Red State editor and blogger Pejman Yousefzadeh is currently on board at Right Reason as a guest-blogger, contributing a series of pieces sketching the lineaments of a rapproachment between conservatism and the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche's philosophy, long tarred by association with the horrors of German National Socialism, and rejected by most conservatives on account of its advocacy of militant irreligion and its status as a resource for postmodernists and nihilists, such as this fool, may, he argues, contain rich potentialities for conservative thought.
In his first installment, Pejman discusses Nietzsche's conception of the self, clearing away misconceptions that often becloud the minds of readers trying to assimilate Nietzsche's teaching on the relationship between Master and Slave moralities, and showing the affinities of his teachings on rank-ordering and responsibility with conservative philosophy. In the second installment, Pejman defends Nietzsche against the stale calumny that he was an antisemite and forerunner of Nazi 'thought', a calumny that should astonish all those who have actually, well, read Nietzsche. And in his most recent contribution, Pejman discusses the uses of Nietzschean thought for religion, building on the argument of the first post to argue that the Nietzschean doctrines of self-overcoming and affirmation are not necessarily incompatible with religious profession.
This latter piece ought to be read in connection with the masterful treatment of the illusory consolations afforded the irreligious by their creeds written by our own Bill Luse. For it behooves the believer well to remember that what a Nietzsche writes that is true is not (wholly) original, and that what he writes that appears to be original is really a modern expression of ancient errors. Then again, there is much to be said for taking spoils from Egypt.
Comments (10)
And not to forget that Alexander Pruss is over there trying to kick the tires on this thing called love. His latest installment is like playing a tennis game wherein he serves the ball and then disappears!
So why don't you post your comment over there, Maximos? Maybe you can get him to dialogue instead of trumpeting soliloquies.
Posted by KW | June 4, 2007 1:28 PM
I would, but for the fact that I'm not conversant with the philosophical writings on love, and haven't devoted much thought to the subject myself. I'm afraid that I'll simply have to take in the soliloquy.
Posted by Maximos | June 4, 2007 2:08 PM
I would . . .
All right, maybe you can post to Pejman's thread.
Posted by KW | June 4, 2007 2:44 PM
I want to add quickly here that in my experience, Alex Pruss is pretty conscientious about replying to commentators. He just sometimes lets them add up and then responds to them several at a time. And the moderation system slows the whole conversation down and makes stuff look more like soliloquies than it should.
Posted by Lydia | June 4, 2007 3:24 PM
I'll go read it, Jeff, but I'm already depressed and I haven't even gotten there yet. I am so weary of the religiously conservative trying to find a way to lie down with the tenets of conservative irreligion. The Republican party, including many social conservatives (I know it's true 'cuz I've seen them on TV), is at this moment fornicating with the prospect of Giuliani as their leading man.
Posted by William Luse | June 4, 2007 3:45 PM
I like your analogy there, Bill...
Don't get depressed: _We_ won't vote for Rudy. Not at gunpoint! :-)
Posted by Lydia | June 4, 2007 4:24 PM
Jumping the gun perhaps by not having read Pejman's comments,but Nietzsche seems an odd man for a conservative synthesis. His remark that a bad tradition is better than no tradition at all may, among others, open the door slightly, but only slightly.
F N was a unwitting prophet of the Age of the Expert, a watered down version of Plato's Philosopher Kings, more recently of R C Collingwood's Priest-Kings, [God help us}, other hideous examples abound and there is always a nitwit somewhere who wishes to crown himself as a leader and director of men, whatever the rationale or level of literacy.
Mussolini was an admirer of Nietzsche but only fastened on to the most recent effusion of the Cult of the Leader, the urge to power and it's excuses predates both and is a running thread thru history.
I am not a King Numbers man, thanks John Randolph, but any philosophy, attitude, or emotion that justifies a ruling class is due some suspicion as well as caution and is hardly a mark of a healthy conservatism.
Posted by johnt | June 5, 2007 7:43 AM
Agreed, john.
Posted by William Luse | June 5, 2007 5:07 PM
Trying to rehabilitate Nietzsche for the conservative cause is a bizarre reach. Is conservatism so weary of robust sources (Burke, Tocqueville, Kirk, et al) that it needs a jolt of Nietzsche?
Next we'll find "The Nietzsche Study Bible."
Posted by Gintas | June 5, 2007 10:54 PM
Lydia writes:
That's a benign interpretation and God knows we need those.
I'm pretty conscientious about how particular forms of blogging is shaping our dialogue and ourselves.
Posted by KW | June 7, 2007 4:33 PM