Two eccentric thinkers whose thought has influenced all of Western culture are compared because of their views on law and the state. Stirner believes that as much in a despotic state as in a socialist society, the individual has no right of his own, but an extraneous right. The state can want nothing more than to be the master of all, and the law is its will, the will of the master. The Bayreuth philoso-pher goes so far as to theorize anarchy because whatever its form, the state enacts through law a violence against the individual, who is forced not to exercise his own will. Nietzsche, for his part, belie-ves that the state began with an imprint by an overwhelming and ruthless machi-ne that transformed the fabric of the community only at the price of terrible tyranny, and succeeded in kneading and making malleable, through law, a raw, almost bestial people's matter to give it form. So law certainly does not represent an end but only a temporary means that the utilitarian wisdom proper to men advises to make use to be able to create higher power units. Surprising is the Nie-tzschean incitement, written in a passage in Human Too Human, to build a party of pace as opposed to the party of war that would bring peace to the peoples of the world by acting not by gradual, inadequa-te and ineffective disarmament, but by total and immediate disarmament.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.