Fascist or Republican?

[GePap]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
See the way I see it, fascism and nazism were simply vehicles towards the Nietzschean ideal of power. If you could become master of people through a puppy dog cult, then that'd be fine too. Hitler choose racism & nationalism as his vehicles for accending to absolute power. The power is the key part, and yes that makes nazism and fascism very Nietzschean. At the same time, as Gepap and Imran note, Nietzsche doesn't give a wit about nationalism or racism. He cares about power.

No, he does not "care about power" in the sense you talk about- he would view hitler as a great example of the slave mentality, a nihilist peddling ideas of fear, and a mob following him as slaves.

Nietzsche is actually very liberterian in his idea of what people should become.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Albert Speer
Nazi party? but i'm not racist.

There were gay Nazis and there were Jews who worked as kapos. So why can't you, like some members of other minority groups, violate principle and become a Nazi?

[MrFun]

Originally posted by OzzyKP


Have you become a youth rights supporter?

no

[OzzyKP]

So much for your talk about equal rights and fairness under the law. Hypocrite.

[Arrian]

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by GePap


No, he does not "care about power" in the sense you talk about- he would view hitler as a great example of the slave mentality, a nihilist peddling ideas of fear, and a mob following him as slaves.

Nietzsche is actually very liberterian in his idea of what people should become.

Libertarianism applies to all people, Nietzscheanism applies to one person. Libertarianism is maxiumum freedom for all, Nietzscheanism is maximum freedom for one.

Like I said, what ideas that one peddles is irrelevant. For example, I bet Nietzsche would (and probably did if I wanted to find a quote) praise the inventer of "slave morality", Jesus, as an example of the Nietzschean ideal. Jesus started a new course in human history, he imposed his will, his morality upon millions of people.

Again, Nietzsche doesn't care what ideas you peddle, he cares with how successful you are at peddling them.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
So much for your talk about equal rights and fairness under the law. Hypocrite.

No -- I just don't believe it's sane for a five year old child to have all the same rights that an adult citizen has.

[GePap]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
You read Nietzsche with rose colored glasses. He isn't saying "everyone should be free to do whatever they will, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else." No, that, he reasons is a corruption of the will. Nietzsche says you have an absolute freedom to do whatever you will." Period. My will to power is directly in opposition to your will to power.

Except if you read his anaylisis of why the slave mentality was necessary, is becuase a conscience is necessary for the overman- seeking power without conscience is essentially the blonde beats.

The highest state possible for a Nietzsche individual is to be dictator of a nation, or several nations.

Of course not, since the nation is a decrepid crutch for the slaves, and anyone leading such an amalgam is no overman. A creator is the Nietzschean ideal- someone who invents new things no matter the consequences for what was old is the Nietzschean ideal. That is why he uses the child metaphor several times.

You are right, he doesn't care about states or nationality, so in that sense, sure he isn't fascist. But he IS authoritarian. He favors one person having absolute power. Absolute will to power.

No.

He hates slave morality insofar as it hinders that one great man from pursuiing his will to power. I bet he would approve of a slave morality with the explicit purpose of serving one great man's will to power. The classical morality he praised explicitly had a component of hero worship and honoring, praising, and obeying great men.

Wrong: he hates the slave morality because it is anti-life. He views the slaves as having internalized their will to power on themselves being too weak to overcome the blonde beats- in doing so they renounce life and become nihilists. HItler is a prime example himself. That is why Nietzsche hated anti-semitism: its a crutch for the weak minded.

Forget this namby-pamby "you can do what you want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else" crap. That's not Nietzsche. That is slavish. Do what you want, if it hurts others, then who cares?

Maybe thats not fascism, but it sounds damn close.

He is not namby-panby, as I said he supports creation with no regard to consequence-but dictators are not generally creators- instead they stiffle creators- the serve the slave morality. Remember what he said of punishment.

[GePap]

Originally posted by OzzyKP


Like I said, what ideas that one peddles is irrelevant. For example, I bet Nietzsche would (and probably did if I wanted to find a quote) praise the inventer of "slave morality", Jesus, as an example of the Nietzschean ideal. Jesus started a new course in human history, he imposed his will, his morality upon millions of people.

Again, Nietzsche doesn't care what ideas you peddle, he cares with how successful you are at peddling them.

Nietzsche does praise Jesus because jesus created a brand new belief system regardless of the consequences it would have to the status quo. He does not believe Jesus was the inventor of the slave morality thought: The Christ, the Annointed One perhaps, but that is not the same as Jesus of Nazareth, moral crusader.

And Jesus did NOT impose his views on anyone- If you remember, he was executed by Roman authorities at the age of 33 or so. It was people who co-opted his ideas into the slave morality that did so.

[MikeH]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Ming.

I was only asking, no need to be rude.

(NO WINK SMILEY MING! HA! )

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by GePap

He hates slave morality insofar as it hinders that one great man from pursuiing his will to power. I bet he would approve of a slave morality with the explicit purpose of serving one great man's will to power. The classical morality he praised explicitly had a component of hero worship and honoring, praising, and obeying great men.

Wrong: he hates the slave morality because it is anti-life. He views the slaves as having internalized their will to power on themselves being too weak to overcome the blonde beats- in doing so they renounce life and become nihilists. HItler is a prime example himself. That is why Nietzsche hated anti-semitism: its a crutch for the weak minded.

Ok, then what does Nietzsche perscribe for those who aren't, and can never be overmen? He doesn't believe all people are capable of being an overman. In his praise for classical morality, it seemed to me that in his eyes the only purpose for the average people was to exhault and worship the overman. While perhaps differing from his definition of slave morality, it certainly seems slavish to me.

edit: Also, are you saying Hitler was a nihilist? I think Hitler was a true creator (or aspired to be) in the Nietzschean sense. The only fault Nietzsche would find with Hitler was the fact he failed.

[Imran Siddiqui]

But he IS authoritarian. He favors one person having absolute power. Absolute will to power.

As GePap has pointed out, that is totally incorrect. The person having absolute power will only result in a slave morality type of system that stifles creativity.

He hates slave morality insofar as it hinders that one great man from pursuiing his will to power.

Also incorrect. He doesn't focus on the one man, but on anyone who wants to be a creator. The slave morality hinders that spirit, such as the mob or the authoritarian government. The one who creates is to be lauded and creating systems where creators are pushed down is something to be reviled.

It's all about creation and promotion of creators. This is one of the main reasons that Fascism or social conservatism doesn't fit. They both want everyone to pull together for the state or the religion. Nietzsche says that is wrong. That destroys the creative spark of individuals.

[Imran Siddiqui]

In his praise for classical morality, it seemed to me that in his eyes the only purpose for the average people was to exhault and worship the overman. While perhaps differing from his definition of slave morality, it certainly seems slavish to me.

The average person will exhault and worship the overman and that is what makes them weak. That is part of the slave morality. However, that should not be considered a goal. The overman is worthy of awe, but not slavish devotion. The slaves may not be able to overcome their worship, but that does not mean it is a good thing to be tolerated. Let them worship, but don't hold it up as good, and don't perpetuate it by saying that is the right thing for them to do.

[Arrian]

I think his wackjobbiness would have found the current attempt at analysis of his ideas by the undermench pretty funny.

-Arrian

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

But he IS authoritarian. He favors one person having absolute power. Absolute will to power.

As GePap has pointed out, that is totally incorrect. The person having absolute power will only result in a slave morality type of system that stifles creativity.

He hates slave morality insofar as it hinders that one great man from pursuiing his will to power.

Also incorrect. He doesn't focus on the one man, but on anyone who wants to be a creator. The slave morality hinders that spirit, such as the mob or the authoritarian government. The one who creates is to be lauded and creating systems where creators are pushed down is something to be reviled.

It's all about creation and promotion of creators. This is one of the main reasons that Fascism or social conservatism doesn't fit. They both want everyone to pull together for the state or the religion. Nietzsche says that is wrong. That destroys the creative spark of individuals.

You can't apply this philosophy to society at large, and democratize the sentiment to every man, woman and child. It just doesn't work. To be a leader, to be a creator, you need to have followers. A world with only leaders and no followers is anarchy, and indeed the anti-thesis to Nietzsche. How can someone be an overman, creator who puts in place new systems and new modes of thinking if he is the only one who follows it? If you apply this idea to everyone, that's what you get.

Nietzschean thought necessarily calls for one, or a very few, overman to create/destroy/do what they wish, and the mass of humanity to follow and slavishly worship those few.