Mixing Marx and Nietzsche

Considering that the Nazis completely misinterpreted Nietzsche's quest toward perfection, and violent "communist" regimes had misinterpreted Marx's quest to empower the proletariat…

Has anyone fused true Marxism with true Nietzschism into a coherent philosophy?

If you take out Niet's shit about discarding compassion and utilizing the weak to enhance the powerful, and then blended it with Marxism you might have something.

Nietzsche's ideas on making life worth living and re examining morals seem to work hand in hand with dismantling the patriarchal chains on the proletariat.

Attached: FB_IMG_1519993098615.jpg (500x369, 13.96K)

Other urls found in this thread:

souciant.com/2012/08/nietzsche-for-anti-capitalists/
furjectivists.livejournal.com/
theanarchistlibrary.org/library/monsieur-dupont-nihilist-communism
amazon.com/Will-Technology-Culture-Nihilism-Heidegger/dp/0802085733?SubscriptionId=AKIAILSHYYTFIVPWUY6Q
academia.edu/33212143/The_Nietzschean_Communism_of_Alain_Badiou
youtube.com/watch?v=goBenJCe-Ck

This piece on Michel Foucault may interest you, op.
souciant.com/2012/08/nietzsche-for-anti-capitalists/

Stranger things have been fused, like Furry Objectivists.
furjectivists.livejournal.com/

Attached: Nietzsche-and-Marx-looking-for-work_-Spain-2009_2.jpg (636x404, 394.7K)

Awesome! Thank you. I'll read over a cup of coffee this morning.

bazinga
theanarchistlibrary.org/library/monsieur-dupont-nihilist-communism

Attached: 1449886306447.gif (348x349, 75.12K)

Fuck off

Arthur Kroker combines Marx, Nietzche and Heidegger.

amazon.com/Will-Technology-Culture-Nihilism-Heidegger/dp/0802085733?SubscriptionId=AKIAILSHYYTFIVPWUY6Q

The bourgeois are the weak user. They have higher levels of consanguinity, and they lack the experience from physical labour. Can't afford to let the proles dilute the bloodline, and can't possibly get their soft, supple hands dirty.

This.
Nietzsche, while certainly a critic of dogma, didn't celebrate the death of God, he mourned it. It's why he spent his life's work trying to remedy a potential "Western" see:German crisis: Nihilism and decadence in the absence of will to power. The condition of nihilism we see in the “West” now is pretty much what he predicted, though he likely had a different idea of what it will truly become.

Attached: slaps your morality.jpg (1956x1211, 934.93K)

The standard image of Nietzsche's "Aristocratic Radicalism" tends to ignore a closer reading of who the weak really are in Nietzsche's philosophy, imo. The "überman" I believe is a nearly impossible ideal, as the figure of the strong, the closest thing you can get to it is the Lion, which I'll talk about later.

The weak man for Nietzsche would be the subject who clings to "metaphysical comforts," assured of some sort of "beyond" which is the indestructible core of their reality (see the satyric chorus in The Birth of Tragedy), whether the "beyond" be specifically a philosophical metaphysics or a politico-ideological fantasy. The weak are also bound to the values of the current society, the "good and evil" values, decrepit morality.

An interesting thing to consider for a Nietzschean model of communism is the following quote from an essay titled "Fate and History," written when he was 17, and I think it provides a good base for a model of revolution:

" If it became
possible completely to demolish the entire past through a strong will, we would immediately
be transported into the realm of autonomous gods, and world history would
suddenly be for us nothing but a dreamy self-deception: the curtain falls, and man
finds himself like a child playing with worlds, like a child who awakens at the glow
of dawn and, laughing, wipes the terrible dreams from his brow." (Nietzsche, 1862)

I think that authors such as Zizek and Badiou recall such sentiments with the notion of communist revolution as a clean break with history, and an absolute negation of capitalist society. The demolition of history and the absolute negation/overturning of all previous values (the Nietzschean transvaluation) provides the open space for pure freedom, pure sovereignty, pure creativity. On this picture it is the figure of the Lion which symbolises revolution, and the famous (Zizekian) "day after" is the figure of the Child, creating and playing with new worlds (as indicated in above quoted passage). This is also reminiscent of Zizek's employment of Benjamin's Theses on the Philosophy of History, I have specifically in mind his discussion of Benjamin, revolution, and repetition from The Sublime Object of Ideology.

tl;dr the Overman is the figure of the revolutionary, the Lion, which performs the transvaluation, the absolute negation of all hitherto society/values.

Nietzsche is the patron saint of edgelords, he never said anything of use.

“The state is the coldest of all old monsters. Coldly, it lies, too; and this lie creeps from its mouth: ‘I, the state, am the people.'”
-Thus Spoke Zarathustra

That sounds pretty useful to me idk about you. Also I find it ironic that such an ignorant, edgy position is used to condemn Nietzsche as edgy

academia.edu/33212143/The_Nietzschean_Communism_of_Alain_Badiou

take 2: article on drawing out a Nietzschean model of Communism from Badiou and counterposing it to the classical (humanist) Marxist picture

I think mixing Stirner and Marx is better.

yes please
I want leftists to not hate me when I say I like Nietzsche
I do not understand why Nietzsche's ideas are incompatible with communism. As far as I know he never wrote telling the higher man to gain power OVER OTHERS, but rather power as an individual in regards to their own unifying life project (as an artist, writer, scientist, someone who makes a great contribution to humanity), which would undoubtedly be infinitely easier in a communist society, without all the pressure to be a cog in the machine.
I think the stuff about the weak being a danger to the strong, puts off lots of leftists, even though he was not talking about any kind of capitalist hierarchy, since his definitions of "power", "strength", and "weak" are not the same as most people. From what I understand, he was just talking about individuals being discouraged by the masses from pursuing their ambitions, labeling the complacent masses as mediocre in the way they value complacency over ambitions or pushing for change in the world.

Literally nobody knows what this is. Anybody who says they do is probably lying.

Attached: 3DF20A79-B505-4028-AE33-BEA023746883.jpeg (776x851, 117.01K)

WHOOOAH

Attached: Finally.png (447x378, 11.3K)

Attached: Socialism is the morality of the master.jpg (1489x261, 126.76K)

I'd argue it's impossible to synthesize Marx and Nietzsche. Nietzsche is definitely an interesting and inspiring figure in many aspects but let's face it, he was a retarded reactionary. I don't understand why so many leftists attempt to sanitize Nietzsche by ignoring his shitty politics.

Because a lot of leftists are virgin liberal arts grad students who love Nietzsche.

they're revisisionists. let's be honest, it's true that rightists, nazis, etc, distorted nietzch into complicity with their ideology, but leftists did the same exact bullshit and much more successfully and enduringly(for policial historical reasons, a la WWII). Niech wasn't a nationalist, he wasn't a fascist or a proto-nazi, but he was indeed an ultra-reactionary.

there's nothing wrong with using ones philosophy for your own purposes, reorienting it or reconceptualizing it. there's just how philosophy is done. but to fucking pretend that nietzsch was "one of you" or as somehow "beyond politics" (a pathetic cop-out, in my mind) is ridiculous.

also, there have been several leftist and also marxist neechie thinkers. I think you could synthesize them, but eh, fuck that.
finally, i'd say the same thing about heidegger

it checks out


Is this something that is all too ingrained in the western psyche? This monotheistic myopia now have to secularized giving way to far severe form of dogmatism.

Honest question for you,user. Let's just say i am having a crisis of faith here. What are we supposed to "fight" for here?

Wasn't Nietzsche majorly against communism? But for some retarded cliche reason. Like, I'm surprised that people can't just go "Oh this person believed x y z fucked up things, but they had a lot of other actually good ideas" Like, why do we have to sanitize people?

Yeah, he thought communists and anarchists fell for the compassion meme and were just Christians in disguise — that is, resentful slaves.
So you can use them as a banner to make your movement look more attractive, at least that's what they assume. It sounds cooler to say "we're proud Nietzscheans" than "we appropriated some of Nietzsche's ideas but discarded the worthless bits".

Literally no one likes Nietzsche besides Nazis and edgy anarchists. Sorry, but this really doesn't make the movement look more attractive or sound cooler.

related : youtube.com/watch?v=goBenJCe-Ck

I didn't argue it was.

The only issue with this is that the stench of liberalism pervades the leftist conception of equality, whether leftists want to admit it or not.
True equality is to exhortatively, rigorously strengthen the weak, not to eternally protect them, or demand that superior people flegellate and prostrate themselves to the level of the weak and defenseless.
To encourage the weak to embrace their weakness and their illness is to deny them strength.

why would Nazis like Nietzsche? he hated them & their dogshit ideology completely.
I've read ol' Freddy extensively and I find it's an awful lot of fun to talk to people who resorted to wikipedia & third-hand opinions. nothing about him is "edgy" in the slightest.