Anyone here read The Decline of the West? Chilling stuff. Oswald Spengler predicted the fall of communism in Russia and its rise as a world power, the rise of egalitarianism and cosmopolitanism in the West, falling birthrates and massive immigration as a result, and even WW2 - specifically how Hitler would lose it, before it even began. He died in 1936.
I think it's bad that his works are not well-known.
http://avery.morrow.name/blog/2014/10/oswald-spenglers-decline-of-the-west-the-100th-anniversary-update/
Everyone on /lit/ knows him, I haven't gotten around to reading him yet but i like his quote i read on wiki about western man being a proud but tragic figure as it'll never reach the heights it aims to reach.
>>17210
Every time I try to talk about him on /lit/ I either get no replies or get told to go back to /pol/.
Spengler was mainly a traditionalist, and while he supported Hitler he disagreed with his racial policies. Note that in the quote in this pic he doesn't literally mean race, "race" to Spengler meant "culture"
>>17378
He was absolutely right on this.
Look at Sweden, they have not seen war since 1814 and became pacifist and weak in spirit and fighting prowess. Now they preach basically giving away their whole country to foreign refugees, surrendering without a fight, their own worst enemy being themselves.
The West has to break out of this stagnant decline of pacifism, international law, globalism, political correctness, supranational entities like the EU and NATO if it is to survive, especially Europe.
The idea that we should all be at war with someone at some time is stupid.
What you need is a sense of national purpose, and war is just an easy shortcut to achieving that. It's not the only way, though.
>>18792
I like the idea of society devoting itself to space. All problems are causes by population pressure at the root, an entire planet worth of new land sounds like a good solution to me.
War is so much more stimulating though, that's the problem.
>>18792
It's needed to keep the military in fighting condition. It's literally going on today, was the plan of Himmler for a Russian buffer state as well
>>18907
I wish we would unite around space/immortality, but people have far too limited imaginations to actually support transhuman objectives.
What really worries me is what will happen when China really comes into her own, she has just the right population and government to lead to another pre-1945 Germany situation, with a bunch of rabid nationalist bydlo goaded into a world-wracking war by a ruling cadre of megalomaniacs.
It all depends on whether or not the Chinese government goes full retard over something like Taiwan or the South China Sea.
>>18992
Globalization makes World War feel unlikely to me. People say Australia will be involved in a war with china in 20 years but by then half our population will be Chinese. Nationalism is broken now.
>>18907
The problem is that in the West, resources that could be spent on massive space efforts are instead spent on refugees, asylum seekers and immigration into Europe, space and the advancement of science takes second priority to misguided humanitarianism.
I say misguided because these very population problems you speak of that space travel and technology would solve are all from the third world- Africa with the highest birthrate in the world, and Western Europe and the Anglosphere with among the lowest birthrates in the world, all devoted to accepting millions of refugees from the ever expanding third world annually.
The resources will run out and the world will descend to chaos if this is not stopped, and the longstanding European-Anglo American dream of space colonization and advancement will be dead before it could begin, because of that, because instead of sticking to our most major and pressing imperative of space colonization we waste resources, time, money and make our homelands unsafe and alienating to us by adhering to humanitarianism, to refugee quotas and whatever else the UN and EU demand.
It's more likely that China will overtake us in these goals, or maybe Russia as well and meanwhile- Western Europe specifically will languish in stagnation by the sheer economic, social, political and population burden that the refugee situation will cause, and there will be no more funds left for space and advanced sciences, the same may happen to the anglo countires and to a lesser extent the United States as well.
All of Western civilization is on the wrong track right now, and Spengler predicted it decades in advance. Chilling.
>>20655
I get what you mean and agree with you to an extent but I also feel like you have a chip on your shoulder regarding this refugee thing.
>>20836
You would to if you understood its full impact, its long term consequences and how forced it all is and how many innocent Europeans silently suffered as a result of these policies.
Since the 1970's.
>>21675
I do think Europe is going down a bad path but I'm incredibly wary of any criticism of that kind of thinking because it can lead to even worse places.
Not to derail the thread but what about Evola? He had the same sort of ideas as Spengler but with some Hindu flavoring.
>>22165
I think Evola was one of those weirdos who saw modern society as a machine that traps men's souls and devoted himself to finding ways to break free through weird spirituality stuff.
What I mean is I think Evola was more about the individual than society and he thought we should all rise above the system and beat the Kali Yuga or something. When my Italian gets fluent enough I'll give him a close look and then decide definitively if he was sane or not.
>>19064
>Globalization makes World War feel unlikely to me.
>Nationalism is broken now.
Famous last words.
We've had peace before, the international system still mainly works through treaties while being highly anarchic. Things haven't changed so significantly that we'll never again see war.
Globalization has its benefits for constituent countries but also a great many hazards. People still look out for the betterment of their ethnic and national groups before others, and it's human nature that they do so. You empathize more with people who are similar.
This means that when change comes at the cost of a certain group or when there's in imbalance or impropriety in the system you have conflict regardless of how well off people are on the whole. Globalization brings with it the flight of capital, moving labor production to where it's cheapest which brings all of the negatives of production efficiency that Marx wrote a while fucking manifesto on.
So long as a global identity and commonwealth is absent, then so will a lasting peace.
We haven't developed a golbal identity in spite of all of the technologies that have arisen so we won't have peace.
