Delenda contra Nietzsche, Part II

Nietzsche shamelessly boasted that Goethe, Shakespeare and Plato were not fit to carry the bags of his Zarathustra. Nietzsche boasted that his philosophical giant – Zarathustra, was so far above all previous philosophers that they were mere mice compared to him, or something along those lines. To denigrate those that the Jew copies from is a typical characteristic of the Jew and a characteristic of Nietzsche. One does not have to look too hard to find in Nietzsche’s work a mosaic of copied and plagiarized material and this includes where another’s work is put forward and the opposite view is taken by Nietzsche, negation it is called. If negation to others work is constant and repetitive it will eventually come to the low standard of a tabloid press, it’s not difficult to lower yourself to mere negation. Goethe would say that the Spirit of Negation is an essential characteristic of the Jew, criticism and negation are the standard tools of the journalist, and Nietzsche, is really, when compared with the German literary circles and intellectuals of the time and previously, a writer of low quality, he is at a Newspaper standard, a journalist with commercial instincts, hence the many catchy slogans, sensationalist titles and bombastic tabloidism! Which has become more appealing over time as the literary standards have lowered.

let us look at an example: “All that the good call evil must come together that one truth may be born: Oh my brothers, are you too evil enough for this truth?” – Thus spoke Zarathustra

Firstly, like most of Nietzsche’s writing, it does not make sense…What has happened is Nietzsche has mutilated a Platonic theory. He has taken a theory and attempted to make it, in a journalistic tabloid way, more sensational. He has made it more crude and made it more appealing to what was in Nietzsche’s time would have been considered low-brow or proletarian semi-literate level, and therefore Nietzsche does not have to get the theory correct, that was all to be sorted out later with Jewish publishing techniques which can convince the general reading market of anything they want. So, Nietzsche, as the Protocols indicate, was to be promoted no matter how bad his writing was.

Here is the Platonic theory that Nietzsche has mutilated: “Plato taught that Unity must include an opposite otherwise the Unity would not even be aware that it is a Unity. In Nature, multiplicity belongs to organic life, or as Goethe said – ‘A counter-King is an advantage to me, now I feel for the first time that I am king.’ – Faust.” That quote from Faust being the poetical version of the philosophical theory. It makes much more sense than Nietzsche’s mutilation.

Directly after his literary theft here, Nietzsche actually states that the law of “Thou shalt not steal” should be broken! But the way in which he means it, or demonstrates his theft, is in a very petty manner, where he is just stealing somebody else’s work and mutilating it and then trying to fob it off as his own, while denigrating the original. And again; “shatter the law tables” is not an idea that Nietzsche has come up it with himself, it’s simply old Moses breaking the law tablets, and there is nothing revolutionary about that literary image making.

One of the worst cases of Nietzsche’s plagiarism is in Thus Spoke Zarathustra’s – “The Night Song”, which is a beautiful piece of writing and was obviously not composed by Nietzsche. “The Night Song” is too good a literary style for Nietzsche, its stands out as a diamond amongst the piles of garbage in Nietzsche’s Zarathustra. And in fact, like something out of a Poe novel, Nietzsche actually condemns himself by leaving a clue to his crime, as if he just can’t help but be identified as the fraudster! I must admit he does this a lot, but it is never so obvious as it is with “The Night Song”…Nietzsche would have hated this lyrical poetry, with its melancholic refrain and rhythm. He would have hated “The Night Song”, and perhaps he added it in under advice, certainly commercially it was a canny inclusion, it is a beautiful poem, and it is probably the main reason that most Aryans would fall under the spell of Zarathustra, because Aryans are attracted by beauty, to a fault in terrestrial terms, often ignoring the dangers and poisons in their attraction and pursuit of beauty, and Nietzsche would have known this, the Jewish instinct knows this. Now in Ecce Homo, Nietzsche refers to “The Night Song” as Dionysian, and one cannot make this mistake, especially a man of Nietzsche’s erudition. “The Night Song” is Apollonian, it’s an Ode to Apollo, probably anonymous, but obviously Nietzsche has copied, this time word for word, an Ode to Apollo. Nietzsche constantly opposes Dionysus with Apollo, and explains Dionysus to represent chaotic, intoxicated darkness and Apollo to represent light and order, with Nietzsche always adoring the former, Nietzsche’s god is always Dionysus, that goes without saying, and yet Nietzsche’s Zarathustra sings an Apollonian song! Luciferian! Nietzsche hates the Luciferian! In “The Night Song” the light-bringer laments of his great loneliness after him having been divided from his primal darkness; the nostalgia of a sun, a brightly burning star – “O the solitude of all givers! O the silence of all beacons”….Beautiful Aryan poetry, not written by Nietzsche, and he admits it, actually leaving a clue that leads to him – the fraudster! For Nietzsche to refer to “The Night Song” as being Dionsyian, when it is clearly not, but it is Apollonian, is Nietzsche identifying himself as the literary thief! Because the real writer could not make that mistake, it has to be deliberate. And when it comes to literary theft, Nietzsche had the character for it, as he often boasts he had, and he had the ambition to do so, and most importantly he had the opportunity to do so.

I will end Part II with some more Nietzschean “philosophy”: “This, is however my teaching: He who wants to learn to fly one day must first learn to stand and to walk and to run and to climb and to dance – you cannot learn to fly by flying!” – Thus Spoke Zarathustra

Possibly the dumbest thing I ever read….He’s joking of course, well, he wasn’t drunk at that time because Nietzsche did not drink, so basically he is saying, and I will put in proletarian terms, in a tabloid manner, “I could write any old shit and you morons will praise it, because you were fucking told to.” Nietzsche badgering his dumb readers.


8 responses to “Delenda contra Nietzsche, Part II

  • crediThor

    Nietzsche copied or borrowed a lot of his philosophy from Max Stirner. He said to his best student “it is the best that we have” about Stirner’s Work and recommended it, while never citing or mentioning him openly in his work. He wanted to hide his knowledge of Stirner. Max Stirner has done agood work with “Der Einzige und Sein Eigentum” translated into “The Ego And His Own”. Therein he shows how the humanist left wing hegelians (Bruno Bauer, Marx…) only abandoned god to supplement god with “humanity”. Stirner shows how the critique of the enlightement stopped right before “humanity” and installed a new god with the empty idea “humanity”. It is a good read and Stirner is avoided in german philosophy, never mentioned, because he named and showed the stupidity of the humanist left.
    Nitzsche and Stirner:
    http://www.lsr-projekt.de/nietzsche.html

  • Sardis

    I have not read much Nietzsche. The little Nietzsche I did read was because there was this idea that he was some kind of great Germanic thinker, a titan of thought. This was the reputation he had wherever I looked. The impression that he left on my adolescent mind was that it was more of a chore to read him, though some ideas stuck with me, such as the idea of a noontide. This, to me, felt like something real and tangible. I had actually experienced a noontide. Or at least when I experienced it I felt that that was what he was referring to. That experience was great and I will not deny that. Otherwise I cannot think of any lasting impression that he has left so far.

    Nowadays it is considered cool and “genius” to have mental problems. The “stars” all have “issues”. Of course they call them “stars” because “stars” are Gods. But nowadays what we consider “stars” in the media are actually more like demons. For that reason Nietzsche seems to have been put on a pedestal. “He was such a Genius he went mad!” This seems absurd and totally contrary to what I would consider Aryan, in my own opinion. In reality insanity is a sign of a neurotic and an idiot. What value does a man have when he cannot keep his senses together? What are we to think of his ideas when he loses his mind? Even Jung said Nietzsche simply could not handle his own thoughts, in more or less words.

    Maybe I am too practical. Maybe I am just not ready. But when I think of greatness I do not think of Nietzsche. Men like Hitler, Wagner or Goethe are much more admirable. To the end they kept their wits and demonstrated genius in every aspect of life. Then this “great genius” Nietzsche writes some vague “philosophy” and we are supposed to think him such a genius that he “went mad”

    I don’t know. At this point I will suspend my judgment on Nietzsche. Maybe I simply don’t understand? This always seems to be the excuse, though. “You just don’t understand” That is even what I had to keep telling myself when I read his work.

    And okay, maybe I don’t understand. If I don’t, I offer my apologies to Nietzsche. Maybe not all of us keep our wits to the end.

    • delendaestziobot

      “At Noontide” in Zarathustra is plagiarized from the old Dionysian Odes, which are old drinking songs. Zarathustra goes to the vine, drinks and then falls asleep, and there is no philosophy in it, just a plagiarized alcohol campaign, which is full of lies, because alcohol is never good for sleep.

      We have all been fooled by this Jew – Nietzsche. I have been fooled by him also in the past, and the reason why we were fooled by him was because he was promoted to us when we were young. Advertising and marketing works, and especially well on the young immature mind.

  • Andre

    Whether Nietzsche was a plagiarist or a Jew – I do not have a definite answer. His pompous arrogance was always difficult to circumvent for me as an early reader, but his theories on future religiosity, slave morality, conspiracy for the ascent of Christianity, and the Ubermensch has shaped much of my worldview. None of his ideas I think are really “original” in the sense that he invented something new, but I think they are just ideas that we always believe in subconsciously, but are trained to no longer believe through conditioning.

    • delendaestziobot

      You are definitely not alone in your thinking, in fact, Jung, Hesse and Serrano would say the same thing, but this is after the worldwide promotion, before the promotion of Nietzsche the prevailing view among German intellectuals was that Nietzsche was a Jew, and a literary fraudster. I would lay no blame on any man who has been fooled by the extravagant mass promotion of Nietzsche as a “philosopher”, I was fooled myself, it only post 2012 that we have received the Light to understand and penetrate with depth this unfortunate occurrence of Jewish Ghetto mentality, it is a revelation to us, but it was known before.

  • The 55 Club

    I do admire someone who is willing to go out on a limb and tell it like it is regardless of the reaction even from their peers. Fortunately, everyone seems to already be on board – a fact that you did not know when you first posted this article.
    Theodor Fritsch basically called Nietzsche a worthless, cowardly punk hiding in his room and I have never found a reason to disagree. In fact, it is quite obvious why he went insane.

    Excellent, as always, Karl

    88

  • delendaestziobot

    Well, I am just playing a “Glass Bead Game” with the Ghost of Nietzsche, probably Elizabeth more than Friedrich, because she is mainly responsible for the work which we have come to read, and this game of little consequence in terrestrial terms will only be viewed amongst our miniature circle.

    “Always love your neighbour as yourselves, but first be such that love themselves.” Nietzsche’s ‘Zarathustra’ quoting Jesus Christ, the Crucified, whom Nietzsche is against, which is of course – dissimulation.

    “A meagre bed warms me more than an opulent one, for I am jealous of my poverty. And it is most faithful to me in the winter.” – Nietzsche’s ‘Zarathustra’, quoting Gospel teachings….

    “You must be ready to burn yourself in your own flame: how could you become new, if you had not first become ashes” – Nietzsche’s ‘Zarathustra’, no explanation that this is from the myth of the Phoenix, yet Nietzsche is claiming it as a original revelation attributed to himself, and he has gotten away with it…

    “My brothers, I do not exhort you to love of your neighbour: I exhort you to love the most distant.” – Nietzsche negating his quote of Christ, in contradiction. dissimulation.

    “Spirit of Gravity” – Nietzsche’s ‘Zarathustra’, taken from Gnosticism.

    “Up, abysmal thought, up from my depths! I am your cockerel and dawn, sleep worm: up! up!. My voice shall soon crow you awake!” Nietzsche’s ‘Zarathustra’, – copying Wagner’s Wotan.

    So on and so forth in this impotent, ineffectual Glass Bead Game.

  • jalexandermaximilian

    Personally I was never drawn to Nietzsche, so I never read much. I think all his grandiose words coupled with that syphilic stare just put me off.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: