Nietzsche and the Third Reich
by
Greg Canada
Introduction
I know my fate, my name will be connected with the remembrance of something monstrous, a crisis, the like of which has never before occurred on earth. I am not a man. I am dynamite.
Nietzsche, Ecce Homo
Historically, the question regarding Nietzsche’s actual involvement in the ideological and spiritual development of the Nazi Weltanschauung has been divisive. On one side, writers such as Georg Luckas, Hans Gunther, Georg Lictheim, Hermann Rauschning, Crane Brinton, have claimed that the general thoughts and expressions propounded by Nietzsche in his works made him partly, if not completely, responsible for the creation and preservation of the Third Reich. Georg Lukas, a leading Marxist historian since the Second World War, in his work The Destruction of Reason (1952), supported this view by commenting that the Nazi Weltanschauung was strikingly similar, if not completely identical to the thoughts and expressions of Nietzsche's philosophy. Nietzsche's emphasis on instincts and his apparent irrationalism, along with his advocacy of barbarism and call for the transvaluation of morals, which, according to Lukas, culminated into "a dreadful reality under the Hitler regime," provided adequate justification for the claim that Nietzsche was the intellectual and spiritual forefather of the Third Reich.1
The Marxist interpretation of the Nietzsche-Nazi relationship was furthered by Hans Gunther, a leading Marxist publicist during the 1930s. In “The Case of Nietzsche" (1935), Gunther espoused an argument similar to that put forth by Lukas--one that emphasized certain similarities between Nazism and Nietzsche’s philosophy. According to the author, Nietzsche's alleged panacea of struggle and the concept of the Ubermensch stood in complete agreement with Nazi ideological ambitions. He went on to argue that since Nietzsche's views of history and social interaction were underscored by the concept of power, they appropriately served as an apotheosis for Nazi ideological imitation and realization.2
The view that Nietzsche was a significant intellectual and spiritual precursor to Nazism went well beyond Marxists' interpretation. The ex-Nazi and former mayor of Danzig , Hermann Rauschning, in his work The Revolution of Nihilism (1939), added to the debate by arguing that the degree to which the Nazi Weltanschauung was indebted to the thoughts of Nietzsche was so great, any attempt to comprehend the former without first understanding the latter would be entirely fruitless.3 Georg Lichtheim, author of Europe in the Twentieth Century (1972), offered an even more extreme view concerning Nietzsche's involvement with the Nazis. As with the aforementioned writers, Lichtheim emphasized the apparent similarities between Nietzsche’s thoughts and Nazi ideology; however, he took this alleged connection in a slightly different direction, arguing that Nietzsche was also a Nazi spiritual guide, one without which: "Hitler's shock troops and the core of the whole movement would have lacked the inspiration which enabled them to carry out their program of mass murder in Eastern Europe."4
On this side of the ocean, the interpretation that Nietzsche was a legitimate intellectual and spiritual forefather of the Nazis was furnished by the Harvard historian, Crane Brinton. In his publication Nietzsche (1948), Brinton furnished the view that, contrary to what his European contemporaries argued, Nietzsche’s thoughts were not entirely consistent with National Socialism. In fact, he pointed out that in some cases they were antithetical. Yet, Craine furnished a conclusion that was similar to those of his European counterparts, arguing that Nietzsche was at least partly responsible for the ideological formulation of Nazism. Nietzsche’s responsibility, Craine insisted, was not so much a question of what he did say, but what he did not. Considering the general mind set of Nazi leaders, the general “feel”of Nietzsche’s rather abstruse philosophy was sufficient enough to render the philosopher as an important factor in the development of Nazism:
most of Nietzsche's grand abstract terms, though they can be given a variety of interpretations,
contain overtones, implications, admirably suited to Nazi uses. The famous phrase "Will to Power"
suggests ruthlessness, aggression, a policy of expansion perfectly illustrated since Hitler's accession
to power. The concept of a new race of Supermen, though Nietzsche left it obscure in form and in
detail as are most such eschatological concepts of recent invention, has proved flattering to an
aspiring Nazi elite, who have considered that they were at least making the development of a new
race of men.5
On the other side of the argument, intellectuals such as Thomas Mann, Albert Camus, George Bataille, Karl Lowith, Walter Kaufmann, Weaver Santaniello, and Ben Macintyre have attempted to provide a different picture of the Nietzsche-Nazi relationship. Although these scholars all agreed that Nietzsche was perceived by the Nazis and others to be an important factor in the rise of Hitler and the Third Reich, they emphatically believed that Nietzsche was not responsible for the actual development of Nazism. For these scholars, the noticeable discrepancy between the perception of a proto-nazi Nietzsche (i.e., the version either disseminated by his sister Elisabeth and the Nazis or defended by the previously mentioned authors) and Nietzsche as he was presented in his texts, provided support that Nietzsche’s actual thoughts were not an important factor in the formulation of Nazi ideology. Any connection between the two, they maintained, was the result of a superficial understanding of the philosopher’s ideas and/or the calculated efforts of a select group whose intentions were to take advantage of Nietzsche’s seemingly open-ended philosophy.
Thomas Mann, author of "Nietzsche's Philosophy in Light of Contemporary Events" (1948), argued that the Nietzsche usually associated with the development of Nazism was ironically a Nazi fabrication of the “real” Nietzsche. Although that ideas presented in Nietzsche’s works rendered him "remote from politics and innocently spiritual," the philosopher, according to Mann, was viciously misinterpreted in order to promote the Nazis’ imperialistic Weltanschauung.6 This view of Nietzsche as a victim of malicious Nazi efforts was further propagated by Albert Camus, who, in his work The Rebel (1956) wrote: “In the history of the intelligence, with the exception of Marx, Nietzsche's adventure [had] no equivalent; we [will] never finish making reparation for the injustice done to him."7
Writers such as Bataille and Lowith took a different approach to the Nietzsche-Nazi debate. Rather than dwelling on the role of Nietzsche as the victim of twisted Nazi appropriation, they attempted to juxtapose the philosophy of Nietzsche with the views of National Socialism in order to elucidate the incompatibility of the two. As a result of his critique, Bataille, in Visions of Excess (1937), concluded:
[Nazism] and Nietzscheanism are mutually exclusive, and are even violently mutually exclusive, as
soon as each of them is considered in its totality: on one side life is tied down and stabilized in an
endless servitude, on the other hand there is not only a circulation of free air, but a wind of a tempest;
on one side charm of human culture is broken in order to make room for vulgar force, on the other
force and violence are tragically dedicated to this charm...8
Lowith, in his tome From Hegel to Nietzsche (1967), concluded that, intellectually and spiritually, Nietzsche and the Third Reich were worlds apart, and that the scholarly attempts to connect the two were the product of "unserious thinkers.” These individuals, for Lowith, exposed an ignorance of Nietzsche’s literature and/or a lack of intellectual integrity by trying to discern National Socialism as the fulfillment of Nietzschean philosophy. According to the historian, even with a limited reading of Nietzsche’s works, the obvious notion that "there was nothing national and nothing social about [Nietzsche]” would be exposed , therefore justly relieving the philosopher of the responsibilty of being the intellectual progenitor of Nazism.
By far the most important and influential argument in support of claim that Nietzsche’s actual involvement with the development of Nazism was, at most, negligible, was made by Walter Kaufmann in his magnum opus Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist (1950). Drawing from his careful survey of Nietzsche’s works, Kaufmann reached a similar conclusion as Lowith and Batille, commenting that the fact the actual philosophical distance between Nietzsche and the Nazis was to such an extent, that the two were completely inconsistent, even in many respects antagonistic. Furthering his arguement, Kauffmann provided a historical explantion of the factors that resulted in the apparent transmogrification of the actual Nietzsche-as-anti-nazi to the the mispercieved Nietzsche-as-proto-Nazi. In short, Kaufmann suggested that the descrepancy between the two images was primarily the result of the unadulterated misappropraition of Nietzsche by his proto-nazi sister Elisabeth and several Nazi ideologists, particulary Baumeler and Hartle.
Building on this theme, recent studies of the Nietzsche-Nazi realtionship have focused on the notion that the connection between Nietzsche and the Nazis was not based on actual similarities, but on unscrupulous misappropriation. Berel Lang, in Act and Idea in Nazi Genocide (1990), argued:
To be sure, misappropriation has casual consequences no less certainly than does affiliation,
and again there is no certain line-between the two. But for Nietzsche's historical aftermath,
what is at issue is an instance of misappropriation, not of deduction and not even ... of
affiliation. Far from being entailed by the premises underlying Nietzsche's position, the
conclusions drawn are inconsistent with them. To reconstruct in the imagination the events
leading up to the Nazi genocide against the Jews without the name or presence of Nietzsche
is to be compelled to change almost nothing in that pattern.9
Santaniello, author of Nietzsche, God, and the Jews (1994) also argued that Nietzsche's link with Nazism was based solely on the deliberate and calculated distortions by the Nazis. In fact, Santaniello argued that the distance that separated Nietzsche from the Nazis was so immense, especially concerning the Jews, the Germans, and anti-Semitism, that the Nazis purposely appropriated Nietzsche in hopes of silencing the vehement diatribes the philosopher had waged against the essential tenets of their ideology. Taking a less radical stance, Macintyre, in his work The Forgotten Fatherland: The Search for Elisabeth Nietzsche (1993), also claimed that the Nietzsche-Nazi connection was one based on careful misrepresentation and subterfuge. However, unlike his contemporaries, his focus was not so much on the misappropriation by the Nazis, but, as the title suggests, on the influence Elisabeth Nietzsche had on preparing her brother for use in the Third Reich.
***
The focus of the following paper will be to address the question concerning Nietzsche’s actual involvement in the ideological and spiritual development of the Third Reich. In short, it is my intention to support the claim that, although Nietzsche was championed by the Nazis and many others as being the intellectual forefather of the Third Reich, the philosopher and Nazism stood at intellectual and spiritual antipodes. In addition, I will argue that the diametrically opposing views of Nietzsche was the direct result of the unadulterated misappropriation of Nietzsche’s literature by Elisabeth Nietzsche and other proto-Nazis, including the Nazis themselves, in their attempt to promote their own pro-German, anti-Semitic political agenda. It is my also contention that such transmogrification of Nietzsche by his sister and the Nazis was itself made possible by the particular intellectual and cultural milieu of late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century Germany, and by the two world wars this environment ultimately engendered.
In design, the following paper will be comprised of four sections, with each section establishing a separate yet interrelated argument. The first two sections of the paper will be directed towards exposing the actual intellectual and spiritual distance between the image of Nietzsche as a proto-Nazi philosopher and the image of Nietzsche presented by the philosopher’s texts and personal letters. This will be conducted by first discussing the apparent views of such notable Nazi ideologist as Hitler, Rosenburg, Baumeler, and others regarding Nietzsche. The attempt to explicate the Nazi perception of Nietzsche will be further conducted by revealing their attempt to incorporate the philosopher’s teachings in various areas of social organization. This proto-Nazi image of Nietzsche, one which has not only been championed by the Nazis, but has been defended by many in academia, will then be assessed by juxtaposing it to a brief survey of philosopher’s thoughts regarding key elements of Nazism, particular anti-Semitism and German nationalism. This examination of Nietzsche’s thought will go onto briefly discuss various Nietzschean concepts and expressions, particular those which have been traditionally linked with Nazism.The result of this simple compare and contrast, I contend, will not only support the argument that Nietzsche’s thought was inconsistent and even antithetical with the essence of National Socialism, but it should provide a strong defense for Nietzsche from any rational attempt to connect him with the cause (and effects) of Nazism.
However, the actual intellectual distance that stands between the two images of Nietzsche brings forth two intimately connected questions, both of which demand answers if a satisfactory understanding of this apparent travesty is to be achieved. The third section of the paper will be devoted to addressing the first of these questions: How did the Nazis come to incorporate a philosopher such as Nietzsche, who was in virtual disagreement with everything the Third Reich represented? The answer to this question will be based a survey of the historical events that stretched from Nietzsche’s mental collapse in 1888 to the actual rise to power by the Nazis in in the 1930s. It will be suggested that a complex combination of the intellectual and cultural environment of Germany at the time along with the devious efforts of Elisabeth Nietzsche and Nazis officials, were reponsible in creating the distorted perception of Nietzsche as the intellectual progenitor of the Third Reich.
The concluding section will address the second question: Why did the Nazis attempt to appropriate a relatively antgonistic philosopher like Nietzsche for the regime? Several motivational explanations have been offered by authors regarding this question. Many have argued that the Nazi appropriation of Nietzsche was a means of providing philosophical justification for their regime. Others, including Santeneillo, have argued that it was a way of silencing the vehement diatribes waged against the Nazi Weltanschauung. It is this author’s view that these explanations, while plausible, do not provide a sufficent response to the question at hand. The position that will be taken regarding this question--one which will actually corroborate the first two responses--will not be entirely novel: the Nazis’ actions to appropriate Nietzsche was motivated by a desire to create a mythical continuity in Germany history that was intended justify the rise of the Third Reich.
(1)
Nietzsche in the Third Reich
The Nazis’ view of Nietzsche as an official intellectual and spiritual forefather is a matter of empirical record. Through myriad Nazi publications and speeches, Nietzsche was championed by numerous Nazis officials as being an intellectual and spiritual pillar for the Third Reich. The Nazis’ willingness to incorporate Nietzsche in the development of their cultural and ideological foundations further supports the claim that the Nazis did indeed herald Nietzsche as a progenitor of their Weltanschauung. In this section, the Nazis' view of Nietzsche will be elaborated by documenting the apparent views of several key Nazi officials, notably Adolf Hitler, Alfred Baumeler, Alfred Rosenberg, and others. The attempt will then be made to show how these perceptions of Nietzsche were actualized in Nazi education and jurisprudence, as well as how they became fuel for the Nazi eugenic, racial, anti-Semitic, and martial policies.
The question concerning the extent of Hitler's actual knowledge of Nietzsche has been the source of much divisiveness among historians. Ben Macintyre, author of The Forgotten Fatherland: The Search for Elisabeth Nietzsche (1993), argued that Hitler's knowledge of Nietzsche's philosophy was, at best, negligible, suggesting that the Fuhrer possibly never read a page of the philosopher's texts.1 On the other hand, historians such as J.M. Angebert, in his work The Occult of the Third Reich (1974), have insisted that Hitler was extremely familiar with the works and overall philosophy of Nietzsche.2 The difficulty these authors (and others) face in addressing the imposing question is epistemic; how is one person’s actual familarity with another person’s work decisively measured? Their assessment is further complicated by the fact that the Fuhrer never made explicit references to Nietzsche in his writings. Yet, despite these problems, it seems plausible to suggest that Hitler was, at least, vaguely familiar with key Nietzschean ideas and themes. Either as soilder in the First World War, or as a member of early twentieth-century Viennese society, it is difficult to imagine Hitler not having some contact, whether direct or indirect, with Nietzsche’s general thoughts and expressions. This suggestion is given considerable support by the fact that such Niezschean phrases and themes as “lords of the earth,” “herd instinct,” and “the will to force” appear in the corpus of Mein Kampf.3
To what extent Hitler actually read or even understood Nietzsche, however, becomes less important when the suggestion that Hitler had at least some knowledge of Nietzsche is given context. It is well established that Hitler was never philosophically oriented. That is, he was not an individual who would go to much, if any, length addressing fundamental questions, particularly thosed raised by philosophers. In addition, when Hitler did philosophicize, what was of importance to him was not the particular position the intellectual took on various topics per se, but whether or not the intellectual’s general position was, at least on the surface, in support of the Fuhrer’s previously established views. The more Hitler was able to perceive his own beliefs in the thoughts and expressions of a particular thinker, the more he was, in effect, willing to express his admiration for the individual.4
Therefore, even with a superficial understanding of Nietzsche's philosophy, Hitler was able to champion Nietzsche as one of the intellectual forefathers of the Third Reich. Hitler's association with Nietzsche as the philosopher who called for a new breed of man, who advocated the notion of "the will to power," who coined phrases such as "master" and "slave" morality, and who vehemently denounced egalitarianism, Judeophile Christianity, and rationalism--thoughts which seemed strikingly similar to the Fuhrer's own personal views and aspirations--became the source of much of the Fuhrer's adulation of Nietzsche.5 Hitler, for example, was recorded as saying to a group of Nazi dignitaries: "In the great hall of the library at Linz, one will find the busts of Kant, Schopenhauer, and Nietzsche, our greatest thinkers. The English, the French, and the Americans cannot line up any philosopher of this stature."6 Hitler was also quoted as telling the official Nazi architect, Albert Speer, in apparent discussion concerning Nietzsche: "One cannot but love this great and magnificent man, if one knows him as well as I do."7
However, Hitler's praise of Nietzsche as an intellectual forefather went well beyond casual comments. Hitler's belief in the close affinity to the philosophical insights of Nietzsche was further reflected by the numerous public visits the Fuhrer made to the Nietzsche Archives in Weimar, Germany. On one occasion, Hitler brought his personal photographer, Heinrich Hoffmann, to capture on film the Fuhrer's deep reverence for his "mentor."8 Hitler's indebtedness to Nietzsche as an official intellectual forefather of the Third Reich was also evidenced by the various monetary awards granted to the Archives and to the construction of a Nietzsche memorial auditorium that would be used to disseminate Nietzsche's ideas through conferences, seminars and workshops.9
The propagation of Nietzsche as an intellectual fountainhead of National Socialism and the concomitant reverence was well established outside the words and actions of Hitler. Alfred Rosenberg, the Nazi's "official philosopher" and author of The Myth of the Twentieth Century, regarded as the most important piece of Nazi literature next to Mein Kampf, was also an important contributor to the proto-Nazi perception of Nietzsche. Although his references to Nietzsche in The Myth of the Twentieth Century were sparse and often indirect, the passages allocated to the philosopher were marked with much admiration. For instance, Rosenberg heralded Nietzsche, along with Beethoven, Wagner, and Rembrandt, as an exemplar of Nordic art and culture. He also attempted to make the connection between those virtues that glorified Nietzsche as a philosopher--e.g., his solitude, courage, and vigor--with those characteristics that elevated the Aryan race.10 As publisher and editor of Volkischer Beobachter, the leading Nazi publication during the 1930s and 1940s, he furnished an article in 1933 that named Nietzsche, among Wagner, Lagarde, and H.S. Chamberlain, as the leading progenitor of the National Socialist movement.11 Moreover, Rosenberg discerned Nietzsche as the principle spiritual advisor of the Third Reich. In an official tribute to Nietzsche printed in Volkischer Beobachter , he wrote, "we honor Friedrich Nietzsche who called us, and still calls us, to arms ... to the arms of the German spirit and to service in the spirit of German arms, to the tragic heroic soldierdom of the whole nation."12
Like Hitler, Rosenberg's admiration and apparent likeness to Nietzsche extended beyond the confines of the written word. Besides making several public sojourns to the Nietzsche Archives, Rosenberg was responsible for conducting various Nazi-sponsored functions that were intended to display the Nazis' deep gratitude to the philosophical and spiritual contributions made by Nietzsche. Upon the death of Elisabeth Nietzsche, Friedrich's sister and curator of the Nietzsche Archives, Rosenberg arranged an elaborate funeral service for "Zarathustra's sister," which was attended by numerous Nazi dignitaries, including Hitler, Himmler, and Goebbles. Further along, during the Nietzsche centenary in 1944, Rosenberg engineered a lavish commemorative ceremony for the German "state philosopher," which entailed a considerable amount of Nazi pomp and circumstance.13
The perception of Nietzsche as the philosophical and spiritual precursor took its most apparent formulations under the workings of Alfred Baumeler, a university professor at Berlin and "official" Nietzsche scholar for the Third Reich. Baumeler, who was a close associate of Rosenberg and who often accompanied his colleague to the numerous public ceremonies, authored a plethora of publications and speeches that have clearly reflected the Nazis' lionized perception of Nietzsche. In such popular Nazi publications as Nietzsche: the Philosopher and Politician and "Nietzsche's Philosophy as Witnessed by Himself,” Baumeler portrayed the philosopher as the preeminent fountainhead of Nazism by discerning Nietzsche as the harbinger of "great politics" and as the courier of a "heroic idealism,” which embodied the virtues of hardness, masculinity, leadership, courage, power, struggle, and various other characteristics promoted by the Nazis.14 Baumeler also viewed the life and reign of Adolph Hitler as a complete synthesis of these two attributes of Nietzsche's philosophy, therefore making Nietzsche's prophetic message even more significant to the Nazi movement.15 In fact, Baumeler's perception of Nietzsche as the intellectual and spiritual progenitor of the Nazis was so profound, that he was recorded as stating at a Nazi youth march, "... when we call 'Heil Hitler' to his youth, then we are at they same time greeting Friedrich Nietzsche with that call."16
There were obviously other instances where Nietzsche was presaged by the Nazis as a seminal figure in the creation and preservation of the Third Reich. Major Max Oehler, a Nazi army officer and director of the Nietzsche Archives, referred to Nietzsche, in an official presentation at the museum, as the "leading philosopher of the state," who, along with Wagner, "had driven to lay the foundation stone ... of German unity."17 In 1933, the German scholar Gottlieb Scheuffler authored a work entitled Friedrich Nietzsche in the Third Reich, which portrayed Hitler as the spiritual descendent of Nietzsche's aristocratic philosophy.18 But by far the most telling instance of the perceived relationship between Nietzsche and the Nazis was that, along with Hitler's Mein Kampf, and Rosenberg's The Myth of the Twentieth Century, Nietzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra was buried in the Tannenberg Memorial, which commemorated Germany's victory over Russia in the First World War.19
The Nazis' faith in Nietzsche's philosophy was further attested by their willingness to incorporate the philosopher's thoughts and expressions in the development and preservation of the cultural and ideological foundations of the Third Reich. “The German state of the future will not be a continuation of the work of Bismarck," Baumeler commented, "it will rather be built out of the spirit of Nietzsche and the spirit of the Great War."20 The Nazis’ intention to build the Reich upon a Nietzschean foundation was clearly illustrated by the integration of the philosopher's thoughts and expressions in various levels of social organization, particularly in German education and jurisprudence.
The utilization of Nietzsche in the ideological indoctrination of Nazi youth was pervasive. The apparent relationship between the Nazis' perception of Nietzsche as the teacher of "heroic idealism," the "will to power," and a number of other Nietzschean themes, and the Nazi educational objective of manufacturing efficient soldiers and future Reich leaders was too evident to ignore, much less not make use of. Under the direction of Rosenberg, Hitler's appointed supervisor of German educational activities, along with Bernhard Rust, the Reich Minister of Education, the Nazi educational system was inundated with Nietzschean literature. Parts from such works as Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Beyond Good and Evil, and The Will to Power were heavily integrated into the school system as required reading.21 Heinrich Hartle's work Nietzsche and National Socialism, which was used by German educators for Nazi youth indoctrination, discerned Nietzsche as the spiritual advisor of the Third Reich by accentuating such Nietzschean messages as "live dangerously!" and "become hard!"22 In addition, the infiltration of Nietzschean prophecy into the hearts and minds of Nazi youths by their mentors was further conducted through classroom discussions and lectures, as well as through the painting of such Nietzschean slogans as "whatever does not destroy me makes me stronger" on the walls and gates of Hitler youth camps.23
Although less explicit, the incorporation of Nietzschean ideas also played an inspirational role in the formulation of Nazi jurisprudence. Hans Frank, the Reich Commissioner for Justice, once commented, "both personally and objectively, it is of importance to me that Nietzsche of all people has become the mentor of German jurisprudence."24 As in the case of education, the Nazis' belief in Nietzsche, clearly represented by Frank, was the product of a perceived similarity between the thoughts and writings of Nietzsche and their legal and judicial objectives. Hitler's comment, "not the individual but only the nation must be regarded as the center of legal concern," which unquestionably reflected the Reich's legal ideology, was seen in close approximation to Nietzsche's own prophetic contempt for liberalism.25 In addition, the protean nature of Nazi jurisprudence, which was indicative of their belief that law was not a set of immutable rules for the supervision of society, but a dynamic instrument for the preservation of the Volk, was perceived by the Nazis as wholly inspired by Nietzsche's own views that inflexible laws were internecine and "life-estranged."26 Even the draconian means of punishment, which were an integral part of Nazi justice, were understood by Nazi jurists as being advocated in the words of Nietzsche's philosophy.27
Besides being appropriated for the development of various social organizations, the Nazi adulation of Nietzsche was also evidenced by their incessant use of the philosopher to achieve certain ideological ambitions. For instance, the Nazi eugenic policies, directed towards the cultivation of a strong, healthy Aryan breed, used Nietzsche as a reference. Nazi medical practitioners, like Dr. Werner Catel, employed Nietzsche as a philosophical progenitor for pervasive use of euthanasia and experimentation aimed at securing the Nazi racial objectives by making explicit references to such themes as the Ubermensch and "the blonde beast," as well as Nietzschean utterances like "what is ripe for death should be allowed to die and should not be sustained" and "those who are falling should be struck, down so they fall more quickly."28 This connection between Nietzsche's philosophy and the Nazis’ racial hygiene policies was further elaborated by such Nazi authors as Heinrich Romer and Kurt Kassler, who both highlighted the prophetic message found in Nietzsche’s thoughts regarding instincts, breeding, and various other Darwinistic themes that outlined Nazi ideology.29
Nietzsche was also portrayed as an ardent supporter of anti-Semitism and was subsequently used by the Nazis to strengthen their anti-Semitic ideology. Romer, in his official Nazi publication Nietzsche and the Race Problem emphasized Nietzsche's perceived anti-Semitism as the logical derivation of the philosopher's extreme contempt for a spiritually and physically internecine Christian religion, the "ultimate Jewish consequence." For Romer, Nietzsche "was the most acute anti-Semite that ever was: he was the most radical discoverer of the unholy role of Judaism played in the spiritual history of Europe."30 Kassler offered a similar analysis in Nietzsche in the Third Reich, in which he argued that Nietzsche viewed the Jews as a "parasitic species" whose existence threatened the cultural and racial superiority of the Aryan state.31 The public consumption of Nietzsche as a supporter, if not the progenitor, of Nazi anti-Semitism was further espoused in the works of Baumeler, Rosenberg, and Oehler. Collectively, their publications involved the use of various quotes from Nietzsche's works such as "Let no more Jews come in! And shut the doors, especially towards the East (also towards Austria)," which compellingly furnished their perception that "the leading state philosopher" was, indeed, an anti-Semite.32
Perhaps the most illustrative use of Nietzsche by the Nazis was as the philosophical and spiritual inspiration for the Third Reich's bellicose Weltanschauung. At the core of the Nazi ideology was a perceived necessity for war, which was intended, ideally, to provide the Reich with Lebensraum, or "living space." "The mission of the National Socialist movement," Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf, "will be filled not by the intoxication of Alexandrian campaign, but by the steady labor of the German plow, which merely needs to be given land by the sword."33 In order to furnish support for their aggressive ideology, Nazi scribes and spokesmen turned to the utilization of numerous Nietzschean ideas and themes. Nietzschean slogans such as "live dangerously!" and "become hard," as well as such popular Nietzschean quotes as "war and courage have done more things than charity" and "Ye shall love peace as a means to new wars," inevitably made their way into the vast collection of Nazi war propaganda.34 Furthermore, Nietzsche's apparent emphasis on various Nazi revered martial virtues and related injunctions as "Love your destiny!" were incorporated by Nazi soldiers as a personal affliction in the course of battle, particularly when Nazi defeat was imminent. As one Nazi commentator wrote, "Nietzsche is the herald of the Either-Or. He hates compromise and affirms the unavoidable authentic decision. He is called to give us strength in this total war."35
Although this discussion of Nietzsche in the Third Reich is not extensive and could easily go on further, it has at least provided an adequate synopsis of the apparent relationship between Nietzsche and the Nazis. Without a question, Nietzsche was perceived by the Nazis as being the intellectual and spiritual pillar of their regime. Their profuse employment of his thoughts and expressions in their cultural and ideological domains further attests to this fact. However, as so often is the case (particularly with the Nazis), appearance and reality are not tantamount. When a brief examination of Nietzsche’s philosophy is conducted, this perceived likeness between the Nazis and Nietzsche becomes highly questionable, if not entirely mendacious.
(2)
Nietzsche Contra the Nazis
In his publication Hitler's Germany, Claud David argued that although the Nazis claimed Nietzsche as one of their ancestors, "it is most unlikely that this impassioned negator would have approved of Hitler's Germany anymore than that of Bismarck, which he detested."1 David's argument is supported by the fact that, in the history of the German intelligentsia, no other scholar has written and spoken out with as much scorn and complete contempt for the very ideas that culminated in National Socialism. By surveying the philosopher’s literature, the following section will make an elucidation of Nietzsche’s thoughts, particulary those which pertained to anti-Semitism and German nationalism--two essential tenets of Nazi ideology. In the process, the effort will be made to compare and contrast the philosopher's views on the Jews, the concept of race, the value of war, and various other topics which also played a crucial part in the Nazi Weltanschauung. The section will conclude by briefly furnishing Nietzsche's personal views of the Wagner circle, undeniably the legitimate precursor of the Third Reich, in order to provide an adequate picture of the actual intellectual and spiritual distance that stood between Nietzsche and the Nazis.
The proto-Nazi perception of Nietzsche carries with it the presupposition that the philosopher, at least, shared a common view about the essential doctrines contained within National Socialist ideology. However, when the examination of Nietzsche's thoughts concerning such fundamental Nazi doctrines as anti-Semitism and German nationalism is conducted, the picture heralded by the Nazis of Nietzsche as the intellectual father of their regime is severely put to question, if not completely destroyed.
It would be superfluous to go into great detail about the common sense notion that the Nazis viewed anti-Semitism as a mainstay of their world view. The fact that anti-Semitism explicitly marked Hitler's Mein Kampf, the "Program of the National Socialist German Worker's Party," and various other "blueprints" of the National Socialist ideology, along with the fact that innumerable laws and policies were passed and executed by the Nazis, in order to secure their anti-Semitic Weltanschauung, clearly reveals the significance of anti-Semitism to the Third Reich.2 What is of importance here is that Nietzsche did not support anti-Semitism in his philosophical works, but, in fact, despised it vehemently.
Nietzsche's severe disdain for anti-Semitism was mentioned in his philosophical works, particularly those written during the 1880s, when the anti-Semitic movement in Germany was increasing in size and appearance. One of Nietzsche's major diatribes against anti-Semitism was that it appeared to him as a reflection of "slave morality,” an ethic underscored by jealously, envy, and revenge--a combination Nietzsche labeled "ressentiment." In his work Daybreak, Nietzsche stated, "the struggle against the Jews has always been a symptom of the worse characters, those more envious and more cowardly. He who participates in it now must have much of the same disposition of the mob."3 In the posthumous publication The Will to Power, Nietzsche reiterated this point: "...in the case of the anti-Semites it is ... to visit condemnatory judgements upon one's opponent and to reserve to oneself the role of retributive justice."4 He went further by adding in the same work: "the anti-Semites do not forgive the Jews for possessing 'spirit' and money. Anti-Semites--another name for the 'underprivileged'."5 In this respect, anti-Semitism, the exemplar of "slave morality," was for Nietzsche the very essence of what he spurned in his philosophy. Equally important, the characteristics he perceived that culminated in anti-Semitism were everything that Nietzsche pictured would be transcended by his vision of the "Good European" and his successor, the Ubermensch: “For that man be delivered from revenge” Nietzsche’s Zarathratra declared, "that is for me the bridge to the highest hope and a rainbow after long storms."6
Also playing a critical role in Nietzsche's intense denunciation of anti-Semitism, which is directly related to his first argument, was his deep admiration of the Jews as a people. Although Nietzsche did in fact attack ancient Judea (which Romer and other Nazis quickly pointed out), his criticisms were primarily lodged against the "priestly strand of Judea": the aspect of Judaism responsible for creating Christianity, the religion of guilt, punishment, and "ressentiment."7 However, as for the ancient Hebrews in general, Nietzsche's views were unequivocally complimentary. In his work On the Genealogy of Morals, Nietzsche wrote, "all honor to the Old Testament! I find in it great human beings, a heroic landscape, and something of the rarest quality in the world, the incomparable naivete of the strong heart; what is more, I find a people."8 Nietzsche's views concerning modern Jews did not alter. In Beyond Good and Evil he stated, "the Jews...are beyond all doubt the strongest, toughest and purest race at present living in Europe; they know how to prevail even under the worst conditions."9 Nietzsche restated this thought in more length in Daybreak:
For two millennia an attempt was made to render them [the Jews] contemptible by treating them with
contempt, and by barring to them the way to all honours and all that was honorable ... They
themselves have never ceased to believe themselves called to the highest things, and the virtues
which pertain to all who suffer have likewise never ceased to adorn them ... Their courage beneath
the cloak of miserable submission ... surpasses the virtues of all the saints."10
In addition, he praised the Jews in his books and letters as creative geniuses who made considerable contributions to art, morality, and culture, lauding the works of such Jewish luminaries as Heindrich Heine and Baruch Spinoza, among others. (Quite a different picture of the Jews than that portrayed by Hitler, who stated in Mein Kampf "the Jew lacks those qualities which distinguish the races that are creative and hence culturally blessed.")11
Nietzsche's condemnation of anti-Semitism went well beyond the bounds of his philosophical works. In a letter to his sister Elisabeth, which responded to her involvement with the German anti-Semitic movement under the leadership of Benhard Forster (the man she eventually married), Nietzsche wrote:
...You have committed one of the greatest stupidities-for yourself and for me! Your association with
an anti-Semitic chief expresses a foreignness to my whole way of life which fills me again and again
with ire or melancholy...It is a matter of honor with me to be absolutely clean and in unequivocal in
relation to anti-Semitism,namely opposed to it, as I am in my writings.12
Totalitarianism and concomitant state idolatry and nationalism, obvious cornerstones of the Nazi Weltanschauung, were also viewed by Nietzsche as the complete antithesis to his thought and were severely reproached in his works. The Nazis championed the idea of a "complete state," one that possessed absolute control over virtually every aspect of an individual's existence, in order to secure "the preservation and advancement of a community of physically and psychically homogeneous creatures."13 This view stood at complete antipodes with a philosopher who had no good word for the State, which he called the "coldest of all cold monsters."14 Nietzsche perceived the State as nothing more than the "herd" responsible for the manufacturing of conformity, mediocrity, and spiritual decadence: characteristics that he found repugnant. The State was for Nietzsche the impediment that restrained the elevation of superior individuals, who loved life and lived upward, by burdening them with "slave morality." It was for this reason that Nietzsche in both The Gay Science and Beyond Good and Evil envisioned the dissolution of all European states in order provide a nurturing atmosphere where "good Europeans" would flourish as individuals.15 On an equal note, Nietzsche's disdain for the State was attributed to the fact that he perceived himself as being "the last anti-political German," one who undoubtedly abhorred the very thought of belonging to any political organization whatsoever.16
By far the most biting criticisms Nietzsche waged against the State were directed towards the concept of nationalism, particularly German nationalism. Hitler propagated the importance of German nationalism in Mein Kampf by insisting "The German Reich as a state must embrace all Germans and has the task, not only of assembling and preserving the most valuable stocks of basic racial elements in this people, but ... raising them to a dominant position."17 Taking an antithetical stance, Nietzsche in The Gay Science, admonished Germans "nationalism" as a "scabies of the heart and blood poisoning that now leads the nations of Europe to delimit and barricade themselves against each other as if it were a matter of quarantine."18 In Beyond Good and Evil he wrote: "The Germans ... with their Wars of Liberation (1813) ... are to blame for nationalism, this disease and madness most inimical to culture."19 The reasons for Nietzsche's severe contempt for nationalism, particularly German nationalism, were essentially threefold. The first, as mentioned earlier, was that Nietzsche championed the vision of Europe without states, which presupposes the absence of nationalism.
The second reason for Nietzsche's disdain for nationalism, which is directly related to the first, concerned his views on race. Through the dissolution of the European states Nietzsche believed that the intermarriage between various races would be facilitated, thus increasing the possibility of producing his visionary "Good European." However, Nietzsche did not define "race" in the same terms as Darwinism. In fact, Nietzsche disliked Darwinism and called it an "incomprehensibly onesided doctrine of the 'struggle for existence'," which "breaths something like the musty air of English overpopulation, like the smell of the distress and overcrowding of small people."20 Rather, Nietzsche was a proponent of Lamarckism, which furnished the belief in the heredity of acquired characteristics.21 In other words, the notion of "race" was more than a set of physical characteristics for Nietzsche, it also possessed a spiritual quality:
One cannot erase out of the soul of a man what his ancestors have done most eagerly and often... It is
not at all possible that a man should not have in his body the qualities and preferences of his parents
and ancestors-whatever appearances may say against this.22
Thus, Nietzsche's ideal of the "Good European," which was only to be achieved with the death of European nationalism, was the product of miscegenation, by which various "superior spiritual strands" would be inherited, hence possessed, by the individual. Judging from what has beeen previously stated, it is easily inferred that Nietzsche included the Jew-- the possessor of an unequaled creative and courageous spirit--in this “race” of people.
Ranking at the bottom of this project for Nietzsche were the Germans, which brings us to the third reason for his severe aspersion of German nationalism: his extreme dislike of the Germans. Contrary to the Nazis’ adulatory view of the Germans "as the embodiment of all creative genius" and "as the new corpus mystium on which salvation of the world depends," Nietzsche had very little positive to say about the Germans, and even less about “keeping the race pure.”23 Nietzsche's contempt for the Germans was no secret: "It is part of my ambition," he wrote in Ecce Homo, "to be considered a despiser of the Germans par excellence."24 He labeled the "German Spirit" as "bad air," and insisted that "the Germans have no idea how vulgar they are."25 Furthermore, he felt wherever the Germans had extended their influence, they ruined culture: "All great crimes against culture for four centuries [the Germans] have on their conscience."26 Obviously the idea of "assembling and preserving" this decadent race appalled (not to mention frightened) Nietzsche. For Nietzsche, the idea of German nationalism was a "race swindle" that required a good dose of Jewish and Slavic blood. In the Twilight of the Idols, he further condemned the notion with his remark that "German humanity and the concept of 'pure blood' is the opposite of a harmless concept."27 Like his views on anti-Semitism, however, Nietzsche's biting attacks on German nationalism were not confined to his philosophical works. In a letter he wrote to his mother and sister, Nietzsche, responding to the growing German nationalistic fervor during the 1880s, was captured as saying: "Admittedly I've as yet managed to mount little enthusiasm for 'the Germanic essence', and even less for keeping this 'glorious' race pure. On the contrary on the contrary..."28
The intellectual distance that stood between Nietzsche and the Nazis did not end with anti-Semitism and nationalism. Even terms such as the "will to power," the "blonde beast," and the Ubermensch have virtually nothing in common with the Nazi Weltanschauung when understood in their proper philosophical context. Judging from their use of the phrase, the Nazis apparently interpreted the "will to power" as a concept that correlated political and physical aggression. Although Nietzsche did acknowledge aggression as a manifeststion the “will to power” in man (as well as the rest of the animal world), it was, for him, only one among many ways the “will to power” has been traditionally exposed. More importantly, Nietzsche, in his evaluations of the various demonstrations of man’s “will to power,” ranked at the bottom those manifestations concerned with “imposing torment” and “giving blows,” calling them collectively “grotesque barbarism” and a weakness in character (he believed that only the weak need to convince themselves of their "might" by openly imposing force on others). For Nietzsche, the “will to power” was not a concept that promoted physical domination and mastery over others, but was, ideally, an aesthetic drive that “gave style to one’s character” by requiring the mastery over oneself. This goes to explain why Nietzsche, in his evaluation, ranked at the top those manifestations of the “will to power” associated with the ascetic (not identical to Christain ascetic), whose existence constituted the attempt at individual self-perfection by sublimating natural instincts and passions, including “ressentiment.”29
Nietzsche's reference to the "blonde beast" also had a meaning quite far removed from that held by the Nazis. From their various uses of the concept, the Nazis understood the "blonde beast" as an explicit reference to their own Darwinian argument of Aryan supremacy. But based on what has been previously said concerning Nietzsche’s view on race and even nationlism, it is difficcult, if not impossible, to support the claim that the meaning behind “the blonde beast” advocated the racial ambitions of Aryanism or any other Darwinistic ideology. Equally important, judged from how the phrase was actually used in Nietzsche’s writings, the “blond beast” was used as a historical metaphor that represented the essence of all past "noble races," including "the Roman, Arabian, Germanic, Japanese nobility, the Homeric heroes, and the Scandinavian Vikings."30 Obviously, the "blondness" was not used to describe the physical appearance of the man; it was meant, perhaps, to elicit the image of a lion, the courageous beast of prey, which Nietzsche believed was indicative of past warrior-aristocrats.31 In the one instance where Nietzsche did in fact specifically refer to the "beast" as German, he, possibly realizing the potential connection between his metaphor and the messages championed by current German racism, was quick to point out that "between the old Germanic tribes and us Germans there exists hardly a conceptual relationship, let alone one of blood."32
Sharing a simliar fate as “the blond beast,” was Nietzsche’s idea of the Ubermensch. The Nazis, under the influenced of such social Darwinists as H.S. Chamberlain and Arthur Gobineau, viewed the notion of Nietzsche's Ubermensch as an illusion to the Aryan race, which was destined to conquer other lesser races in the global struggle for racial supremacy. Turning once again to Nietzsche’s views on race and nationalism, the meaning underlying the Ubermensch was antithetical with the social Darwinism propounded by the Nazi Weltanschauung. In fact, he commented in Ecce Homo that the attempt to connect the Ubermensch with any interpretation of Darwinism was the work of "scholarly oxen," who grossly distorted the notion to fit their own personal prejudices.33 According to Nietzsche, the Ubermensch meant "the designation of a type of supreme achievement," which stood "as an 'idealistic' type of higher kind of man, half 'saint,' half 'genius'."34 The Ubermensch did not represent a species or race of man; rather, it represented the ideal individual who, like the ascetic, perpetually strove to exert his will to power in order to achieve a more perfect self. Moreover, the Ubermensch's goal was not to rule or dominate over others through acts of strength, exploitation, or revenge, but rather to lead an existence very much apart from the adulterating herd (which Nietzsche viewed as the "Ubermensch's greatest danger") whereby he would be able to "give style to [his] character."
Even in cases where the Nazi Weltanschauung and Nietzsche's philosophy shared common ground, their similarities, when understood in their proper context, were only apparent. For instance, both the Nazis and Nietzsche were firm opponents of democracy and egalitarianism. However, where the Nazis' aversion to these principles was based on obvious political reasons, Nietzsche's detestation for them was from a purely cultural perspective. Nietzsche's condemnation of democracy and concomitant egalitarianism was attributed to the fact that he, as mention previously, was "anti-political." This vehement stance against politics, including democracy, was propelled by the belief that culture and state were antagonists: "All great cultures are ages of political decline: what is great culturally has always been unpolitical, even anti-political."35 More importantly, Nietzsche was anti-democratic and anti-egalitarian simply because he did not believe men were naturally equal, and he felt that the attempt to theoritically level all individuals to an equal status would ultimately be internecine to culture. Equality, for Nietzsche, meant conformity and the renunciation of a superior individual's personal initiative towards self-perfection, a drive he believed underscored all cultural greatness.
Similarly, Nietzsche's views toward the concept of war appeared quite comparable to those maintained by the Nazis. Nietzsche, like the Nazis, preached of war as an important factor in human affairs, of the productive nature of conflict, and of the heroic qualities furnished by battle. However, the war which Nietzsche prescribed to his readers was not one in the literal sense of the word, as the Nazis (as well as many others) assumed. Rather, Nietzsche's "war"--the one that required "hardness" and "virility”--was intended to be a personal struggle that rested well within the confines of the intellectual and moral realm, which was clearly taught by Nietzsche’s Zarathustra: "And if you cannot be saints of knowledge, at least be its warriors...You should have eyes that always seek an enemy ...You should seek an enemy and you should wage your war--for your thoughts."36 In essence, Nietzsche's "war," as one author perspicaciously phrased it, was one "geared for the revaluation of morality [and knowledge], not the revaluation of political boundaries."37
Upon this brief examination of Nietzsche's philosophy as it related to various crucial Nazi doctrines, it becomes perfectly clear that he was by no means an actual intellectual forbearer of the Third Reich. His views towards anti-Semitism and German nationalism were not only inconsistent with those of the Nazi Weltanschauung, they were antithetical. His adulation of the Jews and desire for the dissolution of European states stood at complete antipodes with Nazi ideology. Even where the two seemed to be compatible, as in the case of democracy and war, they were actually worlds apart. It may even be plausible to conclude that, if Nietzsche had lived to see the emergence of the Third Reich, he would have denounced it completely. This is inferred from the fact that, during his own lifetime, Nietzsche was a severe critic and avid opponent of the actual intellectual precursors of Nazism, namely the Wagnerians. With their firm advocation of anti-Semitism and German nationalism, Nietzsche vehemently attacked the Wagnerians in his philosophical works, referring to them as a "disease" and a "political infection." He also remarked in Ecce Homo, "I think I know the Wagnerians; I have experienced three generations of them ... Not a single abortion is missing among them, not even an anti-Semite." Such aspersions towards the fountainheads of Nazism, clearly supports the notion that Nietzsche's philosophical views were not only incompatible with the Nazi ideology, but entirely opposed to the very essence of the Third Reich.
(3)
The “Nazification” of Nietzsche
The strinking descrepancy presented here between the image of Nietzsche as a precursor to Nazism and the anti-Nazi Nietzsche found in the texts elicits several important questions. Most notably, how did Nietzsche, a philosopher whose ideas were clearly incompatible and even antagonistic to the Nazi Weltanschauung, come to be perceived by the Nazis and others as a crucial intellectual contributor to their regime? Was it simply a gross misinterpretation by the Nazis, or were there other factors responsible for this transmogrication of Nietzsche and his philosophy? In order to find an adequate explaination to this imposing question, the following section will approach the issue historically by focusing on the roles of key persons and events, both leading up to rise of National Socialism in 1933 and during the Nazi stay in power, which were responsible for this "nazification" of Nietzsche. The suggestion will be made that image of Nietzsche disseminated by the Nazis and others (many of whom will be mentioned momentarily) was more than a case of careless misinterpretation; it was the direct result of both the philosopher’s proto-Nazi sister, Elisabeth Nietzsche, and various Nazis intellectuals’ twisted effort to appropriate Nietzsche in hopes of bolstering the political agenda of the German State. In developing this argument, it will also be suggested that this misappropriation and subsequent transmogrification of Nietzsche was facilitated by a number of events, including the eruption of the First World War, the predominence of Darwnism, and, perhaps most importantly, a significant shift in the European intellectual milieu during the nineteenth- and early twentieth- centuries--to which we now turn.
Until his mental collapse in 1890, Nietzsche's influence as a philosopher and writer was virtually non-existent. With the exception of a handful of his closest friends and various intellectual circles in Austria, France, and Denmark, his books were almost never read.1 Nietzsche's intellectual obscurity even made it difficult to find publishers willing to finance his works for market. However, upon his insanity, Nietzsche's popularity in Europe increased tremendously, especially in Germany where his intellectual obscurity was most evident. His name made numerous appearances in popular German journals and newspapers as well as numerous books, which collectively promoted him as the "philosopher of the time, whose influence is stirring the entire cultural world." Consequently, his philosophical following grew everyday, and by the end of 1890, Nietzsche had become, for the first time after twenty years of intellectual endeavor, a figure of considerable importance.2
Nietzsche's overnight fame was, in large, the product of a shift in the intellectual climate of Germany (and to a lesser extent the rest of Europe) at the time. By the beginning of the nineteenth-century, the rationalism and empiricism that previously dominated the European intellectual milleu, particularly during the “Age of Enlightenment,” slowly gave way to a foil movement, namely romanticism. Initiated by Kant, but having roots as far back as to Goethe, romanticism emphazied the importance of things which were believed to be beyond the domain of reason, particulary the transcendental and the aesthetic. Romanticism was also characterized by a firm belief in the power of the imagination, which, as a consequence, set the stage for the emergance of various quasi-scientific and psuedo-religious myths.3 Nowhere was this myth making tendancy of post-Enlightenment Europe made more apparent than in Germany. Suffering the subjugation of Napoleon as well as witnessing the growing strength of the West, the German population, experiencing a sense of inferiority, attempted to assure itself of its innate superiority by glorifying its history and culture.4 With Nietzsche's mental "death," he was a prime target for this German myth making project. Although he wrote in Ecce Homo, "I want no 'believers' [for] I have terrible fear that one day I will be pronounced holy," Nietzsche's plea fell on deaf ears; the German population, with the aid of numerous romanticists, laboriously attempted to mythicize the inconspicuous philosopher in hopes of bolstering its own image.5
By far, the leading German romanticist responsible for cultivating a glorified image of Nietzsche was his sister Elisabeth. While in Paraguay attempting to establish a colony of German Aryan nationalists, Elisabeth heard of her brother's mental collapse and the new-found notoriety he was receiving in Germany. With the colony in imminent danger of collapsing due to insufficient funds and to the untimely death of her husband and leader of the settlement, Bernhard Forster, Elisabeth quickly left the doomed South American project in order to began a new one in Germany. Upon arriving in her native country, Elisabeth, believing that no one knew this new-found philosopher better than herself, made it her mission to furnish Nietzsche and his philosophy to the world in a fashion that would augment his following and bolster his reputation.6 Elisabeth's new project was made no secret: "My mission in the next ten years," she openly stated, "is to plant the personality of Nietzsche, as the noblest figure of light, firmly into the hearts of people."7 However, in order to be successful in selling her brother to an image-conscious Germany (as well as to satisfy her own position as a supporter of German might and culture), Elisabeth needed to cultivate an image of Nietzsche as a symbol and a cause that would be able "to waken up the sleeping giant Germany and make it stretch its muscles."8
The first step Elisabeth took towards accomplishing her goal was successfully establishing herself as the sole legal executor and protector of Nietzsche's literary estate. With her acquired legal status, Elisabeth gained exclusive rights to all her brother's literary remains, including unpublished works and discarded notes. She was even able to establish, through special court orders, claim to letters he had written to his closest friends.9 With virtually his entire philosophical and personal literature firmly in her grasp, Elisabeth was able to cultivate Nietzsche's image to her own liking. Her initial task was to suppress the publication of certain completed projects that Nietzsche himself did not get a chance to publish while mentally competent; namely the fourth part of Zarathustra, the Antichrist, Nietzsche Contra Wagner, and Ecce Homo, all of which contained numerous diatribes towards German nationalism and culture, anti-Semitism, Aryan supremacy, and Elisabeth herself. These works were obviously viewed by Elisabeth as problematic to her project and were consequently withheld from public consumption for "proper editing."10 As for the books already in print, Elisabeth published new editions that incorporated her own introductions, which were intended to "explain" those passages that seemed antagonistic to the pro-German image of Nietzsche she was attempting to create. In many instances, Elisabeth rearranged material and included new passages in her editions of her brother's work.11 Nietzsche's letters were also a target for Elisabeth's censorship. Containing numerous negative remarks about Elisabeth and Germany, many of his letters were either heavily doctored or completely destroyed in order to furnish the image of a loving, patriotic brother, who would have supported Elisabeth's claim as his rightful heir and sole interpreter.12
The sanitized, mythical image of Nietzsche that Elisabeth was attempting to provide for the German public was provided an impressive conduit in the form of the Nietzsche Archives' in Weimar, Germany. Founded in 1894, the Nietzsche Archives, was established on the principle of being a source of promotion and dissemination of Nietzsche's philosophy, as well as a gathering point for the many books, essays, and articles concerning his ideas. However in reality, "this was no mere archive," as one commentator suggested, "it was a house of creative powers."13 The Archives, under Elisabeth's direct supervision, did not attempt to represent Nietzsche, but rather glorify him as a German saintlike figure. Statues were built of the philosopher which were inscribed with pro-German slogans; elaborate memorial ceremonies were conducted relating to his life and work, and various Nietzschean "cult products" were distributed to the Archive's visitors.14 Yet the most influential attempt to exalt Nietzsche as a heroic German philosopher was made by the Archives, publishing and editing activities.
The first publicational project of the Archives was Elisabeth's biographical trilogy: The Life of Nietzsche (1895-1904), The Young Nietzsche (1912), and The Lonely Nietzsche (1915). Collectively these works were intended to develop Nietzsche into a German symbol that would be a source of emulation. Elisabeth employed her doctored letters to promote an image of Nietzsche as a loving, caring, and selfless brother. By accentuating Nietzsche's role as a soldier in the Franco-Prussian War and by quoting Nietzsche's seemingly war-like passages out of context, Elisabeth was able to disseminate her interpretation of her brother as a German patriot and a heroic warrior.15 As for her brother's contempt for German nationalism, which was too pervasive for Elisabeth's twisted filter to erase and which had, in effect, become a question of some concern for many, she simply attempted to explain it away. "{W}hatever people may say," Elisabeth wrote in The Young Nietzsche, "he loved his German Fatherland. All his passionate reproaches were only the utterances of a loving heart. He wished to see the Germans really great, filled with and transfigured by a genuine culture."16 Moreover, she asserted, with a firm recollection, Nietzsche "often indulged in a 'bout of genuine patriotism' when he would say ‘I love the Germans'."17
By far the greatest act of misrepresentation of Nietzsche by Elisabeth and the members of the Archives was the publication of The Will to Power (1901). Although hailed by Baumeler and Elisabeth as Nietzsche’s “crowning philosophical work,” The Will to Power was not even the philospher’s intended work, but Elisabeth's. She, along with her colleague Peter Gast, took the vast collection of Nietzsche's notes, jottings, and unfinished projects, many of which were intended to be discarded, and glued them together in loosely coherent fashion.18 The finished product was a book that contained four sections, with each section containing a variety of ideas, many of which had little in common with those in his published texts. For instance, Nietzsche, an unrelentless critic of science througout his entire literary career, was portayed as quite the opposite, by having his scientific “proofs” of the unscientific doctrine of the eternal recurrence published in the book. Even the section titles of The Will to Power suggested a view of Nietzsche different than that portayed in the texts. Of particular interest was the title "Breed and Breeding”. Although Nietzsche did in fact have this title in many working drafts, the project to which it belonged was aborted and was never meant to be published. More importantly, Nietzsche's references to breeding, as mentioned earlier, did not pertain strictly to biological breeding nor did they support any form of Dawinism. However, Elisabeth, a complete "laywoman" to her brother's philosophy and a firm advocate of Aryan supremacy, failed to recognize this distinction, and printed the section in a fashion that reflected her own racial views.19 Nietzsche's concept of the "will to power" was also slanted by Elisabeth in this work. Very much a projection of Elisabeth's own penchant for military might, the "will to power" was understood by Elisabeth to mean a prescription for political aggression and was subsequently published in such a manner.20 This equivocation by Elisabeth was made explicit in a passage from the second edition of The Young Nietzsche (1914), which came on the eve of the First World War: "It looks as though my brother's fervent advocacy of the will to power as a law of nature had come in the nick of time."21
Elisabeth's twisted effort to make her brother a symbol and cause for German greatness was not only a product of the works she did publish, but of works she purposely did not. As mentioned previously, several works, including The Antichrist, the fourth part of Zarathustra, Nietzsche Contra Wagner, and Ecce Homo, were suppressed from publication due to their pervasive criticisms of the very ideas that Elisabeth was attempting to promote. The first three works were eventually published, but only after significant alterations. On the other hand, Ecce Homo, which contained by far the greatest number of negative remarks towards German nationalism and culture, Aryan supremacy, and Elisabeth, was withheld for almost twenty years after the author had written it.22 The reason for Elisabeth's prolonged repression of the work was quite simple: she felt that prior to the publication of such condemnatory literature it was necessary to first inundate the German public with as much interpretative work on Nietzsche's life and philosophy as possible. By the time Ecce Homo (1908) was introduced to the public, the image of Nietzsche as a German nationalist and hero was well planted in the hearts and minds of many, both at home and abroad. More importantly, Elisabeth, in order to assist in preserving this carefully crafted image of Nietzsche, limited the accessibilty of Ecce Homo by selling the work at an extremely high price, intending not only to reduce the number of its readers, but to avoid any debate that would assuredly put to question her own interpretation.23
Elisabeth's lengthy suppression of Ecce Homo had implications that extended well beyond her intention of creating a pro-German Nietzsche. Besides being a severe polemic, Ecce Homo was written by Nietzsche for the purpose of safeguarding his philosophy from potential misunderstanding, especially the idea of the Ubermensch. In Ecce Homo, he vigorously repudiated any attempt to define his ideal individual Darwnistically.24 However, with the book unpublished for two decades, Nietzsche's Ubermensch fell prey to a Darwin-conscious age. Proto-Nazi authors like Raoul Richter and Alexander Tille began publishing articles and books that linked Nietzsche's philosophy to Darwin's evolutionary teachings. In the Political-Anthropology Monthly of 1906, Richter presented an article that discerned Nietzsche as the "philosopher of biological anthropology," whose Ubermensch was the product of favorable breeding among "available anthropological types." Richter went on to conclude that Nietzsche, who delivered prophetic philosophy founded upon an alleged connection between racial anthropology and biological ethics, was in accord with the racial theories of Arthur Gobineau and H.S. Chamberlain.25 Tille, in his work From Darwin to Nietzsche (1895), argued a similar point. The Ubermensch for Tille represented a physiological ideal, one that could only be achieved by a new biological ethic that required the purging of weak racial types in the name of promoting stronger, healthier elements.26 These interpretations of Nietzsche were accepted without question from many, most notably in Germany where racial theories and movements founded upon the premises laid out by Social Darwinism were increasing in number and ferocity. Unfortunately, when enough of Nietzsche's material, including Ecce Homo, had finally been published to make possible a scholarly examination of his philosophy, which would have not only put to question these interpretations but would have assuredly freed Nietzsche’s philosophy from this travesty, the First World War erupted, and as one scholar correctly pointed out, "this was not a time for a sober study of such an explosive figure as Nietzsche."27
The impact of The First World War on the cultivation of Nietzsche's image as a patriotic and martial philosopher was extensive. Not only did the war impede a careful appraisal of his work that would have made this image highly questionable, it solidified the interpretation of Nietzsche that Elisabeth and the Archives had vigorously attempted to create. Nietzsche's misrepresented philosophy, through the efforts of Elisabeth and others, was used to bolster the German war effort. Elisabeth’s edition of Zarathustra, with its motivational, yet seemingly belligerent messages that preached discipline, tenacity, and hardness, was cheaply sold to the German soldiers in order to provide a source of inspiration and consolation during the conduct of battle. (Selling over 150,000 copies between 1914 and 1919, Nietzsche's work, next to the Bible and Goethe's Faust, was the most widely read piece of literature among the German military).28 In addition, pamphlets containing Nietzsche's sayings concerning power, war, victory, and the Ubermensch, many of which were misquoted or placed out of context, were complied by Elisabeth and the German author Hermann Itschner, in order to strengthen this connection between the philosopher's ideas and the German war endeavor.29 In effect, the war bestowed an unprecedented success on the project of Elisabeth and the Archives. Nietzsche's philosophy of individualism had become transformed into a symbol and a cause for a nation. Misrepresented doctrines like the Ubermensch and "will to power" had been adopted by the German State as means of winning a war, and, in the years to come, as a source of overcoming defeat.
During Germany's Weimar period (1919-1933), this distorted perception of Nietzsche witnessed little change, and by the time the Nazis came to power in 1933, they had received a Nietzsche that was well suited for their regime. Through the twisted efforts of Elisabeth and others Nietzsche had become a patriotic and martial philosopher, as well as a proponent of Darwinism and selective breeding. During the First World War, Nietzsche's philosophy of individualism had developed into a philosophy for the masses. Collectively, these people and events made the Nazi appropriation of Nietzsche as their philosophical forefather easy; however, they did not make it complete. During their stay in power, the Nazis not only built upon the image of Nietzsche they had inherited, but reshaped the philosopher's ideas in terms of their own needs. Through the laborious efforts of such Nazi "intellectuals" as Hartle, Oehler, and Baumeler, Nietzsche's ideas were further twisted, producing the image of a philosopher whose thoughts not only supported but actually gave rise to such tenets of the Nazi Weltanschauung as anti-Semitism, German nationalism, and Aryan supremacy.
Heinrich Hartle, author of Nietzsche and National Socialism, was a pivotal character in the final stages of transforming Nietzsche's ideas into a pro-Nazi philosophy. In his work (which was used as a handbook for Nazi youth indoctrination), Hartle employed various deceptive means in order to promote the fact that Nietzsche was an anti-Semite and an Aryan supremacist. The first step the Nazi author took was to "explain" Nietzsche's apparent dislike of anti-Semitism. Hartle argued that the philosopher's biting criticisms of Christianity were actually "masked" criticisms of Judaism. "Priest means for [Nietzsche]," Hartle suggested, "a stylized, typified Jew ... The Jews are the bearers of slave morality."30 Hartle insisted that the reason why Nietzsche did not openly approve of anti-Semitism was that the philosopher lived in a period of out-dated racial theories. Hartle knew that Nietzsche was a proponent of Lamarckism, therefore argued that the philosopher believed it was actually possible to transform the decadent Jew into a "good German." However, if Nietzsche had been alive in the 1930s, Hartle insisted, he would have definitely seen the error of his views and would have been a "good Nazi, eager to cleanse Germany of the Jewish race."31
Hartle also argued that Nietzsche was a proponent of Aryan supremacy. In some instances, he picked passages containing the words "master race" and "the blonde beast" from various contexts (and even from different books), enclosed them in a single set of quotation marks, and separated them with a series of three dots in order to give the illusion that Nietzsche was in accord with Nazi racial theories.32 In other instances, Hartle quoted Nietzsche correctly, but only partially. For example, he quoted virtually the entire aphorism from The Genealogy of Morals (section 1, aphorism 11) that contained references of the "blonde Germanic beast", but omitted its last sentence which stated: "although between the old Germanic tribes and us Germans there exists hardly a conceptual relationship, let alone one of blood."33 The reasons for Hartle's unscrupulous actions were kept no secret. In the introduction to his work, he stated that, since much of Nietzsche's material was vague and often times contradictory, he was simply attempting to remove the complexity of Nietzsche's thoughts by shedding light on only the "fruitful" ideas the philosopher presented.34
The deceptive means of selective quoting was also incorporated by Richard Oehler, a leading figure at the Nietzsche Archives. In his work Friedrich Nietzsche in the Third Reich, Oehler took out of context Nietzsche's quotes like "perhaps the young stock-exchange Jew is the most disgusting invention of mankind" and "Let no more Jews come in! And shut the doors, especially towards the East," in order to strengthen the view that Nietzsche was unequivocally anti-Semitic.35 Unfortunately, Oehler failed to mention that the aphorism from which he took the first quote (Human, All Too Human, aphorism 475) also stated "the Jew will be just as usable and desirable an ingredient of [the good European] as any other national residue." (In fact, the aphorism that Oehler cited ironically contained biting criticisms of anti-Semitism, as well as a call for the end of European nationalism!)36 As for the second quote, Oehler did not include the fact that Nietzsche had himself put the passage in quotes and followed it with the comment: "thus commands the instinct of a people whose type is still well and undetermined."37
By far the greatest attempt to create a "good Nazi" out of Nietzsche was conducted by Alfred Baumeler, the university professor from Berlin responsible for the ideological education of the Nazi Party. In works like Nietzsche the Philosopher and Politician and "Nietzsche's Philosophy as Witnessed by Himself", Baumeler incorporated various tactics to induce the idea that the philosopher was not only compatible with the Nazi Weltanschauung , but an ardent supporter. One method Baumeler used was to paper over the differences that existed between the two. For example, Nietzsche's complete dislike of the State and anti-Semitism, and his pro-Jewish comments were explained biographically. Baumeler insisted that Nietzsche detested the State, namely Bismarck's State, because it was a Christian State, and it completely ignored the anti-Christian messages that were presented in his works. Using the same line of reasoning as Hartle, Baumeler insisted that if Nietzsche were alive in the Third Reich, he would have definitely changed his anti-political attitude and would have embraced their regime whole heartily.38 As for Nietzsche's adulation of the Jews, Baumeler contended that this was only an "attention-gaining device" by which the philosopher attempted to exalt the Jews over the Germans in order to get the public to read his works. In respect to Nietzsche's contempt for anti-Semitism, Baumeler insisted that the philosopher was opposed to only the economic and social forms of anti-Semitism that had permeated nineteenth-century Germany, essentially because Nietzsche "stood for a newer and far more radical form."39
Another attempt Baumeler made to appropriate Nietzsche was to simply disregard the philosopher's published texts, with the obvious exception of The Will to Power. Baumeler tried to justify his position by insisting that the philosopher's works were merely "poses" and were not meant to be taken literally. The "real" Nietzsche, Baumeler suggested, was contained in the vast collection of the philosopher's unpublished notes. (In truth, Nietzsche's notes and letters were in complete accord with the views on anti-Semitism, German nationalism, and Aryan supremacy, found in his published works. However this mattered little for Baumeler. Very few people had access to Nietzsche's unpublished material, thus Baumeler knew he could get away with this subterfuge.)40 It comes then to no surprise that Baumeler championed The Will to Power as Nietzsche's magnum opus and the only published text worthy of reading: the work, as mentioned earlier, was nothing but a quilt of Nietzsche's unpublished notes and jottings that his proto-Nazi sister had unscrupulously put together.41
However, Baumeler did not seem to value his own words. He too incorporated the devious means of uplifting random quotes from the philosopher's publications to "show" that Nietzsche was compatible with Nazism. In his piece "Nietzsche's Philosophy as Witnessed by Himself", Baumeler took five hundred passages, many of which were either misquoted, partially quoted, or placed out of context, and put them together in a fashion that made the anti-Nazi philosopher into a philosophical mouth piece for the Third Reich.42
(4)
Why Nietzsche?
The preceding essay on Nietzsche and the Nazis elicits an important question: Why did the Nazis champion Nietzsche as their intellectual forefather, when it was clearly apparent that the philosopher was completely antagonistic to the ideology of the Third Reich? Granted, Elisabeth Nietzsche and a host of others helped create an image of Nietzsche which was militaristic, pro-German, and a supporter of Darwinism. However, this does not explain why the Nazis themselves laboriously distorted a philosophy that they unquestionably knew was at antipodes with their own ideology. The following section will attempt address the foregoing question by providing three separate yet related explanations for the reasons behind the Nazis’ unscrupulous actions.
A common explanation for the Nazis' vigorous attempt to appropriate Nietzsche was that the philosopher would be able to give the Nazis an intellectual justification and a respectability to their Weltanschauung: one they could not receive from their actual forefathers like Wagner, Lagarde, Gobineau, and Chamberlain.1 In this respect, the Nazis' actions were not unusual; throughout most of the history of Western Civilization, philosophers have often been used by political organizations to legitimatize their actions. Philosophers like Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, G.W. Hegel, Karl Marx, and many others have been frequently used as a source of intellectual justification for numerous political movements. Yet, when pressed, this response is, at best, inadequate for it does not the address peculiar nature of the relationship between Nietzsche and the Nazis. In most examples of political movements utilizing or incorporating philosophers as means for legitimization, the former and the latter have usually shared common views or have been in some sort agreement about central issues. In short, the following response still leaves the impending question unanswered: Why Nietzsche? If the Nazis were only motivated by the desire for justification and legitimacy, then why did they not appropriate a philosopher who had at least something in common with their ideology? For example, why did not the Nazis champion Plato as their intellectual father? Afterall Plato, in the Republic, espoused a philosophy that was in closer resemblance to the Nazi world view than anything Nietzsche had ever written.
Weaver Santaniello, author of Nietzsche, God, and the Jews, offered a radically different reason for the Nazis' appropriation of Nietzsche. She argued that the Nazis' appropriation of Nietzsche was motivated by a spirit of revenge against a philosopher who vehemently criticized the very essence of their ideology. In the piece, Santaniello wrote:
I hold that the Nazis were not attracted to Nietzsche, they were repulsed and enraged by him precisely
because he upheld the Jews and dared to defy many precursors of the Third Reich ... The Nazis use of
Nietzsche was not based on any "misinterpretation" or "selective appropriation," it was based on a
twisted sense of spite and was an act of retaliation.2
The Nazis, according,to Santaniello, felt that by purposely furnishing Nietzsche as an anti-Semite, a German nationalist, and an Aryan supremacist they were receiving retributive justice from an "obnoxious foe." Moreover, she argued that by appropriating Nietzsche into the Nazi intellectual pantheon, the Nazis were able to not only "get back" at Nietzsche, they were also able to silence the philosopher's biting criticisms of those ideas that the Nazis held most dear.3 Albeit this argument is fairly cogent, it too is unable to stand alone as a motivational explanation of the Nazis actions. Put simply, if the Nazis’ appropriation of Nietzsche was motivated only by a desire to "get back" and to silence the philosopher, then why did not the Nazis throw Nietzsche's work to the flame, as they had done with so many other anti-Nazi scholars?
Perhaps the most telling explanation concerning the Nazis’ motivation for appropriating Nietzsche was that the former were attempting to create a mythical continuity in German history that would serve as a means for legitimating the Nazi Weltanschauung.4 What makes this response so appealing is that, while supporting the argument of legitimization, it is able to offer an explanation that directly addresses the peculiarity of the relationship between Nietzsche and the Nazis. It is also my suggestion that this response adds a dimension to Santaniello’s argument that would enable her to maintain her position, all the while explaining why Nietzsche was not blacklisted along with many other “unfavorable” writers. The desire for "good lineage" required the Nazis to appropriate as much of their past as they could, and interpret it in a manner that would lead one to believe that National Socialism was the final product of a long term German project--one based on German nationalism, Aryan supremacy, and anti-Semitism. If the Nazis' claim that "all German history led to the rise of the Third Reich" was to carry any weight, they needed to include a figure as Nietzsche, whose popularity and overall significance in Germany in the years just prior to 1933 was matched by very few. Consequently, the Nazis, faced with this imperative, went to great lengths distorting, explaining, and dismissing the various aspects of Nietzsche's ideas that were antagonistic to their ideology in order to create the illusion that philosopher was a pivotal step towards the rise of the Third Reich.
Although it is still uncertain as to exactly why the Nazis attempted to appropriate Nietzsche into their organization, it is plausible to suggest, from the aforementioned interpretations, that the Nazis were, in essence, driven by a desire to strengthen their own political image and agenda. Whether it was to silence Nietzsche, to make him a source of justification, or to use him as a means to creating a meta-historical myth, the Nazis were obviously looking to bolster their own reputation to Germany, as well as to the rest of the world.
Notes
Introduction
1. Georg Lukacs, The Destruction of Reason, trans. Peter Palmer (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, 1952), 341.
2. Hans Gunther, "Der Fall Nietzsche," Unter dem Banner des Marxismus 11 (1935), 542, in Steven E. Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy in Germany, 1890-1990 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992), 275-276.
3. Georg Lichtheim, Europe in the Twentieth Century (New York: Praeger Publishers, 1972), 152.
4. Hermann Rauschning, The Revolution of Nihilism (New York: Alliance Book, 1939), in Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 281.
5. Crane Brinton, Nietzsche (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1948), 217.
6. Thomas Mann, "Nietzsche's Philosophy in Light of Contemporary Events" (Washington D.C.: Library of Congress, 1948), 27-28, quoted in Weaver Santaniello, Nietzsche, God, and the Jews: His Critique of Judeo Christianity in Relation to the Nazi Myth (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994), 169.
7. Albert Camus, The Rebel, trans. Anthony Brewer (New York: Vintage Books, 1956), 75.
8. George Bataille, "Nietzsche and the Fascists" (1937), in Visions of Excess: Selected Writings (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1985), 185-186, quoted in Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 294.
9. Karl Lowith, From Hegel to Nietzsche, ed. David E. Green (Garden City: Anchor Books,-1967), 198.
10. Berel Lang, Act and Idea in the Nazi Genocide (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1990), 197-198, quoted in Aschheim, The Nietzsch Legacy, 320.
Notes
Nietzsche in the Third Reich
1. Ben Macintyre, Forgotten Fatherland: The Search for Elisabeth Nietzsche (New York: HarperPerennial, 1993), 180.
2. Jean-Michael Angebert, The Occult of the Third Reich, trans. Lewis Sunberg (New York: Macmillam, 1974), 129.
3. William L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1960), 100; J.P Stern, Hitler: The Fuhrer and His People (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975), 57.
4. Charles B. Flood, Hitler: The Path to Power (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1989),20.
5. Thomas R. Hinton, Nietzsche in German Politics and Society, 1890-1918 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1983), 1.
6. Angebert, The Occult, 129.
7. H.F. Peters, Zarathustra's Sister The Case of Elisabeth and Friedrich Nietzsche (New York: Crow Publishers, 1977), 222.
8. Hans D. Sluga, Heidegger Crisis: Philosophy and Politics in Nazi Germany (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1993), 179.
9. Peters, Zarathustra's Sister, 222.
10. Albert R. Chandler, Rosenberg's Nazi Myth (New York: Greenwood Press, Publishers, 1968), 77-89.
11. Peter Viereck, Metapolitics: The Roots of the Nazi Mind (New York: Capricorn Books, 1965), 225-226.
12. Macintyre, Forgotten Fatherland, 186.
13. Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 240.
14. Sluga, Heidegger Crisis, 128-131.
15. Ibid., 131.
16. Alfred Baumeler, "Nietzsche und der Nazionalsozialismus,"Studien zur deutsche Geistesgeschichte (1937), 294, quoted in Brinton, Nietzsche, 209.
17. Max Oehler, "Hitler's visit to the Archive", July 20, 1944, Goethe-Schiller Archive, Weimar, quoted in Macintyre, Forgotten Fatherland, 184.
18. Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 235.
19. Peters, Zarathustra's Sister, 221.
20. Alfred Baumeler, Nietzsche der Philosoph und Politiker (Leipzig; Reklam, 1931), 183, quoted in Brinton, Nietzsche, 228.
21. Chandler, Rosenberg's Nazi Myth, 3-4; Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 245.
22. Brinton, Nietzsche, 210.
23. George Seldes, ed., The Great Thoughts (New York: Ballentine Books, 1985), 312.
24. Macintyre, Forgotten Fatherland, 186.
25. Max Domarus, ed., Hitler: Reden und Proklamationen, 1932-1945 (Munich, 1962), 1, quoted in Jackson J. Spielvogel, Hitler and Nazi Germany: A History (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1988), 109.
26. Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 242-243.
27. Richard Grumberger, The 12-Year Reich: A Social History of Nazi Germany,-1933-1945 (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971), 119.
28. Leon Poliakov, The Aryan Myth: A History of Racist and Nationalist Ideas in Europe , trans. Edmund Howard (New York: Burr Books, Inc., 1974), 299.
29. Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 244.
30. Heinrich Romer, "Nietzsche und das Rasseproblem," Rasse:Monatsschrift fur den Nordischen Gedanken 7 (1940), 59, quoted in ibid., 244.
31. Kurt Kassler, Nietzsche und das Recht (Munich: Ernst Reinhardt, 1941), 74ff, in ibid., 251.
32. Brinton, Nietzsche, 216.
33. Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Sentry ed., trans. Ralph Manheim (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.,1943) 655.
34. Brinton, Nietzsche, 212-213.
35. Wilhelm Lobsack, "Nietzsche und der Totale Krieg," Der Deutsche im Osten 6, no. 5 (August 1943), 213, quoted in Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 246.
Notes
Nietzsche contra the Nazis
1. Claude David, Hitler's Germany (Paris: P.U.F, 1954), 61, quoted in Angebert,The Occult, 129.
2. See Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, 300-316 passim; The Nazi Years: A Documentary History , ed. Joachim Remak (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1969), 5-9, 28, 145-160.
3. Friedrich Nietzsche, Daybreak, trans. R.J. Hollingdale (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), 205, quoted in Santaniello, Nietzsche, 50.
4. Friedrich Nietzsche, The Will To Power trans. Walter Kaufmann and R.J. Hollingdale, ed. Walter Kaufmann (New York: Vintage Books, 1968), 190.
5. Ibid., 460.
6. Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, trans. R.J. Hollingdale (London: Penguin Books, 1969), 123.
7. Santaniello, Nietzsche, 106.
8. Friedrich Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morals, trans. Walter Kaufmann and R.J. Hollindale (New York: Vintage Books, 1969), 144, in Walter Kaufmann, ed., On the Genealogy of Morals and Ecce Homo (New York: Vintage Books, 1969).
9. Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, trans. R.J. Hollingdale (London: Penguin Books, 1973), 182.
10. Daybreak, 207, quoted in Santaniello, Nietzsche, 50.
11. Mein Kampf, 303.
12. Friedrich Nietzsche, "Letter to His Sister", Christmas 1887, in Walter Kaufmann, trans. and ed., The Portable Nietzsche (New York: Penguin Books, 1954), 456-457.
13. Mein Kampf, 393.
14. Thus Spoke Zarathustra, 75.
15. See Friedrich Nietzsche, The Gay Science, trans., Walter Kaufmann (New York: Vintage Books, 1974), 318; Beyond Good and Evil, 170-191.
16. Walter Kaufmann, Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist, 4th ed. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1974), 412.
17. Mein Kampf, 398.
18. The Gay Science, 339.
19. Beyond Good and Evil, 176, quoted in Viereck, Metapolitics, 48.
20. The Gay Science, 292.
21. Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 298.
22. Daybreak, 264, quoted in ibid., 296.
23. Chandler, Rosenberg's Nazi Myth, 161.
24. Ecce Homo, 322-323.
25. Ibid., 322, 323.
26. Ibid., 323.
27. Friedrich Nietzsche, Twilight of the Idols, trans. R.J. Hollingdale (Baltimore: Penguin Books Ltd, 1968), 58, in R.J. Hollingdale, trans., Twilight of the Idols and The Anti-Christ (Baltimore: Penguin Books Ltd, 1968).
28. Friedrich Nietzsche, "To Franziska.and Elisabeth Nietzsche", March 31, 1885, in Selected Letters of Friedrich Nietzsche, trans. and ed. Christopher Middleton (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969), 238.
29. Daybreak, 113, quoted in R.J. Hollingale, trans. and ed., A Nietzsche Reader (London: Penguin Books, 1977), 218.
30. The Genealogy of Morals, 41.
31. Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 225.
32. The Genealogy of Morals, 43.
33. Ecce Homo, 261.
34. Ibid.
35. Twilight of the Idols, 63, quoted in Santaniello, Nietzsche, 59.
36. Thus Spoke Zarathustra, 74.
37. Hans Kohn, Political Ideologies of the 20th Century, 3rd ed., (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1966), 48-49.
38. Ecce Homo, 284-285.
Notes
The Nazification of Nietzsche
1. Macintyre, The Forgotten Fatherland, 144.
2. Hinton, Nietzsche in German Politics, 2-4.
3. R.J. Hollingdale, Nietzsche: The Man and His Philosophy (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1965), 2-4.
4. Hans Kohn, Political Ideologies, 289-290.
5. Ecce Homo, 326.
6. Peters, Zarathustra's Sister, 129-130.
7. Ibid., 133.
8. Ibid., 169.
9. Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 68.
10. Santaniello, Nietzsche, 147.
11. Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 5-6.
12. Karl Schelecta, a preeminent Nietzsche scholar, closely examined Nietzsche's notebooks and discovered innumerable cases in which Elisabeth used letters her brother had written to others, but which she altered to make it appear as if they had been written to her. See Walter Kaufmann, From Shakespeare to Existentialism (New York: Anchor Books, 1960), 383.
13. Richard Oehler, Die Zukunf der Nietzsche-Bewegung (Leipzig: Armanen, 1938), 12, quoted in Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 46.
14. Santaniello, Nietzsche, 40.
15. Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 47.
16. Elisabeth Forster-Nietzsche, The Young Nietzsche, trans. A.M. Ludoici (London, 1912), 296-297, quoted in Macintyre, The Forgotten Fatherland, 159.
17. Elisabeth Forster-Nietzsche, The Lonely Nietzsche, trans. Paul V. Cohn (London, 1915), 368, quoted in ibid.
18. "Her Brother's Keeper," Time 71 (March 17, 1958): 34.
19. Macintyre, The Forgotten Fatherland, 164; Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 5-7.
20. (Time 1958, 34)
21. Elisabeth Forster-Nietzsche, The Young Nietzsche, 334, quoted in Macintyre, The Forgotten Fatherland, 165.
22. Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 5.
23. Ibid
24. Ibid., 8, 118.
25. Raoul Richter, "Nietzsches Stellung zu Entwicklungslehre und Rassetheorie," Politisch-anthropologische Monatsschrift (1906), 544-564, quoted in Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 123.
26. Alexander Tille, Von Darwin bis Nietzsche: Ein Buch Entwicklungsethik (Leipzig: C.G. Neumann, 1895), vii, 10-11, in ibid., 123-124.
27. Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 8.
28. Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 132-137.
29. Ibid., 144.
30. Heinrich Hartle, Nietzsche und der Nationalsozialismus, 2. Auflage (1939), 50, quoted in Brinton, Nietzsche, 230.
31. Ibid.
32. Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 291.
33. Brinton, Nietzsche, 214.
34. Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 252.
35. Brinton, Nietzsche, 216; Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 290.
36. Friedrich Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human, trans. R.J. Hollingdale (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1986), 175.
37. Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 291; Beyond Good and Evil, 182.
38. Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 291; Brinton, Nietzsche, 227-228.
39. Aschheim, The Nietzsche Legacy, 250-251.
40. Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 78, 289.
41. J.P. Stern, A Study of Nietzsche (Cambridge; Cambridge University Press, 1979), 25.
42. Brinton, Nietzsche, 228.
Notes
Why Nietzsche?
1. Kaufmann, Nietzsche, 235-236; Brinton, Nietzsche, 203-206.
2. Santaniello, Nietzsche, 150.
3. Ibid., 151.
4. Sluga, Heidegger Crisis, 30, 45.
Bibliography
Angebert, Jean-Michael. The Occult of the Third Reich. Translated by Lewis Sunberg. New York:
Macmillam, 1974.
Aschheim, Steven E. The Nietzsche Legacy in Germany, 1890-1990. Berkeley: University of California
Press, 1975.
Brinton, Crane. Nietzsche. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1948.
Camus, Albert. The Rebel. Translated by Anthony Brewer. New York: Vintage Books, 1956.
Chandler, Albert R. Rosenberg's Nazi Myth. New York: Greenwood Press Publishers, 1968.
Flood, Charles B. Hitler: The Path to Power. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1989.
Grumberger, Richard. The 12-Year Reich: A Social History of Nazi Germany, 1933-1945. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, 1971.
"Her Brother's Keeper." Time 71 (March 17, 1958): 34.
Hinton, Thomas R. Nietzsche in German Politics and Society, 1890-1918. Manchester: Manchester
University Press, 1983.
Hitler, Adolf. Mein Kampf. Sentry edition. Translated by Ralph Manheim. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Co., 1943.
Hollingdale, R.J., trans. and ed. A Nietzsche Reader. London: Penguin Books, 1977.
--------. Nietzsche: The Man and his Philosophy. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1965.
Kohn, Hans. Political Ideologies of the 20th Century. 3rd. ed. New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1966.
Kaufmann, Walter. From Shakespeare to Existentialism. New York: Anchor Books, 1960.
--------. Nietzsche: Philosopher, Psychologist, Antichrist. 4th ed. Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1974.
--------. trans. and ed. The Portable Nietzsche. New York: Penguin Books, 1954.
Lichtheim, Georg. Europe in the Twentieth Century. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1972.
Lowith, Karl. From Hegel to Nietzsche. Edited by David Green. Garden City: Anchor Books, 1967.
Lukacs, Georg. The Destruction of Reason. Translated by Peter Palmer. Atlantic Highlands, NJ:
Humanities Press, 1952.
Macintyre, Ben. The Forgotten Fatherland: The Search for Elisabeth Nietzsche. New York:
HarperPerennial, 1993.
Middleton, Christopher. trans. and ed. Selected Letters of Friedrich Nietzsche. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1969.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. Beyond Good and Evil. Translated by R.J. Hollingdale-London: Penguin Books,
1973.
--------. The Gay Science. Translated by Walter Kaufmann. New York: Vintage Books, 1974.
--------. Human, All Too Human. Translated by R.J. Hollindale. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1986.
--------. On The Genealogy of Morals and Ecce Homo. Translated by Walter Kaufmann and R.J
Hollingdale. Edited by Walter Kaufmann. New York: Vintage Books, 1969.
--------. Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Translated by R.J. Hollingdale. London: Penguin Books, 1969.
--------. Twilight of the Idols and The Antichrist. Translated by R.J. Hollingdale. Baltimore: Penguin
Books Ltd., 1968.
--------. The Will to Power. Translated by Walter Kaufmann and R.J. Hollingdale. Edited by Walter
Kaufmann. New York: Vintage Books, 1968.
Peters, H.F. Zarathustra's Sister: The Case of Elisabeth and Friedrich Nietzsche. New York: Crow
Publishers, 1977.
Poliakov, Leon. The Aryan Myth: A History of Racist and Nationalist Ideas in Europe. Translated by
Edmund Howard. New York: Burr Books; Inc., 1974.
Remak, Joachim, ed. The Nazi Years: A Documentary History. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
1969.
Santaniello, Weaver. Nietzsche, God, and the Jews: His Critique of Judeo-Christianity in Relation to the Nazi
Myth. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994.
Shirer, William L. The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany. New York: Simon
& Schuster, 1960.
Sluga, Hans D. Heidegger Crisis: Philosophy and Politics in Nazi Germany. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press, 1993.
Spielvogel, Jackson J. Hitler and Nazi Germany: A History. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
1988.
Stern, J.P. Hitler: The Fuhrer and His People. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1975.
--------. A Study of Nietzsche. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979.
Viereck, Peter. Metapolitics: The Roots of the Nazi Mind. New York: Capricorn Books, 1965.