The Herd-ification of the Ubermensch.

German philosopher and academic professor, Frederick Nietzsche, has served as an inspiration to a
plethorha of people from the likes of public intellectuals such as Carl Jung, to brutal tyrants such as
Hitler himself. Largely considered a nihilist, his statement on the ‘death of God’ is his more famous and
more misunderstood one(which is a discussion for another day), but his ideas on the ways to live a
fulfilling life and his critique of the ‘herd’ mentality is what has influenced the lives of his readers more
than anythin.

The ‘herd’, which can be described as the society one lives in, is the easy way out, according to
Nietzsche. The way of life where you are told what to believe and what to do and where self-
determination is largely absent is unfulfilling because in a seemingly meaningless world with no ‘greater
purpose’ the only thing in our control is what we ourselves choose to do and to give up this agency, in
the form of intellectual surrender, to the merciless hands of the herd would be the greatest tragedy. The
concept of the Ubermensch is therefore one of freedom. Freedom not only from the ‘herd’ but also
from the looming tragedy of nihilism.

An Ubermensch, therefore, is someone who is comfortable with making himself uncomfortable. A

discomfort that arises from challenging values we were born into, then again challenging new values we
may come to accept, is an integral aspect of achieving intellectual freedom. Such freedom would also
lead to the individual becoming more ‘effective’ in the sense that the individual begins to value power
and independence rather than qualities like humility and kindness which simply tie the individual to the
herd, according to Nietzsche.

In complete irony, this concept, or rather weak imitations of it, have historically developed herds of their
own. Be it the idea of an Aryan German or a Top G, ideas of ‘self-empowerment’ and ‘rejection of
modern values’ are often perpetuated as replications of the Ubermensch, a claim which seems foolish
upon closer inspection. However, it can not be ignored that such doctrines do have some, although
flawed, grounds to be accepted on such a large level.

Firstly, it is important to understand that the emergence of ideas like the Aryan is almost always
reactionary to existing lifestyles that are considered ‘weak’. In response to urbanized life, the Aryan
identity was cultivated around the idea of hardworking, masculine, man, who would lead the lost nation
to glory and can’t easily be found in modern society.. In recent times, a similar pattern can be seen with
public figures like Andrew tate running movements to ‘reclaim masculinity’ and reject values of modern
society..Firstly, this deviancy from modern society gives these movements the legitimacy that they are
“moving away from the herd”. Secondly, the promotion of a self-empowering lifestyle with masculine
traits that make a man ‘strong’ creates an abstract connection to the Ubermensch in the sense that such
individuals have the ‘will to power’(the desire to exercise power) which Nietzsche describes as the
fundamental rationale for why we do, and should do things.
Both of these connections can be proven to be false by just a little bit of investigating. First off, the idea
of being a ‘lone wolf’ by rejecting modern values is more cognitive dissonance than intellectual freedom
since ‘puppy in a pack of dogs’ would be a more apt description of such a person. People that hold
values like the ones described above are often not lone wolves since what led them to accept these
values in the first place was close proximity to societal structures and norms that enforce those very
values in the first place meaning that they stayed in the herd they were previously a part of. Even the
people who do adopt completely different value systems, are still integrating themselves into another
community that shares those value systems and again fall into a cycle of getting their beliefs affirmed,
becoming part of a herd.

This is important to recognize because in recent times, you can see many individuals, especially young
men who themselves are readers of Nietzsche, being convinced that they are the peak of intellectual
integrity and ascribing the acceptance of such values to the attainment of intellectual freedom which
couldn’t be further from the truth. Figures like Andrew Tate endorse principles of self-determination
while also running ‘educational programs’ where they teach young men the ideal way to live their life,
meaning that followers of such figures are merely following another dogmatic system while being
convinced that they are Super men. It also can not be said that Andrew Tate or Hitler themselves were
Supermen, despite the will to power being an obvious part of their personality. This is because their
ideologies have a common theme of the ‘slave morality’ wherein they blame other groups of people
(Jews, Women) for the problems they have which clearly misaligns with the Nietzsche’s ideals of valuing
power, nobility and independence rather than having a miguided view of ‘good and evil’.

It is important to highlight such obvious flaws in ideologies such as these because not only do they
distort the philosophical legacy of powerful philosophers such as Nietzsche but also because Nietzsche’s
philosophy can be as effective as it can be misunderstood and therefore used to give a false sense of
integrity to flawed ideologies which may deceive impressionable, young individuals.