Si Vales, Valeo
Thank you for your kind email and for sharing this interesting thought with me. It is a good question, especially today where the polarization of the so-called “left and right” is so vast.
The Will to Power (or more accurately, the “Desire for Power” – Machtgelüst) is a modification on Schopenhauer’s will to live, which is a much more accurate description of what drives living things. All we have to do is observe nature to see just how correct Schopenhauer was in this matter. The lust to overwhelm and overpower appears to be only displayed by humans. Animals are simply surviving.
Humans are animals too. Some more so than others. But they can’t use human nature as an excuse, because we can choose our course and our behavior. We create systems in which our survival does not necessitate the sort of cruelty we see in the world, and yet there it is.
In my opinion, the way the term is used today, The Will to Power is an attempt to explain, justify or naturalize the sadistic pleasure from causing pain over someone less strong by making it a part of human nature rather than the psychosis that it really is. It is used to dehumanize people less fortunate, and shields the people hooked on that phrase from having any feelings of remorse for having treated others so badly.
Of course, I am being the devil’s advocate here. I am laying this quick foundation to make sure that when you say The Will to Power we are speaking about the same thing
Aristotle believed that human nature is a cause that exists independent of individual humans, which has some influence in how a person becomes. It is easy to see how he saw it as a connection between human nature and the divine. We could call it ones True Nature or True Will and be closer to the mark.
Human nature has been debated for centuries in an attempt to determine whether or not humans are basically good or bad. Ultimately most of them disagree on just about everything, and why should human nature be any different.
If by Will to Power you mean a desire or drive to exceed and rise above the dross of humanity, that is quite a different thing altogether. And if this is the case, then I dare say that in my opinion, being born in impoverished conditions, a bi-racial family, or raised by a single parent, having to put ones self through school by washing dishes or cleaning toilets, and maneuvering oneself into a social position where one ultimately ends up being in a position to have an effect in the world around them shows a much stronger Will to Power than a person that has had everything handed to them.
What I see today, especially from the people causing conflict and poverty on the rest of the world is the will to cheat and pander. We should refrain from calling it Will to Power. For doing so profoundly sullies the entire concept of self-governance and the right to exercise freedom. It is rubbish, baloney and hokum as they used to say in the old days. It isn’t Will to Power. Certainly not what Nietzsche or Schopenhauer must have had in mind.