I realise that this subject has been touched upon before but I wish to explore this using primarily the writings and thoughts of Julius Evola and Friedrich Nietzsche, although hopefully not exclusively.
It is common knowledge that Nietzsche held in disdain the idea of "god" and sought the deification of a certain type of man into a new being, the Superman.
"Could it be possible! This old saint in the forest hath not yet heard of it, that God is dead![Zarathustras Prologue, part 2, Thus Spake Zarathustra]
Nietzsches conclusion that God is dead inevitably leads to the conclusion that man and man alone is the pinnacle of earthly existence. However within the species of man it is necessary to differentiate by both race to race and man to man. In short a hierarchy is called for.
"God hath died: now we do desire-the superman to live."[Chapter 73, Thus Spake Zarathustra].
Nietzsche saw the Superman as the meaning of the earth and everything accordingly must be subordinated to his awakening and arrival.
In essence he is the function of the Will to Power and domination.
Evola criticises this approach. "One can see from this that Nietzsches nihilism stops halfway. It sets up a new table of values, including a good and an evil."[Ride The Tiger]. There is the dichotomy. In the elimination of "god" and the affirmation of the Superman concept Nietzsche far from going "beyond good and evil" creates a new Weltanschauung with its own set of values, in essence a form of "good and evil".
Evola added "A true nihilism does not spare even the doctrine of the Superman."[Ride The Tiger].
Yet Evola in his way was proposing his own form of "Superman" through his "Doctrine of Awakening". Yet Evola did not reject the concept of "god" at all but through his Awakened One sought a synthesis between the human and the divine.
Are both doctrines of the Superman irreconcilable?
Is the concept of the Superman something to be desired, rejected or something that we should dread?

I like some of Evola's stuff but Ride The Tiger was poop.

Evola was brighter than Nietzsche in that he had a better survival instinct. Not a small thing considering the times Evola was stuck living in.

intresting topic. bear with me on this reply it rambles.

yes great topic Aryan Lord. Interesting and how ironic that I previously discussed a very similar topic with a VNNer, in particular, the similarity between William Gayley Simpson's chapter on Jesus and Nietzsche and Julius Evola's chapter on Nietzsche in Ride the Tiger. Not the same issue but related.

I agree with Evola's assessment of Nietzche and its states something others have noticed. Nietzsche says "God is dead" but he puts up a new idol in his place the Doctrine of the Overman. Nietzsche says "beyond good and evil" but what else is his work but a rejection of certain things as bad stuff, ie, evil.

Here is the key to unlocking Nietzsche and these apparent contradictions. 2 things: 1) the Cycle of Endless Return. Look at that in Zarathustra. One might say, "things will come full circle." Hegel's thesis and antithesis struggle and become a synthesis, but then the synthesis becomes a thesis to be challenged by another antithesis. So the particulars change, but the inner structure of the dialog remains the same. 2)

2): Transvaluation of all values. In short, Fred N was not just trying to talk about "transvaluation of all morals" as something others did, Fred N was trying to do it himself!

Allow me to explain. Read "Genealogy of Morals." IN this Fred N talks about the JEWS and in Fred N's mind their intellectual heirs the Christians twisted the "meek and the mild" and so forth into somethign not contemptible and weak but good, ie, noble: suffering savior and so forth. Nietzsche said they denigrated the noble and elevated slave morality instead. So far I know you guys are with me. That is what many WN parrot about Christianity.

But Nietzsche was a Judeophile. His niece didnt want the Nazis to notice this so she played it down along with a few other idiosyncratic elements of Fred that did not fit NS. Such as him being a complete elitist. (to further digrees, this is one of the places Evola frankly parted company with NS as well) Anyhow, Nietzsche talked about the incredible Will to Power of the Jews, that allowed them to survive as none other had:a landless Diaspora people. He thought that their bizarre religion, was an incredible manifestation of the "will to power" that he glorified. Quite an irony, No? Look it up, I could hardly believe the turnabout he made myself. I still wonder about it to this day.

But it was not until I read Kevin MacDonald that I started to understand. The Jews do have an incredibly strong tribal Will to Power. They are organized to actualize it and they have done so. Moreover, they have done so at our expense.

So how out of the struggle? Perhaps by using the very same tool that FN explored: TRANSVALUATION OF ALL VALUES. Judo, in a different word. Where the Enemy pushes, we dont push back, we pull. The Enemy overbears itself and topples. But not always, sometimes we "kuzushi" and push to confuse and then pull!

How do we achieve that kind of flexibility? Well to begin with, it requires DETACHMENT. We dont need to dogmatically adhere to any particular idea or strategy. We should be honest of course; but unafraid to experiment and adapt to new circumstances.

People cant get their arms around Nietzsche because they are too dogmatic. Nietzsche was DOING transvaluation of all values, he wasnt just talking about it.

Like VNN: somebody said its like performance art. Its more than the words, its the act of speaking them. The words from day to day may change, the memes and themes alter. But we embolden by ourselves speaking them, increasingly to our own cadence! We have in many ways adapted Jewish memes to our own use. Ridicule; gossip; invective..... all aimed back in the other direction...... I laugh and embrace the struggle, and all along VNN has seemed to me "a YEA SAYING!"