DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
True Left
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: True Left vs Right
*****************************************************
#Post#: 26887--------------------------------------------------
Re: Arthur Schopenhauer vs Friedrich Nietzsche
DIR By: antihellenistic
Date: June 29, 2024, 10:54 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Friedrich Nietzsche was a rightist on racial view
--- Quote ---
> “There are probably no pure races but only races that have
become pure, even these being extremely rare. What is normal is
crossed races, in which, together with a disharmony of physical
features (when eye and mouth do not correspond with one another,
for example), there must always go a disharmony of habits and
value-concepts. (Livingstone¹¹³ heard someone say: 'God created
white and black men but the Devil Created the half-breeds.')
Crossed races always mean at the same time crossed cultures,
crossed moralities: they are usually more evil, crueller, more
restless. Purity is the final result of countless adaptations,
absorptions and secretions, and progress towards purity is
evidenced in the fact that the energy available to a race is
increasingly restricted to individual selected functions, while
previously it was applied to too many and often contradictory
things: such a restriction will always seem to be an
impoverishment and should be assessed with consideration and
caution. In the end, however, if the process of purification is
successful, all that energy formerly expended in the struggle of
the dissonant qualities with one another will stand at the
command of the total organism: which is why races that have
become pure have always also become stronger and more beautiful.
The Greeks offer us the model of a race and culture that has
become pure: and hopefully we shall one day also achieve a pure
European race and culture.” ― Friedrich Nietzsche
--- End Quote ---
Source :
1. Daybreak : Thoughts on the Prejudices of Morality by
Nietzsche, Friedrich Wilhelm, 1844-1900 page 149
HTML https://archive.org/details/daybreakthoughts0000niet/page/148/mode/2up?q=Devil
2. Friedrich Nietzsche > Quotes > Quotable Quote
HTML https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/7559943-there-are-probably-no-pure-races-but-only-races-that
In contrast on Hitler's view of race
--- Quote ---
> In mid-1936 the Nationalsocialistische Korrespondenz stated
with clarity and authority: "From his deeds one can recognize
the Nordic man - not from the length of his nose and the colour
of his eyes." In effect this last phase of National Socialist
race theory was a complete rejection of Günther's Nordicism.
--- End Quote ---
Source :
National Socialism and Race by Dr. A. James Gregor
HTML https://archive.ph/2017.06.23-181852/http://dienekes.awardspace.com/texts/natsoc/#selection-359.107-359.313
...
--- Quote ---
> ...Hitler disapproved of such [racial] comparisons. He
especially opposed reference to physical contrasts of stature,
coloring, or physiognomy among German ethnic groups. In 1930 he
told an aid, “Discussions about the race problem will only
divide the German people further, incite them against one
another, atomize them, and in this way make them inconsequential
with respect to foreign affairs.” He admonished senior officials
of the party to avoid the subject of ethnic diversity in
speeches and articles: “Everything that unifies and welds the
classes together must be brought forth, what divides them, what
re-animates old prejudices, must be avoided. . . .They are the
surest way to destroy a community.” He remarked that people
should be selected for leadership roles “not according to
outward appearance, but by demonstrating inward ability."
Goebbels, himself a diminutive man with a slight limp, recorded
in his diary in October 1937, “Discussed race policy with Dr.
Gross. I reproached him for our flawed standards for making
selections. According to them, practically every officer today
would be dismissed."
--- End Quote ---
Source :
(2013. Richard Tedor, Hitler's Revolution, Ch. 1, 'Racial
Hygiene' section)
--- Quote ---
> ...the concept of keeping the race pure can never be
transferred from the Jewish example to, for example, the Aryan.
>
> “Much as I gaze in awe at the Jews’ laws for maintaining and
preserving the purity of their race, I must nevertheless proceed
from my belief that racial theories, should they become the
subject of public discussion, may prove a national disaster
rather than a blessing.
>
> “We must accept the mixing of blood as it is. We must not call
one blood worse than another, one mixture better than another.
Rather, we must employ other means to breed a higher form from
this gray mass. We must try’ to bring to the surface the
valuable traits of the people living in Germany, to cultivate
and to develop them, and we must find ways and means to prevent
the propagation of all the bad, inferior, criminal, and decadent
tendencies and all the congenital diseases so damaging to the
Volk.
--- End Quote ---
Source :
Hitler - Memoirs Of A Confidant by Otto Wagener page 252, 257,
258
#Post#: 26891--------------------------------------------------
Re: Arthur Schopenhauer vs Friedrich Nietzsche
DIR By: antihellenistic
Date: June 29, 2024, 6:51 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Friedrich Nietzsche support White Colonialism
--- Quote ---
> Nietzsche was an advocate of European colonialism, seeing it
as a way to solve the overpopulation problem, pacify the
rebellious working class, and rejuvenate the decadent European
culture. European expansion and global domination were part of
his "great politics". He noted that in colonies, Europeans often
act as ruthless conquerors, unconstrained by Christian morality
and democratic values, which he saw as a liberated, healthy
instinct.[145]
--- End Quote ---
--- Quote ---
> We should note that the German term Nietzsche uses for
“predatory nature” [Raubtier-Natur] appears in other Nietzschean
contexts without any pejorative sense. In many writings from the
1880s, the beast of prey [Raubtier] is contrasted with the
despised herd, the domesticated animal that human beings have
become under the leveling influences of the Judeo-Christian
heritage and a politics of democracy. We must evaluate similarly
Nietzsche’s identification of the good European with the
criminal, which also often has a positive valence in Nietzsche’s
works.48
>
> Other texts from the 1880s indicate that these colonialist
criminals and predators are in fact the “good Europeans.”
Sometimes the European colonial project is justified in terms of
a biological analogy. In the notebooks from 1888, Nietzsche
claims:
>
> The right [Recht] to punishment (or to social self-defense)
has in essence become the word “justice” [Recht] only through a
misuse: a right is acquired through contracts—but
self-protection and self-defense are not based on a contract. A
people, at least, ought to consider with just as much
justification its need for conquest, its craving for power, as a
right, whether it be with weapons, with trade, commerce, and
colonization—for example, a right to growth. A society that
rejects war and conquest for all times and instinctively is in
decline: it is ripe for democracy and shopkeeper regimes.
(Nachlass 1888, 14[192], KSA 13.379)
>
> In this passage, Nietzsche contrasts democracy and the
shopkeeper mentality—a frequently used derogatory term in
Zarathustra—with aggressive colonialism, interpreting European
expansion as a natural right to self-preservation. In other
remarks, Nietzsche uses a historical view to discuss the desired
course for European domination of the world.
--- End Quote ---
Source :
1. Wikipedia contributors. (2024, June 19). Philosophy of
Friedrich Nietzsche. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.
Retrieved 23:27, June 29, 2024, from
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philosophy_of_Friedrich_Nietzsche&oldid=1229946796
2. Holub, R. C. (2018) Nietzsche in the Nineteenth Century:
Social Questions and Philosophical Interventions. University of
Pennsylvania Press, 2018. p. 249
In contrast to Hitler's view on White Colonialism :
--- Quote ---
> We were ready to throw our forces into the scales for the
preservation of the British Empire; and all that, mark you, at a
time when, to tell the truth, I feel much more sympathetically
inclined to the lowliest Hindu than to any of these arrogant
islanders. Later on, the Germans will be pleased that they did
not make any contribution to the survival of an out-dated state
of affairs for which the world of the future would have found it
hard to forgive them. We can with safety make one prophecy:
whatever the outcome of this war, the British Empire is at an
end. It has been mortally wounded. The future of the British
people is to die of hunger and tuberculosis in their cursed
island. - Adolf Hitler, 4th February 1945
--- End Quote ---
Source : Bormann, Martin – Testament of Adolf Hitler
(Hitler-Bormann Documents) Page 7
--- Quote ---
> Spain, France and England had all weakened, weakened and
exhausted themselves in this futile colonial enterprise. The
continent from which Spain and England gave birth, which they
created piece by piece, has today acquired a completely
independent way of life and completely selfish views. Even so,
they were just an artificial world, without a soul, culture, or
civilization of their own; and judging from that point of view,
they were nothing more than dirt. - Adolf Hitler, 7th February
1945
--- End Quote ---
Source :
Bormann, Martin – Testament of Adolf Hitler (Hitler-Bormann
Documents) Page 13
--- Quote ---
> The United States and Australia afford good examples. Success,
certainly - but only on the material side. They are artificial
edifices, bodies without age, of which it is it is impossible to
say whether they are still in a state of infancy or whether they
have already been touched by senility. In those continents which
were inhabited, failure has been even more marked. In them, the
white races have impose their will by force, and the influence
they have had on the native inhabitants has been negligible. -
Adolf Hitler, 7th February 1945
--- End Quote ---
Source :
Bormann, Martin – Testament of Adolf Hitler (Hitler-Bormann
Documents) Page 13
--- Quote ---
> The white races did, of course, give some things to the
natives, and they were the worst gifts that they could possibly
have made, those plagues of our own modern world-materialism,
fanaticism, alcoholism and syphilis. For the rest, since these
peoples possessed qualities of their own which were superior to
anything we could offer them, they have remained essentially
unchanged. Where imposition by force was attempted, the results
were even more disastrous, and common sense, realizing the
futility of such measures, should preclude any recourse to their
introduction. One solitary success must be conceded to the
colonizers: everywhere they have succeeded in arousing hatred, a
hatred that urges these peoples, awakened from their slumbers by
us, to rise and drive us out. - Adolf Hitler, 7th February 1945
--- End Quote ---
Source :
Bormann, Martin – Testament of Adolf Hitler (Hitler-Bormann
Documents) Page 13 - 14
#Post#: 26892--------------------------------------------------
Re: Arthur Schopenhauer vs Friedrich Nietzsche
DIR By: 90sRetroFan
Date: June 29, 2024, 8:10 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
In this, Hitler is consistent with Schopenhauer:
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Schopenhauer#Political_and_social_thought
--- Quote ---
> Schopenhauer was fervently opposed to slavery. Speaking of the
treatment of slaves in the slave-holding states of the United
States, he condemned "those devils in human form, those bigoted,
church-going, strict sabbath-observing scoundrels, especially
the Anglican parsons among them" for how they "treat their
innocent black brothers who through violence and injustice have
fallen into their devil's claws". The slave-holding states of
North America, Schopenhauer writes, are a "disgrace to the whole
of humanity".[76]
--- End Quote ---
HTML https://philarchive.org/archive/WOOSOT-9
--- Quote ---
> Schopenhauer’s moral philosophy, which is not developed along
contractarian lines, but is grounded in compassion with
sufferers, concerns itself (not exclusively) with the same
relatively powerless and vulnerable groups that his political
philosophy overlooks, as evidenced by some of the examples that
Schopenhauer himself adduces as confirmation of his moral
philosophy, such as the abolition of slavery and the animal
welfare movement.
> ...
> Schopenhauer is laudably critical of the unjust domination and
oppression
> of human beings that was happening in his
mid-nineteenth-century world – in particular, the
> African slave trade and the widespread immiseration of the
proletariat.41 The “remote cause”
> of both of these evils, Schopenhauer avers, is the dominant
classes’ desire for luxury: “as long
> as luxury exists on the one hand, then necessarily on the
other excessive work and a bad life
> must exist, be it under the name of poverty, slavery, of
proletarians, or of slaves,” since “in
> order for a few people to have what is dispensable,
superfluous and refined … a great portion
> of existing human powers must be expended upon them and
withdrawn from what is necessary”
> (PP II, 221-222).42
> ...
> Schopenhauer is acutely sensitive to the plight of black
African slaves:
> in his later works, he regularly refers to the slave trade as
the prime historical example of human
> depravity. See WWR II, 578; OBM, 218-219, 222; PP II, 193,
228, 231, 315, 320, 533.
> 42
--- End Quote ---
#Post#: 26893--------------------------------------------------
Re: Arthur Schopenhauer vs Friedrich Nietzsche
DIR By: antihellenistic
Date: June 30, 2024, 9:05 am
---------------------------------------------------------
--- Quote ---
> Bataille was one of the first to denounce the deliberate
misinterpretation of Nietzsche carried out by Nazis, among them
Alfred Baeumler. In January 1937, he dedicated an issue of
Acéphale, titled "Reparations to Nietzsche", to the theme
"Nietzsche and the Fascists.[5]" There, he called Elisabeth
Förster-Nietzsche "Elisabeth Judas-Förster," recalling
Nietzsche's declaration: "To never frequent anyone who is
involved in this bare-faced fraud concerning races."[5] Domenico
Losurdo ridicules the idea that an "intellectually rather
mediocre woman" managed to manipulate and derail interpretations
of Nietzsche for decades and inspire political movements
encompassing millions of people. He dismisses such idea as
unsustainable conspiracy theory noting that "there is no
shortage of unsettling and horrific passages in Nietzsche's
writings".[150] Due to his complex views and occasionally
contradictory comments on these matters, the idea of Nietzsche
as a predecessor to Nazism and fascism remains controversial and
debated among scholars (see: Nietzsche and fascism). Owing
largely to the writings of Walter Kaufmann and French postwar
philosophers, Nietzsche's reputation improved and today he
usually is not linked to Nazism as he was in the past.
Detractors note that authors such as Houston Stewart Chamberlain
and Arthur de Gobineau also had complex views on matters of
politics, nation and race that were incompatible with Nazi
ideology on numerous points, but their influence on the Third
Reich is still not dismissed as a misunderstanding.[151]
--- End Quote ---
Source :
Wikipedia contributors. (2024, June 19). Philosophy of Friedrich
Nietzsche. In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved 14:01,
June 30, 2024, from
HTML https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philosophy_of_Friedrich_Nietzsche&oldid=1229946796
#Post#: 26952--------------------------------------------------
Re: Arthur Schopenhauer vs Friedrich Nietzsche
DIR By: antihellenistic
Date: July 4, 2024, 11:46 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Friedrich Nietzsche defended slavery based on Aristotelian
doctrine of "Natural Slavery"
--- Quote ---
> In 1864, at the height of the American Civil War, the
19-year-old Nietzsche submitted a valedictory thesis on the
Greek poet Theognis of Megara. Extremely learned and at the same
time subtly partisan, it was a sympathetic reconstruction of
Theognis’ staunchly aristocratic world view, including his
racist, segregationist views on forced labour. Slaves, Nietzsche
remarked, hailed from “useless and harmful stock” and belonged
to an altogether different and invariably subordinate species.
Approvingly he cites Theognis’s “very accurate” poem:
>
> Never do the enslaved go upright
> But the crooked necked are ever gnarled
> Just as a squill does not bear roses or hyacinths
> A slave woman does not bear a free child.
>
> These comments echo the arguments of Southern apologists of
slavery like William Harper, who insisted on the inherent
physiological and psychological differences between Africans and
Europeans. In his Memoir on Slavery, Harper maintained that “the
Negro race, from their temperament and capacity” were
“peculiarly suited” to hard labour, not least because they were
significantly less susceptible to physical pain than white men.
Nietzsche was convinced that Africans, whose constitution he
believed closely resembled that of “primeval man”, felt less
pain than white people, especially the white “cultural elite”.
In Daybreak he pondered the possibility of importing Chinese
workers to Europe to carry out menial tasks, because their
“modes of life and thought” made them suitable “industrious
ants”.
>
> Like George Fitzhugh, the South’s preeminent pro-slavery
theorist, Nietzsche frequently invoked Ancient Greece to argue
that slavery belonged to “the essence of a culture” and that in
order for there to be a “fertile soil for the development of
art”, the “overwhelming majority” had to be “slavishly
subjected” in the service of a “privileged class”.
>
> ...
>
> Throughout his oeuvre, Nietzsche adheres to the view that
slavery was, is, and will be needed: for the flowering of
Ancient Greek civilisation; for the regeneration of contemporary
European culture; for the establishment of a new nobility based
on a new social “rank-ordering”; and for the future elevation of
“man” into “superman”. Nietzsche consistently formulates his
most radical ideas about human flourishing and autonomy in the
context of their opposites, what he calls “the danger of
servitude” and the “incomplete” humanity of the slave. But
slavery, for him, is less a foil to than a condition of human
greatness. In The Gay Science, he significantly mentions
“subhumans” as the natural attendants of heroes and supermen.
>
> ...
>
> Among other things, Nietzsche’s justifications of slavery,
notably his advocacy of “natural slavery”, provide us with a new
perspective on his conception of human nature and psychology. As
he writes in Beyond Good and Evil, slavery is the “prerequisite
for spiritual discipline and cultivation”, a “moral imperative
of nature” addressed to “peoples, races, ages, and classes – but
above all to the whole human animal, to man.”
--- End Quote ---
Source :
Ruehl, Martin A. (2018). In defence of slavery: Nietzsche’s
dangerous thinking. Accessed on 5th July 2024, from
HTML https://www.independent.co.uk/news/long_reads/nietzsche-ideas-superman-slavery-nihilism-adolf-hitler-nazi-racism-white-supremacy-fascism-a8138396.html
#Post#: 27000--------------------------------------------------
Re: Arthur Schopenhauer vs Friedrich Nietzsche
DIR By: antihellenistic
Date: July 10, 2024, 9:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Nietzsche contra Wagner, then National Socialism contra
Nietzsche
Translated by German to English Google Translate
--- Quote ---
> National Socialist Nietzsche critics
>
> As early as 1937, Oscar Levy pointed out that the image of
Nietzsche was divided under National Socialism. There were
critics of Nietzsche who vehemently rejected the philosopher as
incompatible with National Socialism.
>
> In Nietzsche heute (1935), Hans Goebel turns against
Rosenberg, Giese and Baeumler. He wants to prove that Nietzsche
cannot be the mastermind of the Nazi state, since for him there
was only the good European. Nietzsche was also an enemy of
Christianity and German nationality. Where Nietzsche wants the
superman, the Reich promotes "healthy and strong Volksgenossen".
Nietzsche lacks any positive conception of the state.
>
> Curt von Westernhagen said that Nietzsche had been wrongly
portrayed as a pioneer of Nazi ideas, but rather that the goat
had been turned into a gardener. Nietzsche was not only not an
enemy of the Jews, but the most skilful lawyer they had ever
had. (Westernhagen: Nietzsche, Jews, anti-Jews! Weimar 1937)
>
> Wilhelm Michel, who in Nietzsche in our Century (1939) tries
to defend Christianity from the perspective of a Catholic
existentialism, comes to a rejection of Nietzsche's philosophy
and all attempts to make him the philosopher of the Third Reich.
Michel identifies Nietzsche's critique of morality and religion
as Nietzsche's Marxist body of thought. (Michel: Nietzsche in
our century. Berlin 1939, p. 38)
>
> Martin Löpelmann (Nietzsche National Socialist? In: NSEn, Vol.
2, No. 28 of 23 December 1933, pp. 497f.) rejected Nietzsche as
a National Socialist guide or intellectual hero. He knew how to
rave about power and strength, because he never had them
himself. He blames Nietzsche for hostility towards Germanism,
pro-Jewish sentiments and opposition to socialism. He had "never
had any understanding for the workers' question."
>
> The philosopher and educator Ernst Krieck explained the
National Socialist reception of Nietzsche, quoting an article in
the French newspaper Le Temps: "All in all: Nietzsche was an
opponent of socialism, an opponent of nationalism and an
opponent of the idea of race. If one disregards these three
schools of thought, he might have made an excellent Nazi." [5]
>
> ...
>
> In the 1930s, Oscar Levy wrote essays on Nietzsche and
National Socialism, partly under the pseudonym Defensor Fidei,
in which he distinguished the philosopher from a National
Socialist interpretation. Levy pointedly: "With these views, it
is quite certain, Nietzsche would be in a concentration camp or
in the misery of emigration today" (Oscar Levy [Defensor Fidei]:
Ein Nazi contra Nietzsche (1937), in: Levy 2005, p. 260)
>
> ...
>
> Nietzsche was rehabilitated in France and Italy in particular.
Deleuze, Guattari, Laruelle, Bataille, Montinari, and others
stood up for Nietzsche and saw a falsification by the National
Socialists. After 1945, German philosophy had a hard time with
Nietzsche. From the 1980s onwards, a new Nietzsche boom began,
which made Nietzsche the philosopher about whom the most
published is today. Current Nietzsche research in Germany almost
unanimously assumes that Nietzsche was misused, e.g. Hans-Martin
Gerlach.
--- End Quote ---
Source :
Autoren der Wikimedia-Projekte. (2008, May 8). Verzerrende
Darstellung der Philosophie Nietzsches während der NS-Diktatur.
Wikipedia.org; Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
HTML https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nietzsche-Rezeption_im_Nationalsozialismus
#Post#: 27746--------------------------------------------------
Re: Arthur Schopenhauer vs Friedrich Nietzsche
DIR By: antihellenistic
Date: September 4, 2024, 11:24 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Nietzsche's view on "Master Race"
--- Quote ---
> “The same is true of virtually all Europe: the suppressed race
has gradually recovered the upper hand again, in coloring.
shortness of skull, perhaps even in the intellectual and social
instincts: who can say whether modern democracy, even more
modern anarchism and especially—that inclination for "commune"
for the most primitive form of society, which is now shared by
all the socialists of Europe, does not signify in the main a
tremendous counterattack—and that the conqueror and master race,
the Aryan, is not succumbing psychologically, too?” - Friedrich
Nietzsche
--- End Quote ---
Source :
Friedrich Nietzsche, The Genealogy of Morals page 30 - 31
HTML https://archive.org/details/ongenealogyofmor0000niet/page/30/mode/2up
#Post#: 27747--------------------------------------------------
Re: Arthur Schopenhauer vs Friedrich Nietzsche
DIR By: 90sRetroFan
Date: September 5, 2024, 12:00 am
---------------------------------------------------------
Please take a break from posting. None of your recent posts are
helping us at all. All they will do is confuse readers.
#Post#: 29112--------------------------------------------------
Re: Homo Hubris
DIR By: antihellenistic
Date: January 7, 2025, 10:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Westerners justify themselves only because they can do anything,
not because they are ethical on rational argument and keep being
rational when they implement it's argument
--- Quote ---
> Only the weak use arguments. Therein lies the roots of the
decline of the White race --- when it decided to justify itself
through values approved by reason, rather than allowing its
strength, its conquering will, its vitality, its master
morality, its grand achievements, to speak for themselves,
without justification.
--- End Quote ---
Source :
HTML https://x.com/dr_duchesne/status/1876794190786351348
#Post#: 29115--------------------------------------------------
Re: Arthur Schopenhauer vs Friedrich Nietzsche
DIR By: 90sRetroFan
Date: January 8, 2025, 3:01 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
We can take this as an enemy acknowledgement that we have won
the ethical debate. I predicted this would happen all the way
back here:
HTML https://trueleft.createaforum.com/true-left-vs-right/debunking-rightist-anti-immigration-arguments/msg9867/#msg9867
--- Quote ---
> This pretty much highlights how it is flat-out logically
impossible for WNs to win the ethical debate. If they go with
the position that migration is wrong (which they need for
criticizing migration by "non-whites"), then they cannot avoid
the conclusion that "whites" wronged "non-whites" first, and
hence have no authority to complain. The only logical way to
avoid incriminating themselves is to go with the position that
migration is not wrong, in which case they have no reason to
complain. Either way they are screwed.
>
> Their only recourse is to declare that it is OK when "whites"
do it but not OK when "non-whites" do it ie. ingroup/outgroup
double-standards a.k.a. "It's OK to be white!" In other words,
to declare that they do not care about ethics.
--- End Quote ---
*****************************************************
Page 7 of 8
DIR Previous Page
DIR Next Page