PDA

View Full Version : great Nietzsche quote



Ned
30-05-2006, 06:24 PM
I know there are a million great Nietzsche quotes but this is one I've never seen quoted before:


What I attack is that economic optimism which behaves as though, with the increasing expenditure of all, the welfare of all would also necessarily increase. To me the opposite seems to be the case: the sum total of the expenditure of all amounts to a total loss: man is diminished - indeed, one no longer knows what purpose this immense process has served in the first place. A purpose? A new purpose - that is what mankind needs.

Nothing very new but it's interesting in that you don't think of Nietzsche as an anti-capitalist.

polystyle desu
30-05-2006, 06:51 PM
Thanks for that Ned & Nietzsche ...

diminished men (not demolished)
...
new purposes ...

Omaar
01-06-2006, 03:01 PM
Yeah that is interesting.

It's a little bit off topic, but I was chatting with some workmates in the pub, who were arguing in favour of the capitalist maxim that states something along the lines of it being necessary to accumulate capital in large pockets to allow investment in occur, and thus for major projects that benefit mankind to happen.

This seems a bit ridiculous to me, possibly they or I are confounding two principles.

Does an ideal capitalist economy, according to it's proponents, require accumulations of wealth in the hands of a few in order to generate large investement projects, or is it theoretically possible to have decentred financial system in which limits are placed on stockpiling capital, but development still occurs through collectively organised small scale investments? Actually I suppose that's how the share system is supposed to work. I guess accumulation is to some degree a violation of the principle of competition anyway.

Er sorry , that was all a bit pointless.

What does Nietzsche say after that quote though? What new purpose does he suggest? Is this in the context of the Uberman?

IdleRich
01-06-2006, 03:31 PM
"Does an ideal capitalist economy, according to it's proponents, require accumulations of wealth in the hands of a few in order to generate large investement projects"
As I understand it (which may not be very far) capitalism is defined by private control/ownership of capital but it doesn't necessarily prefer it to be in the hands of the few, at least not by definition. An equally "ideal" capitalist state could have lots of small owners of capital though I guess this would be achieved by the market rather than by rules limiting the size of capital. As far as I know the more rules you have controlling the freedom of the market the further you move from capitalism.
I don't see that various small owners of capital investing jointly would be a problem. The point is they would still own a part of the things they invest in and would be seeking to make profit from it which would be for them.

adruu
02-06-2006, 03:34 PM
not to jack this thread, but i wouldnt mind a good quote thread at all...

here's another frederich one i jotted down last year. its from beyond g+e i think, and related to neurophysics and secular meditation.

"To close the doors and windows of consciousness for a time; to remain undisturbed by the noise and struggle of our underworld of organs working with and against one another, a little quietness, a little tabula rasa of the consciousness to make room for new things, above all for the nobler functions -- regulation, foresight, premeditation -- that is the purpose of active forgetfulness which is like a doorkeekper -- a presever of psychic order repose and eitiquette, so that it will immediately obvious that there could be no happiness, no cheerfulness, no hope, no pride, no present, without forgetfulness."

Ned
02-06-2006, 06:15 PM
The stockpiling and investment can be done by the government, whose interest (in an ideal world anyway) is in making life better for people, not just in making profit.

Some more good ones, both of which, improbably, I used in my exam today:

'The world was conquered through the understanding of dogs; the world exists through the understanding of dogs.' Actually just realised I totally misquoted this one, fuck.

'I have forgotten my umbrella.'

tate
02-06-2006, 06:58 PM
'I have forgotten my umbrella.'
If you are interested in this quote, you should consider reading Derrida's Spurs: Nietzsche's Styles/Eperons: Les Styles de Nietzsche (U of Chicago, 1981).

Ned
02-06-2006, 07:09 PM
Yeah actually that was where I heard of it but I ended up using it in a completely unrelated and fairly tenous context.

zhao
02-06-2006, 08:58 PM
'I have forgotten my umbrella.'

that is a great one! I've never heard it before.

Omaar
05-06-2006, 10:08 AM
The stockpiling and investment can be done by the government, whose interest (in an ideal world anyway) is in making life better for people, not just in making profit.



That wouldn't be capitalism then, really. More like Market socialism maybe?

dominic
11-06-2006, 05:36 PM
i think nietzsche's criticizing the "economics of growth," regardless of whether such economics are organized along capitalist or socialist lines. certainly capitalism is more pointless than socialism, insofar as the object of capital is merely to beget (accumulate) more capital, whereas socialism aims at improving general material conditions. however, b/c socialism takes its bearings from people's material needs rather than their spiritual or higher needs, nietzsche on my reading argues, the expenditure of so much time and energy toward the satisfaction of such need is, again, contrary to true human interests . . . .

basmala
19-07-2006, 09:58 PM
Capitalism favours social injustices in the name of free competition; look at the results of globalization on the third world economies, there is no possible chance for building any independent economy in there without rules limiting the entrance of foreign products that could be made locally for example. Factories that rich counteries establish in third countries are only making the latter more dependent. Even if they might offer job opportunities to individuals these factories are not beneficial to the people on the whole, am I not right?

polystyle desu
20-07-2006, 03:26 AM
basmala , I have to agree on that ...