Siemens, H., Nietzsche hammer, philosophy, destruction or the art of limited warfare.pdf

7/24/2019 Siemens, H., Nietzsche hammer, philosophy, destruction or the art of limited warfare.pdf

1/28

Peeters Publishers, Tijdschrift voor Filosofie, Katholieke Universiteit-Leuven and Hoger Instituut voorWijsbegeerte are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Tijdschrift voor Filosofie.

http://www.jstor.org

Katholieke Universiteit LeuvenHoger Instituut voor Wijsbegeerte

NIETZSCHE'S HAMMER: PHILOSOPHY, DESTRUCTION, OR THE ART OF LIMITED WARFAREAuthor(s): H. SiemensSource: Tijdschrift voor Filosofie, 60ste Jaarg., Nr. 2 (JUNI 1998), pp. 321-347Published by: /Peeters Publishers Tijdschrift voor FilosofieStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40887912Accessed: 14-06-2015 12:59 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of contentin a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

This content downloaded from 162.89.0.21 on Sun, 14 Jun 2015 12:59:06 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=peetershttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=tijdfilohttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40887912http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40887912http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=tijdfilohttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=peetershttp://www.jstor.org/


2/28

NIETZSCHE'SHAMMER:PHILOSOPHY,DESTRUCTION,ORTHE

ARTOFLIMITED WARFAREbyH. SiemensDenHaag)

I. Introduction: Nietzsche'sPhilosophyand Destruction.

It is not unusual, ollowinghe subtitle f Twilightf the doL,o seeNietzsche s one whophilosophizesith hammer". t is this popularimage hat wish to address:Nietzsche s thephilosopherf unbridledviolencend destruction;heone who notonlyengagesn a virulent,uncompromisingolemicwithWesternivilisation Christianitynpar-ticular , but alsoglorifiesower nd the pathosof aggression.s isknown,hismagewascultivatedyNaziinterpretersnd enabledhem oappropriateietzsche sa militarist, ryan hilosopher1.hisappropri-ationhasprobablyonemore han ny oputpeopleoff eadingim.

Inwhat ollows,shall rgue hat his magesadistortion.proposeocorrectt byretainingertain eaturesndrejectingthers s a falsification

Herman Werner IEMENS1963)received is Ph. D. from heUniveristyf Essexin 1993(thesis:Socrates esitation:gonalCritiquend CreativitynNietzschesarlyThought).e iscurrently ased at theKatholiekeUniversiteit ijmegenas a NWO Postdoctoralellow,working n a NietzscheDictionaryResearchrogrammes well as his ownproject oncerning ietzsche'sgonalThought.

1 On the role of Nietzsche's istern nazifyingiswritingsee W. KAUFMANN,ietzsche.hihsopher,Psychologist,ndAnnchnst, ewJersey, rinceton niv. Press, th edition, 974,p. 4-8, 15-18,442-445.Documentation n theNietzschenthologies repared y Naziphilosopherss to be found n: R. E.KUENZLI,he NaziAppropriationf Nietzsche, ietzsche-Studien2, 1983,p.428-435.

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/28

322 H. SIEMENS

ofNietzscheshilosophicalractice.o be retaineds theunderstandingfNietzsche'sroject s a hard nd uncompromisingonfrontation,totalcritiquefWesternalues:

The Hammerpeaks'Why ohard?' he harcoal ncesaidto the diamondTor rewe notcloserela-tions?'Why osoft? mybrothers,hus askyou:for re younot mybrothers?Why osoft, nresistingndyielding? hy s there omuchdenial ndabnega-tion nyourhearts? o little ate nyour lances?Andifyouwillnot be fates,fyouwillnot be inexorable: ow canyouoneday- conquerwithme?Andifyourhardness illnot flash nd cut and cut to pieces:how canyouoneday create ithme?[...]"G-D,epilogue;SA6,161. FromZ///: fOldandNew Law-Tables9)2

To be rejected,n the other hand,is any confusionf Nietzsche'sHammerwith project f uncontrolledr total iolence ent n destruc-tion. he task s, hen, o think hrough ietzsche'sroject f otal ritiquewithoutotal iolences anecessaryngredientrmotivation.hisdoesnot

mean,at the other extreme,o subtract truggle Kampf fromNietzsche'sroject ltogether,s somecontemporaryesponseso Naziappropriationsouldhaveus do.It s peculiarhatDeleuze,who themat-izesthenotion f total ritique, sing estructionndviolenceepeatedlyto characterizeietzsche'sroject,hould lsowrite:

One cannot veremphasizehe xtent owhich henotionsf truggle, ar, ivalryor ven omparisonre oreignoNietzschendtohis onceptionf hewill o ower.It is not that hedenies he xistence f truggle:uthedoesnot seeit as in anywaycreative f values.At east heonlyvalues hatt creates re those f the ri-

umphantlave.

truggles not the

principler motor f

hierarchyutthemeans

bywhich he lavereversesierarchy.truggles never he active xpressionf

2. Referenceso Nietzsche's extsppear n bracketstheir itles re abbreviated ith ection/aphorismnumbersnd/or ames, s appropriatethey regiven ogether ithpagereferenceso theGerman ext ntheKrittschetudienausgabe,. COLLI& . Hrsg.),Mnchen/Berlin,980.E.g.:(G-D,epi-hgue-, SA6, 161)=Gtzen-Dmmerung,pibgue;Kritischetudienausgabe,olume , p. 161.Abbreviatedtitles ollow he standard bbreviationsor he Germantexts sed in KSA,withoneexception:HomersContestHomersWettkampf,SA1,p. 783ff.) HC (notCV5).ReferencesotheNachhssrefromKSAand follow henotation herein: .g. 2 [110], 12)=note2 [1 10]in KSAvolume12. Translationsremine,although have leanedon Hollingdale,Kaufmann nd others. quarebrackets ..] are mainlyusedinquotesfor lternativeranslationsr comments f mine. Unlessotherwisendicated,mphasisn quotes(italics)soriginal.



4/28

NIETZSCHE'SHAMMER 323

forces, or hemanifestationf a will o power hat ffirms anymore han tsresult xpresseshetriumph f the master r the strong. truggle, n the con-trary,s themeansbywhich heweakprevailver he trong, ecausehey re hegreatestumber3in boldtype:HS).

ButNietzsche,nlike eleuze,distinguishesetween wopossibilitiesfstruggler Kampf ndtheir istinct istoricalormationsnWestern ivi-lization. n theone hand there s the slave-revoltf morality"GM,I ,10f.), reactivetrugglefone class r castentheface f n overpoweringcaste fmasters".orn f

passive,mpotentatred r ressentiment,t eeks

revengenabsoluteictory,he nnihilationVernichtung)f the ther, utcanonlymanage n imaginary evengehatreverseshe others' alues.On the ther and, heres also the ctivetrugglenter ares f the ontestor agon Wettkampf),iscoveredyNietzschen Greek ulture nd de-velopedyBurckhardtnhis Griechischeulturgeschichte4.ietzsche's ostsystematiceflectionsn the gonareto be foundnthe arly extHomer'sContest1872)andsurroundingotes5.ere, ontra eleuze,truggles n

3. G. DELEUZE,ietzschendPhilosophy,ransi. . TOMLINSON, ondon,Athlone ress, 986,p. 82.4. Inconnection ithNietzsche'shilologicalork n the fictitiousontest etweenHomer and Hesiod

(in:KritischeesamtausgabeG. COLLI& M. MONTINARIHrsg.),Berlin, 967f.,vol.II, i: p. 271-339),the lassicist ughLloyd-Jonesrites: it s more nterestingo notethat n this tudyweseetheorigins fNietzsche'smportant bservationf the ignificancen Greekife f contests ndcompetitions.his is em-phasizednthehistory fGreek ulture f JacobBurckhardt,senior olleaguefNietzschentheUniversityofBasel;andthoughBurckhardtlways epthisdistance romNietzsche,nd later ameto mistrust im,it seems ertain hat his eature f his work was due toNietzsche'snfluence." . LLOYD-JONES,ietzscheand the Study of the Ancient World, Studies in Nietzsche and the ClassicalTradition,J. C.O'Flaherty, . Sellner, R. M Helm(Eds.),ChapelHill,N. Carolina, 979.Cf.J. Burckhardt:Gnechischeulturgeschichte,eipzig,1929,esp.vol. ll, Ch.2: 'DerkoloniaUnd qpnakMensch'.

5. HomersWettkampf(KSA1, p. 783 f.).An edited translations availablen ThePortable ietzsche,W. KAUFMANNEd.&Transi),NewYork, 958,pp.32-39).AnunabridgedranslationyCarol DlETHEis to befound ogether ith contemporaneousextTheGreektate Dergriechischetaat, nKSA 1p.764-777)in On theGenealogyfMorality, . Ansell-Pearson(Ed.),C. Diethe (Transi.), ambridge, 994,p. 187-194.Despite he urious ranslationf the ide s Homer nCompetition,his s, find, hebest vail-abletranslation.ogetherwiththe notebook II 8 b (=16[ ], KSAvol.7),HomersContests the mostimportantource orNietzsche'shought n the gon.As one ofFivePrefaces orUnwritten ooks"givento CosimaWagner orChristmas 872, twasfinishedn the 29thDecember1872"(KSA1,p. 792).Butthedraftsn 16[ ] showthatNietzschewasworking n it n period: ummer71- early72,i.e.during at-ter tages f BT. ThefolderMpXII3 (=20[ ], KSA7),containingirst raft, sdated ummer 2.

Fortheagoncf.also:1[62];DasgriechischeusikdramaKSA1,p. 515f.)on the tragedians pen-tathlete"; ocrates nd die TragdieKSA1,p. 533f.)on the ntroductionf dialectics s theagonwith



5/28

324 H. SIEMENS

activexpressionf forces"agonalrivalrys,to useNietzschewords,play f forces"WettspielerKrfte)et n motion ya pluralityf gen-iusesplayingt war6. his dynamics,moreover,rofoundlyreative.nNietzsche'sccount, gonalculture ffects n affirmativeisplacement{bertragung)r transformationf powerful,estructivempulsesntoconstructiveorces f culture; hecreativityf Greek ulture annotbeunderstoodpart rom he gonorcontest,s the nstitution overningllareas f ife, romducationopoetryndpolitics.Mostmportantly,s we

shall ee, gonaltruggleWett-kampf)ssystematicallyistinguishedrom

the truggleor nnihilationVernichtungs-kampf)ccordingo their oals:as a regimef imitedggression,t s oriented owardsemporary,ncon-clusiveictoryr mastery,otthe bsoluteictoryf nnihilation.

Againsteleuze,contendhatNietzschenows,ffirms ractisesnactive,reativeorm f strugglen agonalontestation:ietzsche'sriticalconfrontationsith heprevailingaluesfmodernityregovernedy nagonalrinciple.ndevelopinghis laim,my im s to repudiatehe mageof totalor unlimited iolencessociatedwithNietzsche'sammer. hestrategy ill be to interrogatehegoalof his totalcritique:s it reallydestructive?oesit reallyeek oannihilateertain erniciousaluesndconsignhem o oblivion?

Thebasis f the rguments thepropositionhatNietzsches first ndforemostphilosopherf ife. hismeans t east wothings orhiscriticalpractice:1)Nietzscheanritiqueakeshape sa contestationfvalues:n examiningandevaluatingalues,Nietzsche'sext eeks otake he ideof ife its

affirmationnd ntensification.very alue whetherpity" rtruth"is therefore easurednd evaluatedgainstife, sthehighestalue ndthe

words ndgrounds"nto ragedy,nd theresultinggonbetweenmusic nd dialecticp.545f.) PHG5 &6 on Heraditus' ransfigurationf the gon nto WeltpHnzipKSA1,p.825i); MA1158,170,214 andthe mportant ote5 [146](1875;KSA8); the ecture oursesDie Geschichteergriechischeniteratur(Grossoctav-ausgabe,eipzig, 894f., ol.XVIII,esp.p. 134f.) ontainmportant bservationsn the mpactof the gononGreek rt;JGB,259; G-D(TheProblemf ocrates,) on Socratic ialecticsa newkindofagon.

6. Thecontest Wettkampflrises romwar?As anartistic lay bpiel'andimitation iMachahmung]'(16 [26],7)



6/28

NIETZSCHE'S HAMMER 325

standardfevaluation7.hepattern hat mergesrom ietzsche's ork sthat ife s raised ndpitted gainst revailingaluesfWesternulture. ishostilityowards hristianity,or nstance, erives rom n analysisfChristianitys a form f ife hat s hostileo ife:Nietzsche'sostility,ere,is a hostilityowardshostilityo ife.2)Lifehas an existenialbearingn Nietzscheanritique: s a philosopherof ife,Nietzsche ommitsimself ot ustto a total ritique f values nthename f ife;he commits imselfocritiques a way f ife, o astylef

critiquehat an be livedwith.Nietzsche earnsery arly hat philos-ophy fdestructionanslip ndget nsnaredn thevery amehostilityolifewhich twoulddestroy;e sonly oo aware fhowdamaginghepro-jectof total ritiquean be to the health f the ritic, oweasilyheknifeofvivisectionlips nd cuts ntoone'sown flesh. his is often hematizedinhiswritings a conflict etween nowledgend ife, ut t alsoappearsas a self-referentialhreadhatweavestswaynand outofhis extsndthelarger hilosophicalarrativeshey ecount8.

Theupshot f Nietzsche'sxistentialommitmentocritiques a con-cern o find limit n negation hat s,a style f critique hich emainsuncompromising,ut imits nd contains his ogic f elf-destruction,he

7.Theprefaceo theGenealogyfMorals ffers typical equencef Nietzscheanuestions:Under hat onditionsidthehuman eing iscoveror tselfhosealuesoodnd vil? ndwhat alue othey hemselvesave?

To question hevalue of values n a meaningful ayrequires standard f evaluation.hat life onsti-tutes his tandard or Nietzsche an be seen ntheunfoldingf his nitial uestions:

Havehey ntil ownhibitedr furtheredumanhriving?re heyignsfneed,mpoverishment,egen-erationn ife? r, n the ther and, oes he ullness,trength,hewill f ife etraytselfnthem,ts our-age,ts onfidence,ts uture?..GM,reface,; KSA5,250)8. Indiscussinghephilosophers omplicity ith ourwholemodernmode ofbeing hewrites:Hybrisstodayurwholettitudeowardsature,ur iolationfnature ith he idofmachinesndour othoughtlessorharmless:nbedenklich]nventivenessf the echniciannd the ngineer;ybriss our tti-tude owardsod ...];Hybrissour ttitudeowardsurselves,for e xperimentith urselvess wewouldneverermiturselvesith ny nimal,nd lit pen he ouls four till ivingodies,ontentnd urious:what o we care or he salvation"f he oulAfterwards,edo our wn elf-healing:eingick s nstruc-tive, e've odoubt, armorenstructivehan eing ealthy, themakersf icknesseem venmore ecessa-ry or stodayhan hemedicine-menndhealers".e now iolateurselves,heres nodoubt, enutcrac-kers f he oul,wequestioningndquestionablenes, s f ifewere omore han rackinguts;nthiswaywe must ecessarilyecomeaily etmore uestionable,ore orthyfquestioning,nthisway erhapslsomore orthy of iving?...GM,II,9;KSA5,397)

InsectionI, I shalldiscussnother uch momentwhich,nresponseothe nescapablyistoricalr tem-poral haracterf ife, ecounts ur nevitableomplicity,scritics,n the insof our fathers.



7/28

326 H. SIEMENS

recoil f critique ponthe critic.Myclaim s thatNietzsche indst inagonalritique a form f critiquemodeledn theHomericgon. n thefinal art f thepaper, shall ketch model fcritiquesagonor contestwhich etainshebasicmpulsef total ritique to overcomealueshos-tile o ife yet ransformshedestructiverientationf totalwarfarentothe roductiverientationf agonalmastery. astery esignatesposturewhich, ar rom eekingodestroyntagonisticalues,reserveshem s astimulusowardshe reationfnewvalueseyond oodandevil.

II.CritiqueasWarfare, nd the Hazards of (Self-)Destruction.

Tostart ith et us ookata few assageshich nnouncendcelebrateaphilosophyfdestruction orat east ppear o doso:

That the ambshavesomething gainst hegreatbirds f prey, hat s hardlysurprising:nly hiss noreason ohold t gainsthegreat irds fprey hat heytake heir ittle ambs.Andif the ambs ayamongsthemselvesthese irds fprey re vil; nd whoevers aslittle s possiblebeast fprey, atherts ounter-

piece, lamb shouldhe notbegood?",heresnothing oobject o n thiswayoferectingdeals,ven f t should happen hat hebirds f prey ookuponit alittle cornfullynd perhapsayto themselves:Wehavenothing t all againstthese ood ambs,we evenovethem:nothings tastier han succulentamb."- To demandofstrength hat t not expresstself s strength,hat t notbe awanting-to-overwhelm,wanting-to-throw-down,wanting-to-master,thirstfor nemies nd resistancesndtriumphs,hat spreciselys absurdsdemandingfrom he weakthat hey xpresshemselvess strength. quantumof power[strength]ssimplyucha quantum f drive,will, ffect...GM,I 13;KSA5,278-9)

Nietzsche'sarable f the lavishrigins f theevaluationgood"akeson a frighteningspectwhensetnext o the bird f prey" erspectiveadoptednthefollowingassagerom heAntichrist:

What sgood? All that aiseshefeelingfpower,hewill opower, oweritselfn humanbeings.

What s bad?- Allthat tems romweakness.Whatishappiness? thatfeelinghatpowersgrowing,hat resistances

being vercome.Notcontentment,ut morepower;notpeaceat all,butwar;notvirtue, ut

competencevirtuen the renaissance

tyle,irtu, irtue ree fmoral

lavourings)



8/28


The weak nd ll-constitutedught ogotoground: irst rinciplef ourphil-anthropy. ndoneought ogive hem helping and.What s more amaginghan nyvice? Compassionndeedswith ll ofthe

ill-constitutedndweak Christianity..."AC,2; KSA6,170)

Thepathos f aggressionn thispassages thematizedn the prefaceoTwilightf he doL rHow toPhilosophizeith Hammer:

[...]A maximwhoseorigin withhold rom earned uriosity as ongbeenmymotto:

increscuntnimi,

virescit olnere irtus[the pirit rows, trengths restoredn wounding]

Another orm frecovery,nacertainense venmore uited ome, s to soundout doh... I erect o new dols;ettheold idolsearnwhat t means o haveegsofclay.To overthrowdoh mywordfor ideals') thatrather smybusiness...Reality as beendeprivedf ts value,tsmeaning,ts truthfulnessothe samedegrees an idealworldhas been abricated.}here re more dols n theworldthan here re realities:hat s my vil yefor hisworld, hat s alsomy evil ar'...Foronce toposequestionserewith hammerndperhapso receiveor nswerthat amous ollowoundwhich peaks f nflated owels what delight orone who has earsbehindhis ears for n old psychologistnd pied piper ikeme...This book too...s above ll arelaxation,sunspot,n escapadento he dlehoursof a psychologist.erhaps lso a new war?Andare new idols soundedout?...This ittle ook s a grand eclarationfwar... ...]"

(G-D:Preface;SA6,59{interpolation:H: Preface,; KSA6,258})Another hing s war. am in my way warlike.Attacking elongs o my

instincts.o beableto be anenemy,o be anenemy that erhaps resupposesastrong ature,t s nany aseconditionedneverytrong ature.t needs esis-tances, onsequentlys seeks esistances:heaggressiveathosbelongss necess-arily ostrengths dovengefulnessnd vindictivenesso weakness..."

(EH:Whyam so wise; KSA6,274)On thebasis fthese assages,newould ertainlye ustifiednregard-

ingNietzsche s aphilosopherhopracticesnd advocatesritique s aform f warfare,nimated y pitiless athos f ggression.hesewere, fcourse, ighlyelective,eavily not to sayviolently edited eadings.But thiskind of hermeneutic iolence sabsolutelyndemic o a goodmany ppropriationsfNietzsche fascistr otherwise.ater n we willsee

usthowafuller

eadingf the ast

passageesistshe

magefviolence



9/28

328 H. SIEMENS

we haveustpainted. erewe needto examine neofmany ossibleextswhereNietzscheoices hesitationoncerninghis ggressivempulse,ndwhere hishesitationanbereferredo a problem fflictingheproject ftotal ritique.

Insection of TheUses ndDisadvantagesfHistoryorLife,Nietzschespeaksf thenecessityor critical oat ofhistory:

Ifhe is to ive, hehumanbeingmust ossessndfrom ime o time mployhestrength o breakup and dissolve past:he doesthisby bringingt beforetribunal,

crupulouslyxaminingt and

finallyondemningt;

every ast,how-

ever, s worthy o be condemned for hat s the nature f humanthings:human iolencend weaknessave lways layed mighty olen them. HL,3;KSA1,269)

Clearly,t stakencriticalistorys the ritical valuationr udgementfthepast:WhatdoesNietzscheave osay n thisnecessaryorm f udge-ment?

Then itspast sregardedritically,hen ne takes heknife o its roots, hen necruelly ramples vereverykind of piety. t is always dangerous rocess,especiallyo for ife tself: nd men and ageswhich erve ifeby udging nddestroyingpast realwaysangerousnd endangered en andages.For sincewe aretheoutcomef earlier enerations,e arealsotheoutcomef their ber-rations, assionsnd errors,nd indeed f their rimes;t s notpossiblewhollytofree neself rom his hain. f we condemn heseberrationsndregard ur-selvess abovethem free, nthoben,f them], his oesnotalter hefact hatwestemfrom hem. he bestwecan do is to contest resist:widerstreiten]ur n-herited nd hereditaryangestammte]aturewith our knowledgef it, andthrough new, tern isciplineombat ur nborn eritagend inplantn our-selvesnewhabit, new nstinct, secondnature,o that ur first ature ithers

away.t s an attempt ogive neself,sitwere posterionspastfrom hich newouldike o stem noppositionothat romwhich ne doesstem: alwaysdangerousttempt ecauset is so hard to find limit n the negation f thepast...."HL,3; KSA1,269)

Thepredominancef ifenthis assagesunmistakable.hepattern fargumentations controlledhroughoutythe nterestsf ife: t s ifethat dark, riving owernsatiablyhirstingor tself" ibid.) whichnecessitateshe ccasionaleploymentf ritical istory,cruel ndmerci-less

purgingferrors einherit rom he

past;but t s also ife the ife



10/28


of the critic r the culture f critique that s threatenedn theprocessand demandshat wefind limit n thenegationf thepast" ibid.).Assuch, his assagelearlyemonstratesoth lementsfNietzsche'shilos-ophyof ife ntroducedarlier. is existentialommitmentocritiquesseennthepreoccupationith measure f critical istoryhat ervesifeand doesnot uccumbo thedestructiveorcest unleashes.n the econdplace, hekindof udgement e arecalledon to maketakes heform fwhat called contestationfvalues: ifenecessitateshese riticaludge-

ments, otmerelys an externalondition,ut s the groundnd standardof udgement.ritical istory eansmeasuring givenife-formr valueagainsthe nterestsf ife sthehighestalue,ndcondemningtprecise-lyto that egreewhich est ervesife'snterest.

The primacy f life n turn lluminates he nature f the problembroachednthepassage,he ource fthose aveatsnwhich t culminates.Exactly hy scritiqueucha dangerous ndertaking?ritical eflectionmayprovokehedemandoovercomepastform f ife n account f tsaberrationsndcrimes,ut t doesnotremove hefact hatwe stem romit;weremain,nNietzsche'sords, chained"o thevery rrorsndcrimeswewould condemn. hus thedangerwould iein punishingrimes fwhichwe too onaccount f omegenealogicalatality areguilty hisis allrathermystifying more ike scenefrom eschylushan philo-sophical roblem.What, n particular,re we to makeof the hereditarycurse eingnvoked ere?

I shall ttempt wo nterpretationsfNietzsche'shought.1.The first akes heAeschyleanathos f thepassages its lueand asks:

Howdoesa tragic ero, uch s Orestes,uccumbothehereditaryurseafflictingisfamily? ne answers,ofcourse,hathe hasalwayslreadysuccumbedo it byvirtue f the ncestralct of transgressionhichfirstbroughthe urse ponhisfamily9.hecurse s a divine atalityhich ic-tates hat heoriginal rimewillbe repeatednd avengedndefinitely:Agamemnon'sacrificef Iphigenia,lytemnestra'sevengen herhus-

9.Atreus, gamemnon'sather,laughteredis brothers hildren, oastednd offered hem o their n-knowing athers a feast.



11/28

330 H. SIEMENS

band,Orestes' evengen his mother...10et the nvocation f a divineorder nd divine,mnipresentimescombinedyAeschylusith ten-tative xplorationf humanwillthat akes lacen theopaqueand con-fusing emporalityf human ction11:t is not untilOrestes oesaheadwith he ctualmurder f his mother hat he succumbso thehereditarycurse12.t is his actofdestructionhich, rovokingheErinyesntoperse-cuting im, rolongsheviciousircle f revenge,otbroken ntil umanjusticesgrounded ith heAreopagust the ndof hedrama.Nietzsche's

point, y nalogy, ouldbe that he ct of estroyingheast swhat nchainsusto t.The actofcriticalestruction,ywhichwewouldovercomepastonaccountf ts rimes nderrors,urns ut to be a futile epetitionf thevery rimesnderrors e condemn. ut f t s the ct of riticaludgementthat mplicatess nthe rimes nderrorsf hepast, hen heserimesnderrorsmust hemselvesnvolve ctsof criticaludgement. n Aeschyleanreadingf the cene f critical istoryuggestshat hehereditaryurse rfatality nvokedby Nietzsche meanssomething ike a dialectic fEnlightenment-,n emancipatorympulseo overcome given egimefoppressionhroughationalritique,ndsupreplicatingppressionnthenewregimet establishes.hus,accordingoAdorno ndHorkheimer13,

10. WalterOTTO is astrong dvocatef this reading.ee:Ursprung erTragdie,n: KurtVONFRITZ(Hrsg.),Das Wort erAntikeStuttgart, 962,p. 178-9:...theopening ituation,n which he demise nwhich t culminates,s alreadyealed[beschbssen]."lso on Clytemnestras urder f Agamemnon:thedecisivection, venwhen t takes lacen the drama tself,ppears ssomethinghat s,as itwere, lreadythere longtime lngstchon a]."(UrsprungerTragdie,bid., 173).

11. This is theposition f J.-RVERNANT P.Vidal-Naquet inMyth nd Tragedyn AnaentGreece,Janet LOYDTransi.),NewYork,1988.SeeespeciallyIntimations f the Will in GreekTragedyand

Aeschylus,he Past and the Present' herein. he pointhas beenput forcefullyy KarlReinhardt, howrites f Gottes llmacht nd Vorausbestimmung,iegleichwohlin Mitwirken es Menschen ordert..."K.REINHARDT,ischylosh RegisseurndTheologe,ern,1949,p. 13.Seealso Nietzsche n thedark eel-ingofreciprocal ependence"etweenmen andgods, ymbolizednAeschylus'rometheusGT9; KSA1,68)

12.Althoughhedemisen which ragedyulminatessalreadyealedn theopeningcene,t s, ccord-ingto Otto,essentialhat t s not yet finishedatastrophe ithwhich heplaybegins...What mustfol-low nthe econdplaces anoccurrence,uperhumanlyrdained, utnaturallyealizedhroughhedeed ofa humanbeing,whereby hatwas a fearfulhreatn theopeningcenario,irst merges, ppears' s realityandcertainty"UrsprungerTragdie, p.cit., p. 178-9).Oragain:Wasngstchondaist, ritt nsLicht,enthllt ich nderVerwirklichung.ssenwirnicht agen, ass auch frAischylos,ie fur ophokles,ieEnthllungelbst astragische eschehen st?"Ursprung erTragdie,bid.,p. 173).

13.T. Adorno &M.Horkheimer,DialektikerAufklrung,rankfurt.M.,1969.



12/28


Plato'sritique f myth ndsupreplacinghe yrannyf superstitioniththetyranny f the concept;bythe same ogicof (self-) estruction,heattempt odestroylatonism ould nturn eplicatelato's rimesgainstmyth. rom his erspective,ietzsche'sallfor limitn thenegationfthe past"stems rom n insightnto the self-defeatingonsequencesfemancipatoryritique.

Thisinterpretation,antasticndarbitrarys it seems, indsupportnthe remarkableonsolation"fferednNietzsche'slosingines n critical

history:Buthereand there ictorys nonethelesschieved,nd for hose combatants[Kmpfenden]hoemployritical istory or he akeof ife, here s a remark-able consolation:amely,o know hat his irst ature was once a secondnatureand that very ictoriousecondnaturewillbecome first ature. HL,3; KSA1,270)

Byfirst ature", ietzschemeans f courseour nheritedndhereditarynature",o bereplacedythe econdnaturemplantedhroughur criti-calpracticeseeprecedingines, ited n p. 328above).Byaligninghisfirst ature,n ts oming-to-be,ith he econdnature hat s to replacet,he assimilates oth critical istory nd its objectto a singleprocessfEnlightenedriticalonfrontationKampf]ith astvalues nd ife-forms.

2. Analternativeeadingf the fatalityr curse fflictingritical istoryappealsoanother ereditaryursenvoked fewyearsater nHumanAllTooHuman.n ThecongenitalailureErbfehler]fphilosophers"MAI,2; KSA2,24),Nietzschergues hat lack fhistoricalense" asdriven

philosopherso ook for onstant,ternal ruths s their tarting oint ndtheground f udgement. gainst his,Nietzscheroposes newkindofhistoricalhilosophizing",hosevirtue s the virtue f modesty",ndwhose mottoruns:Allesst...geworden" Everythingasbecome;there re no eternal ivens:ust as there re no absolute ruths"ibid.).Historicalhilosophizing"alls n us to think nthe ight f hensighthattheresnothingbsolute,o stablendunchanginground f udgement;no eternalnd mmutabletandpointnBeing,hatwouldremovesfromthehistorical

ealityeinterrogate.



13/28

332 H.SIEMENS

It s, suggest,his amensighthat nforms ietzsche's arningsegard-ingcritical istory:he ritic as no metaphysicalrivilegef standpointabove"rbeyondheforms f ife e scondemning;e s notfree o ookoutside heprocessf ife-as-Becorningor a ground f udgementnBeing,thatwould secure imagainst is owncriticisms.hismay eem n un-tenablenterpretationfa text hat ulminatesnanappealothesupra-historical",s

thepowerswhich ead the ye wayfrom ecomingowardshatwhichbestows

uponexistence

Dasein]he haracterf the ternal ndstable

Gleichbedeutendtowardsrtzna religion.HL,10;KSA1,330)

But when Nietzsche ntroducesritical istory, e doesso against hebackgroundf the dangersf antiquarianistoryndthevalueof monu-mental istory:heformerknowsnlyhow topreserveife, ottoengen-der t"; unlike he atter, t undervaluesecomingdas Werdende}"ndhindershepowerfulesolve orwhat snew" accumulatingietiesndreverencesor hepast, t resists single iety r reverenceor what s

becomingnd

presentWerdende,

egenwrtige]"HL,3; KSAl,268-9).

Thevery ext ine peaksf henecessityor ritical istory,ligningtwithBecomingndthe ctive truggleor oveltymonumentalistory)gainstpreservation,tasisndthe tabilityf Being.

Theproblemaisedycritical istory,hen, oncernsheground r siteofcritique. ecausef the nescapablyistoricalr temporalharacterflife-as-Becoming,he ritic ho puts heknife o a past lways lreadyutsintohisown flesh. ecognizinghe emporalharacterf ife ndourhis-torical initude indsusto the historicalife-contexteare to udge, x-

posingurcomplicitynthe rrors e wouldcondemn.ohow arewetopractise total ritique f the past n theknowledgef ourhistoricalini-tude?n the nterestsf ife, ritical istory ould ondemnutright hosevalues romhepast hat rehostileo ife. ut howcanwe condemnhemin the nterestsf ife, hen hat eryudgementhreatensur ife the ifeofthe ritic r the ulture fcritique?Whether e follow hefirst r the econd nterpretation,ietzschesxis-tential ommitmentocritiquesexpresseds ananxiety oncerninghedestructionf

pastforms f life that t will consumehe ife f the



14/28


criticn tsuncontrollediolence. ow isthis ogic f elf-destructiono becontained?n the ontext f historicalhilosophizing",ietzschepoke fthe irtue f modesty"inthe ontext f ritical istory,e calls or a imitin thenegationf the past". he questions: whatform sthis racticeflimitedestruction"o take? t cannot ake heform fa compromisera compact hatwould insulateertain alues from ritical eflexionnadvance;or ritical istory emandshat onecruellyramplesver verykind f piety"HL,3; KSA1,270).

The curiousuggestionnthe ext s thatwegive urcriticaleflexionheform f severeisciplinehatwouldenableustocontest ho we are or:who wehavebecome)withwho wewould ike o be(or:whowewouldlike ohavebecome)

The best we can do is to contest widerstreiten]ur inherited nd hereditarynature ith urknowledgef t, ndthrough new, evereisciplineombat urinbornheritagend inplant n ourselves newhabit, newinstinct, secondnature, o that ur first aturewithersway.t isanattempt ogive neself,s itwere posteriori,pastfromwhich newould ike ostem noppositionothatfromwhich nedoes stem..."

HL,3;KSA

1,269)Anewregimef the elfwhich,n its everity,ombatswho wearewithcounter-factualhantasyf the elf, dream f who we wishwe were?Anewart f udgementhat tagesn oneiric, ictiveontest ith nes self?IsNietzscheeallyuggestinghatwe cannotvail urselvesf standpointin Being, ecause t s a fiction,...o thebestwecan do is to nventn alto-getherictiveorm f udgement?s a solution o theproblemf the ite fcritique,his shard o take eriously.onetheless,nmyview his assageisprogrammaticorNietzsche'subsequentritical ractice:t s ust ucha strategyf a fully onsciousiction, contestationf the contemporaryvalueswehavenheritedrom fictivetandpointn Homeric reekulture,that shallpursue nder henameofagonal ritique.

Mythesis uns s follows:Nietzsche'sext eploysn agonalegimeoregulatets ritical ractice,nd this iction ffers wayout of the mpasseofcritical istory:t creates theatre or hetotal ritique fvaluesn thenameof ife,where he ogicofself-destructionsarrestedhrough codeof imited iolence.



15/28

334 H. SIEMENS

III. Nietzsche's War-PraxisFindinga Limitn the Negation of the Past".Aglaringnconsistencyppearso haveopenedupin the ourse f our

readings.beganwith number f passageswhichwouldsupport ascistreadingsy dvocatingphilosophyfwarfarer total iolencesectionI).It nowappearshatNietzsche idafter ll have one or tworeservationsaboutviolence.f we take t - asI thinkwe can- that he targets fNietzsche's arfarere preciselyheobjects f critical istory thoseforms f ife nd values rom hepast hat ontinue o inform hepresent- , then here oes ome eem o be aquestionablequivocationere.WasNietzscheimplyooviolentnd uncontrolledthinker o heedhis ownwarnings?r do thosewarningsetrayn unfortunateapse, moment fweaknessnanotherwisexemplaryhilosopherfviolence?

In fact,weneednotchoosebetweenhese qually alselternatives,finsteadwe choose o readarefully.n support f this esponse,shallgoover heEcceHomopassagen warfareited n sectionI, pointing utwhere he pparentdvocationfdestructionsattenuated.hiswill erve

to ntroducehe gonalmodel f imited arfareorNietzscheanritique.Anotherhings war. am inmywaywarlike. ttackingelongsomy nstincts.To be ableto be anenemy,o be anenemy that erhaps resupposesstrongnature,t s in anycase conditionedn everytrong ature.t needsresistances,consequentlyt seeks esistances:heaggressiveathosbelongss necessarilyostrengths dovengefulnessnd vindictivenesso weakness...he strength f theattacker inds n the opposition e needsa kindof measureMaass:meaning(i)limitation;(ii)auge];very rowth etraystselfn the earch or powerfulopponent or problem:for a philosopherwho is warlike lso challengesproblemso a duel.Thetask s to becomemaster, ot ver nyresistances,ut

over hose gainstwhich nehas to deploy nesentire trength,upplenessndmasteryfweapons, over qualopponents...qualityntheface f the nemy- first resuppositionf an honest uel ..My war-praxisan be summarizednfour rinciples.irst: attack nlythose hings hat re victorious, I wait,under ircumstances,ntil hey revictorious....hird: never ttack ersons,makeuseof the person s a strongmagnifyinglasswithwhich ne canmakevisible general,utevasivendbarelyangibletate f need....Fourth: attackonly hings here nypersonalifferencesreexcluded, here here s no back-ground n badexperiences.n thecontrary,o attack n mycaseis a proof fgood-will,nder ircumstances,f gratitude. do honour, confer istinctioninsofarsI bind

mynamewith hat f n issue,

person:or r

againstin this



16/28


respecthey ount s the ameforme. f wagewaronChristianity,have rightto do so, because have no experiencef a fatality r frustration rom hatdirection themost arnest hristians ave lways eenwell-disposedowardsme. I myself,n opponent f Christianitye rigueur,m far frombearinggrudge gainst n individualorwhat s thefatalityfmillennia"(EH,WhyAm&Wfc*,7;KSA6,274-5;HS)

This somewhat uller ccount f Nietzsche'sar-praxisnforms sof a)the auses fwar b)thegoalsndpresuppositionsfwar; nd c)two on-stitutive oments f Nietzschean arfare. xaminingachin turnwillremove ietzschean arfarerom he bsolute egativityf destructionnthree tages; t each stage, limitn the negation f the past", s de-manded fcritical istory,sbeing ound.

(a):Tobeginwith hecausesfwar:Nietzsches at pains opoint utthat e s concerned,otwith ersons,utwith hephilosophicalroblemsthat hey ame14. heseproblemsre, n turn, itched t the generalevelof cultural onditions,ot ndividuals.t is becauseNietzsche'sathos faggression,s a critic, espondso a culturalroblematichat e can distin-

guishhisoppositionoChristianityrom nypersonaluarrel r grudgeagainstndividual hristians.fNietzschettacks lato,he isusing im sa figureoexpose generalrisis f modern ulture andas a nameforthe victorious",.e.prevailingaluesof modernityhat egitimatendprolong hat risis. he samegoesfor he Nietzscheanemand hatwetransvalueur values: t is not eveled t individuals,s if theywerethemotors fchange;heprinciplesf gencyre ocatednsteadt the evel fcultural ores collectivechmas rregimesf valuationormingypes

accordingospecific odily

conomies15.hiswillbecomemportant

henwecometo ook atNietzsche'sgonal esponseothat emand.

(b):Turningo thegoalsofwarfare, efindnothing n destructionnthis assage.nstead f negatingheopponent, concern ith elf-affirm-ation nd-empowermenteems ppermostnNietzscheanarfare.t s aninterestnstrength",r rather n interestngrowth"r ntensificationn

14.[...]It s not ndividuals hat ie with ne another, ut rather deas."(l6[9], 7)15.E.Blondels perspectivenNietzsche: he

Bodynd Culture.ransi,

ySeanHand, London,1991.



17/28

336 H. SIEMENS

the ritics art hat rives is earch or powerfulpponent: e wants oattain mastery"ver worthwhileesistance,ot tsdestruction.hatevermastery eans,t clearlyepresentslimited,atherhan bsoluteegationof the opponent.

Inthis oncern ith masteryver nd againstestruction,eencounterthefirst limitn thenegationf the past". hesecondmoment omes olight y xploringheogic fmastery.he text s marked y logic fneedandandrelativity astrong ature needsesistances" thatwouldpre-clude destruction: astery equireshepreservationf what t masters,preciselyn order ogauge"nd affirmtsmastery,hat s, tsability omeasure r evaluate ts opponent.Clearly he need to preservenesopponenturtherttenuateshe bsolute egativityfdestruction.

(c) Thissuggestions then pelledut and ntensifiednto n out-and-out affirmationf the other when, n fourth ule of his war-praxis,Nietzschexplainsisrationale or ttacking:

I dohonour, confer istinctionnsofarsI bindmynamewith hat f n issue,a

person:for r

againstin this

respectheyountfor he same forme

[...](loc.cit.).

Here, he nterestnpreservinghe pponentsexpressednthebindingfnames. he positivealueof this ond sevidentlyuchthat henegativeevaluationf the other s subordinate to the point f rrelevance:riti-calnegationf the other counts or he ame" s affirmativevaluation.Thebinding f names s at the sametime, heforging f a genealogicalbond, fNietzsche'spponents a figure rom hepast, soften heyre: n

preservingheopponentsnameit expressesn interestn historical rgenealogicalontinuityhich hould, think, e seen sa responseo thesense fhistoricalinituderoublinghecritical istorian.oattack,hen,farfrom ntendinghe absolutenegativityf destructionnd oblivion,intendsoaffirmhe pponentnaforgingfbonds.How far his ond sfrom he chain"hat fflictedhecritical istorian,omes ut n the pre-cedingine:

With me to attack s a proof f good-will,ndercircumstances,f gratitude(loccit.).



18/28


Withthis emark ietzsche eems ohave ost ight fwarfareltogether.The destructiveegativityf Nietzscheanritiquehas not just beenlimited;thasbeenreversednto ffirmativeesturesfgratitudendgood-will. n order o confirmhat his s some ort f warfare, e shallhave olookagain t the notion f mastery.

Butfirst, heprocessf imitation ketched ut abovecallsfor com-ment: irst e sawthat he ggressoreedsopreservets pponent,othattheopponentanaffirm he ggressors astery;henwe saw that ttack-

ing, n turn, onstitutes kind ofaffirmationf the opponent.t seems,therefore,hatNietzsche's ourth uleremoves he rationale orwarfarefrom blind, ne-sidedogicofdestructionowardsdynamicfmutualaffirmationrempowerment.

So whatof thenegativityf warfare? xactlywhatform oesit take?Accordingo thefirst ule fNietzscheanarfare,e attacksnly hose ul-tural orces hat re victorious.he purpose,s wesaw, s to gain masteryover hem.Anotefrom 888helps oexplainwhat hismeans:

I havedeclaredwar on the anaemicChristian deal(includingwhat s closelyrelatedo t),notwith he ntention f nnihilatingt,butonly fputting n endto its tyrannynd making lacefor newideals,more robust deals. 1 11 ]12)16

Wecoulday, hen, hatNietzscheanritiqueeeks, ot odestroyhe dealsit ttacks,ut opUcelimit r measurentheir yranny,o as tomake oomfor ompetingdeals.Now,this ormulationoesappearntheEcceHomo

16.The fullnotesreads:Ihavedeclaredwaron the naemicChristiandeal including hat s closelyelated oit),notwith he

intention f annihilatingt [vernichten],utonly f putting n end to its yrannynd making lacefornewideals,more obustdeals... hecontinuedxistencef the Christiandealbelongsothemostdesirablehingsthat xist: nd that or he ake of the deals,whichwant will] o assert hemselves ext o itandperhapsover t theymusthaveopponentsantagonists]trongpponents,n order o becometrong.n thisway,we immoralists eed thepowerof morality, ur drive o self-preservationillsthat our opponentsemainstrong, it wills nly o becomemasterHerr] ver hem. " (10[1 17], 12).

Also:Nicht inKampfumExistenzwird wischenenVorstellungenndWahrnehmungenekmpft,sondern m Herrschaft: ernichtet ird ie berwundeneorstellungicht, ur urckgedrngtder ubli-miert. s giebt mGeistigeneineVernichtung.?.NIETZSCHE,Werken3 Bnden,K. SCHLECHTAHrsg.),Mnchen,956, ol.II,p.898.



19/28

338 H. SIEMENS

text n warfare;nthis ext, owever,t s referredo the ritic, ot isoppo-nent:Thestrength f the ttacker indsn theoppositione needs kindofmeasure[or imitation]loc.cit.; S).

At the beginning f the passageon mastery, his line suggestshatNietzscheanritiquemaybeginwithdestructive,yrannicalntent, utfinds tselfimited o a posture f masteryy the resistancet seeks ndencounters.hat is: it finds tselfimited olimitinghetyranny f the

idealst seeks ut for his s whatmastery eansnnote10[l 17] above).From this analysist emergeshat the thought f limitednegationsgovernedya dynamic,eciprocaltructurehatmirrors hedynamicfmutual ffirmationr empowerment.n thiscaseNietzsche emovesherationale orwarfarerom blind, ne-sidedogic fdestructionowardsdynamicfmutual egation,imitationrdisempowerment

Combiningoth ffirmativendnegativemoments, e could ummar-ize Nietzsche'srt of warfare s a dynamic f mutual ffirmationr em-

powerment,nd mutualimitationr

disempowerment

IV. Nietzscheand the GreekAgon: TheArt of LimitedWarfare.

With his ormula e have hedynamicrinciplef theGreekgon, heart of limited iolencewhichgoverns ietzsche'sritical onfrontations.Thecuefor his nterpretations, nfact, ivenn theEcceHomoext, iththe resuppositionsor justorhonest orm fwarfare:

The task s to becomemaster, otoverny

resistances,ut overthosegainstwhich ne hastodeployne entire trength,upplenessndmasteryfweapons,- over qualopponents...qualityn theface f the nemy first resupposi-

tion f an honestud [...] (loc.cit.).

This sa referenceo Hesiod WorksndDayswhere, or hefirst ime,tis observedhat allrivalry,lleris resupposesrelationshipfequality"17.Worksnd Daysforms he sub-text o HomersContest,ietzsche'smost

17.SeeJ.-P. ernant, TheOrigins fGreek hought,thacaN.Y.,1982,p.47.



20/28


concentratedccount f theGreekgon, nd tcanalreadyeheardnthelines shall se to ntroducehe gon.Thispassageffersn obliquentryintoagonalculture y wayof its mmediateubject: he nstitution fbanishmentr ostracism.

Theoriginalense f this eculiarnstitutionostracism HS]isnot,however,that f a vent escape-valve],ut rather hat f a stimulant: ne removes heout-standingndividualo that he play f forcesWettspielerKrfte] ayreawaken:a thought hat s inimical o the exclusivity"f geniusn themodern ense, utpresupposeshat n a natural rder f things here re lwayseveraleniuseswhorouse

[stimulate]ne another o action

[lit.deed],as

theylsohold one an-

otherwithin he bounds of measure. hat is thecrux f the Hellenicnotion fcontest: t abhors bsolute egemonynd fears tsdangers;t desires,saprotec-tion gainst enius asecondgenius.HC;KSA1,789;HS)

In thefigure f theexclusivityf genius"nd theoutstandingndivid-ual" one canhear hevictoriousorces" hichNietzscheingledut forattacknEcceHomoseep.334).In thepresentontext,heoutstandingindividual"s theone whoholdsabsoluteegemony"Alleinherrschaft),the bsolutend conclusiveictor,.e.that ontestantowhomnone are

equal.Nietzscheuotes heEphesians'Amongsts no-one houldbethebest; f omeones,then ethimbeelsewhereandamongst thers.' or why houldno-one be thebest?Because thecontestwould fail nd the ternalife-groundf the Hellenictatewould be eopardized.

(HQKSA1,788)Ostracismllows or n initial efinitionf the gon: f heoutstanding

individualread: bsolutend conclusiveictor)sostracizedor he ake fthe gon,then heagoncanonly hrive here pluralityf antagonisticforcesKrfte) r geniuses"reengagedn an inconclusive,pen-endedon-testationfvictory.

Theagondoes not dmit bsoluteictory,utonlymasteryetweenhecontests temporary,ntermittentictorsike heOlympichampionrthewinner f the ontest f tragedieshis ear. heemergencefanabso-lute ictor ills he gon nd, incet s the ife-bloodf heGreekity-stateandcommunity,t lso nnihilateshe tate18.n short, he gongivesbso-

18. n HomersContesthe bsolute ictorssymbolizedyNietzschenthefigure fAlexander heGreat,whoappears s the

grotesque"f the Hellene,a caricature"f AchillesHC; KSA1, 784,792 .Cf. 6



21/28

340 H. SIEMENS

luteprecedenceocomparativesver bsolute uperlatives.hat the gonis intrinsicallypen-ended,nconclusive,epeatablean be heardinNietzsche's ormulation:ettspielerKrfte. s the competitivelayofforces,t combines henotion f a contestationf powerwith he ndlessrepeatabilityfplay.

Theres,however,ne crucial ifferenceetweenhe gon nda normalgame.Usually ictorynd defeat n a particularoutarefirmly efined,prescribedya rule r set of rules hat ive standardr measure f vic-

tory,utsidend

independentlyf the ourse aken

y particularout. n

the gon,bycontrast,hemeasurer standard fvictorysupfor rabsneachbout:the udgementfwhat onstitutesictorynd defeatsdeter-minedmmanentlyythedynamicfeach contest.heconceptf usticedetermininghe standard r measure f victorys immanent o thedy-namic f ach ontest:t s the ctual ssue f ontestation,heboneof on-tention. upport or his nterpretationan be drawn rom phorism 70inHuman,All TooHuman.Ofartisticmbition" ietzsche rites:

The Greek rtists, hetragediansor xample, oetizedn order owin; theirentire rt annot e conceivedithout hecontest: heHesiodicEris, mbition,gavewings o their enius.Now this mbition emandedbove ll else hat heirwork hould ttain hehighestxcellencen their wn yes,hat s, sthey nder-stood this xcellence,ithout oncern or hedominant aste nd thegeneralopinion oncerningxcellencen a work f rt... husthey trive or ictoryverrivalsn their wn estimation, efore heir wn seatof udgement,hey eallywantto bemore xcellent;hey hendemand onsensusn this heir wnesti-mation rom thers utside, onfirmationf their udgement....] (MAI 170;KSA2, 158;HS)19

Notonly oesthe

gonalntagonistant o

win;n

strivingor

ictoryn

his owneyes, efore is ownseatof udgement,is ambitions to deter-minewhat ounts swinning,othatyouhave contest i udgementsfvictoryr a contestationf ustice,.e. the tandardr measurefvictory.

[16],7).As suchhe is connectedwiththe demiseof the agon- Eristunmglich emacht urchdasHervortretenesEinzelnen"16 [19],7)- and thedisintegrationf the ity-statento mpire.

19. also9 [145],12(1887):L-J he Will oPowerppears...] n a strongerypeArt' hat s grow-ingtowards ower s a will to predominancesuperior ower:bermachtif t first nsuccessful,hen tlimits tself o thewillto Justice', hat s,to the equalmeasureMass]frightssenjoyed ytheother omi-nating herrschende]ype struggleor ights...)...]"



22/28


Theagon s,therefore, ore han he nconclusiveontestationfvictorysuggestedbove;it san inconclusive,pen-endedontestationf ustice r theverytandardfvictory. hat counts s victorys not pre-determinedrfixed utside, ut mmanento,eachcontest;t needs o bere-determined,definednew nresponseo thedynamicourse aken y ach gon,whichbegins y hrowingur udgementnto uestion20.n eachcontestt s theverydefinition f victory hat s at issue, o that each bout puts thequestionWhat onstitutesictory" ntoplay

At this oint ome mportantmplicationsorNietzscheanritiqueanbedrawn.f, s I contend,n agonalregime ndergirdsndregulateshecriticalosturesndstrategieseployedgainst ominant uropean aluesat the urface f Nietzsche's exts,henwe cansay:at issuen every on-frontationsthe uestionfvictoryrovercoming.ietzsche'sonfrontationsserve, otto establishictoryr a personalegemonyverhisopponents,nottodestroyndbefinished ith ruth, oodandevil, quality,rwhat-ever alueshe iscontesting;hey erve ather o open hequestion:Whatwould be theovercomingf these alues Whatwoulda standpointe-yondgoodandevil ook ike?Whatconceptf usticean weappealo norder odetermine hether given valuationsbeyond oodandevilornot?Whatwouldconstituten affirmativeractice eyond hehostilityolife?Rather han losethebookon certain erniciousalues,onsigningthem o oblivion,gonal extserve oopenandre-openhequestionfovercoming.heirprincipalrientations notdestructive,utproductive

20. This s llustratednHC,where n antagonistf Pericles,hen skedwhich f them s the bestwres-tler n thecity, esponds:'evenf throw imdown hedenies hathe hasfallen, ttains isobjectivendpersuadeshosewho saw himfall'" HC;KSA1,788). See alsoPHG onHeraditus' ransfigurationf theagon nto Weltprinzipworld-principle):Just severy reek ightss ifhealone s ntheright imRecht],and an infinitelyuremeasuref udicialudgementMaassdesrichterlichennheils] etermineshetrendofvictoryt everymoment, o thequalitieswresdewith ne another ccordingoinviolableawsand stan-dards Maassen]hat re mmanent o the ontest"PHG,5; KSA1,825).Thestandard r measureMaass)for fair udgement fvictorydasrechte nheil)sdrawn nto, nddeterminedythe mmanent ynamicofthe ontest.n the ontext f the gon,thenotion f usticeGerechtigkeit)sstripped f ts ranscendentstatus, s notedbyHeraclitus:[...]hecould nolonger onsider hewresding airs nd the udges Richter]asseparaterom neanother, heudges eemed ocontest, he ontestantshemselveseemed oudge rich-ten] indeed, s heperceivedt bottom nly heoneeternallyovereignustice Gerechtigkeit],edared ocallout: the trugglef themany tselfstheone ustice ...]" {PHG,6; KSA1,826-7)



23/28

342 H. SIEMENS

andexperimental:oinauguratend stimulate adicalnewchallengesohegemonialdeals,omultiply ewposturesnd radicallternatives.

As themodelfor n open-endedontestationf values ocused nthequestionfovercoming,he gonoffershe deal rena or otal ritique;tthe ametime, tsproductiverientationromisesodeflecthe ogicofself-destructionfflictingotal ritique. ow Nietzsche'sriticalmpulse,swe sawnEcceHomo, nfolds t a collectiveevel,n responseo a culturalproblematic.eretoo,the gon shelpfuln elucidatingowNietzsche's

demand or hangend therequisiteesponseanoperatet this evel.In putting hequestionf overcomingntoplay, gonal exts anonlywork f his uestions contestedna play f forces",f pluralityf an-tagonisticorcesredrawn, hallenged,rovokedo contesthequestion.Just s the Greek gonis conditionalpona plurality f antagonisticforces,oagonalwritinganonly hrive here we" anagonalommun-ity fscholars",artists",freepirits",immoralists",philosophersf thefuture" r anyother eaders horespondo the maginaryommunitiespopulatingietzsche'sexts aredrawnnto hefray. utwhat xactlysanagonalommunity"What s ts onstitutionnd mmanentynamic?Here thefirst assagen ostracism ives n importantndication.heagon,Nietzscherites, resupposespluralityf forces r geniuseshorouse[reizen]ne anotherto action [Tat],as they lsohold one anotherwithin he boundsof measure"beat.). The agonaldynamics oneofmutual timulation,rousal, rovocation,mpowermentndmutual is-empowerment,imitation ithin hebounds f measure.he contest illonly rise ut of mutual rovocationndstimulation;hilemutualimi-

tation empersndcontainshevictoryf singleorce,o that he ontestmay ontinue. s the omplexnterplayf positivendnegativeostures,reciprocalffirmationnd negation,roachedn EcceHomo,t isdistin-guished n one sidefrom redemptivecheme f peaceand reconcili-ation21;ndon theother, rom hepure, nmeasuredntagonismfwar,or mutual nnihilationVernichtungskampf).

21. Nietzsche'sonstrual f the ocialist tate, or xample:5 [178],[180],[188](KSA8)



24/28


Fine. But how canforces e so ordereds to both timulate nd limiteach other? nd how can this rder e conceivedn the evel fhumanbeings,membersf state-communityr readers?he answeriven y hetext entres n agonaldrives r affects.s thekey o thedynamicf mu-tualempowerment disempowerment,gonal ffectsllowusto probefurther he key issueof this paper:namely, he distance eparatingNietzscheanritique rom he ogicofdestruction.oragonal ffectsredistinguishedrom nother et of affects those that drivemen to

struggleor nnihilation

accordingoHesiod distinctionetween he

good"nd the evil ris" oddesses.he evil ris", eferredyNietzscheto affects uch as hate,cruelty,ust,deceit, indictivenessdrivesmentowards he inimical truggle or annihilation Vernichtungskampfwhereas hat ris s good

who,asjealousy, rath, nvy, ousesstimulates] en to deeds,not of mutualdestructionVernichtungskampf],utrather hedeedofcontestWettkampf]TheGreek s envious nd feels his uality ot as a flaw, ut rather s the effect f abeneficenteity...HC;KSA1,787)

Such gonalffects onot ust rovokeontestation;hey lsoensure hesecondmoment f mutual imitation.his can beseenthrough rief on-siderationf nvy, hichwill lso erve o flesh utthe gonalmodel f ri-tique s analternativeounmeasuredarfare; eneed,nspecific,ogivebody o thenotion f masteryeparatinghe wo.

V.EnvyndAgonalMastery:heCreative urn f Nietzscheanritique.

Agonalnvy,ike he mpulseocritical istory,snotrestrictedo ivingpeers.n Homers ontestietzsche ecallsenophanes'elationoHomer,cited yAristotles anexamplethat ven ne who sdeadcanrouse newho salive o aconsumingealousy".ietzscheees his,ikePlato'sttackonHomer, srootednthe

monstrous esire...otake heplaceof the fallen oetoneselfnd to inherit isfame reputation].very reatHellenepassesn thetorch f thecontest; verygreat irtue indles new greatness.//C; KSA1,788)

Agonalnvy hus timulatesn individualooutbid he urrent ictor.t sthedesire o imit im nd create new

greatness"that s, newvaluend



25/28

344 H.SIEMENS

a newstandardf evaluationhat sbinding n others,o that ne mightinherit isfame", is culturaluthority22.t the ame ime t s also envythat, n the ther ide, rovokesheGreeks ertiginousear fvictorynditsfruits. owhere s the negationnd imitationf the elf o pronouncedasinthevictors ear f divinenvy:

Becausehe is envioushe alsofeels,withevery xcess fhonour,wealth, loryhappiness,heenviousyeof a god resting ponhim, ndhe fears his nvy; nthis ase t reminds imof the transiencef every uman ot,hishappinessillshimwithdread nd,sacrificinghebestof t, he bows to thedivine nvy. HC;

KSA1,787)23This account an be used to tieup variouslements f Nietzscheanri-tiquewe have ncounterednto cohesiveoncept f masterynwhich tculminates.

22. This isvery lose to Kant'sconceptionf exemplaryenius s the making f originalense whichliberates he others riginality.... hemaking f originalense s the making f somethinghat nables rstirs thers o make

originalense."T.

GOULD,The Audience of

Originality,ssaysn Kant's

Aesthetics,P. Guyer &T. Cohen (Eds.),London/Chicago,982,pp. 188-189.23.An analogouspoweror stimulationnd limitation s prominentn Nietzschesccountor agonal

ambition. he Hellenic ttitude o ambition nd egoismscomparedwith hat fJesuit aedagogy:Theyeem obelievehat goism,hats, he ndividualactors ust hemost owerfulgent hich, owever,receivests haractersgood"revil"ssentiallyromhe oalsowardshicht tretchesut.Nowfor heancientshegoal f gonalducationasthewelfaref thewhole,he tate ociety.very thenian,or x-ample, as upposedodevelopis elfnthe ontesto that egree hich ould e ofgreatestdvantageoAthensnddo t he east arm."HC;KSA1,789)

The contestantsrivingmbitionwas for ersonal lory nd fame Ruhm);but for he gonalndividu-al,thiswas nseparablerom hat f his state r community:

...itwasof hewell-beingfhismaternality hat youth hought hen unningr throwingr singingncompetition;twasher ame hat ewantedo ncreasehroughis; and]hewreathshich heudgesf hecontestlacednhonourponhishead, ededicatedothe ods fhis ity.(//C; SA1,789)

Nietzsche'soint eems o be that pre-reflectivedentity etweenhe elf nd thecommunity aspre-formed n an affectiveeveln the gonal ffectsuch asambition: heagon s basedon social orcommu-naldrives, hatNietzscheometimes alls allgemeineriebe"3 [44],19[21],7). Theireffect s to placethe ndividualctionswhich hey rive nto he ervice f the tate-community:

Every reek elt rom hildhoodn theburning ishwithin imselfo be an nstrumentor hegoodsal-vation]fhis ity nthe ontest f he ities: herein ashis goismnflamed,hereintwas lso heckedndbounded.HC;KSA1,789).

Or again:Theagon nleasheshe ndividualnd t the ame imetbindsrestrains]he ameccordingoeternalaws.(16 [22],)

Thusboth moments f stimulationnd limitationrepre-formedn an affectiveevel: t is the com-munalor social haracterf Hellenic mbition hat etermineshemoments f mutual timulation r em-powermentnd constraint r imitation,haracterizinggonalnteraction.



26/28


Masterywas first ncounteredn Ecce Homo asnaming helimitednegation" hrough hichNietzscheanritique ontains he ogicof self-destruction.n that ontext t was argued hatNietzscheanritiquemaybegin ith estructive,yrannicalntent, utfindstselfimited y he esis-tance t encounterso a posture f mastery, hichmeant: imiting hetyrannyf the valuest challenges.t is ust ucha confrontationhat g-onalenvydescribes: heenvyof, say, Xenophanesr Plato vis--visHomer sthedesire o limitHomerstyrannicalold overGreek ulture,

hishegemonys theeducator f the people.What smore, nvy llumi-nates hemovement rom yrannyomastery: nder he signof agonalenvy, hetyranny n so manyof Nietzsche'sttitudes indeed,thenecessaryyrannynany udgement24 becomes hemonstrousesireotake heplace"fwhat sbeing ontested.

At the ametime, gonal nvy roundshe imiting r curbing f thistyrannicalriventhe worelationshipst nformsi)the ontestantrela-tion o the gods and i)hisrelationo his ntagonist.shall onsider achinsuccession:i) In the first nstance,hetyrannicalrive indsts imit n a gesture fsacrifice"r renunciationn the faceof divine nvy. hisdoesseemanunpromisingirectionnwhich o ookfor nsightnto modern theisticcriticikeNietzsche untilwerecall he haracterfGreek ods:far romtranscendent,hey reonly ooprone ohuman-all-too-humanassions,like nvy.ndeed, heir nly ealdifferencerom umanbeingss immor-tality; heir nly ealffliction,oremind s of ourmortality.t s this enseofhistoricalinitude,urbondageo ife-as-becoming,amiliars theprob-lem of critical istory,hatNietzschegainemphasizesn thecontext fagonalnvy: hecontestantfearsthegod's]nvy; n this ase t remindshimofthe ransiencefevery uman ot" be. it.).

Leavinghegodsbehind,we canrefer hecontestantorcritic's ear fenvy othe ther gonal ontestantsnstead,s anequallyransientlural-ty f active,ntagonisticorcesying or moment f gloryWithin uch

24. Cf.T.ADORNO& M.Horkheimer,op.cit., . 204,on the bsolute, niversalaiminherentnany

judgementua judgement,nd the need for eterminate

egationsacorrective.



27/28

346 H. SIEMENS

acommunity,he nvious esireoappropriateor neself he uthorityfanother,o create newvalue r rule nd ay laim o a newtruth, s sanc-tioned,ndeedncouraged.ut s apluralityf quallyctive,ntagonisticforces,hecommunitylso afflictshisdesirewith sense f ts ownvul-nerability,nanxietyodischargeard-wonatietyntobadly eedednno-cence25.gonal nvy imits he tyrannicalriven a gesturef sacrifice"provokedyanopen-ended ublicontest: he ubmissionf ones claimto a collectiverocessf contention hat nsurestsmortality,hepassage

of eachhard-wontruth"ntomemory.he agonalommunityf criticsis, n short, he source f that resistance hich imits he tyrannicalm-pulsento posturefmastery.utwhat xactlyoesmastery eannthiscontext?ii) Here the secondrelationshipf envyneedsto be considered:hecontestantsonsumingealousyf the reigninghampion Homer,nPlato's ase.Agonalnvy s not he desire o annihilatehechampion;tseeks o limithis achievementsyoutbiddinghem, o as toinherit isfame".n thisformulation,he contestantsr critics rge odestroy isopponents checkedy wofamiliarmpulses.he first s agreateroncernwith he ffirmationndempowermentfhisown ife whatNietzschecalledgrowth"nEcceHomo ndappears ere s the desireo outbid heopponent ycreating newwork f human greatness".he other heckinvolves limitedffirmationfthe pponent,nd t followsrom hefirstimpulse ccordingothe ogic fmasteryseep.335-336).The contestantsnewwork r deedofgreatness ayprovidehenew tandardfevaluationor measure hich imits isopponentschievements;ut t also needs o

preservehose chievementssa measuref ts wn uperiority.gonalnvyis thedesireoinherit isfame"assuch t eeks oaffirmndpreserveheopponent hroughbindingfnames, genealogicalond hatwould ub-tend hecontestantattempt ointensifynd outbid heother achieve-

25.Cf. WalterBENJAMINn the agonalvictor: Visibleoall,praised y thepeople,thevictor tandsthere he s ndesperateeedof nnocence Unschuldut hmbitter ot] holding he upofvictorynupheldhands ike shellfull f wine,fromwhich spiltdropwould tainthimeternally."as Glck desantikenMenschen,Gesammeltechriften, . TlEDEMANN H.SCHWEPPENHUSERHrsg.),Frankfurt.M, 1977,Bd..,. 129.



28/28


ments. heyareconserved,ot ustas ameasure,ut as a stimuUntornewdeedorwork, newgreatness".gonal nvy rings o thenotion fmasteryn emphasisn creativeroductionhat eorientshedestructiveimpulse f Nietzscheanritique owards he creationf new ife-affirm-ative alueseyond oodand evil.

Summary

The questionposedin thispaperconcernsdestructionWhatpart, f any,doesdestruction lay n Nietzsche'sife-projectf critical ransvaluationNietzschespro-ject, argue, nvolves total ritique f Western alues n the name of life,yet thisdoes not entail otal iolence: hedestructionf antagonisticalues.Violent, estruc-tive mpulsesannot be subtracted romhis thought; hequestion s whether heymakefor destruction s the goalof critique I). Nietzsche'seflectionsn criticalhistory" re used to show his awarenessof a recoiling ogicof self-destruction

threateningnyctofcritical estruction. n this basis,

arguehatNietzsche eeks

a limit n the negation f thepast" II) andpropose n agonal"modelofcritiquethat ncorporatesucha limit Nietzscheanritique sregulated ya regime f recip-rocal mpowerment disempowerment,ased on thecentral nstitution f Homericculture, he agonor contest.The agonal regime llows for the total critiqueofvalues,while arresting he logicof self-destructionhrough code of limitedviolenceagonalmastery" isplacesdestruction s the goalof critique. n supportof this thesis,Nietzsche's wnaccountof his war-praxisrom cce Homo is exam-ined withemphasisn the moments f imitationIII).Hisaccount of the agoninHomeric Greekculture s then examined s amodelfor ritique hat mbodieshis

declaredwar-praxisIV).In the final ection V), theagonal pathosofenvy susedto explicatehedynamic f agonalcritique s an alternativeototalwarfare nd toflesh ut the conceptof mastery hat eparateshetwo.

Siemens, H., Nietzsche hammer, philosophy, destruction or the art of limited warfare.pdf

Documents

Transcript of Siemens, H., Nietzsche hammer, philosophy, destruction or the art of limited warfare.pdf