If they can understand him, he will make anybody right wing

It's very hard to categorize him in any political light since the foundation of his philosophy is will to power, an idea that permeates politics but also everything outside it.

t. someone who doesn't understand Nietzsche

If anyone understood him, they'd be thinking for themselves about which side is best and not shitposting on Veeky Forums

Power is a fundamentally right wing concept. Leftist soyboys hate the thought of themselves having power or responsibility

anyone who falls for this bait will never be an ubermensch

t. Foucault

Define right wing, I guess. There's really no existing right wing party that aligns itself with will to power. Self-interest =/= will to power.

too bad the right has been poisoned by the jew god.

i undestand his philosophy, yet i identify as left wing.
he didn't respect the concept of religion, nationality and patriotism. And these things are the most crucial part of right wingers

then why liberals created nations int he first place?

>implying gay sex orgies and reading marx makes one automatically a leftist

Left and right wing are terms of vanity and identity, not description. Bloated tribes.

> right wing
you mean apolitical?

Ah yes

He seems to have taken the William Blake pill.

the amount of disgust nietsche would have for your interpretation would probably surprise you

This is not a politics board, fuck off

t. literal caveman
wrong tense, 'int', not knowing history of 'liberalism' in Europe

makes you think

reading nietzsche properly will make you think politics is for faggots, unless you're some kind of caesar-like figure

>muh right wing vs left wing
Step your game up

Stop memeing, anyone who understands the Neetzsch becomes a guy who scolds modern culture, the state, glorifies the Greeks and holds a certain masculinity as his ideal (which is again implied in the Greek culture). Basically you become a Helenophile disgusted by the modern world and high on masculine power phantasies. I mean, I'm okay with that, its a healthy philosophy. But it also depends on what era of Neetzsch you're on, I think that the Human, all too Human era has most to give from a practical and materialistic standpoint in philosophy. Protip, if you want to understand the Neetzsche read the books he read. Start with Brobjers intellectual biography and work yourself through Langes Geschichte des Materialismus first.

every board is a politics board

The first liberals were the ones to begin nationalism however by introducing the idea of a land ruled by its people and not a monarch, it eventually evolved into an anti-nationalist ideology

he preferred the latin writers didn't he?

Everything being influenced by politics does not make everything political.

dat phenotype

he was the biggest beta and cuck of his time. severe one-itis

explains why alt-righters, redpillers and incels love him so much lmao

Not really. Anyone who understands him will have nothing but contempt for the right in its current form.

this

Nietzsche is too WOKE for the alt right. They can't handle his pluralism and revert to tribalism when dealing with it.

Nietzsche would probably turn someone toward egoism, some flavor of anarchism, maybe at the extreme something like ancap.

And to be clear, I would NOT count ancap as a flavor of anarchism. I'm not sure where'd I'd place it. But it's obvious to me that arguments of degeneration into feudalism/monarchism would actually be looked upon positively by someone who sees themselves as slaying dragons wandering the desert etc.

if le rightists was in favor of power they wouldn't aim so much resentment towards intellectuals, evil rich people, jews, leftist infiltration, killuminati blood rituals, etc

Anarcho-capitalism is fundamentally based on liberal morality, "no touch my shit". If you want dominant organizations, there are perfectly fine governments already in place to turn tyrannical.

He'd probably make them want a warrior-class/feudalist society. Not this modern right-wing stuff.

yeah stalin was well known to be against the idea of power

>muh spooks
When will nihilstic teenage redditors who haven't actually read Stirner but parrot his "spook" meme to make themselves feel superior leave?

Exactly. Far right especially doesn't have much respect for the intellect.

>And these things are the most crucial part of right wingers

Not necessarily. For one, nationalism was initially a left-wing movement. I think the one major theme which unites all strands of rightist thinking is a skepticism, or even outright hostility to egalitarianism, and Nietzsche was certainly critical of egalitarianism.

>he didn't respect the concept of religion
From my reading of Nietzsche, I would say he wasn't necessarily critical of the concept of religion per-se, he was critical of how Christianity in particular had become a slavish, weak belief system.

He's a solipsistic Marx. No thanks.

Spook is to Veeky Forums as kino is to /tv/
We understand its a terrible meme, we use the term as affectionate lingo.

>he was critical of how Christianity in particular had become a slavish, weak belief system.
You mean was, unless you mean like became right after it left the mouth of christ

Not even trying, mate. Back to the ballpit with the other kids on /pol/.

Hmm, yes the crusaders were weak hmmm

>Christianity destroyed for us the whole harvest of ancient civilization, and later it also destroyed for us the whole harvest of Mohammedan civilization. The wonderful culture of the Moors in Spain, which was fundamentally nearer to us and appealed more to our senses and tastes than that of Rome and Greece, was trampled down ( I do not say by what sort of feet ) Why? Because it had to thank noble and manly instincts for its origin because it said yes to life, even to the rare and refined luxuriousness of Moorish life! The crusaders later made war on something before which it would have been more fitting for them to have grovelled in the dust a civilization beside which even that of our nineteenth century seems very poor and very "senile." What they wanted, of course, was booty: the orient was rich. Let us put aside our prejudices! The crusades were a higher form of piracy, nothing more! The German nobility, which is fundamentally a Viking nobility, was in its element there: the church knew only too well how the German nobility was to be won . The German noble, always the "Swiss guard" of the church, always in the service of every bad instinct of the church but well paid . Consider the fact that it is precisely the aid of German swords and German blood and valour that has enabled the church to carry through its war to the death upon everything noble on earth! At this point a host of painful questions suggest themselves. The German nobility stands outside the history of the higher civilization: the reason is obvious. Christianity, alcohol the two great means of corruption. Intrinsically there should be no more choice between Islam and Christianity than there is between an Arab and a Jew. The decision is already reached; nobody remains at liberty to choose here. Either a man is a Chandala or he is not. "War to the knife with Rome! Peace and friendship with Islam!" : this was the feeling, this was the act , of that great free spirit, that genius among German emperors, Frederick II. What! must a German first be a genius, a free spirit, before he can feel decently ? I can't make out how a German could ever feel Christian .