/lit/ - Literature

>>14955114
Basically, if we see the cycles of civilisation, then we no longer have to passively allow them to happen. We can try to do things differently.

I think there's also a btfo of Spengler in emphasising the sheer level of continuity in culture/civilisation between ancient Mesopotamia and the contemporary West (as well as even other parts of the world). Although I'm not familiar with anyone other than myself who might have said this (but it's probably occured to other people). Basically, taking Spengler's splitting of the Classical-Middle Ages-Renaissance-Now linear history into different threads all acting the same way but starting at different times and having different motifs, and saying, yeah ok, but you're *really not getting how much continuity there's been* and pointing to things like the amount of continuity in our religious and mathematical culture, not to mention our alphabet, with the Middle East. As well as similar continuities to the East and down into Africa. (To give an example: If you go to the Temple of Heaven in Beijing, you can see Qing dynasty writing in Manchu script that ultimately derives from Egyptian hieroglyphs.)

>>14955126
>A caricature barely known to the Muscovites, utterly unknown to Ukrainians and Belarusians.
Sure Ivan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1PAO3jgmXY
Which reminds me:
The horizontal stripes in your military singlets (yeah, I know, originally a Breton pattern, but y'all went nuts for it)
The very-far-horizontally-extending tops of your military caps

>Lel so random.
Well, am I wrong though?

>Not populated until XVII century at the earliest
There was no one on the steps until the 17th century? Come on, anon.

>>14955158
>only Germanics had forests
Is a retarded critique.
I'm not familiar enough with Spengy to fully grasp his position on the relationship of land to culture, but is it impossible for a cultural trend to start from a particular environment and then spread with the people from that environment? Cause I can see that.
Either that or it works in some way we don't understand.
But denying the pattern is churlish.