Nietzsche - leftist interpretations

Any good leftist interpretations of this mustachioed fellows "the will to power"?
Thanks.

Other urls found in this thread:

mariborchan.si/text/articles/alain-badiou/who-is-nietzsche/
youtube.com/watch?v=2fTnEB_r_6Q
twitter.com/AnonBabble

The go to answer is always Deleuze and Foucault

Thank you I'll be sure to read this soon.

mariborchan.si/text/articles/alain-badiou/who-is-nietzsche/

youtube.com/watch?v=2fTnEB_r_6Q

Geuss is a Marxist/leftist who thinks Nietzsche can be read in leftist ways. Emma Goldman also read Nietzsche as a leftist.

There's genuinely no way that his real writings can be considered Leftist.
At times very anti-conservative and anti-moralist, yes, but never progressive.

Pretty much all the pretense surrounding him is due to Kaufmann releasing his falsified/expurgated translations which remove the meaning of his more offensive writings such as his overt anti-judaism and anti-egalitarianism.
E.g. Nietzsche states outright that the only real nobility (in the sense of a man's virtue and character, not noble class which he explicitly mocks in the same line) "is that of birth and blood" and then goes on to say that the term "aristocracy of intellect" is an obscurantist term used as code among "ambitious Jews", and that intellect can never ennoble anything but needs to be ennobled itself by blood.
Kaufmann decides to translate words like blood to say "spirit", denigrations of jews like the reference to a codeword as a "favorite term" and entirely omits lines that are too negative like saying that they are a "crafty people" turning a line about them being sneaks who take advantage of people into one of how great they are for taking advantage of people. His mockery of "how easily" Christianity spiritually castrated them becomes a cyclical historical claim of "it's only fair" under Kaufmann.
That's just the teensiest bits of shit he, the re-popularizer of Nietzsche among the Left post-WW2 gets up to. His extensive footnotes are there primarily in order to whitewash the bits he couldn't falsify like the claim that when Nietz says "the young stock-exchange Jew is altogether the most disgusting invention of mankind." Kaufmann claims he's really talking about Spinoza because "reasons" which are totally explained in my other writings srsly guis pls buy my book. (his 1/4th page annotation whining about why Nietz's anti-woman writings are SO WRONG I'M LITERALLY SHAKING RIGHT NOW is even worse, it reads like a tumblr or reddit white knight rant)

As for Derrida, Deleuze and Foucault they're not really bothering with discussing Nietzsche at all but merely using his name as a vehicle for their own thoughts.

There's genuinely no way that his real writings can be considered Leftist.
At times very anti-conservative and anti-moralist, yes, but never progressive.

Pretty much all the pretense surrounding him is due to Kaufmann releasing his falsified/expurgated translations which remove the meaning of his more offensive writings such as his overt anti-judaism and anti-egalitarianism.
E.g. Nietzsche states outright that the only real nobility (in the sense of a man's virtue and character, not noble class which he explicitly mocks in the same line) "is that of birth and blood" and then goes on to say that the term "aristocracy of intellect" is an obscurantist term used as code among "ambitious Jews", and that intellect can never ennoble anything but needs to be ennobled itself by blood.
Kaufmann decides to translate words like blood to say "spirit", denigrations of jews like the reference to a codeword as a "favorite term" and entirely omits lines that are too negative like saying that they are a "crafty people" turning a line about them being sneaks who take advantage of people into one of how great they are for taking advantage of people. His mockery of "how easily" Christianity spiritually castrated them becomes a cyclical historical claim of "it's only fair" under Kaufmann.

That's just the teensiest bits of shit he, the re-popularizer of Nietzsche among the Left post-WW2 gets up to. His extensive footnotes are there primarily in order to whitewash the bits he couldn't falsify like the claim that when Nietz says "the young stock-exchange Jew is altogether the most disgusting invention of mankind." Kaufmann goes on about Spinoza and unexplained "reasons" shilling his other books in a "srsly guis pls buy my book fashion. His 1/4th page annotation whining about why Nietz's anti-woman writings are SO WRONG I'M LITERALLY SHAKING RIGHT NOW is even worse, it reads like a tumblr or reddit white knight rant.

As for Derrida, Deleuze and Foucault they're not really bothering with discussing Nietzsche's content at all but merely using his name and jargon as a vehicle for their own thoughts.

[Citation Needed]

"The instinct of a people [the Germans] whose type is still weak and indeterminate enough…to be easily obliterated by a stronger race. But the Jews are without a doubt the strongest, purest, most tenacious race living in Europe today. They know how to thrive in even the worst conditions….

The fact that the Jews, if they wanted (or if they were forced, as the anti-Semites seem to want), could already be dominant, or indeed could literally have control over present-day Europe—this is established. The fact that they are not working and making plans to this end is likewise established….What they wish and want instead…is to be absorbed and assimilated into Europe…in which case it might be practical and appropriate to throw the anti-Semitic hooligans out of the country…."

Also, way to half-quote and take out of context, filfty Nazi.

"The whole problem of the Jews exists only in nation-states, for here their energy and higher intelligence, their accumulated capital of spirit and will, gathered from generation to generation, thorugh a long schooling in suffering, must become so perponderant as to arouse mass envy and hatred. In almost all contemporary nations, therefore—in direct proportion to the degree to which they act up nationalistically—the literary obscenity is spreading the Jews to slaughter as scapegoats of every conceivable public and internal misfortune…Unpleasant, even dangerous qualities can be found in every nation and every individual: it is cruel to demand that the Jew be an exception. In him, these qualities may even be dangerous and revolting to an unusual degree; and perhaps the young stock-exchange Jew is altogether the most disgusting invention of mankind. […] We owe it to their exertions, not least of all, that a more natural, more rational, and certainly unmythical explanation of the world was eventually able to triumph again, and that the bond of culture which now links us with the enlightenment of Greco-Roman antiquity remained unbroken"

It is worth quoting the passage at length because it shows what a vast gulf separated the real Nietzsche from what his sister emended to his texts to appease the third Reich in Germany.

it is a fact of life that people are not equal

Even outside of superficial shit like money and class, some people are more physically capable than others, some people are smarter than others, some people more attractive. This will always be a source of inequality until humans start modifying their own genetic code or do cloning.

You can believe that and also simultaneously support basic human rights and equality of opportunity. So a lot of his writing is pretty orthogonal to left vs. right. Although you could argue that traditionally individualism is a conservative/libertarian favorite, I don't think Nietzsche ever really talked about that in the context of a state

Also as a Jewish person (not religiously, just ethnically) a lot of what he said about Jewish was not wrong in essence. It was just phrased in what is now not a politically correct way