How can anyone be a Marxist and a Nietzschean at the same time?

>who are Deleuze and Foucault

>look at my leftist cult figures

That doesn't answer my question, fucklord.

By being a retard
See

Well yes, but he was trying to overcome it. Like that's why he wrote.

HURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR FUNDIES XDDDDDDD FUGKIEN CHRISCHDENZ

Oh look, it's a Christcuck being retarded.

What a surprise.

im redpilled and marxism is a disease of liberality and slave thinking, try the redpill

Probably lives in Kentucky or his mother's basement or both

only the ignorant and closed minded don't accept God

having the dedication and fervor to go insane over your philosophy is not a slave mentality

the kid had heart

>He thinks there is a connection between his philosophy and his later insanity
Because every-single thing we know about his insanity contradicting that doesn't matter at all.

>How can someone be a marxist, a proeminent left wing thinker, and a nietzschean
>Here's two philosophers who take from both
>LOL NO THOSE PPL DONT COUNT BECUS THEY LEFTUS

The thing is, you're retarded, because Nick Land is a literal meme in this board and he takes a lot from both Marx and Nietzsche, so you don't even know your fucking memethinkers

>19th centure Ayn Rand
Jesus christ I wouldn't throw that insult against a mortal enemy.

Leninism is basically Nietzschian Marxism.

Explain?

>How can anyone be a Marxist and a Nietzschean at the same time?

By ignoring everything he ever said about equality and anarchism/socialism (both of which he used interchangeably to mean Marxism, which to my knowledge he never called by name).

One of his longer, and arguably most visceral aphorisms, literally rips Socialism a new asshole by comparing it to Christianity in a far from complimentary manner.

Sadly, 20th century French hacks - that is to say, 20th century French philosophers - loved his moral scepticism/relativism/etc, but ignored A LOT of other stuff.

Yes. It makes sense that a working class Nietzschean would be a communist.

>Taking sides in Philosophy like it's a sport.

>Being an (x)

>Not taking truth as it comes through greater understanding accomplished through every day reading, yet malleable to new insights as ideas are contrasted to each other, thus forming your own mind.

>truth

Hold still

>expecting anything else from the dumbest generation in the history of the world.

>One of his longer, and arguably most visceral aphorisms, literally rips Socialism a new asshole by comparing it to Christianity in a far from complimentary manner.
Where can I read this?

I'll type it out from my copy of Portable Nietzsche, 4u:

>Christian and anarchist: When the anarchist, as the mouthpiece of the declining strata of society, demands with a fine indignation what is "right," "justice," and "equal rights," he is merely under the pressure of his own uncultured state, which cannot comprehend the real reason for his suffering - what it is that he is poor in: life. A causal instinct asserts itself in him: it must be somebody's fault that he is in a bad way.

>Also, the indignation itself soothes him; it is a pleasure for all wretched devils to scold: it gives a slight but intoxicating sense of power. Even the plaintiveness and complaining can give like a charm for the sake of which it endures it: there is a fine dose of revenge in every complaint; one charges one's own bad situation, and under certain situations, even one's own badness, to those who are different, as if that were an injustice, a forbidden privilege. "If I am canaille, you ought to be too" - on such logic are revolutions made.

>Complaining never does any good: it stems from weakness. Whether one charges one's own misfortune to others or to oneself - the socialist does the former; the Christian, for example, the latter - really makes no difference. The common and, let us add, the unworthy, thing is that it is supposed to be somebody's fault that one is suffering; in short, the sufferer prescribes the honey of revenge against his suffering.

>The objects of this need for revenge, as a need for pleasure, are mere occasions: everywhere the sufferer finds occasion for satisfying his little revenge. If he is a Christian - to repeat it once more - he finds them in himself.

>The Christian and the anarchist are both decadents. When the Christian condemns, slanders, and besmirches "the world," his instinct is the same as that which prompts the socialist worker to condemn, slander and besmirch society. The "last judgement" is the sweet comfort of revenge - the revolution, which the socialist worker also awaits, but conceived a little farther off. The "beyond" - why a beyond, if not as a means for besmirching this world?

Staggered for your reading pleasure.

>what it is that he is poor in: life.

Yeah, as opposed to food/living standards/etc.

Nietzsche was such a bourgeois schmuck.

thank you

Pure ressentiment.

topjej