Fascist or Republican?

[Imran Siddiqui]

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.

You see Nietzsche will blackened glasses. Hitler was not a true creator because his goal was a slave morality state with him at the center. That isn't creation, that is perpetuating repression. That is extending the slave morality. Hitler was a good example of one who internalized his Will to Power and blamed everything on the Jews. And failure of a creator doesn't diminish their attempts at creation.

[Moral Hazard]

and yet Nietzsche made it clear that he favoured abstinence! why? not because God said so (THAT is slave morality) but because it contributed to the biological/psychological/spiritual betterment of the individual by making him feel stronger by the absorption of semen into the blood... in other words, to Nietzsche abstinence was good... was practical... it's wasn't good because God commanded it and it's opposite (sex) was declared evil by God!

So speer your abstinent to perserve your precious bodily fluids.

[Arrian]

[OzzyKP]

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

-Arrian

Agreed, hehe.

The fact we discuss it at all plays right into his hands. Nietzschean philosophy was not a grand recipie for humanity. It was a clever prank/scheme for Nietzsche to exhault himself. It is clear from his writings that the greatest examle of an overman is Nietzsche himself. By discussing his theories you just lend further credit to his claim.

It is genious in fact. But so self-serving

[Imran Siddiqui]

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.

A follower and a slavish devotee are two vastly different things. Trotsky followed Lenin, but that doesn't mean he had a slave mentality to Lenin. Hamilton followed Washington, but that doesn't mean he had a slave mentality in slavish devotion to Washington.

Leaders can have followers who can think for themselves. They don't require slaves in order to lead.

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.

Blackened glasses once again. He doesn't want the masses to slavishly worship. Why do you think he constantly speaks out against the slave mentality? Though he does realize that people will do so. However, if shouldn't be promoted.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It was a clever prank/scheme for Nietzsche to exhault himself.

And here we hit it. You are so biased against Nietzsche that you can't even discuss his writings with any rationality. The ideas are uncomfortable to think about and thus you confine them into the dark. In Freud-speak we may think of this as a reaction-formation.

[Last Conformist]

Why should being a creator and being a nihilist be mutually exclusive? In fact, creation without regard for the consequences sounds fairly nihilistic to me.

[GePap]

Originally posted by OzzyKP


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.

As Imran says, the common man may marvel (but not worship) at the overman- thought in fact there are no overmen- overmen being a later stage in the possible development of man. As for the classic tradition, while he finds it better than the slave mentality, he feels it lacked depth- which is why the creation of the consciousness in the slave is crucial for the attainment of the overman.

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.

What did Hitler create? Take jesus- he preached, but was then killed. It was only decades after that his devoted followers kept the ideas he created alive and eventually those ideas would sweep the world. 50 years after he killed himself, what ideas of Hitler are still percolating out there? That is not an issue of failure- anyone who creates something can't fail in that sense-trying to create and being a creator are two different things. That is the difference between someone who doddles on the side and an artist.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
Why should being a creator and being a nihilist be mutually exclusive? In fact, creation without regard for the consequences sounds fairly nihilistic to me.

How could something that creates(as opposed to simply destroys) be nihilistic?

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

It was a clever prank/scheme for Nietzsche to exhault himself.

And here we hit it. You are so biased against Nietzsche that you can't even discuss his writings with any rationality. The ideas are uncomfortable to think about and thus you confine them into the dark. In Freud-speak we may think of this as a reaction-formation.

Ok, lets quickly skim the chapter titles from Ecce Homo:
"Why I Am So Wise"
"Why I Am So Clever"
"Why I Write Such Good Books"
"Why I Am a Destiny"

[GePap]

At OzzyKP's "reading" of that last chapters.

I wonder what Bozo was teaching that class.

The funny bit is that if you actually read the chapters, you see many of the predictions he made, particularly the one of coming strife, were right.

[OzzyKP]

I know my fate. One day my name will be associated with the memory of something tremendous—a crisis without equal on earth, the most profound collision of conscience, a decision that was conjured up against everything that had been believed, demanded, hallowed so far. I am no man, I am dynamite.—

[Arrian]

TNT! I'm dyna-mite! TNT!

See me ride out of the sunset
On your colour TV screen
Out for all that I can get
If you know what I mean
Women to the left of me
And women to the right
Ain't got no gun
Ain't got no knife
But don't you start no fight

CHORUS:
'Cause I'm T.N.T. I'm dynamite
T.N.T. and I'll win the fight
T.N.T. I'm a power load
T.N.T. watch me explode

I'm dirty, mean and mighty unclean
I'm a wanted man
Public enemy number one
Understand
So lock up your daughter
Lock up your wife
Lock up your back door
And run for your life
The man is back in town
Don't you mess me 'round

-Arrian

[GePap]

See, perfect example- that is completely right.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Arrian
TNT! I'm dyna-mite! TNT!



-Arrian

AC/DC, the true overmen