… an accurate and intelligent account of Nietzsche’s ideas, by one who has studied them and understands them, is, as Mawruss Perlmutter would say, yet another thing again. Seek in What Nietzsche Taught, by Willard H. Wright, and you will find it. Here in the midst of the current obfuscation, are the plain facts, set down by one who knows them. Wright has simply taken the eighteen volumes of the Nietzsche canon and reduced each of them to a chapter. All of the steps in Nietzsche’s arguments are jumped; there is no report of his frequent disputing with himself; one gets only his conclusions. But Wright has arranged these conclusions so artfully and with so keen a comprehension of all that stands behind them that they fall into logical and ordered chains, and are thus easily intelligible, not only in themselves, but also in their interrelations. The book is incomparably more useful than any other Nietzsche summary that I know. It does not, of course, exhaust Nietzsche, for some of the philosopher’s most interesting work appears in his arguments rather than in his conclusions, but it at least gives a straightforward and coherent account of his principal ideas, and the reader who has gone through it carefully will be quite ready for the Nietzsche books themselves.
These principal ideas all go back to two, the which may be stated as follows:
- Every system of morality has its origin in an experience of utility. A race, finding that a certain action works for its security and betterment, calls that action good; and, finding that a certain other action works to its peril, it calls that other action bad. Once it has arrived at these valuations it seeks to make them permanent and inviolable by crediting them to its gods.
- The menace of every moral system lies in the fact that, by reason of the supernatural authority thus put behind it, it tends to remain substantially unchanged long after the conditions which gave rise to it have been supplanted by different, and often diametrically antagonistic conditions.
In other words, systems of morality almost always outlive their usefulness, simply because the gods upon whose authority they are grounded are hard to get rid of. Among gods, as among office-holders, few die and none resign. Thus it happens that the Jews of today, if they remain true to the faith of their fathers, are oppressed by a code of dietary and other sumptuary laws — i.e., a system of domestic morality — which has long since ceased to be of any appreciable value, or even of any appreciable meaning, to them. It was, perhaps, an actual as well as a statutory immorality for a Jew of ancient Palestine to eat shell-fish, for the shell-fish of the region he lived in were scarecly fit for human food, and so he endangered his own life and worked damage to the community of which he was a part when he ate them. But these considerations do not appear in the United Sates of today. It is no more imprudent for an American Jew to eat shell-fish than it is for him to eat süaut;ss-und-sauer. His law, however, remains unchanged, and his immemorial God of Hosts stands behind it, and so, if he would be counted a faithful Jew, he must obey it. It is not until he definitely abandons his old god for some modern and intelligible god that he ventures upon disobedience. Find me a Jew eating oyster fritters and I will show you a Jew who has begun to doubt very seriously that the Creator actually held the conversation with Moses described in the ninteenth and subsequent chapters of the Book of Exodus.
H.L. Mencken, “Transvaluation of Morals”, The Smart Set, 1915-03.
April 16, 2020
QotD: Nietzsche’s ideas
March 7, 2020
History Buffs: Lawrence of Arabia
History Buffs
Published 17 Apr 2016BIG THANK YOU TO THE GREAT WAR CHANNEL FOR COLLABORATING WITH ME AND MAKING AWESOME VIDEOS!
Check out their T.E. Lawrence video here –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqvcjL6ObH0And the rest of their awesome channel here 🙂
https://www.youtube.com/user/TheGreatWarAnd thank you History Buffs so very much for being patient whilst I was in Ireland working on the Vikings podcasts for the History Channel and moving house at the same time. I sincerely hope you guys enjoy this review!
â—Ź Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/HistoryBuffsNH
________________________________________ÂÂ_________________________________
Lawrence of Arabia is a 1962 epic historical drama film based on the life of T. E. Lawrence. It was directed by David Lean and produced by Sam Spiegel through his British company Horizon Pictures, with the screenplay by Robert Bolt and Michael Wilson. The film stars Peter O’Toole in the title role. It is widely considered one of the greatest and most influential films in the history of cinema. The dramatic score by Maurice Jarre and the Super Panavision 70 cinematography by Freddie Young are also highly acclaimed. The film was nominated for ten Academy Awards and won seven in total including Best Director, Best Sound Editing, Best Film Editing, and Best Picture.
The film depicts Lawrence’s experiences in the Arabian peninsula during World War I, in particular his attacks on Aqaba and Damascus and his involvement in the Arab National Council. Its themes include Lawrence’s emotional struggles with the personal violence inherent in war, his own identity, and his divided allegiance between his native Britain and its army and his new-found comrades within the Arabian desert tribes.
In 1991, Lawrence of Arabia was deemed “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant” and selected for preservation in the United States Library of Congress National Film Registry.
February 3, 2020
Yet another attempted settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict that will go nowhere
Ted Campbell on the recent peace plan proposed by US president Donald Trump:
On the subject of the Trump Mideast Peace Plan, I agree with both The Economist which says, “as a blueprint for a two-state solution it was dead on arrival,” and with the Globe and Mail‘s Mark MacKinnon who writes that “President Donald Trump’s Middle East peace plan … aims to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict almost completely on Israel’s terms [and, while] Mr. Trump’s allegiances came as no surprise [to the Palestinian leaders, but] some of [their] bitterness was reserved for the leaders of Arab states that Palestinians see as quietly going along with the designs of the U.S. President and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.”
I think that is because President Trump, and much of the world, has lost patience with the Palestinians who still demand a right of return that, if ever seriously considered by anyone, would destroy Israel. Only Iran really wants that.
The strategic situation in the region, indeed in the entire Islamic Crescent which stretches from Mauritania and Morocco on the Atlantic coast of West Africa to Indonesia in East Asia, has changed in the past 70 years. There is no longer a unified Muslim “world” that opposes the very existence of a Jewish state in the Middle East. Indeed, a few Arab and Islamic states have correct, even friendly relations with Israel and others trade with the Jewish state (without having diplomatic relations) to their mutual advantage. The current problems in the region are centred on a power struggle between the Shia Islamic community, centred in Iran and the larger but socially and politically fragmented Sunni Islamic community …
… the differences are more than just religious. Iran, backed by China and Russia, and Saudi Arabia, backed by the USA, are engaged in something close to a real shooting war while Egypt and Turkey egg them both on. All four have some claim to dominance in the region and none is a real “friend” to any of the others and none gives a damn about Palestine or the Palestinian people.
[…]
President Trump has done a big political favour for Benjamin Netanyahu … but, ultimately it is probably pointless, and he and his successor and her (or his) successor, too, will likely still be seized with this issue in 2025 and 2030 and beyond.
Eventually, a solution will be found … it will, I suspect, involve Israel ceding a bit of territory to a new Palestinians state and, perhaps, establishing some sort of controlled, limited access corridor from the West Bank, possibly across the Northern Negev Desert. More importantly, it will involve Israel and Jordan, working in tandem, helping the new state to grow and prosper and live in peace with its neighbours. It’s a dream, of course, but it’s better, better for everyone, than is another war.
January 17, 2020
Zionism, Arabism & Colonialism in the Middle East | BETWEEN 2 WARS I 1936 Part 1 of 3
TimeGhost History
Published 16 Jan 2020After more than twenty years of colonial management, promises made but few promises kept and ethnic & cultural clashes in the area, unrest in the Middle East erupts in violence. A series of movements originate in this time, with long lasting consequences.
Watch our episode about the Middle east in the 1920s here: https://youtu.be/y6tSvRbvh2s
Join us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/TimeGhostHistory
Hosted by: Indy Neidell
Written by: Joram Appel
Directed by: Spartacus Olsson and Astrid Deinhard
Executive Producers: Bodo Rittenauer, Astrid Deinhard, Indy Neidell, Spartacus Olsson
Creative Producer: Joram Appel
Post-Production Director: Wieke Kapteijns
Research by: Joram Appel
Fact-Checking by: Jonas Srouji
Edited by: Daniel Weiss
Sound design: Marek KaminskiSources:
Arab by LINECTOR from the Noun Project
Bomb by P Thanga Vignesh from the Noun ProjectColorizations by:
– Dememorabilia – https://www.instagram.com/dememorabilia/
– Adrien.Colorisation – https://instagram.com/adrien.colorisa…
– Norman StewartSoundtracks from Epidemic Sound:
– “Dawn Of Civilization” – Jo Wandrini
– “The Inspector 4” – Johannes Bornlöf
– “Easy Target” – Rannar Sillard
– “First Responders” – Skrya
– “Not Safe Yet” – Gunnar Johnsen
– “Deflection” – Reynard Seidel
– “The Charleston 3” – HĂĄkan ErikssonA TimeGhost chronological documentary produced by OnLion Entertainment GmbH.
From the comments:
TimeGhost History
42 minutes ago (edited)
We have already covered “Carving up the Middle East” in one of our first Between Two Wars episodes (watch here: https://youtu.be/y6tSvRbvh2s), but we felt like we had to return to the area one more time as all that carving had quite some consequences. This means that a large part of this episode is about colonialism, Zionism, Arabism, race and ethnicity. I’m also aware of the complicated modern-day conflict in the area, many of which originate in [the events covered in] this episode. However, we would like the comment section to be reserved for debating the history. We’re not going to engage with people discussing modern-day issues and politics, and we’re going to be quite strict in monitoring any racist or otherwise hateful comments.Cheers,
Joram
January 10, 2020
“Light in the Black” – United Nations Peacekeeping – Sabaton History 049 [Official]
Sabaton History
Published 9 Jan 2020The United Nations were created to avoid any future human suffering and all-out conflict. Numerous peacekeeping missions had the goal to deescalate and protect the innocent. However, the success and usefulness of the UN is still quite ambiguous. The Sabaton song “Light in the Black” is about the UN peacekeeping missions and we tell you about the history.
Support Sabaton History on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/sabatonhistory
Listen to Attero Dominatus (where “Light in the Black” is featured):
CD: http://bit.ly/AtteroDominatusStore
Spotify: http://bit.ly/AtteroDominatusSpotify
Apple Music: http://bit.ly/AtteroDominatusAppleMusic
iTunes: http://bit.ly/AtteroDominatusiTunes
Amazon: http://bit.ly/AtteroDominatusAmzn
Google Play: http://bit.ly/AtteroDominatusGooglePlayListen to Sabaton on Spotify: http://smarturl.it/SabatonSpotify
Official Sabaton Merchandise Shop: http://bit.ly/SabatonOfficialShopHosted by: Indy Neidell
Written by: Markus Linke and Indy Neidell
Directed by: Astrid Deinhard and Wieke Kapteijns
Produced by: Pär Sundström, Astrid Deinhard and Spartacus Olsson
Creative Producer: Joram Appel
Executive Producers: Pär Sundström, Joakim Broden, Tomas Sunmo, Indy Neidell, Astrid Deinhard, and Spartacus Olsson
Production Intern: Rune Væver Hartvig
Post-Production Director: Wieke Kapteijns
Edited by: Iryna Dulka
Sound Editing by: Marek Kaminski and Karolina Dolega
Maps by: Eastory – https://www.youtube.com/c/eastoryArchive by: Reuters/Screenocean https://www.screenocean.com
Music by Sabaton.Sources:
RijksmuseumAn OnLion Entertainment GmbH and Raging Beaver Publishing AB co-Production.
© Raging Beaver Publishing AB, 2019 – all rights reserved.
QotD: Deciding what is “newsworthy”
The idiosyncracies of historical remembrance of battle do not hinge alone on the presence of a Socrates or Teddy Roosevelt in the ranks. Sometimes there are wild cards of culture and politics as well. In this case and at this time, the fact that Israelis fit the stereotype of affluent and proud Westerners abroad while the Palestinians were constructed as impoverished and oppressed colonial subjects brought to the equation the sympathies of influential Americans and Europeans in the media, universities, and government — the prominent and sometimes worrisome elites who determined to send their reporters, scholars, and diplomats to Jenin rather than to Islamabad or Grozny.
Victor Davis Hanson, Ripples of Battle, 2004.
November 28, 2018
AirBnB virtue signals its … anti-semitic street cred?
In the National Post, Barbara Kay discusses the odd business choices of AirBnB in cutting off rentals to only certain locations that just happen to be in Israel:
Planning a group holiday in Kashmir? Airbnb is there to serve you. Likewise in Tibet, northern Cyprus and Georgia’s separatist republic of Abkhazia, all occupied or disputed territories. Airbnb’s political neutrality in these hot spots therefore quite rightly casts suspicion, to put it mildly, on its recent decision to delist some 200 Jewish homes in West Bank communities.
Airbnb stated, “We know that people will disagree with this decision and appreciate their perspective. This is a controversial issue.” No kidding. An Israeli class-action lawsuit has been filed against Airbnb, seeking US$4,000 in damages for every affected host.
Indignation has been running high outside of Israel as well, in statements both spontaneous — disgusted blog, Twitter and Facebook posts — and considered. The Beverly Hills city council, for example, passed a unanimous condemnatory resolution, calling Airbnb out for anti-Semitism and stating, in part: “The City of Beverly Hills hereby calls upon Airbnb to correct this act of disrespect to the land of Israel and restore its original services immediately.”
Setting aside the anti-Semitic optics, is it legal for Airbnb to do this?
The U.S. Constitution, as well as various state laws and acts of Congress, prohibits both American individuals and corporations from participating in boycotts against other nations. A corporate boycott against a foreign government does not fall under the “free speech” rubric,” but is considered a “tool of statecraft” reserved for the federal government in such situations as war. The office of Rob Portman of Ohio (R), an author of the Israel Anti-Boycott Act in the Senate, told The Jerusalem Post last Tuesday that it wants to hear from Airbnb. The Illinois state legislature — which passed the nation’s first local anti-BDS law in 2015 — will reportedly meet in mid-December, when it anticipates debating whether Airbnb violated its statute.
Establishing illegality pivots on whether the move is deemed as “politically” inspired. It certainly seems to be. As noted by Kohelet Forum legal expert Eugene Kontorovich in a recent Wall Street Journal oped, “An American Jew with a rental property in the West Bank is barred from listing it for rent on the website. But an American Arab is welcome to list his home a few hundred metres away, even though the Palestinian law forbidding real-estate deals with Jews carries a maximum penalty of death. That openly racist policy doesn’t trigger Airbnb’s delisting policy.”
October 25, 2018
QotD: The unique situation of Israel
In 1948, one internationally recognized sovereign state (Israel) was invaded by the armies of various neighboring sovereign states (Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon). At the end of that war, much of the former British Mandate of Palestine was in Israeli hands, but the West Bank wound up with Jordan and the Gaza Strip with Egypt. Over the next two decades, nobody referred to Egypt’s or Jordan’s exercise of its sovereignty in those lands under loaded terms such as “settlement”.
In 1967, the Arabs tried again to wipe out Israel, and again failed. And this time their defeat was even more total: Egypt lost the Gaza Strip (and the Sinai) and Jordan lost the West Bank. That was half-a-century ago. One of the most basic laws of war is: to the victor the spoils. If you launch a war and you lose, then the guy who took your territory is the one who determines its future. Instead, the “international community” decided to intervene in the matter in a way it has in no other supposed boundary dispute.
Thus began the “Palestiniazation” of the problem. Uniquely in such matters, the victorious sovereign state is forbidden from returning the spoils of war to the defeated sovereign states – Jordan and Egypt. Instead, it can only treat with the designated representatives of “Palestine”, who … have no interest in nation-building, or capacity for it, only in Jew-killing.
To repeat: the “international community”‘s treatment of this issue is like no other boundary dispute of the last 200 years. Maybe that’s because this situation is unique to one small patch of land in the Middle East. Or maybe it’s because the “international community” really really doesn’t like Jews.
I say that Israel (independent since 1948), Jordan (1946) and Egypt (1922) are all sovereign states entitled to act in their own interests, and live with the consequences – especially after two or three generations.
Mark Steyn, “License to Dye”, Steyn Online, 2016-12-30.
October 2, 2018
Stories From The Palestine Front – More About WW1 Trucks I OUT OF THE ETHER
The Great War
Published on 1 Oct 2018In this episode of Out of the Ether, we read a few excellent comments about WW1 Trucks and the Palestine Front.
September 28, 2018
The Meuse-Argonne Offensive – Bulgarian Collapse I THE GREAT WAR Week 218
The Great War
Published on 27 Sep 2018This week, the biggest American military operation in history kicks off with 1.2 million American soldiers trying to take the Krimhilde Stellung. At the same time the Army of the Orient advances into Bulgaria and the Ottoman 7th and 8th armies collapse in Palestine.
September 21, 2018
Allied Breakthroughs In Palestine And Macedonia I THE GREAT WAR Week 217
The Great War
Published on 20 Sep 2018In a turbulent week of the First World War, the Allies break through at the Macedonian Front during the Battle of Vadar and in Palestine during the Battle for Palestine. At the same time, the Ottoman defeats the last defenders of Baku.
August 24, 2018
Over By Christmas? – Growing Allied Confidence I THE GREAT WAR Week 213
The Great War
Published on 23 Aug 2018Get David Zabecki’s Book about the German 1918 Offensives: http://bit.ly/Zabecki1918
With the recent “Black Day of the German Army” and the success of the new strategy of Allied attacks along the Western Front and with the renewed offensives in Palestine, British Commander Sir Douglas Haig is confident the war can be won by the end of the year. Entente Generalissimo Ferdinand Foch is a bit more cautious but also thinks the war can be won by 1919.
August 10, 2018
The Black Day Of The German Army – The Battle of Amiens I THE GREAT WAR Week 211
The Great War
Published on 9 Aug 2018Ludendorff and his generals didn’t think the Allies had it in them, but this week they attack with the might off several hundred tanks near Amiens, the Black Day of the German Army.
August 3, 2018
Four Years of War I THE GREAT WAR Week 210
The Great War
Published on 2 Aug 2018As the war turns 4 years old, there is still no end in sight. From the Western Front to the Caucasus and the Middle East; in every theater the war is still raging on.
July 31, 2018
German Asia Corps In The Ottoman Empire During WW1 I THE GREAT WAR Special
The Great War
Published on 30 Jul 2018German-Ottoman military cooperation predated World War 1 by a few decades. But their alliance during the First World War meant that German (and Austrian) troops would actually fight in and with the Ottoman Empire.
