Review of Frank Cameron and Don Dombowsky's book on Nietzsche

Review of Politics

In his later books Nietzsche repeatedly complains that philosophers have no sense of history. On a more modest level and with gentler and more respectful remonstrance, Christian J. Emden makes a similar claim. Surveying recent discussions of Nietzsche's political thought in English, he remarks that they show little awareness of the political context in which Nietzsche lived and to which his views responded. It should not be forgotten that Nietzsche lived through several of the more tumultuous turning points in German history: the Revolution of 1848, the Austro-Prussian War, the Franco-Prussian War, the creation of the new German state, and the subsequent economic boom, which brought in its train panics and a search for scapegoats.

Undergraduate Journal of Humanistic Studies, 2020

Friedrich Nietzsche occupies a contested, yet essential place of privilege in modern political philosophy. His poetic exhortations to readers to take personal responsibility for their beliefs and actions reveals an unsurpassed appreciation for individual liberty, but many contemporary theorists understand Nietzsche as dangerously inegalitarian, on account of his view that not all individuals are fit to achieve the highest freedom of self-creation. Nietzsche’s tolerance of, and even preference for, hierarchies of power and human worth seem to put him at odds with modern liberalism: both see individual liberty as a central goal, but liberalism also strives uncompromisingly for the general reduction of suffering and equal political participation. Nietzsche’s apparent apathy towards these latter two goals makes him a problematic ally for modern theorists, many of whom write him off as apolitical, insufficiently liberal, or even inherently facist. This essay argues that such one-dimensional interpretations of Nietzsche overlook a fundamental affinity between Nietzsche and modern liberals such as Richard Rorty and threaten to obscure essential conceptual resources that contemporary political theorists would do well to avail themselves of.

Galley proof for chapter in Nietzsche as Political Philosopher Eds. Manuel Knoll and Barry Stocker De Gruyter, 2014

The Review of Politics, 1995

2023

This paper takes it starting point from the basic assertions of Martha Nussbaum’s 1997 paper “Is Nietzsche a political thinker?". In the paper she argues that seven criteria are necessary for a serious political philosophy: 1) understanding of material need; 2) procedural justification; 3) liberty and its worth; 4) racial, ethnic and religious difference; 5) gender and family; 6) justice between nations; and 7) moral psychology. She argues, that on the first six criteria, Nietzsche has nothing to offer but does make significant contributions on the seventh. In her estimation, then, we should forget about Nietzsche as a political thinker and instead focus on the enlightenment political philosophers he found to be so boring instead. Her basic conclusion is threefold: either Nietzsche is a racialist, inegalitarian, misogynistic, and elitist, he is puerile, or he is incoherent (Nussbaum 6-9). In opposition to Nussbaum's appraisal of Nietzsche's political thought, I argue that he is in fact a serious political thinker. To present the case I focus on the inclusion of Nussbaum's six criteria in Nietzsche's Zarathustra. My focus on this work is motivated by Nussbaum's own recognition that in this work Nietzsche makes numerous allusions to Plato's Republic, a seminal work of political thought in the tradition. Surprisingly, however, Nussbaum doesn't consider Zarathustra in her appraisal of the lack of political thought in Nietzsche.

Palgrave Studies in Classical Liberalism, 2023

Here, precisely the political aspect of Nietzsche's philosophy is at stake. Undoubtedly, Nietzsche aimed to "philosophize with a hammer." 1 What he was trying to destroy was nothing but houses of idols, Nietzsche's word for 'ideals,' or "houses of cards," as Wittgenstein would say. 2 However, the first question for us is whether the Nietzschean hammer can also be observed and interpreted as a political tool, the annihilator of the modern state as the New Idol-"Only where the state ends, there begins the human being." 3 I am inclined to answer this question in the affirmative;