Contra Nietzsche (and Darwin)
nemonemini at SPAMyahoo.com
Sun Feb 11 22:24:22 MST 2001
I never thought I would agree with anything Alan Bloom
ever said until I read his head-scratching wonder that
the left should adopt Nietzsche. He had a telling
point. How did it happen? It is a puzzle.
Nietzsche is one of the first philosophic casualties
of Darwin. And it is needless, because Darwin was a
fool who didn't get it right.
I happen to enjoy many of Nietzsche's insights, but it
is worth considering that all his basic ideas about
history and Zarathustra and tragedy are simple wrong
and misleading. Look at his Schopenhauer. From Kant's
noumenon to Schopenhauer's 'will', suddenly it is the
'will to power'. That is degeneration, and the very
decline that Nietzsche protested in his own work.
Apart from any of this he was a reactionary, please.
Back to the minor leagues where he belongs.
Nietzsche's ideas of Dionysian and Apollonian aspects
in Greeks and Greek tragedy are simply imaginary
constructs and don't correspond to what that was all
about. And I doubt if any right minded Greek who would
have liked his 'tragic view of life'. Such a view
degenerates into the Kissinger version (he has quite a
tragic view of things) that excuses murder in politics
to the tune of crocodile tears. Nietzche had a nice
literary style, but he wasn't a nice person. If you
worry that Christians had a slave morality (bull shit)
then the same could be said of Marx.
It is worth reading Arno Mayer's fine study
Persistence of the Elites about this generation that
lead to the First World War.
The question of Zarathustra is curious with Nietzsche,
for he stumbled onto something, but misread it. The
original Zarathustra is said to be the inventor of
monotheism, whatever that means. It is so unfair and
dangerous inversion of symbolism to turn him upside
down in this fashion, yet it does token a curious
meaning in Nietzsche. For Zarathustra shows in fact
the ambiguous moment when the polytheist, conceiving
the one god, realizes that he has a problem no
polytheist has, which is how he will assign good and
evil to one God! Thus Zarathustra, or some of his
later followers, were 'Iranian dualists', which is now
denounced, but the point was what Nietzsche stumble
on, which isn't 'god' but the confusions of 'good and
But his Zarathustra is nauseating and bogus. Forget
it. As Patton said, what a waste of fine infantry.
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
More information about the Marxism