00:00 📜 Nietzsche criticizes capitalism, drawing from ancient philosophers' views on wealth as a danger to society and morality. 07:44 💰 Capitalism satisfies desires efficiently but blurs the line between wants and needs, leading to health problems and addiction. 12:23 🏛 The state is incentivized to manage the health issues caused by capitalism, leading to bureaucratic expansion and eroding social cohesion. 16:46 🔄 Capitalism can ultimately lead to revolutions against property relationships and class distinctions. 19:34 💼 Capitalism introduces a new selection mechanism based on capital efficiency, contrasting with pre-capitalist aristocratic hierarchies. 20:44 🏦 Nietzsche criticizes the idea of letting the market sort out fraudulent behavior, arguing that without state intervention, fraud can go unpunished, harming consumers. 21:12 🏛 Nietzsche suggests that governments exist to protect the rich from the poor, emphasizing the role of the state in safeguarding the interests of capital holders. 23:19 🧳 Corporate leaders hold significant political power, often influencing government regulation, funding, and legislation through lobbying and campaign contributions. 24:15 📜 Nietzsche characterizes successful businessmen as relying on skills such as contracts, law, deception, and public relations to exercise power, which may involve neutralizing threats through litigation and arbitration. 25:24 🍾 Nietzsche describes capitalism as promoting a society driven by pleasure-seeking, with a focus on immediate satisfaction of desires, leading to concerns about self-preservation, health, and convenience. 26:46 💼 Nietzsche portrays the top echelon of capitalists as shallow, materialistic, short-term oriented, and hedonistic, reflecting the culture of capitalist society. 28:25 🔄 Nietzsche highlights the connection between the rise of socialism and the behavior of the wealthy, suggesting that extravagant displays of wealth by the rich fuel socialist sentiments. 31:23 💰 Nietzsche places responsibility on the rich for the spread of socialism, arguing that their excessive materialism and ostentatious spending contribute to the rise of socialist sentiments. 34:10 📚 Nietzsche asserts that possession is the sole differentiator between the rich and socialists, implying that if the rich were to lose their wealth, they would become socialists themselves. 41:46 📜 Nietzsche emphasizes the importance of self-discipline among the wealthy to conquer resentment and achieve prosperity. 42:13 💰 Nietzsche warns about the dangers of wealth in the hands of those lacking in intellectual and moral virtues, leading to a societal divide. 48:00 🏛 Nietzsche views democracy as an unstoppable force that contributes to a pan-European culture, akin to cyclopean building, preserving civilization from barbarism. 49:19 🌍 Nietzsche believes that democracy's rise will lead to a European League of Nations with individual nations as autonomous entities. 51:12 🧐 Nietzsche predicts that socialism will be diffused within a democracy, leading to the welfare state and a middle class. 01:00:46 🇷🇺 Nietzsche discusses the potential for future struggles between Europe and Russia as a means of invigorating Europe. 01:02:23 ⚖ Nietzsche highlights the challenge of addressing the unjust distribution of property due to historical injustices within the framework of liberal democracy. 01:03:20 ⏰ Nietzsche explores two methods for addressing the injustice of property: equal distribution and state ownership. 01:04:32 🔄 Nietzsche critiques both capitalism and socialism, arguing that they share the same utilitarian underlying thought. 01:05:29 💡 Nietzsche contends that socialism cannot be the solution to capitalism because it's an outgrowth of capitalism's premises. 01:06:24 💰 Nietzsche questions capitalism's ability to equate unequal things, particularly in relation to land, which holds sentimental and practical value. 01:09:25 🔄 Nietzsche suggests that redistributing land to achieve socialism may lead to new injustices and class divisions. 01:15:08 🗳 Nietzsche proposes limitations on democracy to combat dangers posed by parties, the rich, and the poor, aiming to preserve democratic stability. 01:18:08 🏦 Nietzsche suggests nationalizing the financial sector, preventing the sudden acquisition of wealth and maintaining open paths for small fortunes. 01:22:14 👤 Nietzsche argues that labor cannot be justly valued by the product's merit, as individual responsibility is denied due to the absence of free will. 01:23:39 🏭 Nietzsche argues that meritocracy doesn't necessarily select for moral merit, as a person's industriousness and productivity aren't choices they make. 01:24:47 🤖 The value of labor in a capitalist system is determined by its ability to satisfy desires and is not a reward for hard work; automation can replace human labor when it becomes cost-effective. 01:25:56 🐎 The decline of horses in the economy due to automation serves as an example of how capitalism doesn't prioritize the well-being of individuals or species. 01:27:09 💰 Nietzsche argues that capitalism doesn't correlate hard work with economic success and that success in business is not a product of free will. 01:28:48 🏭 Nietzsche suggests that quality of goods can decline in a market economy due to the emphasis on appearance and mass production; he proposes that experts should judge product quality. 01:32:42 🔍 Capitalism's focus on mass production and salability often leads to lower-quality goods and discourages specialization or deviation from mass-produced products. 01:36:23 🌍 Nietzsche criticizes capitalism for its short-term mindset, exploitation of workers, and manipulation of the public, as well as the response of those in power to vilify symptoms of discontent rather than addressing the root issues. 01:39:14 🗳 Nietzsche suggests that those in power exploit movements like socialism to create exceptional rules and consolidate their authority. 01:44:00 💰 Nietzsche criticizes both the super-rich and socialists, suggesting that they often pursue material advancement with equal vigor. He does not completely reject the role of the state in economic matters, unlike Ayn Rand. 01:45:08 🏛 Nietzsche sees the state as an embodiment of human instincts and does not view it as entirely separate or contradictory to the market, in contrast to Ayn Rand's perspective.
Quite the best lectures I've heard on philosophy, but in fact on anything, and I've attended lectures by world-famous scholars in person. This podcast deserves far greater fame. Nietzsche himself would approve, I'm sure! On a personal note, like most academics and intellectuals, I usedbto be leftist, but had to abandon the flock or herd thinking. And yet, like Nietzsche, I remain deeply suspicious of capitalism, so I don't neatly fit on the right either - certainly not in the Republicans or Conservatives (I have dual citizenship. ) We need a new kind of political philosophy, one based on Burkean principles, I think, as Sir Roger Scruton argued - a kind of conservatism of tradition, which is not opposed to change, but also doesn't seek to destroy simply because it assumes that our society is rotten to the core and.must be torn down so that we can build some kind of neo-Marxist utopia.
I think you and I are on the same wavelength politically. I’m also a former leftist, but I don’t fit in with the right-wing either. I also don’t really care for the “centrist” label, as if the truth is always in the middle… there’s a lot of truth at the fringes, too! I think we should just smash the entire political compass and start over from new first principles.
@@untimelyreflections In a way, that's happening. Populism is an attempt to do that, but so far it's just been demagogues like Trump who appealed to the lowest common denominator. Giorgia Meloni in Italy seems to be responding to what people actually want, but it's still too early to tell. She doesn't appear to be the far-right bogeywoman that the left have painted her as, anyway. At least she's managed to form an administration outside the framework of the traditional parties of power. That's a step forward. Europe is about to change radically anyway. I'm not sure about the States.
Many Species are evolving from Marxian Genus,, Wokeism. They do post hoc rationalisation and say Marxism is constantly evolving Idea, 😂 but in reality a Quasi religious Superstitious infallible Dogma
I don’t think Friedrich “the re-evaluation of all values” Nietzsche would have cared much for tradition or conservatism. While I’m sympathetic to your goal of not being bound by either left wing or right wing dogma, a conservatism that’s occasionally open to change just seems like moderate right-wing thought to me, not anything new. Ultimately, every political movement is open to changing some things and keeping others, the question is how we decide what’s worth abandoning and what’s worth keeping.
This is your first video I'm listening to and it's perfect. I'm impressed by the depth and breadth of your analysis. I have decided to watch all of your previous videos and l look forward to more quality content from you. You deserve way more viewers and subscribers. I wish you nothing but success
Absolutely crazy video bro Massive respect for the work put into it and how beautifully listenable and easily digestible it is. If you got someone to animate some of this while you narrate you could get lots of views and gain influence over a chunk of the youth The youth needs to consume things such as this and not 13 second tiktok videos that fry their brains and teach them little outside of tomfoolery
What an extraordinary experience listening to you. At the end of his life, they took him to an asylum 129"Th right man in the right place, " says the brutal Nordan. But soon his old mother cares to claim him and take him under her forgiving care. She died in 1897 and Nietzche's sister took him to live in Weimar. There a statue was made by Kramer-- showing the once powerful mind broken, helpless, and resigned. Yet, he was not all unhappy, the peace he had never had when sane was his now. Nature had mercy on him when she made him mad. He caught his sister weeping as she looked at him, and he could not understand her tears: "Lizbeth," he asked, "why do you cry? Are you not happy?" On one occasion he heard her talk of books; his pale face lit up; "Ah!" he said brightening, "I too have written some good books" -- and the lucid moment passed. He died in 1900. Seldom has a man so great a price for genius. My papa and brother turned me on to philosophy at a young age and books. My brother was so intelligent, college educated, and a Navel man. The Navey destroyed my brother and he loved Nietzche's writings. He also went insane and he will always be my inspiration to study and grow. He returned home and slowly went insane as he lived with my parents and my visits were frequent. His grave is at a cemetery near our ole homeplace and on it reads, the USS LIBERTY NAVEL SHIP, 1967. He also came home, broken and shattered as many men do from unjust wars. With the deepest appreciation and respect for your videos.
Thanks for your personal story Rudolf Steiner sat for hours with Nietzsche for hours when Nietzsche was in his daze. He wrote a biography of Nietzsche titled Nietzsche Fighter For Freedom It’s a wonderful book And Steiner also wrote the Philosophy of Freedom which expounds in Nietzsches ideas Our society is dying because of the factors mentioned in this talk
I'm so glad your video on Faust ended up in my recommendations; continue the good work. (Also, I'm not sure if I should be proud or ashamed that I've listened to that specific episode several times.)
The issue with that is people are so basic they aren’t intelligent enough to consume this content he needs to add a cashapp or patreon ill send him 50$ bucks
Incredible analysis. It’s amazing to hear Nietzsche’s advice on focusing on the middle class and being suspicious of the lower and higher classes. We are definitely on the other edge of the spectrum where we ignore the middle class and feed the rest. The middle class, however, is not dependent on their financial status so naturally they will excel in character so this makes total sense. The poor have to worry about surviving while the rich on appearance.
He actually had pretty common sense solutions. The financial sector isn't talked about enough. A lot of people still talk of capitalism like it's the same system Marx was criticizing, when everything has changed so much since then. If we essentially get rid of the financial system as we know it, this would solve 90% of our economic problems.
Maybe there was some hope to do something with the financial system at 2008, until the Democratic party understood that identity politics is a better investment in the political arena.
your content is very good. I usually criticise the moments where you might anglicise nietzsche, only because you are the only one who gives me occaision to and my own thinking does it a lot....this episode i was enraptured, it was really well delivered. thanks
As I understand it (or at least try to), coming from an Austrian and laissez-faire free market perspective and also studying Bitcoin extensively, this critic seams more towards the "Fiat-system", incentived by Fiat-money as for example outlined in Saifedean Ammous' "The fiat standard". It provides a plausible explanation for wrong incentives, over financialization, high time preference tendencies and the disconnect between merit and capital accumulation. You brought some new perspectives, of which I was ignorant so far and for that I'm very grateful. However I struggle to conceptualise if the same capitalism critic will still hold in a global free market without "broken money", which so far could have only been theorized about by libertarians or anarcho-capitalists. Bitcoin changes the reality of private property in a profound way. It's properties could enable a sound money that has not been seen before, and has not even come close by the failed promise of gold as during the gold-standard (also the time of Nietzsche) which actually coined the term "sound" money. Pun intended. I'm sharing my thoughts to see if there is some merit to them and to ask if you have pondered about this already or not.
Jung revealed the distinguishing skill that catapulted Nietzsche into the league of Plato beyond perhaps even Schopenhauer, and Emerson. Nietzsche was highly trained as a classical philologist immersed in the original sources of Greek, Latin, and Hebrew. Hence, Nietzsche gained a profound knowledge of the greatest minds of antiquity and could read the source material in a direct first hand way and not rely on second hand accounts. Imagine being able to understand all the nuances of source material from the Bible in Hebrew or Plato in Greek to appreciate the nuances and meanings of texts directly rather than to accept second hand some other scholars interpretation of the passage. Nietzsche's devastating critique of the intellectual edifice of the times originated because he knew how the professors of the time masked the state/church control over the cultural wasteland. These professorial serfs under state control pushed an agenda, protected their "bread and butter" intellectual moat, as well as just hid unbounded potentiality and luminosity from themselves or others for either lack of courage, intellectual depth, or even just nakedly "hidden in plain sight" sinister reasons. Nietzsche lived and breathed for channeling the creative, sublimated outlet of the will to power. Just as a world class poker player has to live, breathe and sleep poker to be a world champion, a philosopher on the Olympian level of Nietzsche has to breathe the mountain air of pure, inspired energy every day in a way not possible for a man involved in a daily business or practice such as Jung. Sure, the business can keep the man "grounded", but to reach Nietzsche's Olympian level and full spectrum dominance philosophical level you need the foundational basics of classical philology combined with a passion and instinct for enlightenment and illumination based off actual reading of ancient wisdom in the original. As German philosopher Schopenhauer observed, unless a man can read Latin and Greek in the original, there will always be a hole in the scholar's education that undermines the strength of his intellectual thought. This observation is a bitter pill for us all in a vapid age of mass media and hollow men. The German professor, visionary was just such an intellectual tour de force that we will probably never able to appreciate his greatness or sublime gifts to humanity. Greek and Latin are not emphasized in today's propaganda mills of liberal arts universities or even at the time of Jung when studying Latin and Greek required hard work most were not willing to endure. Nietzsche was a sublime gift to humanity, and in fact his Navy Seal like attack on the soft, descendent Western philosophers and clergy of the time came with devastating force and mountain lightning speed. Ultimately though, Nietzsche's attack came out of a deep love for man and his no limit potential. Once the blinders came off and courageous, disciplined men were made aware of what the actual classical and Biblical texts meant free of some political or mercenary agenda, Nietzsche allows us all then to share in the love for expanded grand inner horizons and "satori" enlightenment resulting from the sublimated will to power. In this sense, "the laughing lion" legendary philosopher, in exposing the agendas of many "translations" and university moat protecting "degrees" brings us all back to ourselves and our higher man potential. Nietzsche's took humanity out to the creative philosophical edge and gave a wonderous vision of vast intellectual horizons. The grand German' philosopher's lionheart roar, that still reverberates in the Swiss Alps today, echoes how the creative sublimated will to power can allow us to rise high above the dark agendas and deception pervasive amidst the establishment wasteland.
Sorry my English. Amazing lesson, Professor. I can see now, why, Nietzsche considers Socrates and Buddha as egoists. Socrates and Buddha just care for the individual salvation, society or the state is just an instrument to achieve it. Now, Nietzsche, as Plato, Aristotle and Aquinas, before him, considers the common good of society as the supreme good. He sees the individual as a instrument of the state and to the conservation this obscure notion of "high culture" ( French books about the salons' debates of the high society of XIX century, for instance, rich people playing piano and violin, poems about love and spleen, and so on? ). Now, Nietzsche wants to go back to the ancient Greeks, but for them, during the Homeric age, the most important value was not the city or its common good, but the individual glory. Achilles doesn't fight the Trojans because he is a soldier seeking the common good of the Greeks, he just wants the gold, the female slaves of Troy and the glory on the battlefield. He just fights for his own good. So, I guess, Nietzsche's idea of aristocracy is a medieval one, barbarian war lords fighting each other for the good of their kingdom and faith, but fighting and living as a collective entity.
New listener to your channel, great job. Your content is great, and your delivery is outstanding, both clear and concise with a voice made for podcasting. Would like to hear some thoughts on Oswald Spengler or some full podcasts, if that is a topic that you would like to cover. Wishing your channel continued growth from a new fan.
Why does it matter that a lot of people have a hard time with making responsible choices in the market? The individual still can if he chooses too. Can a society truly say it reared great individuals if they can't make good choices unless they are forced too?
"Forced to" in this context means that society uses external control like punishment and rules to stop people from behaving impulsively, instead of either helping strengthen the individual's impulse control or spurring their intrinsic motivation
This still works in a deterministic framework but i'm not certain i buy that idea, though i think the definition of free will as an uncaused cause is not really useful either. I would define it as the mechanism within an individual that picks between conflicting internal and external drives
Since we do not like power concentrated in the hands of too few wealthy people when capitalism is involved. If we are stupid enough, we will chose instead of have power be even more concentrated in the hands of an individual tyrant, such as Lennon and Stalin, shown above, who also have a gruesome monopoly on violence.
This is one of my go back to episodes. I think I’ve streamed it 7 times- - whatever, who’s doing the counting when it involves a topic as important as a non-Marxist, or Marxian, critique of 19th century laissez faire capitalism, which was brutal on both body and soul for the (often child) workers. That being said, through a painfully slow process of grudging adaptation, a compromised approach was achieved by the onset of the Great War. (I’m gonna state this as a semi-existentialist Christian- - Jesus, why oh why did that generation have to suffer so? Oh, wait- - venal politicians, poor planning, worse communications, new weapons technology, and obstinate “telephone generals” were to blame. Got it!) Anyway, here’s my lame attempt at a formula for market formation. Its markets roughly equal manufactured desire, plus perceived need. M=?~ md + pn. Alright people, start lobbying for my Nobel Prize. (No Corrine- it’s not “noble”, it’s “Nobel”. She’s cute as a button, and dumb as a bent thumb tack.)
First time , just got your channel recommended, what detail and assertion , splendid stuff thank you good sir , subscribe and like. not too many channels like you, remind me of academy of ideas but wayyy more versatile ! Thank u as we shall continue truth seeker!
I've really enjoyed the content of the channel thus far, thank you for your hard work, and I'm glad to see the channel growing. I'm twenty minutes in so far, but I wanted to address something you said about the market vs the state, namely that consequences are delayed when the market sorts it out. I'd argue the same critique could be applied to the state as well, especially when it comes to fraud. If the FTX, and Madoff scandals have shown us anything it's that there aren't any organizations that can prevent fraudulence, regardless of whether the watchdog is a private or state actor, and that arrogant people will always try to shortcut to meaningful wealth. Just my two cents, keep up the good work.
Hi ! Very nice video on an aspect of Nietzsche that is quite misunderstood and not mentioned often. I have a suggestion for a video. How important is heredity for Nietzsche ?
I don’t remember it coming up much in what Nietzsche I’ve read and he famously hated nationalism so I would say it probably isn’t that important to him, but I haven’t done any sort of comprehensive study of his work so I might be wrong
"The less you eat, drink and buy books; the less you go to the theatre, the dance hall, the public house; the less you think, love, theorise, sing, paint, fence, etc., the more you save - the greater becomes your treasure which neither moths nor rust will devour - your capital." -- Marx 1844. Capitalism steals the oxygen from the fire crucial to the development growth of the will to power. Money is a good slave but a bad master ( capitalism ).
Keegan, always a pleasure to listen to your commentary. Let’s make this simple: the one force of all existence is the will to power. It is the only thing that explains all physical and psychological existence. Adam Smith nailed it by describing how man interacts with killing each other. Ayn Rand said it bluntly. Capitalism is the most moral of ism’s compared to all the others. I mean other than those in business to produce for profit, who determines distribution of the goodies? Bureaucrats? Give me a break. As capitalism flourishes with those who allow it, they will flourish while everyone while those who don’t melt into air. Nothing will stop the status except the stupidity of warmongers .
As far as I know Cicero was wealthy man who was quite keen on accumulating wealth. Therefore it is always good to take wealthy peoples opinions on wealth with some caution. Plato was also rich and did not have to care for his daily bread.
I have a question: What about all the small businesses that help millions of regular people become successful and also keep their morality? How does that fit into his critique?
I want to thank the Nietzsche Podcast for these illuminating expositions of Nietzsche's thought, in terms that even the most dangerously antisocial ideologues of the American empire can understand.
Final note: every issue highlighted has to do with the connection between state power and money: Nietzsche is not a supporter of the dictator of the proletariat, but of the anarchists.
It's important to factor in the people and localities markets are made up of. I think a market where everyone involved shares the same culture and locality, generally is less manipulated and less of a breeding ground for noncommittal fly by night businesses that ruin everything.
People no matter what need to learn to make good choices. I want variety but I still make good choices. People who are successful and wealthy are usually healthy too because they make the right choices. If someone chooses for you what do you think will happen?
As Nietzsche says, this is actually misattributing an effect to a cause, when it’s the reverse. Often times, people who are wealthy have the opportunity to make better decisions, not necessarily the other way around. As for learning to make good choices, that would mean an increased focus on egalitarian education, not needlessly “challenging” people economically. It is one thing to create a barrier in order to teach a lesson. It is another to create an impossible standard or insurmountable barrier. Shaving people off and eroding people on the basis of Wealth is simply not a potent or accurate measure of excellence in terms of intelligence, creativity, etc, etc.
Damn this is good. I'd buy this as a book for sure. Do you have any written resources? Awesome job. Very understandable for a lay person like me!..... Update NM found your blog. Yay! :)
I’m interested in the notion that Nietzsche doesn’t seem sympathetic towards Anarchist/ Left-Libertarian arguments against capitalism. I don’t think he was superficial but it’s interesting how much he considers socialism a bad thing for equalising people and property, when Leftist politics has far more to offer than simply the equalisation of the classes, namely fostering the freedom of the individual, and recognising the inherent value of things rather than strictly commodity value, for example. Das Kapital spends a good chunk of time discussing nuances that would seem to interest him.
There is a storied tradition going all the way back to the days of Plato and Diogenes, polar opposite figures, who both nevertheless agree that philosophers rule and successful leaders and businessmen drool. As a philosophically-inclined person myself, I find something compelling about their position! 🤣🤣😁
I love the way you create time for your audience. Amazing. You give me hope that when we all accomplish the dream of doing what we enjoy doing, we shall extend ourselves to one another. It's has to be that because I fail to see how you find time after being so involved in your essentialsalts.
@@untimelyreflections no worries. Everyone has their place. Just it is odd that so many people gang up on the poor trader. The merchant is overextended and will be picked off, as they say in mobas. But it would be nice to see a philosoper who would put him in their place rather than just cast him away. Integration rather than dismissal.
I'm nitpicking with this criticism, and I almost always agree with your reading of things, but this concept of capitalism as a need filling machine is an argument that rarely comes from a sophisticated defender of capitalism. Capitalism is half of the equation, and the other half is morality. Christians often, correctly, argue that the best capitalists are those who use the system but gain morality elsewhere. That's not even a new argument, it's literally from Adam Smith. So while I agree with your analysis, a smart Christian capitalist would also agree, and they would say that's exactly why we need the stabilizing force of Judeo-Christian culture.
It’s a fair criticism. I think the things to think about are: - if some counter-balance of morality is needed, then aren’t we bringing in a value outside of market forces? - if so, we could imagine lots of systems that are based on different first principles that might have very different outcomes with capitalism, massively successful versions and massive failures - finally, the “capitalism working as intended” (the Smith model) may well be a normal stage in the course of empire, but suppose it is only a stage? It seems to inevitably degenerate into a hedonistic free for all, as a phase of the imperial life-cycle
@@untimelyreflections Also fair response. This is the struggle I have when reading Nietzsche, where I flip between Capitalism as a necessary component to a larval stage, which I think you're implying, or an impediment. Or Fukuyama's The End of Times is right and we're all stupid digging into the old guy from a century ago. One of the two.
Yes but capitalism as we know it today and as it was in Nietzsche’s day are not the same thing at all; what we have in America now is much closer to a covert fascism than the capitalism of the 19th century
Is an economic system really a good one if it relies on people being pious and following a specific moral/religious code at all times to function? Isn’t that usually the argument people make against communism, that it relies on people being generous and altruistic? If anything, you could say that capitalism needing a “judeo-Christian culture” to counterbalance it is another reason why Nietzsche would dislike capitalism, since he famously disliked “judeo-Christian” values
I am listening to this again. Which book does one like best Orwell's "1984" or Aldoux Huxley's "Brave New World"? I go with Huxley. Although, I appreciated both writers. Which socialism? All had different ideas. Did they not in that era? What is Neo-liberalism and neon cons, Inadverted tolertarism, plutocracy, oligarchy, tennocrats? Or am I not understanding anything? It took years to build all those cathedrals, geometry. There are still arguments about how the great Egyptian pyramids were built, archeologists. As I see it , and I will admit I am still acquiring knowledge and I could be wrong, but I can be humble and keep learning. One has to read and understand Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations." Am I correct or not? What about Herbert Spencer? May Democratic socialism work? Has it ever been tried?
7:54 Capitalism is not a Designed System it’s a Naturally Emergent Phenomenon. And money is not a Invention of State, many commodities naturally came to be used as Money as a result of economic activity between economising Individuals.
I have a nephew who at middle age, having been subjected to the demands of capitalist democracy but due to his cultural background has been kept like his family on the margins of society, the best employment positions having been handed out to those with lessor talent but of similar cultural heritage as those with whom power lays that he has turned to Islam. It is now difficult to retrieve him. I fear I have lost touch with him. He, like me has been subject to exploitation, manipulation and marginalisation. I get his, and others like him disenfranchisement. All in Islam might say that that is not a bad thing. However the skeptic in me thinks of the best but plans for the worst. Capitalism is creating what could be an even worse possibility further down the road.
I must object to your statemtent at 21:28 "The rich fund the government". In fact, poor and middle income families pay a greater share of their income in taxes than wealthy families.
Nietzsche: All capitalist would be socialist, if they were poor! You: Temporary embarrassed millionaires! Socialists: Stop voting against your own self interest! This does not square. Also it's always social democrats who veneer short term Keynes and not Ultra-capitalists who precisely reject his short term attitude. There is no just origin with property? Try a just justification for the territory of the states.
It squares just fine. If the rich were poor they’d adopt more socialistic beliefs. America has dealt with this by making it so no one is poor, relative to the rest of the globe. Communists and capitalists alike have recognized that America was preserved against socialism because our workers actually prospered. We can debate as to how this was accomplished, but you’d probably say it was by adopting more capitalism, right? Socialists saying that people vote against their self interest are mostly being foolish and that viewpoint is not adopted here. The fact that we can’t justify the territory of states doesn’t undo the lack of justification for property. It just means that justice is an absurd concept, and power rules.
Capitalism is humane. Socialism is about giving all the power to strong centralized government. So that strong centralized government can act with impunity.
The State uses the legal system to protect the environment for Capitalism, but when Capitalism corrupts the legal system itself, the health of society is victimized.
In Bathe Spain in the 50's started co-ops and it has work well. We also have some now here in America. But that also,the capitalist, try their best to outwit that. I think that that is a good thing. At last count, I think we have 40,000. Furthermore all I may to this discussion now is my interpretation of Capitalism: Capitalism will pit race against race and religion against religion, as it takes away its public education from the mouths of its children. Citizens United our Supreme Ruled in 2008, that coorperations were people and money speech which allowed more dark money into our elections. Profits mean more than people. In 2008 when banks fell, our corrupt politicians handed it back to banks that created the problems in the first place. That is socialism for the wealthy and Capitalism for the poor. We are 33rd in the in education, colleges have risen to attend a good one, we have student loans, homelessness is still growing rampant. We have 25 million children going to bed hungry in America . We still don't have health care for millions, big pharma and health insurance companies, look at Covid and the trillions of dollars they made, or the opioid crisis, 400,O000 passed as dotors and pharmaceutical companies were handing them out to Wal-Mart and CVS, and people are still trying to get their money over the deaths and they are still fighting in court, no infrastructure, what has the Presidents been doing since the Supreme Court Warren and the Chamber of Commerce got together in 1978 with the Warren Report to undo the New Deal? Nietzsche was correct with arguments, yes sir, you are correct. Bogie man of stupidity. Make people fearful. You are so awesome, sir. I want to give congratulations to your critical analysis.
Excellent presentation but I would argue Nietzsche wasn't criticizing "capitalism" as an "ism", which is in fact not a real word but a Marx invented word. This is an important distinction for people who actually think "capitalism" is some sort of ideology or something like that when in fact commerce, trade, production, private property etc have existed as long as humans have. He was, like the ancients, issuing warnings about WEALTH, and in the Europe that he lived in, those who inherited great wealth coupled with political power. His warnings, like the ancients warnings, were very similar to the dire warnings given by an advisor of John D Rockefeller's, whose name I can't recall. The only addition I would make to this discussion is the Christian moral/psychological inheritance that has shaped our entire Value System, whether rich, bourgeois or "poor". To me it is impossible to separate the legacy and disintegration of this influence from the progression of modern, particularly American derived political and economic systems. As far as Yale being a barometer of American "inequality" (another Marxist slander term), it doesn't in any way determine or predict a person's wealth creation capacity. The only thing colleges like these prepare you for are high level positions in the professions and to some degree public service. I know because I wen to one. American history has been and continues to be the fly in the eye of the marxists nice neat formula. But Lenin knew this first hand. BUT as you discuss, wealth creation in mere monetary terms in no way equates some sort of "elite" human individual or group. The domesticated, bourgeois consumption values are identical up and down the economic ladder.
I don’t think Marx actually used the word “capitalism” all that much, he preferred to talk about “capital” or “the bourgeoisie” because, ironically a lot like what you said, his concern was less with “capital-ism” as a belief system and more with the realities of how wealth is distributed, how labor is organized, etc. unlike many of his other socialist contemporaries. Marx wasn’t the first one to talk about capitalism and even less so the idea of inequality so I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that these words are all just Marxist inventions
Alright, serious time: 32:35: "the law defends their wealth" -- not since medieval times; this is not a minority with the exclusive right to tax peasants. The law defends the holding of wealth.
Nietzche's view that we have to 'protect' ourselves against the poor - shows the poverty of his own contradictory thinking - this man was a sad walking bag of confusion.
The famous are a reflection of all of human asperation and are not morally inferior to those at the bottom of the totem pole who admire them. The fault is in our stars. There was never another way.
These assumptions are not the same as Hayek. He would say that capitalism is more responsible because people are responsible for their actions. They live and they learn. Under Socialism, people have no free will, they are only told what to do, and never develop their understanding of the consequence of their actions. Socialism treats people like infants and does not develop them. Capitalism allows people to grow and make something of themselves. Socialism is hopeless people getting drunk on Vodka to kill the pain. Capitalism is people exerting themselves because they see real hope, and a light at the end of the tunnel. Socialism rewards laziness. Capitalism rewards usefulness.
I've been struggling with this. I think it actually is the most important virtue. We all die anyway so might as well make your life fruitful for someone else. I see how this can get flipped pretty easily by saying "I must always be giving and never receive anything". And that is wrong because the fruits of your labor are meant to be consumed and enjoyed and will keep you alive longer so you can self sacrifice more. But this is all coming from a lazy pos so please don't listen
@@repton007well you could also argue something like “we’re all gonna die anyway so we might as well live for ourselves”, couldn’t you? This actually reminds me of some of what George Bataille, a philosopher heavily influenced by Nietzsche, wrote. He said that waste is a necessary and important part of life or, in other words, it doesn’t matter if self-sacrifice is something we *should* do but it’s something we *will* do in some way, because wealth and power can’t just be accumulated forever. We either have to give it away, destroy it, waste it on luxury, or otherwise get rid of it. I haven’t read that much of his work yet but I think it’s an interesting way of thinking at least and I want to look into it more.
You talk about incentives. If the incentives of government aid for poor behavior/living weren't there, you wouldn't have a culture industry, encouraging it. Say Wal-Mart's employees had no food stamps to get. Well, maybe they wouldn't have enough, would find another job, and then Wal-Mart would pay more.
It doesn't anger me, an American conservative with libertarian leanings. It simply tells me Nietzsche was more in thrall to the very European ideologies he claimed to disdain. Not a practical bone in his body. Did he ever express any curiosity about how humans got raw material and goods from where they were found/made to those who could use them? And why they would bother? American pioneers knew better than Nietzsche, it would seem.
not many practical solutions in this ideology, at least as it is being presented. don't let poor people vote. don't let ultra wealthy vote. get rid of parties. it's obvious that capitalism and democracy has plenty of flaws, but these ideas would be impossible to implement in any practical sense. who would be the arbiter of those who cannot vote? who decides what parties can exist? who would enforce any of this? get rid of the stock market. ok. now watch all of the entrepreneurial capital evaporate as an unintended consequence. there is no freewill and no real merit. ok, so why should my kid get up and mow the lawn tomorrow morning, if he doesn't deserve to get paid over the kid who chose not to? capitalism can be ugly, but empirically speaking, it has created greater wealth than socialist and communist systems. is it fair or just? no. but that's not the right question to ask. the utilitarian question would be, which system creates the greatest wealth and good to society. i have sympathy for these ideas in an emotional sense, but there has to be a practical path or it is just an intellectual exercise, devoid of any practical use.
8:31 That’s Debunking Conspiratorial Nonsensical Labour theory of Value… because common sense says; Value is Subjective and there’s no value in things, we value things out of our subjective desirability .
Funny thing is that Karl Marx was actually anti-labor of theory of value, in a way. He thought that people under capitalism did value goods according to the labor needed to produce them but, unlike a lot of other socialists, he thought that was a bad thing because it ignored lots of other factors and led to people destroying themselves through dangerous and monotonous work. Congratulations, you’re a Marxist!
In some way Nietzsche is inverting this thing of subjective value. He is interested in people an not in things. You are what you value. Merchants value things like the poor, they are equal then. The poor does not recognize any diference or authority of the wealthy, any justification of their difference in position. This is not about goods or services or their cost. Dumb
To find someone analyzing Nietzsche without twisting it for an outside agenda is so refreshing I cannot even tell you
Amen, and, awoman
I haven't had the same experience.
Most of the Nietzsche presentations that I've enjoyed didn't seem twisted for some outside agenda at all.
not having agenda is having agenda
You find it refreshing because you have agenda, we are all the same
@@babelbabel2298 that was deep
Curiosity is not an agenda.
We are not the same.
Nietzsche has also been attributed to have saying: "We lost kings because people became unworthy of them"
Corny ass quote. Implies a natural hierarchy among humans, which doesn't exist.
Much closer to the message he was giving than this critique.
@@codyranta2807Probably true, but fuck that message. It’s moronic.
00:00 📜 Nietzsche criticizes capitalism, drawing from ancient philosophers' views on wealth as a danger to society and morality.
07:44 💰 Capitalism satisfies desires efficiently but blurs the line between wants and needs, leading to health problems and addiction.
12:23 🏛 The state is incentivized to manage the health issues caused by capitalism, leading to bureaucratic expansion and eroding social cohesion.
16:46 🔄 Capitalism can ultimately lead to revolutions against property relationships and class distinctions.
19:34 💼 Capitalism introduces a new selection mechanism based on capital efficiency, contrasting with pre-capitalist aristocratic hierarchies.
20:44 🏦 Nietzsche criticizes the idea of letting the market sort out fraudulent behavior, arguing that without state intervention, fraud can go unpunished, harming consumers.
21:12 🏛 Nietzsche suggests that governments exist to protect the rich from the poor, emphasizing the role of the state in safeguarding the interests of capital holders.
23:19 🧳 Corporate leaders hold significant political power, often influencing government regulation, funding, and legislation through lobbying and campaign contributions.
24:15 📜 Nietzsche characterizes successful businessmen as relying on skills such as contracts, law, deception, and public relations to exercise power, which may involve neutralizing threats through litigation and arbitration.
25:24 🍾 Nietzsche describes capitalism as promoting a society driven by pleasure-seeking, with a focus on immediate satisfaction of desires, leading to concerns about self-preservation, health, and convenience.
26:46 💼 Nietzsche portrays the top echelon of capitalists as shallow, materialistic, short-term oriented, and hedonistic, reflecting the culture of capitalist society.
28:25 🔄 Nietzsche highlights the connection between the rise of socialism and the behavior of the wealthy, suggesting that extravagant displays of wealth by the rich fuel socialist sentiments.
31:23 💰 Nietzsche places responsibility on the rich for the spread of socialism, arguing that their excessive materialism and ostentatious spending contribute to the rise of socialist sentiments.
34:10 📚 Nietzsche asserts that possession is the sole differentiator between the rich and socialists, implying that if the rich were to lose their wealth, they would become socialists themselves.
41:46 📜 Nietzsche emphasizes the importance of self-discipline among the wealthy to conquer resentment and achieve prosperity.
42:13 💰 Nietzsche warns about the dangers of wealth in the hands of those lacking in intellectual and moral virtues, leading to a societal divide.
48:00 🏛 Nietzsche views democracy as an unstoppable force that contributes to a pan-European culture, akin to cyclopean building, preserving civilization from barbarism.
49:19 🌍 Nietzsche believes that democracy's rise will lead to a European League of Nations with individual nations as autonomous entities.
51:12 🧐 Nietzsche predicts that socialism will be diffused within a democracy, leading to the welfare state and a middle class.
01:00:46 🇷🇺 Nietzsche discusses the potential for future struggles between Europe and Russia as a means of invigorating Europe.
01:02:23 ⚖ Nietzsche highlights the challenge of addressing the unjust distribution of property due to historical injustices within the framework of liberal democracy.
01:03:20 ⏰ Nietzsche explores two methods for addressing the injustice of property: equal distribution and state ownership.
01:04:32 🔄 Nietzsche critiques both capitalism and socialism, arguing that they share the same utilitarian underlying thought.
01:05:29 💡 Nietzsche contends that socialism cannot be the solution to capitalism because it's an outgrowth of capitalism's premises.
01:06:24 💰 Nietzsche questions capitalism's ability to equate unequal things, particularly in relation to land, which holds sentimental and practical value.
01:09:25 🔄 Nietzsche suggests that redistributing land to achieve socialism may lead to new injustices and class divisions.
01:15:08 🗳 Nietzsche proposes limitations on democracy to combat dangers posed by parties, the rich, and the poor, aiming to preserve democratic stability.
01:18:08 🏦 Nietzsche suggests nationalizing the financial sector, preventing the sudden acquisition of wealth and maintaining open paths for small fortunes.
01:22:14 👤 Nietzsche argues that labor cannot be justly valued by the product's merit, as individual responsibility is denied due to the absence of free will.
01:23:39 🏭 Nietzsche argues that meritocracy doesn't necessarily select for moral merit, as a person's industriousness and productivity aren't choices they make.
01:24:47 🤖 The value of labor in a capitalist system is determined by its ability to satisfy desires and is not a reward for hard work; automation can replace human labor when it becomes cost-effective.
01:25:56 🐎 The decline of horses in the economy due to automation serves as an example of how capitalism doesn't prioritize the well-being of individuals or species.
01:27:09 💰 Nietzsche argues that capitalism doesn't correlate hard work with economic success and that success in business is not a product of free will.
01:28:48 🏭 Nietzsche suggests that quality of goods can decline in a market economy due to the emphasis on appearance and mass production; he proposes that experts should judge product quality.
01:32:42 🔍 Capitalism's focus on mass production and salability often leads to lower-quality goods and discourages specialization or deviation from mass-produced products.
01:36:23 🌍 Nietzsche criticizes capitalism for its short-term mindset, exploitation of workers, and manipulation of the public, as well as the response of those in power to vilify symptoms of discontent rather than addressing the root issues.
01:39:14 🗳 Nietzsche suggests that those in power exploit movements like socialism to create exceptional rules and consolidate their authority.
01:44:00 💰 Nietzsche criticizes both the super-rich and socialists, suggesting that they often pursue material advancement with equal vigor. He does not completely reject the role of the state in economic matters, unlike Ayn Rand.
01:45:08 🏛 Nietzsche sees the state as an embodiment of human instincts and does not view it as entirely separate or contradictory to the market, in contrast to Ayn Rand's perspective.
Some people say that National Socialists misunderstod Nietzsche but this is very NS.
Wow you are awesome my friend 👍👏
You are such a powerhouse of content, I can't keep up.
Binging through waves of depression.
@@juss_jay7436 I have bipolar, I know what you're going through. Hang in there. ❤
@@whoaitstiger not sure if im pulling it off but im trying.
@@juss_jay7436 It's a particularly hard time in the world right now which doesn't help either, but that will change too.
@@whoaitstiger hope like the ineffable smell of spring a turnt page new mental words to explore.
Quite the best lectures I've heard on philosophy, but in fact on anything, and I've attended lectures by world-famous scholars in person. This podcast deserves far greater fame. Nietzsche himself would approve, I'm sure! On a personal note, like most academics and intellectuals, I usedbto be leftist, but had to abandon the flock or herd thinking. And yet, like Nietzsche, I remain deeply suspicious of capitalism, so I don't neatly fit on the right either - certainly not in the Republicans or Conservatives (I have dual citizenship. ) We need a new kind of political philosophy, one based on Burkean principles, I think, as Sir Roger Scruton argued - a kind of conservatism of tradition, which is not opposed to change, but also doesn't seek to destroy simply because it assumes that our society is rotten to the core and.must be torn down so that we can build some kind of neo-Marxist utopia.
I think you and I are on the same wavelength politically. I’m also a former leftist, but I don’t fit in with the right-wing either. I also don’t really care for the “centrist” label, as if the truth is always in the middle… there’s a lot of truth at the fringes, too! I think we should just smash the entire political compass and start over from new first principles.
@@untimelyreflections In a way, that's happening. Populism is an attempt to do that, but so far it's just been demagogues like Trump who appealed to the lowest common denominator. Giorgia Meloni in Italy seems to be responding to what people actually want, but it's still too early to tell. She doesn't appear to be the far-right bogeywoman that the left have painted her as, anyway. At least she's managed to form an administration outside the framework of the traditional parties of power. That's a step forward. Europe is about to change radically anyway. I'm not sure about the States.
Many Species are evolving from Marxian Genus,, Wokeism. They do post hoc rationalisation and say Marxism is constantly evolving Idea, 😂 but in reality a Quasi religious Superstitious infallible Dogma
I don’t think Friedrich “the re-evaluation of all values” Nietzsche would have cared much for tradition or conservatism. While I’m sympathetic to your goal of not being bound by either left wing or right wing dogma, a conservatism that’s occasionally open to change just seems like moderate right-wing thought to me, not anything new. Ultimately, every political movement is open to changing some things and keeping others, the question is how we decide what’s worth abandoning and what’s worth keeping.
This is your first video I'm listening to and it's perfect. I'm impressed by the depth and breadth of your analysis. I have decided to watch all of your previous videos and l look forward to more quality content from you.
You deserve way more viewers and subscribers. I wish you nothing but success
Absolutely crazy video bro
Massive respect for the work put into it and how beautifully listenable and easily digestible it is. If you got someone to animate some of this while you narrate you could get lots of views and gain influence over a chunk of the youth
The youth needs to consume things such as this and not 13 second tiktok videos that fry their brains and teach them little outside of tomfoolery
What an extraordinary experience listening to you.
At the end of his life, they took him to an asylum 129"Th right man in the right place, " says the brutal Nordan.
But soon his old mother cares to claim him and take him under her forgiving care. She died in 1897 and Nietzche's sister took him to live in Weimar. There a statue was made by Kramer-- showing the once powerful mind broken, helpless, and resigned. Yet, he was not all unhappy, the peace he had never had when sane was his now. Nature had mercy on him when she made him mad. He caught his sister weeping as she looked at him, and he could not understand her tears: "Lizbeth," he asked, "why do you cry? Are you not happy?" On one occasion he heard her talk of books; his pale face lit up; "Ah!" he said brightening, "I too have written some good books" -- and the lucid moment passed.
He died in 1900. Seldom has a man so great a price for genius.
My papa and brother turned me on to philosophy at a young age and books. My brother was so intelligent, college educated, and a Navel man. The Navey destroyed my brother and he loved Nietzche's writings. He also went insane and he will always be my inspiration to study and grow. He returned home and slowly went insane as he lived with my parents and my visits were frequent.
His grave is at a cemetery near our ole homeplace and on it reads, the USS LIBERTY NAVEL SHIP, 1967. He also came home, broken and shattered as many men do from unjust wars.
With the deepest appreciation and respect for your videos.
Wasn't the USS Liberty the vessel that was attacked by Israel?
Thanks for your personal story
Rudolf Steiner sat for hours with Nietzsche for hours when Nietzsche was in his daze. He wrote a biography of Nietzsche titled Nietzsche Fighter For Freedom
It’s a wonderful book
And Steiner also wrote the Philosophy of Freedom which expounds in Nietzsches ideas
Our society is dying because of the factors mentioned in this talk
I'm so glad your video on Faust ended up in my recommendations; continue the good work. (Also, I'm not sure if I should be proud or ashamed that I've listened to that specific episode several times.)
This man deserves at least triple the amount of subs
So everyone SHARE! He is excellent.
The issue with that is people are so basic they aren’t intelligent enough to consume this content he needs to add a cashapp or patreon ill send him 50$ bucks
Incredible analysis. It’s amazing to hear Nietzsche’s advice on focusing on the middle class and being suspicious of the lower and higher classes. We are definitely on the other edge of the spectrum where we ignore the middle class and feed the rest. The middle class, however, is not dependent on their financial status so naturally they will excel in character so this makes total sense. The poor have to worry about surviving while the rich on appearance.
Loved this podcast, I'll definitely be listening to more of your work. I look forward to listening to your previous and future work.
Capitalism lover who had a long week. This is exactly what I needed. 😘
I can’t express how much I love your attitude.
Found you because of uberboyo. This channel is amazing!
Hey, thanks!
Great work! Actually a romansh native speaker now listened to this ;)
Awesome work man, always cool to hear another view on things ive read countless times. Definitely gonna keep a close eye on your channel 👍
He actually had pretty common sense solutions. The financial sector isn't talked about enough. A lot of people still talk of capitalism like it's the same system Marx was criticizing, when everything has changed so much since then. If we essentially get rid of the financial system as we know it, this would solve 90% of our economic problems.
Doubtful, people are pretty good at making problems out of nothing for and against self interest.
The point isn't being the *same system* it's that whatever system it uses it is a very similar *value hierarchy*
Maybe there was some hope to do something with the financial system at 2008, until the Democratic party understood that identity politics is a better investment in the political arena.
I assume you're talking about industrial capitalism vs. the finance capitalism of today.
your content is very good. I usually criticise the moments where you might anglicise nietzsche, only because you are the only one who gives me occaision to and my own thinking does it a lot....this episode i was enraptured, it was really well delivered. thanks
As I understand it (or at least try to), coming from an Austrian and laissez-faire free market perspective and also studying Bitcoin extensively, this critic seams more towards the "Fiat-system", incentived by Fiat-money as for example outlined in Saifedean Ammous' "The fiat standard". It provides a plausible explanation for wrong incentives, over financialization, high time preference tendencies and the disconnect between merit and capital accumulation.
You brought some new perspectives, of which I was ignorant so far and for that I'm very grateful.
However I struggle to conceptualise if the same capitalism critic will still hold in a global free market without "broken money", which so far could have only been theorized about by libertarians or anarcho-capitalists.
Bitcoin changes the reality of private property in a profound way. It's properties could enable a sound money that has not been seen before, and has not even come close by the failed promise of gold as during the gold-standard (also the time of Nietzsche) which actually coined the term "sound" money. Pun intended.
I'm sharing my thoughts to see if there is some merit to them and to ask if you have pondered about this already or not.
Jung revealed the distinguishing skill that catapulted Nietzsche into the league of Plato beyond perhaps even Schopenhauer, and Emerson. Nietzsche was highly trained as a classical philologist immersed in the original sources of Greek, Latin, and Hebrew. Hence, Nietzsche gained a profound knowledge of the greatest minds of antiquity and could read the source material in a direct first hand way and not rely on second hand accounts. Imagine being able to understand all the nuances of source material from the Bible in Hebrew or Plato in Greek to appreciate the nuances and meanings of texts directly rather than to accept second hand some other scholars interpretation of the passage. Nietzsche's devastating critique of the intellectual edifice of the times originated because he knew how the professors of the time masked the state/church control over the cultural wasteland. These professorial serfs under state control pushed an agenda, protected their "bread and butter" intellectual moat, as well as just hid unbounded potentiality and luminosity from themselves or others for either lack of courage, intellectual depth, or even just nakedly "hidden in plain sight" sinister reasons.
Nietzsche lived and breathed for channeling the creative, sublimated outlet of the will to power. Just as a world class poker player has to live, breathe and sleep poker to be a world champion, a philosopher on the Olympian level of Nietzsche has to breathe the mountain air of pure, inspired energy every day in a way not possible for a man involved in a daily business or practice such as Jung. Sure, the business can keep the man "grounded", but to reach Nietzsche's Olympian level and full spectrum dominance philosophical level you need the foundational basics of classical philology combined with a passion and instinct for enlightenment and illumination based off actual reading of ancient wisdom in the original. As German philosopher Schopenhauer observed, unless a man can read Latin and Greek in the original, there will always be a hole in the scholar's education that undermines the strength of his intellectual thought. This observation is a bitter pill for us all in a vapid age of mass media and hollow men.
The German professor, visionary was just such an intellectual tour de force that we will probably never able to appreciate his greatness or sublime gifts to humanity. Greek and Latin are not emphasized in today's propaganda mills of liberal arts universities or even at the time of Jung when studying Latin and Greek required hard work most were not willing to endure. Nietzsche was a sublime gift to humanity, and in fact his Navy Seal like attack on the soft, descendent Western philosophers and clergy of the time came with devastating force and mountain lightning speed. Ultimately though, Nietzsche's attack came out of a deep love for man and his no limit potential. Once the blinders came off and courageous, disciplined men were made aware of what the actual classical and Biblical texts meant free of some political or mercenary agenda,
Nietzsche allows us all then to share in the love for expanded grand inner horizons and "satori" enlightenment resulting from the sublimated will to power. In this sense, "the laughing lion" legendary philosopher, in exposing the agendas of many "translations" and university moat protecting "degrees" brings us all back to ourselves and our higher man potential. Nietzsche's took humanity out to the creative philosophical edge and gave a wonderous vision of vast intellectual horizons. The grand German' philosopher's lionheart roar, that still reverberates in the Swiss Alps today, echoes how the creative sublimated will to power can allow us to rise high above the dark agendas and deception pervasive amidst the establishment wasteland.
Sorry my English. Amazing lesson, Professor. I can see now, why, Nietzsche considers Socrates and Buddha as egoists. Socrates and Buddha just care for the individual salvation, society or the state is just an instrument to achieve it. Now, Nietzsche, as Plato, Aristotle and Aquinas, before him, considers the common good of society as the supreme good. He sees the individual as a instrument of the state and to the conservation this obscure notion of "high culture" ( French books about the salons' debates of the high society of XIX century, for instance, rich people playing piano and violin, poems about love and spleen, and so on? ). Now, Nietzsche wants to go back to the ancient Greeks, but for them, during the Homeric age, the most important value was not the city or its common good, but the individual glory. Achilles doesn't fight the Trojans because he is a soldier seeking the common good of the Greeks, he just wants the gold, the female slaves of Troy and the glory on the battlefield. He just fights for his own good. So, I guess, Nietzsche's idea of aristocracy is a medieval one, barbarian war lords fighting each other for the good of their kingdom and faith, but fighting and living as a collective entity.
New listener to your channel, great job. Your content is great, and your delivery is outstanding, both clear and concise with a voice made for podcasting. Would like to hear some thoughts on Oswald Spengler or some full podcasts, if that is a topic that you would like to cover. Wishing your channel continued growth from a new fan.
You make this so easy to understand or is it because I will be 81 next mont, insteas of the 18 years old, with the boring teachers. lol Thank you.
Why does it matter that a lot of people have a hard time with making responsible choices in the market? The individual still can if he chooses too. Can a society truly say it reared great individuals if they can't make good choices unless they are forced too?
“Forced to” is an interesting phrase to use here. What is being forced in a world of Fatalism/Determinism?
"Forced to" in this context means that society uses external control like punishment and rules to stop people from behaving impulsively, instead of either helping strengthen the individual's impulse control or spurring their intrinsic motivation
This still works in a deterministic framework but i'm not certain i buy that idea, though i think the definition of free will as an uncaused cause is not really useful either. I would define it as the mechanism within an individual that picks between conflicting internal and external drives
Is it /the/ goal of society to "rear great individuals"?
@@JR-kn6rs it's an ideal Nietzsche puts forward, certainly seems better than making everyone a good (in the opinion of the ruling) marionette
Have you done a video on Spinoza? Nietzsche himself call Spinoza his predecessor.
It’s planned.
@essentialsalts
Spinoza looking forward to that.
@@cheri238 AND IT HAS COME!
Since we do not like power concentrated in the hands of too few wealthy people when capitalism is involved. If we are stupid enough, we will chose instead of have power be even more concentrated in the hands of an individual tyrant, such as Lennon and Stalin, shown above, who also have a gruesome monopoly on violence.
I think Carl Menger- Austrian Economist of that time should have considered in this Podcast,
This is one of my go back to episodes. I think I’ve streamed it 7 times- - whatever, who’s doing the counting when it involves a topic as important as a non-Marxist, or Marxian, critique of 19th century laissez faire capitalism, which was brutal on both body and soul for the (often child) workers. That being said, through a painfully slow process of grudging adaptation, a compromised approach was achieved by the onset of the Great War. (I’m gonna state this as a semi-existentialist Christian- - Jesus, why oh why did that generation have to suffer so? Oh, wait- - venal politicians, poor planning, worse communications, new weapons technology, and obstinate “telephone generals” were to blame. Got it!) Anyway, here’s my lame attempt at a formula for market formation. Its markets roughly equal manufactured desire, plus perceived need. M=?~ md + pn. Alright people, start lobbying for my Nobel Prize. (No Corrine- it’s not “noble”, it’s “Nobel”. She’s cute as a button, and dumb as a bent thumb tack.)
In my 9:32 76th week as carnivore. Totally agree with you.
First time , just got your channel recommended, what detail and assertion , splendid stuff thank you good sir , subscribe and like. not too many channels like you, remind me of academy of ideas but wayyy more versatile ! Thank u as we shall continue truth seeker!
I've really enjoyed the content of the channel thus far, thank you for your hard work, and I'm glad to see the channel growing.
I'm twenty minutes in so far, but I wanted to address something you said about the market vs the state, namely that consequences are delayed when the market sorts it out. I'd argue the same critique could be applied to the state as well, especially when it comes to fraud. If the FTX, and Madoff scandals have shown us anything it's that there aren't any organizations that can prevent fraudulence, regardless of whether the watchdog is a private or state actor, and that arrogant people will always try to shortcut to meaningful wealth.
Just my two cents, keep up the good work.
There is a properly functioning justice system. Public execution would be a good step forward... at least in the cases you referenced.
Consequences are always delayed, it lies within their nature
You are very good at presenting the information in our day from Nietzsche's time. 😊
Fascinating stuff. I love your talks. Top content on UA-cam imo.
Hi ! Very nice video on an aspect of Nietzsche that is quite misunderstood and not mentioned often.
I have a suggestion for a video. How important is heredity for Nietzsche ?
I don’t remember it coming up much in what Nietzsche I’ve read and he famously hated nationalism so I would say it probably isn’t that important to him, but I haven’t done any sort of comprehensive study of his work so I might be wrong
"The less you eat, drink and buy books; the less you go to the theatre, the dance hall, the public house; the less you think, love, theorise, sing, paint, fence, etc., the more you save - the greater becomes your treasure which neither moths nor rust will devour - your capital." -- Marx 1844. Capitalism steals the oxygen from the fire crucial to the development growth of the will to power. Money is a good slave but a bad master ( capitalism ).
Very. He talks about the habits of our ancestors becoming our own 'natural ' proclivities.
Keegan, always a pleasure to listen to your commentary. Let’s make this simple: the one force of all existence is the will to power. It is the only thing that explains all physical and psychological existence. Adam Smith nailed it by describing how man interacts with killing each other. Ayn Rand said it bluntly. Capitalism is the most moral of ism’s compared to all the others. I mean other than those in business to produce for profit, who determines distribution of the goodies? Bureaucrats? Give me a break. As capitalism flourishes with those who allow it, they will flourish while everyone while those who don’t melt into air. Nothing will stop the status except the stupidity of warmongers .
As far as I know Cicero was wealthy man who was quite keen on accumulating wealth. Therefore it is always good to take wealthy peoples opinions on wealth with some caution. Plato was also rich and did not have to care for his daily bread.
I'm sure they considered themselves virtuous enough
I have a question: What about all the small businesses that help millions of regular people become successful and also keep their morality? How does that fit into his critique?
I want to thank the Nietzsche Podcast for these illuminating expositions of Nietzsche's thought, in terms that even the most dangerously antisocial ideologues of the American empire can understand.
"A crushing 'refutation' of Marx indeed" lol, in all seriousness good video
Final note: every issue highlighted has to do with the connection between state power and money: Nietzsche is not a supporter of the dictator of the proletariat, but of the anarchists.
I don’t think he supports either one, to be honest. I think he only supports a warrior-aristocracy.
@@untimelyreflections fair (and pretty interesting). Thanks for clarifying.
It's important to factor in the people and localities markets are made up of. I think a market where everyone involved shares the same culture and locality, generally is less manipulated and less of a breeding ground for noncommittal fly by night businesses that ruin everything.
Really enjoying your work. 🎉
People no matter what need to learn to make good choices. I want variety but I still make good choices. People who are successful and wealthy are usually healthy too because they make the right choices. If someone chooses for you what do you think will happen?
As Nietzsche says, this is actually misattributing an effect to a cause, when it’s the reverse. Often times, people who are wealthy have the opportunity to make better decisions, not necessarily the other way around. As for learning to make good choices, that would mean an increased focus on egalitarian education, not needlessly “challenging” people economically. It is one thing to create a barrier in order to teach a lesson. It is another to create an impossible standard or insurmountable barrier. Shaving people off and eroding people on the basis of Wealth is simply not a potent or accurate measure of excellence in terms of intelligence, creativity, etc, etc.
@@wanshitong5101 U got things backwards and I dont even understand what your saying... you write so bad.
I can't appreciate it enough 😔 so humbled
extraordinary work, sir.
Abolish usery
Yes please
That’s a powerful thumbnail.
A very suggestive one also, it implies certain things
"One is not like the others"
@@user-hu3iy9gz5j I’d argue two of them, but I digress.
Damn this is good. I'd buy this as a book for sure. Do you have any written resources? Awesome job. Very understandable for a lay person like me!..... Update NM found your blog. Yay! :)
I know this voice and oratory skill. Hats off for diversification
You made me realize I work in a soma factory (coca cola bottling plant)
I’m interested in the notion that Nietzsche doesn’t seem sympathetic towards Anarchist/ Left-Libertarian arguments against capitalism. I don’t think he was superficial but it’s interesting how much he considers socialism a bad thing for equalising people and property, when Leftist politics has far more to offer than simply the equalisation of the classes, namely fostering the freedom of the individual, and recognising the inherent value of things rather than strictly commodity value, for example. Das Kapital spends a good chunk of time discussing nuances that would seem to interest him.
The philosopher sure envy those who can convince others. Smear the merchant and call him deceitful; "they took er jerbs" says the philosopher .
There is a storied tradition going all the way back to the days of Plato and Diogenes, polar opposite figures, who both nevertheless agree that philosophers rule and successful leaders and businessmen drool. As a philosophically-inclined person myself, I find something compelling about their position! 🤣🤣😁
I love the way you create time for your audience. Amazing. You give me hope that when we all accomplish the dream of doing what we enjoy doing, we shall extend ourselves to one another. It's has to be that because I fail to see how you find time after being so involved in your essentialsalts.
@@untimelyreflections no worries. Everyone has their place. Just it is odd that so many people gang up on the poor trader.
The merchant is overextended and will be picked off, as they say in mobas.
But it would be nice to see a philosoper who would put him in their place rather than just cast him away.
Integration rather than dismissal.
I'm nitpicking with this criticism, and I almost always agree with your reading of things, but this concept of capitalism as a need filling machine is an argument that rarely comes from a sophisticated defender of capitalism. Capitalism is half of the equation, and the other half is morality. Christians often, correctly, argue that the best capitalists are those who use the system but gain morality elsewhere. That's not even a new argument, it's literally from Adam Smith. So while I agree with your analysis, a smart Christian capitalist would also agree, and they would say that's exactly why we need the stabilizing force of Judeo-Christian culture.
It’s a fair criticism. I think the things to think about are:
- if some counter-balance of morality is needed, then aren’t we bringing in a value outside of market forces?
- if so, we could imagine lots of systems that are based on different first principles that might have very different outcomes with capitalism, massively successful versions and massive failures
- finally, the “capitalism working as intended” (the Smith model) may well be a normal stage in the course of empire, but suppose it is only a stage? It seems to inevitably degenerate into a hedonistic free for all, as a phase of the imperial life-cycle
@@untimelyreflections Also fair response. This is the struggle I have when reading Nietzsche, where I flip between Capitalism as a necessary component to a larval stage, which I think you're implying, or an impediment. Or Fukuyama's The End of Times is right and we're all stupid digging into the old guy from a century ago. One of the two.
Yes but capitalism as we know it today and as it was in Nietzsche’s day are not the same thing at all; what we have in America now is much closer to a covert fascism than the capitalism of the 19th century
Is an economic system really a good one if it relies on people being pious and following a specific moral/religious code at all times to function? Isn’t that usually the argument people make against communism, that it relies on people being generous and altruistic? If anything, you could say that capitalism needing a “judeo-Christian culture” to counterbalance it is another reason why Nietzsche would dislike capitalism, since he famously disliked “judeo-Christian” values
I am listening to this again. Which book does one like best Orwell's "1984" or Aldoux Huxley's "Brave New World"? I go with Huxley.
Although, I appreciated both writers.
Which socialism? All had different ideas. Did they not in that era? What is Neo-liberalism and neon cons, Inadverted tolertarism, plutocracy, oligarchy, tennocrats? Or am I not understanding anything?
It took years to build all those cathedrals, geometry.
There are still arguments about how the great Egyptian pyramids were built, archeologists.
As I see it , and I will admit I am still acquiring knowledge and I could be wrong, but I can be humble and keep learning. One has to read and understand Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations." Am I correct or not? What about Herbert Spencer?
May Democratic socialism work? Has it ever been tried?
No, one has to read Carl mergers Principles of economics from same Era.
i love your channel bro never stop
Your lectures are brilliant!
Thanks for the content,has UA-cam algorithm improved? I've been getting a lot of new recommendations
Nature goes on forever for everyone and everything to return as everyone and everything an infinite number of times through evolutionary processes. 🌌
Exactly nobility not money grubbers
Yale's completely free if your family has a gross income under $75k/year.
7:54 Capitalism is not a Designed System it’s a Naturally Emergent Phenomenon. And money is not a Invention of State, many commodities naturally came to be used as Money as a result of economic activity between economising Individuals.
Comment for the algorithm. Reminds me a lot of Tocqueville.
I have a nephew who at middle age, having been subjected to the demands of capitalist democracy but due to his cultural background has been kept like his family on the margins of society, the best employment positions having been handed out to those with lessor talent but of similar cultural heritage as those with whom power lays that he has turned to Islam. It is now difficult to retrieve him. I fear I have lost touch with him. He, like me has been subject to exploitation, manipulation and marginalisation. I get his, and others like him disenfranchisement. All in Islam might say that that is not a bad thing. However the skeptic in me thinks of the best but plans for the worst. Capitalism is creating what could be an even worse possibility further down the road.
The comments on this one are wild
Your channel is criminally under subscribed.
I must object to your statemtent at 21:28 "The rich fund the government". In fact, poor and middle income families pay a greater share of their income in taxes than wealthy families.
"one of the first cancellings was the red scare"
Nietzsche: All capitalist would be socialist, if they were poor!
You: Temporary embarrassed millionaires!
Socialists: Stop voting against your own self interest!
This does not square.
Also it's always social democrats who veneer short term Keynes and not Ultra-capitalists who precisely reject his short term attitude.
There is no just origin with property? Try a just justification for the territory of the states.
It squares just fine. If the rich were poor they’d adopt more socialistic beliefs. America has dealt with this by making it so no one is poor, relative to the rest of the globe. Communists and capitalists alike have recognized that America was preserved against socialism because our workers actually prospered. We can debate as to how this was accomplished, but you’d probably say it was by adopting more capitalism, right?
Socialists saying that people vote against their self interest are mostly being foolish and that viewpoint is not adopted here.
The fact that we can’t justify the territory of states doesn’t undo the lack of justification for property. It just means that justice is an absurd concept, and power rules.
Man yore doin great work here thank you 🙏🏼 🎉❤
Capitalism is humane. Socialism is about giving all the power to strong centralized government. So that strong centralized government can act with impunity.
Great talk. Nietszche's notion of becoming soft due to techne was prescient.
The State uses the legal system to protect the environment for Capitalism, but when Capitalism corrupts the legal system itself, the health of society is victimized.
In Bathe Spain in the 50's started co-ops and it has work well. We also have some now here in America. But that also,the capitalist, try their best to outwit that. I think that that is a good thing. At last count, I think we have 40,000.
Furthermore all I may to this discussion now is my interpretation of Capitalism:
Capitalism will pit race against race and religion against religion, as it takes away its public education from the mouths of its children.
Citizens United our Supreme Ruled in 2008, that coorperations were people and money speech which allowed more dark money into our elections. Profits mean more than people. In 2008 when banks fell, our corrupt politicians handed it back to banks that created the problems in the first place. That is socialism for the wealthy and Capitalism for the poor.
We are 33rd in the in education, colleges have risen to attend a good one, we have student loans, homelessness is still growing rampant. We have 25 million children going to bed hungry in America . We still don't have health care for millions, big pharma and health insurance companies, look at Covid and the trillions of dollars they made, or the opioid crisis, 400,O000 passed as dotors and pharmaceutical companies were handing them out to Wal-Mart and CVS, and people are still trying to get their money over the deaths and they are still fighting in court, no infrastructure, what has the Presidents been doing since the Supreme Court Warren and the Chamber of Commerce got together in 1978 with the Warren Report to undo the New Deal? Nietzsche was correct with arguments, yes sir, you are correct.
Bogie man of stupidity. Make people fearful.
You are so awesome, sir. I want to give congratulations to your critical analysis.
Excellent presentation but I would argue Nietzsche wasn't criticizing "capitalism" as an "ism", which is in fact not a real word but a Marx invented word. This is an important distinction for people who actually think "capitalism" is some sort of ideology or something like that when in fact commerce, trade, production, private property etc have existed as long as humans have. He was, like the ancients, issuing warnings about WEALTH, and in the Europe that he lived in, those who inherited great wealth coupled with political power. His warnings, like the ancients warnings, were very similar to the dire warnings given by an advisor of John D Rockefeller's, whose name I can't recall.
The only addition I would make to this discussion is the Christian moral/psychological inheritance that has shaped our entire Value System, whether rich, bourgeois or "poor". To me it is impossible to separate the legacy and disintegration of this influence from the progression of modern, particularly American derived political and economic systems.
As far as Yale being a barometer of American "inequality" (another Marxist slander term), it doesn't in any way determine or predict a person's wealth creation capacity. The only thing colleges like these prepare you for are high level positions in the professions and to some degree public service. I know because I wen to one. American history has been and continues to be the fly in the eye of the marxists nice neat formula. But Lenin knew this first hand.
BUT as you discuss, wealth creation in mere monetary terms in no way equates some sort of "elite" human individual or group. The domesticated, bourgeois consumption values are identical up and down the economic ladder.
I don’t think Marx actually used the word “capitalism” all that much, he preferred to talk about “capital” or “the bourgeoisie” because, ironically a lot like what you said, his concern was less with “capital-ism” as a belief system and more with the realities of how wealth is distributed, how labor is organized, etc. unlike many of his other socialist contemporaries. Marx wasn’t the first one to talk about capitalism and even less so the idea of inequality so I’m not sure where you’re getting the idea that these words are all just Marxist inventions
Thank you for what you do. Are you a professor?
He's a doom metal guitarist.
Who'd have thought he had a heart?
I'm not sure his criticism of capitalism is evidence of that, to be honest....
I guess what this is about, is having 'skin in the game' or not.
this is interesting because the middleclass will fall in my lifetime
I wonder what Nietzsche would think of China 53:45
The high priests of capitalism I call neoliberals
21:45 23:52 25:49
Very good vid here! :)
Nothing wrong with satisfying desire! We all do it! Is not HEALTH a desire? C'mon!
Alright, serious time: 32:35: "the law defends their wealth" -- not since medieval times; this is not a minority with the exclusive right to tax peasants. The law defends the holding of wealth.
There is an argument for a hereditary aristocracy. It keeps the aristocracy small.
hereditary rule of the best - what a nice oxymoron..
Nietzche's view that we have to 'protect' ourselves against the poor - shows the poverty of his own contradictory thinking - this man was a sad walking bag of confusion.
It dignifies extortion to call it capitalism.
38:10 It seems to me the “rising tide” has been sinking many boats too
The famous are a reflection of all of human asperation and are not morally inferior to those at the bottom of the totem pole who admire them. The fault is in our stars. There was never another way.
Like Christianity; "Promising 1000 things, but keeping none"
Damn.
These assumptions are not the same as Hayek. He would say that capitalism is more responsible because people are responsible for their actions. They live and they learn. Under Socialism, people have no free will, they are only told what to do, and never develop their understanding of the consequence of their actions. Socialism treats people like infants and does not develop them. Capitalism allows people to grow and make something of themselves. Socialism is hopeless people getting drunk on Vodka to kill the pain. Capitalism is people exerting themselves because they see real hope, and a light at the end of the tunnel. Socialism rewards laziness. Capitalism rewards usefulness.
Lmao like there are no alcoholics under capitalism
Self sacrifice is not a virtue!
I've been struggling with this. I think it actually is the most important virtue. We all die anyway so might as well make your life fruitful for someone else. I see how this can get flipped pretty easily by saying "I must always be giving and never receive anything". And that is wrong because the fruits of your labor are meant to be consumed and enjoyed and will keep you alive longer so you can self sacrifice more. But this is all coming from a lazy pos so please don't listen
Why not?
@@repton007well you could also argue something like “we’re all gonna die anyway so we might as well live for ourselves”, couldn’t you?
This actually reminds me of some of what George Bataille, a philosopher heavily influenced by Nietzsche, wrote. He said that waste is a necessary and important part of life or, in other words, it doesn’t matter if self-sacrifice is something we *should* do but it’s something we *will* do in some way, because wealth and power can’t just be accumulated forever. We either have to give it away, destroy it, waste it on luxury, or otherwise get rid of it. I haven’t read that much of his work yet but I think it’s an interesting way of thinking at least and I want to look into it more.
You talk about incentives. If the incentives of government aid for poor behavior/living weren't there, you wouldn't have a culture industry, encouraging it. Say Wal-Mart's employees had no food stamps to get. Well, maybe they wouldn't have enough, would find another job, and then Wal-Mart would pay more.
The problem isn't the guy with the money or the guy with the junk food, It's the guy with the g*n.
And moreover, the first two guys would disappear, without the Third.
It doesn't anger me, an American conservative with libertarian leanings. It simply tells me Nietzsche was more in thrall to the very European ideologies he claimed to disdain. Not a practical bone in his body. Did he ever express any curiosity about how humans got raw material and goods from where they were found/made to those who could use them? And why they would bother? American pioneers knew better than Nietzsche, it would seem.
“People didn’t use their labor to turn raw materials into finished products before capitalism”
30:00
not many practical solutions in this ideology, at least as it is being presented. don't let poor people vote. don't let ultra wealthy vote. get rid of parties. it's obvious that capitalism and democracy has plenty of flaws, but these ideas would be impossible to implement in any practical sense. who would be the arbiter of those who cannot vote? who decides what parties can exist? who would enforce any of this? get rid of the stock market. ok. now watch all of the entrepreneurial capital evaporate as an unintended consequence. there is no freewill and no real merit. ok, so why should my kid get up and mow the lawn tomorrow morning, if he doesn't deserve to get paid over the kid who chose not to? capitalism can be ugly, but empirically speaking, it has created greater wealth than socialist and communist systems. is it fair or just? no. but that's not the right question to ask. the utilitarian question would be, which system creates the greatest wealth and good to society. i have sympathy for these ideas in an emotional sense, but there has to be a practical path or it is just an intellectual exercise, devoid of any practical use.
You're examining capitalism from a consumer standpoint? A better premise would be political economy...
8:31 That’s Debunking Conspiratorial Nonsensical Labour theory of Value… because common sense says; Value is Subjective and there’s no value in things, we value things out of our subjective desirability .
Funny thing is that Karl Marx was actually anti-labor of theory of value, in a way. He thought that people under capitalism did value goods according to the labor needed to produce them but, unlike a lot of other socialists, he thought that was a bad thing because it ignored lots of other factors and led to people destroying themselves through dangerous and monotonous work. Congratulations, you’re a Marxist!
In some way Nietzsche is inverting this thing of subjective value. He is interested in people an not in things. You are what you value.
Merchants value things like the poor, they are equal then. The poor does not recognize any diference or authority of the wealthy, any justification of their difference in position.
This is not about goods or services or their cost. Dumb