Nietzsche influenced view on nationalism

First of all let's talk about an objective way of regarding your country. This can't be done easily by everybody, it is hard to achieve the knowledge about true history and true politics. For example, a Romanian may find it hard that his country is and was irrelevant on European scale or that Hungary has bettered Romania in most of the clashes. Same can be said about a lot of nations, such as Poland or Slovakia, to name some. Reality is a harsh thing.

Therefore, nationalism is something for the weaklings who cannot accept the truth. Nationalism hasn't led to anything, and, furthermore, is pointless.

A feeling of supremacy can and should exist, but again, it is hard for an Albanian, to give an example, to heed the fact that he is superior to some nations and peoples, but inferior to some others.

Nationalism is also embraced by the sheep because they don't have anything to refer to, they have no remarkable qualities, so they resort to nationalism in an attempt to be proud of something. They don't mind being part of the rabble and obeying everyone without asking (therefore, they do the same once they reach power or within their families), as long as this makes them able to be even more proud of their country.

Because of their gregarious mentality, most of nationalists are devout Christians, a religion which allows and, even more, enables the herd mentality. A normal people seeks to destroy what is sick, whilst Christianity seeks to enable the sickness even more, through means such as "love for every human" and despising selfish nature of the man.

Thoughts?

Sup Forums has gone to shit, everybody just comments on Kek threads...

>Therefore, nationalism is something for the weaklings who cannot accept the truth. Nationalism hasn't led to anything, and, furthermore, is pointless.

I bet Nietzsche was a cuck. Fitting that he was German giving today's circumstance.

If nationalism is for the weak, then how have the juice survived for so long and essentially run the world today?

Jews have always fought for their well-being, they have first thought of themselves, not their nation.

Said by the guy who when asked would wewuz about being 100% polish all the time.

Seems like a pretty high horse to me. It looks like he got BTFO at some point and got bitter. 'Objectivity is hard for some people'. then proceeds to dismiss a whole bunch of people by calling them weaklings, sheep and a bit slow on the uptake generally. At least that's what I got from it.

So you have the same grasp I do? Because this is my interpretation.

He never claimed that. He claimed that he has some Polish blood in his because he acknowledged the differences between ethnicities.

>A feeling of supremacy can and should exist, but again, it is hard for an Albanian, to give an example, to heed the fact that he is superior to some nations and peoples, but inferior to some others.

Nationalism does not always have to be synonymous with a feeling of superiority, nationalism is just an adaptive group strategy that promotes altruism and solidarity within one's group which enables them to better mobilize against outside threats.

>Therefore, nationalism is something for the weaklings who cannot accept the truth. Nationalism hasn't led to anything, and, furthermore, is pointless.

As I stated above nationalism can be very beneficial in promoting group interest, but I agree Nationalism that promotes overtly aggressive foreign policy can be more harmful than beneficial.

>Nationalism is also embraced by the sheep because they don't have anything to refer to, they have no remarkable qualities, so they resort to nationalism in an attempt to be proud of something

No, nationalism is just an extension of tribal feelings from our tribal past; in group vs out group. Humans have natural tendency to be more accepting of those genetically and culturally similar to them, in a way your fellow countrymen could be compared to an extended family on a global scale.

Conclusion:

Nationalism can be very beneficial to promote group interest, solidarity, and altruism. But that's not to say it doesn't have it's down side, when nationalism promotes aggressive foreign policy it can certainly be maladaptive for the group, because it can lead to many unnecessary deaths.

>Nietzsche
>Cuck

Nietzche is literally the most redpilled, based philosopher.

>I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood.
>some Polish blood

...

You know, he would always would a stylized way of writing. He did not mean it.

I am not a nihilist. You didn't understand either my text or his writings if you think so.

You have a problem if you you consider yourself inferior to anything whatsoever.

Your point of view should define superior as: Like You.

Reality will show you how that pans out.

Having said that, you are not complete within yourself. Alone you would die. So this is where aesthetics comes into play. You in your entirety lacks the ability to improve as clones. You are part of a population.

What population landscape looks promising, and aesthetically pleasing to be part of?

This is exactly what I was talking about: absolute superiority cannot be reached. I am a pessimist, therefore a realist.

In the Fröliche Wissenchaft he says that Christinaity is actually good for maintining the pleb controlled and it is a good thing for the masses, but his readers and the upper class aristoi should see it by what it is, slave morality. Nationalism is also a good thing for the pleb, it gives these low IQ tools simple purposes in life, confort and meaning, while we get the benefits of it, like protection.

The elite preachs a lot of morals and follows none of it. If you have the aristoi mentality, you are not affected ´by the guilt of a slave, you can kill, rape, commit incest, steal from the poor, lie and cheat and none of it affect you, because pleb are a different species from you. You see plebs and slaves as jews see goym, like non-human cattle.

Preach morals to the max, follow none of it, reap the benefits and increase your power. Guilt is your sin, do what you would do as if it would happen infinitely. Would you like to feel ad aeternum the pleasure of raping your enemy? So do it, there are no rules, you write your own tables of values.

Nietzsche was a literal cuck. The only woman he ever loved, he shared with his friend. He was too scared to ask her out, so he had his friend ask for him.

>he made a good point, but haha, tough luck, KEK xD

I was thinking the same, "useful idiots".

>First of all let's talk about an objective way of regarding your country.

why? Until transhumanism transforms us into a completely different species Homo Sapiens will always see things like "my country" subjectively. There's nothing wrong with that. You are either self-aware of your cognitive limitations or you are delusional and call it "objectivity"

>This can't be done easily by everybody

this can't be done by anybody.

> it is hard to achieve the knowledge about true history

WE

>Therefore, nationalism is something for the weaklings who cannot accept the truth.

what truth exactly?

> Nationalism hasn't led to anything, and, furthermore, is pointless.

It build nation-states which usually functioned fine until multiculturalism started to wreck them. When Christian-feudalist-monarchism collapsed the alternatives were nationalism or communism. Well there are still nation-states doing well, communism exists only in Cuba and Best Korea.

>, it is hard for an Albanian, to give an example, to heed the fact that he is superior to some nations and peoples, but inferior to some others.

That's a completely arbitrary statement. How do you know that? Where the hell do you take all these claims from? Your ass?

>Nationalism is also embraced by the sheep because they don't have anything to refer to, they have no remarkable qualities, so they resort to nationalism in an attempt to be proud of something.

All sorts of people embrace nationalism. Over-achievers, mediocre, losers. Homo Sapiens is a social creature. We have always been part of a group. We evolved like that. We are a herd creature. Human identity and personality forms in relation to the groups he is a member of. The need for belonging and identifying your personal qualities with those of a group is completely natural. What you are proposing is not objectivity but some kind of severe autism.

>“I was taught to ascribe the origin of my blood and name to Polish noblemen who were called Niëtzky and left their home and nobleness about a hundred years ago, finally yielding to unbearable suppression: they were Protestants."
- Nachlass, Sommer 1882 21 [2]

>"my ancestors were Polish noblemen, even my grandfather's mother was Polish"
- letter to Heinrich von Stein, December 1882

>"My ancestors were Polish noblemen (Niëzky); it seems that the type is well preserved in spite of three German "mothers"
- letter to Georg Brandes, 10 April 1888

>"I thank Heaven, that in all of my instincts I am a Pole and nobody else."
- letter to Meta von Salis, 29 December 1888

>"And yet my ancestors were Polish noblemen: it is owing to them that I have so much race instinct in my blood, who knows? perhaps even the liberum veto."
- Ecce homo, chapter 3 (Warum ich so weise bin)

>"I am enough Polish, to give away all the music of the world just in exchange for Chopin."
- Ecce homo, chapter 4 (Warum ich so klug bin)

>"I am a pure-blooded Polish nobleman, without a single drop of bad blood, certainly not German blood.”
- Nietzsche Contra Democracy by Fredrick Appel, page 114

>“Germany is a great nation only because its people have so much Polish blood in their veins. [...]
>”I am proud of my Polish descent."
- The Philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche by H. L. Mencken, page 6

>romanian
>nationalist
lol literally no one would be proud of being a filthy fucking gyppo

I think in Zarathustra there is a chapter about warriors and people that go to war, if I remember correctly is in the line of letting them die if they want to

Can you imagine the anarchy if people all thought for themselves? It is good most people are sheep- but this is why we must find good banners to organize people under.

People act according to sense of purpose, sense of identity, sense of norms. Religion has the power to unite people in all of these categories, and it can transcend nationality and race. Christianity plays a large part in why European identity has become very linked in many ways.

Nationalism is somewhat more limited. By it's nature, it is one of the best systems for any individual country but cultural fragmentation could lead to future conflict unless mutual co-operation can be established between nations.

That being said, globalism is failing largely due to western culture not being able to imperialize islamic culture. The type of subtle Marxism at play in western politics runs into the same roadblock it ran into with national socialism- a way of conceiving the world that honors strength above all else is unlikely to be subjugated by a system that values compliance and plebs giving away their power as central tenets. Biden acknowledged this in his words about the return to spheres of influence- western culture cannot project global mono-culture with its failures to reign in Islamic radicals at home and abroad.