Sunday's Thoughts
by Alice-Alexandra-Sofia
 

Works of Friedrich Nietzsche

 

Introduction

The Nietzsche’s Predecessors

Friedrich Nietzsche’s “Teachings”

The Dionysian State

Friedrich Nietzsche and Nazism

Conclusive Remarks

 

===============================================

 

 

Introduction

 

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) identified himself with the “opposite” of the moralist that is with Zarathustra whom he made a model of the “Superman” [Förster–Nietzsche xiii, xxvi; Nietzsche (1999) vi].

Real Zoroaster, or Zarathustra (1000 B.C.), is a founder of ancient Persian religion, which combines dualism with the belief that salvation can be earned with good deeds. The original Zoroastrianism influenced many nations because of propagated human ideals and logically sound concepts of the divine law, the good as the foundation of salvation and prerequisite of the eternal life, and the creative force of the human mind. Oriental religions, cults, and doctrines (for instance, Cabbala, Gnosticism, Manichaeism, Mithraism, Pythagoreanism, and the others) adopted at least some concepts of the Zoroastrianism [e.g., Baybrook 610–612; World Scripture 9–10, 441, 452, 626; The Sunset Knowledge].

Nietzsche followed the practices of the philosophizing theologians and philosophers of divination who modified concepts created by their predecessors and then, ascribed own interpretation to the authors of the original version (for instance, as Aquinas did with the Christian teachings). In the same manner, Nietzsche misinterpreted Zoroastrianism and used the name of Zarathustra to cover own assertions and to make them look more significant and attractive.

Some researchers characterize the Nietzsche’s thought as “the guiding light” for the contemporary heathenism [O’Sullivan 59], assert that writings of Nietzsche had enormously influenced the European culture along with the founders of Fascism (Mussolini) and Nazism (Hitler) [e.g., Brock 46; Eatwell 174; McGovern 415; Rhodes 77], and refer to Nietzsche as to one of “the three towering figures” in the history of German intellectual life [the other two named are Marx and Feurbach – in: Diggins 21] and “one of the greatest psychologists” [Brock 47].

Other researchers blame Nietzsche’s sister, Mrs. Elizabeth Förster–Nietzsche, for the declaration that Adolf Hitler is the exact Nietzsche’s Superman [her brother defined superman as “the meaning of the earth” – in: Nietzsche (1924) 7]) and for the subsequent correlation of the Nietzsche’s name with Nazism; they refer to Nietzsche as to “a staunch opponent of anti–Semitism” [Clark and Swensen x–xi; Nietzsche (1999) vi (qtd.)].].

The author’s own works are the best source for the conclusion concerning the nature and significance of his legacy. Whatever intentions might be ascribed to Friedrich Nietzsche, the historical fact is that his words decorated the deadliest weapon of national suicide – Nazism.

The childish and sometimes incomprehensible or meaningless conglomerates of words of Thus Spake Zarathustra and other Nietzsche’s publications would not influence the mind that either is unfit for the Aristotelian framework of reasoning or is able to discard the false of mythological imaginary worlds. Neither Nazism nor anti–Semitism would ever find the center of attraction in the works of a true philosopher, especially the Christian philosopher: Christianity voids national, racial, and other boundaries among human beings and reminds that all are equal before the Creator of all {Romans 10:12–13}. Yet, Nazism utilized the Nietzsche’s writings and made them the foundation of Nazi propaganda, Nazi ideology, and the Nazi state.

From another point of view, nor Nietzsche nor Mussolini nor Hitler invented new doctrines. Fascism and Nazism absorbed many destructive concepts developed during at least twenty–five centuries by theologians, philosophers, and scientists whose minds accepted the symbolical mode of thinking and worked within the Aristotelian framework. Fascism and Nazism, in fact, embody the program of self–annihilation of the societies rushing to death. Obviously, only the societies molded by political theology, which transforms the creation of God into the slave who might be burned alive, robbed, re–programmed, and made a blind weapon of assassination and destruction, could willingly accept Fascism and Nazism as the means of decision for the economical, political, and social problems inherited from World War I, especially such as impoverishment of the population and crisis of the European social and political institutions.

The Fascist and Nazi parties gained the access to the power through wide support of their programs by the majority of population, which either was unable to recognize the essence of the philosophical doctrine beyond the Fascist and Nazi programs or discarded ethical and human values similarly to their ancestors who assisted the Inquisition.

Other authors accentuate that Nietzsche “was psychiatrically abnormal for years” [Guirdham 37], inform the readers that both – Nietzsche and his father, a Lutheran minister*1* – had the illnesses resulted in insanity [Nietzsche (1997) vi; (1999) iv], or mention that psychopathologists discussed the possibility that after August 1881, the Nietzsche’s style and self–estimation revealed the first symptoms of mental illness. Almost all professionals assumed that the Nietzsche’s works written in the second half of 1888 are “considerably affected” by his mental condition [Brock 128–129] (insanity came into the manifest phase and permanently disabled Nietzsche on January 3, 1889).

Interpretation of the Nietzsche’s phenomenon as the result of pathological influence of insanity would be an attempt to scrutinize the surface and to conceal the roots. The personal Nietzsche’s tragedy is irrelevant, because the surrounding him world was filled with the insanity of dehumanization of man. He absorbed this insanity and propagated it with his theoretical speculations, which, in their turn, were absorbed by those who embodied them into the policies, laws, and actions of Nazi and Fascist parties and states, which, then, were supported by the majority of population.

There is no doubt concerning insanity of such notions as destruction of the morality, the master–race of supermen that has the right to exterminate the inferior races, the superman, “death of gods,” dithyramb to the heathen god of death and insanity, worship to death, propagation of insanity, and other similar declarations which composes the main body of the Nietzsche’s writings.

Any life–oriented and healthy human being perceives death and annihilation as the greatest evil: death – even only physical – contradicts the human nature, and desire of death is insanity: any mental institution keeps persons with the suicidal intentions under strict surveillance. Many criminals escaped human justice because their advocates were able to prove their insanity as the inability to discern the good and the evil. Death becomes attractive when all purposes of life are accomplished and when the conscience had pronounced own sentence and triggered self–annihilation because of the perversion of nature or an inability to complete the mission: only if the mind reaches irreversible stages of the perversion, the acceptance of the cult of death becomes possible. Consequently, the main point of an interest in the Nietzsche’s phenomenon might be an answer to the question: what compels the apparently healthy mind to accept insane ideas, or is insanity contagious similarly to the medieval bubonic plague?

Considering the Nietzsche’s definition of religion as the “slave morality,” references to the Roman pope and some other wordings, which imply unreserved obedience and other social “virtues” of the subjects of the papal hierarchy, it is possible to conclude that Friedrich Nietzsche identified Christianity with Catholicism and in all his works, referred to the papal faith–Catholicism as to “Christianity,” although he comprehended the difference between Christianity and Catholicism. Such a conclusion is based on the following (a, b, c):

a/ Nietzsche’s remarks that

– “there never was more than one Christian, and He died on the Cross”

– “Christianity no longer sat upon the papal chair”

– the meaning of the Gospel is the “unity between God and man,” and Jesus Christ lived this unity

– the religion “as dogma perished of its own morality” and became enormous perversion

b/ Nietzsche’s definition of the Crusades as “superior piracy”

c/ Nietzsche’s accusation in the destruction of the Spanish culture of the Moors along with the inference that impotence prevents “the Christians of today” from burning people at the stake, not love to their neighbors [Nietzsche (1911b) 178, 183, 226–227, 229, 231; (1997) §104 49; (1998) 117; italic in the original].

To the contrary, other researchers do not distinguish the Christian teachings from Catholicism – the religion, which Nietzsche named “the great curse” and “innermost perversion” [Nietzsche (1911b) 231]; for instance, Max Weber shared the Georg Simmel’s conclusion that Nietzsche “completely misinterprets Christianity” [Weber ref. and Simmel ref. and qtd. in: Diggins 130].

There is the greatest and – if to judge by the results – fatal misconception to identify Aristotle–Aquinas’ political theology or Catholicism as Christianity, or to mention political theology in any connection with the Christian teachings, especially, when it – Catholicism/political theology – is reflected with inflamed and sick imagination of the trained in self–torturing diviners. Consequently, that what Nietzsche names “religion” or “Christianity,” is the reference to Catholicism, not as the reference to Christianity. Catholicism*2* is not based upon the teachings of Lord God Jesus Christ; its foundation is Aristotle’s philosophical–astronomical–arithmetical–theological speculations, heresy, and the dreams of diviners covered with the wordings snatched from the Holy Scriptures.

From the Nietzsche’s own writings, it might be concluded that Nietzsche did not write about the original Christian dogma: his works defy the papal official doctrine – Aristotle–Aquinas’ political theology.

Nietzsche’s methods and flow of the thoughts are fully compliant with the traditions of the heathenism: he modifies the shared dream world of the heathen theology and philosophy with its own additions, assembles new concept of the cosmos, and propagates his hallucinations as the true knowledge of deities, humans, and the human world.

In particular, instead of the already established cult of the self–asserted deity–pope, Nietzsche offers another cult – the modified Dionysian cult of death, and then, prepares the ground for the next heathen cult that would underlie the official Nazi doctrine and foundation of the Nazi state.

For instance, Nietzsche refers to a Christian (obviously, to a Catholic, because Nietzsche considers Catholicism as Christianity) as to “the domestic… gregarious… sick animal” and asserts that the root of religion is the “instinctive hatred of reality” and of the earth [Nietzsche (1911b) 129, 179; (1997) §62 45].

These two assertions correctly diagnose the main elements of the Aquinas’ political theology: Aristotle’s concept of social animal, interactive theology, and the Plato’s concept of a human body as the disease, which falls onto the immortal soul. However, these concepts sustain Aristotle–Aquinas’ political theology; they have nothing in common with the Christian teachings, and the Christians consider their application to Christianity as blasphemy and as the crime against God and man.

Perhaps, the reason for the Nietzsche’s indifference concerning the original Christian teachings is rooted in the eighth and ninth centuries when the ancestors of the Nietzsche’s “blond Germanic beasts” conquered the West parts of the Roman Empire, took over the Church in Rome, and established own Frankish–German papacy. Later, the Roman popes (who for a while survived as the Franks’ vassals) made from the conquerors the obedient weapon, which served the papal hierarchy well (e.g., the Crusades in the Eastern Asia and attempts with sword and fire to convert Orthodox Russia into the Catholicism) until the Dr. Luther’s Reformation*3*. As Nietzsche notices, the German nobility always served “the bad instincts of the Church” [Nietzsche (1911b) 227; compare with: Luther 49, 93–95]: the Lutheran upbringing and education in the Protestant boarding school obviously did contribute to the Nietzsche’s distaste for Catholicism.

Besides, the definition of the Germans as the pope’s servants could be also one of the reasons behind Adolf Hitler’s hatred toward the papacy and his decision to deprive the papal hierarchy of any authority and influence within his party, his state, and his world.

 

 

The Nietzsche’s Predecessors

 

Friedrich Nietzsche absorbed and summarized into one inhumane doctrine the notions produced by the minds fostered within the Aristotle and Aristotle–Aquinas’ frameworks during the fourteenth–nineteenth centuries. The Nietzsche’s doctrine could be conceived only within the civilization fashioned by the political theology. Embodiment of the Nietzsche’s doctrine into political establishment (the Dionysian/Nazi state) became possible because

a/  as Philipp Sherrard writes, the adaptation to Aristotle’s philosophical principles crippled Christian theology; through the efforts of Thomas Aquinas, integrity of man was crippled with the “Aristotelian standards,” and the Christian concept of man was reframed with the Aristotle’s “technical language” [Sherrard (1987) 48–49, 53, 60].

b/ the papal theologians put the inherited from the heathenism image of the deity of death and destruction (that tolerates justification of torture, maiming, execution of men for their beliefs, and even has the special law to burn people alive*4*) at the place of Christian God; this substitution was completed by Friedrich Nietzsche whose works written in the end of the nineteenth century re–introduced the cult of Dionysus – the cult of death and insanity to the social and political life of European nations.

Therefore, perversion of the Christian teachings with the heathen philosophy and Manichean heresy and the deeds of the papacy, which were justified with the Aquinas’ political theology, prepared the fertile ground for the Nietzsche’s version of the cult of death and facilitated its acceptance, advancement, and embodiment.

Within the specific framework arranged by the heathen philosophy and elaborated by its offspring – political theology, Nietzsche digested and re–told each of the following ideas of his predecessors (from 1 through 9) who diligently elaborated components/ideas/assumptions of the Plato–Aristotle’s political–theological–social utopia. Then, Nietzsche’s admirers made his works the part of the foundation of the Fascist and Nazi states.

1. The Aristotle’s concept of the supremacy of the polis/state over its subjects/members/citizens provided the starting point for the Jean Bodin’s (1530–1596, France) theory of sovereignty, which strengthens the position of the state. In particular, Bodin asserts that the state is created by force, the state is an embodiment of the force, and the state exists as the force; therefore, the state should possess the “sole ultimate control” over all its subjects – persons and their establishments [Bodin ref. in: McGovern 58–60; italic in the original]

2. Thomas Hobbes (1558–1679, England) asserted the right of a sovereign to control and prevent spread of opinions, which might endanger the social stability: as soon as the actions of men are the consequences of their opinions, the control of the opinions would govern the actions [Hobbes ref. in: McGovern 75].

Nietzsche interpreted this assertion in the form of warning that the power of the press is the means through which “cattle become masters”: one of the practical inferences was the total control of the press and restriction of the freedom of speech implemented by the Fascists and Nazis during the first days after election, when they obtained access to the state structures of coercion [Nietzsche (1910) §753 206; Recent Legislation in Italy 33, 41–42 (417, 425–426]. Then, the press was used as the tool of the state propaganda.

3. Thomas Carlyle (1795–1881, Scotland) supplied two notions:

a/ identity of the right and force; force is the right, or “might and right… are… the same”: the strength is justice

b/ feelings/instincts as the basis of a political organization, especially the state; the unconscious in the politics is the sight of “right performance” as it is in “the animal body” [Carlyle ref. and qtd. in: McGovern 201–202].

At the beginning of the twentieth century, it was accepted that the unconscious determines behavior. The flow of physical energy (identified with the will to power) was considered as “sexual in character” [MacIntyre 29, 32]. Such background allows comprehension of

– the Nietzsche’s negative attitude toward sexual abstinence, solitude, and fasting, which he characterized as the “dangerous prescriptions” [Nietzsche (1997) §47 35]

– the Nazi assertion that “the great masses” have the woman’s psyche, which must be subjugated by the strong masculine leadership – cruel and merciless, especially in a form of physical terror [e.g., Hitler (1940) 56, 58].

The religious people, who learn to control the desires of flesh for the sake of undisturbed thinking and independency of the spirit from the limitations of material world, usually practice at least some sexual abstinence, solitude, and fasting. Nietzsche challenges and besmears these proven means of achievement of self–control, because he is obsessed with the Dionysian cult of death, which originated the Maenad rites and intended to replace the intellect with “divine” insanity and the reason with sensual perception. Besides, the Maenads are promiscuous, therefore, they are quite manageable (for instance, they were sent to murder Orpheus): before they enter the state of complete insanity, they might be easily programmed by their superiors. Consequently (when Nazis assumed the power), through the due programming, the majority of the population of Nazi Germany was successfully set out to assassinate the Jews and the inferior nations.

4. Georg W. F. Hegel (1770–1831, Germany), to whom McGovern refers to as “the prophet of ‘creative unconscious reason,’” provided the basis on which the cult of the state developed. He asserted that the national state is greater than mankind is; it is “the ultimate goal of evolution,” obtainable through inevitable and useful wars [Hegel ref. and qtd. in: McGovern 318, 554].

The Hegel’s assertion is the starting point of social Darwinism, which envisions social development as the constant conflicts among the social groups and struggle, which secures survival of the fittest and elimination of in the weakest or unfit.

Other Hegel’s ideas adopted by Nietzsche include the following:

1/ the state–winner achieves compliance with the “World Spirit”: the war is “the act of supreme power,” which guards and protect the life [Hegel ref. and qtd. in: McGovern 319]

2/ the state is “the Divine idea”; it is an embodiment of the universal spirit – the “one Universal Person” in whom all mankind is united (at the same time, individual minds are “unreal abstractions” or “momentary phases” in the development of the universal spirit). Thus, the state is “a soul, a person, a potent will conscious of its ends” that is superior to its parts–subjects [Hegel and Gentile ref. and qtd. in: McGovern 560–561].

The Hegel’s speculations reveal the basis for deification of the state: the mixture of the Plato–Aristotle’s presentation of the wars as the necessary means to support existence of the perfect community (as the source of additional slaves that sustains existence of the perfect community), the Aristotle’s notion of the divine origin of the state, the ancient heathen concept of the deified universe, and the Aristotle–Averroes’ doctrine, which, in the interpretation of the Western philosophers and papal theologians, became the concept of the unity of mankind through the active intellect. This concept excludes personal immortality personal salvation; it was absorbed by “deprivitized” theology*5* of the papal theologians.

With an assertion of war as the means of evolution, Hegel substitutes the reality of anti–evolution for the reality of evolution. The deified state, which is the Hegel’s “ultimate goal of evolution” of mankind, in fact, is the means of annihilation and the weapon of anti–evolution: Nazi Germany has proved with the lives of more than 54 million human beings that the heathen cult of the state is the deadliest weapon of suicide ever invented by those who perverted own nature and became incapable of existence. In the beginning, people created idols from wood and stone and sacrificed own brethren to the creation of own hands; in the nineteenth–twentieth century, people elevated the creation of own minds–image/idea and its embodiment–state to the status of idol, worshiped it, and make from themselves the slaves of their own creation. Although there is some apparent progress or an escalation of the perversion (at first, they used hands, then, they learned to employ the mind), the results are the same: the idols turn against their worshipers and take their freedom, the remnants of reasoning, and the very lives.

Hegel also wrote that a person believes in “the phantom which he calls his individuality,” yet he “in reality is little more than a puppet” of the society; his “very reason, will, and conscience,” conception of the world, morals and beliefs are determined by the community of the living and the dead: his predecessors and contemporaries [Hegel ref. and qtd. in: McGovern 345].

So, Hegel elaborates the Aristotle’s concept of social animal–man–property of the community: the social animal progresses from the physical slavery to the total psychological and spiritual dependency. In fact, man (who initially was the property, which the community apprehends) becomes the product (“puppet”) of the community, therefore, loses the ability to understand the meaning of freedom, conscience, thinking, and choice, yet acquires such a feature as readiness to be programmed and to dance according to the wish of his creator–master. The notion of the community–owner of its members also is elaborated into its ultimate embodiment – the state.

The obviously irrational assumption is the Hegel’s depiction of the society of the puppets, which determines the reason, will, and conscience of its members. In such a case, either the society of the puppets acquires the super–reason, which all its parts–puppets do not have, or there is another source/being that determines that what should become the reason, will, and conscience of the society of the puppets. Aristotelian metaphysics does not admit creation of something from nothing. Consequently, for Hegel who obviously follows Aristotle in other speculations, appearance of the intellect in the group–society of the puppets just because they are assembled into the group–society is not the logically sound construction.

Another point: logically, the Hegel’s society of the puppets demands existence of deity. The Hegel’s deity – the “World Spirit” whose “act of supreme power” is war with which this deity guards and protects the life of its creations – is the second irrational constructions: it is not possible to guard life with death and destruction. Then, if the Hegel’s deity had created two types of beings (one type must be guarded with assassination of the others), the Hegel’s speculations are the actual source of Hitler’s obsession with the superiority of German race, which, as Hitler asserted, should live and prosper by exterminating the “inferior” nations. In summary, the Hegel’s logic, which became the foundation for the cult of the state, is the logic of death.

The very correlation of death with logic does not seem to be rational for any mind created for the eternity: death, even only physical, is not consistent with the nature of human being created into the image and after likeness of Almighty Immortal God. Therefore, in this particular case, the logic of death prepares the mind for acceptance of the state as the embodiment of death. It justify the use of the most effective weapon of self–annihilation by the state that has to prepare swiftly the space and reserves for the others who would play their part in the uninterrupted processes of anti–evolution – degeneration, collapse, and disintegration.     

5. Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860, Germany; the very influential figure in the Nietzsche’s logical reality) postulated the concept of will, which he defines as the only ultimate reality: the mind is not rational; it acts in conformity with the universal will – the vital force, which determines the life of the Universe. In continuation of the Hegel’s “unconscious creative reason,” Schopenhauer asserts that man should not be called a “rational” animal, because his intellect serves the universal will (or the universal desire to exist), and even the knowledge about existence of the “universal will” comes through the insight, not as the result of reasoning [Schopenhauer ref. in: McGovern 409].

This concept along with the Carlyle’s notion of the political unconscious as the sign of right performance became for Nietzsche and his followers the ground for the assertion that the essence of everything is the will that manifests itself through the unconscious – the instincts, not the reason. Therefore, the greatest wisdom of political and state establishments is to follow the instincts.

Another interesting moment is the logical completion of the Aristotelian concept of the social animal: after deprivation of man from divine origin, from likeness to God, and from freedom, the last protective layer – the intellect/reasoning – is removed, and the state receives its naked subject – the matter in motion and without faculty of deliberation – in the total and ultimate possession.

6. Arthur de Gobineau (1816–1882, France) introduced the theory of racial inequality: the Aryan race – the Germanic tribes, which through mixing with the native population produced all civilizations, is the superior race. The success and prosperity of each civilization depends on the right dose of the Aryan blood, and the fall of a civilization is the result of racial degeneration. With assistance of Richard Wagner, de Gobineau’s racial doctrine became the German official article of faith – the belief in the exceptional superiority of the German nation [de Gobineau ref. in: McGovern 500–504].

The ancient Aryan race is the puzzling phenomenon in the history of mankind. Myths and legends saved the dreams of the Golden Age of the Minoan civilization with the images of super–heroes and sages who possessed the perfect harmony of beauty, intelligence, and virtues [e.g., The Sunset Knowledge]. Some researchers connect the Aryans with the Minoan civilization, trace the Aryans’ roots to the population of Atlantis, and assert that the place of origin of the Aryans is the Mediterranean region (Atlantis): after the ruin of the Minoan civilization, those who survived migrated to Greece, India, Egypt, and Minor Asia. If to forget the fact that all the nations at the Earth have just two parents (Adam and Eve), the Aryans have no direct connections with the Nordic–Germanic barbarian tribes: Hitler and his surrounding adopted the Aryans as the ancestors of the “great German super–race” (and immediately began to exterminate the adopted elder brothers – the Gypsies who are the true descendents of the Aryans survived in India).

7. Eduard von Hartmann (1842–1906) offered own interpretation of the Aristotle’s social animal–man: man is higher than all other animals because he has the unity of three instincts: sexual, social, and “enmity of all to all,” which makes him the Aristotle’s political animal. Such elaboration resulted in three practical inferences:

a/ the necessity of improvement of the race through a sexual selection

b/ the eradication of the “inferior races” is inevitable; thus, it is inhumane to artificially prolong the struggle of “savages”: “the more merciless is the struggle for survival the more advantageous” it is for the evolution of the race

c/ “the Unconscious” is indifferent to suffering of milliards of humans and “animal individuals” because their “torments further development, and thereby its own main design” [von Hartmann 2:11–13, 15; italic in the original].

The improvement of the German race became the purpose of the Nazi breeding and sterilization laws. Inevitability of eradication of the “inferior races” was asserted as the inference from the image of “the Unconscious” (an additional title for the Hegel’s “world spirit”), which designed development of mankind as the process of the merciless struggle, torments, and death of “milliards” of beings.

A human being was created to serve God and accomplish the evolution: God is the natural focus, the meaning of conscience, the purpose of existence, the core of human mind, and life of the human spirit. It means that rejection of God is not a completed act: something instead of God has to be chosen to fill the empty core, without which a human being loses the meaning of existence and cannot be a fitting servant even for the atheism–minded earthly rulers. Von Hartmann modified the very meaning of humanity in its opposite and invented a new image of contemporary Moloch (in comparison with whom the old Dionysus is an embodiment of mercy): the idol indifferent to suffering of human and animal beings, “the unconscious,” which unconsciously designs torments, suffering, and death of mankind and covers the process of extermination with the name “development” or “evolution.”

Consequently, the Nietzsche/Nazi/Dionysian state became the embodiment of this unconscious idol–designer–death, to which the merciless Nazi super–race served unconsciously obeying “instincts” instead of reason, and gathered the plentiful harvest: lives of 14 millions of “racial inferiors” and 54.8 millions (estimated) of victims of World War II [Trager 893, 894].

There are some irrational and inconsistent assertions in the von Hartmann’s anthropological and theological discoveries. For instance, the meaning of Aristotle’s political animal includes not only the features traditionally ascribed to the beasts of pray, which eat the beings of own kind. For his gregarious animals, Aristotle designed the mandatory public education–training, which was intended to facilitate co–existence through the cooperation, because the Polis would not survive without purposeful and supervised cooperation of its parts. The obvious necessity of at least some cooperation even within the herd of the beasts makes the von Hartmann’s combination of the social (gregarious) instinct with “enmity of all to all” practically improbable, because the animals, which are unable to learn the lessons in cooperation and co–existence, would be cast off the herd or exterminated.

Then, von Hartmann’s “the unconscious,” which actualizes the evolution through torments and annihilation of human and “animal individuals,” has no cause to create mankind, to desire its development and, yet, methodically exterminate own creation. Therefore, the von Hartmann’s theological notion presupposes initial existence of another – good – deity or the actual creator of mankind, therefore, his theoretical construction re–iterates the ancient Persian dualism.

Evidently, the von Hartmann’s works assisted Nietzsche in his choice of Zoroastrianism as the apparent cover–up for his “new teachings” and portrayal of the Dionysian state as an instrument of destruction and cyclical extermination of the “surplus” of population.

Many centuries ago, the ancient Greek philosophers concluded: man creates his gods in his own image and according to degree of his development; thus, logically, dehumanization of man should result in degeneration of the man’s gods. It means that behind the von Hartmann’s “unconscious,” is the blind unconscious death created by the perverted imagination of the being in the irreversible stage of disintegration that has lost any likeness to a human being.

8. Houston S. Chamberlain (1855–1926) – Englishman who married the daughter of Richard Wagner and became a subject of the German state, supplemented the racial theory of de Gobineau with the assertions that the message of Christ was “chained to the fundamental ideas of Judaism” and the Jew “will wreck… the true European spirit.” The very presence of the Jews infects the land with the Jewish spirit, thus, it is dangerous for the European states in such a degree, that in the treatment of the Jews, the European nations must “not be influenced by general humane principles” [Houston S. Chamberlain ref. and qtd. in: McGovern 504, 507–508].

The Chamberlain’s presentation of Christianity in the time when the Jews were associated with Bolshevism, Communism, and all other deadly sins against mankind, became the finishing touch on the foundation on which Hitler designed his world without the Jews and without the Christians.

9. The Nietzsche’s closest spiritual predecessor – Heinrich von Treitschke (1834–1896, Germany) increased the number of the nations, which must be exterminated (he added the Poles), and assembled some of the referred above concepts into the set of declarations [von Treitschke ref. and qtd. in McGovern 368–372, 380–381], which became the blueprint of Nietzsche’s Dionysian state:

 

“the nobler race should absorb the inferior stock”

the German nation is the greatest, thus it has the right of dominion
over life and death of the others;
for instance, “no people was ever more justly annihilated than the Poles”

the force and accomplishment of own will are the essence of the state

the state demands obedience and “cannot tolerate any power above its own”

the will of the state is superior even to religious beliefs

for the sake of national unity, the state must impose the official religion
as the mandatory for all its subjects
(for von Treitschke, such mandatory religion was
Protestantism with “the glorious deeds of Luther”).

 

Hence, Nietzsche, and through him Nazism, inherited from Aristotle, Thomas Hobbes, Thomas Carlyle, Georg W. F. Hegel, Arthur Schopenhauer, Arthur de Gobineau, Eduard von Hartmann, Houston S. Chamberlain, and Heinrich von Treitschke the following building blocks for the Dionysian state:

1/ superiority of the German race, which has the duty to exterminate inferior races and nations, and especially to preserve civilization by preservation of own racial purity and by annihilation of the Jewish spirit along with its bearer – the Jewish nation

2/ the image of the world, where the evolution is accomplished with merciless torments and annihilation of “the inferior” races and “animal individuals,” as well as through planned sexual improvement

3/ the meaning of the state as the deity, which is free from the morality, acts according to instincts and impulses, which sprang from the unconscious, pursues own will over rights, freedom, morals, and conscience of its subjects, and develops and expands own boundaries through conflicts and wars with the surrounding nations

4/ concept of a person as the “puppet” in the hands of the state: the flesh/matter in motion without the free will, conscience, morals, and reason, which must sacrifice own well–being and the very life for the sake of the state and preservation of the race.

 

 

Friedrich Nietzsche’s “Teachings”

 

A notion of a philosopher as the dreamer who “dreams extraordinary things” and the modernized heathen cult of philosophizing Dionysus (to whom Heraclites refers as to “the god of death”) became the foundation for Nietzsche’s philosophy of insanity and death and its embodiment – Nazi ideology. Nietzsche–“Zarathustra” envisioned himself as “the last disciple and initiate of god Dionysus” and “the first tragic philosopher” of “the tragic wisdom” of a Dionysian philosophy, which rejects any concept of being and affirms annihilation and war [Heraclites qtd. in: Bevan 140; Nietzsche (1909) §3 193; (1977) §292, §295 144, 146; (1997) §295 146].

In fact, Nietzsche performed the function of a digesting sponge. He absorbed the results of the centuries of intentional misinterpretation of the word of God, de–humanization of man, and work of the minds corrupted with the heathen Plato–Aristotle’s utopias and their offspring – political theology*2*. Then, he poured out the collected mixture in the form of mythical–artistic works in quasi–biblical or “romantic” style, which was the suitable form for comprehension and acceptance by the minds of Nazi and Fascist leaders longing for the theatrical version of romanticism and aggrandizement.

The human mind seeks wisdom as the source of survival and prosperous life. The very correlation of wisdom with death, annihilation, and war signifies either non–human logic of thinking or insanity. The logic of the heathen cult of death became the foundation for the image of the superman and the politics of the Dionysian – Nazi – state. Ultimately, in conformity with the “tragic wisdom” of Nietzsche, the logic of death resulted in destruction of Nazi Germany.

Until then, Nietzsche elaborated and supplemented the gathered notions and referred to the mixture as to his own “teachings,” which would enlighten men with new pride and new ego defined as the possession of “the awakened” and “the discerning ones.”

The following declarations convey the summary of Nietzsche’s “teachings” (1 through 5) [in: Nietzsche (1910) §727, §749, §862 188, 204, 297; (1924) III, IV, X, XXII, LVI, LXXV 7, 9, 33–35, 53, 91, 245–246, 371].

1. “The awakened” and “godlike” one knows that he is “entirely, and nothing more” than body, believes in the body, although “it is sickly thing” and he would like to get out of his skin; so, he accepts “the preachers of death” and pursues “life of obedience and of war”; his distinction must be obedience because distinction of a slave is resistance.

This statement contradicts to another Nietzsche’s assertions, e.g., concerning slave morality; besides, it makes his “teachings” apparently irrational foundation for any social or political – especially Nazi – establishment:

a/ the notion of obedience as distinction repeats the Ignatius Loyola’s dictum concerning the Jesuit society [e.g., Ignatius of Loyola The Final Word on Obedience §2 in: Personal Writings 252], while Nietzsche apparently defies Catholicism

b/ the belief in eternal existence of the soul as the foundation for religion and morality always has the great significance for any ruler or leader.

For instance, if man is only a body, ethics and morals would lose any significance: he does not have any reasons to risk the only life he has, to live in obedience, and to follow the “high ideals” of his leaders. If man has no moral obligations before his neighbors, superiors, or society, he has no reason to accept any authority or maintain the social stability. At any convenient time, such an immoral atheist can kill or rob his neighbors, overthrow the ruler, and to take the ruler’s place along with all ruler’s possessions. Historically, the ability to influence the after–life and eternal destiny of a soul was intensively propagated as the foundation of official religion when the rulers attempted to exercise the absolute power over the subjects (e.g., Egypt pharaohs and the Roman popes).

Consequently, Hitler corrected the Nietzsche’s misconception: he provided his followers with new set of beliefs including the cult of Nordic blood and new version of the earthly deity – himself, the Fuehrer.

2. Only those who robbed the wildest animals of their “virtues” – the “virtues of beast,” which are envied by men, can become men

Probably, this particular assertion became the root of the new logical–philosophical–political construction: “unconscious beast ethics”; for instance, such as rat’s “morality,” which the inventors of the human cognitive maps constructed upon observation of behavior of the laboratory rats and applied to description of human thinking.

3. The good and the evil are illusions; all knowledge grows “beside the bad conscience.”

This assertion prepares the ground for the Max Weber’s concept of value–neutral social sciences and admission of the morally contaminated data as the basis for scientific concepts and recommendations.

4. Only immoral men can be the strongest power; morality, which Nietzsche defines as “humbug” and sign of imperfection, must be annihilated.

The Nietzsche’s addition resulted in the particular advancement of the Plato’s Republic; for instance, if the guardians had the task to regulate/improve only population of own communities, the Nietzsche’s supermen–immoralists planned to undertake the task of improvement of mankind through annihilation of “declining” races.

5. With the death of all gods, the Superman lives

The “teachings” of Nietzsche–“Zarathustra” misrepresents the original Zoroastrianism and reveals primitive materialism and continuation of the attempts to downgrade a human being to the levels of an animal and then, the beast of prey. All this had been done many times and with more convincing arguments than irrational and childish fantasies, which misrepresent the doctrine of the ancient magi – seekers of wisdom.

Two assertions made the “teachings” of Nietzsche–“Zarathustra” especially valuable for Nazism: the direct link between a wild beast–predator and man (e.g., “the man of pray” [Nietzsche (1997) §197 63]) and presentation of the good and the evil as illusions. With such an approach, design of the death camps, mass executions of population of the conquered cities, and enslaving of all non–Germans became an ordinary duty of the supermen.

There is an old saying about perspicacity of insanity: with “cheerfulness,” Nietzsche forewarns his readers about death behind his speculations and foresees the consequences. From another angle of consideration, he simply embodies the essence of the cult of Dionysus into the recipe of the destructive state. For instance, Nietzsche [in: Nietzsche (1911a) 9; (1911b) 53; (1924) X–XI 53–55]

a/explains that he loves his brethren from his “very heart”: he does not spare them

b/ refers to the state as to the place where life is “the slow suicide of all,” and describes the state as the snare, false in everything, “new idol,” dying for many glorified as life (the concept of common good), “confusion of language of good and evil” that indicates the will to death, device for consuming of surplus of the population – “the superfluous ones”

c/ asserts that the “iron clamp” of the state makes possible existence of the society.

In continuation of the von Hartmann’s concept of humanity, Nietzsche associates love with ruthlessness, thus elaborates the ground for the Dionysian state – the state–assassin: instead of the ability to protect existence and facilitate development of the civilized society, the main virtue of the state becomes the ability to terminate its subjects under the slogan of brotherly love.

 If to compare the Nietzsche’s image of the state with Nazi Germany, the actuality of description would become undisputable. The only Nietzsche’s mistake was the definition “slow suicide”: within the frame of time, which accommodates existence of mankind, the destruction of Nazi Germany was almost instant (1933–1945; in twelve years).

Nietzsche’s abhorrence to the Catholicism increased gradually. For instance, in 1885, Nietzsche–“Zarathustra” addressed to the pope as just the “old pope”; then, in 1887, Nietzsche–“the first tragic philosopher,” referred to the priests as to “the most evil enemies” and declared that as the morality, religion must perish [Nietzsche (1998) §7, §27 16, 117; (1924) LXXVIII 384].

The last Nietzsche’s works, especially The Antichrist and On the Genealogy of Morality written during 1887–1888, immediately before manifest insanity (since January 3, 1889), convey overwhelming hatred to the papal faith and to the papal Church. With the declaration that only one Christian ever existed and He “died on the Cross,” Nietzsche defines the papal religion as “one enormous and innermost perversion… immoral blemish of mankind” [e.g., in: Nietzsche (1911b) 178–179, 225–227, 230–231; (1998) §§8–10 17–19].

Consequently, it would be logical to expect that the papal hierarchy and its subjects would consider impossible any cooperation with Nazism, which absorbed the Nietzsche’s ideas: the Catholics are barred from any communication with the enemies of the papal faith. It means that before any Catholic accepts any possibility to support or bless Nazism, which flourished on the Nietzsche’s speculations, either the ability to discern the evil must be completely missed or there is some inconsistency in the papal articles of faith. This apparent inconsistency might be explained with the fact that the papal subjects are trained to discard easily all immaterial considerations in a search for the power and material wealth, as the following historical events confirm:

– the mandatory Jesuit training in blasphemies against Lord God Jesus Christ [e.g., Ignatius Loyola Spiritual Exercises §67 298], with which the papal hierarchy teaches the absolute obedience to the superior

– the affair of the Jesuits with the Confucianism*6*.

With the appeal to the “discerning ones” to break up the “old tables” and to discard the morality (which Nietzsche defines as the “instinct of degeneration” antagonistic to the nature) Nietzsche obviously refers to the tables of The Ten Commandments that justifies the comparison of Origen and Nietzsche made by the contemporary Catholic researcher [Nietzsche (1911) 30–31; (1924) 244–245; in: Origen… Introduction 3]*7*.

The Nietzsche’s self–determination as the disciple and the initiate of Dionysus [Nietzsche (1997) §295 146] and the condemnation by the Ecumenical Councils (that is by the Universal Christian Church) of the Origen’s writing as heretical, mythical, and worthless illustrate the true meaning of the asserted connection between Nietzsche and Origen. Although sixteen centuries separate Origen and Nietzsche, they indeed, have the common features:

a/ both possess (or are possessed with) the particular “fire of spirit,” and this fire, which they share, is fueled with self–aggrandizement and imagination

b/ both have a similar self–image: the higher being that knows what is needed for all the others

c/ both constructed own imaginary worlds and attempted to impose onto the others the figments of own imagination:

 

Origen borrowed from the Egypt priests and Greek pagan philosophers and poets
the methods of allegorical–mythical interpretations and interactive theology –

through the Origen’s heretical misrepresentations of the Scriptures,
human imagination came to Aristotle–Aquinas’ political theology

||

Nietzsche re–introduced the Dionysian cult of death and madness
into the cultural and political life of European nations –

with the Nietzsche’s “teachings”
human imagination constructed the Nazi state.

 

d/ misrepresentation of the words of God (Origen) and rejection of God (Nietzsche) culminated in the non–Christian imaginary worlds of political theology and Nazi neo–heathenism, which were embodied into the reality of existence and resulted in death and suffering of countless human beings (the religious persecutions and wars waged by the papacy and the World War II initiated by Nazi Germany).

Yet, there is a difference between Nietzsche and Origen:

1/ the wordings

– Origen covers his self–assessment with the terminology borrowed from the Holy Scriptures; some of his writings could make an impression of the positive attitude toward the undeveloped souls of the lesser brothers

– Nietzsche openly rejects religion, does not disguise negative assessment of all the others (“inferior men”), and interprets brotherly love according to the von Hartmann’s definition

2/ the choice of methods

– Origen propagates feeding of undeveloped souls with the images invented by doctors of the Church and at least apparently supports the Christian teachings

– Nietzsche denies religion and appeals to pride and own reasoning as the means to discard “the slave morality” along with the morals based on religion and culture, which he blames for weakening of the German race and refers to as disguise for “impotence to power” [Nietzsche (1910) §721 186].

The meaning of the Nietzsche’s especial hostility to the morality might be more easily comprehended if to recall that since the beginning of civilization, the morality denotes the essence of the human nature. The Nietzsche supermen – “splendid blond beasts” have to clear up their minds from the very word “morality” because they must have nothing human: they might exist only by consuming resources of the other nations and at the land freed from its original populations exterminated as the inferior race – “subhumans.”

There is an opinion that almost all old heresies have the modern expression [Allison 17].

All modern expressions of old heresies and the heresies themselves have the same source – the heathenism. All basic versions of heathen cults reappear during the different periods of history: the heathenism and heresy as the way of rejection of true knowledge of God and methods of perversion of human nature are the permanent means of intellectual destruction. Heresy co–exists with human thought perhaps in the same fashion as any deadly virus co–exists with mankind to destroy bodies with the damaged immune system or with impaired/distorted genetic code. When the virus begins its work, a human body undergoes definite processes of decay and destruction, which a physician detects as the symptoms of particular diseases; these symptoms might have different range of manifestations determined by the initial health or conditions of life, yet the essence of disease and its outcome are the same. Likewise, the ancient and contemporary versions of the same heresies reveal the permanent patterns of behavior through which the particular stages of self–annihilation of a person or a society might be detected.

 

 

The Dionysian State

 

The destructive purposes of the Nietzsche’s speculations are obvious. However, what is the Nietzsche’s vision of the Future, which is expected to come after destruction of the morality, religion, compassion and after the reign of the splendid blond beasts; how Nietzsche envisions the post–destructive phase of existence? He concludes the remarks (from 1 through 3) about the society and the state with “a prodigious hope” of Dionysian tragic age [Nietzsche (1909) §25, §4 185, 194; (1910) § 890, §895, §898 324–327; (1910) § 859, 296; (1997) 126; (1911a) 9; italic in the original].

1. For a long time, the main purpose or “the impelling power” must be the belittlement of man because the “stronger species” arise on the broad base of “inferior people,” and the weak must be kept for “an enormous mass finicking works”; they must be held in delusion that they might exist.

The practical question is the scale of sacrifice: how much freedom must be taken away, or to which degree of enslavement development of the “higher species” is possible. The “impelling power” obviously means the state (because for Nietzsche, the will to power is the essence of life, and the embodiment of will is the Dionysian state) whose “iron clamp” is capable of restraining the masses. This assertion illustrates the Nietzsche’s understanding of the social Darwinism.

Jean Jacques Rousseau correlated freedom and humanity and inferred that without free will, the morality of actions does not exist [Rousseau 325]. This link might facilitate comprehension of the meaning and consequences of the Nietzsche’s development of social Darwinism as the part of the logical reality of anti–evolution.

For instance, whichever loud words have been employed for magnification of the Nietzsche’s Dionysian state embodied into the Hitler’s Reich/Nazi Germany, its essence is deprivation of freedom. Deprivation of freedom transforms man into the ultimate version of the Aristotelian social animal–property of the community: the Nazi “splendid blond beast” who is purified from the intellect and who acts according to instincts and impulses arising from the unconscious stimulated by the new deity–state/fuehrer

2. The “new party of life” will accomplish the rise of mankind after “the relentless annihilation of all things degenerating and parasitic.”

Nietzsche’s project of creation of the better species in fact, is based on Antoine Destutt de Tracy’s assumption that the human nature might be modified with the political and social actions. So, the “new party” arranges a long period of humiliation, dehumanization, and enslavement of men during which the strongest species develop from the mass population. After that, the new party clears the space for the strongest species by termination the wasted, weary, or unnecessary humans. Then, the “new party” completes modification of the rest of mankind and produces the strongest species.

To accomplish all these actions, the “new party” needs organization – the state with its structures and coercive power: Nietzsche definitely, speaks of the state, which is the means by which the “new party” would be able to arrange the long period of humiliation, enslavement, and subsequent termination of humans. Consequently, the state already deified by Hegel assumes the role of von Hartmann’s unconscious idol and designs suffering and annihilation of own subjects as the evolution or the process of creation of the strongest species.

Adolf Hitler translated the Nietzsche’s proclamations into the language of the state sterilization laws. He also asserted that the only disgrace is procreation of children that inherit deficiencies of their parents; therefore, the state must assume the role of “the guardian of a thousand years’ future”: six hundred years of prevention of procreation of “physically degenerated and mentally sick” beings along with promotion of “the fertility of the most healthy bearers of the nationality” would result in obtaining “a high–bred racial treasure.” In addition to control of a body, the state must mold the character of its subjects, and especially cultivate such personal features as “loyalty, willingness to sacrifice, and silence,” and knowledge of the racial foundation of the Nazi state – “the purity of blood.” The education for the state subjects must culminate in military service after which the subjects would be used according to their physical and mental abilities [Hitler (1940) 608–609, 621, 623, 636–637, 658–659; italic in the original].

3. After “too–much of life” again will be accumulated, the Dionysian state would arise again: its destructive nature is “an instrument” of the economy of the Future.

These assertions modify the Plato–Aristotle’s design:

– Nietzsche allows unlimited reproduction for the sake of the strongest species; moreover, the economy of the Dionysian state would be based upon the cycles of production–consuming–terminating–reproduction of the surplus of the weakest beings (the “matter in motion”)

– Hitler accepts the notion of the Plato’s class of guardians of the perfect Republic and makes it the function of the Nazi state; his vision of the state education reveals also the influence of the ancient Spartan traditions. In addition, the ideal personal features fostered by the Nazi state obviously absorbed the official values of the Jesuits and subjects of the papal hierarchy; besides, silence always is the main virtue of slaves in the slave–owning societies.

In summary, the actual essence of the Nietzsche’s Dionysian state is the machine for breeding and producing of slaves – the human weapon ideally trained for the conquest of the world; the Hitler’s version absorbed the worst concepts of the heathenism starting from ancient Greece and finishing with political theology.

Fascism also elaborated the Nietzsche’s vision of “instrument”: an individual is “an economic instrument for advancement of the society,” which the state might use and then, “subordinate,” when it “no longer serviceable”; with such utilization of individuals, the problem of economic freedom and the state’s intervention is resolved [Alfredo Rocco ref. and qtd. in: McGovern 566].

Thus, the Fascist state uses its subjects as the instruments; this solution of the problems of interaction of the state with its subjects utilizes the Aristotle’s concept of man as a property of the state.

The heathen cults and religions employ the elaborated rituals, especially the common ones, which are expected to unify all the believers into one homogeneous and easily manageable mass, which worships the same idol(s) professes the same beliefs, and experiences the same emotions. Nietzsche’s design employs the rich traditions of the heathen Antiquity; he is aware of the power rituals and arts. He notices that “the Dionysian capacity” of man is expressed in the inseparable unity of music and tragic myth: music is similar to geometrical figures and numbers, which carry the “universal forms of all possible objects of experience,” and as such, is a universal language able to convey the universality of concepts. The art is the “counter–agent” to religion, morals, and philosophy, which alleviates a sufferer or man of action and allows him to achieve deification of pain when suffering becomes the “form of great ecstasy” [Nietzsche (1910) §794; II 239, 290–291].

In the Nietzsche’s modified version of heathenism, music and tragic myths allow standardization of the feelings and emotions and unification with the symbols of deities, morals, and fruits of imagination. The rationale might be found in the fact that people have different degrees of development of imagination. Since Plato, it is held that the knowledge (in fact, entertainment with the imaginary worlds – games of imagination) of the divine philosophers is too much sophisticated for the illiterate population: the mob needs myths and collective gatherings, during which the gregarious instinct and artificially evoked emotions facilitate mass programming. Consequently, sounds of music and spoken words of myths become more reliable means of influence, because they are more easily perceived, thus, they elicit more easily programmable response than the imaginary worlds behind silent symbols.

Normally, emotions and feelings serve survival because they evaluate/reflect sufficiency of actual abilities for the achievement of the desirable purposes, as well as the compatibility with the environment; they also mirror the inner well–being and indicate presence (or absence) of the latent processes of mental and physical decay or disintegration. The Stoic misconception (that a human being can live without sorrow and mercy) culminated in the specific cruelty that distinguished the Roman Empire and in the Nietzsche’s definition of mercy to the weak as the vice or sin with an inference that in order to become a superman, man has to discard the human morality.

However, misuse of emotions leads to bewilderment and perplexity.

Consequently, some ancient philosophers, and especially, the Stoics, began to consider emotions as the source of the evil, which should be avoided. For instance, Baruch Spinoza’s definition reiterates the Stoic contempt – he defines emotion as the passion or “a confused idea”: the understanding is the source of the power over emotions, while the inadequate knowledge produces the knowledge of evil [Spinoza IV:64; V:3,6; 211, 220–221].

Nietzsche and then, Hitler denigrated human feelings (e.g., such as mercy and compassion), yet, included emotions and ignorance (ignorance because it provides the basis on which the emotions might be unleashed and used without control of the reason) into the very fabric of the Dionysian state.

The Nietzsche’s reality (where the emotions and imagination rule) is the state of confusion and ignorance experienced by the body–matter, which has assumed the role of the ruler–reason, yet is unable to survive. This reality describes the first irreversible stage of disintegration. The musical–mythical version of the cult of death and madness replaces reason and conscience with emotions, which become the universal language of needs and insufficiency of a body–matter. Then, the Nietzsche’s musical–mythical “counter–agent”–art logically supplements the official rituals of the Dionysian state. The intensity of feelings and emotions indicates the actual inner condition and might be easily detected if the subjects are not professional comedians. At the levels of societies under the total surveillance, the ability to control subjects’ emotions facilitates the control of the subjects’ loyalty. However, in the Nietzsche’s world, loyalty means transformation into a slave, and the salve is the deprived of reason moving matter without faculty of consideration; the overall picture illustrates the Socrates’ formula: slavery is the death of reason, yet, the death of reason is the death of society.

In general, the Nietzsche’s attempt to create a new “teachings,” proclamations concerning superman, pseudo–biblical style, attachment to the arts – and obviously to the hoarse “Dionysian music” of Richard Wagner – have a shabby taste of the arena. Nevertheless, the Nietzsche’s high praise of an artistic side of superman evidently influenced Hitler who mentioned composer Richard Wagner “side by side” with Martin Luther*3* and Frederick the Great [Hitler (1940) 287]: a composer and with him the Dionysiokolax became the figures of the same importance as the ruler of the state and the father of Reformation in Germany.

Adolf Hitler accepted the idea of political control through emotions and used all means possible to awake emotions in his followers: the atmosphere of theatrical spectacle, which was the necessary component of any Nazi gathering, along with transformation of the theatrical performances into the acts of worship became the prominent features of the Hitler’s state. No one totalitarian regime before and after Nazis used music and theatrical shows to unify, entertain, and mold the mob so intensively as the Nazis did.

It looks like Adolf Hitler implemented also the opinion of Carl von Clausewitz concerning the cause of unprecedented cruelty of the French mob revealed during the eighteenth century revolution: “emotional sensitivity combined with a lack of depth” [von Clausewitz 255].

The Nazis had to exterminate all “inferior nations” to free the space and resources for the German super–race. In view of that, the Hitler’s prescription of “emotional sensitivity” combined with unreserved obedience, blind faith in the Fuehrer, and with adopted from the Inquisition methods (especially the practice to prohibit books and publicly burn the forbidden books) were expected to facilitate ultimate transformation of the Germans into the men of pray and beasts without mercy and compassion. The basis of the Hitler’s recipe includes two ingredients widely used by the mob managers since the Antiquity:

a/ circus and theatrical shows as the effective way of programming of mass conscience and fostering of the gregarious instinct

b/ artificially cultivated ignorance and superstitions.

The Nietzsche’s next forecast for the Future indicates that after “the hardest but most necessary wars,” mankind will come to the promised “tragic age... without suffering therefrom” [Nietzsche (1909) §4 194; italic in the original].

So, according to Nietzsche, after devastating wars, Nietzsche’s mankind that deifies pain and lives in pain as in the form of great ecstasy, will come to the tragic age without suffering. Mankind simply, with the sounds of music and tragic myths, would unconsciously rhythmically reproduce–terminate–reproduce–terminate own surplus, because it lives within the imaginary world of the myths and has unconscious deity–designer of suffering and death. The period of restoration of the population of inferior men (after annihilation of the unsuitable and unnecessary for the needs of the supermen part of mankind) will be followed with re–birth of the Dionysian state, which would annihilate/execute new surplus of population after consuming of their slave labor. All this with the arts – Dionysian music similar to geometrical figures and numbers along with the tragic myths – as the only alternative to the morals, ethics, religion, conscience, truth, therefore, true knowledge.

Tragedy, as well as pain, always is synonym of suffering, otherwise, there is no tragedy: the Nietzsche’s wording “tragic without suffering” is meaningless. Besides, it does not look like Nietzsche himself believes that after elimination of religion, morals, and compassion to the weakest, the meaning of suffering disappears: from his “tragico–Dionysian” state, which he sees as the necessary component of the Future, “the greatest pain may not be excluded” [Nietzsche (1910) III 291]. Evidently, he digested the von Hartmann’s ideas and envisions the Dionysian state as the instrument of torment, pain, reaching of “great ecstasy” of death, and annihilation; thus, Nietzsche indeed re–iterates the cult of madness and pain practiced by the diviners and followers of Dionysus.

The depiction of man as a being who is a physical body only, focus the rulers on the means to silence the reason and to switch the mind’s focus from God. Similarly to the Loyola’s methods of the Jesuit training, Nietzsche offers pain, thus sensory perception, as the means to silence the reason and subdue a human being to those who administer pain and suffering; then, madness and ecstasy, which pagan diviners reached through physical suffering, fill the void resulting from rejection of religion, morality, and philosophy.

Although both – Ignatius of Loyola and Friedrich Nietzsche – developed the Aristotle’s ethical speculations into the advanced means of perversion of the human nature, there is some difference:

Loyola employed self–inflicted pain as the main method of stimulating of imagination and training in unreserved obedience for the Jesuits and subjects of the papal hierarchy

Nietzsche introduced the concept of the state as the means to achieve great ecstasy of pain, which he asserted as the aim and reward for the followers of the Dionysian cult of death and madness.

The Nietzsche’s system of alteration of human nature with madness and pain–inflicted ecstasy is more advanced than the Ignatius Loyola’s exercises with self–flagellation and other austerities invented for upbringing unreservedly obedient subjects of the papal hierarchy*6*; (for instance, 1 through 3).

1. Loyola focuses on the restricted (yet international) privileged groups of the church militants, which are expected to realize the papal world dominion and to fashion the laity of all nations.

The weak links of the Loyola’s design include

a/ uncomplicated re–programmability. The beliefs and the special manner of existence assemble the Jesuits with the different racial, national, educational, and cultural background into the unit ready for execution of the papal orders. However, at any time, the beliefs, as well as the meaning of virtue and vice, as well as all other basic assumptions and interpretations of the papal will, might be changed, because the core of a human being – conscience – had been silenced and emptied for easily re–programming. However, if today they change the meaning of the faith (e.g., the Jesuit affair with the Confucianism), who can prove that tomorrow they would not change those who program them?

b/ the possibility of revolt of the human nature against the mandatory eunuch–like manner of existence. Perhaps the necessity to compensate this flaw of the original design might explain traditional tolerance of the papal hierarchy to “the sins of the flesh” committed by its members (e.g., the recent disclosure of continuous abuse of children by the Catholic priests and the cover–up by the members of the papal hierarchy).

Nietzsche selects the German nation/race as the only foundation for the development of the strongest species higher than men – the nation/race (not the set of inner beliefs) becomes the main criterion of selection.

The advantage of the Nietzsche’s design is unification through the similarity of material components of the human existence, culture, history of wars against other nations, preservation of at least some natural tides (the institute of marriage and family are needed for the maintenance of the “purity of race”) and through the appeal to the gregarious instinct, which is the more powerful the close the particular nation or establishment comes to complete transformation into the Aristotelian community of the social animals. The war as the manner of living of the Dionysian state and the following necessity of accelerated re–production of the genuine Germans might provide some explanation of the Nietzsche’s particular hatred toward sexual abstinence.

2. Loyola stimulates imagination with pain that allows him to cage the minds of his followers within the only available comforting imaginary world of the papal Inferno–Purgatory–Paradise, thus, subdue the reason to the papal will asserted as the will of God. Again, the possibility of escape exists through the return to true God

Nietzsche also employs pain, yet, in his image of man (nothing more than body), pain has to silence the reason: sensory perception becomes the only available reality. From a particular point of view, the Future of the Nietzsche’s state might be seen as the ultimate Dante’s Inferno: man must leave all expectations – there is nothing human (e.g., God, faith, morals, compassion) left, and everything is focused on physical survival/destruction and extermination of the human matter – the worn out or simply not needed people

3. The Loyola’s training demands individual instruments of self–torture, thus, it leaves at least some personal freedom as the possibility of hidden disobedience.

The Nietzsche’s design demands existence of the Dionysian state, which enforces the officially accepted public rituals of the “great ecstasy” and does not leave any personal freedom or possibility of disobedience.

Both (Nietzsche’s and Loyola’s) systems of perversion of the human nature have the similarity: both target all the earth, because the first task of the matured Dionysian state is to expand its power over all the nations, and the source of the papal declarations still is the claim on world dominion, which in the Present is covered with self–assertion of own universal mission of the unity. The Nietzsche’s plan reflects significant advancement of the methods of self–annihilation in comparison with those historically employed by the decayed societies.

The overall analysis of the Nietzsche’s Dionysian state allows the following conclusions (1 through 5).

1) The Nietzsche’s logical reality – the world, which Nietzsche built, is the contemporary version of ancient materialism mixed with the theology of destruction usually identified with the cult of Dionysus; as any reality of anti–evolution, it accommodates the irreversible processes of disintegration:

a/ disintegration of the mind – insanity; after the mind lost the image of God, thus perverted own nature, it enters the irreversible phase of disintegration or insanity: the knowledge created by such a mind conveys the patterns of own decay and attracts the minds, which are ready to undergo the similar processes

b/ disintegration of the body – construction of the Dionysian or totalitarian state, which during self–destruction attempts to destroy all other states and nations.

Nietzsche’s hatred toward religion might be easily explained with the necessity to ultimately subdue the free independent human spirit that makes possible transformation of a human being into the matter living only by the world of the matter, with all aspirations focused on the material world. Such transformation and re–focusing would fashion free man into a manageable obedient slave – the matter in motion without faculty of deliberation, or the living dead. That is why the Nietzsche’s world

– is based upon the idea of “death of gods”: the “dead gods” demand death of the free human spirit

– is the ultimate embodiment of death intended to terminate human beings.

2) The logical core within the Nietzsche’s vision of the Future includes the mixture of the remnants of Pythagorean, Stoic, and Plato–Aristotle’s philosophical–arithmetical–theological imaginary worlds/dreams. He assembled all these remnants into own “teachings,” which he – quite illogically – opposes to political theology, while they both have the same founding fathers and discernible differences between them include only

a/ cover–up: political theology uses Christianity; Nietzsche uses the myths, especially, cult of Dionysus – the deity of insanity and death

b/ wordings: political theology uses wordings borrowed from the Scriptures; Nietzsche applies the philosophical terms, language of myths, and pseudo–biblical style, which he ascribes to Zoroaster

c/ names of the main deities: political theology uses the name of God and the pope, Nietzsche invented the Superman, “tragico–Dionysian state,” etc.

d/ apparent duration: political theology had approximately eleven centuries to develop in the contemporary strategy of world dominion (starting with Origen through Augustine and finishing with Aquinas, because the Vatican/papal councils only re–iterated the main Aquinas’ assertions); the Nietzsche’s doctrine was compiled (with the ideas originated by Plato and Aristotle, their followers, and Nietzsche’s contemporaries), consumed, and harvested within a half of a century.

In general, the Nietzsche’s scheme is more business–oriented, straightforward, and rapid than the Aquinas’ design, because it does not take the time to corrupt and unnoticeably pervert the existing religious dogma and beliefs: it declares all them void and openly introduces the “new teachings.”

Although Nietzsche unifies Plato and religion into “the putrefaction” unacceptable by Dionysian man [Nietzsche (1909) §2 192; italic in the original], the Dionysian state has many similar features with the Plato’s perfect Republic: Nietzsche complemented the Plato’s dreams with the updated recommendations.

For instance, the Nietzsche’s Future prescribes improvement of mankind through the cycles, which include the following processes:

 

annihilation of the excessive population after it has produced the strongest species

restoration of surplus of population

destruction of the surplus (after it has served the purposes of “the strongest species”)
by new Dionysian state

tragic life without suffering for those who were allowed to continue existence

restoration of the surplus of population

destruction of the surplus (after it served the purposes of “the strongest species”)
by new Dionysian state…

 

All this with music and tragic myths as the substitutes for traditional religion, morality, and morals, which obviously are intended to provide the kind of narcosis (or a specific form of mental confinement). Perhaps, such narcosis is expected to prevent the constant fight among the splendid blond beasts – the strongest species higher than men – for the absolute power.

So, this is the Future, which expects Nietzsche’s mankind without God and without the morality.

Does Nietzsche’s mankind without God and without the morality deserve any Future at all?

3) Nietzsche’s self–aggrandizement has the pathological nature: evidently, he envisions himself as the deity that has deep contempt of man; this deity is capable of creation of new strongest species higher than man from the majority of inferior men who are only “piecemeal” and fragmentary examples of man allowed to believe in possibility of existence [Nietzsche (1910) §881, §895 317, 326].

Evidently, such self–aggrandizement is the Nietzsche’s method to compensate humiliations of daily life and debilitating disease, which culminated in insanity, yet, mankind had paid too much for the Nietzsche’s self–comforting delusion.

In general, the Nietzsche’s pattern of self–evaluation does not differ from the Plato’s concept of consummated divine philosopher. Both affirm the unity or at least, possibility of co–operation and co–existence of the opposites: the one and all the others, the superman and subhumans, the superior master–race and the inferior (barbarian) nations–sources of slaves and other resources. Even the division into two categories is similar:

– Plato admits the possibility of existence of two groups – the privileged elite of the slave–owners and their slaves acquired through wars under the leadership of the philosopher–warrior–king

– Nietzsche elevates the whole German nation into the rank compatible with the Plato’s slave–owning elite and asserts the right of the German race of the masters to enslave all other nations.

4) Nietzsche created own version of ideology based on the set of assumption and practical recommendations concerning modification of human nature; Nazism elaborated the Nietzsche’s theoretical speculations and arranged Germany into the embodiment of Nietzsche’s ideology.

5) Nietzsche reconciled the Plato’s vision of man with the Aristotle’s practical virtues in the following assertions, which later were fully embodied into Nazi ideology, by which the Dionysian/Nazi state lived:

– the will to achieve the end and to use the means to achieve it becomes the high morality

– virtues must be justified economically and to become the “machine–like virtues” because man must be “an infallible machine” for the state [Nietzsche (1910) §880, §888 316, 321–322; italic in the original].

 

 

Friedrich Nietzsche and Nazism

 

Nazism absorbed the most part of the Aristotelian–imperial–fascist doctrine. The difference is that the branch of nationalism, from which Nazism started, identifies the community (that originally was the Aristotle’ Polis) with the German nation–state and justifies subjugation or termination of the alien groups [e.g., in: Griffin 149–150]. It assumes the Plato–Aristotle’s division of the society into the privileged class of the slave–owners–citizens/members of the community and the slaves (e.g., the people that belong to another nation or race) that entitled to exist only for service and general utility [Nietzsche (1997) §61 43]. The Nazi modification of the Aristotle’s ‘master–→slave’ pattern recognizes the German nation as the only master and all other nations as the slaves. Consequently, the citizenship is reserved only for an individual of Nordic–German race – “a genuine German” [Hitler (1940) 600–601, 635, 658–659; italic in the original].

Nietzsche compiled many basic concepts for Nazism (and Fascism); his “teachings,” which was transformed into Nazi ideology and at least partially absorbed by Fascism, might be described with the following summarizing statements ( from 1 through 9).

1. Although a person has the feeling of responsibility, the multitude of people does not have any responsibility; thus, the crowd will do things that a person is not able to do. Such abilities of the crowd are the consequences of obedience, divided responsibilities, and patriotism. The only virtues recognized by the society are strength, power, and order: only fear of punishment restricts men. The state is the “unmorality (sic) organized,” and everything it demands from man is against the human nature [Nietzsche (1910) §716, §717 183, 184].

These assertions evidently are reminiscence of the Machiavelli’s doctrine. They shift the focus from a person to the state, which fashions and keeps its subjects in order by fear. In fact, Nietzsche prepares the completion of the Aristotle’s statement that the virtues of a citizen are not the virtues of a person, and so, provides the foundation for establishment of the contemporary version of the Plato–Aristotle’s political design.

2. The Dionysian or totalitarian state is the establishment, which

a/ modifies the nature of its components/parts – men – in accordance with own needs

b/ transforms a person into a particle of the inhumane state machine

c/ achieves own purposes by consuming own components – the human matter (that is the matter in motion, which – according to Aristotle – must serve the bodily needs of the masters)

d/ grows through enslaving of other states and subsequent consuming the resources of the subdued nations.

Mussolini interpreted the Nietzsche’s blueprint into the assertion that Fascism has the all–embracing conception of the state, which is consistent with the anti–individualistic concept of life: the Fascist state accepts an individual only when his interests coincide with the state interests; the state controls “the whole life of people” and “sums up the manifestation of the moral and intellectual life of man”– outside the state the human and spiritual values do not exist [Mussolini ref. and qtd. in: McGovern 568]

Therefore, the Mussolini’s Fascist state has two predecessors: the Plato’s perfect Republic embodied into Aristotle’s political design and the papal perfect communities described by Thomas Aquinas and improved by Ignatius of Loyola. All of them consider a person as a part of a community/polis/state, assert superiority of the common good or interests of the whole community/state over the rights and good/interests of a person, and pretend to accommodate the whole life of a person (including control of the conscience, thinking, manner of living, and reproductive function).

Alfredo Rocco supplements the Mussolini’s definition with a statement that Fascism is near the people; in conformity with its all–embracing ideals, it educates and organizes moral, political, professional, educational, cultural, and all other aspects of their life. Consequently, the Fascist state has its own morals, which it “must instill into the people,” and “must preside over and direct national activity in any field” [Rocco ref. and qtd. in: McGovern 568, 572].

The Rocco’s supplement stresses the creative function of the state: the Fascist state itself produces own subjects, arranges their life, and controls any of their activities (recall the Hegel’s puppets of the society).

Adolf Hitler provides the more practical definition of the state: the state is “a community of physically and mentally equal human beings” formed upon the principle: authority of the leader “towards below and responsibility towards above.” This organization has the purposes of “the furtherance” of human species through preservation of the race, realization of “the most sacred” right/duty of its subjects – preservation of the pure German blood, and achievement of a dominant position in the world. The German people have the mission to form such a racial state, which transcends boundaries of all other states and collects “the most valuable” racial stock of “racially primal elements” with the purpose to preserve racial superiority of the Germans and lead them to world domination [Hitler (1940) 195, 594–596, 600–601, 606, 670].

The referred definition discloses three processes ascribed to the function of the Nazi state: modeling or fashioning of the physical and mental equality that is standardizing and alteration of human beings in accordance with the state standards, control of procreation of citizens, and achievement of world dominion.

In the context of Adolf Hitler’s adherence to social Darwinism, the sterilization laws, genetic experiments, and “the laws of breeding” intended to preserve purity of German blood and to produce the race of supermen, these processes signify a practical implementation of the concept of deified state: the racial state becomes the creator of human species through the control of procreation and modification of the nature of its subjects, then, it takes the place of the highest authority of the world.

The Fascist slogan: “Nothing outside the State, nothing above the State or against the State; everything in the State and for the State” [qtd. in: Sturzo 480] adequately describes the essence of any totalitarian state – Fascist, Communist, and Nazi, which transforms itself into the center of the mankind universe, and according to the Aristotle’s political design, asserts the exclusive right on possession by its parts – persons.

However, the term “state” – even when the state gained the complete possession of its subjects – has a local meaning, therefore, restricted significance, which is not sufficient to envelop the ambitions of Nazi supermen. Consequently, Adolf Hitler introduced the new term “Aryan mankind” and re–named the Nazi Germany into “the empire that will last a thousand years.” Then, he asserted that the medieval “German Empire” participated in the “divine” government because it acted as the “God’s viceroy on earth,” and declares that the German Reich includes all Germans even those who live in other countries and are citizens of other states [Hitler (1940) 601, 666; Note in: Hitler (1940) 600].

The Hitler’s vision of the world empire embodied in one German race is the modification of the concept of man who was created as one unique being after the image and likeness of God and then, was blessed by God to populate and to possess the Earth {Genesis 1:26–28; 2:7–24}. Adolf Hitler replaced mankind with one nation; then, he would envision his empire as the ultimate embodiment of social Darwinism and the Aristotelian parasite–state: survival of one nation through consuming of all the others.

The Hitler’s interpretation of the role of the medieval Germany is intended to re–write the history and to correct the Nietzsche’s declaration that the German nobility always served “the bad instincts of the Church” and the Dr. Luther’s conclusion that the Germans became the servants to the Roman pope who intended to possess the world empire and used the hands of the Germans to deprive the others from their rightful possession [Luther 49, 94–95; Nietzsche (1911b) 227].

Adolf Hitler also was very sensitive to humiliating references to the history of the Germans, especially to the traditional portrayal of the pre–Christian Nordic–German tribes as the barbarians: it was the “unbelievable offense” because would they come to the South and receive the resources of “the inferior nations,” their slumbering Aryan “culture–formatting abilities” would become “radiant bloom” as those of the Greeks [Hitler (1940) 594].

Therefore, all what was needed for the radiant bloom of the Nordic–German–Aryan nation was the resources of the “inferior” nations. If to recall the Hitler’s favorite doctrine – social Darwinism, which generously applies its analogies with the world of animals to mankind, the Hitler’s superior German nation might be likened to an Aristotle’s Polis, which develops through consuming the resources of the neighbors (“barbarians”). Although Hitler in his speeches and writings elevated Nazi Germany at the rank of the master of the world, in fact, the Nazi state was designed after the Aristotle Polis or the parasite–state, which exists by plundering and consuming the resources of other nations–members of the mankind, enslaves the lawful owners of the plundered wealth, regulates reproduction of its slaves, and exterminates the unnecessary surplus [e.g., Aristotle Politics, Oeconomica, Magna Moralia].

It means also that nothing had been learned or accepted from Christianity during all the time, which separates the pre–Christian barbarian Nordic–German tribes from their apparently civilized descendents who diligently served the papacy and then, in the twentieth century, decided to present themselves as the super–race that has the right to plunder and destroy other nations.

The Hitler’s sensitivity to association of the ancestors of the Germans with the barbarians could have also the concealed reason: the Aristotle’s remark that “barbarian and slave are by nature one and the same” [Aristotle Politics I.2.1252b2–16], which could stain the image of the German “super–race” of the “superhumans” – “masters of the world.” However, the apparent dissociation with the barbarians did not preclude Hitler from transformation of his subjects–“masters of the world” into the Nazi state’s unreserved slaves who betrayed, murdered, and plundered according to the order of the Fuehrer, therefore, were deprived of the conscience and, as any slave (according to Socrates), of the faculty of deliberation.

3. European democracy embodies weakness: through parliamentary government and the power of the press, “cattle become masters.” Therefore, the “higher men” must wage the war with the mass population of “inferior men”: man is not different from “the meanest worm,” because the right to live, the right to work, the right to be happy do not exist [Nietzsche (1910) §753, §759, §762, §861 206, 208, 297; italic in the original]

Hitler established the tyranny of Nazi party along with the centralized rigid control over the media and attempted to arrange the Nietzsche’s sometimes irrational and contradictive assertions into the practical guide.

For instance, it is not possible to reconcile the belittlement of man (which – following the Nietzsche’s works, obviously should begin with the German race and culminate in creation of the strongest and highest species from the humiliated inferior men), with the assertions that the German race already is the master race, thus should already consist from splendid blond beasts or higher men destined to be the masters of all the others. In addition, the Nietzsche’s assertion that only the strong (the race of the Supermen) have the privilege to be independent [Nietzsche (1997) §29 22] also contradicts to unreserved obedience, which the Nazi state demanded from all its subjects, and which was the distinctive feature of the Nazi party.

Consequently, Adolf Hitler’s version of the process of belittlement has the following order: after man comprehends that his place within the state is the place of an animal within the herd, he must make the next discovery: he is not different from the worm because he does not have even the right to exist; all he has is the possibility to maintain own existence through the complete obedience and satisfactory service to the state.

To control the process of belittlement of the splendid blond beasts, Hitler asserted the cult of the German race as “the center of life,” proclaimed birth as the main confirmation of the rights on the exclusive German nationality and authority, masked the actual slavery of his subjects with such a definition of “a genuine German” citizen as “the master of the Reich,” and declared necessity of the forcefully imposed “new order” or new organization, where “the broad masses” serve “a highest intellectual leadership” and which is built on the preeminence of “the personality” (that is on dictatorship), not on the majority [Hitler (1940) 608, 635, 658–661; italic in the original].

In summary, all loud words and slogans were intended to cover the fact that a citizen–“master of the Reich” is an ordinary slave of the dictator. All these assertions formed the set of official beliefs, which Adolf Hitler and his staff imposed on the German population with the intention to build the flawless military system for the conquest of the world, which was started with the increase of the German space (occupation of the adjacent territories of France, Poland, Czechoslovakia) characterized as “one of the most important military factors” that would secure survival in the “wars of the future” [Hitler Directs…25].

The description of the desirable results of the “wars of the future” illustrates the plan of actions intended to reinforce the weak – according to the Nietzsche’s definition – European democracy. In particular, the “Greater Germany” would be a “steely core” of “an indissoluble unity” surrounded by the “indestructible block” of one hundred million people of Austria, Bohemia, and the western part of Poland, which must serve as the material foundation for the German power. The third tier would provide material, labor, and other reserves; it would include three coalitions:

a/ the Eastern Alliance of “vassal states” deprived of any military, political and economical autonomy (Poland, the Baltic States, Ukraine, Georgia, and Volga Basin)

b/ the Western Union (Holland, Flanders, and Northern France)

c/ the Northern Union (Denmark, Sweden, and Norway).

Subsequently, the German leadership would be restored in America, evidently, with the German storm troopers, whom “degenerate Yankeedom” would not overcome, and the German part of the American population would become the source of the American “political and mental resurrection.” The Latin America would serve as the place for creation of a new Germany: it has everything the Germans need, and it will be conquered with “not visible” weapons [Hitler (1940a) 4–5].

Therefore, the chase after the absolute world power culminated in the design of new political settings founded on the re–invented by Nietzsche cult of death and insanity, the notion of racial inequality of men, and dictatorship of Adolf Hitler who promised his fellow–countrymen the world dominion and possibility to enslave, rob, and consume wealth and labor of other races and, nevertheless, was democratically chosen as the state leader by the majority of the German population.

One state is missed from the Hitler’s depiction of the future of “Great Germany” – it does not provide any space for Great Britain, although one of the forerunners of the English version of Fascism – Thomas Carlyle (1795–1881; England) proclaimed: “That noble, patient, deep, pious, and solid Germany” should become the “Queen of the Continent,” or in William M. McGovern’s interpretation, the Germans would rule Europe, and England would rule the world [Thomas Carlyle ref., qtd. and interpreted in: McGovern 204].

However, it looks like England was scheduled for the ultimate extermination, perhaps, because Adolf Hitler needed no additional pretenders on the role of the world leader.

4. Nietzsche proposes the definite ways to deal with man whom he defined as “the worm”:

a/  to annihilate morality – tyranny against the human nature and reason

b/ to construct the teachings, which would strengthen the higher men, “paralyze and smash up the world–weary”

c/ to annihilate declining races and to achieve domination over the world for development of the higher type of stronger species

d/ to find the practical solution for the problem “how could one sacrifice the development of mankind in order to assist a higher species than man to come into being” [Nietzsche (1910) §859, §862 296, 297; (1997) §188 57; italic in the original].

Although Nietzsche – “the last initiated” of Dionysus the pagan god of insanity and death, and Sor María de Agreda – the Catholic nun [Colahan]*6* lived in different times and in different environment, the symptoms are the same: both applied the word “worm” toward human beings created in the image of God and after likeness of God.

There is an old belief, which has the roots in the heathen Antiquity: the ambition of woman might be inferred from man whom she envisions as her lord and master; the ambition of man could be inferred from his self–positioning against counterparts.

If Sor María de Agreda portrays herself as the “turtledove” and “dearest wife of the Most High” and subsequently serves as an advisor and counselor of the Spanish king, Nietzsche–“Superman”–“Zarathustra” has the task to determine how to sacrifice the development of mankind, thus ascribes to himself the ability to decide the destiny of mankind.

Some Catholics still desire to canonize Sor María de Agreda; Nietzsche had became one of the most influential figures in European social and political life in the beginning of the twentieth century and the object of admiration for many of those who shaped the social and scientific development in the European states; for instance, for Sigmund Freud (psychoanalysis with such discoveries as his “Oedipus” complex*8*), Max Weber (the concept of value–neutral social sciences), Andre Gide (Nobel prize in 1947), Thomas Mann, Rainer Maria Rilke, George B. Shaw, and some others who defined the Western culture of twentieth century. Such influence prompts the question: is insanity of self–deification the necessary condition for influence on the life and beliefs of the people, or only the minds already affected with mental disorder follow those with more advanced processes of mental disintegration?

The Nietzsche’s ideas of development of the strongest species were implemented

1/ by Mussolini who intended to transform Italy into the genetic laboratory for improvement of mankind

2/ by the Hitler’s state policies –“a good portion” of estimated 200,000 sterilizations made in the German medical institutions after enactment of the sterilization laws in 1933 was made due to social or political reasons [Note in: Hitler (1940) 319].

The Nietzsche’s arrangements for creation of new strongest species higher than man and deification of the power, which has been embodied into the Dionysian state – the Hitler’s Reich/Nazi Germany, lead to the following conclusions (a, b, c).

a/ As soon as for Nietzsche, man is only a body, and nothing more than a body – the matter in motion, the Nietzsche’s method of creation of new species by jumbling together piecemeal and fragments of belittled men [Nietzsche (1910) §881, §890 317, 324] re–invents the Mary Shelley’s fiction about the Frankenstein monster.

b/ The power deified by Nietzsche is the power over the matter; thus, the first task is to make a human being just a body–matter without soul and reason. Consequently, Nietzsche transforms a human being into the beast of pray, rejects religion and morality, elevates the state in a position of authority over life and death of persons, and ascribes to the state the ability to be a designer of the human nature (in continuation of the Aristotle’s concept of the Polis/state as the divine establishment).

Attachment to the power over the matter or obsession with the lust of domination is the symptom of mental disorder and indication of the inner decay/disintegration, which the mind undergoes after rejection of God. Therefore, any institution, social or political system, which embodies the lust of domination over the others, establishes new morality and morals that contradict the laws of God, because it pretends to possess the capability of improvement of the human nature through social, political, genetic, selective, or other means. Any such system or institution inevitably follows the Fascist –Nazi–communist model, which has the roots in the Aristotelian “divine” Polis; therefore, it should be considered as the means of social/state annihilation and terminated before it destroys the society where it attempts to achieve the power.

c/ The Dionysian state embodies the ultimate version of the Aristotelian state: its foundation is slavery; it is an embodiment of the self–asserted right of the minority, which appropriated the force of coercion to transform the others into the slaves and consume their lives, labor, and other possessions.

5. Nietzsche digested the speculations of his predecessors concerning superiority of German race and its historical destiny to be the master of other nations and compiled own version of the racial superiority described with

a/ pseudo–historical speculations about the Aryan conqueror–race

b/ association of nobility of the race with madness, absurd, contempt toward life, security, and “depth” of destructive desires

c/ justification of the necessity to enslave all other nations – if “the Greeks perished through their slavedom,” the German nation would perish “through the lack of slavery” [Nietzsche (1911a) 9; italic in the original]

d/ anti–Semitism

e/ dithyramb to the “splendid blond beast” or the foundation of “all noble races” – “the blond Germanic beast” the predator without conscience and feelings who raged through the history destroying “everything and covering it with blood” [Nietzsche (1998) 13, 22–23].

The documents of the Hitler’s Reich confirm that the Nietzsche’s predator –“splendid blond beast” without conscience and humane feelings – became the official Nazi state role/model for the Germans and especially for the German troops. However, the force of destruction always comes back to those who unleashed it: those who take the sword shall perish by the sword {Matthew 26:52}.

For instance, the secret directives of the Hitler’s headquarters prescribe application of the “unlimited means, even against women and children” at the occupied territories, annihilation of the captured “British commandos,” and retaliation to civilians for the military actions of guerrillas. In 1942–1945, the German troops strictly observed these directives and, for any military opposition, methodically terminated the civil population at the conquered territories. In April 1945, during the advancement of military forces of the Allies, the Hitler’s headquarters ordered the total demolition of industry, public utilities, military installation, and see harbors at the German territories. The remains of the German troops, which were formed from children, teenagers, and the aged men, were ordered to fight unto death, without retreat [Hitler Directs…5–7; Fuehrer Directives… Nr. 003830/42 I:50–51; Nr. 003132/45 II:216; Nr.3064/45 II:219]. Finally, the raging through the history “blond Germanic beasts” brought death and destruction into own cage and put under the fire own offspring.

6. The image of the power as the essence of the world and as the meaning of life along with the inference that exploitation is the “primary organic function” of the human nature [Nietzsche (1997) §259 126] became the foundation for the most inhumane social and political system, which ever existed on the Earth. This system was designed for dehumanization and belittlement of man. It began with

a/ portrayal of morality, human ideals, religion, and culture as the means to bread slaves and weaken the German race, which is destined to rule over all other nations [Nietzsche (1910) §727, §730 188, 190; (1911a) 7–8; (1911b) §4–5 30–31; (1997) §199; §202 64, 68; (1998) 23; italic in the original]:

– slavery and cruelty are the essence of culture, religion, and power

– the morality signifies undeveloped man

– the morality makes man a slave or a “domestic animal”; those who are mature attack

– the morality is the antagonistic to nature “instinct of degradation” and “death sentence” of the doomed to destruction

– the European morality is the “herding–animal morality” (among “human herds” Nietzsche mentions families, communities, tribes, peoples, states, churches)

b/ re–programming of the conscience through elimination of truth as the foundation of life and as the framework for the social, political, and cultural activities along with modification of the traditional human values into their opposites. These new values sustain, for instance [Nietzsche (1910) III 291; (1911b) §2 128; (1997) §34 26; (1998) 108–109],

– the definition of a free spirit as the spirit, which has rejected any belief in truth and follows the discovered by the Crusaders “invincible order of Assassins” for whom “nothing is true, everything is permitted”

– the declaration: the conviction that “truth is worth more than semblance” is only “a moral prejudice”

– the explanation: the meaning of good is the power, and the meaning of evil is everything derived from weakness; the greatest vice is compassion for all the weak

 Obviously, all these assertions are directed against the traditional values, which determine the meaning of humanity and differentiate a human being and the beast.

Furthermore, these proclamations are directed against God the Father of mercies, Who is the truth and perfect love and to Whom a human being worships in spirit and truth and love {John 4:24; 13:34–35; 14:15–16, 23; 17:26; 1 John 4:7–8, 16; 2 Corinthians 1:3–4}. Nietzsche substitutes the evil and merciless power for the good and compassion (perhaps, Nietzsche–“Zarathustra” decided to appropriate the authority to change the meaning of vice and virtue, which Cardinal Bellarmine (Jesuit) ascribed to his earthly deity – the Roman pope).

In general, the Nietzsche’s attempts to fight with God not only evoke sadness and pity to the insane mind, which struggles with suffering of the sick disintegrating body; they reveal the tragedy of a human being – the initially perfect world – which perverted own nature unto such a degree that became unable to love God and to live, thus, has no choice but to undergo self–annihilation.

Another interesting detail is that Nietzsche with all the remnants of disintegrating reasoning, attempts to make insanity, suffering, and death the inevitable actuality of all mankind. The same phenomenon is behind Sigmund Freud’s attempts to bestow his own “Oedipus” complex onto the entire mankind*8*.

7. The Nietzsche’s assertions that truth is non–existent thing, truth is not more valuable than deception, and the weak should be allowed to believe that they may exist [Nietzsche (1910) III, §895 291, 326; (1997) §34 26; Hitler (1940a) 3] provided the foundation for Nazi propaganda.

Adolf Hitler envisioned propaganda as the art and means of intentional deceit and manipulation by the masses, at first, by the “genuine Germans,” then, by the population of the already occupied or intended for occupation territories. Hitler knew that propaganda is not compatible with the logical thinking: it works through the appeal to emotions of the ignorant masses, not to reasonable and educated persons; therefore, it must be designed for those with the lowest level of development within the society. Hitler arranged the propagandist activities of Nazis on the assumption that the public opinion is not the consequence of individual knowledge and experience: it depends on images created by “spiritual producers” and owners of the press, which Hitler named a “machine for educating the masses.” Propaganda became “a weapon of the first order” in the struggle for attention and then, manipulation by the “great masses,” which Hitler characterized as “non–intelligentsia” with inertia and the very limited perceptive ability, non–reasonable and unable to distinguish “the wrong of the others” and their own, with such forgetfulness that only thousands of repetitions would open their memory [Hitler (1940) 108, 231–232].

The following examples illustrate the methods of Hitler’s propaganda at work; for instance, he        refers to “parasitism” of the Jewish nation, defines the Jew as a “parasite” who “eats into” the people, and whose presence leads to death of “the host people.” At the same time, Hitler declares that the slumbering Aryan “culture–formatting abilities” of the pre–Christian Nordic–German barbarian tribes would become “radiant bloom” if they come to the South and use the resources of the “inferior nations” [Hitler (1940) 196, 420, 425, 594].

Then, before occupation of Greece and other countries, the special groups were appointed for appropriation and transportation into Germany the plundered resources of the occupied territories; distribution of these resources among Germany and its allies was also determined by the special directives of the Hitler’s headquarters. After invasion, Nazi Germany began planned destruction of Greece: “especially valuable” resources were taken by Germany; the remainder was given to Bulgaria and Italy [e.g., Fuehrer Directives… Nr. 37/39 VI.II.b, 44545/41 §7 1:22, 1:171]. As the result,

– in January 1942, Greece suffered from the worst famine in her history (similarly to Ukraine in 1930s, when Stalin organized the worst famine in the history of Ukraine with the intention to terminate the population that opposed to communism [in: Trager 817])

– during the Nazi occupation, Greece lost 13% of her population; 85% of survived children had tuberculosis; more than 50% of national wealth vanished; the infrastructure was completely destroyed [in: Bitzes 165; Greece: A Summary of Background Information 1, 2].

All occupied nations shared the fate of the Greeks, and the same destiny awaited the world: the “Greater Germany” was expected to become the “steely core” resting on tires/blocks of nations, each serving the German interests [Hitler (1940a) 4–5] that is providing the German supermen with the resources needed for their “radiant bloom.”

Thus, the prosperity, cultural “radiant bloom,” and world dominion of the German nation were directly connected with plundering, robbery, and extermination of other nations. Such attitude and intentions made Nazi Germany exactly the same type of parasite whose presence lead to death of the host – occupied nation, to which Hitler referred in his insinuations concerning the Jews.

 Another example: Adolf Hitler blamed the Jews for “strictest seclusion” of their race, preservation of the pure Jewish blood, and the ability to use any knowledge for the progress of own race and for destruction of the others. According to Hitler, the racial qualities and materialism not the religion had made the Jews: the Jewish state developed as the “universally unlimited” by space, restricted by “the collectivity of a race,” and covered with “the flag of religion,” which became the guaranty of the historical “Aryan” tolerance.

At the same time, the Hitler’s very own definition of the Nazi state includes the task of protection of “the German race,” preservation of the purity of German blood, and achievement of dominion over all other nations. The Nazi state includes all Germans irrespectively of the place they lived; it must exist by consuming labor and other resources of all the conquered nations.

This theoretical definition, which mirrors all features ascribed by Hitler to the Jews, was confirmed with the sterilization and breeding laws, as well as with systematic extermination of racially “inferior” nations and plundering of the occupied states

If to analyze the history, it becomes obvious that the Nazi Germany strictly followed the portrayed by Hitler pattern of the universal unlimited state and all ascribed to the Jews deeds were, in fact, committed by Adolf Hitler, Nazi party, and Nazi Germany.

Goebbels supplemented the Hitler’s definitions with an explanation: propaganda should make the crowd to laugh during destruction of “whatever was sacred” – education, human affection, friendship, traditions [Goebbels ref. and qtd. in Note in: Hitler (1940) 233].

In general, propaganda is intended to re–program conscience, to erase the remnants of the image of God within the soul, and to transform a human being into the blind weapon of destruction. As a historical phenomenon, propaganda

a/ began with the Origen’s assertion that the undeveloped souls instead of the word of God should be fed with the images created for them by the doctors of the Church

b/ was developed by the philosophizing theologians who misinterpreted the word of God according to the needs of the papacy

c/ reached the highest (before the Hitler–Goebbels’ innovations) destructive potential in the Bolshevist version, which ruined the Russian Empire.

In general, the Hitler’s design utilized the experience of the papacy and other hunters for the phantom of the absolute power; he only slightly modified the common pattern according to his own needs: the myths of Nazi cult became the main source of images, and the role of the doctors–guardians–theologians–feeders of the undeveloped souls of the great masses was allotted to the special state structure headed by Goebbels.

Adolf Hitler determined the primary tasks of propaganda as manipulation by the masses: re–programming and fashioning of the mass conscience and enforcement of the specific patterns of thinking, acting, and social behavior. He also intended to substitute propaganda for religion, morals, and traditions, elevate ignorance and superstition to the rank of knowledge, evoke fear, hatred, cruelty, envy, and greed, and to focus them on the chosen groups or establishments, which might be a threat to his aspirations or would hinder his way to the absolute world power. For instance, Hitler promised to direct propaganda against the papal Church and then, to make the very word “Church” disgusting for the masses if the “clerical caste” would not voluntarily vanish from the political life.

Then, propaganda was expected to facilitate subjugation of the chosen groups or establishments and their transformation into the source of labor and material reserves, which would secure prosperity and wealth of the German race of supermen and facilitate annihilation of the scheduled to perish races, social groups, and nations [e.g., Hitler (1940) 231–240; Notes to pages 147–148, 231–233 in: Hitler (1940); Rhodes 172–175].

Hitler asserted that successful tactics should be based on “an exact calculation of all human weaknesses,” and physical terror against an individual and the masses. With the presupposition that even the cruelest weapons are humane when they bring the quicker victory, he defined the purposes of propaganda:

1/ to attract the prospective followers, which might be susceptible to influence

2/ to destroy the existing order

3/ to impose by force the propagated beliefs and convictions unto the entire population [Hitler (1940) 58, 230–240; (1940a) 5–6].                 

A human being might become susceptible to the poison of propaganda only at the state of irreversible corruption of the human nature. It means that propaganda influences only those who are ready for self–annihilation. Propaganda is not only the means of manipulation by the masses; it is the means of arrangement of the system of ultimate destruction. For instance, with propaganda,

a/ Bolsheviks transformed the traditionally religious Russians into the insane mobs of revolution, which demolished the Russian Empire

b/ Hitler unleashed the “splendid blond beasts” within the apparently civilized Germans, who became executioners that “purified” the German race from the Jews (and plundered their property), began systematic extermination of other “subhumans,” and ultimately, assassinated millions of human beings.

The historical facts – the destruction of the Russian Empire, the rise and destruction of Nazi Germany, and the rise and collapse of the Soviet Union – confirm that propaganda is the deadliest and most effective weapon of the national/state destruction, and then, national/state self–annihilation. This weapon works especially effectively through the groups that struggle for the power within the unstable societies with economical, social, and political problems.

Propaganda might be successful if three groups of conditions exist:

a/ moral degradation, ignorance, illiteracy, and superstitions that make truth undesirable or non–acceptable, therefore, facilitate re–programming of conscience; these conditions prepare the ground on which propaganda might be planted

b/ economical, political, social, racial, or religious conflicts, which result in social and political instability and the consequent acceptance of the force of coercion as the only effective means for social, economical, and political conciliation; these conditions divide the society into the three groups, which would provide the players for the roles of victims, executioners, and the privileged minority that would direct propaganda and use the results

c/ a person, group, or establishment capable to transform the existing state and social structures into the system for achievement of own purposes: power, enrichment, self–deification, etc.

The dangerous combinations of the conditions, on which propaganda can flourish and gather the harvest of death, already exist within the majority of contemporary societies and establishments; the preventive and defensive actions, through which freedom, thus, survival might be secured, became the matter of concern in some of them. However, the logical realities, which correspond with these societies and establishments, do not provide the adequate protection against propaganda or against other means of subjugation and destruction of independent human mind.

To be protected from the danger of propaganda and its consequences, any society, state, or establishment should prevent appearance or development of the referred above conditions: it must block any attempt of manipulation by people through deceit, lies, and corruption of morality. As it is could be inferred from the history of mankind, only one unique logical reality – the Christian Faith – accommodates the establishments unassailable for propaganda and other weapons of national and state suicide and annihilation.

For instance, propaganda might be successful if corruption, degeneration, and perversion of human nature reach the critical level, or the point of activation of the program of self–annihilation. Any human establishment includes people with some degree of perversion, yet, until the society is able to restrain the corruption at the level of an exception (e.g., one abnormal person, not the group/society) it has possibilities of survival, development, and optimization. For instance, a life–oriented society would be able to control corruption and degeneration if

1) it adheres to the main laws, which determine life of a human being: to love God with all heart, soul, and understanding and to love a neighbor as he loves himself {Matthew 22:36–40} – the comprehensive laws that must be observed by the perfect being that exists to dominate and cultivate the earth according to the universal law of perfection. Observance of the main commandments of God protects a human being from moral degradation, hatred, aggression, and envy, thus makes impossible re–programming of the conscience and crimes against humanity

2) it guards the true knowledge of God as the most precious treasure; the true knowledge of God protects a human being from ignorance and violation of the commandments of God, therefore, prevents perversion of the human nature

3) it pursues actualization of human rights and freedom as the main purpose and the meaning of existence of the state and social structures; if the state and social structures are designed for actualization of human rights and freedom, freedom does not become the object of restrictive policies

4) it is focused on the good of a person, and cultivates the human ideals and values, ethics and morality as the actual meaning of social and political activities. Within the Aristotelian perfect communities, the focus on human ideals, ethics, and morals never was the purpose of the political or social structures; their focus is survival of the whole through consuming of own parts – members, citizens, persons

5) it fosters the religious education and builds up the public education as the means to secure the safe and prosperous Present and as the most important investment in the Future. Only education that serves the evolution of the society – that is the education centered on the knowledge of God and its applications toward social, political, personal activities – protects people from the moral degradation, corruption, and perversion of the human nature.

In summary, the moral degradation and perversion of the human nature inevitably activate the program of self–annihilation of human beings and their establishments, thus make the society ready for propaganda or other means of social and political disintegration.

8. The Nietzsche proclamations of hatred toward traditional religion along with the references to the ancient Dionysian cult of death, his self–identification with “the initiated” disciple of heathen deity of insanity and death and with name of Zarathustra attracted the minds for which the true knowledge of God became unattainable.

The inability to comprehend the danger of the heathen inheritance facilitated acceptance of the heathenism as the foundation of the Nazi state and its politics.

For example, Alfred Rosenberg (the Deputy responsible for the control of ideological training of the Nazi party) compiled own version of the Nietzsche’s mythological cult. This cult reflected the beliefs in exceptional role of the “Nordic blood”; it was mixed also with ancient pagan myths and legends of the Vikings and Nordic barbarian tribes. The majority of Nazis insisted on official recognition of Rosenberg’s mythical speculations as the main ideological doctrine of the Nazi movement.

However, Hitler made his own peculiar conclusion from his own assertion that for the “great masses,” the faith is the main source of the morals. Obviously following Nietzsche’s declaration that the faith of the Christians is the instinct of “the herd” [Nietzsche (1997) §191 60], Hitler declared: the faith, in fact, is the basis of “all effectiveness,” and that those who control the faith seize the masses. Then, he negatively referred to the intention of the Catholics to identify the Catholic faith with the political party: in his opinion, it was “misuse of Christianity” and “the impudence”; then, he decided to give the Germans new faith by inventing new “myth” and propagating it “stubbornly.” Rosenberg interpreted the decision of his Fuehrer after the papal model: for a Nazi–soldier of Hitler, religion is “the faith in his Fuehrer” (as for the Loyola’s “church militant” the main deity is the pope who is entitled to such a degree of blind faith that even vice becomes virtue if the pope so desires). Consequently, the books of Rosenberg and Hitler received the status of “Nazi Bibles” [Hitler (1940) 365, 367; Notes in: Hitler (1940) 365, 643; Rosenberg ref. and qtd. in: McGovern 651].

The Rosenberg’s “teachings” confirms that Nazism is neo–heathenism [e.g., in: Lewy 151–154]; it started the controversy between the Reich and those Catholics who expected that Nazism would become the foundation for advancement of the papal faith and ultimately would actualize the substitution of Catholicism for “Jewish Bolshevism–Communism” in Russia and promote the conversion of other countries into Catholicism.

9. The hatred toward God and His laws (that are the foundation of human morality and virtues) led Nietzsche to the contradictory statements (contradictory assertions usually indicate the specific mental disorder and distorted thinking processes, which also might illustrate the influence of hatred on the ability to think rationally):

a/ the Jews are the people “born for slavery” and responsible for “inversion of valuation”

b/ the Jews – “the strongest, toughest, and purest race” – could have the supremacy over Europe

c/ Germany has too many Jews and “difficulty in disposing” of them, thus, she should shut the doors: “Let no more Jews come in!”

d/ the Jews invented Christianity as the “spiritual revenge” and began “the slave revolt in morality” because of their “truly great politics of revenge” and “secret black art”

e/ “everything is jewifying or christifying or mobifying” in the contemporary societies, yet, he (Nietzsche) never met a German who would have favorable inclination toward the Jews [Nietzsche (1997) §195, §251 63, 115–116; (1998) 16–19; italic in the original].

Obviously there is some logical inconsistency or the latest addition to the Nietzsche’s original text: how the Jews can be the people “born for slavery” and in the same time “the strongest, toughest, and purest race” that can have the supremacy over Europe? Besides, no other nation on the Earth has suffered such horrified consequences as anti–Semitism covered with the blame for crucifixion of God; so, Nietzsche obviously overestimated greatness of the “politics of revenge.”

In spite of inconsistency and irrationality of Nietzsche assertions, Adolf Hitler accepted them as the warning against possibility of the competition for the world dominion between the German and the Jewish nations and took the drastic preventive measures including the plan of total extermination of the Jewish population in Germany and in the states occupied by Germany. Obviously the two political factors – fear of competition in the struggle for world dominion and the Russian experience (the Leon Trotsky’s design of the Bolshevist revolution and Trotsky’s struggle with Stalin for the power over post–1917 Russia) – determined the Hitler’s position toward the Jews. Consequently, the Jewish influence was presented as the “disease in the body” of the Germans, which must be eradicated before “the Great German Reich” would “overcome the will of the world” [von Ribbentrop ref. and qtd. in: Trager 858–859]. After that, extermination of the Jewish nation became “the moral right,” the duty, and the means of self–preservation of the Germans [Himmler ref. and qtd. in: Rhodes 56].

The following allegations were compiled into the theoretical foundation and justification for the genocide and death camps of Nazi Germany:

a/ the Nietzsche’s reference to the religion as to the Jewish “spiritual revenge”; this assertion also facilitated spread of anti–Semitism and the intentional dissociation of Nazism with any religion incompatible with the Nazi neo–heathen mythical cult

b/ the assertions that the Jews are responsible for materialism, Marxism, Bolshevism, and Soviet Communism, that they lead all Marxist movements over the world, that they intend to destroy Germany as they destroyed Russia, and – according to Adolf Hitler – to kill Germans as they have “killed or starved about thirty million people… in part amid inhuman tortures” in Russia [Eatwell 175, 177; Rhodes 47; Hitler ref. and qtd. in: Rhodes 46–47].

Consequently, the objectives of propaganda for operation “Barbarossa” included the task to persuade the population of the Soviet Union that the enemy of Germany are “exclusively the Jewish–Bolshevist Soviet government” and Communist party, not the people of the Soviet Union: Germany intends to “free them from Soviet tyranny” [Fuehrer Directives… Nr. 144/41 of June 1941 1:180].

In general, propaganda begins with the historical or current event, which actually exists and might be confirmed. Then, after the event was ascertained or acknowledged as the truth, this truth is used as the cover–up for any false consistent with the purposes of the initiators of propaganda if this false might be by any means associated with the true event. The mixture of apparent truth, false, misinterpretation, and intentional lies compiled into the verisimilar mixture provides the basis for beliefs imposed by propaganda on the mass population. The practice to use the verisimilar assertions and misinterpret the truth according to own purposes or for justification of own assumptions, which was invented by Aristotle, developed by Philo of Alexandria, Origen, and Augustine, and elaborated by Thomas Aquinas, reaches its maximal potency in propaganda.

In the Nazi case, three assertions coincided with the reality: “the Jewish–Bolshevist Soviet government” and the Communist party did include the Jews (as well as the people of other nationalities), the atrocities of Bolsheviks–Communists did result in death and suffering of the millions, and the Communist Russia did become the nest/base for all Marxist–oriented terrorist movements over the world.

The next step was the association of the entire Jewish nation with Bolshevism/Communism: the presentation of the entire Jewish nation as commissars, executioners, and robbers of the world fostered fear and hatred toward the Jews. After negative emotions, hatred, and fear impaired abilities to think rationally, the mass population was led to the conclusion: annihilation of the Jews would liberate the world from the danger of Bolshevism/Communism.

Then, assertion of the necessity to terminate the Jewish nation, which was Hitler held responsible for the destruction of the Russian Empire and evil and atrocities of Communists, was presented as the “noble” task of the great German race to prevent spread of Marxism and Bolshevism. Consequently, the Germans were portrayed as the liberators and the friends of the nations oppressed by “the world Jewry.”

Nazi propaganda was conducted with the expectations that filling of the consciousness of the masses with the images of the noble German liberators would facilitate the fast advancement of the German army; then, appropriation or destruction of all material and human reserves, which might be used against the German troops, would prevent the organized resistance. Then, the Germans would complete enslaving of the “liberated” masses and arrange uninterrupted consuming of resources of the conquered states according to own needs.

Indeed, some parts of the population at the occupied Eastern territories with the historical traditions of anti–Semitism [Eatwell 177; Note to pages 240–241 in: Hitler (1940)] greeted the Nazi troops as the liberators and (as the majority of the population of Nazi Germany) did not oppose extermination of their neighbors–Jews. Some of them even participated in persecution of the Jews until they personally tried out the taste of Nazi “freedom.”

However, if the population of the Eastern European countries believed that “the Jews dominated soviet communism,” if the Jew Karl Marx produced Marxism, if the Jew Leon Trotsky was one of the main architects of the Bolshevist revolution and the Stalin’s competitor in the struggle for dictatorship [Femia 113; Trager 761, 792; Eatwell 177 (qtd.)], if the bolshevist–communist government and terrorist bands included the Jews or were headed by the Jewish commissars (until the Stalin’s purges of “Trotskyites”), if the Jews were among those who planned and unleashed the Bolshevist propaganda and carried the terrorist actions before and after 1917, – do all these facts justify the Hitler’s vision of all Jews as the carriers of the communist threat against Germany and the entire world, thus, do all these facts justify the necessity of total extermination of the Jewish race?

This particular historical example illustrates the logic of thinking, which should be typical for the Aristotelian framework; for instance, if man is a part and property of the whole (e.g., community, nation), the whole must be blamed for the crimes of one of its members. However, if to apply the same – Aristotelian – logic of thinking to its carriers, predecessors, and the accompanying historical facts

a/ all the papal hierarchy should be burned alive for atrocities of the Inquisition and the Crusades

b/ all the Catholics should be deprived of their property and sent to exile or even executed along with the papal hierarchy

– for the centuries of persecution and robbery of the Jews and those who refused to convert into the Catholicism and assassination of those who after the forceful conversion attempted to keep their religious and other traditions

– for corroboration with the papal Inquisition

– for transformation into unreservedly obedient slaves with re–programmable conscience and ability to see vice as a virtue if the superior “universal teacher”–pope so commands

c/ the whole German race should be exterminated for the centuries of military aggression and wars with their neighbors and especially for their service to – in accordance with the Nietzsche’s definitions – “the bad instincts” of the papacy

d/ all mankind should be exterminated because the perfect Earth became the cursed ground for the deeds of man: death and suffering define the meaning of destiny for humans and animals.

This imaginary example illustrates the destructive potential of the Aristotelian framework: that what begins with dehumanization of man logically should be completed with annihilation of mankind.

Researchers offer different opinions concerning the causes of Hitler’s pathological hatred toward the Jewish nation and the phenomenon of anti–Semitism, which flooded Germany and other states under the Nazi and Fascist influence. Perhaps the actual roots of anti–Semitism might be determined if – in addition to the referred above political factors – to consider the following facts (1 through 4).

1. Through the Jewish nation, all the world received The Ten Commandments, Christianity, and such examples of the loyalty to God and spiritual invincibility as the holy martyrs from the Book of Maccabees – Eleazar the teacher of the Law, the mother with seven children, and the others {2 Maccabees 6:1–4, 18–28; 7:1–41}. The moral ideals of The Ten Commandments, loyalty to God, and Christianity are incompatible with the Catholicism, Nazism, and other “isms,” which substitute

 

idols for God

corruption for the morality

slavery–death of reason for freedom of thinking.

 

The Ten Commandments and the Christian teachings describe a human being who lives according to the nature created by God in His image and after His likeness; they establish the morality of a normal human being. The faith, love to all creations of God, benevolence, morality, and freedom of the spirit are the meaning of nature, or the innate features of a human being who carries the image of God. At the same time, these features were the main obstacles for transformation of the German race into the splendid blond beasts of pray – “supermen” who consider the morality, and especially mercy, as the source of all weaknesses, therefore, the vice. In view of that, Nietzsche advised his followers (and the Nazis diligently implemented his recommendation): the human morality had to be exterminated along with its carriers.

2. The status of the chosen nation of God and the Nietzsche’s warning that the Jews would have the supremacy over Europe obstructed the propagation of the image of German “super–race” (whose ancestors traditionally were portrayed as the barbarian tribes with barbarous cults and customs) and downgraded the “Aryans” at the level of all other races, perhaps, even at the level of the least civilized nations. For Adolf Hitler, the Jewish nation was the main competitor, and his policy of genocide was the logical inference from social Darwinism.

3. For the Hitler’s purposes of world dominion, the human ideals of Judaism and Christianity were the greatest obstacle, which could impede enslaving, plundering, and extermination of the “inferior” nations. Thus, those who had received and kept The Ten Commandments – the foundation of Judaism and the root of Christianity – had to be recognized as the worst enemies of the Nazi Germany and all other nations. Then, according to the Hitler’s plan, the criteria for evaluation of racial purity and moral and cultural development had to be modified in their opposites, and the Jews – along with the moral and human ideals – had to be slandered and besmeared in such a degree, which would make impossible the very idea of competition between the Jews and the Germans.

The European population already acquired the habit to discard the human rights of the Jews during the centuries of atrocities of the Inquisition. Such papal policies as deprivation of property and exile of those who refused to convert into the Catholicism, the yellow marks on the Jew’s clothing, and the pyres of Jewish books also were well known part of the life for the European Catholic communities: the deeds of the papal hierarchy prepared the foundation for the Hitler’s plan to exterminate the Jews as the “inferior” nation of “subhumans.”

Then, by association of Christianity with Judaism and especially, by presentation of Christianity as the spiritual revenge of the Jews, the Christian teachings would be easily besmeared, perverted, and eliminated from the life of the Nazi supermen and their slaves: the ultimate freedom of Christianity was the Hitler’s worst enemy and the next target, which Hitler attempted to hunt with the exposure of the Jewish roots of Christianity.                          

4. The Nazis opened the first concentration camp at Dachau on March 20, 1933, after Adolf Hitler became the chancellor and, then dictator of German Reich, and the camp of death was intended not only for the Jews: its contingent included also the Gypsies, political opponents, and the other “unfit” persons [Trager 818]. Then, the Czechs (whom Hitler blamed for the process of de–Germanization and for resistance to anti–religious and national policies of the Nazi state) and the Bohemians (mostly for keeping the Hussites traditions and independent spirit) were scheduled to “get out of Central Europe” and to be transported to reservations in Siberia and other parts of Russia [Hitler (1940a) 3; (1940) 139–140].

Consequently, it might be concluded:

1/ anti–Semitism was the initial stage of the Hitler’s plan to achieve the world domination by creation of the ultimate weapon of annihilation – cultivating the race of the beast of pray without God and without the morality. Christianity and especially The Ten Commandments, which describe the true human nature, were the main targets because the Christian teachings, and especially The Ten Commandments as its roots, were the main obstacle for the Nietzsche–Hitler’s re–design of the mankind. Would mankind receive The Ten Commandments through another nation, not through the Jews, this other nation would take the place of the Jews in the German concentration camps

2/ Hitler’s anti–Semitism has to be considered as the general model of actions toward all other “inferior” and “declining” races that according to the Nietzsche’s plan of development of the strongest species have to be eliminated: anti–Semitism was just the beginning or the general rehearsal. The European states and societies could recognize the forewarning, yet, they believed that their fate would be different if the Nazi “splendid blond beasts” feed themselves with the small nations without the sufficient means for self–defense. Their choice and the consequent tolerance of extermination of the Jews, Gypsies, and other victims of the Dionysian–Nazi state during almost six years (1933–1939, starting with election of Adolf Hitler as the German chancellor and until the beginning of World War II) were incompatible with Christianity and with the true knowledge of God, although the majority of the peoples living in these states believed that they are the Christians. For instance, in 1938, the home ground of the papal church of Rome – Italy with the Catholics as the majority of population – enacted the anti–Jewish legislation [Trager 853].

As usual, tolerance to the crimes signifies those who are ready to act similarly, thus, would suffer the similar destiny. Ultimately, for the non–Christian and unethical decisions of the European governments and for the blessings, which the papal clergy poured out onto Adolf Hitler and his party, mankind paid with lives of 14 millions of “racial inferiors” and 54.8 million people from 57 nations – participants and victims of World War II [estimated, in: Trager 893, 894].

The inconceivable part of the tragedy of Nazism and World War II is that Adolf Hitler and his staff never completely disguised their intentions and ultimate purposes and the Future could be predicted if only the people in the position of power and influence undertake the task to analyze the Hitler’s own writings and speeches, as well as the inheritance of the Hitler’s spiritual guide – Nietzsche.

Indeed, Mein Kampf, Nazi slogans, official announcements, and private conversations of Adolf Hitler convey the definiteness of death ready to be embodied into the global slaughterhouse for the social animals who are classified by the degrees of their inferiority in comparison with the super–race of the beasts of pray.

From another angle of consideration, it should not be forgotten that the mind has to lose any ability of reasoning and foresight before it would become able to accept the world and the Future offered by Nazism, Fascism, or any other “isms” constructed on the assumption of superiority of one and inferiority of the others. It means that if the society or a particular social/political group tolerates insanity of such means of destruction and self–annihilation as, for instance, Nazism, this society/group is not normal.

In conclusion, Fascism and Nazism (as well as Communism) did not emerge on the empty space or through imagination of Dionysiokolax, the self–proclaimed “initiated” of the Dionysian rites:

 

they began with the Aristotelian ‘master–→slave’ pattern
and the concept of social animal–man as a property of the Polis/community/state

they absorbed the arrangement of the Plato–Aristotle’s utopias
where men and women were transformed into the slaves
who have no right to mate without their master’s permission
and whose children could be assassinated
because they were unfit to the master’s requirements
or born without the master’s approval

they assumed inheritance of the chambers of torture and the stakes of the Inquisition,
absorbed centuries of the papal struggle for absolute power and world dominion,
which advanced through enslaving and corruption of the unreservedly obedient subjects

they assimilated the rich experience
accumulated by the papal hierarchy and papal subject
during the centuries of deprivation of property and persecutions
of the different–minded and the Jews that refused to convert into the Catholicism

they assumed the all–permissiveness of the perverted imagination
of the followers of Ignatius of Loyola obsessed with
self–tortures and blasphemies against Lord God Jesus Christ.

 

From another angle of consideration, the Hitler’s contemporaries had the very difficult task to discriminate truth and false in the writings and speeches, where the truth and the false were incorporated into the verisimilar mixture with which Hitler intended to distract logical thinking, evoke the destructive emotions of fear, hatred, envy, and wrath, and prepare his audience for the determined by him actions.

For instance, Adolf Hitler rightly noticed that Marxism assembled the most destructive and most poisonous “elements” and accumulated them into “a gradually decomposing world.” Another true assertion was the reference to Karl Marx as “the only one among millions” who was able to amass all poison into the “concentrated solution” intended for destruction of the independent free nations worldwide. Then, Hitler ascribed own intentions to the Jews and employed another argument, which led his audience to the conclusion about the necessity and historical mission of the German nation to exterminate the Jews for the sake of preservation of the world. In particular, he proclaimed that the international Marxism is the plot to transfer the world dominion into “the hands of Jewry” [Hitler (1940) 578–579; italic in the original], while himself intended to conquer the whole world and make it serve the needs of the German “supermen.”

Therefore, Adolf Hitler uses the old methods of the verisimilar mixture similarly to those employed, for instance, by Thomas Aquinas who intentionally misinterpreted the Holy Scriptures. However, as soon as Hitler has to deal with the “great masses,” the medieval scholasticism is not enough, and he has to modify the old techniques and to supplement them with the drastic appeal to “the unconscious” that is simply to evoke the emotions, which would impair judgment or even disrupt the work of the reasoning. Hitler assembles his construction with the obviously true statements, which persuade his audience in his sincerity and evoke fear and hatred; the belief in truth of some of his initial arguments and uncontrollable emotions (uncontrollable because of fear) make the false of his following assertions unnoticeable or indiscernible.

As it could be inferred from the history, this trick worked successfully, although there is no apparent direct connection between Marxism and Judaism. Although the parents of Karl Marx were the Jews who converted into Protestantism, Karl Marx received the traditional Lutheran upbringing of many “Aryans” (e.g., similar to Nietzsche’s upbringing). The Marx’ philosophical speculations absorbed doctrines of Aristotle, remnants of Persian dualism, logic of Hegel, and other inhumane concepts employed or compiled by the non–Jews (also similar to those employed by Nietzsche). The simplest analysis of Marxism might reveal its absolute incompatibility with the God–centered reality of the original Judaism.

In particular, Marxism, as Nazism, is the derivative of the Hegel’s logic (that is the German – or the “Aryan” as the descendants of the Nordic–German barbarian tribes preferred to refer to themselves – creation) amassed with the ancient Greek atheism and materialism, the Aristotelian logic, the concept of struggle and unity of the opposites, and other misconceptions accommodated during the centuries within the logical reality of disintegration/anti–evolution. Marxism (especially if evaluate its contents with its ultimate embodiment – the Soviet state) had absorbed many concepts and notions, which Nazis and Fascists used to justify own actions and which were created and committed by the non–Jews. For instance, the Marx’ speculations have the links with

1/ the Plato–Aristotle’s utopia and the Aristotle’s “divine” state

2/ Aristotle–Aquinas political theology

3/ the theoretical foundation of the Inquisition (especially the Augustine’s political ideas, e.g., such as possession with property and other rights should be correlated with the religious beliefs; the non–Christians do not deserve justice and might be deprived of their rights). Marxism changed the meaning of beliefs, and allotted the place of those who for the Catholics were “non–Christians” to the social class of owners condemned to elimination

4/ the described and theoretically justified by Thomas Aquinas and other papal theologians “perfect” communities, whose members sacrificed human beings for the sake of the papal “common good,” believed that the death penalty for the different–minded is the inference from the Law of God, committed massacres, robberies, and other crimes against humanity – all in accordance with the orders of their superiors

5/ deification and the cult of the Roman pope arranged similarly to the cult of the Roman emperors

6/ the Jesuitism of Ignatius of Loyola

7/ the Machiavellian “political science”

8/ the Hegel’s logic and heathen mythical construction of the deified state – embodiment of the “world spirit”

9/ the notions of permissibility of modification of the human nature, elimination of religion, morality, freedom of conscience, forceful deportation and elimination of the national minorities

10/ and many other products of the decayed or completely insane human minds that

– rejected true knowledge of God

– downgraded own brethren at the level of the human chattel/moving matter without the soul and reason

– buried themselves in the heathen imaginary worlds

– and, as a result, became unable to discern the good and the evil, thus, to foresee the consequences of own figments of imagination.

Nazism has the common ground not only with Fascism; Nazism is much closer to Marxism than any other set of concepts produced by political philosophy, especially in its reliance on “the great masses,” dictatorship, treatment of the property of the others, concept of “the nobility of creative labor,” and regulation of labor and capital. If to substitute the Nazi “race” for the Marxist “class” or for the Fascist “state/empire,” the similarity would become evident. In fact, Nazism should take its historical place as another branch of Marxism, perhaps, at the same level as Communism:

– Marxism had supplied its version of the updated theoretical basis for destruction of freedom and dehumanization of man and the right of one group/class to decide the destiny of all the others

– Nazism and Communism had actualized the worst theoretical assumption ever created by insanity of death: appropriation of the right to decide the destiny of other nations and the right to assassinate human beings for their race, nationality, political and religious beliefs.

All three ideologies have the same core: Plato–Aristotle’s political design. For instance, Philip Sherrard refers to the concept, which sustains the Plato’s Republic, as to “an idealized and despotic form of communism” [Sherrard (1978) 80]. Irwin Edman infers that the Platonic state completely denies equality and freedom; he finds similarity between the Plato’s utopia and the Fascist state, as well as between the Plato’s contempt to democracy and ordinary men and the Nietzsche–Nazi’s concept of the superman [Edman 139–143]. 

The referred above examples illustrate only some results of almost literal absorption of the Aristotle’s political design by Communist, Fascist, and Nazi ideologies. However, the apparent consequences, such as the particular conviction in own right to murder, enslave, rob, and humiliate the other, are just a top of an iceberg. Another group of the consequences includes influence on the mind.

Heathen philosophy developed the path to the destruction of the intellect–reason–intelligence through an assertion of slavery as the natural order of the Universe, assertion of insanity of diviners as the gift of gods, and admission of the figments of imagination as the reliable sources of theological and philosophical concepts; it became the philosophy of death because it justifies degeneration of man through his transformation from the creation of God and the measure of existing things into the animal–property–slave of his own establishment; consequently, it corrupts everything it touches.

In summary, it might be concluded: Marxism, Fascism, Nazism, and Communism are the similar weapons of destruction created by the human reason that serves the anti–evolution; they all

1/ reject God and accept the figment of human imagination – the image of absolute power over the world embodied into a particular part of mankind (always only a part because the imaginary world of absolute power consists from the unity of the opposites, which do not exist without each other: the ruling privileged power–bearing establishment/race/group and the masses or all the others deprived of power and consequently, from any freedom to build own life in conformity with own purposes and preferences), which might offer the specific person/group/idea as the subject of worship, or to hide this person, group, or idea behind the façade of establishment, society, state, etc., and impose on human beings the duty to die for the sake of this deified image

2/ are the analogous versions of neo–heathenism, or new cults, with which the prepared for annihilation beings construct the means of suicide

3/ downgrade man at the level of the matter in motion without the faculty of deliberation

4/ exist by consuming lives of ordinary people for the sake of survival of the privileged groups/establishments and result in death and destruction of all who are within their reach

5/ compile the sets of false assertions and misrepresentations, ascribe the status of prophetic revelations to delusion of the insane imagination, and assert them as the absolute truth

6/ have the similar arrangement, described by Roger Eatwell as the classic Fascist style: the mass party led by deified (or charismatic) leader(s) and extensive use of propaganda [Eatwell 181] that is deceit and lies

7/ develop on the basis of social, political, and economical conflicts, difficulties, and – until they reach the power over all the state structures – provoke and trigger off the social instability

8/ differ only with the wordings in which they envelop their destructive essence:

 

Fascism concentrates on the idea of the world empire –
the state–empire becomes the main deity, subdues all other states,
and determines the destiny of all the subjects;
consequently, the cult of empire and imperial culture
become the main points of unification, not racial or even national definitions
(for instance, according to Roger Eatwell, many Italian Jews “joined or supported the Fascist party” [Eatwell 176]
while Nazism led the Crusade against the Jews)

||

Nazism embodies the cult of one race –
the deified race of supermen conquers the world and then,
controls and determines destiny of all “inferior” races of “subhumans”

||

Communism embodies the cult of one party;
the Communist–Marxist party obtains the world dominion
and determines destiny of all the opponents and “enemies of proletariat.”

 

Fascism, Nazism, and Communism have the same source of origin – Plato’s Republic, similar arrangement – after the Aristotle’s Polis, and the similar core – the political religion, which has the root in heresy of Origen: the minority–elite produces and spreads the images for the majority–masses, arranges them into the establishment with the means of propaganda and with the force of coercion, and uses their destructive potential to obtain the access to the force of coercion.

 

 

Conclusive Remarks

 

In summary, all Nietzsche’s declarations reveal the logic of death – the logic of anti–evolution, in which the evil takes the place of the good, and death becomes the main deity and the only reality of existence:

 

if the truth is the being, the truth is not compatible with the cult of death and annihilation;
therefore, there must be no truth, only myths are permitted to exist

when there is no truth, there is no possibility to discern the good and the evil;
thus everything is permitted

if everything is permitted, the power becomes the only driving force;
thus all the weak must be either annihilated or enslaved to serve the needs of the power
those worn out must be periodically replaced with new “surplus”

if compassion contradicts the needs of the power,
it is unacceptable

if everything is permitted, the spiritual freedom becomes the freedom
to assassinate the others and to apprehend their possessions.

 

Eventually, Nietzsche’s “teachings” would transform man (and the German super–race), into a cannibal who freely, according to his nature (that is with unconscious impulses and instincts improved by the Dionysian state) feeds himself with the flesh of his counterparts and victims–inferior men. Such a transformation is the ultimate completion of the Aristotle’s concept of man as a social animal–property of the perfect community and the triumph of death: the slaughterhouse, which humans invented for killing of animals, becomes ready to be used for annihilation of humans. This inference has the practical confirmation: the concentration camps in which Nazi Germany assassinated millions of human beings for their race, religion, and manner of thinking.

Each human soul has a special mission to accomplish during lifetime; sometimes, it is the mission of the optimization–evolution; sometimes it is the mission of destruction. From such a point of view, the Nietzsche’s life and works serve both purposes – survival and self–annihilation – by providing

1/ the means of self–annihilation for those who accept the Nietzsche’s concepts as the guidance for actions

2/ one more alarming appeal to the human reason and the reminder that with a rejection of God, human beings reject own dignity, sanity, and life and become ready for the slaughterhouses, death camps, and the evil and Inferno of such singularities of void as the value–neutral and ethics–free sciences.

The history confirms the danger of the perverted human imagination, which results in heresy, nihilism, or atheism. In this context, Nietzsche has achieved the most tragic purpose that has the great significance for all those who are able to think: his works vividly illustrate the unbreakable links between rejection of God and death, between the heathenism and inevitable self–annihilation, between perverted imagination of one and death of many, between the evil thoughts of one (e.g., “my old, beloved – evil thoughts” [Nietzsche (1997) §296 147; italic in the original]) and such global disaster, for instance, as World War II waged by Nazi Germany in a pursuit of the world dominion.

However, the force of destruction unleashed by the “old, beloved – evil thoughts” came back to those who employed it: the world transformed World War II into destruction of Nazi Germany who finally had to taste the dish she prepared for the others – the loss of the state independence and dignity – while she during almost forty–five years (1945–1990) was divided between the Allies and her worst enemy – Communist Russia. Would the tragedy of the German nation always serve as the warning for the next candidates for the supermen, race of the masters, and world empire, or, as many other catastrophes, which compose the history of mankind, it would be forgotten soon?

In summary, Fascism, Nazism, and Communism sprang from one small seed of the evil: the assumption that man is an animal and property of his own establishment, therefore a slave, because slavery is the divinely established order of the Universe, and the polis/state is the divine arrangement. This assumption became the ground for deification of one man or one group and belittlement and humiliation of all the others that were transformed into the means of bodily service to the deified state/polis leader/elite. This assumption could exist only within the irrational reality of the heathenism that has no true knowledge of God, denies existence of God within each man, and covers the void of evil with the artificial imaginary worlds, which camouflage the inevitable processes of self–annihilation with the images and fantasies conceived with perverted imagination, and promise life, freedom, and happiness to those who are led to the slaughterhouse to be slaughtered and consumed for the sake of survival and prosperity of their masters.

The history of mankind confirms that in each generation new mussolinis/hitlers/stalins arise, perhaps because each new generation has to pass its own tests, and the first of them is the loyalty to God. The next test is the ability to discern the good and the evil. Then, the abilities to think, to comprehend the reality, to foresee the Future, and to act adequately must be proved if those who undergo the tests intend to survive and serve God: achieve the state of perfection and accomplish the purposes of evolution. Those who reject God become unable to discern and distinguish the good and the evil; they lose the ability to foresee the consequences of own thoughts, words, and deeds. Consequently, they pronounce own death–sentence and produce the weapon of suicide: new versions of the cult of death masked with the scientific terms and slogans, and own executioners – mussolinis, hitlers, stalins, deified “universal teachers,” great leaders, and so on and so forth.

People, at last, should come to the understanding that the rulers and leaders, in fact, are the servants of the people {Matthew 23:10–11; Mark 10:42–45} and should be treated as such; for instance, dismissed or replaced when their performance is not adequate to the purposes of evolution and the political systems they lead begin to suppress the freedom and human rights of citizens. All remnants of the insanity of self–deification including the right of the one to deprive the many of freedom, life, and happiness must be eliminated from the actuality of human societies. Any possibility for the political criminals to maintain ignorance, illiteracy, and poverty of the population and to cultivate social, racial, and political conflicts must be eliminated. Otherwise, no one society, state, or other establishment might discard the danger of updated versions of Fascism, Nazism, Communism, and other offspring of the heathenism.

The contemporary versions of Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, etc., still cherish the dreams of absolute power and world dominion: in the beginning of the twenty–first century, only a form, or updated wordings, or just another name (e.g., terrorism instead of Bolshevism), differentiate new embodiments of the same destructive pattern, and no one nation is protected against the plague of inhumanity.

Quite illogically, yet, there is some constancy within the vicious circles of the anti–evolution: new generations perform either the role of victim or the role of executioner according to the degree of own decay and the material reserves left in its discretion: those with the access to the force of coercion exterminate those who are weaker.

The history of mankind does not sustain the expectation that the reality of anti–evolution would ever become the Past; it comes to life again and again and again, because the repetitive choice between life and death is the inseparable part of existence in the material world. The problem is how to determine the choice made by a particular mind, thus, the threat, which this mind poses to the others. Probably, after three–thousand–year history of human misconceptions and their deadly consequences, the time came when the degree of development of a human being should be determined by the attitude and actions toward the freedom of all the others: persons, social groups, and nations.

The main factor, which should be taken into consideration, is the inheritance of the heathenism, especially Greek heathen philosophy, as the producer of the destructive systems of false beliefs, which ruined many empires, states, social and other establishments and harvested suffering and untimely death of their creators, subjects or followers, and opponents. The imaginary world of philosophical games set up and sustained the nightmares of the culture, which equates man with animals, allows inhumane extermination of people and animals, tolerates and even demands human sacrifices and execution of different–minded thinkers.

Four catastrophic (by their consequences for mankind) events have roots in Greek heathen philosophy and theology:

1/ Augustine’s leaps of imagination with such practical results as Compelle Intrare

2/ Aquinas’ political theology

3/ the Nietzsche’s “morality,” which facilitated official recognition and practical implementation of the neo–heathenism and its embodiments, e.g., such as Nazism

4/ the totalitarian states of the twentieth century; for instance, Alfredo Rocco (1875–1935, a legal expert and Minister of Justice in Fascist Italy), envisioned Fascism as a successor of the organic state founded on the Plato, Aristotle, and Machiavelli’s doctrines [Alfredo Rocco ref. in: Eatwell 180].

Continuing fascination with Nietzsche’s doctrine and widening neo–Nazi movements prove that the contemporary societies, which are fashioned or influenced by the Aquinas’ political theology, have no protection against the heathenism.

Nietzsche’s doctrine not only contributed into the foundation on which the Nazi ideology evolved and Nazi Germany state was built; it provides the last warning concerning the current destructive potency of the heathenism… 

 

 

===================================================

 

Notes:

 

*1* Friedrich Nietzsche is a son of the Lutheran minister; his family and he had developed social and cultural connections. For instance, Nietzsche was a friend of composer Richard Wagner (Nietzsche dedicated to Wagner his work The Birth of Tragedy, 1871); the husband of his sister Elisabeth was a founder of a German colony in Paraguay. His sister Elisabeth’s correspondence with Mussolini confirms that she has ties with Fascist circles. There is also a photo of her with Adolf Hitler who especially came in Weimar to celebrate her birthday.

Friedrich Nietzsche received initial education in the Schulpforta, the Protestant boarding school, and began studies at the University of Bonn. Then, Nietzsche was offered the chair in classical philology, at the University of Basel; then, the University of Leipzig awarded him with doctorate. In 1889, Nietzsche has the first mental collapse. Then, he lived in asylum, then, his mother cared for him until her death, and then his sister cared for him until his death, in 1900.

 

*2* see Doctrine of Thomas Aquinas, Folder Philosophy, Page_7, and Folder Political Theology.

 

*3*  Doctor Martin Luther began as the papal theologian; however, he refers to Aristotle as “a plague” for the sins of men, and he was able to discern the work of “the evil spirit” behind the Aristotelian works, which for the Catholic theologians “suppressed” the Scriptures [Luther 86–87].

In the beginning of the sixteenth century, German Catholic theologian Dr. Martin Luther of the Order of Monks at Wittenberg proclaimed that the Roman pope is against Christ and exists “to ruin and destroy the existence and will of Christ” [Luther 56–57].

it should be some rationale behinds the reasons, which forced

– Dr. Martin Luther, the learned theologian and member of the papal hierarchy, to rebel against the Roman pope, therefore (according to the papal dogma), to commit the mortal sin of disobedience and forfeit eternal salvation of own soul

– Dr. Martin Luther to rebel against the indulgencies through which the papal hierarchy exercises its “absolute” power over the souls and money of the believers (The papacy asserted that the papal clergy can free the soul from the Purgatory: pay money, buy the indulgence, and a Catholic priest will let the soul of the sinner to have vacations from the suffering in the Purgatory, which the papal diviners discovered somewhere at the middle stage between the Earth and the Paradise. This assertion became the article of papal faith [Baybrook 262–274, 426; Luther Ninety–five Theses §§21–28, 35, 49, 50, 82–85  12–14, 17]. Sale of the indulgences is based on the sacrilegious assertion that decisions of papal clergymen made for money, which they obtain from the sinners, supplant the judgment of God.)

– the Germans of the sixteenth century to reject the papacy, which as they believe, is the institution of their ancestors (during the eighth–ninth centuries the papacy became, as some researchers assert [e.g., Romanides], the Frankish institution, with the German tribe as the component of the Franks).

As it could be inferred from the Dr. Martin Luther’s writings, it happened because

a/ while the Germans expected to become the lords, they became the servants to the Roman pope who appropriated the real authority, took “unlawful possession of all German foundations,” and sold them to the non–Germans without any profit for Germany

b/ by the hands of the Germans, the Roman pope had taken from the Roman Emperor in Constantinople “what he had no right to” take (Dr. Luther refers to the Latin empire, which the Roman pope established on the ruins of the Christian Churches pillaged and destroyed by the Catholic Crusaders)

c/ the Roman pope sought to give the empire to himself, not to Germans, and to control the whole world through the Germans [Luther 49, 94–95].

Yet, according to the pope Innocent III, the Apostolic See already had “transferred the Empire from the Greeks to the Germans in the person of Charles the Great” [The statement of the Papal Claim by Innocent III, March 1202, in: Documents of the Christian Church 123].

Dr. Luther’s reformation had profound influence on the European countries, which used the Reformation to freed themselves from the papal authority. For instance, Russian tsar Peter I eulogized Dr. Luther for the Reformation as for the possibility for the German rulers to gain independence from the authority of the Roman pope. He evaluated Dr. Martin Luther’ role: “he was of great use to many princes who were cleverer than the rest” [Peter I qtd. in: Cracraft 25]. The praise also reveals tsar’s understanding of the intelligence of the ruler: the religious turmoil might be beneficial for those who are clever enough to use it for own advantage. From such an inference, it is only one step to the assumption that the “clever prince” can himself organize the religious turmoil (e.g., the Church reforms) if he considers it useful for his purposes.

Could, then, it be concluded that the material considerations and, in particular, the unfulfilled expectations of the imperial power over the world, are the actual causes of the Reformation in Germany? If so, the West Schism demonstrates one more failure of the papacy to achieve its main goals (absolute secular and absolute spiritual authority) and its inability to establish the common good of the papal hierarchical church as the main priority (higher than the national interests) for all papal subjects.

Therefore, despite the claims on own exclusive deified status, the papacy had to fight for the power and wealth with own subjects as any worldly institution, and had to suffer defeat and rejection as any other men’s establishment does. The papacy was not able to obtain the absolute power over the minds of its subjects, starting with the members of own hierarchy, such as Dr. Luther and his followers: the clerics, the “temporal lords” – German princes and vassals of the pope, and laymen. Ultimately, the Germans for the sake of the national interests (the common good of Germany) rejected the common good of the papacy along with the papacy itself. 

From such a point of view, Nazism might be seen as the continuation of the national movement that in fact, pursued the same old dream of the domination over the world, promised by the papacy to the Germans centuries ago [e.g., Luther 92–95].

 

*4* Theologians Henry of Susa (1271) and Jean d’Andre (1348) asserted that the papal law to burn people at the stake was sanctioned by “the law of Christ” [ref. in: Vacandard 128]. See Doctrine of Thomas Aquinas, Folder Philosophy, Page_7.

 

*5* Concerning “papal “deprivitized” theology, see Introduction to Political Theology, Folder Political Theology, Page_1.

 

*6* See The Church Militants, Folder Political Theology, Page_3.

 

*7* See Works of Origen, Folder Philosophy, Page_5.

 

*8* See Works of Philo of Alexandria, Folder Philosophy, Page_4, esp. Note 5.

 

 

==================================================

 

References:

 

Allison, C. FitzSimons. The Cruelty of Heresy: An Affirmation of Christian Orthodoxy. Harrisburg, Philadelphia: Morehouse, 1994.

Aristotle. "The Magna Moralia." The Metaphysics. v.2. With an English Translation by G. Cyril Armstrong. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann, 1935. 425–685. 2 vols.

Aristotle. "The Oeconomica." The Metaphysics. v.2. With an English Translation by G. Cyril Armstrong. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann, 1935. 321–424. 2 vols.

Aristotle. Politics. Trans. Ernest Baker. Revised with an Introduction and Notes by R.F. Stalley. Oxford, England:  Oxford University Press, 1995.

Baybrook, Gar. Heresies of the Christian Church. Payson, Arizona: Leaves of Autumn Books, 1998.

Bevan, Edwyn Robert. Sibyls and Seers: A Survey of Some Ancient Theories of Revelation and Inspiration. Norwood, Philadelphia: Norwood Editions, 1977.

Bitzes, John G. Greece in World War II to April 1941. 1982. Manhattan, Kansas:  Sunflower University Press, 1989.

Brock, Werner. An Introduction to Contemporary German Philosophy. London: Cambridge at the University Press, 1935.

Clark, Maudemarie, and Alan J. Swensen. "Introduction." On the Genealogy of Morality: A Polemic by Friedrich Nietzche. Trans. with Introduction and Notes by Maudemarie Clark and Alan J. Swensen. Indianapolis & Cambridge: Hackett, 1998. VII–XXXIV.

von Clausewitz, Carl. Historical and Political Writings. Edited and translated by Peter Paret and Daniel Moran. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1992.

Colahan, Clark Andrew. The Visions of Sor María de Agreda: Writing Knowledge and Power. Tucson & London:  The University of Arizona Press, 1994.

Cracraft, James. The Church Reform of Peter the Great. London: Macmillan, 1971.

Diggins, John Patrick. Max Weber: Politics and the Spirit of Tragedy. New York: Basic Books, 1996.

Documents of the Christian Church. Selected and edited by Henry Bettenson. 3rd ed. Ed. Chris Maunder. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Eatwell, Roger. "Ideologies: Approaches and Trends." "Fascism." Contemporary Political Ideologies. Eds. Roger Eatwell and Anthony Wright. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1993. 1–22. 169–191.

Edman, Irwin. Four Ways of Philosophy. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1937.

Femia, Joseph V. "Marxism and Communism." Contemporary Political Ideologies. Eds. Roger Eatwell and Anthony Wright. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1993. 100–126.

Förster–Nietzsche, Elizabeth. "Introduction." Thus Spake Zarathustra: A Book for All and None by Friedrich Nietzsche. Introduction by Mrs. Elizabeth Förster–Nietzsche. Trans. Thomas Common. New York: Macmillan, 1924. ix–xxvi.

Fuehrer Directives, and Other Top–Level Directives of the German Armed Forces. Washington, D.C., 1948. 2 vols.

Greece: A Summary of Background Information. Prepared by the Office of Public Affairs U.S. Department of State. March, 1947.

Griffin, Roger. "Nationalism." Contemporary Political Ideologies. Eds. Roger Eatwell and Anthony Wright. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1993. 147–168.

Guirdham, Arthur. Christ and Freud: A Study of Religious Experience and Observance. London: George Allen and Unwin, 1959.

von Hartmann, Eduard. Philosophy of the Unconscious: Speculative Results According to the Inductive Method of Physical Science. With a Preface by C.L. Ogden. 1931. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1972.

Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf. Editorial Sponsors: John Chamberlain, et al. New York: Reynal & Hitchcock, 1940.

Hitler, Adolf. My World of Tomorrow. New York: Polish Information Center, 1940. (a)

Hitler Directs His War: The Secret Records of his Daily Military Conferences. Selected and Annotated by Felix Gilbert, from the Manuscript in the University of Pennsylvania Library. New York: Octagon Books, 1982.

Ignatius of Loyola, Saint. Personal Writings: Reminiscences, Spiritual Diary, Select Letters, including text of The Spiritual Exercises. Trans. with Introduction and Notes by Joseph A. Muniti and Philip Endean. London: Penguin Books, 1996.

Introduction. Origen. Origen, Spirit and Fire. A Thematic Anthology of his Writings by Hans Urs von Balthasar. Trans. Rober J. Daly, S.J. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1984.

Lewy, Guenter. The Catholic Church and Nazi Germany. 1964. Boulder, Colorado: Da Capo Press, 2000.

Luther, Martin. Basic Luther. Four of his Fundamental Works. (The Ninety–five Theses. Address to the Nobility. Concerning Christian Liberty. A Small Catechism.) Springfield, Illinois: Templegate Publishers, 1994. 10–153.

MacIntyre, Alasdair C. The Unconscious: A Conceptual Analysis. 1958. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul; Atlantic Highlands: Humanities press, 1976.

McGovern, William Montgomery. From Luther to Hitler: The History of Fascist–Nazi Political Philosophy. Boston, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1941.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Birth of Tragedy, or Hellenism and Pessimism. v.1. Trans. WM. A. Haussman. Edinburgh & London: T.N. Foulis, 1909. 18 vols.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Will to Power. v. 15. Trans. Anthony M. Ludovici. Edinburgh & London: T.N. Foulis, 1910. 18 vols.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. Early Greek Philosophy & Other Essays. v.2. Trans. Maximilian Mügge. Edinburgh & London: T.N. Foulis, 1911 (a). 18 vols.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Twilight of the Idols, Or, How to Philosophize with the Hammer. An AntiChrist: An Attempted Criticism of Christianity. v.16. Edinburgh & London: T.N. Foulis, 1911 (b). 18 vols.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. Thus Spake Zarathustra: A Book for All and None. Introduction by Mrs. Elizabeth Förster–Nietzsche. Trans. Thomas Common. New York: Macmillan, 1924.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. Beyond Good and Evil: Prelude to a Philosophy of the Future. Trans. Helen Zimmern. Edinburgh & London: T.N. Foulis, 1909–1913. Dover Thrift Editions. Mineola, N.Y.: Dover, 1997.

Nietzsche, Friedrich. On the Genealogy of Morality: A Polemic. Trans. with Introduction and Notes by Maudemarie Clark and Alan J. Swensen. Indianapolis & Cambridge: Hackett, 1998. Nietzsche’s Bibliographical Note in: Thus Spake Zarathustra: A Book for All and None by Friedrich Nietzsche. Introduction by Mrs. Elizabeth Förster–Nietzsche. Trans. Thomas Common. New York: Macmillan, 1911. Dover Thrift Editions. Mineola, N.Y.: Dover, 1999. iii–vii.

O'Sullivan, Noël. "Conservatism." Contemporary Political Ideologies. Eds. Roger Eatwell and Anthony Wright. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1993. 50–77.

Romanides, Joannes S. Franks, Romans, Feudalism, and Doctrine: An Interplay between Theology and Society. Patriarch Athenagoras Memorial Lectures. Brookline, Massachusetts: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 1981.

Spinoza, Baruch. "Ethics Demonstrated in Geometrical Order." The European Philosophers from Descartes to Nietzsche. Ed. Monroe C. Beardsley. New York: The Modern Library, 1992. 140–226.

Sturzo, Luigi. Church and State. v.2. London: G. Bless, The Centenary Press, 1939. 2 vols.

Recent Legislation in Italy. Reprint: Information Service vol. II, No.7, June 7, 1926. Association for International Conciliation. Documents for the Year 1926. American Branch Doc. 216–225. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. New York City, 1927. 416–439.

Rhodes, James M. The Hitler Movement: A Modern Millenarian Revolution. Hoover Institute Publication 213. Stanford, California: Hoover Institution Press, 1980.

Rousseau, Jean Jacques. "The Social Contract, or Principles of Political Right." The European Philosophers from Descartes to Nietzsche. Ed. Monroe C. Beardsley. New York: The Modern Library, 1992. 321–364.

Sherrard, Philip. The Rape of Man and Nature: An Enquiry into the Origin and Consequences of Modern Science. Ipswich, Suffolk, U.K.: Golgonooza Press, 1987.

Sherrard, Philip. The Wound of Greece: Studies in Neo–Hellenism. London, U.K.: Rex Collings, and Athens, Greece: Anglo–Hellenic, 1978.

The Sunset Knowledge: The Sacred Doctrines of Babylon, Egypt, and India. St. Petersburg, 1837. (Russian)

Trager, James. The People’s Chronology: A Year–by–Year Record of Human Events from Prehistory to the Present. Rev. ed. A Henry Holt Reference Book. New York: Henry Holt, 1992.

Vacandard, Elphege. The Inquisition: A Critical and Historical Study of the Coercive Power of the Church. 1915. Trans. from the 2nd edition Bertrand L. Conway. Merrick, New York: Richwood Publishing, 1977.

World Scripture: A Comparative Anthology of Sacred Texts. A Project of the International Religious Foundation. Ed. Andrew Wilson. Foreword by Ninian Smart. St. Paul, Minnesota: Paragon House, 1995.

 

 

===================================================

 

 

Posted September 2, 2011

 

 

 

==============================================

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright (c)2010 Sunday's Thoughts & JustHost.com