I'm reading Nietzsche's ANTICHRIST again. I find it perfectly logical. What can make a difference is the perspective of the reader. It takes a while to develop the capacity to read it without the lens of contemporary ideologies. I remember being very much enmeshed in some of the contemporary era ideologies that were invented to smash the left. You were either on the side of "civilization" or against it. This kind of reading distorts Nietzsche's writing so that instead of making logical points, he seems to be taking sides in a political struggle. To read Nietzsche as making psychological observations, not political ones, gives coherence and intelligibility to his whole approach.
When I consider his opposition to the anarchists, I can reflect from the standpoint of today that I have met many left wingers who seem emotionally weak. I've also met their equivalents on the right. Nietzsche thought that the disruptive people, who looked to undermine society, were intent to undermine a structure which they could not enjoy anyway, due to their dependent natures. It wasn't the society that had something wrong with it, but these agitators themselves did. Psychologically speaking, I have found this is often true. It doesn't work to condemn all agitators as weak personalities, though, because to generalize in that way is only possible by invoking metaphysical -- that is theological -- principles. That's exactly what Nietzsche's writing wants to avoid. Rather it seems one should exercise intellectual caution and view everyone on their own merits.
From my point of view, I find Nietzsche's commentary on those who want to overthrow the established order to have incredibly complex ramifications. Consider that I had barely become an adult, when my own established order was completely overthrown. Almost nothing remained, except for a small core of agitators for the extreme right and another skeleton group taking refuge in denial within the protective bubbles of their Christian ideologies. For me, life itself, in almost every sense that I had known it, had been completely overturned:
I immediately saw through the ideological, defensive response, and I only considered the alternative -- the hive of right-wing agitators -- when the aggressive people of the left had begun attacking me too much. Primitive emotional responses are common when a defeated enemy (me) is in your grasp. They're also common when the prior rulers realize they have been defeated and seek to take revenge for their humiliation. I've experienced this aggression from both sides of politics. Both have seen me, somehow, as their enemy -- someone whom they need to pick on to score points, or prove themselves worthy of their particular political ideologies.
When I consider his opposition to the anarchists, I can reflect from the standpoint of today that I have met many left wingers who seem emotionally weak. I've also met their equivalents on the right. Nietzsche thought that the disruptive people, who looked to undermine society, were intent to undermine a structure which they could not enjoy anyway, due to their dependent natures. It wasn't the society that had something wrong with it, but these agitators themselves did. Psychologically speaking, I have found this is often true. It doesn't work to condemn all agitators as weak personalities, though, because to generalize in that way is only possible by invoking metaphysical -- that is theological -- principles. That's exactly what Nietzsche's writing wants to avoid. Rather it seems one should exercise intellectual caution and view everyone on their own merits.
From my point of view, I find Nietzsche's commentary on those who want to overthrow the established order to have incredibly complex ramifications. Consider that I had barely become an adult, when my own established order was completely overthrown. Almost nothing remained, except for a small core of agitators for the extreme right and another skeleton group taking refuge in denial within the protective bubbles of their Christian ideologies. For me, life itself, in almost every sense that I had known it, had been completely overturned:
Let no one doubt for an instant! One has truly not heard a single word of
Nietzsche's unless one has lived this signal dissolution in totality; without it,
this philosophy is a mere labyrinth of contradictions, and worse; the pretext for
lying by omission (if, like the fascists, one isolates passages for purposes which
negate the rest of the work).["will to chance," Bataille]
I immediately saw through the ideological, defensive response, and I only considered the alternative -- the hive of right-wing agitators -- when the aggressive people of the left had begun attacking me too much. Primitive emotional responses are common when a defeated enemy (me) is in your grasp. They're also common when the prior rulers realize they have been defeated and seek to take revenge for their humiliation. I've experienced this aggression from both sides of politics. Both have seen me, somehow, as their enemy -- someone whom they need to pick on to score points, or prove themselves worthy of their particular political ideologies.
No comments:
Post a Comment