The lies of statism, democracy, and the inevitability of totalitarianism from a Nietzschean perspective

---

We are sold this meme about the virtue of democracy and its inherent bias towards moderation or a desire to serve the wealthy as the expense of the masses. In fact none of these seem to be true. Here's why:

Who was Friedrich Nietzsche?

First off, he was a man with a massively powerful mustache. More importantly, he was a German philosopher (1844-1900). His work has gotten a bad wrap in history due to the fact that his sister, a Nazi sympathizer, posthumously edited unpublished works of his to suit her political leanings. In life, his particular spheres or influence were primarily morals and theology.

Master/Slave Morality:

This dichotomy of ethics is one of the central tenants of Friedrich Nietzsche's work. To him, There is a master morality, and a slave morality.

• Master Morality: is an ethical framework formed by the elite, be them intellectually, physically, professionally, or otherwise above the pack. The ethics of the superiors, or the "ubermensch" as he unfortunately dubbed this class, is characterized by a striving for self-actualization, strength, willpower, and nobility. Additionally, this framework sought to judge acts based on the end result, regardless of intentions.

• Slave Morality: The slave suffers in the world and is driven to hate those who do not suffer from their weakness. This manifests itself as resentment to the more successful and the ethic they embrace. Slave morality is characterized by valuing things for their utility to the collective, vilification of the superiors, and a rejection of will power. This view also values the intention of acts instead of the end result. According to this argument, slave morality is the more common, especially where people are told that those who are more successful are a threat or owe them something.

---

Slave morality and the nature of democracy:

It is no surprise to anyone that in a democracy, the majority rules through their vote. Given this, it is clear that a democracy will ultimately devolve into a majoritarian rule of the slave morality. The masses demanding medical services as a state service, or the idea that the wealthy owe a greater percentage of their income (or any percentage at all) because they have more to give plainly exhibits the slave morality and resentment of success. You have it, I want it, and because it has utility, you are forced to give it to me. With every cause du jour, the slave masses will abdicate their free will to the power of the state and advocate for the free will of the superiors who do not give up their rights to be taken by force. Since the majority dictates its will and morality to the minority, this will always happen.

Slave morality and revolt

One of the clearest cases of a violent takeover of slave morality is the October Revolution and the overthrow of the Czar. Seeing a monarchy which lived in the lap of luxury while the majority suffered stirred resentment. This resentment was militarized by the Bolsheviks and turned into a revolution. In the end an oppressive regime was established because in the eyes of the untermensch, private property was an oppressive concept in that an item held in private cannot have a collective utility. To satisfy this idiotic idea, the Soviet Union came about, gulags, ethnic cleansing, and political assassinations too.

Let me know what else you would like to add!

I will upvote and engage with substantive comments. Have a good one!

-@roofcore