“You’re looking for fans? You’re looking for zeros!”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“Twilight of the Idols”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Friedrich Nietzsche is perhaps one of the greatest and most misunderstood figures of the 19th century. Possibly the most peculiar and eccentric philosopher of his time, a modern \u201cPre-Socratic\u201d. Initially influenced by Arthur Schopenhauer and Richard Wagner, he was ultimately led to completely repudiate them, while he abandoned his university chair in Basel (1869\u20131879) due to health reasons and began his wanderings in Southern Europe (Nice, Genoa, Rapallo, Turin).<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In the years that followed, the great philosopher was judged negatively and positively (from choleric enemies to devoted apologists), in many ways, by all ideological lines and all political factions. It is therefore necessary to try to report what he really wrote, without fear or passion, examining some aspects of his work with cold objectivity, regardless of what has been written about him from time to time and approaching \u201cmarginalized\u201d issues that have been touched upon from time to time by him.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
History resembles a battlefield, where fallen giants wait to be dogged and swept away, their bones sharpened into weapons by hands that are not afraid of theft. On the Right, clever thinkers recognized this early on: Marxist ideas about hegemony, discipline, and social struggle could be reshaped against their originators. Why let these blades rust when they can pierce back into the very hearts that forged them? Liberal radicalism may cry out incessantly for \u201cequality,\u201d \u201cidentity,\u201d and \u201cjustice,\u201d but beneath the surface lies weakness. Conservatives searching through the ruins show resilience: They demonstrate that survival depends on both knowing the enemy and learning from the enemy, turning fragments of theory into armor, using them as instruments of counterattack. A spiritually heroic act is being performed: Where necessary, what once belonged to the Left is being torn apart and reshaped, purified, and placed at the service of a different destiny.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Left, in its intellectual clouding and moral hypocrisy, betrayed itself long ago. Figures like Walter Benjamin found inspiration in Carl Schmitt, the National Socialist jurist, theorist of domination who explained how order requires a Leader, a decisive iron hand. Herbert Marcuse infused his Marxism with the psychic energy of Nietzsche, transforming the latter\u2019s \u201caristocratic disobedience\u201d into a fake revolutionary spark. Only Martin Heidegger, the greatest mind in modern philosophy, remains inaccessible and invulnerable to leftist appropriation, even when surrounded by the obsessive leftist rhetoric of \u201cliberation.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The brilliant and multi-talented German Jew Theodor Ludwig Wiesengrund-Adorno revealed the \u201ctruth\u201d: he condemned Marcuse as a \u201cfascist (!?) disguised by circumstances.\u201d [Adorno was an internationally renowned sociologist, philosopher, musicologist, and composer, a member of the \u201cFrankfurt School\u201d along with Max Horkheimer, Walter Benjamin, Herbert Marcuse, J\u00fcrgen Habermas, and others. He was also Musical Director of the \u201cRadio Project\u201d from 1937 to 1941 in the USA and a lyricist for the Beatles!]. This insult speaks volumes, for it acknowledges the magnetic pull of power and hierarchy even among those who swear by equal demands. Ideas that are rooted in power and will permeate their veins despite any denial and criticism they express. This movement and redistribution of ideological lines exposes the Left\u2019s thirst for power, which it cannot create alone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nietzsche truly remains the ultimate rebellious exponent of emancipation and liberation from the shackles of Power!<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n He has often been misinterpreted by the (probably) well-intentioned attempt of some scholars to give a new dimension and interpretation to his thought, after the end of the Second World War, despite his “peculiar” identification with the Fascist regimes, through capable theorists and evil analysts such as the militant Baeumler and the eccentric eupatride Ludovici.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [Alfred B\u00f6hmler presented the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche as an intellectual and moral justification for Nazism in his highly influential 1931 book Nietzsche, der Philosoph und Politiker (Nietzsche, the Philosopher and Politician), arguing that Nietzsche provided a philosophical basis for National Socialism. B\u00f6hmler was a major Nazi philosopher who used Nietzsche to legitimize the Nazi movement. B\u00f6hmler’s 1931 book was widely read and influenced the formation of perceptions of Nietzsche within Hitler’s Germany. His interpretation was brilliantly controversial, with the passionate anti-fascist Thomas Mann calling passages from the book “Hitler’s prophecy.” Of course, the ideas in the book were suppressed after the Second World War, as they were considered dangerous and subversive to the new ideologies. However, the work was later republished.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the book, B\u00e4umler states: \u201cA theory of the state is not to be found in Nietzsche\u2019s work \u2013 but this work opened all the roads to a new theory of the state. \u2026 His attack on the \u201cReich\u201d arises from a sense of a world-historical duty that awaits us. He did not want to hear anything about the state as a \u201cmoral organism\u201d in the sense of Hegel, nor did he want to hear anything about Bismarck\u2019s Christian \u201cLittle Germany\u201d (\u201cKlein Deutschland\u201d). Before his eyes lay the duty of our race: the duty to become the leader of Europe. \u2026 What would Europe be without the German North? What would Europe be without Germany? A Roman colony. \u2026 Germany can exist world-historically only in the form of greatness. It has the choice to exist as the anti-Roman power of Europe or not to exist. \u2026 The German state of the future will not be a continuation of Bismarck\u2019s creation, but will be created by the spirit of Nietzsche and the spirit of the Great War\u201d (from pages 180\u2013183).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Anthony Mario Ludovici was a polyglot and multilingual British philosopher, sociologist, and social critic, one of the first and most important interpreters of Nietzsche, focusing on the impact of his ideas on the will to power, art, and aesthetics. He wrote about Nietzsche, publishing two works on the great German philosopher: “Nietzsche and Art” (where he analyzed how art and creative expression are connected to Nietzsche’s philosophy, illuminating the importance of pain and the transformative nature of artistic creation) and “Nietzsche: His Life and Works” (where he reports that he took important elements from Nietzsche to develop his own aristocratic philosophies).<\/p>\n\n\n\n As a committed Nietzschean, Ludovici – himself a brilliant philosopher – explored in depth the relationship between Nietzsche’s philosophical ideas and art, aesthetics and intellectual creativity. Not only did he write about Nietzsche, but he also translated more than 60 works, demonstrating a deep knowledge of his works. Overall, Antoni Ludovici is considered a conscious follower and interpreter of Nietzsche, an interpreter whose research on the work of the Great Teuton in the field of art and philosophy remains outstanding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Some thinkers in post-war America and Europe attempted to give a more \u201chumanistic interpretation\u201d to Nietzschean thought. Such cases are Kauffman and Montinari. Kauffman, while admitting that he does not completely agree with Nietzsche, tries to give a somewhat personal and existential interpretation to the philosopher\u2019s thought, as a means of spiritual transcendence. Montinari, in turn, tries to reflect on whether it is possible to use Nietzsche for political \u201cdemocratic purposes\u201d!<\/p>\n\n\n\n [The German-Jewish-American philosopher, translator, and poet Walter Arnold Kaufmann served for more than 30 years as a professor at Princeton University. His book, Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist (1950), significantly restored Nietzsche’s reputation, debunking the widespread myth that he was a “proto-Nazi”. Kaufmann provided a comprehensive, balanced interpretation of Nietzsche’s philosophy, emphasizing his ideas as pioneering in psychology and a reaction to Christianity rather than a mere excuse for ruthless self-assertion. He argued that Nietzsche was a peculiar “problematic thinker”, not a systematic one, and that his philosophy was deeply connected to existentialism and the Socratic spirit. Kaufmann worked to dispel the “Nietzsche legend”, which linked him to Nazism and was fueled in part by his sister’s distortions. He argued that Nietzsche, unlike philosophers with rigid systems, focused on philosophical problems and “overcame” them rather than solved them!<\/p>\n\n\n\n Kaufman also presented Nietzsche as a precursor to modern psychology, emphasizing his insights into human motivation and the will to power. He connected Nietzsche’s thought to the broader themes of existentialism and saw him as “the embodiment of the critical, intellectual integrity of the Socratic tradition.” Furthermore, he supported Nietzsche’s criticisms of Christianity, considering them central to his overall philosophical outlook. He addressed and clarified apparent contradictions in Nietzsche’s work, showing how they were superficial and understandable within the context of his truly broad overall work. Kaufmann’s work is considered one of the most influential accounts of any major Western philosopher, setting the stage for many subsequent studies of Nietzsche. Although highly influential, his interpretations have been challenged by many scholars, and some recent studies favor new translations based on critical editions of Nietzsche’s work. Despite his vigorous defense of Nietzsche, Kaufmann found much to disagree with in his work, particularly in Thus Spoke Zarathustra.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Mazzino Montinari, an Italian scholar of German studies, Germanist and committed communist, was a leading Italian scholar and philologist who significantly influenced academic research on Nietzsche, notably as co-editor, with his friend, also an Italian philosopher, philologist and historian, professor at the University of Pisa, Giorgio Coli, of the definitive critical edition of Friedrich Nietzsche’s collected works and letters (known as KGW \u2013 Kritische Gesamtausgabe Werke and KWB \u2013 Kritische Werke und Briefe). Montinari undertook the translation of German writings for the Communist Party. In 1953, when he visited East Germany for research, his work focused on providing the most accurate possible texts, both for academic and accessible editions of Nietzsche’s writings, while his critical essays, such as those in “Reading Nietzsche”, explore topics such as Nietzsche’s relationship with Wagner, his later involvement with the Nazis, and the misinterpretations of his work by figures such as his sister, Elisabeth F\u00f6rster-Nietzsche, a fanatical National Socialist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Montinari, together with Giorgio Coli, undertook the monumental task of creating the first truly critical and complete edition of Nietzsche’s writings, based on his original manuscripts. This work aimed to provide accurate, scholarly texts free from the distortions that had crept into previous editions. In this influential work, Montinari vigorously contested the authenticity of The Will to Power, arguing emphatically that it was a posthumous collection and not a complete book written by Nietzsche himself. Montinari advocated a “patient philology” for understanding Nietzsche, emphasizing the physical and sensual power of words and the importance of a deep, careful reading of his texts. This collection of essays, available in English, delves into important aspects of Nietzsche’s work, including his philosophical development, his relationship with Richard Wagner, and the controversial historical reception of his ideas, particularly by Nazis and Marxists in the mid-20th century.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The critical editions that Montinari helped to create remain the academic standard for the study of Nietzsche, providing the basis for new translations and further research worldwide. Through his meticulous editing and critical writings, Montinari played a crucial role in correcting historical distortions of Nietzsche’s philosophy, especially those that arose from his sister’s extensive involvement in editing his work after his death. Montagnier’s work established a new paradigm for Nietzschean scholarship, emphasizing historical accuracy, rigorous textual analysis, and critical engagement with the full range of Nietzsche’s writings.]<\/p>\n\n\n\n This newer tradition of “exonerating” and “decriminalizing” Nietzsche from the “fascist miasma” has led to various misinterpretations, reaching as far as important thinkers and philosophers: Michel Paul Foucault [Michel Paul Foucault, 1926 \u2013 1984 French post-structuralist and postmodernist philosopher, psychologist, and psychopathologist, who was strongly influenced by the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche and Martin Heidegger] and Jacques Derrida [Jacques Jackie \u00c9lie Derrida, 1930\u20132004) was a French-Jewish Algerian philosopher, Sephardic born in Algeria, known and as the founder of deconstruction. His wide-ranging and detailed work had a profound influence on the field of literary theory and philosophy [as this work was crucial for the distinction between continental and Anglo-Saxon philosophy] to use methods of deconstruction inherited mainly from the “Genealogy of Ethics”, but also from his other works. [The term “deconstruction” is understood as the detailed reading of texts with the aim of suggesting that any given text, rather than being a unified whole, has irreconcilably contradictory meanings. Derrida explains that he translated the Heideggerian term Destruktion or Abbau. Heidegger was one of the most important influences on Derrida’s thought]<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, after all this the harsh truth is that Nietzsche cannot be described as a democrat, in fact he is exactly the opposite. His desire to create a Caste society, as a contrast to the bourgeois democratic social reality of “universal suffrage”, “equality” and “human rights”, in which the “Superior Men”, (who know both “to obey and to govern”) will be the “Sovereigns”, is clearly visible in his work. And his inner opposition to the bourgeois order, which (worldview and practice) formed the core of the Enlightenment movement in its monstrous revolutionary extensions, is obvious and manifest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Of course, it is a fact that he himself is not a form of reactionary like the Savoyard Count Josef Marie de Maistre and the conservative Anglo-Irish Edmund Burke. On the contrary, he considers the aristocrats to be completely degenerate (the \u201cVon\u201d as he contemptuously says), as well as the pre-revolutionary monarchical and aristocratic \u201cOld Regime\u201d (Ancien Regime) and has no intention of restoring anything from the \u201cpre-revolutionary era\u201d, nor does he wish to do so. For him \u201cman lives tragically in his time\u201d and faces the consequences of this, a position of ruthless existential logic that Oswald Spengler will later adopt in his work \u201cMan and Technology\u201d (as well as many others).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Finally, his receptivity towards the death of all metaphysics (“Death of God”) is clearly indicative of the absence of any hidden connection with the reactionary logic of the anti-Enlightenment. Moreover, he himself does not criticize the Enlightenment at all as an intellectual whole, as he praises scientific progress and evolution. Thus, he consistently practiced his criticism, focused on the vulgar and sometimes vulgar offspring of the Enlightenment, causticizing the French Revolution and its irrational and dangerous passionate tendencies (which, according to him, derive their origin from the Swiss Jean-Jacques Rousseau, whose political ideas influenced the development of communist and socialist theory, internationalism, but also patriotism and national consciousness).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" “You’re looking for fans? You’re looking for zeros!” “Twilight of the Idols” Friedrich Nietzsche is perhaps one of the greatest and most misunderstood figures…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":25919,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[988,7],"tags":[7336,2609,7335],"class_list":["post-25918","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-political-science","category-research","tag-friedrich-wilhelm-nietzsche","tag-left-ideology","tag-right-ideology"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25918","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=25918"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25918\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":25920,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25918\/revisions\/25920"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/25919"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=25918"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=25918"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.liberalglobe.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=25918"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}