1. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53223
    15 Jan '06 17:38
    Originally posted by Vladamir no1
    In my version (Oh how I wish I could read German) I have a heading of 'of old and new law tables' so i shall check there...n yes its there cheers
    Can someone here talk about the Nazi conection to Nietzsche?
    I think maybe a lot of people are put off by that. Did the Nazi's
    just read into it what they wanted or is there some hidden
    master race manifesto in it?
  2. Hmmm . . .
    Joined
    19 Jan '04
    Moves
    22131
    15 Jan '06 18:023 edits
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Can someone here talk about the Nazi conection to Nietzsche?
    I think maybe a lot of people are put off by that. Did the Nazi's
    just read into it what they wanted or is there some hidden
    master race manifesto in it?
    Basically, I think the answer is, “Yes, they read it into him.” But it is not difficult to read into Nietzsche! They also had help from his sister, who had custody of him after he collapsed into insanity. She helped to interpret her brother in ways that would support Nazi notions—apparently she also forged works by him, and the original editions of Will to Power were infected with her forgeries. Ironically, Nietzsche refused to attend his sister’s wedding because she married an anti-Semite; I have seen references that indicated his break with Wagner might have been partly over the latter’s anti-Semitism. The notion of German supremacy would have been a joke to Nietzsche, who preferred to think of himself as “a European.”

    This from the wiki article on Nietzsche:

    “During the First World War and after 1945, many regarded Nietzsche as having helped to cause the German militarism. The German right-wing didn't like Nietzsche's thought until the Nazis. Nietzsche was popular among left-wing Germans in the 1890s. Many Germans read Thus Spoke Zarathustra and were influenced by Nietzsche's appeal of unlimited individualism and the development of a personality. The enormous popularity of Nietzsche led to the Subversion debate in German politics in 1894/1895. Conservatives wanted to ban the work of Nietzsche. Nietzsche influenced the Social-democratic revisionists, anarchists, feminists and the left-wing German youth movement.
    During the interbellum, various fragments of Nietzsche's work were appropriated by National Socialists, notably Alfred Bäumler in his reading of The Will to Power. During the period of Nazi rule, Nietzsche's work was widely studied in German (and, after 1938, Austrian) schools and universities. The Nazis viewed Nietzsche as one of their "founding fathers." They incorporated much of his ideology and thoughts about power into their own political philosophy (without consideration to its contextual meaning). Although there exist some significant differences between Nietzsche and Nazism, his ideas of power, weakness, women, and religion became axioms of Nazi society. The wide popularity of Nietzsche among Nazis was due partly to Nietzsche's sister, Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche, a Nazi sympathizer who edited much of Nietzsche's works.

    It is worth noting that Nietzsche's thought largely stands opposed to Nazism. In particular, Nietzsche despised anti-Semitism, though his venomous attack upon the Jews in other works such as the Genealogy of Morals confuses this attitude. He also despised nationalism. He took a dim view of German culture as it was in his time, and derided both the state and populism. As the joke goes: "Nietzsche detested Nationalism, Socialism, Germans and mass movements, so naturally he was adopted as the intellectual mascot of the National Socialist German Workers' Party." He was also far from being a racist, believing that the "vigour" of any population could only be increased by mixing with others. In The Twilight of the Idols, Nietzsche says, "...the concept of 'pure blood' is the opposite of a harmless concept."

    As for the idea of the "blond beast," Walter Kaufmann has this to say in The Will to Power: "The 'blond beast' is not a racial concept and does not refer to the 'Nordic race' of which the Nazis later made so much. Nietzsche specifically refers to Arabs and Japanese, Romans and Greeks, no less than ancient Teutonic tribes when he first introduces the term... and the 'blondness' obviously refers to the beast, the lion, rather than the kind of man."

    While some of his writings on "the Jewish question" were critical of the Jewish population in Europe, he also praised the strength of the Jewish people, and this criticism was equally, if not more strongly, applied to the English, the Germans, and the rest of Europe. He also valorised strong leadership, and it was this last tendency that the Nazis took up.

    While his use by the Nazis was inaccurate, it should not be supposed that he was strongly liberal either. One of the things that he seems to have detested the most about Christianity was its emphasis on pity and how this leads to the elevation of the weak-minded. Nietzsche believed that it was wrong to deprive people of their pain, because it was this very pain that stirred them to improve themselves, to grow and become stronger. It would overstate the matter to say that he disbelieved in helping people; but he was persuaded that much Christian pity robbed people of necessary painful life experiences, and robbing a person of his necessary pain, for Nietzsche, was wrong. He once noted in his Ecce Homo: "pain is not an objection to life."

    Nietzsche often referred to the common people who participated in mass movements and shared a common mass psychology as "the rabble", and "the herd." He valued individualism above all else. While he had a dislike of the state in general, he also spoke negatively of anarchists and made it clear that only certain individuals should attempt to break away from the herd mentality. This theme is common throughout Thus Spoke Zarathustra.

    While it will thus be appreciated that a political 'flavour' is easy to discern in Nietzsche's writings, one must stress that his work does not in any sense propose or outline a 'political project'. The man who stated that 'The will to a system is a lack of integrity' was consistent in never devising or advocating a specific 'system' of governance - just as, being a champion of individual struggle and self-realisation, he never concerned himself with 'mass movements' or with the organisation of 'groups' and 'political parties' that bartered and haggled for political power. In this sense, Nietzsche could almost be called an anti-political thinker.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nietzsche

    I really only skimmed the article, and just want to note that N defined his “Will to Power” in terms of “life enhancement”—that is, more than Schoepnahuer’s “will to life,” or to survive or perdure; I “translate” will-to-power as “will to thrive,” rather than as political power or conquest or some such.

    Nietzsche's discussions of "master and slave" mentalities had nothing to do with a "master race" manifesto.

    EDIT for cleanup of that lengthy citation.
  3. Joined
    23 Sep '05
    Moves
    11774
    15 Jan '06 18:232 edits
    Originally posted by vistesd
    Basically, I think the answer is, “Yes, they read it into him.” But it is not difficult to read into Nietzsche! They also had help from his sister, who had custody of him after he collapsed into insanity. She helped to interpret her brother in ways that would support Nazi notions—apparently she also forged works by him, and the original editions of Wil ...[text shortened]... T for cleanup of that lengthy citation.
    All I can say is: Excellent post vistesd. 🙂

    I'm curious about the forgeries made by Elisabeth. How do we know today which parts were forged? Or do we really know that? Was it only the original version of Will to power?

    Perhaps I should read a little more about Friedrich himself, look at things he said before he became incapacitated, and read his works with that knowledge in the back of my mind?

    Again, excellent post. 🙂
  4. Hmmm . . .
    Joined
    19 Jan '04
    Moves
    22131
    15 Jan '06 18:47
    Originally posted by stocken
    All I can say is: Excellent post vistesd. 🙂

    I'm curious about the forgeries made by Elisabeth. How do we know today which parts were forged? Or do we really know that? Was it only the original version of Will to power?

    Perhaps I should read a little more about Friedrich himself, look at things he said before he became incapacitated, and read his works with that knowledge in the back of my mind?

    Again, excellent post. 🙂
    Thanks for the kind comments.

    I'm curious about the forgeries made by Elisabeth. How do we know today which parts were forged? Or do we really know that? Was it only the original version of Will to power?

    I really don’t know the answers to any of those questions. I probably should have been more careful to say “alleged” forgeries. I'm going to try to search that out...
  5. Joined
    23 Sep '05
    Moves
    11774
    15 Jan '06 19:08
    Originally posted by vistesd
    I really don’t know the answers to any of those questions. I probably should have been more careful to say “alleged” forgeries. I'm going to try to search that out...
    I found this. Can't verify its accuracy, but it's interesting nonetheless:

    "How much Nietzsche's illness - dementia paralytica or syphilis - affected his thinking and writing is open to speculations. During the second period of brain syphilis, the patient often acts manic-depressively and has megalomaniac visions. During his manic period in the 1880s Nietzsche produced Thus Spoke Zarathustra, The Gay Science, and Beyond Good and Evil."

    http://nietzsche.thefreelibrary.com/

    So it's possible that Elisabeth had a hand in my current book of choice.

    ----

    In that same document (on a different matter):

    'According to Nietzsche, the other world is an illusion, and instead of worshipping gods, man should concentrate on his own elevation, which Nietzsche symbolizes in the Übermench. The contrast of "good and evil" as opposed to that of "good and bad," Nietzsche associated with slave morality. He argued that no single morality can be appropriate to all men. The meaning of history was the appearance, at rare moments, of the exceptional individual. And by creating the figure of Zarathustra, Nietzsche presented the teacher of the coming superman.'

    I'm especially interested in the statement that N argued that "no single morality can be appropriate to all men". I wonder what that means, really. It's hard for me to think that morality can be (and should be? - perhaps even is?) different for different individuals.
  6. Hmmm . . .
    Joined
    19 Jan '04
    Moves
    22131
    15 Jan '06 19:152 edits
    A few references to Elisabeth’s forgeries, etc., that I have found thus far:

    From: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.cgi?path=175731096029225--

    The question of her major forgery, the posthumous Will to Power, remains. Diethe wonders why "it is still not possible to state the full extent of Elisabeth's manipulations" (p. 109), but her study does not give much information that goes beyond the findings of the Italian researchers Colli and Montinari, which were published in their edition of Nietzsche's complete works in the late 1960s.

    From: http://www.britannica.com/ebc/article-9034925--

    Meanwhile, she collected some of his notes under the title Der Wille zur Macht (“The Will to Power&rdquo😉 and presented this work, first as part of her three-volume biography (1895–1904), then in a one-volume edition (1901), and finally in a completely remodeled two-volume edition (1906) that was widely considered Nietzsche's magnum opus. After her death scholars reedited his writings and found some of Elisabeth's versions distorted and spurious: she forged nearly 30 letters and often rewrote passages. The discovery of her forgeries and of the original texts had a profound influence on subsequent interpretations of Nietzsche's philosophy.

    From: http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/classes/cluster21/wiki/index.pl?diff=NietzscheTimeline--

    Elisabeth took Nietzsche's literary production for her own and used it largely to make money, but also tried to excerpt it in ways that made his views appear sympathetic to the Aryan cause and her dead husband's beliefs. She even forged several key passages. Although Nietzsche himself was not entirely not to blame, it was in large part these editorial and marketing decisions that made Nietzsche's work appealing to, among others, Adolf Hitler.||

    From: http://www.freeindiamedia.com/book_review/29_sep_03_book_review.htm--

    If you assume that Nietzsche mad was Nietzsche dead, then The Will to Power was published posthumously by Elisabeth, who raided the notebooks, took what she fancied entirely out of context and whether or not it had been crossed out, and knitted together a book that Heidegger helped make respectable. She turned the virulently anti-German, anti-anti-semite into a Jew-hating hyper-nationalist and suppressed everything inconvenient in his writings. Wishing to translate Nietzsche, Mazzino Montinari examined the archive and reported:

    “Our hair stood on end when we came to read, in the shorter Nietzsche biography by Förster-Nietzsche, such comments by Richard Oehler [Elisabeth's nephew] as 'apparently not printed in the works' or 'apparently not published in the posthumous works' regarding decisive quotations from Nietzsche cited in the text . . . What was still slumbering away in the manuscripts after more than seventy years of which we - in Florence - would never have been able to learn?”

    EDITs because I can never seem to get the paragraphs right on these cut-n-pastes! 😠
  7. Hmmm . . .
    Joined
    19 Jan '04
    Moves
    22131
    15 Jan '06 19:181 edit
    Originally posted by stocken
    I found this. Can't verify its accuracy, but it's interesting nonetheless:

    "How much Nietzsche's illness - dementia paralytica or syphilis - affected his thinking and writing is open to speculations. During the second period of brain syphilis, the patient often acts manic-depressively and has megalomaniac visions. During his manic period in the 1880s Niet can be (and should be? - perhaps even is?) different for different individuals.
    So it's possible that Elisabeth had a hand in my current book of choice.

    I doubt it. Hemingway was probably manic-depressive and managed to write his own stuff.

    Friedrich didn't collapse until 1889, and his relations with his sister were not good.

    EDIT: Whether or not N had syphillis is speculation, and has been argued both ways.
  8. Hmmm . . .
    Joined
    19 Jan '04
    Moves
    22131
    15 Jan '06 20:01
    Originally posted by stocken
    I found this. Can't verify its accuracy, but it's interesting nonetheless:

    "How much Nietzsche's illness - dementia paralytica or syphilis - affected his thinking and writing is open to speculations. During the second period of brain syphilis, the patient often acts manic-depressively and has megalomaniac visions. During his manic period in the 1880s Niet ...[text shortened]... can be (and should be? - perhaps even is?) different for different individuals.
    I'm especially interested in the statement that N argued that "no single morality can be appropriate to all men". I wonder what that means, really. It's hard for me to think that morality can be (and should be? - perhaps even is?) different for different individuals.

    I think a lot of attempts have been made to get a handle on N’s ideas about morality vis-à-vis his doctrine of perspectivism.

    First, N was not a systems-thinker or a formula-philosopher, and consistency was not his particular hobgoblin. I can see him rejecting any notion of a one-size-fits-all, for-all-time system of moral rules. When he referred to himself as an “immoralist,” I think he meant a kind of moral skeptic—at least with regard to “conventional” rule-book systems. He did not argue for either libertinism or some groundless moral “relativism.”

    Second, sometimes N’s references to “morality” seem to mean a particular set of rules or conventions dictated by the authority of tradition (most especially, Christian morality), rather than practical ethical guides or principles. That is, he doesn’t always distinguish between morality per se and “a morality.”

    Third, these “teasers” from Peter Berkowitz’s Nietzsche: The Ethics of An Immoralist:

    “Prizing knowledge above authority or tradition, the intellectual conscience undercuts the authority of conventional moral judgments by revealing that conventional morality, far from possessing a transcendent ground in nature, reason, or divine revelation, originates in the accidents of instincts, appetites and circumstances. What follows the painful self-discovery that conventional morality lacks authoritative or lofty foundations, according to Nietzsche, is the task of understanding the imperative or necessity to undertake self-creation. The opinion that conventional morality is groundless is one of the grounds of Nietzsche’s ethics of creativity.” (p. 17)

    Also: “Generally speaking, Nietzsche is, as postmodern interpretation suggest, a teacher of self-making or self-creation. Yet postmodern interpreters and ‘neo-Nietzschean’ theorists overlook the foundations of Nietzsche’s imperative to self-making and underestimate the severity of his ethics of the creative self.” (p.15)

    Berkowitz also notes: “One must of course be alive to Nietzsche’s famous irony…” (p.7)

    I have not finished Berkowitz’s book: I got bogged down in what I thought was a bad interpretation of NSZ, and set the work aside for awhile.
  9. Joined
    23 Sep '05
    Moves
    11774
    15 Jan '06 21:45
    Originally posted by vistesd
    I got bogged down in what I thought was a bad interpretation of NSZ, and set the work aside for awhile.
    I hope that wasn't my interpretation of NSZ? I hate to have disturbed you in your work.

    Your posts are complete and to the point, which is something I enjoy to read. Don't mistake my lack of response for lack of interest. It's clear that you are far beyond me on these matters, and I will get back to my own work now. 🙂

    Stocken.
  10. Hmmm . . .
    Joined
    19 Jan '04
    Moves
    22131
    16 Jan '06 01:081 edit
    Originally posted by stocken
    I hope that wasn't my interpretation of NSZ? I hate to have disturbed you in your work.

    Your posts are complete and to the point, which is something I enjoy to read. Don't mistake my lack of response for lack of interest. It's clear that you are far beyond me on these matters, and I will get back to my own work now. 🙂

    Stocken.
    No, no, no! It wasn't your interpretation: this was some months ago. You are stimulating me wonderfully on this, and getting me to look at Nietzsche again (I tend to move from study project to study project as the "spirit" moves me--have lots of unfinished ones laying around at all times!). I am enjoying this thoroughly, Stock. Thank you. 🙂
  11. Joined
    28 Aug '05
    Moves
    1355
    16 Jan '06 11:48
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Can someone here talk about the Nazi conection to Nietzsche?
    I think maybe a lot of people are put off by that. Did the Nazi's
    just read into it what they wanted or is there some hidden
    master race manifesto in it?
    They twisted and contorted it to suit their own needs much as others have done with religion 🙁
  12. Joined
    28 Aug '05
    Moves
    1355
    16 Jan '06 13:23
    If u can tell me in what book and where Nietzsche said "There are no facts, only interpretations" you'll be a hero...someone quoted it in their book and didn't source it! help
  13. Joined
    23 Sep '05
    Moves
    11774
    16 Jan '06 13:29
    Originally posted by Vladamir no1
    If u can tell me in what book and where Nietzsche said "There are no facts, only interpretations" you'll be a hero...someone quoted it in their book and didn't source it! help
    "There are no facts, only interpretations. [...] Is this a fair statement of Nietzsche’s views? Well, he did say it himself, at least according to Danto. Still, the reference is to Nietzsche’s unpublished notes, so it is hard to tell when he wrote this, in what context, and to what extent he endorsed the view, rather than expressing it provisionally or ironically."

    http://huh.34sp.com/res/truth.pdf
  14. Joined
    28 Aug '05
    Moves
    1355
    16 Jan '06 13:451 edit
    Originally posted by stocken
    "There are no facts, only interpretations. [...] Is this a fair statement of Nietzsche’s views? Well, he did say it himself, at least according to Danto. Still, the reference is to Nietzsche’s unpublished notes, so it is hard to tell when he wrote this, in what context, and to what extent he endorsed the view, rather than expressing it provisionally or ironically."

    http://huh.34sp.com/res/truth.pdf
    Thanks...........Soooo.....if I use the quote in an essay the only source I can put is (unpublished notes)???

    just found this

    There are no facts, only interpretations.

    Source Nietzsche's Notebooks Summer 1886-Fall 1887 7 [60]
  15. Joined
    23 Sep '05
    Moves
    11774
    16 Jan '06 14:521 edit
    Originally posted by Vladamir no1
    Source Nietzsche's Notebooks Summer 1886-Fall 1887 7 [60]
    That would be (a part of) Nietzsche's unpublished notes, me thinks.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree