Nietzsches Critique of Liberalism - Essay Example

?Liberalism Nietzsche’s Critique of Liberalism Introduction Liberalism is a political ideologythat recognizes the rights of people, personal property and a free for all economy (Owen,1995). In addition to this, it also recognizes governments that protect the liberty of each citizen and a constitution which also protects the autonomy of its people from the powers of the state. It was introduced in the late seventeenth century and was based on the ideas of individualism and freeeconomic markets with a special emphasis on the independence of individuals and personal property. Born in October 1844, Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzche was a German philosopher, poet, composer, cultural critic as well as a classical philologist. His works has beencharacterized with the use of irony and metaphors. It is for this reason that most of his works have been subject of discussion by many scholars the world over. His political neutrality has contributed to the accreditation of his works since they had no bearing on any political front (Thomas, 2004). This paper, therefore, aims at critiquing his work on liberalism. His views on liberalism have been subject to controversy by many scholars given his witticism and use of irony on his articles. The aim of this paper is neither to give credit nor criticize his works on liberalism, but try and better understand his ideologies on liberalism and how they can be applied in the modern world. Assessment of Neitzsche’s criticism on liberalism. Against the backdrop of liberalism movement that was taking place in the late 17th century and early 18th century, Neitzsche claimed that democracy only worked to protect the rights of the majority, which included the general population compared to the liberal idea that democracy worked to protect the rights and interests of individual people (Ansell-Pearson, 1994). This view on liberalism, strikes the right chord because in every sense, democracy in the modern world is based on the rights of the majority against the rights of individuals. This means most constitutions, the world over, claim to protect the rights and privileges of individuals yet,on the other hand, the rights of the majority overrules. It is only in exceptional cases, which often involve the affluent in society, that this viewis applied. The rich are always given their rights when they demand them. This is not often the caseif a poor citizen was to demands the same rights. The idea of liberalism emphasized on protecting the rights of every individual, but according to Neitzsche, these individuals’ are usually the rich people in society. The liberals did not protect the rights of the general citizenry as they claimed. Instead, they were clustered in one group and their rights were determined as a whole’ (Shaw, 2010). Nevertheless, the rights of the majority came in as a second priority since the liberals focused on securing the rights of the affluent in society. This means that the poor or middle income had no say; since the rich people were the main decision and policy makers because only their voice counted in key decision making. This notion created a slave mentality among such liberal states. According to Peters, et al (2003), Nietzsche also believed in the mastery of oneself. He believed that human beings should define their live according to themselves and rid themselves pity of the weak members of the society. In order for an individual to succeed in a society, he should not be tied to any equality standards, but be allowed to go grow beyond boarders in tandem with their abilities. This means that liberalism hindered the growth of individuals since it placed standards and emphasized on equality among individuals, yet each individual has the ability to grow beyond the average. He believed that liberalism emphasized on equality among members of the society, yet in the real sense not every human being has the same potential as the other. He envisioned a society where, individuals would have their own independence and persevering will to make their choices with regards to living. In respect to this, Neitzsche believed that the liberal society tied down mankind to certain goals instead of letting them define their own goals and paths in life. He believed that one needs to better understand himself and as such would overcome the problems associated with the liberal society such as having pity for the weak. He saw that the Europeans hindered their progress in life since they believed in the morality of custom which made them weak and vulnerable (Nietzsche, et al,2007). The ‘overman’, as he describes, would be an individual who has mastery of himself. He would overcome the challenges that prevailed in the society in Europe at the time and would be liberated from the morality of custom. This ‘over man’ would be a supremeachievement that will create his own path in life and discard pity from the masses in the society. Conclusion Nietzsche criticism of liberalism cannot be dismissed as mere philosophical argument. Its practicality can be seen in the modern world as it was in the past. Liberal states continue to argue that they promote the rights of each and every individual, yet most of the decisionsis made based on the majority vote. On the other hand, there are those few individuals, mostly politicians and the wealthy, which make decisions on behalf of the majority without consulting them. His vision of an ‘overman’, though desirable, cannot be achieved in the practical world given the depth at which liberalism has been entrenched in our society. It may act as an inspiration to many and a source of hope though it could never be actualized in the real world. His criticism of liberalism, however, exposes the hypocrisy of the system and how many have been deceived into believing in its doctrines and principles. By analyzing Neitzsche critic of liberalism, one is able to have a better understanding on the underlying faults in such a system, and envision on better policies that benefit the general good of mankind. Bibliography OWEN, D. (1995). Nietzsche, politics and modernity: a critique of liberal reason. London [u.a.], Sage Publ. THOMAS, D. W. (2004). Cultivating Victorians: liberal culture and the aesthetic.Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press. ANSELL-PEARSON, K. (1994). An introduction to Nietzsche as political thinker: the perfect nihilist. Cambridge u.a, Cambridge Univ. Press SHAW, T. (2010).Nietzsche's political skepticism.Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press. PETERS, M., OLSSEN, M., & LANKSHEAR, C. (2003).Futures of critical theory: dreams of difference. Lanham, Md, Rowman& Littlefield. NIETZSCHE, F. W., DIETHE, C., &ANSELL-PEARSON, K. (2007).On the genealogy of morality. New York, Cambridge University Press. Read More