In Rage and Time Sloterdijk proclaims that militancy and apocalypticism are the ways for the “losers” to deal with their loss. This sort of interpretation makes sense, considering the historical circumstances and religious beliefs Sloterdijk cites and considers. However, if one returns to the first image of the book – the figure of Achilles – then one can see how Achilles and his thymotic rage is, for Sloterdijk, the way of the winners, even if Achilles dies in the battle. Achaeans are winners, Trojans are losers. The rage of the winners is the righteous indignant rage, the reaction of the losers is to transform their rage into revenge and eventually to create a vengeful god who will punish the winners in the end (that is to come).
One issue that has bothered me in Sloterdijk’s proposal (besides a lack of any references to Islam when talking about Jewish and Christian monotheisms in chapter 3, probably based on his assumption that Islam did not play any significant role in the Western European theology which is, of course, false) is that I am not sure if the “losers” back then were perceived as the “losers” today. Romans and Venetians traced their mythical origins to Troy, not Greece, despite of Troy’s epic loss and destruction – why?