Why nobody can understand Nietzsche

Nietzsche wrote for people with aristocratic roots and attitudes, but his knowledge of antiquity can hardly be found among protestant noble aristocrats. Noble Germans ended in theology.
The knowledge of antiquity gave Nietzsche a parallel experience on how aristocracy finishes last in democracy and seeing that not only aristocracy but also classical sciences are coming to an end he wrote to some kind of conspirators, even if they didn’t exist. He knew that protestants, democrats, socialists and generally dumb people must be his enemies, so, he saw himself surrounded by an ocean of enemies.

Only who has had this experience from a very young age can start writing concealed and also seek other concealed writers. In fact, you become deep instead of concealed. You start describing all of your dangers and wait if anybody feels himself in danger. Most people can’t follow Nietzsche because they have solutions there where he sees problems. I can tell my problems are fully observed from his points of views.

Therefore it is not faith that is driving me to follow Nietzsche and to demand from others more attention for his writings, but the deadly danger I have experienced many times.
To fight for our values is a matter of life and death. Therefore I love one song most, from an early age: wanted dead or alive.

In democracy every aristocrat feels like a pig in Teharan.

Why would anyone assume that no one can understand Nietzsche?
You cannot know everyone, so you cannot make that claim.

This is an argument from ignorance in two ways’1) your ignorance of Nietzsche, and 2) your ignorance of other people.

PS The rest of your verbage is so full of crap it is not worth my while listing all the faults and errors.

Thank you for sharing your hate. You approve my statement that aristocrats are in danger. Next patient.

Three things.

  1. I do not hate you. You are not worthy of me holding any emotional position to you.
  2. You are a Moron.
  3. This has nothing to do with aristocrats.

Yo sculptor, chill out on the “moron” stuff please. We have to have a baseline of civility throughout disagreements. If you can’t have that, you should find a graceful way to exit the conversation.

Did Nietzsche offer any advice to women? What about hard women keeping weak men in line? :evilfun:

Wicked women keeping their sons weak: he called that “marasmus feminismus”.
Advice was “women shall be the rest for the warrior”.

So a hard man, a Spartan warrior, will seek comfort in a hard woman, a Spartan woman?

Do hard men raise weak sons?

It’s understandable that a wicked woman would raise a weak son, but not understandable for weak offspring to arise from hard parents.

How do you think Nietzsche would describe a hard woman?

I describe a hard woman as capable and wise in every sense of the word regarding the endowments of being feminine.

There is no hard woman, or there are not enough virtuous women to make a big difference. Most women are still slaves who see in the creation of humans a “job”, because they can’t appreciate friendship. The percentage of non-slaves among women might be around 0,5-1%.
Men are much more free by nature, but under unfavorable conditions they can fall under the rule of wicked men or women. Unfavorable conditions are wars with pyrrhus victory which bring a change to the societal order. So came democracy to Europe through two world wars.
As Nietzsche said, as his Zarathustra looked at the men he thought the Earth were ready for the sense of Earth (Overman) but when he saw the woman, Earth seemed like a place for idiots.

If idiots can be quiet, that’s the best jewelry they can carry, as Sophocles stated. Also idiots were prohibited from philosophizing.

K: you are just another clown who thinks they are an “aristocrat”… you haven’t a clue
what Nietzsche was about… but you have your ego and a pretense that you are a
“Ubermensch” superior to us “common folk”

your quotes are nonsense, your understanding of Nietzsche is less then an 5 year old…
please, stop embarrassing yourself with with an idiot understanding of Nietzsche…

you are a clueless putz…

Kropotkin

No, I wont stop. And I don’t care if you don’t stop doing your whateveryouare. I approve everybodies dreams and lives. Yours is to obstruct, that is how ressentiment works.

Do you want to be an Übermensch? Please be invited…

K: a couple of things clownboy…first of all, I can spot your kind easily enough,
wannabe Ubermensh who wants to believe that they are vastly superior to the
hoi polloi…how can I tell? easy, 40 years ago or so, I too read Nietzsche and
felt I was the superior Ubermensch… I pose with the best of them… and that is
what you are, a poser… nothing more…how do I know that? N. is for the young…
it excites the young the exact same way Ayn Rand excites the young…
and it is foolish nonsense…
for we old people have gotten past the Ubermensch nonsense of N.
it isn’t even the best part of N…

second, you violate the very request of Nietzsche…and why you are a
pretend Nietzschean…recall:

“You say you believe in Zarathustra? But what matters Zarathustra!
You are my believers-but what matters all believers! You had not
yet sought yourselves, and you found me. Thus do all believers: therefore
all faith amounts to so little.”

and this:

“One repays a teacher badly if on always remains a pupil only. And
why not pluck at my wreath?”

and finally:

…“be a man and do not follow me-but yourself! But yourself!”

Nietzsche had his truths, but where are your truths?

and the third bit is this: your use of “ressentiment”
is wrong…

and you have completely missed what Nietzsche himself thought was
his greatest accomplishment, “The Eternal recurrence”…

Kropotkin

Or you could mind your own business

He’s not the messiah - he’s just a vey naughty boy.

Erm, I think FJ is a moderator here?? :-k

Stamps his feet like a little girl,
I’l sweeeem until I am sick

Na. Not if the Übermensch can’s spell “everybody’s”.

Gosh.
Given the norms on this Forum I doubt the odd “moron” is going to invoke some sort of capital punishment.

@Kropotkin,

I generally enjoy your posts and your namesake, but I don’t think we ought to be conflating Nietzsche with Ayn Rand, who was once an admirer of Nietzsche but later dismissed him as a “mystic.” I also really can’t get down with dismissing his idea of the Overman as nonsense, though many ways it has been interpreted don’t really accord with what N was arguing for.