The main problem with the universalism debate is that Academic Agent and Imperium Press are conflating the depoliticised, liberal type of universalism with the philosophical and theological form. This grounds the debate in liberalism and a secondary type of democratic particulars.

Nietzsche said, "Truth is a woman." Hamann said, 'Truth is Phryne. The most perfect justice – which, however perfect, can never be repeated.'
In this is Nietzsche's systematising.

Of course, as Jünger said, we must approach Nietzsche as an "intelligence test". Every attempt to follow Nietzsche or overcome him has failed due to systematisation. He was something of a final sacrifice to irrationalism.

The question is one of heresy. Did Nietzsche approach such a perfect irrationalism that he would have no choice but to turn away? This is in his choice to study physics for ten years, as it is in his Eternal Return, and the face of his death in the shadow of Hölderlin, Kleist.

Suicide as the German song that observes.
Suicide of that which may never be interpreted.
As Goethe knew, "Soon, you too will rest." Such perfect peace cannot know the Eternal Return.

And, of course, only fools attack Nietzsche.

Good writing is not only what is "surprising to oneself, even in retrospect", it also gives order to that inevitable moment, "What have I done?"

If the conservative is finally conserving something you know something is wrong.

To what extent does the will-to-power become a will-in-itself? "Queen Truth, may you not thrust my thinking up against a coarse lie." Power is not only that which is unbounded, unlimited, it is also the undiminished – what attains strength even in diffusion.
It is in this sense that Schopenhauer was the free spirit of philosophers of the will – for freedom is in one who is in conflict with the unknown. In his response to Kant he reattached the thing-in-itself to another object, as Alexander had done with the Gordian Knot; Nietzsche only attempted to sever it. But what is it to sever a nothing,? What has already been severed can have no further destruction or the decision which separates. The absolutely unknown at war with itself is the war of a Quixote or Ion.

To what extent does twitter act like the rigged stock market? First there was the rumour of the takeover, which is a benefit from the speculative, then this speculation is drawn out over the longest possible takeover to maximise value from the thinnest resources.
This method has been repeated by the market for a decade, and suggests something stinks.
#pessimisticspeechrights

Democracy is the tradition of the dead.

Just as a true Machiavellian would never reveal his methods, a true Nietzschean would forget the name Nietzsche.

Technology surpasses art as equality of conditions. The culture war is part of the dissolution of technology – the nakedness of the titans. In Schmittean terms, it is a second interim following the failure of a strong politics.
In other words, rather than confronting the existential enemy that is the dissolution of technology, the West turns inwards, to its own criminality. Rather than a Berlin Wall moment, there is a Khrushchev Thaw.
And yet, democracy approaches the limits of its mild character.

Basic position on technical free speech (twitter restoration): a Solomon's Judgement in which the left was unwilling to give up the baby, and now the right is happy to receive the remains.

Political discourse today is repeating your position over and over to wear down opponents, to eliminate them through moral exhaustion. It is the equivalent of the bad songs repeated on the radio until the audience accepts them.

Theological Centrism:
Democracy and liberalism have always been extremist.

https://t.iss.one/BertieBassett4Life/13268

A counter-intuitive reason for why the modern state moves left.
Schmitt says anarchism's true focus is the elimination of God.
This is of course a much more powerful position than abolition of the state, and more significant than absolutism/the reaction, which is not only reduced to a defense of religion but also denial of the metamorphosis/Gestaltwandel of God.
It is also perhaps untenable, yet the whole of society struggles against the anarchist position – first creating a leftward position, then a second interim, a void.

Sensible centrism:
Professional wrestling idealism.

Theological centrism:
Relinquishment of pro wrestling to the Mexicans.

The danger of sensible centrism is that it returns the left-right distinction to reality at the very moment it was becoming a mere formality. What was indecisive in the German crisis is automatic and permanent in our own – the perfection of indecision.

Socrates will eternally be known as a reborn Silenus; Nietzsche proclaimed he was Dionysus – and then was paralyzed by vines.

Sensible center: World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc.

Theological center: Jacob wrestling with the angel.

The opposition of Nietzsche and Socrates is misplaced. Jünger acknowledges Nietzsche's mistakes, his limits and absolute mortality, but nevertheless stands behind him as a Nestor to Achilles. "He will fight when he can fight."
The question for Nietzscheans is this, who is the hero that would stand, no matter his weaknesses, behind Socrates? Or perhaps we must ask of that which is more than a hero. In this is also the question, what was missing in Alcibiades?