Nietzsche and the Nazis

I wish to review a review of Nietzsche I came across.

Quote:

However, this does somewhat undercut the larger thesis of Nietzsche and the Nazis, which is that the Nazis were not stupid and that Nazi ideology appealed to a larger literate, educated, and informed audience of Germans. If the Nazis and their supporters got Nietzsche wrong on important issues, how intelligent and educated can they have been? http://ift.tt/1FqSHCD; onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

yes because smart people never make mistakes nor are they capable of misquoting others......especially when it comes to confirmation bias, or promoting political ideology.

Quote:

the first of these, Hicks wants to deny that Nietzsche was a racist, and he accuses of the Nazis of using Nietzsche's phrase, "blond beast," out of context. He says that the term "blond beast" was used in reference to the lion and stood, like the lion, for predators in general. Such predators could be all "noble races," like "the Roman, Arabian, German, Japanese nobility as for the Homeric heroes and the Scandinavian vikings." However, in the same passage from the Genealogy of Morals [Part I §11] with the list of noble races, where Hicks cites the term "blond beast" (blonde Bestie), Nietzsche actually uses the phrase "blond Germanic beast" (der blonden germanischen Bestie) also http://ift.tt/1K87d8V

I looked around and the term "blood Germanic beast " depends on the translation.
Also Blondness” is by no means a universal commodity among Germanic nobility or in Scandanavia. One would be hard-pressed to find much of it among “the Roman, Arabian...Japanese nobility, [or] the Homeric heroes.” The lion interpretation is inescapable. The fact that blondness is specifically part of aryan identity makes it less plausible that Nietzsche approved of aryan ideals.

Quote:

Nietzsche clearly is using the lion analogically and comparing its predatory power to the predatory power that humans of many different racial types have manifested. Nietzsche here lists six different racial and ethnic groups, and the Germans are not special in that list. So while Nietzsche does endorse a strongly biological basis for cultures, he does not endorse racism of the sort that says any one race is biologically necessarily superior to any other. http://ift.tt/1K87d8W

Quote:

This is not mitigated by the kinds of "positive" things that Nietzsche says about the Jews, such as (quoted by Hicks) that "the Jews are beyond doubt the strongest, toughest and purest race now living in Europe" and could actually take over Europe if they wanted to. This is itself entirely an anti-Semitic fantasy since the Jews are neither a race nor "pure" (Russian Jews with red hair, while Yemeni Jews look like Arabs), and were never in any position to "have the ascendency, in fact literally the supremacy, over Europe if they wanted it."

, considering the quotes come from a paragraph where he mocked anti-Semites I think this author engages in quote mining. The full quote goes: "That the Jews, if they wanted to - or if people were to force them, as the anti-Semites seem to want to do - could even now become predominant, in fact, quite literally gain mastery over Europe, is certain; that they are not working and planning for that is equally certain.Meanwhile by contrast they desire and wish - even with a certain insistence - to be absorbed into and assimilated by Europe. They thirst to be finally established somewhere or other, allowed, respected, and to bring to an end their nomadic life, to the "Wandering Jew."And people should pay full attention to this tendency and impulse (which in itself perhaps even expresses a moderating of Jewish instincts) and accommodate it. And for this, it might perhaps be useful and reasonable to expel the anti-Semitic ranters out of the country."
Nietzsche was making the argument that if the jews wanted to they could conquer Europe but didn't have the desire to do so and mocked antisemitic thought at the time.
Remember when he questioned how the intellectual elite got Nietzsche wrong? Same way he did.

Quote:

So why should Hicks embarrass himself with the bogus "blond beast" business and the shameful whitewash of Nietzsche's anti-Semitism? http://ift.tt/1K87d8V

Considering how well known he was in trying to distance himself from antisemites like his sister and Wanger, it isn't whitewashing. http://ift.tt/1K87adf

Quote:

Nietzsche thought in European terms, and, with the Aryans lost, "the European problem as I understand it: the breeding of a new caste which is to rule Europe"

Quote:

At the same time, Nietzsche also expresses some uncertainty about the fate of the Aryans: "...and whether, even physiologically, the Aryan race of conquerors is not doomed?"

...true....but then the author goes on to say things that end with:

Quote:

The eugenics movement was popular elsewhere, even in the United States, but it was never the bedrock program of a political movement that came into a dominant position of power -- except in Germany.

Well Nietzsche can hardly be blamed for eugenics.

Quote:

When Nietzsche speaks *explicitly* about eugenics policy (or what we, more enlightened folks call “immigration policy”), he consistently speaks in favor of mixing as many groups as possible to bring about a “European man” and “the strongest possible European mixed race.” “One should not be afraid to proclaim oneself simply a good European and actively work for the amalgamation of nations.” The means by which this is to be accomplished? “Trade and industry, the post and the book-trade, the possession in common of all higher culture, rapid changing of home and scene, the nomadic life now lived by all who do not own land” and their consequence, “a weakening and finally abolition of nations” http://ift.tt/1K87adh

Quote:

In the past, he evidently thinks there was a master race in Europe and it was blond. Genealogy of Morals makes this clear, especially i.5. But that doesn’t mean Nietzsche thinks the future can be secured by re-concentrating the Aryan strain anew. Indeed, if that’s what he thought, it’s strange he didn’t say so. He never advocates, for example, breeding blond (or otherwise Aryan) people together. This despite plenty of talk about the importance of blood and breeding for developing a strong race of the future, even to the extent of giving the community a hand in the marriage practices of private individuals (WP 732-734). He also speculates in several places (e.g., WP 960, Human, All Too Human i.475) that a stronger breed may emerge from racial mixing (including mixing with the Jews). http://ift.tt/1K87adh

race mixing....how very unlike the aryan ideal....And Nazi eugenics in general

Quote:

At the same time, Hicks should know by now that the Israelites probably would not have really been "slaves" in Egypt at all. They would have been drafted, after living many years unmolested in the Nile Delta, into the standard Egyptian corvée for the new building projects of Ramesses II in the area.

...um Israelies weren't in Egypt
http://ift.tt/1FqSGi2
And he studies Egypt. He should've known better. Hell he admits on his site:

Quote:

On the other hand, the archaeology of Palestine [note] does not seem to show an external invasion such as Genesis describes. Some sites, like Jericho, show destruction that originally was thought to have been the result of Israelite conquest; but it turned out these events occurred much earlier than the period thought to be that of the Exodus. When later Israelite sites are identified with some confidence, their material culture does not look any different from the antecedent Canaanites of the area.

He is one to talk about history. Nietzsche has the excuse of not knowing this at the time of writing his works.

Quote:

The larger falseness of Nietzsche's "slave revolt" theory is that there is nothing unique about Jewish morality. Confucianism, Buddhism, and, for that matter, the Ancient Egyptians, have all seen morality as requiring the protection of the weak and charitable compassion towards them. Confucianism, with the fundamental virtue of "love," , for others, remained hostile towards war throughout its history; and Buddhism positively condemned all killing. Surviving Egyptian literature contains the "Tale of the Eloquent Peasant," who exhorts those in power about their duty to protect the defenseless.

While many religions did promote these virtues I am of the though that promotion of these values alone would lead to death and trampling those of with master morality.

Quote:

While Hicks appears to endorse Nietzsche's "master" morality and his dismissal of the "slave" morality, he fails to note, and leaves out from the characterizations, that the meaning of morality is indeed the protection of the weak.

....sigh

Quote:

Master morality weighs actions on a scale of good or bad consequences unlike slave morality which weighs actions on a scale of good or evil intentions. For Nietzsche, a particular morality is inseparable from the formation of a particular culture. This means that its language, codes and practices, narratives, and institutions are informed by the struggle between these two types of moral valuation. http://ift.tt/1K87adl; onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;–slave_morality

Just because kindness formed morality did not make it good on it's own. What good is kindness without a strong will? Otherwise you'll be taken advantage of. Likewise kindness is kept around not because it is good in of itself but because it is useful and by promoting it, we would survive.
http://ift.tt/1FqSHCM

http://ift.tt/1FqSGi5
Looking at this link we can see the logic of Nietzsche. They were being told to follow Jesus for a reward he couldn't really prove existed beyond assertion. And Christianity's intentions while good, lead to a great amount of death: http://ift.tt/1lHqkwX
He then goes on to mention the occult nature of Nazis...Then says

Quote:

As Hicks documents well, Nietzsche loved war. Would he have mellowed in the face of a vicious and aggressive Germany? Especially a Germany responding to Nietzsche's own advice?

Actually...
http://ift.tt/1FqSGi9
Any thoughts?

via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1K87atD