sort of strange- has some interesting stuff but as others have said it kind of goes all over the place. he introduces the idea of reading like a loser - which is pretty interesting- and then barely references it again. he talks for a whole chapter about Heidegger but it's very confusing (partially cause Heidegger is ridiculous) and not clearly tied to Nietzsche. it also has a really horrid implication which I feel is probably partially the end point of his ideas- there's a sort of idea that concentration camp inmates had some sort of special human insight because of the torture they were put through and it's not exactly there and hard to explain but it's just ugh and the problem with talking positively about sub humans (to oppose to Nietzsche) - you see things which create supposed sub humans as not so bad because the condition of supposed sub humanism is more acceptable. but I might be being unfair here. the Heidegger chapter is definitely skippable at least (the sub humanism chapter) which is a shame cause it seems like one of the more important ones to his idea.

which is one of the frustrations- he looks at radical egalitarianism and Nietzsche as bad but sort of skirts around putting forward his own philosophy and in the final chapter very much shys away from the implications of egalitarian philosophy. He seems uncomfortable with ideas like philistinism that he promotes in the abstract. it just feels a bit embarrassing because these ideas seem important to me but he presents them as near impossible and never really works out how to put them into action or how to form a coherent philosophy out of them. Like he never really follows through on the promise of the title - sometimes he just repeats ideas from Nietzsche that are vile but says nothing much about them, just lets them lie.

Like I enjoyed most of it, especially the first couple of chapters as the later ones tended to get a bit more wanky, but it sort of ends suddenly at the point where you'd expect him to go further and it goes all over the place so although you get some good ideas it's not very helpful as a Nietzsche critique. I just wanted more anti-Nietzsche. He does provide fertile ground for my own hatred of Nietzsche to grow though - some of these quotes were almost unreadable for the sheer hideousness of them. Unbelievable how popular he is in "leftist" circles. ( )