Yea, you’ve presented it in black & white terms, but I, and N, prefer to think of things in degrees, where some individuals and civilizations at least came closer to embodying his ideals than others.
In this sense, America as being a mechanism for rank-creating, did, I think, have his respect.
Naturally he wasn’t so silly as to believe men have intrinsic rights, he wasn’t as silly as to disregard reality of how men interact, nor did he value men in particular as more ontologically significant than animals, so he did not value the base narrative of the USA, but he must have valued the massiveness of its power machinations.
And since he considered overcoming and self-overcoming as a crucial aspect of noble nature, he would definitely have had some pleasure in the path to power of the African gene pool. He certainly wasn’t racist.
N was a white supremacist who’s been appropriated by liberal-socialists because he’s hip.
While Italian Fascism and German Nazism may’ve been too crude, collectivist and egalitarian for his tastes, as they were too crude for the likes of individualistic elitists like Julius Evola, still clearly they came closer to meeting his ideals than our Judeo-Christian, liberal-social democracies do.
You can be a hip elitist, or a square equalist, the left doesn’t have a monopoly on hipness.
N was the archetypal proto-Nipster.
N and Evola did for the right what Sartre and Camus did for the left.
Stirner and Novatore were hipper still, they didn’t quite fit into either camp, left or right.
You’re throwing out pretty random responses here man. Yes, clearly N is speaking to elites. Elites who don’t hold moralities.
Ethics isn’t the same as morality.
.
Stirner’s burns were pretty bad ass too.
He’s got a fiendish, scoundrelly look to him.
The original Dieter from Sprockets (SNL)
The resemblance is uncanny.
I wouldn’t trust him with the plastic cutlery, looks like the worst elements of Antifa, PETA and Hitler’s brown shirts combined.
Alright meine Herren, denn… who of yous is an ubermenschennnn???
Nietzsche valued great men.
They could be great architects, engineers, artists, athletes, industrialists, philosophers, scientists or statesmen.
Great men are men who bring great value to themselves and others, primarily other great men like themselves, great men aren’t emancipators of small men.
They would either be in favor of maintaining and rising within old hierarchies, or erecting new, better ones, not overturning all hierarchy.
For Nietzsche, ubermensch are not Buddhachrists, Robin Hoods, Spartacuses, anarchists, democrats, classical liberals or socialists.
The Superman is not a man as we know it. He’s not a great or “higher” man. He’s not a Napoleon or Caesar. He’s not some amalgamation of characteristics picked and chosen from great men in history. He’s not even one of Nietzsche’s “creating ones.” He doesn’t necessarily go through the phases in Zarathustra (camel/lion/child).
Everything in TSZ is about creating ones literally sacrificing themselves (like Nietzsche nobly did) for the future of the Superman. There’s something about this sacrificing of noble men that will bring about the Superman. Nietzsche(as far as I know) never says HOW the Superman will come into being.
The only thing N said that can be tied to the Nazis and the Soviets was something like, ‘there will be massive experiments, and mankind may perish of them. Oh well!’
If you look at the nazi leadership, they were all frail, unappetizing neurotic dwarflike men. Their idea of a master race was a gigantic herd. About as un-Nietzschean as possible. That can be said about the particular values. But the general, brutal audacity of the Nazi and Soviet experiments (both forms of Marxist atheism) was something by which N would not have been shocked in the least - something he saw coming, too.
The central idea of popular nazism however was not bravery but coziness, Heimlichkeit, belonging to a great group. The USSR was a little more manly, if you ask me. At least it sent us into space, which is a Nietzschean accomplishment.
Where the state ends, the Superman begins… So does that mean that even “good” ethnocentric nationalist governments are only good insofar they get in the way of unchecked globalism (which could potentially end the possibly for the Superman to come into being (Nietzsche’s big fear with the Last Man)
Antithesis:Nietzsche valued great men.
They could be great architects, engineers, artists, athletes, industrialists, philosophers, scientists or statesmen.
Great men are men who bring great value to themselves and others, primarily other great men like themselves, great men aren’t emancipators of small men.
They would either be in favor of maintaining and rising within old hierarchies, or erecting new, better ones, not overturning all hierarchy.
For Nietzsche, ubermensch are not Buddhachrists, Robin Hoods, Spartacuses, anarchists, democrats, classical liberals or socialists.The Superman is not a man as we know it. He’s not a great or “higher” man. He’s not a Napoleon or Caesar. He’s not some amalgamation of characteristics picked and chosen from great men in history. He’s not even one of Nietzsche’s “creating ones.” He doesn’t necessarily go through the phases in Zarathustra (camel/lion/child).
Everything in TSZ is about creating ones literally sacrificing themselves (like Nietzsche nobly did) for the future of the Superman. There’s something about this sacrificing of noble men that will bring about the Superman. Nietzsche(as far as I know) never says HOW the Superman will come into being.
Fixed Cross:The only thing N said that can be tied to the Nazis and the Soviets was something like, ‘there will be massive experiments, and mankind may perish of them. Oh well!’
If you look at the nazi leadership, they were all frail, unappetizing neurotic dwarflike men. Their idea of a master race was a gigantic herd. About as un-Nietzschean as possible. That can be said about the particular values. But the general, brutal audacity of the Nazi and Soviet experiments (both forms of Marxist atheism) was something by which N would not have been shocked in the least - something he saw coming, too.
The central idea of popular nazism however was not bravery but coziness, Heimlichkeit, belonging to a great group. The USSR was a little more manly, if you ask me. At least it sent us into space, which is a Nietzschean accomplishment.
Where the state ends, the Superman begins… So does that mean that even “good” ethnocentric nationalist governments are only good insofar they get in the way of unchecked globalism (which could potentially end the possibly for the Superman to come into being (Nietzsche’s big fear with the Last Man)
May be, on the contrary, the more, the merrier. That is, of it really is contrary!
In order to become the ubermensch, you must vanquish the ubermensch.
There can be only one.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooN9xdAgi5w[/youtube]
Omg. That dumbass just walked right into that sword.
Omg. That dumbass just walked right into that sword.
IKR
In order to become the ubermensch, you must vanquish the ubermensch.
There can be only one.
Here’s his likeness–
Dang, he ugly.
That’s what generations of noble incest will do to yuh.
promethean75:Omg. That dumbass just walked right into that sword.
IKR
Anomaleigh:In order to become the ubermensch, you must vanquish the ubermensch.
There can be only one.
Here’s his likeness–
Dang, he ugly.
That’s what generations of noble incest will do to yuh.
Nathaniel Rothschild. Looks like.
Anomaleigh: promethean75:Omg. That dumbass just walked right into that sword.
IKR
Anomaleigh:In order to become the ubermensch, you must vanquish the ubermensch.
There can be only one.
Here’s his likeness–
Dang, he ugly.
That’s what generations of noble incest will do to yuh.
Nathaniel Rothschild. Looks like.
You’re not just a pretty face.
The Superman is not a man as we know it. He’s not a great or “higher” man. He’s not a Napoleon or Caesar. He’s not some amalgamation of characteristics picked and chosen from great men in history. He’s not even one of Nietzsche’s “creating ones.” He doesn’t necessarily go through the phases in Zarathustra (camel/lion/child).
Everything in TSZ is about creating ones literally sacrificing themselves (like Nietzsche nobly did) for the future of the Superman. There’s something about this sacrificing of noble men that will bring about the Superman. Nietzsche(as far as I know) never says HOW the Superman will come into being.
If N only defined the Ubermensch negatively, by what he’s not, then he’s nothing, just like N’s philosophy.
Many theologians only defined God by what it’s not, not by what it is.
perpetualburn:The Superman is not a man as we know it. He’s not a great or “higher” man. He’s not a Napoleon or Caesar. He’s not some amalgamation of characteristics picked and chosen from great men in history. He’s not even one of Nietzsche’s “creating ones.” He doesn’t necessarily go through the phases in Zarathustra (camel/lion/child).
Everything in TSZ is about creating ones literally sacrificing themselves (like Nietzsche nobly did) for the future of the Superman. There’s something about this sacrificing of noble men that will bring about the Superman. Nietzsche(as far as I know) never says HOW the Superman will come into being.
If N only defined the Ubermensch negatively, by what he’s not, then he’s nothing, just like N’s philosophy.
Many theologians only defined God by what it’s not, not by what it is.
Because he is all allusion. to someone other then, himself, who is, also that who is alluded, to.
And that only appears as if nihilized, in fact he is merely alluded to, by a simulation.
Not merely a pretty face…