Is Nietzsche the most misread author in history?

>everyone should be a balls to the wall mental tryhard like me!
>i'll rewrite the laws of nature and God!
>glimpses the infinity and dies in an asylum

whelp

but the misreadings of nietzsche by the alt right are not based on his sister's warpings. they're based on an interpretation of his own concepts

Peachy, as in peachy keen, as in dandy, as in just fine.

Nietzche's sister is a scape-goat.

Basically Nietzsche did influence the Nazis and after ww2 he basically became black-listed as an author. You'd damage your career if you ever cited him.

A guy Jewish guy named Kaufman basically pinned the entire Nazi thing on his sister. She was in contact with Hitler and helped popularize his brother, so Kaufman just blank-stated that any "evil" things were sis dilberitly misrepresenting her brother. He also greatly exaggerated how much she altered his works. After this it was socially acceptable to discuss Nietzche again.

So ironically we have a Jew to thank for making a Nazi philosopher acceptable.

Yes, his ideas were intentionally corrupted by a relative for political reasons. Then again, his ideas are so open-ended that it is hard to argue that he can truly be corrupted. And of course some would make an argument that there is no inherently incorrect fashion of literary analysis.

This trigger the pinker

Is this a dupe of a different thread? I swore I wrote a long comment on this.

>t. person who's never actually read Nietzsche

Last thread was deleted.

Pinker is the one who actually misread 'che the most

>be staunch ant-Nietzsche religious
>do school project on Nietzsche
>read his stuff
>mfw he's actually right

No. There's just a lot riding on his philosophy, a lot of trash that people called philosophy in the last century and a lot of trash people call philosophy today. Nietzsche must be protected in order to legitimize this chain of stupidity.

Yes because most people don't know the history of philosophy and ideas that he was responding to

Go back to /r/eddit, autist.

Isn't it weird that Nietzsche's writings informed both leftist/sjw icons like Derrida, Deleuze and Foucault as much as conservatives, extreme right-wing thinkers and straight-up fascists? This might be an one of a kind thing

Not at all actually.

Nietzsche admired jews for their strength, he would have disapproved of the nazi movement because of its appeals to plebs and ressentiment towards the Jews.

He didn't suck cut cocks, he even says that the Jew on the stock exchange floor was the most loathsome form of human in existence but the depths of Jewish depravity were balanced by and in a way enabled the Jews to also produce the highest type of spirituality. Without the Jews being so vile neither Spinoza nor Christ could have been what they were since both of these figures are powerful reactions against the Jews around them. In improving or doing away with the disgusting money changers you preclude the possibility of the development of these higher types of men.

they also completely ignored his genius foreign policy advice which was basically that Germany needs to ally with either the international Jews or Russia otherwise the empire won't survive the next century.

>the highest type of spirituality
didn't nietzsche loathe judeo-christian spirituality?

The anti-semetism is problem the most anti-Nietzsche thing thing about them. Nietzche's thinking is complicated and you can't group everyone up into good guys and bad guys.

However I do think that Nazi Germany was one of the things closet to his vision, the most Nietzchean country alive right now I think is Israel.

I am myself a Jewish with love for the Nazis and Nietzsche. It's a rather complex position. I think Jewish thinking occupies the extreme ends of both spiritual strength and spiritual sickness. We invented slave morality so we are the best in the world at it, yet at we also have a far better religion than the rest of Europe. Judaism is practically a cult of earthly power compared to Christianity given how little it emphasizes the after-life, it doesn't even exist in many interpretations.

Nietzsche said that humans are uncapable or abtaining any truth, that philosophy is a lie and every statement is merely an interpretion. To him there is no metaphysics of any sort. After having said that, he gave his interpretation of the world (based on materialism, psychology and phisiology). In the prelude of Writings on Wagner he described these analyses as his way of being a moralist.

People who misread Nietzsche are usually those people who take these statements at face value. Of course who will read him correctly will see nuance in virtually everything he says, and will always keep in mind his views on epistemology as the foundation of his thought. Then you have bad readers like Richard Spencer, who will get obsessed with slave morality, aristocracy, the notion of Will to Power and so on.

Pay attention to what he said. Spinoza was the most spiritual man alive until Nietzsche showed up. He was very much a product of Jewish thinking, Maimonides in particularly, despite the fact that he had so muc to criticize the man for.

>Then you have bad readers like Richard Spencer, who will get obsessed with slave morality, aristocracy, the notion of Will to Power and so on.
Pinker's reading is even more superficial. He sees him as some kind of champion of Enlightenment values and science. That couldn't be further from the truth

He loathed ressentiment which is what Paul brought to Christianity. Nietzsche loved Jesus.

Nietzsche literally characterized black people as being less evolved than white people and speculated that they had less sensitivity to pain due to their lower level of intellect. While he wasn't an antisemite, he frequently characterizes Jews, as well as other racial and ethnic groups, in a manner that would suggest a large degree of biological essentialism. To argue that he was antiracist is absurd. He would have opposed the Nazis for reasons having nothing to do with their being mean to nonwhites.

nietzsche wasn't a socialist or an anarchist, but whenever a socialist or anarchist takes inspiration from nietzsche's philosophy, no mention is made of the fact that he despised socialism and anarchism as well as mass politics in general. there it is simply understood that you can take inspiration from a philosopher's work without agreeing with him on every issue, which is of course obvious. but whenever an ethnonationalist or fascist of some kind is inspired by nietzsche (quite understandably), this seems to be conveniently forgotten, and they're accused of "appropriating" him. this accusation doesn't seem to mean anything and seems to be used as a cudgel by people who enjoy cultural hegemony against those who don't.

i've literally never heard of atheists who like dostoyevsky accused of "appropriating" him. nor leftists who like celine, mishima, or hamsun. this is nothing more than whining from people in power because they dislike their enemies liking things they like or would prefer if they could characterize them as illiterate as well as evil.

btw, i don't even particularly like spencer or the alt-right. it's just hard not to see how massively full of shit some people are.

No, whoever wrote the Bible is because people think it was literally god who wrote it when it really was a group of saints. Makes quite a difference.

Yeah. I think the people/normies who talk about "interpreting" him haven't actually read his work. Other than Zarathustra it's all pretty clear. Ironically it's the "left" interpretations that have become popular which intentionally try and soften him. Kaufmann knows exactly what he's doing, but there's only some much you can do.

Adam Smith

Death of the author means he's not misread.

Fishing for a few quotes that support your presupposition from Nietzsche and than ignoring the man's actual thought is not "taking inspiration" that's not even philosophizing, or even real thinking.

Not him, but isn't contemporary liberalism a perfect example of slave morality?

It is preciously such a thing. And it shows a complete lack of that they want to cherry pick a few quotes from Nietzsche, ignore everything else he said and go about their merry way.

this isn't what is going on, though. this is far-right people liking him and hysterical ninnies crying "appropriation". his critique of christian morality, concept of the will to power, and glorification of the aristocratic principle of nature is perfectly in line with their thinking. it's inevitable that they would be fans. while nietzsche was not himself a fascist, there are definitely proto-fascist elements in his writing. you have to be delusional not to see them. but then again, i've heard people claim nietzsche was a feminist.

nietzsche literally said liberalism was for cattle. he called socialists and anarchists rabble. he hated democracy. he hated nationalism because he saw it as another form of mass politics. he was a reactionary individualist. his views aren't hard to figure out.

Wrong. This is just a way to save N from history.

He's right wing as fuck

Where/in which book does Pinker discuss Nietzsche?

>39 replies
really?

ass

Wrong, in his lifetime he was an anarchist.

Fascism and Communism are the definition of slave morality. Much more so than anything else besides monarchism and theocracy of course.

That's not accurate. Kaufman did start the entire obssesion with Nietzsch'es sister, but Nietzsche returned to fashion way before. It wad Deleuez'es new take on his ideas that sparked the 2nd half -20th century Nietzsche renaissance, with important thinkers like foucault joining in.
Basically, every movement has its Nietzsche and it's only natural, and while nazism isn't exactly contradicted by Nietzsche, it is far from being a glove on his thought. Deleuze proved Nietzsche to be more than a philosopher of hierarchy - a critique of "the human", its society and conceptions, a metaphysician of difference, a creator of a new philosophical method. After the 60's it was clear he is one of the most necessary thinkers for our times.

that's not how you pronounce nietzsche tho
he would have been better off going for "...not your teacher" or "can't teach ya" or summat like they did in monty python

Deleuze's "readings" are literally fabrications ex nihilo

Way before my ass. Kaufmann was publishing his work on Nietzsche as early as the '40s, and published his Nietzsche book in 1950.

>(((Pinker)))
>Relevant
youtube.com/watch?v=1BRAF0yVXsY

WRONG

anarchists are faggots. N praised SOCIETY and great men

Shit, for some reason I was sure he published at the 70-80's. Dumb mistake, but the main argument holds, Kaufman has a relatively minor influence on the Nietzsche revival.

Why

>Jews desperately calling any right wing reading of Nietzsche "wrong"

Not even a fan of NEEtzsche but I'm so sick of this kikery

315 KB

>Deleuze proved Nietzsche to be more than a philosopher of hierarchy - a critique of "the human", its society and conceptions, a metaphysician of difference, a creator of a new philosophical method. After the 60's it was clear he is one of the most necessary thinkers for our times.

Jesus Christ did Deleuze's ghost threaten you with a gun to write this?

>That couldn't be further from the truth
How, his own view of the world is based on lingusitics, psychology and rationalism.

>People often say that the Nazis loved Nietzsche, which is true. What’s less known is that Nietzsche’s sister, who was in charge of his estate after he died, was a Nazi sympathizer who shamefully rearranged his remaining notes to produce a final book, The Will to Power, that embraced Nazi ideology. It won her the favor of Hitler, but it was a terrible disservice to her brother’s legacy.

Apart from that's fucking wrong.

The article, while a bit unfair to the alt-right (not that I think the alt-right or fascists in general deserve fairness) in suggesting their entire movement relies on Nietzsche, is right that their interpretation of Nietzsche leaves a lot to be desired, in particular in that nationalism is essentially a religion with which they hope to fill the role of Christianity, and thus nationalists are fleeing from life rather than embracing it.

I've literally never seen /pol/ give an ounce of fuck about Nietzsche, but the Pomo's on Veeky Forums love him.

Hitler often said National Socialism is a Lebensbejahende ideology. And indeed it is. Free from guilt and shame. Kraft durch Freude.

>Is Nietzsche the most misread author in history?

That award goes to Aquinas

Wrong, he literally got involved with anarchist parties for his entire life, and this is apparently the only political allegiance he ever mantained.

In his books he criticize anarchists and socialists, but you're also forgetting that he criticizes virtually everyone. Of the great men of our past tradition he literally says that they probably all had severe mental illnesses. Your view of Nietzsche's writings is skewed, my retarded friend.

>Nietszche
>Nazi Philosopher
>Implying he would have agreed with Nazi Ideology

lol keep dreaming whitey.

press.princeton.edu/titles/10635.html

Nobody other than Kaufman cultists actually believe this.

Nietsche was not a "Nazi philosopher" he would have vomited at the thought of all the plundering an paranoia the Nazis were perpetrating.

>When you post on Veeky Forums but can't parse a simple sentence multiple ways

Nietzsche != Nazi Philosopher
Nazi Philosophers = Nietzschean.

I'm sure that the pathetic and clumsy approach to culture employed by Nazis would be enough for Nietzsche to dismiss them. Just imagine how he would have reacted to Nazi's treatment of classical music: to him they would have looked like children pretending to be something they're not.

You misunderstand. He was an anarch,not an anarchist. Look up Ernst Jünger. It was a popular thing in Nietzsches time and a while after, especially among military types and especially National Socialists.

People have a difficult time imagining an anarch siding so enthusiastically with an NS-regime. This confusion is rooted in misconceptions they have regarding fascism and national socialism.

Actually correct. Every thomist has to first explain to everyone that Kant, Hume, Spinoza and just about every Enlightenment philosopher either didn't read him or misread him.

>Nietzsche admired jews for their strength

This is how I spot people who never read "Genealogie der Moral"

>Just imagine how he would have reacted to Nazi's treatment of classical music: to him they would have looked like children pretending to be something they're not.

Uh, Nietzsche's interest and knowledge of classical music was literally childlike, the stuff he composed was so bad he literally got laughed out of the entire scene. I don't think you've actually read much about his personal life.

Nietzsche is funny because he is this to inteligent rebel in his novels and a total failure in his actual life.

People have some weird idea that Nietzsche was classically educated and highly cultured, he was actually the opposite and was borderline illiterate on any that wasn't philosophy, of which he was considered only average at and was dependent on friends to get a respectable teaching job.

Idiocy, he composed a few short pieces on piano for friends of his (the anecdote that sees Wagner laughing at his compositions is false), he was not known by "the scene" and his musical training was mostly technical (he was apparently a pretty good pianist). Also, apparently, he did ear training and could recognize enharmonic pitches (this means that he had mastered ear training as much as possible for someone living in the tonal era): basically, as a listener he was far more proficient than 99.9% of humanity (made up stat, but I can assure you that even in conservatories it's difficult to find such good listeners).

what a load of crap, i bet you never read nietzsche. his sister is just a dumb scapegoat, truth is that nietzsche was very right wing but i agree that he wouldn't have been too fond of nazism - large-scale ubermenesch manufacturing is utopia-

When will teenagers stop reading Nietzsche?

>who is Hegel

as soon as fedora faggots will stop feeling edgy by shitting on teenagers because they read nietzsche and they're misreading him? or maybe don't, keep going man, maybe vox will hire you

interesting article, tracing the development of left-nietzscheans and right-nietzscheans to this day.

Part 3: Whatever Happened to Nietzsche?
voegelinview.com/rise-reactionary-part-iii/

that's just igniorant

I've read basically everything except the Nachlass

>using the german title of the book to sound smart

nice one lad. Yes, he excoriates the Jews for their extreme issues with resentment but also recognizes them as an exceptionally powerful race. A race with so many powerful enemies must also be powerful, powerfully degenerate but powerful nonetheless.

He flatly states that Spinoza is the wisest man and Christ the most powerful soul, both Jews and neither would have been able to rise to the heights they achieved without prodding by the wretched Jews they were surrounded by

Please. I attack every nietzche pagan idiot on /pol/ whenever I see them. They always begin with jew on a stick post.

???

there are no nietzsche fanboys and that's just a fact, get some pills schizo

>when your post literally says Nazi Philosopher but then you try to backpaddle

>using the german title of the book to sound smart

Or maybe he is German. Oy vey!

Even the nazis said Jews are clever, shrewd and powerful.

If they were as powerless and meaningless as gypsy they wouldn't have focused so much on the Jewish threat.

"There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach ya 'bout the raising of the wrist..."

>nietzsche
>rationalism
wew

It seems clear to me he is speaking of Pinker, but perhaps I'm the one mistaking

I was referring to Nietzsche, not Deleuze, yea? I don't love him honestly, but his book on Nietzsche is really important and well written imo.

>nietzsche wasn't an antisemi-

Probably, but he deserves it

Not really, he kinda cleared the ground for people to create new values again.

>he thinks this is not a compliment

It all depends on which interpretation of Nietzsche you're into. He's too fucking hard to pin down to really even belong on the political spectrum. Also, you guys need to stop sperging out. There are well known and respected left and right wing interpretation of Nietzsche, his work is too sweeping to belong only in one camp. We can all at least agree that it's complicated.