Sjoerd van Tuinen and Gijs van Oenen visit Felix & Sofie

Friedrich Nietzsche introduced the notion of "ressentiment" in his genealogy of Western morality. According to Nietzsche, morality arose as a product of the envy that the less fortunate felt toward the elite. Out of inability to actually improve their lot, the oppressed committed an "imaginary revenge," by creating morality. This morality is primarily designed to create a sense of guilt in the elite, so that they are spiritually blackmailed into showing altruistic behavior. Ressentiment thus read is about a structural psychological antipathy to the "fortunate." An envy of the mediocre - let's say, "ordinary" - man toward those who care little about norms. This conception of the origin of morality may be offensive to modern sentiments, but we also find there the interesting question of whether ressentiment can help us better understand our own political time.   

Inspired by Nietzsche, the early-twentieth-century intellectual Menno ter Braak picked up this idea in the context of democracy in his book Het nationaal-socialisme als rancuneleer (1937). Nazism feeds on resentment which, Ter Braak argues, is the result of the pursuit of equality. Seen this way, democracy and rancour are inseparable. And yet, Ter Braak writes, "...in a democracy (...) resentment has at least the freedom to diagnose itself."

Even in our time there is no lack of resentment and intolerance. At the same time, people are fighting on many fronts for more equality, equal value, and democracy. What role does resentment, or ressentiment, play in contemporary emancipatory movements? And does resentment stem from the pursuit of equality or is it also the other way around, that a pursuit of equality can stem from resentment? And what political color does resentment actually have, or equality? Or is that indistinguishable? 

These questions and more will be discussed during Felix & Sofie with Sjoerd van Tuinen and Gijs van Oenen.