Reputation and Misconception: Christopher Columbus and Friedrich Nietzsche

by Eleanor Williams-Brown

Friedrich Nietzsche and Christopher Columbus appear to have little in common. One was a philosopher, the other an explorer, and they lived in vastly different times. However, each has had their image actively altered to portray them as fundamentally different from what they truly were - Nietzsche for worse, Columbus for the better. Acknowledging their true characters offers a more accurate portrayal into both history and philosophy.

Friedrich Nietzsche, born into nineteenth century Germany, is now commonly remembered for his proclamation ‘God is dead’ and his appropriation by the alt-right. Richard Spencer, the American white nationalist leader, claimed he “was red-pilled by Nietzsche”; furthermore, Hitler visited the Nietzsche Archive and emerged gifted with Nietzsche’s walking stick. Spencer and other white nationalists interpret Nietzsche taking the belief that, as Sean Illing summarised, “Christendom united the European continent and forged white identity”, paradoxically believing these internalized values has made the West grow weak. They acknowledge Nietzsche’s belief that ‘God is dead’ - that reason and science have progressed beyond being able to justify a belief in God. But, they then ignore his continuation that you should then move forward, rather than returning to ethnocentric beliefs - indeed Nietzsche feared God’s death would create an era of people searching for a group identity. People like Spencer thus fundamentally misunderstand Nietzsche's point: the philosopher believed in slebstüberwindung (self-overcoming) to allow us to reach who we truly are; he did not justify racism.

Spencer can be chalked down to misunderstanding Nietzsche, but how did a man who claimed “I will have all antisemites shot” become an apparent supporter for the man who tried to eradicate Jewish people? Simply, he did not, his sister did. Nietzsche suffered a mental breakdown from which he never recovered at only 44, leaving his sister Elisabeth in charge of his intellectual property. Elisabeth, who later became a fervent Nazi supporter, was married to a notorious antisemite; unsurprisingly Nietzsche did not deign to go to the wedding which was part of an attempt by his sister and brother-in-law to create a “pure-blooded” Aryan colony in Paraguay (it failed). Where she did not fail, though, was taking over Nietzsche’s estate and changing his writing, fundamentally altering his message for nearly forty years. She published Nietzsche’s autobiography, only after removing all unseemly references to herself, and amalgamated a confused mixture of his works to form ‘The Will to Power’, which she published under her brother’s name. This led to extreme right-wingers claiming Nietzsche and reappropriating his words, notably "Übermensch".

This is an egregious abuse of anyone’s work, but is made all the more potent considering Nietzsche’s progressive views towards women, which were thus nearly lost. Nietzsche treated his sister as an equal, aiming to widen her knowledge, and he supported a motion, in 1874, to allow women to enter Basel University. He and his friend, Malwida von Meysenbug, a prominent feminist, aimed to set up a school for all with nothing off limits. This intriguing feminist side of Nietzsche is almost lost to the general public, and the association he has been given with fascism limits the number of people exposed to a philosopher whose philosophy eerily forewarned our modern political situation. In addition, he encourages the humanities not to be dry and didactic but, much like Greek tragedies, to be used as a means of catharsis to fill the gap a lack of belief in God has left.

Christopher Columbus’ image has also been altered posthumously to change the fundamental facts about his life, resulting in the creation of an American icon with his own holiday. His fame derives from a belief he proved the world was round and discovered the New World. There is little done to reconcile this image with a brutal tyrant who, when greeted with gifts and respect from indigenous people, returned with more ships, aiming to enslave the people and take their gold. When they stated they had no gold, Columbus was infuriated and slaughtered them all - so that by 1542 the Taino population had fallen from 250,000 to 200.

Furthermore, it was already common knowledge the world was round; indeed Columbus was singular by believing it was pear shaped. Saying Columbus discovered America is demeaning to the thousands of indigenous people already living there. Columbus never even set foot in North America (he landed in what is now the Caribbean) and died thinking he had made it to India. Erasing these facts ignores the suffering of an entire people and America adds insult to injury by celebrating Columbus Day, a day celebrating a myth, despite a variety of protests since the 1960s arguing for Indigenous Peoples’ Day instead.

Like Nietzsche, the misconceptions of Columbus derive not from him but by people doctoring historical facts. During the American Revolution, he was used to name streets and act as a minor image of a non-British, American ideal. But it was Washington Irving, a writer most famous for ‘The Legend of Sleepy Hollow’, who took the mostly-ignored figure of Columbus and, in 1828, wrote the first English-language biography of him. Irving single-handedly redrew Columbus’ image, creating the basis for the modern myth of Columbus today. An influx of Italian immigrants in the late nineteenth century facing discrimination looked for an American hero to prove they held a place in America, and took Irving's version of Columbus and called it truth, until it was believed.

Nations frequently take a basis of myth in forming their national identity: Britain used the Empire, France their democratic revolution, and Japan still faces controversy over what their flag represents. So, it is natural that America has taken Columbus and made him into a mythic hero. However, this should not be the case. Getting the facts wrong is harmful not only because children are then taught lies, but, as it changes the entire meaning of a country’s history - were they ‘discovered’ by a genius who proved the Earth was round, or a fool stumbled upon the Americas by accident and slaughtered those he met?

While appearing distant, these ideas shape contemporary thought regarding race and politics, meaning we should aim to learn the truth of the past before using it to justify racism or to exclude Native Americans from their country’s narrative. Just as with Columbus, ignoring Nietzsche’s philosophy means people miss an opportunity to enrich their lives with his ideas about truth, envy and Christendom; acknowledging the truth of both allows an accurate history and more intriguing ideas to be discussed.