Peoples and Fatherlands, Para. 242 (Or a word about a common Europe!)

In Iran, I put a lot of value on the West and its people, especially the Europeans. After WWII, the engagement by England and France to make a common Europe, which came to fruition by Germany and France, made me sincerely wish to belong to this intellectual and cultivated community. I had a dream in Iran of seeing people in all of Europe holding books in their hands as they walked on the streets, and yet, when we escaped and arrived in Germany, I realized that it was a dream after all! Great expectations? It might be; in any case, I still had high expectations from European society. But as I followed this beloved idea wholeheartedly, I became increasingly upset. I found those gatherings of the European governments, apart from significant fundamental differences in understanding freedom, a group under solid influence by lobbyists trying to get their own wins on their business.

Long story short, I want to present the opinion of the great philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche here. As we will notice, he recognized, however tough, the problems of this idea and predicted them beforehand.

Translated from “Werke in vier Bänden, Band 3, Jenseits von Gut und Böse”

Call it “civilization”, “humanization”, or “progress,” where the distinction of Europeans is now sought. Let’s simply call it, without praising or blaming, with a personal formula, the democratic movement of Europe: behind all the moral and political backgrounds that are pointed out with such a formula, an enormous philosophical process is taking place that is becoming more and more fluid – the process of similarity between Europeans, their growing detachment from the conditions under which climatically and class-bound races arise, their increasing independence from every particular milieu that for centuries wants to inscribe itself in soul and body with the same demands – i.e. the slow emergence of an essentially supranational and nomadic type of human being who, physiologically speaking, has a maximum of the art of adaptation and – strength as its typical distinction. This process of becoming a European can be delayed in speed by significant relapses. However, perhaps because of this, it gains and grows in intensity and depth – the now still raging Storm and Stress of the “national feeling” belongs here, as does the anarchism that has just emerged -: this process probably leads to results that its naive promoters and eulogists, the apostles of “modern ideas”, least want to count on. The same new conditions under which, on average, a levelling and mediation of people will emerge – a valuable, industrious, multi-purpose and employable herd animal; humans -are highly capable of giving rise to exceptional people with the most dangerous and attractive qualities. While that power of adaptation, which constantly tries out changing conditions and begins a new work with every gender, almost with every decade, does not make the power of the type possible at all, as the overall impression of such future Europeans will probably be that of many talkative, poor-willed and extremely employable jobs that require the master, the commanding one, like daily bread; while the democratization of Europe amounts to the creation of a type prepared for slavery in the finest sense: In individual and exceptional cases, the strong person will have to become stronger and more prosperous than he has perhaps ever been before – thanks to the unprejudiced nature of his training, thanks to the enormous diversity of practice, art and mask. I wanted to say that the democratization of Europe is simultaneously an involuntary event for the breeding of tyrants – the word understood in every sense, including the spiritual one.

Sincerely appreciate your interest.🙏💖

The title image by Michael Cheval