Great work lately - lots of fresh perspectives!

"There are those who preach my doctrine of life, and are at the same time preachers of equality, and tarantulas. (...) With these preachers of equality will I not be mixed up and confounded. For thus speaketh justice UNTO ME: *“Men are not equal.”* And neither shall they become so! What would be my love to the Superman, if I spake otherwise?" Thus Spoke Zarathustra, P2, 29.The Tarantulas

Very pleasant listen, the guest was super satisfyingly clear and well spoken. Great interviewing too.

I'd like to pitch in this quote from Marx's "Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts". His critique of political economy (in that book) is simultaneously a critique of moral asceticism: "By counting the most meagre form of life (existence) as the standard, indeed, as the general standard - general because it is applicable to the mass of men. He turns the worker into an insensible being lacking all needs, just as he changes his activity into a pure abstraction from all activity. To him, therefore, every luxury of the worker seems to be reprehensible, and everything that goes beyond the most abstract need - be it in the realm of passive enjoyment, or a manifestation of activity - seems to him a luxury. Political economy, this science of wealth, is therefore simultaneously the science of renunciation, of want, of saving and it actually reaches the point where it spares man the need of either fresh air or physical exercise. This science of marvellous industry is simultaneously the science of asceticism, and its true ideal is the ascetic but extortionate miser and the ascetic but productive slave. Its moral ideal is the worker who takes part of his wages to the savings-bank, and it has even found ready-made a servile art which embodies this pet idea: it has been presented, bathed in sentimentality, on the stage. Thus political economy - despite its worldly and voluptuous appearance - is a true moral science, the most moral of all the sciences. Self-renunciation, the renunciation of life and of all human needs, is its principal thesis." Let's emphasize that last part: "Thus political economy - despite its worldly and voluptuous appearance - is a true moral science, the most moral of all the sciences. Self-renunciation, the renunciation of life and of all human needs, is its principal thesis." www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/needs.htm

Thumbnail game is still on point!

I rest my case : "Vengeance will we use, and insult, against all who are not like us"-thus do the tarantula-hearts pledge themselves. "And 'Will to Equality'-that itself shall henceforth be the name of virtue; and against all that hath power will we raise an outcry!" Ye preachers of equality, the tyrant-frenzy of impotence crieth thus in you for "equality": your most secret tyrant-longings disguise themselves thus in virtue-words!"

“Last Man Nietzshean” in other words.

I think it would be great if you could interview Donovan Miyasaki, he recently published two books on Nietzsche and one is precisely about the prospects for a Nietzschean leftist politics. Though I have to say that I dislike the phrase "the left" as if there were something so monolithic and homogenous. There are different strains of thought and different movements. And I believe that what has been disparagingly called "ultra-left", a label coming from more institutionalized strains of leftist thinking, has come close and coincidenced with Nietzschean critique in many ways. Nietzsche is like an antidote to purge the reactivity, moralism, and latent theology of **classical** marxism, from radical politics.

Granted I haven't watched the full thing yet, but I was interested to see how he squared Nietzsche's very clear repudiation of so many aspects of left wing thought with this view. I think he did the best he could, made a good point about Nietzsche not wanting us to hang on his every word. In many ways I take the opposite view of Goure. Because while Nietzsche does repudiate left wing thought, there also lays a repudiation of the traditional worldview within Nietzsche that I have grappled with. I believe Nietzsche had many great insights that turned out to be prophetic and vindicated, but the parts of Nietzsche that I have always had issues with is his view of truth and relativism. And while he has many interesting things to say about the nature of morality that should be kept in mind, I reject the notion that morality is this totally relative and subjective thing. I'm also no where near as anti-Christian as he was.

Great work, a good deep discussion across the board. A really intense thoughtful experience for me, thank you nicely! I find Anarchy fits very nicely with Niezsche and his values. Once a person realises their own will to power, it shines in a possibility of what the collective can become. Once we are willing to act on the collective will and over(t)-humanity, it makes sense to look for a greater will to power. Nature is our only, and perfect mirror of the power in harmony. A will to divine leadership is the best way to navigate the uncertsinties anarchy allows to be realised. 1:18:29 i recently came to decide that all thoughts initiate a sense of powerlessness, that we rurn to an active state of correcting. It's something im actively playing around with, addressing my thoughts. Im just going to look up the bronze-age pervert....🤔 hope nothing too weird turns up. Sorry for another edit. Id like to ask if you agree, Nietzsche would admit to divine mysteries? I think this removal from God and the uncertainty is a reflection of how close humanity is creeping toward the abyss. That we extinguish the light to serve our dark desires and what they arouse.

When are we getting a companion video of an interview with BAP?

Lots of interesting things brought up there, and so little time to cover them. That was a good conversation. Squaring Nietzsche with anarchism might not be that difficult. His apparent love of aristocracy seems to be more a youthful fantasy and a personal taste(instinct for self defense? against what?). Maybe we can say that according to reality, if the aristocrats are in charge, then they clearly are better at being in charge, or they wouldn't be. It may be only for this reason alone Nietzsche can justify them. Anarchism seems to me to be much more in line with Nietzsche's ways of seeing the world. It is sort of like an individualism, but from the perspective, or through the lens of a good society. Anarchism is essentially hinged or mounted on the idea of proactively being against archways going over heads without asking first. It's not only about voluntaryism, and the respect for choice, but also against tyranny. I wonder could we say that voluntaryism is the slave morality? Although I think not. i would be more likely to say it is just a more passive stance, which add description of action in it's name, rather than ideology or belief, like anarchism. PS. Want the most Nietzschean anarchist ever? Have a listen to Lysander Spooners "No Treason- The constitution of No Authority". It's so good :) This guy got so tired of the government butting in, that he went up against the Federal post system as a competitor. My two favourite people from history, are Nietzsche and this guy.

I know it'd be probably hard to get him to come on the podcast as he doesn't do many interviews outside of his own show, but I think a discussion between you and Bronze Age Pervert could be really interesting, especially as a counterpart to this episode as he is pretty much the current-day avatar of Right Nietzschean thought.

"with dialectics the rabble gets on top"

WE NEED BAP ON THE PODCAST TO BALANCE THIS OUT...

I love your work, but with all due respect, you guys get the contemporary Nietzschean right-wing very wrong. The Nietzschean right isnt simply atavist calling for a revival of Sparta. You're right to point out the emphasis on rule by a military caste, but I gather most right wing Nietzscheans would probably be quite content with a regime modeled on Franco's Spain, or any number of other military dictatorships that have existed throughout the 20th century. Military rule is in no way contradictory with modernity. Further, I recommend reading BAP's book for details on his take on race, but it's not as simple as "white smart, black dumb." The takes from guys like Steve Sailer tend to be a lot more nuanced and more concerned with how general tendencies influence macro-level behavior, which has little bearing on any given individual person. Their interest in race isn't some naive white nationalism, but an attempt to honestly reckon with scientific evidence about potential genetic foundations in group difference that might have something important to tell us about how to craft immigration policy, for instance. Let me clarify that this is not an endorsement of right Nietzscheanism. In fact, I've written critical pieces of their stuff in the past, but I think we need to get really clear on what they're actually saying.

I love keagan, however I have no idea what point this guy is trying to make. Please help simplify for me if you don't mind.

Interesting video so far. While the interviewer asks leading questions, i.e. what is 'left nietzschaenism'" as a means of implicit authoritarianism, the interviewee seems more laid back and descriptive, with the true examiner's spirit. Will be interesting to hear the rest of the discussion.

Hey Keagan. Love your work, and I would consider myself very much on the left, but it always irritates me to no end when leftists invoke “equality” as a political end. The more I hear that term, the more I think it doesn’t mean anything. I think Liberty is what describes the political ends of the Left, and I think it’s a travesty that they seem to have forgotten it. “Equality”should be left to the purview of mathematics. For a Left Nietzschean, it surprised me when he invoked “equality” as the foremost political value of the left. It was difficult for me to even listen to him beyond that. I would’ve thought that another Nietzsche enjoyer like myself would recognize the error there. “Liberty Liberty Liberty” is the name of the game, and I would think one who tries to synthesize Leftism with Nietzsche would capitalize on that, because Liberty is something that Nietzsche held great value for. Anyway, I love your stuff, keep up the good work, and stay dangerous.

Isn't Left and Nietzsche a contradictio in terminis?

Allow me to engage in some cheeky ad hominem: - Annoying voice - Oberlin - “Mapped onto” - Too mentally fragile to survive in academia - “Neurodivergent” - “Foucault’s foundational for me” Yep, definitely a Leftist. Is this the Ubermensch? In a more intellectually generous vein, I appreciated the discussion. My older brother is a Leftist professor with a deep interest in Nietzsche, so I want to learn more about how Leftists approach the philosopher. I’m a Nietzsche n00b, so this channel has been a real blessing.

Thundering prophet vs Utopian prophet

Remember to be careful when reading Nietzsche because he will stuck to your head forever, and what is that Z really tought was go out and find yourself, not to be just his disciple and blind fallower. I kind of hate why so many people don' t challenge the man enough, nowdays " philosophers" and academians plays too much on the safety ground. I bet Nietzsche would have laugh at you, for taking his words too granted or without doubt. Challenge is the key, and if can' t do that, forget it, you won' t find anything new. But nice conversation anyway, so thank you.

1:25:07 That Dutch woman, Ali, converting to Christianity, as a political things has one source, HER experience with islam itself in her personal life, and I imagine (if she is to be believed, which I do) the lives of many other woman, most of which are or remain in islam willingly as much as many christians remain with Christianity willingly as PRACTICAL matter to not face the consequences of the societies they happen to HAVE TO live in... My criticism of these people who suffer greatly under a CERTAIN thing or mentality, is how they let themselves be used politically, she is not a stupid person, nor ignorant either, and yet they let themselves be used to receive (I imagine) the benefits of such usage. THEN the world for some reason takes THOSE PEOPLE as experts or guides of whatever tragedy they lived; THAT is a problem for sure, since their views are skewed by necessity and lived experience. Somehow her opinion is more valid than the other islamic woman. As mentioned this is an issue for all persons who live some tragedy or hard times, like alcoholics, drug addicts and cancer or an accident that permanently changes your being and life... suddenly they are "advocates" for whatever happened to them. A woman gets ovarian cancer and suddenly that becomes her life purpose, and in her eyes the ONLY valid purpose for all others, etc etc

To those who are butthurt about leftists appropriating Nietzsche for their own devices, nobody batted an eye when antisemites did the same in Nietzsche's time and continues today. Of course, feel free to dismiss me as being "resentful".

Nietzsche despised socialism and anarchism

Nietzsche shares no commitment to the right.

Nietzsche and Hegel were both satirist.

1:23:00 That's blatantly inaccurate as far as I have seen. The "grind" focuses a lot on bodily health, exercising, eating healthy, etc. The sacrifice is of comfort, luxuries and procrastination. It does often hang the carrot of hedonistic pleasure in front of the audience, though: As many hoes and luxury cars as you want, once you've worked hard enough.

The egalitarianism is the main thing that needs to be accounted for and I still don't hear it. I get that Nietzsche technically leaves room for you to make your own normative judgement, but why are you making that one? Equality is descriptively certainly irreconcilable with reality, further, Nietzsche basically argues its pursuit is futile. You say otherwise why? This is a question for Marx, too. I'll add the analysis on sanity sounds interesting and is something I've been playing with in my notes lately.

This is nuts.

1:21:00 Ok, sure, but if not Tate, then whom?? If not hedonism, then what, the "priestly caste"?? And... they are not fighting against nihilism, I don't think any modern thinker can fully understand the original intent or meaning of nihilism. Nietzsche's meaning and usage of nihilism is NOT what you guys are describing here. I would like if you guys talk about the idea of gods, or lack thereof, some clever Christinas like Jordan Peterson say that humans NEED gods, that even if we get rid of the christian god, we AUTOMATICALLY replace it with another ideology, like in they case Marxism, but it can be ANY idea or ideology we VALUE, that THAT becomes out god AUTOMATICALLY, "it doesn't matter if you believe or not, you ACT AS IF you believe [JP]".... there is some mental fuckery going on here, I think they are full of sh!t, but as of yet I have not been able to verbalize it. I imagine that you two to, not necessarily agree with me, but that at least you do NOT agree with that mentality?? How are they wrong with it?? Believing n the things humans NEED to be able to live together and interact with others is the same as a "god"...?? That sounds like buffoonery.

you spend an hour talking but the thumbnail sums up the thesis in its totality 🤷‍♀

These people are so insufferable.

Always had a problem with Left-Nietzscheans, because they're Post-Marxist who still hold onto Marx's idea of transcendence over "capitalism" with the masses. All the while Nietzsche himself was an ardent individualist and would have viewed Marxism as Crypto-Christianity.

Devin's critique of the aristocratic radicalists is spot on

Christo-Nietzscheanism? What is this? Worshipping the Emperor of Man from Warhammer 40k?

This guy is unlistenable

Except social justice "Wokeism" is ressentiment and Last Man-ism par excellence.

Really hope this isn’t going to be some moral cope

What a dishonest perversion of what Nietzsche wrote.