Has anyone else realized that Raskolnikov is Nietzsche's poor criminal?

Has anyone else realized that Raskolnikov is Nietzsche's poor criminal?

He is the ubermensch.

Why the blunt end?

he's holding the axe wrong
what retard drew this?

I did as soon as I read it. I knew Nietzsche liked Dosto, and when he said he was "pale" and mentioned an axe I got it.

best be trollin fgts

>He had not a minute more to lose. He pulled the axe
quite out, swung it with both arms, scarcely conscious of
himself, and almost without effort, almost mechanically,
brought the blunt side down on her head. He seemed not
to use his own strength in this. But as soon as he had once
brought the axe down, his strength returned to him.

Not necessarily.

It's cleaner and quieter to use a heavy blunt object and strike at the nape of the neck.

>not realizing that hitting with the blunt side is just as effective for killing frail old women, reduces blood splatter and doesn't leave you drenched in proof of your crime

Non-napoleonic untermenschen detected, would never pull off even mediocre crime.

He's morally stabbing himself in the back.

He's actually shooting at god

"There is no such things as robbery and murder"
Is that what you're referring to?

nietzsche was a big fan of dostoyevski because of his "modern" depiction of criminals, but dostoyevski foresaw nietzschean revaluation attempts and pre-emptively disavowed them in a magazine article:

>Among these ideas concealed in the Russian people-ideas of the Russian people-is the denomination of crime as a misfortune, and of criminals-as sufferers. This is a purely Russian idea. In no other European people has it been recorded. In the West it is now being expounded only by philosophers and commentators. However, our people proclaimed it long before those philosophers and commentators.
>No, the people do not deny crime, and they know that the criminal is guilty. It is only that the people are aware of the fact that they themselves are guilty in common with every criminal. Still, blaming themselves, the people do not prove thereby that they believe in "environment" ; on the contrary, they believe that environment is wholly dependent on them, on their uninterrupted repentance and self-betterment, Energv , work, and struggle-these are the things which reform environment. By work and struggle alone, independence and the sentiment of self-respect are being achieved. "Let us become better, and environment will improve." This is what the Russian people, by a strong feeling, are tacitly conceiving in their concealed idea of the misfortune ot the criminal. Now imagine : what if the criminal himself, on hearing from the people that he is a "sufferer," were to consider himself only a sufferer and not a criminal? -In this case the people would turn away from such a misinterpretation and would call it a betrayal of the popular truth and faith.
(diary of a writer)

Less chances of the axe glancing off her skull.

Yeah I picked that up almost immediately. It's a refutation of Nietzsche 20 years before Nietzsche wrote.

Nope, it's an attack on the socialists and nihilists of his time. Anyone who think C&P refutes Nietzsche's ideas is probably dumb and american as well.

Based Dosto.

>he thinks Nietzsche wasn't well aware of this

so is the Turin Horse story real? how is it so similar to Ralkonikov’s dream?

This is the third time in 2 months I'm seeing the same fucking combination of posts

Except he failed

Save the edge for cutting up the meat.

Sorry, I just like posting them here.