From Wikipedia
Nietzsche's criticism of anti-Semitism and nationalism
Peter Gast would "correct"
Nietzsche's writings even after the philosopher's breakdown and so without his
approval - something heavily criticized by today's Nietzsche scholarship. Although
Nietzsche has famously been represented (some strongly argue misrepresented)[17]as a predecessor to
Nazism, he criticized anti-Semitism, pan-Germanism and,
to a lesser extent, nationalism. Thus, he broke
with his editor in 1886 because of opposition to his anti-Semitic stances, and
his rupture with Richard Wagner, expressed in The Case of Wagner and
Nietzsche
Contra Wagner (both written in 1888), had much
to do with Wagner's endorsement of pan-Germanism and anti-Semitism — and also
of his rallying to Christianity. In a March 29, 1887 letter to Theodor Fritsch, he mocked
anti-Semitics, Fritsch, Eugen Dühring, Wagner, Ebrard, Wahrmund, and the leading
advocate of pan-Germanism, Paul de Lagarde, who would become,
along with Wagner and Houston
Chamberlain, main official influences of Nazism.[3] This 1887 letter to Fritsch
ended by: "— And finally, how do you think I feel when the name
Zarathustra is mouthed by anti-Semites? ..."[18]
Section VIII of Beyond Good
and Evil, titled "Peoples and Fatherlands",
criticized pan-Germanism and patriotism, advocating instead the unification of
Europe (§256, etc.). In Ecce Homo (1888),
he criticized the "German nation", its "will to power (to
Empire, to Reich)", thus underscoring an easy misinterpretation of the Wille
zur Macht, the conception of Germans as a "race", the
"anti-Semitic way of writing history", or of writing "history
conform to the German Empire," and stigmatized "nationalism, this national
neurosis from which Europe is sick", this "small politics".[19]
Nietzsche heavily criticized his sister's husband, Bernhard Förster, and his
sister, speaking harshly against the "anti-Semitic canaille.": "I've
seen proof, black on white, that Herr Dr. Förster has
not yet severed his connection with the anti-Semitic movement...Since then I've
had difficulty coming up with any of the tenderness and protectiveness I've so
long felt toward you. The separation between us is thereby decided in really
the most absurd way. Have you grasped nothing of the reason why I am in the
world?...Now it has gone so far that I have to defend myself hand and foot
against people who confuse me with these anti-Semitic canaille; after my own
sister, my former sister, and after Widemann more recently have given the
impetus to this most dire of all confusions. After I read the name Zarathustra
in the anti-Semitic Correspondence my forbearance came to an end. I am now in a
position of emergency defense against your spouse's Party. These accursed
anti-Semite deformities shall not sully my ideal!!" Draft for a letter to
his sister Elisabeth
Förster-Nietzsche (December 1887)
Georges Bataille was
one of the first to denounce the deliberate misinterpretation of Nietzsche
carried out by Nazis, among them Alfred Baeumler. He
dedicated in January 1937 an issue of Acéphale, titled
"Reparations to Nietzsche," to the theme "Nietzsche and the
Fascists.[3]" There, he
called Elisabeth
Förster-Nietzsche "Elisabeth
Judas-Förster," recalling Nietzsche's declaration: "To never
frequent anyone who is involved in this bare-faced fraud concerning races."[3]
Nietzsche titled aphorism 377 in the fifth book of The Gay Science (published
in 1887) "We who are homeless" (litt. "We who are without
Fatherlands" — Heimatlosen), in which he criticized pan-Germanism
and patriotism and called himself a
"good European". In the second part of this aphorism, which according
to Bataille contained the most important parts of Nietzsche's political
thought, the thinker of the Eternal Return stated:
"No, we do
not love humanity; but on the other hand we are not nearly "German"
enough, in the sense in which the word "German" is constantly being
used nowadays, to advocate nationalism and race hatred and to be able to take
pleasure in the national scabies of the heart and blood poisoning that now
leads the nations of Europe to delimit and barricade themselves against each
other as if it were a matter of quarantine. For that we are too open-minded,
too malicious, too spoiled, also too well-informed, too "traveled":
we far prefer to live on mountains, apart, "untimely," in past or
future centuries, merely in order to keep ourselves from experiencing the
silent rage to which we know we should be condemned as eyewitnesses of politics
that are desolating the German spirit by making it vain and that is, moreover,
petty politics:—to keep its own creation from immediately falling apart
again, is it not finding it necessary to plant it between two deadly hatreds?
Must it not desire the eternalization of the European system of a lot of
petty states? ... We who are homeless are too manifold and mixed racially and
in our descent, being "modern men," and consequently do not feel
tempted to participate in the mendacious racial self-admiration and racial
indecency that parades in Germany today as a sign of a German way of thinking
and that is doubly false and obscene among the people of the "historical
sense." We are, in one word—and let this be our word of honor!— good
Europeans, the heirs of Europe, the rich, oversupplied, but also overly
obligated heirs of thousands of years of European spirit: as such, we have also
outgrown Christianity and are averse to it, and precisely because we have grown
out of it, because our ancestors were Christians who in their Christianity
were uncompromisingly upright; for their faith they willingly sacrificed
possessions and position, blood and fatherland. We—do the same. For what? For
our unbelief? For every kind of unbelief? No, you know better than that, my
friends! The hidden Yes in you is stronger than all Nos and Maybes that afflict
you and your age like a disease; and when you have to embark on the sea, you
emigrants, you, too, are compelled to this by— a faith! ..."[20]
Views on women
Main article: Nietzsche's
views on women
Nietzsche's views on women have served as a magnet
for controversy, beginning during his life and continuing to the present. He
frequently made remarks in his writing that some view as misogynistic. He claimed in Twilight
of the Idols (1888) "Women are considered profound. Why? Because we
never fathom their depths. But women aren't even shallow."[21] He is also quoted as saying
"Ah, women. They make the highs higher and the lows more frequent".
Relation to Søren Kierkegaard
Nietzsche knew little of the 19th century
philosopher Søren Kierkegaard.[22][23] Georg Brandes, a
Danish philosopher, wrote to Nietzsche in 1888 asking him to study the works of
Kierkegaard, to which Nietzsche replied that he would.[24][nb 1]
Recent research, however, suggests that Nietzsche was
exposed to the works of Kierkegaard through secondary literature. Aside from
Brandes, Nietzsche owned and read a copy of Hans Lassen
Martensen’sChristliche Ethik (1873) in which
Martensen extensively quoted and wrote about Kierkegaard’s individualism in ethics and
religion. Nietzsche also
read Harald Høffding’s Psychologie in
Umrissen auf Grundlage der Erfahrung (ed. 1887) which expounded and
critiqued Kierkegaard’s psychology. Thomas Brobjer believes one of the works
Nietzsche wrote about Kierkegaard is in Morgenröthe, which was partly
written in response to Martensen's work. In one of the passages, Nietzsche
wrote: Those moralists, on the other hand, who, following in the footsteps
of Socrates, offer the
individual a morality of self-control and temperance as a means to his own
advantage, as his personal key to happiness, are the exceptions. Brobjer
believes Kierkegaard is one of "those moralists".[25]
The first philosophical study comparing Kierkegaard
and Nietzsche was published even before Nietzsche's death.[26] More than 60 articles and
15 full-length studies have been published devoted entirely in comparing these
two thinkers.[26]
Relation to Schopenhauer
According to Santayana,
Nietzsche considered his philosophy to be a correction of Schopenhauer’s philosophy.
In his Egotism in German Philosophy,[27] Santayana listed
Nietzsche’s antithetical reactions to Schopenhauer.
The will to live
would become the will to dominate; pessimism founded on reflection would become
optimism founded on courage; the suspense of the will in contemplation would
yield to a more biological account of intelligence and taste; finally in the
place of pity and asceticism (Schopenhauer’ s two principles of morals)
Nietzsche would set up the duty of asserting the will at all costs and being
cruelly but beautifully strong. These points of difference from Schopenhauer
cover the whole philosophy of Nietzsche.
These emendations show how Schopenhauer’s
philosophy was not a mere initial stimulus for Nietzsche, but formed the basis
for much of Nietzsche’s thinking.
Legacy
Main article: Influence
and reception of Nietzsche
Perhaps Nietzsche's greatest philosophical legacy
lies in his 20th century interpreters, among them Pierre Klossowski, Georges Bataille, Leo Strauss, Alexandre Kojève, Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze (and
Félix Guattari), and Jacques Derrida. Foucault's later
writings, for example, adopt Nietzsche's genealogical method to develop anti-foundationalist theories
of power that divide and fragment rather than unite polities (as evinced in the
liberal tradition of political
theory). The systematic institutionalisation of criminal delinquency, sexual
identity and practice, and the mentally ill (to name but a few) are examples
used to demonstrate how knowledge or truth is inseparable from the institutions
that formulate notions of legitimacy from 'immoralities' such as homosexuality
and the like (captured in the famous power-knowledgeequation).
Deleuze, arguably the foremost of Nietzsche's interpreters, used the
much-maligned 'will to power' thesis in tandem with Marxian notions of
commodity surplus and Freudian ideas of desire to articulate concepts such the rhizome and
other 'outsides' to state power as traditionally conceived.
Certain recent Nietzschean interpretations have
emphasized the more untimely and politically controversial aspects of
Nietzsche's philosophy. Nietzschean commentator Keith Ansell Pearson has
pointed out the absurd hypocrisy of modern egalitarian liberals, socialists,
feminists and anarchists claiming Nietzsche as a herald of their own left-wing
politics: "The values Nietzsche wishes to subject to a revaluation are
largely altruistic and egalitarian values such as pity,
self-sacrifice, and equal rights. For Nietzsche,
modern politics rests largely on a secular inheritance of Christian values (he
interprets the socialist doctrine of
equality in terms of a secularization of the Christian belief in the equality
of all souls before God" (On the Genealogy of Morality,
Ansell-Pearson and Diethe, eds., Cambridge University Press, 1994, p. 9). Works
such as Bruce Detwiler's Nietzsche and the Politics of Aristocratic
Radicalism (University of Chicago Press, 1990), Fredrick Appel's Nietzsche
Contra Democracy (Cornell University Press, 1998), and Domenico Losurdo's Nietzsche,
il ribelle aristocratico (Turin: Bollati Boringhieri, 2002) challenge the
prevalent liberal interpretive consensus on Nietzsche and assert that
Nietzsche's elitism was not merely an aesthetic pose but an ideological attack
on the widely held belief in equal rights of the modern West,
locating Nietzsche in the conservative-revolutionary tradition.
References
1. The Gay
Science, Section 108, provides an exception.
2. See Beyond
Good and Evil.
4. Mazzino Montinari,Friedrich Nietzsche
(1974; transl. in German in 1991, Friedrich Nietzsche. Eine
Einführung., Berlin-New York, De Gruyter; and in French, Friedrich
Nietzsche, PUF, 2001, p.121 chapter "Nietzsche and the
consequences"
6. see
Steven Luper's introduction on Nietzsche in Existing for a detailed
analysis of these efforts
7. Dennett,
D. C. (1995), Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life,
Simon & Schuster
8. "For
a clear reconstruction of Nietzsche's uncharacteristically careful deduction of
what he once described as 'the most scientific of hypotheses,' see Danto 1965,
pp. 201-9- For a discussion and survey of this and other interpretations of
Nietzsche's notorious idea of eternal recurrence, see Nehamas 1980, which
argues that by 'scientific' Nietzsche meant specifically 'not-teleological.' A
recurring—but, so far, not eternally recurring—problem with the appreciation of
Nietzsche's version of the eternal recurrence is that, unlike Wheeler,
Nietzsche seems to think that this life will happen again not because it and
all possible variations on it will happen over and over, but because there is
only one possible variation—this one—and it will happen over and over."
Dennett, D. C. (1995), Darwin's Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of
Life, Simon & Schuster
9. For ex. Beyond Good
and Evil, first section, §19
10. Bernd A. Laska: Nietzsche's Initial Crisis. In:
Germanic Notes and Reviews, vol. 33, n. 2, fall/Herbst 2002, pp. 109-133.]
11. Conclusion of Stirner et Nietzsche
by Albert Lévy, op.cit.
12. Patrick
Wotling, Nietzsche et le problème de la civilisation, PUF, 1995 (2nd ed. 1999)
14. Letter to Overbeck, 30 July 1881
16. Olivier Ponton,
""Mitfreude". Le projet nietzschéen d'une "éthique
de l'amitié" dans "Choses humaines, trop humaines"",
HyperNietzsche, 2003-12-09
17. Keith
Ansell-Pearson, An Introduction to Nietzsche as Political Thinker: The
Perfect Nihilist, Cambridge University Press, 1994, pp 33-34.
19. Ecce Homo, "Why I Write
Such Good Books", The Case of Wagner, §1 and 2
20. The Gay Science, aphorism
377, transl. by "We who are homeless" (litt. "We who are without
Fatherlands"), read here
21. Friedrich
Nietzsche (1844-1900) Twilight of
the Idols (1888) http://www.handprint.com/SC/NIE/GotDamer.html#sect1
22. Angier,
Tom P. Either Kierkegaard/or Nietzsche: Moral Philosophy in a New Key. ISBN 0-7546-5474-5
23. Hubben,
William. Dostoevsky, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche and Kafka.ISBN
0-684-82589-9
26. ab Miles,
Thomas. Rival Visions of the Best Way of Life in Kierkegaard and
Existentialism, Jon Stewart, ed. p.263.
27. Chapter XI,
“Nietzsche and Schopenhauer”
Notes
1. Brandes
and Nietzsche wrote letters back and forth between 1886-1888. In 1886 Neitzsche
sent Brandes copies of Beyond Good and Evil (written in 1885) and later
Genealogy of Morals and Human, All Too Human. (p. 314). Brandes sent Nietzsche
a copy of Main Currents in 1888. (p. 331-331) Nietzsche wrote in May of 1888
that “Dr. George Brandes is now delivering an important course of lectures at
the University of Copenhagen on the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche!
According to the papers these lectures are having the most brilliant success.
The hall is full to overflowing each time; more than three hundred people
present.” (p. 227). “They were ready for my theory of “master morality” owing
to the thorough general knowledge they possess of the Icelandic sagas which
provide very rich material for the theory. I am glad to hear that the Danish
philologists approve and accept my derivation of bonus: in itself it seems
rather a tall order to trace the concept “good” back to the concept “warrior”.
(p. 229) On January 11, 1888 Brandes wrote the following to Nietzsche, “There
is a Northern writer whose works would interest you, if they were but
translated, Soren Kierkegaard. He lived from 1813 to 1855, and is in my opinion
one of the profoundest psychologists to be met with anywhere. A little book
which I have written about him (the translation published at Leipzig in 1879)
gives me exhaustive idea of his genius, for the book is a kind of polemical
tract written with the purpose of checking his influence. It is, nevertheless,
from a psychological point of view, the finest work I have published.” (p. 325)
Nietzsche wrote back that he would “tackle Kierkegaard’s psychological
problems” (p. 327) and then Brandes asked if he could get a copy of everything
Nietzsche had published. (p. 343) so he could spread his “propaganda.” (p. 348,
360-361) Selected Letters of Friedrich Nietzsche 1st ed.
edited, with a preface, by Oscar Levy ; authorized translation by Anthony
M. Ludovici Published 1921 by Doubleday, Page & Co
Further reading
Main article: List of works about Friedrich Nietzsche
On Nietzsche's view on women, see Jacques Derrida, Spurs:
Nietzsche's Styles, trans. Barbara Harlow (Chicago & London: University
of Chicago Press, 1979).
On Nietzsche and biology, see Barbara Stiegler, Nietzsche
et la biologie, PUF, 2001, ISBN 2-13-050742-5.
External links
The Nietzsche Channel (include
letters, section on Nietzsche's library, etc.)
Nietzsche
Quotes Searchable database of Nietzsche quotations, with
daily quotes
"On the Significance of Genealogy in Nietzsche's
Critique of Morality", by Carsten Korfmacher
The Nietzsche
Pyramid Nietzsche discussion for a on various levels of
expertise.
