I. From Canada to Europe and Back

Paul Stephan: Dear Willow, thank you very much for your readiness to participate in this dialogue on Nietzsche and North America. I’m particularly excited about your opinions since you’re not just an expert on Nietzsche and continental philosophy in general, but also a researcher with a very international profile. You have done research in Belgium, the UK, where we first met each other at a conference on Nietzsche and feminism, Japan, and now in Canada, where you’re working as a lecturer at the University of British Columbia. Maybe you can tell us more about your background? Where have you been born and how did you get to know Nietzsche?

‍

Willow Verkerk: I was born in Victoria, BC, in Canada. I first became interested in Nietzsche in high school when an older friend who was already in university gave me a copy of Beyond Good and Evil. I continued reading Nietzsche in Montreal where I completed my BA and MA in Philosophy under the supervision of Horst Hutter at Concordia University. Realizing that there were few Nietzsche scholars in Canada, and even fewer working in the continental tradition, I looked to Europe and found Paul van Tongeren who agreed to supervise me at Leuven University, where I completed a MPhil and PhD. Since my father was born in Arnhem in the Netherlands, I was able to obtain a Netherlands passport and this made the transition to Belgium less complicated. This was lucky, in fact, as my father died when I was 6 years old and I was raised by a single mother, an avant garde filmmaker, poet, feminist, and anti-poverty activist. She encouraged me to pursue creative and literary interests, and was supportive of my studies in philosophy.

‍

II. “Continental” vs. “Analytic” Tradition

PS: The term “continental philosophy” is surely crucial to understanding the main differences between the European and the North American philosophy culture. You already mentioned that continental philosophy is not that well-represented within Canada. How do you understand continental philosophy and why is it apparently difficult to do academic research within this tradition on your side of the pond?

WV: In North America, continental philosophy is distinguished from Anglo-American and analytic philosophy, which mostly originated in Britain and the United States. Continental philosophy is really just European philosophy and, perhaps more appropriately, it is called this in the United Kingdom. Both continental philosophy and European philosophy refer to the philosophical traditions that originated in Germany and France, sometimes including other parts of Europe, from Immanuel Kant onward. In the Anglosphere, there has been more academic research focused on analytic philosophy, perhaps because it originated in the English-speaking world. In Quebec, which is Francophone, there is more continental philosophy. In the United States, Catholic and Jesuit universities are more interested in the history of philosophy and have more of a focus on continental philosophy. Often continental philosophy is taught and studied in political science, German Studies and French Studies, as well as Literary Studies more than in philosophy departments in North America.

Internal divides within philosophy departments vary region by region and each have their own current and historical reasons for prioritizing some areas of research over others. When I became a member of the American Philosophy Association, I was asked to join a group called ‘Beyond the Analytic-Continental Divide’ because, I think, the association was trying to mitigate the antagonism between these two schools of philosophy. Analytic philosophers previously had a bad reputation for isolating their continental colleagues. Some speculate this is because students tend to enjoy studying continental philosophy much more than analytic philosophy.  My limited knowledge of the western part of North America, of British Columbia and California, is that philosophy departments here were historically dominated by logical positivism which dismissed continental philosophy and took part in various gatekeeping activities to limit the hiring of continental philosophers. However, today, it seems like the institutional climate is changing because younger academics are less interested in this division and more analytic scholars are writing about German and French philosophy, noticing that Hegel, Nietzsche, Sartre, Beauvoir, and others have insights to offer not found in the writings of, and scholarship on, Anglo-American thinkers.

PS: This antagonism is also often described in terms of style. While the writing of continental philosophers is said to be more literary – i.e., through use of metaphors, analogies, and rhetorical language – analytical philosophers prefer a more “sober” style, and try to refrain from these stylistic devices. Nietzsche seems to be clearly on the continental side and maybe his high regard (to put it mildly) among continental philosophers has something to do with the fact that he gives a justification for this approach when he talks about truth being a ‘movable army of metaphors, metonymies, anthropomorphisms’² and about the inescapable perspectivism of our knowledge of the world.³ At the same time, there has been a growing interest in Nietzsche’s philosophy also within the analytic camp within recent decades. These interpreters are more interested in Nietzsche’s arguments than his style and try to detach the former from the latter. Do you think that’s a promising development? Or is Nietzsche somehow “stripped naked” in these interpretations?

WV: That Nietzsche is read by different kinds of philosophers and people seems a good thing. However, as you note, since he has a literary style and also writes esoterically, he is easily misread and misinterpreted. These misreadings and misrepresentations, however, are not new, and not limited to analytic philosophers. Yet, analytic philosophers not only isolate his arguments from his styles, they often isolate an argument from the book in which it appears, and more broadly from Nietzsche’s other works. Further, they tend to place him into categories familiar to analytic philosophers that Nietzsche did not employ (and likely would have problematized) to make him decipherable. In doing so, they overlook the agonistic qualities of Nietzsche’s writings and the clues he gave his readers about the topics, aims, and challenges of his various books, found in his prefaces. As you suggest, analytic philosophy also tends to seek out conclusive analysis which Nietzsche fundamentally challenged through his perspectivism and his critique of metaphysics. So, one could go as far as to claim that the methodologies of analytic philosophy are incompatible with Nietzsche. But, perhaps, it is precisely because certain analytic philosophers sense the lack in their methods that they turn to Nietzsche.

‍

III. Nietzsche in American Popular Culture and Student Life

PS: So, we have the analytical tradition which is traditionally very strong in North America and in tension with Nietzsche but is recently more open towards his insights, and a minor continental tradition across the Atlantic as well. But what about the reception of Nietzsche outside of academia? I think, in Europe, and similarly in parts of South America, Nietzsche is a very popular philosopher with a large cultural significance to this day. Has there been a comparable cultural significance of Nietzsche in Canada and the US? Would school kids read Nietzsche? Are his thoughts taught at high school? And how interested are students in his philosophy?

WV: My experience living, working, and traveling in different cities and countries in Europe and North America is that one is much more likely to find a person interested in, and knowledgeable about, philosophy in Europe. Those who read philosophy in North America tend to be academics, artists, or creatives. I asked students, friends, and acquaintances on social media and in a course I’m teaching if they read philosophy in high school. I had both Americans and Canadians reply (but more Canadians). The consensus seems to be that those who went to private school studied some philosophy but those in public school mostly did not; some were exposed to French philosophers in French classes but German philosophy was usually not part of high school curriculum. There are some regional exceptions, mostly in those parts of the continent closer to the Atlantic and especially in French speaking regions. A few students mentioned learning about Nietzsche in movies or on television but, generally speaking, Nietzsche, and philosophy in general, do not have a comparable cultural significance in Canada and the US as compared to Europe and parts of South America. Often those students in my courses at UBC on exchange from Brazil, Chile, Mexico, South Africa, the Middle East, Europe, and China know more about Nietzsche than the North Americans. Of the 8 courses per year I teach at UBC, one is a seminar on Nietzsche, and two others include Nietzsche in the reading materials. University students generally seem very interested in him.  

PS: What particularly interests your students about Nietzsche?

WV: Students who have religious backgrounds, and have or are questioning their faith, find Nietzsche’s claim in The Gay Science 125 that God is dead and we have killed him fascinating. I teach this text in a course called ‘Existentialism’ and we read the 20^th century French Existentialists in response to Nietzsche’s diagnosis of nihilism after the death of God. In this course I’ve noticed that students are interested in thinking about Nietzsche’s account of nihilism and applying it to contemporary accounts of nihilism like eco-nihilism and techno-nihilism. It is surprising to see how enduring Nietzsche’s critique of passive nihilism is: his portrayal of the last human in the Prologue to Thus Spoke Zarathustra as the one who ‘just blinks’ to every question posed appears to resonate deeply with students here.

Nietzsche’s account of the will to power also fascinates students, perhaps because it has been so often misrepresented, but also because Nietzsche claims that behind every truth claim is the will to power. Investigating the relationship between power and truth is especially interesting to students working in social and political philosophy, critical theory, feminist, and anti-racist studies, since social ontology and genealogical investigations have become more popular in feminist, queer, and anti-racist scholarship. I’ve also noticed that students are drawn to learning more about Nietzsche's genealogical methodology and his theory of perspectivism. Sometimes students are disturbed by Nietzsche or take him too literally: once in a Nietzsche seminar while reading Nietzsche’s writings about woman and man after Beyond Good and Evil 231, I had two students passionately arguing, one on the edge of tears about Nietzsche’s misogyny and the other proudly announcing that Nietzsche was supporting traditional family values.

Finally, a significant number of students are interested in Nietzsche’s therapeutic philosophy, sometimes read as his remedies for nihilism, other times as his philosophy of overcoming. Recently I’ve been impressed by student work focusing on his therapeutic philosophy which links Nietzsche to Dis(ability) Studies, phenomenology, and the project of non-violent decolonization. It is incredible to see how he continues to inspire students with different disciplinary commitments and be relevant to thinking about the cultural challenges of our current age.

PS: That’s actually not so different from the main points of interest for students in Europe, I think. Here in Germany, there’s perhaps an additional great interest in Nietzsche’s unfortunate connection to fascism and national socialism. This subject regularly sparks controversial debates within and beyond the seminar room. Does this aspect play a role in North America as well or is it less significant?

WV: I'm not sure if students in North America are as interested in Nietzsche's historical connections to fascism and national socialism. It does get brought up sometimes in courses and in my social life but from Canadians and Americans I hear more often about the contemporary manosphere and the political right quoting Nietzsche or attempting to use him to prop up their claims. I have only a very limited knowledge of the use of Nietzsche by sexists, racists, and fascists in North America. I know that Jordan Peterson, a self-proclaimed self-help guru for disenfranchised young men, has an online “school” and that he attempts to use Nietzsche to talk about becoming a manly warrior. But, I only know this because I received some ads for it, oddly enough, on my social media right after returning from the Nietzsche’s Zukünfte conference in Weimar in 2024.⁴ Otherwise, I have had some students ask me about the connections between Nietzsche and accelerationism, sometimes mentioning Nick Land. The intellectual roots of accelerationism, from what I understand, lie in Deleuze and Guattari’s Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia and A Thousand Plateaus and are considered left-wing but today Nietzsche inspired accelerationism appears to fuel more right-wing perspectives.

PS: What do you make of such appropriations? Can Nietzsche serve as a tool to contradict these tendencies – or is this line of reading justified to some extent?

WV: One can find various quotes in Nietzsche and interpret them for all kinds of ends. A quotation that may be deemed “accelerationist” can be found in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, ‘On Old and New Tablets,’ 20: ‘But I say: to what is falling one should give a further push! Everything of today – it is falling, falling into decay: who would want to keep it! But I – I will give it a further push!’⁵ One of the basic tenets of accelerationism is to accelerate the decay of that which is already in decline. This indeed seems to be a Nietzschean value, connected to his writings on overcoming the problems of passive nihilism through action. However, the foundations of accelerationism do not rest on Nietzsche alone. They bring Marx into dialogue with Nietzsche, claiming that the malaises of capitalism must be accelerated so that capitalism can overcome itself. Often accelerationists also connect their manifestos with automatization and sometimes with Futurism. While I do think there is abstract support for these projects in Nietzsche's works, the accelerationists, like other political actors, merge Nietzsche with other thinkers and traditions and use him as a toolbox to prop up their own aims. Certainly, there are other quotations in Nietzsche's works which emphasize the direct opposite kind of praxis to that of accelerationism. Nietzsche also writes that one must slow down, think carefully, and return to nature: he writes numerous times in Thus Spoke Zarathustra that the Overhuman is the meaning of the earth. And, in The Gay Science, he is critical of industrialization, the speeding up of time, and the conditions of technological change which made it difficult to enjoy long walks and conversations with good friends (a condition that seems to have worsened since Nietzsche's time). So, there is evidence, and often within the same book, for contradictory readings and perspectives.

‍

IV. Nietzsche and the American Culture of His Time

PS: Maybe this is the right moment to have a look at Nietzsche’s own relationship to America.

The world in which he lived was in many regards so different from our own, especially when it comes to North America. The US was still a relatively young country, Canada a colony, Europe the proud unchallenged centre of the globe.

This is also reflected in Nietzsche’s works where America is rarely mentioned – although Nietzsche’s sister lived in Paraguay for a few years to establish a “Aryan” colony there with her husband Bernhard Förster, an ardent anti-Semite whom Nietzsche despised.  

First, one should mention that Nietzsche was an enthusiastic reader of American authors such as Edgar Allan Poe, Mark Twain,⁶ and, most prominently, Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882). Little known in Germany today, the influence of Emerson on Nietzsche can hardly be understated. In his early and middle period Nietzsche quotes him excessively (sometimes without explicit acknowledgement), especially in Schopenhauer as an Educator. The heroic individualism of Emerson obviously impressed him, and he praises him on several occasions, even in his later works.⁷

Is Emerson still a relevant figure in North American culture today? And is his huge influence on Nietzsche widely discussed?

WV: I agree, Nietzsche’s time was very different from our own because today it seems that America is the loudest imperialist voice that assumes itself to be the center of the globe, whereas formerly Europe occupied this position. Nietzsche, however, seemed to support the imperialist European project when he writes about Europeans giving their culture and supervision to the world, suggesting that European culture is superior while also critiquing German nationalism (see ‘The Wanderer and His Shadow,’ aph. 87⁸). Yet, as you suggest, Nietzsche's relationship with his sister deteriorated during her time with the fascist-colonialist Bernhard Förster; he thought their attempt to establish a colony, which was a great failure, was a foolish endeavor. In terms of Nietzsche’s interests in American authors, I’ve heard Emerson mentioned many times by American Nietzsche scholars and he has come up in my own research when I was encouraged during my doctoral studies to read him. My impression is that Emerson remains an important figure in American literature and is taught in both high school and university courses in the United States. The extent to which he is read by the general public is unclear to me: perhaps more than Nietzsche because he is a foundational figure in American literature. But, Americans are more likely to read fiction over philosophy and also more likely to listen to podcasts, videos, or read self-help books than canonical figures. Often their Emerson and Nietzsche are learnt about through pop culture. While the influence of Emerson on Nietzsche is a point of interest amongst their readers, I cannot say that this is widely discussed. Their philosophical relationship was explored perhaps most visibly in the US by Stanley Cavell who was a prominent American philosopher and Harvard professor who published in both academic and popular places. He wrote that it was rarely apparent to him what had brought him back to reading Nietzsche but reading Nietzsche would inevitably take him back to Emerson.⁹

‍

V. ‘No American future!’ – Nietzsche’s Views on America

PS: When Nietzsche writes about America itself, I see two main tendencies which seem to reflect general European attitudes towards the “New World” in his time – and still today. Firstly, he sees American not as essentially different from European culture. For example, in Daybreak he speaks, critically, of ‘our current hounded, power-thirsty society of Europe and America’¹⁰, whose extreme hunger for might manifests itself, at first glance paradoxically, in a cultural yearning for ‘powerlessness’ (ibid.) – a temporary and showy glamour that can only serve as a kind of diversion for these resolute warriors, however.

‘European’ is, he writes in ‘The Wanderer and His Shadow,’ synonymous with ‘modern’ and thus Europe reaches, culturally speaking, far beyond its geographical boundaries. It’s more than ‘this small peninsula of Asia’¹¹ but ‘namely America belongs to it insofar as it is our culture’s daughterland’ (ibid.). Accordingly, both continents share the same ‘European-American restlessness’¹² that Nietzsche contrasts with the, allegedly, ‘ one hundred times inherited Asian sedateness’ (ibid.). He critiques this modern attitude and strives for a synthesis of ‘European-American’ frenzy and Asian ease.¹³ All this reflects, of course, the ongoing industrialization and also European imperialism, which Nietzsche seems to be at least partially opposed to.

Secondly, to pick up the metaphor of the ‘daugtherland,’ Nietzsche often characterizes America as a very “ill-bred daughter,” however, which radicalizes these negative traits of her “mother” to a certain extreme. America – and it’s very clear that he means the US in these passages as he sometimes explicitly distinguishes between ‘America’ and ‘South America’¹⁴ – becomes, thus, synonymous with all that Nietzsche despises of modern societies, a nightmare of a perfectly rationalized world without any beauty¹⁵, sense of meaning, authenticity, greatness, in which everyone is a mere actor of himself; a perfect ‘society of the Spectacle,’ as Guy Debord put it, when writing in the 1960s. You already wrote about Nietzsche’s contempt for modernity in this regard.

Strangely enough, America seems even to be the true origin of this barbaric ‘Indian-like’¹⁶ – he speaks here of course about native Americans – ‘particular savagery with which the Americans strive for gold’ (ibid.) and their ‘breathless hustle for labor – the true vice of the New World’ (ibid.). This cult of labor is now infecting ‘old Europe’ (ibid.) – a huge danger for its culture according to Nietzsche. – This passage is a bit odd, of course, since we all know that the ruthless ‘strive for gold’ was a thing brought to America by the Europeans not the other way around.  

Be it a perversion of European culture itself – unsurprisingly, England is often mentioned here as the primary foe – or a foreign “barbaric” influence: Nietzsche views this tendency as a great threat and calls for its correction. He sums up this attitude maybe most comprehensively in Human, All Too Human:

MODERN UNREST.—Modern restlessness increases towards the west, so that Americans look upon the inhabitants of Europe as altogether peace-loving and enjoying beings, whilst in reality they swarm about like wasps and bees. This restlessness is so great that the higher culture cannot mature its fruits, it is as if the seasons followed each other too quickly. For lack of rest our civilisation is turning into a new barbarism. At no period have the active, that is, the restless, been of more importance. One of the necessary corrections, therefore, which must be undertaken in the character of humanity is to strengthen the contemplative element on a large scale. But every individual who is quiet and steady in heart and head already has the right to believe that he possesses not only a good temperament, but also a generally useful virtue, and even fulfils a higher mission by the preservation of this virtue.¹⁷

In his notebooks, Nietzsche recommends a cultural-political alliance between Europa and Asia, including Russia,¹⁸ to stop this ‘madness of movement.’¹⁹ ‘No American future!’²⁰, he declares in this vain. And he hopes: ‘The Americans are too quickly consumed – maybe only appearing to be a future world-power.’²¹

All these considerations are complicated by the fact that late Nietzsche, as you already mentioned, is not as romantic as early and middle Nietzsche and does not view attributes such as “barbarism,” “striving for power,” etc. as necessarily bad. On the contrary, at certain instances he doesn’t view them as bad at all. It is this that makes “accelerationist” readings of Nietzsche at least feasible.

I think Nietzsche is a rather typical European in all these regards. He despises America mainly due to its association with modern capitalism in its most extreme form but at the same time is a little bit afraid, envious, and even fascinated by it. And slightly bemused when it comes to the question how to counter the apparently unstoppable might and success of this young, dynamic colossus.

An alliance with Russia and Asia against the US? This is not even a futile intellectual fancy but has been proposed recurringly as an alternative to the perceived “Americanization” of the continent. Europe as either a mere variation of the “American way of life” or a truly alternative interpretation of “the West,” more modest, less aggressive.²²

What do you make of these considerations of Nietzsche? Do they in any way resonate with an American view of the world?

WV: You commence your question with Nietzsche’s statement about Europe and America who, he indicates, seek power, at least partially, so that they can enjoy recreation. Allowing for some reductive interpretation here, one could say that Nietzsche captures the mood of capitalistic America that works hard so that they can play hard: surplus is gained so it can be expelled in excess and this itself is one of the ugly joys of wealth celebrated in the United States. Of course, there is a counter move too, inspired by western interpretations of “the East,” or Buddhistic perspectives, which seek minimalism and practice mindfulness, a trend popular amongst educated middle class professionals. So, Nietzsche, being the great philosopher of culture that he was, seems to have captured two trends in their early manifestations that moved through European and American society and have become magnified during our times. What does seem important to note here, however, is the enjoyment of expenditure or recreation is not specific to “the West”: we tend to romanticize and purify “the East.” It is not as if they do not enjoy excess too. This exotification of “the East,” a trend of Nietzsche’s time and still common today can be found amongst North American Buddhists. As someone who was initiated into Buddhism at 8 years old, and has spent considerable time in Japan meditating with Japanese monks and westerners, I’ve noticed that the American practitioners do tend to overperform their “mindfulness,” bringing that spirit of unrest, that Nietzsche elucidates, to Buddhism too, manifested through an emphatic, and arguably performative, adherence to dogma.

While it may be the case that some Europeans still look upon America as an "ill-bred daughter" which prioritizes performance over substance and accumulation over consistency, I have not found that Americans view themselves in this way. It may be the case that the rise of populism in America has caused a widespread disenchantment with the American way of life, but the majority of those experiencing disenchantment remain committed to democratic Euro-American values rather than pursuing an exit from them.

What about a European alliance with Russia and Asia over America? Some Americans particularly enamored with late-stage capitalism or who have bought into the ideologies of new fascism in America may express concern and/or fear over the socialistic values of a European alliance with “the East.” It is sometimes difficult to comprehend the plurality of responses to this moment in America: from the rise of trad-wives, to the anti-vaccination movement, to those building alternative communities of support on the left and right, as well as speculation about Trump’s relationship with Putin, we live in a time where it is difficult to navigate between the real and the fake. In Canada, the government has been working to forge new alliances with Europe and Asia, as the relationship with America has degraded under Trump. In the academic realm, some have left America for Canada, accepting lower salaries to live somewhere they perceive as safe. And, in the queer and transgender communities, families and individuals have left America for Canada, and other more hospitable countries, as it has become impossible for them to stay due to legal changes related to gender affirming care and a rise in transphobia and homophobia. Racism of many kinds has become more public, and antisemitism has returned taking on new insidious forms. In my view, North Americans have much to learn from the European memory of past mistakes. At the same time, those of us in “the West” must be cautious of stereotypes which play themselves out through new representations yet are caught up in the same old mistakes of exoticizing or dehumanizing the other.

PS: I sincerely hope that here and there we will overcome the recent malaise of “the West.” There remains a lot to be discussed in this regard – but I’m afraid we have to end our dialogue at this point. Dear Willow, thank you so much for your most insightful responses!  

WV: Thank you, Paul, for a very interesting conversation. It is good to have the chance to speak with you again. I look forward to our next meeting!

Willow Verkerk (born 1976, in Victoria, Canada) is Lecturer in Continental and Social Philosophy at the University of British Columbia. She is the author of Nietzsche and Friendship (Bloomsbury: 2019) and co-editor with Nidesh Lawtoo of Homo Mimeticus III: Plasticity, Mimesis and Metamorphosis with Catherine Malabou (Leuven University Press: 2025). Willow has published various scholarly articles on love, friendship, heroism, monstrosity, gender, objectification, alienation, and sovereignty, most often engaging with Nietzsche, 20^th century French philosophy, critical theory, and feminist philosophy.  

‍

Footnotes

1: Editor’s note: We’re fully aware of the highly problematic context of these sculptures. They represent racist stereotypes. Additionally, Münch-Khe was a Nazi and even had to flee to Argentine after the war. But precisely this problematic nature makes them a fitting illustration for an article dealing with these stereotypes in a critical manner.

2: On Truth and Lie in a Nonmoral Sense, § 1. Unless stated otherwise, all German quotes have been translated by Paul Stephan.

3: Cf. On the Genealogy of Morality, § III, 2.

4: Editor’s note: See the report on this conference written for our magazine by Paul Stephan, where he also talks about Willow Verkerk’s talk.

5: German original; translated by Graham Parkes (Oxford University Press: 2005).

6: On Twain, Nietzsche writes in a letter to Paul Rée from the 2^nd half of June, 1877: ‘I love his kookiness more than German shyness.’ (Translation: Henry Holland.) Cf. also Posthumous Fragments, nr. 1880, 7[229].

7: Aside from the third Untimely Meditation, Nietzsche’s most explicit acknowledgement of Emerson’s influence on him is the motto of the first edition of The Gay Science from 1882 which is a direct quote from him. In a fragment from 1879, Nietzsche calls Emerson ‘the richest American.’ In another fragment from 1881, where he is apparently talking about Emerson, he goes so far as to write: ‘Until now, the most thoughtful author of this century has been an American.’ – Even in Twilight of the Idols (‘Skirmishes,’ 13), Nietzsche dedicates an entire aphorism to him, full of praise.

8: Editor’s note: See also the discussion between Michael Drescher and Paul Stephan on Nietzsche’s relationship to nationalism on this magazine.

9: See Cavell, ‘Old and New in Emerson and Nietzsche,’ International studies in philosophy, 2003, Volume 35, Issue 3.

10: Daybreak, aph. 271.

11: Human, All Too Human II, The Wanderer and His Shadow, aph. 215.

12: Posthumous Fragments, nr. 1876, 17[55].

13: Cf. ibid.

14: Cf. Posthumous Fragments, nr. 1887, 11[234] and nr. 1884 25[112].

15: Cf. for this aspect Posthumous Fragments, nr. 1880, 7[194] and nr. 1880, 7[100].

16: The Gay Science, aph. 329.

17: Human, All Too Human I, aph. 285 (translated by Hellen Zimmern).

18: Cf. Posthumous Fragments, nr. 1876, 17[53].

19: Posthumous Fragments, nr. 1876, 17[54].

21: Posthumous Fragments, nr. 1884, 26[336].

22 : Posthumous Fragments, nr. 1884, 26[247].

23: The idea of a united Europe allying with Russia or maybe even China against the US can be seen as underpinning the German social democratic approach of normalizing the relations towards “the East” from Willy Brandt to Gerhard Schröder, for example, but also in the call for a “new Europe” brought forward by Derrida and Habermas in a joint manifesto from 2003 (February 2015) (although they’re not discussing possible new alliances explicitly). Recently, it has become a bit outdated for various reasons, but Europe is still not very happy about its ever-assigned role as a mere puppet of US interests – and after some time, this old idea will undoubtedly reemerge. The Nazis’ politics of colonizing Eastern Europe and parts of the Soviet Union, and of allying with Japan to counter both the US and the British Empire represents a perversion of this idea. The strategic dilemma Europe has to face – and which Nietzsche already is aware of – is clearly that independence from the US is hardly achievable without finding new allies; which leads to new dependencies. A truly sovereign Europe would at least require a more or less full independence from oil and gas imports.