supply and demand are factors which are defined by society's predetermined values, therefore not created by an individual, but rather a reaction on something external to him. Thus, capitalism is a system for slaves, since the force of the weak is reactive, while the force of the strong is active. This anon was right >>18043964