I doubt the British empire will ever collapse

>different cultures and civilizations rise and fall gradually over time
>"WOW SO SHOCKING THIS IS SO MYSTERIOUS, I THINK I SEE A PATTERN HERE, LIKE, WHAT IF THE WEST TOO, LOOOOL"

Reminder Spengler is for literal autists

Academics don't take Spengler very seriously. I haven't read him, so I can't give you my opinion on the matter.
>Is history
History is the progression of Being through time. There's nothing infinite or cyclical about it. There are observable patterns that we can use to make inferences given certain conditions, but whether or not there is a univesral 'theory' of history according to which X is true is a different story entirely.
>when did the West begin to rise?
Probably with Charlemagne, sometime in the 13th century, or during the Renaissance. I don't know which.
>When did it peak?
The Victorian era.
>When did it start it's decline?
Whether or not it's in decline is questionable. Western civilization is capable of restructuring itself. If it doesn't currently resemble its 17th-century self, that's because it had to change to adapt to centuries of shifting conditions.
>When and how will it fall?
It will probably be the Jews' doing.
>What even is the West?
The idea of Freedom, demonstrated in history.

>>929667
I mean, he was the first to actually point it out. He even mentions in the intro how he's amazed a principle so obvious hadn't ever been formulated before.

Moreover, most modern day historians ignore it. The great fallacy is that we are now in the "modern" age, and that at some point in the future, we will reach an equilibrium, like an apocalypse, a world government, world peace, etc., and the world will then proceed to just be one stable utopia.

>>929706
>The great fallacy is that we are now in the "modern" age, and that at some point in the future, we will reach an equilibrium, like an apocalypse, a world government, world peace, etc., and the world will then proceed to just be one stable utopia.
No one with half of brain believes that shit

>>929706
Literally no one believes that except maybe High Schoolers.

>>929622
everything that can go up can go down and often does eventually, that doesn't necessarily mean there is a set cycle

>>929706
>I mean, he was the first to actually point it out.

Point what out? That empires rise and fall? He certainly was not. That the West is falling? Literally an opinion, and he's not the first there either.

>>929706
>empires rise and fall
>Tunisian sandnigger said the same thing in the 14th century
wew lad