How does /his/ feel about Oswald Spengler and his two volume tome "The Decline of the West"? Are his ideas that earthshattering or just a reiteration of the same pessimistic opinions since time immemorial?
I'm interesting in books that try to predict the collapse of civilizations. Is there anything like Spengler?
>>980700
Great article on Spengler:
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/4945
>>980700
Those are minerals, Marie. Jesus Christ.
>>980781
keked
Has anyone here seen this?
A Spenglerian decides to crash /lit/'s party, and the results are absolutely glorious.
The discussion in this thread is the stuff of legends:
https://warosu.org/lit/thread/S4570057
Started reading him about 2 years ago. Hugely impacted how I view the world and history, and he's the reason I'm apolitical today.
>>980700
Just your typical "DONT TOUCH ANYTHING IF YOU CHANGE ANYTHING WE'LL ALL DIE" traditionalist
>>980831
Too bad that archive doesn't have quote backlinks
I liked when he punched Walter White
>>980913
>I didnt read the book but I'll shitpost based on what I read in the internet
you right now
>>980886
How so? His entire thesis is unfalsifiable and unscientific.
>>980994
You can't just say something like that without backing it up.,
>>980994
>unfalsifiable and unscientific
>when talking about humanities
ok senpai
>>981031
Things can be falsifiable and scientific in the humanities. Though obviously not in the same sense as the sciences. I mean works that are based on heavily sourced facts and data.
Spenglers work is a grand narrative akin Hegel. It's an interesting idea, but it's not factual.
>>981086
yep.
and he himself admits that. unlike someone like Marx, he never attempts to present a factual narrative, quite the opposite. He supports intuition as a fundamental element in his historical analysis.
Its what he calls a physiognomic analysis in contrast to systematic analysis.
So yeah, saying that its not "factual" is a moot point.
I mean, there are facts, but its the interpretation and connection of those facts that matter.
>>981086
>it's not factual.
Spengler was a historian. History provides his facts, and his theory is an observation of history. If you want something more 'factual' than that, then look no further than John Calhoun's mouse utopia experiment.
>>980831
Jesus Christ what a fucking massacre. Absolutely based.
>>980831
>mfw it turns into a three way battle between the Spenglerian, liberals, and a Catholic reactionary
>>980994
Kill yourself Popper.
>>981495
Catholics are always the most interesting part of any discussion they're in.
>>980831
>A Spenglerian decides to crash /lit/'s party, and the results are absolutely glorious.
I only read like half way down. The Spneglerian didn't really make any good points, it's just /lit/ are a bunch of retards.
>>980831
>A Spenglerian decides to crash /lit/'s party
I didn't read the absolutely glorious results, but the quote kicking the thread off is teenage edgelord tier crap.
The only good book to challenge Spengler, if your national library has a copy and you're familiar with Spengler, go read it
>>980700
Deserves prime of place in the misinterpreting Nietzsche starter kit.
>>982662
>expecting anything beyond fedora tier neoreactionary shit from Spengler
>>980700
Spengler sees nothing in history than this arbitrary notion of 'strength' and decline allows him to. His notion of societies as organisms is perhaps /the/ mark of fascism: let us consider what is excluded in conceiving of societies in organic terms.
Beyond the initially stupefying nature-imagery of Spengler's aestheticized prose, his notion of societies as organisms excludes any notion of conflict within these very societies - for instance, differences between classes as analysed by Marx, bourgeois and proletarian, are obscured and rejected as 'decadence' (Spengler's word for thought outside of his own, effectively working as a pre-emptive finger-in-ears tactic allows Spengler to refuse any meaningful response to anything outside his own ideology), so what do we find in his absolutist conception of history as the development of societal organism? --- a totalitarian notion of what it is to be a 'culture' that abolishes all difference and variety within it, a closing-off of intellectual life --- rejecting all consequent political possibilities other than that of Nazism (since political struggle, class struggle, opportunities for change is unthinkable in Spengler) - instead of any positive programme or even accurate historical commentary, we have Spengler here acting as the chief ideologue of fascism, his sleight-of-hand is his obscuring of the struggle between classes (bourgeois and proletarian) which can lead to his idealized 'uniting' of a specifically 'german' socialism --- that is, national socialism, which works to cover up the actual differences and conflicts WITHIN society by focusing on the paranoiac image of a foreign intruder: this is why National Socialism ended in the fanaticism and ethical catastrophe of the Holocaust: the anxieties and problems of German society are transferred onto this figure of an outsider ... (cont).
>>982772
...who is simultaneously cultured and barbarian, rich and poor: the image of the evil Jew is simply the differences between bourgeois and proletarian transposed onto the 'foreigner within' -- which is at the same time an outsider, the Jew becomes the object of hate which embodies the anxieties and troubles of German society: except, what we learnt from the Holocaust is that this cannot work --- the more the Jews are killed, the more omnipotent and omnipresent they seem since they must be "pulling the strings" in the background --- and this figure is designated as the 'secret' behind the actual weaknesses and troubles of German society --- it's the fantasy of "if only the Jews were out of the way, we would have a complete, perfect society" --- as dreamed up in Nazi imagery for instance, that, "our culture" is somehow disturbed by the presence of Jews. To reiterate: the use of this fantasy is propaganda which legitimises the crimes against humanity of the Nazi regime, obscuring the conflicts within German society.
This is why it's such a popular fantasy for /pol/, who, in their anxiety and insecurity over what is going on, and their alienation for the political process, they deduce that there must be some alien force secretly pulling the strings and preventing the 'Living-culture' of European, white people from achieving the full potential of white European culture, : this is a utopian dream and a very dangerous one, as well as an intellectually dishonest one.
>>982772
>Spengler sees nothing in history than this arbitrary notion of 'strength'
>Thinking strength is """"Arbitrary""""
What kind of fucking sophistry is this?
>>980700
notice how evola, spengler and lovecraft are all pretty much a variation on the same phenotype, with crowley just being that same thing on another level
enough to just at the faces, not to mention the thinking and character
>>982772
>>982787
Jesus Christ, what absolute babble by someone who has not read Spengler at all.
As a stoic I don't even find Spengler that interesting or enlightening, but at least I have read his works, and know that class and the conflict between classes does play a role within his writings, he just does not couch it in Marxian terms, the connection to Fascism and Nazi's is completely moronic when you consider his clear opposition to both of those movements, especially the element of racial ideology, ergo, no focus on anti-Semitism or the other garbage you are proposing here.
Summa summarum, you have absolutely no fucking clue what you are talking about.
>>982672
>that logo
I wonder who could be behind this post
>>982772
>>982787
Spengler's work is apolitical. He did vote for Hitler in a kind of "last great man of the West" sort of way, but he also wrote how Hitler would fail and that he disagreed with his racial policies, and his books were banned for it. He was not a fascist or an anti-Semite.
His theory focuses on great cultures and their inevitable transformation into decadent civilizations. Not "societies" as organisms. One society in this mega culture will come to dominate all others in its local area - Romans, Qin, Aztecs, Maurya, etc. The US came to dominate our culture, but Spengler thought at the time it would be Germany. I can't imagine Spengler is popular on /pol/ because, like I said, his work is apolitical and the main message is that all cultures are doomed. I think that would be seen as defeatism by a fascist, or insane ramblings by most others.
Your accusations of fascism and antisemitism make me question if you even know who you're talking about.
>>980781
>I thought jack sent you to Belize already.
>>982858
>I can't imagine Spengler is popular on /pol/
Spengler is popular with conservatives, reactionaries, and /pol/ types because of his "culture first" view of history. Concepts like "Civilization X fell because of degeneracy/decadence" goes well with views that see their contemporary cultural landscape as sliding into degeneracy/decadence and propose a return to traditional values to keep their civilization from falling apart.
>>982914
But he doesn't propose a return to traditional values. He doesn't propose anything, he takes a strictly observational stance. He does say that the decline of civilizations is inevitable and unstoppable. These people misinterpret Spengler.
>>982925
>he doesn't propose anything, he takes a strictly observational stance
He proposes inaction and 'acceptance of Destiny' --- this Destiny, of course, being Nazism.
>>982939
>He proposes inaction
There you go.
>>982939
He was against Nazism and an ideology based on race.
>Man glaube doch nicht, daß je ein Volk durch die bloße Einheit der leiblichen Abstammung zusammengehalten wurde und diese Form auch nur durch zehn Generationen hätte wahren können. Es kann nicht oft genug wiederholt werden, daß diese physiologische Herkunft nur für die Wissenschaft und niemals für das Volksbewußtsein vorhanden ist und daß kein Volk sich je für dieses Ideal des ‚reinen Blutes‘ begeistert hat.“
>>982925
>But he doesn't propose a return to traditional values.
He doesn't have to. His observation is all they need from him. People use others observations/thoughts/studies in ways to forward their own argument even if the person didn't/wouldn't agree with their conclusion or failed to propose any action all the time. What make Spengler such a great tool is he works on a grand scale and presents things so simply.
>>982939
And the FDR, and the DDR and the EU, etc. etc.
>>982950
Translation nigga I can't read Germans.
>>982959
You are a clown that thinks that Spengler supported National-Socialism which can be refuted with a simple google search, you think I am going to waste time translating for you as well?
>>982977
I'm not him, just wondering why you would post a German quote when we're all speaking English.
>>982979
I reckon that most people here have an add-on for translating - especially on /his/int/lit/
But here it goes - can't be assed to find the text in English:
>You should not believe that a people (Volk) have ever been held together by the mere unity of biological descent and that this form would have stayed true for ten generations or more. It can not be repeated often enough that these physiological origin exists only for science and never for the popular consciousness and that no nation has ever been excited for this ideal of pure blood.
Does not sound very /pol/ to me, but then all the extremists, whether right or left, are usually gigantic cretins.
Has anyone here actually read Spengler?
Every time I see anyone commenting on him it's obvious that he has at best read his Wikipedia entry.
>>980831
IMO, the Jews are the central political problem. In the early 20th century intellectuals had no qualms about discussing the "Jewish Problem"; everybody understood that it was an important issue. But now, through propaganda, anybody that questions Jewish hegemony is "anti-semitic".
Your understanding of politics is based upon your understanding of the Jews. If you use the term "anti-semitic" you are no-nothing goy, a goy golem serving the interests of the hyper-intelligent Jews without knowing it.
Then there is the next step in understanding the Jews which is the /pol/ & Hitlerian view, where you view the Jews as just another political force that needs to be understood purely in terms of power.
Then there is the true understanding of the Jews, which is understanding them spiritually, understanding their souls, their desires, their ambitions.
I'm not an "anti-semite", IMO the Jews are the greatest people to have ever lived. The Bible is the greatest achievement of mankind and it was written wholly by Jews. I consider myself a Jewish patriot; which is why it saddens me so much to see how corrupt Jews have become since they rejected Christ as Messiah. This is the key to understanding the Jews: the Jews though that the Messiah would make them the rulers of all nations, would make them rulers over the Gentiles. Jesus Christ as Messiah means that the Jews aren't special, that the Gentiles are going to inherit the Kingdom of God as well as the Jews. The Jews could not stand this; they wanted to be special, they wanted to rule. They HATE the Gentiles. This is why when a Jew rejects Christ a darkness enters his soul. A Gentile can reject Christ and still remain more or less innocuous, because the search for the Messiah isn't ingrained in the Gentile spirit the way it is in the Jewish spirit. But when a Jew rejects Christ, they become ravening wolves with a frothing hatred for "the goyim".
>>984399
>I'm not an "anti-semite", IMO the Jews are the greatest people to have ever lived. The Bible is the greatest achievement of mankind and it was written wholly by Jews. I consider myself a Jewish patriot; which is why it saddens me so much to see how corrupt Jews have become since they rejected Christ as Messiah. This is the key to understanding the Jews: the Jews though that the Messiah would make them the rulers of all nations, would make them rulers over the Gentiles. Jesus Christ as Messiah means that the Jews aren't special, that the Gentiles are going to inherit the Kingdom of God as well as the Jews. The Jews could not stand this; they wanted to be special, they wanted to rule. They HATE the Gentiles. This is why when a Jew rejects Christ a darkness enters his soul. A Gentile can reject Christ and still remain more or less innocuous, because the search for the Messiah isn't ingrained in the Gentile spirit the way it is in the Jewish spirit. But when a Jew rejects Christ, they become ravening wolves with a frothing hatred for "the goyim".
You were good until this part. The whole thing know just sounds condescending and your positive spin contrasts starkly with the otherwise negative tone of your post.
>>984682
he copy pasted that from the linked thread
When I read his spergtacular chart w/ the Colosseum I knew I was dealing with an overzealous art critic and not a serious historian, which is what he would have wanted because his method is knowingly based on poetic narrative crafting bullshit against academe.
Patron Saint of white Hoteps.
>>984760
Hmm?
>>982772
>his notion of societies as organisms excludes any notion of conflict within these very societies - for instance, differences between classes as analysed by Marx, bourgeois and proletarian, are obscured and rejected as 'decadence'
This is flat out wrong
>who is simultaneously cultured and barbarian, rich and poor: the image of the evil Jew is simply the differences between bourgeois and proletarian transposed onto the 'foreigner within' -- which is at the same time an outsider, the Jew becomes the object of hate which embodies the anxieties and troubles of German society: except, what we learnt from the Holocaust is that this cannot work --- the more the Jews are killed, the more omnipotent and omnipresent they seem since they must be "pulling the strings" in the background --- and this figure is designated as the 'secret' behind the actual weaknesses and troubles of German society --- it's the fantasy of "if only the Jews were out of the way, we would have a complete, perfect society" --- as dreamed up in Nazi imagery for instance, that, "our culture" is somehow disturbed by the presence of Jews. To reiterate: the use of this fantasy is propaganda which legitimises the crimes against humanity of the Nazi regime, obscuring the conflicts within German society.
This is just scaremongering that has absolutely nothing to do with Spenglers work.
You can say he was an enormous pessimist, a technophobic and very much averse to any XXth century art, but calling him an anti-semite shows how you havent read his work at all
>>982939
>this Destiny, of course, being Nazism.
nope. Not at all.
I mean, he accepted Nazism as much as he supported FDR's big government, Stalin, Lenin, Trotsky, and any other big political leader that would assert political power above moneyed interests (capitalism)
In fact, like another anon said, he opposed the racialist ideas of the Nazis, and predicted correctly how that would end up. Not the only thing he predicted by the way
>>982914
>Concepts like "Civilization X fell because of degeneracy/decadence"
this is not what Spengler says.
Reactionaries and /pol/tards read that in his work, but thats not what he meant.
His meaning of decadence is devoid of moralising implications altogether. Its biological metaphor is always present, and it applies to the concept of decay here too. Its not the decay of original values. Thats a moot point for Spengler, because a culture is constantly changing anyway
>>984236
I have read the decline of the west.
Most reactionaries and /pol/ people who talk about Spengler clearly never actually read him. They probably just read his wikipedia page and saw some videos about his work in youtube.
Same thing for a lot of the people who critize Spengler here too, as it is obvious with the anon ITT
Amazing historian who's more influential than it seems.
>>980831
Cringe fucking worthy.
/lit/ should stick to novels.
>>988783
>/pol/ people who talk about Spengler clearly never actually read him.
If you actually knew anything, you would not be /pol/.
>>984236
>Every time I see anyone commenting on him it's obvious that he has at best read his Wikipedia entry.
Sounds like internet discussions on any topic famalam.
>tfw when magian civilization
Literally fuck you bald man. Christianity is literally a necessity for the faustian notion.
>>991023
No.
>>982799
You must be able to recognise ''''''anti-fascist'''''' marxism by now
>>982914
>Spengler is popular with conservatives, reactionaries, and /pol/ types because of his "culture first" view of history
Oh yeah, only the right is obsessed with culture. It's totally the right's thing. The left doesn't even talk about culture
>>991023
"christianity" isnt a fixed set of beliefs or religious praxis
You would know this, if you had actually read him
>>980700
I only have read his essay on Russia and it is the most thorough and correct analysis of the Russian people, their culture and their mindset I've ever read.
