Is there a Pessimism of the Strong?

Nietzsche wrote, in his more youthful work The Birth of Tragedy, the following question: , “Is pessimism necessarily a sign of decline, decay, malformation, of tired and debilitated instincts [. . .]? Is there a pessimism of strength? An intellectual preference for the hard, gruesome, malevolent and problematic aspects of existence which comes from a feeling of well-being, from overflowing health, from an abundance of existence? Is there perhaps such a thing as suffering from overabundance itself? Is there a tempting bravery in the sharpest eye which demands the terrifying as its foe, as a worthy foe against which it can test its strength and from which it intends to learn the meaning of fear?”

The short answer: Yes.

The long answer is harder, and should be put in context. My personal context is simple: I have been arguing with a few people who see themselves as pragmatists and issue-focused lately who seem to have a hard time trying to square the circle that their representation in either congress or parliament doesn’t seem to represent them. In fact, not only does it not represent them, but it doesn’t represent the public on issues in which they is large scale support if the question is asked with loaded partisan language.  While I may be tempted to paint this as solely a liberal problem, it’s not.  The public opinion is incoherent, but that is not so much a way to condemn the public but to say that material conditions–by that I mean the fact how the economy is run and what is happening the various economic and ecological systems– are almost too complex to comprehend now, and in light of declining public and private capital and abstract value, this may be particularly difficult to deal with.


In short, I will be honest: I do’t think the problems had in Europe or North America are fixable by technocratic intervening, nor do I think that collapse will be quick or it will reset us a hunter-gather default setting.  None of these things seem likely to me, and I have spent two years talking about why. Yet, the Gramsci quote that used to brings hope sits dormant, “The challenge of modernity is to live without illusions and without becoming disillusioned … I’m a pessimist because of intelligence, but an optimist because of will.”

The challenge of modernity seems to loom as those of try to interact become increasing disillusioned and the window for change gets smaller and smaller: it is not that there is no answer, but it harder and harder to see an answer that would fundamentally change material conditions enough to change the trends of the past half-century.  So there is a pessimism of the strong: it is a tragic optimism.  The idea that there may be a way out of the situation and one must think and act one’s way through it should be maintained, but the likelihood that historical moment where things could have been altered may be passed must be held in the back of one’s mind.

I suppose, a pessimism of the strong is, as Nietzsche thought, a realizing of the tragedy in life and what is likely to happen in the near future, but not abandoning that there could be an answer to many of our current problems.   

About these ads

About El Mono Liso

Por una civilización de la pobreza.

Posted on March 2, 2013, in Philosophy and Politics. Bookmark the permalink. 1 Comment.

  1. I agree and disagree, and I feel the combination of them strongly. Not that I strongly disagree and strongly agree, but the feeling I have is strong and is both of agreement and disagreement. Do you see the difference?

    The more I learn, the more I think I want to sit and have drinks with this Nietzsche guy. The problem of modernity, or the thoughts about the problem of modernity are a problem all by themselves. While Nietzsche like to think in detached ways, we cannot do so, at least not as a group or a society so it is that while Nietzsche is right, society cannot be as he thinks of things.

    To think of modernity necessarily requires that we frame the thought in reference to what was and in doing so we have limited what our response can be. Not what it is, but what it can be. We live now in societies which are matured post modernist societies. That is to say that we are no longer infantile in our experience. Some examples of this are:
    1- the world is smaller now, my expendable income affects the economy of other countries
    2- we do not think as monolithic societies – we are not and cannot be isolationist any longer
    3- the child/infant mortality rate of other countries affects my future. My political awareness must needs be exercized with their welfare in mind.
    4- no matter how non-intellectual the citizen is, they are aware of the above and it affects how they vote, or can/should

    The problem is, as it has always been, a problem of education. Not in the classical sense of academia but of awareness. The average joe cannot analyze the federal deficit on a whim but they can figure out what they have to do to get a new fishing boat or tickets to NASCAR. While these are not kind statements about average joe, they have explanatory power. When the federal deficit can be explain in terms of fishing boats and NASCAR tickets and all the exacerbating systems and factors are explained, average joe can be rather intellectual. The educational systems of the world have indeed increased the average understanding of complex matters of the world such that despite becoming terribly more complex, we can still view it in what are currently termed ‘simple’ terms. This effect has pushed the problem and the actors past the curve that Nietzsche knew when we consider society on the whole and not as individuals.

    As individuals, it can still be argued that we might as well have come down out of the trees in the last century in many cases. The post modernistic reaction in the USA was one of conservatism but this only served to mask what was essentially a fasciast element pushing politics out of reclusion and into global trade, bringing war and economic and human rights issues right back to our doorsteps such that they cannot be ignored. Your laptop is made by slave labor, your shirts made by child labor, and your tax dollars funded warlords in countries full of starving people. What is more, these thoughts are no longer shocking to average joe. The keeper of society’s morals have shown themselves to be morally bankrupt and society is now looking at the world with their own eyes. Nietzsche’s dreams are becoming reality.

    It is becomming common to hear publicly aired opinion that states matter of factly that _we_ are our own best hope for the future no matter what the mess is that we’ve made of it so far. These changes are by no means complete nor guaranteed but that they can be seen gives me more reason to hope for the future than ever there was. It is not the voice of politics or clergy or aristocrat that makes the news today, but the voice of average joe. The revolution will be televised, tweeted, facebooked, and youtubed. It has been and will continue to be. Far from police states envisioned with security cameras everywhere, we have citizen journalist cameras everywhere. The voice of average joe has been amplified to the point that despair which might be our lot is not to be. Information, like air and water, is now a right. A basic human right. Information is what changes and breaks the boundaries which Nietzsche was held captive inside. I think he would be proud of us as a species but he’s probably rolling over and over…. sigh

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,231 other followers

%d bloggers like this: