system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
How would a materialist respond to Nietzsche's view that history is driven by resentment?

I'm not particularly knowledgeable on Nietzsche's philosophy of history, so I might misrepresent it quite substantially here, but from the gist of it Nietzsche believed that history is driven by the feeling of resentment. The way I understand it is, specific events or conditions create a sense of resentment towards that thing which societies tries to answer to, and that answer further creates resentment and this is the driver of historical development.

Take for example the rise of Fascism in Italy or Germany in the 1920s/1930s. Most historians would agree that the feeling of resentment, betrayal or injustice was what allowed fascism to develop. Another more contemporary example is Putin and Russia's resentment towards the Western world for depriving Russia of the superpower status that it enjoyed in the 1980s under the USSR. This feeling of resentment is what drove the events to where we are, where in the process we see most vigorous responses to Russian attack by countries that also have resentment towards Russia for past atrocities (Baltic states, Romania, Poland, Finland, Czechia etc.). This resentment will generate more resentment in Russia and so history will continue to progress

The materialist position is that it is material conditions that drive the development of history. So for example a historical materialist could say that the crisis of the Great Depression led to such difficult material conditions that pushed the people in Germany to support the Nazis, and that the Nazis themselves were produced by the material conditions of the time, or that the difficult conditions of the 90s led to the people in Russia supporting Putin. I know I'm oversimplifying quite substantially, so apologies for not providing the "elevator pitch" type of introduction of either theories

Both appear to have intuitive and explanatory power. However, they seem incompatible with eachother. Resentment is a feeling and feelings do not need to be grounded in material conditions. 

How would a materialist respond and critique the resentment theory of history?
gpt
It's worth noting that Nietzsche's arguments about "ressentiment" are critiques of dominant culture, rather than a fully-fledged interpretation of history.  He is particularly challenging narratives of history which focus on progress and national or personal greatness.  Against narratives which say "Look how great our nation is because of the wise decisions we have made," he basically says, "Not so much.  Mostly we got here because we were driven by base, atavistic impulses.  There is nothing to celebrate here."  He is, in a significant way, attacking the nationalisms (and other ideologies) of his day.