Page:Nietzsche the thinker.djvu/453

Rh democratic (more fundamentally speaking, Christian, more fundamentally still, social or herd) instinct. For there is a tendency throughout history (and quite independently of Christianity) of this sort. The weak, so far as they are clever—and none may be cleverer—instinctively combine to make themselves masters of the strong; if the strong man is not their shepherd, they have no use for him. This is an incident in the struggle for existence to which the school of Darwin has not ordinarily paid much attention. Instead of there being merely a tendency to the survival of the strong in the unhindered struggle for existence, there is so far a tendency to the survival of the weak, according to the laws of natural selection itself. undefined It might even be contended that there is objective warrant in this way for the idea of the Jewish prophets that God (the supreme power in nature) was on the side of the humble and poor. Nietzsche faced the paradox. Nature's ways were no model to him, still he had to pay attention to them—his motto, amor fati, itself obliged him to. Commenting on the fact that the strong are weak, when organized herd-instincts, superior numbers are against them, he says that there is perhaps nothing in the world more interesting than this unwished-for spectacle. He has reflections like the following: Is this victory of the weak perhaps only a retarding of the tempo in the total movement of life, a protective measure against something still worse? May it not be a greater guarantee of life, in the long run? Suppose that the strong became master in every respect, even in fixing valuations, think of the consequences. If the weak looked on sickness, suffering, sacrifice as the strong do, they would despise themselves—would seek to slink out of sight and extinguish themselves. Would that be desirable? Should we really like a world in which qualities developed by the weak, fineness, considerateness, spirituality, suppleness, were lacking? If not, we cannot set down the victory of the mass and their valuations as antibiological. We must rather seek to explain it as somehow in life's interest, as