/lit/ - Literature

>2014
>being this continental

>Thus, the only way for a society to remain youthful and survive, it must embrace Tradition

But that's what Evola would say, not Spengler. Spengler was fatalistic, Evola said the decline could be stopped by making choices, ie embracing Tradition.

>>4467115
>Thus, the only way for a society to remain youthful and survive, it must embrace Tradition

Spengler was a fatalist, there's no salvation. Stop using Spengler for your retarded utopian fantasies.

>>4467133
>>4467127
I know that. The first part of my post was a direct reference to Spengler, but the second line was a reference to Evola. I meant to do that

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditionalist_School

>Followers of the Traditional school claim that a variety of authentic spiritual traditions present in the world today, share the same origin and are based on the same metaphysical principles, sometimes called philosophia perennis. The term philosophia perennis first appears in the Renaissance. It is widely associated with Leibniz who in turn owes it to the 16th century theologian Augustinus Steuchius. They twisted the philosophia perennis of the Renaissance for their own agenda.
>The exoteric is the outward dimension of religion, which consists of religious rites, moral and dogmatic theology. The exoteric point of view is characterized by its "sentimental", rather than purely intellectual, nature, and it remains fairly limited. Based on the doctrine of creation and the subsequent duality between God and creation, exoterism does not offer means to transcend the limitations of the human state.
>In the Traditionalist view esoterism is more than the "complement" of exoterism (the spirit as opposed to the letter, the kernel as opposed to the shell). Esoterism has, at least de jure, a total autonomy with respect to religion, for its innermost substance is the "Primordial Tradition" itself. Based on pure metaphysics its goal is the realization of the superior states of being and finally the union between the individual self and the "Principle".

>One of the distinguishing features of traditionalist authors is their insistence on the necessity for affiliation to one of the "normal traditions" or great ancient religions of the world.[12] Most traditionalists, like Guénon himself, found a way in Sufism, and accordingly they embraced Islam, but others, like Marco Pallis, found a way in Buddhism, and still others, like James Cutsinger belong to the Greek Orthodox Church. The most influential representatives of this school in Northern Europe, viz. Kurt Almqvist, and Tage Lindbom, also embraced Sunni Islam. What is primarily crucial for the seeker is, as pointed out early by Guénon, the regular affiliation to an exoterism, i.e. the ordinary life of a believer: this would eventually open, for those qualified, the doors of initiation, i.e. access to the esoterism of that given religious form.

>>4467134
Sorry to break it to you but Spengler was probably right. He's right because there's no way a society could somehow revert to its Springtime form when the culture's mathematical systems have already advanced

>>4467142
>converting to Islam

Hah, what a pleb

>buddha
>civilization began to decline and degenerate

>>4467149

"Upon my word, they will shout at you, it is no use protesting: it is a case of twice two makes four! Nature does not ask your permission, she has nothing to do with your wishes, and whether you like her laws or dislike them, you are bound to accept her as she is, and consequently all her conclusions. A wall, you see, is a wall ... and so on, and so on."

Merciful Heavens! but what do I care for the laws of nature and arithmetic, when, for some reason I dislike those laws and the fact that twice two makes four? Of course I cannot break through the wall by battering my head against it if I really have not the strength to knock it down, but I am not going to be reconciled to it simply because it is a stone wall and I have not the strength.

Notes from the Underground Chapter 3

http://www.classicreader.com/book/414/4/

>>4467127
>Evola
>not made-up traditions
Pick one.

>>4467162
Yes, the people from the time of Vedas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vedas)) would view Buddhism as degenerate, the same way Medieval European Priests would view Socialists as degenerate

>>4467191
How are they made up? They're based on historical heirarchies where the priest class controlled everything and fertility was extremely high

>>4467197
but jesus was socialist in many ways

>>4467210
Let's not go there

What about the US? It's in decline now, but it reached its peak after undergoing change

>>4467217
According to Spengler the US is part of the West which was born in around 1100. To him, the Middle ages were the golden age, the renaissance was the silver age, enlightenment was bronze, modern is winter/death stage.

According to the ideas of Oswald Spengler in THE DECLINE OF THE WEST, all the great cultures of mankind have followed the same stages of evolution. This can be seen in the arts, architecture, politics and economics of comparative cultures. Spengler showed that the ancient cultures took the same time to reach similar situations as the modern cultures.

One example of this is the length of time it took for cultures to start expanding beyond their previous known limits, such as the Romans starting to conqueror Italy from the security of a city, compared to the Europeans expansion to the continent of America from their relative countries

The author follows this idea, comparing the evolution of Rome and the rise of America and comes to some astonishing conclusions.

Firstly, if the account is started at 515BC for the Romans and at 1584 for the Anglo-Saxons (when Sir Walter Raleigh came to "Virginia"), there is a cultural difference of 2100 years which remains constant between the two states. After this time both states reached hegemony within their regions -- the Romans in 202BC after the second war against Carthage, and 2100 years later the Americans in 1898 after the war against Spain.

Secondly there are many events of similar meaning before and after that, confirming the idea that the Americans of the year 2008 are in the same political and economical situation as the Romans circa 92BC.

Thus the Americans would now seem to be living in the latter time of their republic, which would correspond with the Romans 2100 years before. On that basis it will take maybe 30 years for the modern equivalent of the triumvirate, Caesar and Crassus to appear. In about 70 years the power of Rome passed to an Emperor, and so America will become the "American Empire" in accordance with Spengler's theory of the cyclical rise and fall of civilisations.

The author's main interest lies in the following years: What will happen if this view of history is true: In 92BC the Romans elected a new reformer, Livius Drusus, who was killed a year later by those who hated any idea of structural change -- could this happen again to the new American president, Barak Obama ? And furthermore: shall we be witnesses of a modern version of other events that took place 2100 years before?

>>4467226
Thinly veiled call to assassination.

By the term "Caesarism" I mean that kind of government which, irrespective of any constitutional formulation that it may have, is in its inward self a return to thorough formlessness. It does not matter that Augustus in Rome, and Huang Ti in China, Amasis in Egypt and Alp Arslan in Baghdad disguised their position under antique forms. the spirit of these forms was dead, and so all institutions, however carefully maintained, were thenceforth destitute of all meaning and weight. Real importance centred in the wholly personal power exercised by the Caesar...
~The Decline of The West Spengler

OUR Western world, America and Europe, is threatened with Caesarism on a scale unknown since the dawn of the Roman Empire. In order to see this threat in its proper
perspective, we have to assess the relationship between America and Europe, and define their historical destinies. It is the contention of this book that expanding democracy leads unintentionally to imperialism and that imperialism inevitably ends in destroying the republican institutions of earlier days; further, that the greater the social equality, the dimmer the prospects of liberty, and that as society becomes more equalitarian, it tends increasingly to concentrate absolute power in the hands of one single man. Caesarism is not dictatorship, not the result of one man's overriding ambition, not a brutal seizure of power through revolution. It is not based on a specific doctrine or philosophy. It is essentially pragmatic and untheoretical. It is a slow, often century-old, unconscious development that ends in a voluntary surrender of a free people escaping from freedom to one autocratic master. New concentrations of power during the past fifty years of world wars, revolutions, and crises, have made this threat of Caesarism increasingly evident. Political power in the Western world has become increasingly concentrated in the United States of America, and in the office of the President within America. The power and prestige of the President have grown with the growth of America and of democracy within America, with the multiplication of economic, political......
~The Coming Caesars. Amaury De Riencourt

>>4467204
>fertility was extremely high

Hahahaha, oh god.

Spengler was quite conscious of this clash of orientations in the West. He knew that men are generally disdainful of experience and that, driven by limitless and uncontrolled hope, they like to conceptualize the future in terms of what they consider the desirable rather than the likely course of events. In counterpoint to these, in his view, irrational trends, he remarked that optimism is naive and in some respects even vulgar, and that it surely stands for cowardice when one is afraid to face the fact that life is fleeting and transient in all its aspects.
These thoughts touch a major motif in Spengler's philosophy which critics tend to ignore, namely the recognition of the place of tragedy in the Occidental cultural world. Tragic modes of experiencing life can only evolve there, where the individual human being is presumed autonomous in his feelings, thoughts, and actions, and where he is therefore vulnerable to the agony of having to make choices between conflicting interests and commitments. They are thus absent in the high cultures of the Orient, where human beings are generally subsumed in the superior concept of the consensus or in the social roles assigned them. In fact, they have been fully developed only in the cultures of the West, and in this context, again, Spengler suggests that they have been more enduring in continental Europe than in England, where they atrophied under the weight of utilitarianism and pragmatism, and in the United States, where "the longing for the happy ending" came to set the tone for life.
Spengler's pessimism, then, is strictly qualified. And the same holds for his determinism. He notes that there is nothing absolutely inevitable about the passage from one phase in the history of a culture, a nation, or a state to the other, and that none of these three organisms is bound to wither away. Decline will set in only when living human beings choose to play light with their society's moral and legal ground rules and when they voluntarily indulge in the mechanization of their intellectual and sentimental lives. Indices of decline are man-made, after all—hence Spengler's distinction between possible and actual culture. Indeed, there is a strong suggestion in his work that biography is, in the final analysis, dominant over the flux of time. Just as he himself had the courage to fathom the idea of decline without ever suspending efforts to arrest this process, so does he seem to have believed that intelligent men must always be ready to size up the epoch and the milieu in which they find themselves so that they may take constructive action in response to the demands of the hour. Statesmanship in particular, he tells us, is just not conceivable without this dimension of thought.

>>4467242
requesting the journal about population patterns determining civilizations rise/fall

>>4467226
Surely he didn't take it to that ridiculous degree

Anyone can see parallels but this year-to-year stuff is idiotic

>>4467244
>>4467239
>>4467142

Are you trying to recruit someone for a cause? I don't get it?

>>4467226
He really thinks the US is as cyclically connected to medieval europe as the late republic was to pre-hegemony Rome? That's just silly.

>>4467261
Nope, we're not the same people

I'm just spreading ideas that are interesting and completely transcend typical contemporary discussions

>>4467264
he noted that just as the culture was born in GREECE but Rome would become the empire, the same way the western culture was born in Europe but it would be America that would go on to become the empire.

>>4467226
>According to Spengler the US is part of the West which was born in around 1100. To him, the Middle ages were the golden age, the renaissance was the silver age, enlightenment was bronze, modern is winter/death stage.

Julius Evola believed that mankind is living in the Kali Yuga, a Dark Age of unleashed materialistic appetites, spiritual oblivion and organised deviancy. To counter this and call in a primordial rebirth, Evola presented his world of Tradition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Evola

>>4467261

I'm only one of those people you linked. I just have an interest in the OP, so I'm posting relevant information that might promote discussion. I also feel that by posting larger excerpts and extracts, we might be able to move away from one sentence replies and sarcastic greentext and memes.

>>4467272
Oh it's just pasta.

>>4467285
If you consider book quotes as pasta, then yea

Ok

It's an interesting perspective because it forces you to not look at history as something in relation to yourself but something that you can look at objectively and compare different cultures to each other and find a multitude of parallels and patterns

>>4467226
So who's ganna be Caesar of America?

>>4467307
>wall st believes in free markets

>>4467298
>objectively

He is basing it on intuition mate, he didn't do science his theories are not based on testable fact, but on his own interpretation and definition of epochs and cause-effect relations, no actual historian takes him seriously.

Pls. Refrain from posting on this board if you don't know what words mean.

>>4467307
Putin obviously

Btw, there's 50,000 Russian troops ready to deploy into the US. They're going to loot and pillage and take everything once the economy collapses. Good luck Amerifats

http://beforeitsnews.com/war-and-conflict/2014/01/russian-chinese-subs-off-coasts-of-america-50000-russian-spetsnaz-troops-in-america-2450008.html

>>4467315
>no actual historian takes him seriously.

you sure about that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oswald_Spengler#Influence

>>4467226

This sounds a lot like fucking mysticism to me.

>>4467319
>beforeitsnews

>>4467319
Spengler did note that the Russian culture was still in its infancy still trying to find itself after years of "metamorphosis" from external countries. Russia will surpass the West according to him

>>4467321
Then Foucault is a serious historian too.

>>4467315
but he's right, and a multitude of authors have verified his ideas. Mainly I'm referring to Toynbee's a study of history

>>4467342
Can you supply an actual quote from him, Nostradamus?

>>4467352
Up to now I have refrained from mentioning Russia —intentionally, for with Russia it is not a question of different peoples but of different worlds. The Russians are by no means a people like the Germans and the English. Like the Germanic tribes of the Carolingian age they contain within themselves the potentialities of many future peoples. "Russianism" is the promise of a future culture as the evening shadows grows longer and longer over the Western world. The distinctions between Russian and Western spirit cannot be drawn too sharply. As deep a cleavage as there is between the spirit, religion, politics, and economics of England, Germany, America, and France, when compared with Russia these nations suddenly appear as a unified world. It is easy to be deceived by some inhabitants of Russia who reflect strong Western influence. The true Russian is just as inwardly alien to us as a Roman in the Age of Kings or a Chinese long before Confucius would be if they were suddenly to appear among us. The Russians have been aware of this every time they have drawn a line of demarcation between "Mother Russia" and "Europe."

For us, the primitive soul of Russia is an inscrutable something that lies behind dirt, music, vodka, meekness, and a strange melancholy. We naturally form our judgments subjectively, i.e., as the late, urban, and intellectually mature members of a wholly different culture. What we "see" in Russia is therefore not a soul just now awakening, which even Dostoyevsky was helpless to describe, but our own mental picture of it, which is formed by our superficial image of Russian life and Russian history and is further falsified by the use of such very "European" words as will, reason, and Gemut. Yet perhaps some of us are able to convey a virtually indescribable impression of that country that will leave no doubt as to the immense gap that separates us.

This childlike, inarticulate, fearsome people has been confused, wounded, tortured, and poisoned by having forced upon it the patterns of a foreign, imperious, masculine, and mature "European" culture. Its flesh has been pierced by European-style urban centers with European ambitions, and its undeveloped consciousness infected by overripe attitudes, philosophies, political ideas, and scientific principles. In 1700, Peter the Great forced upon his people the Baroque style of politics, complete with cabinet diplomacy, dynastic influence, administration, and a Western-style navy. In 1800, English ideas, basically incomprehensible to these people, made their entrance in the guise of French writers who succeeded in confusing the minds of a small intellectual minority. Even before 1900 the bookish Russian intelligentsia introduced Marxism to their country, a complex product of Western European dialectics of whose origin they were completely ignorant. Peter the Great transformed the tsarist state into a major power within the Western system, thus perverting its natural development.

>>4467388
And the "intelligentsia," themselves the product of the Russian spirit after it was corrupted by foreign-style cities, then entered the scene with their somber longing for indigenous institutions that must arise in some far-distant future, thereby distorting the primitive thought of their country into a kind of barren, childish theorizing after the manner of professional French revolutionaries. Owing to the Russians’ boundless humility and willingness to sacrifice, Petrinism and bolshevism have accomplished some very real things in senseless and disastrous imitation of such Western creations as the Court of Versailles and the Paris Commune. But these institutions have affected only the surface of Russian existence; each of them can disappear and reappear with unpredictable swiftness.

As yet Russia has had only religious experiences, no social or political ones. Dostoyevsky, in reality a saint who has been made to appear in the nonsensical and ridiculous Western guise of a romancier, is misunderstood if his social "problems" are considered apart from his novelistic form. His true essence is sooner to be found between than in the lines, and in The Brothers Karamazov he reaches a religious intensity comparable only to that of Dante. His revolutionary politics, on the other hand, originated within an insignificantly small metropolitan coterie which no longer possessed definite Russian sensibilities and, as far as family extraction is concerned, can indeed hardly be called Russian at all. As a consequence Dostoyevsky’s political thought was caught between the extremes of forced dogmatism and instinctive rejection.

Hence Russia’s deep, formidable, atavistic hatred of the West, of the poison in its own body. It can be felt in the inner suffering of Dostoyevsky, in the violent outbursts of Tolstoy, and in the silent brooding of the common man. It is an irrepressible hatred, often unconscious and often concealed beneath a sincere inclination to love and understand, a basic hatred of all symbols of the Faustian will: the cities (Petersburg in particular) which intruded as vanguards of this will on the rural calm of the endless steppes; the arts and sciences, Western thought and emotion, the state, jurisprudence, administrative structure, money, industry, education, "society"—in fact, everything. It is the primeval apocalyptic hatred that distinguishes the culture of antiquity. All bolshevism contains something of the dismal bitterness of the Maccabees, as well as of the much later insurrection that led to the destruction of Jerusalem. Its rigid dogmatism alone could never have supplied the impetus that sustains the movement even to the present day. The subliminal anti-Western instincts of Russia, at first directed against Petrinism, have lent strength to bolshevism. But since bolshevism is itself an outgrowth of Petrinism it will in time be destroyed in order to complete Russia’s liberation from "Europe."

>>4467392
The proletarian of the West wishes to reshape Western civilization to meet his special desires; the Russian intelligentsia wishes, by instinct if not always consciously, to destroy it. That is the meaning of Eastern nihilism. Our Western civilization has long since become purely urban; in Russia there is no such thing as "the masses," but only "the people." Every true Russian, whether his occupation is that of scholar or civil official, is basically a peasant. He is not really interested in the second-hand cities with their second-hand masses and mass ideologies. Despite Marxism, the only economic problems in that country are rural problems. The Russian "worker" is a misunderstanding. The only reality is the untouched, unharmed land, just as in Carolingian Europe. We went through this phase a thousand years ago, and thus we do not understand each other. We Western Europeans are no longer capable of living in communion with the virgin land. Whenever we go "to the country" we take with us the city with all its spiritual aspects; and we take it there in our blood, not just in our head like the Russian intelligent. The Russian mentally transports his village with him to the Russian cities.

If we wish to understand this irreparable cleavage between Eastern and Western "socialism" we must at all times distinguish the Russian soul from the Russian political system, and the mentality of the leaders from the instincts of those they lead. For what else is Pan-Slavism but a Western-type political mask covering a strong sense of religious mission? Despite all the industrial catchwords like "surplus value" and "expropriation," the Russian worker is not an urban worker, not a man of the masses as in Manchester, Essen, and Pittsburgh. He is actually a ploughman and reaper who has left home, with a hatred for the foreign power that has spoiled the true calling that his soul still clings to. The ideological elements that make bolshevism work are quite insignificant. Even if its program were turned on its head, its unconscious mission for awakening Russia would remain the same: nihilism.

Even so, bolshevism has an immense appeal for the fomenting intellectuals of our cities. It has become a hobby for tired and addled brains, a weapon for decaying megalopolitan souls, an expression for rotting blood. The Spartacism of the salons belongs in the same category as theosophy and occultism; it is for us the same thing as the cult of Isis was, not for the Oriental slaves in Rome but for the decadent Romans themselves. The fact that it made its entrance in Berlin has to do with the monstrous sham of this Revolution. It is relatively unimportant that empty-headed fools started founding "peasant councils" in Berlin in imitation of the Soviet model, or that no one noticed that rural affairs are the cardinal problem in Russia while our headaches are strictly urban.

>>4467395
In the face of socialism, Spartacism has no future in Germany. But bolshevism is certain to conquer Paris, for when mingled with anarchic syndicalism it can satisfy the tired, sensation-hungry French soul. It will be the proper form of expression for the taedium vitae of that giant city that is so satiated with life. As a dangerous poison for refined Western intellects it has a greater future than in the East.

In Russia it will be replaced by some new form of tsarism, the only possible system for a people living under such conditions. Most probably this tsarism will resemble the Prussian socialistic system more closely than capitalist parliamentarism. Yet the future of the unconscious forces of Russia lies not in the solution of political and social quandaries but in the imminent birth of a new religion, the third to emerge from the matrix of Christianity, just as Germanic-Western culture unconsciously conceived the second form of Christianity around 100 A.D. Dostoyevsky is one of the prophets of this new faith; it is as yet nameless, but it has already begun to enter with quiet, infinitely tender power.

For us citizens of the Western world, religion is finished. In our urban souls what was once true religiosity has long since been intellectualized to "problematics." The Church reached its fulfillment at the Council of Trent. Puritanism has turned into capitalism, and Pietism is now socialism. The Anglo-American sects represent merely the nervous businessman’s need for theological pastimes. There is no more repulsive spectacle than the attempted of certain Protestant groups to revivify the cadaver of religion by smearing it with bolshevist offal. The same thing has been tried with occultism and theosophy. And nothing is more deceptive than the hope that the future religion of Russian can stimulate a revival of religion in the West. There should no longer be any misunderstanding: with its hatred of state, science, and art, Russian nihilism is also directed against Rome and Wittenberg, whose spirit is present in all forms of Western culture and thus an integral part of what this nihilism aims to destroy. Russia will push this development aside and link up once again, by way of Byzantium

Oswald Spengler, The Decline of the West, II, especially 192 ff., 278, 295 f., 495.

The problem here is: do you WANT civilization to continue? It is arguably the most unhealthy period of man. Do you want to prolong it?

>>4467398
I'm personally fine the west's "bronze age". I wish we could stay in the enlightenment and not become quasi-marxists but alas it is too late

>>4467395
>dat last paragraph

Damn this Spengler fellow has some attitude

Weekly Spengler thread eh?

>>4467397
>>4467397
This is bullshit. As if everyone in St. Petersburg is depressed because they work in an office or factory, when deep down they have the souls of farmers...is this guy saying that western Europeans have had the farm boy bred out of them?

>>4467450
He's saying that City life has conquered Country life in the west. Thus the Western man is a mass man subscribing to mass ideologies and works in factories, while the Russian man is still agricultural and rural. Makes sense when you think about it

>>4467459
But what does it mean? Here in the US I've met plenty of rural, agricultural people. They're the ones that, you know, work on farms in rural areas. It seems like Spengler is trying to define Western individual vs a Russian one. How is a Russian growing up in the city any less a or more a mass man than an American or British one growing up in a city?

more like Oswald Sperglord! amirite, bros?

Very interesting thread. It all strikes a chord with me. The West seems dead, and lately only Russia has impressed me with a sense of vitality and integrity that I don't find at home. The points about the rise of liberalism and the decline of democracy and culture also ring true. I'd like to think that a return to tradition would be a cure for this, but, I realise that is unlikely in any significant way.

>>4467534
You realize what you are saying has been said for a very long time. People in every age say that their age is more degenerate.
> Decline of democracy and culture
How has this occurred? How were other ages more democratic and cultured?

>Russia is a barbarian to Europe similar to when the germans were barbarians during the Roman empire
>America is still a colony of Europe, but without the culture
>Hitler wasn't the European Caesar, America won't get one
>Chinese and Jewish cultures are old-aged.
>Marxism is for retards, Capitalism has had its moment, Prussian Socialism is the new Idea for this age.

>>4467551
>You realize what you are saying has been said for a very long time.

Yes, that gets posted a lot too.

>How has this occurred?

Well, there are some interesting ideas in this thread. I haven't read the books referenced here though yet. Also, I just don't know. Those are vast questions. The general idea I'm getting though, whilst thinking about this thread, is that culture as it evolves tends to move away from (watch out I'm about to be abstract and semi-religious) the spirit. Considering culture seems to be an effort to know the esoteric in terms of the exoteric, what I imagine happening is an accumulation of information, culture, in an attempt to describe the esoteric, but, as the exoteric piles up, all that happens is the distance from the core is increased.

Okay, you can all go ahead and greentext me to death with insults now.

>>4467534
Go read Francis Yockey's Imperium when you get the chance.

>>4467591
The culture is the spirit expressing itself. It changes in the same way a human has an inner imperative to go through the stages of life (birth-growth-old age-death)

>>4467591
Sorry I don't mean to be rude. But the thing is people in every age scream that there age is so much worse and that the past is much better. Our age has its own problems granted but the living conditions have increased in general and literacy has also increased.
My friend who studies medivieal history was looking at a church chronicle stretching back 300 years in France and literally in every single decade there was someone lamenting how their age was much worse and the past was infinitely better.

>implying Indian culture didn't have its peak around 1400 AD, a couple thousand years after Buddha

Please leave, take your vague, sloppy, and dishonest Continental "thinking" with you, and let the grownups discuss actual philosophy in a scientific framework.

>>4467601
Every age has its problems. In the previous age it was people having the wrong religion, then it was science that dictated everything and people had the wrong philosophy, race or morals.

>>4467608
That is what I am trying to get at. So I think it is a fallacy to declare objectively that this age is so much worse than other ages. It is just sloppy thinking.

>>4467606
This.

>>4467115
This guy is just as spooky as Marx.

>>4467601

I know, I've heard that, although what you say about the church chronicle is the first concrete expression of that I've heard. It's interesting, and warrants thought, I just have none on that topic at the moment, and I do feel that a society can move in a dangerous direction, I mean, I don't think anyone would disagree with that, and I feel that the West is moving in that direction at the moment. Personal thoughts there, granted, but ones that I see echoed in a few places and I think are worth looking at.

>>4467598

I suppose this is expanded on in Spengler? Like I say, not read him, just passing by the thread and the ideas have caught my eye. Will read.

>>4467593

WIll read this and Evola too, although they sound extremely far right.

>>4467606
>>4467614

Telling people to leave because they think differently to you and are interested in different aspects of life? That seems very immature to me, but I'm not unfamiliar with the attitude, I've started to notice now how the left, with all of its talk of equality and democracy, are incredibly eager to drown out all opposition.

>>4467630
>I've started to notice now how the left, with all of its talk of equality and democracy, are incredibly eager to drown out all opposition.
>muh persecusion complex

You're already turning.

>>4467488
We're talking about generalities here. Just because rural areas exist doesn't mean they are the dominant way of life. In the west, the Megalopolis is the dominant way of life

These topics transcend traditional arguments between left/right. It's very contrarian and reactivist in nature. Basically, 2 edgy 4 me

>>4467630
Well the right also likes to "drown out opposition" that being said I respect the libertarians for advocating for free speech rights.

>>4467115
Reminds me of this: http://www.lexido.com/EBOOK_TEXTS/TWILIGHT_OF_THE_IDOLS_.aspx?S=3

Tradition is dead though, it can't be revived.

>>4467671
How can you say tradition is dead? What do you mean? Are you referring to traditional Western religion?

>>4467668

True, but when the left do it it seems very hypocritical, and much more sinister amongst the constant equality talks. The right have an authoritarian approach that I can respect.

I didn't mean to start a left/right thing here though. This thread was more interesting and substantial when people posted extracts, in my opinion.

>>4467606

And furthermore,
>implying there is any non-sophistic reason to believe that Indian culture is somehow incapable of peaking again

Continentals always speak as if they're elucidating some very profound truth, and yet all they do is play around with a preposterous private vocabulary which only operates in their own agenda-driven worldview. It's perfectly alright to put things in original terms and make up new vocabularies, but doing so without actually FUCKING EXPLAINING what one means is bullshit in the philosophical sense posited by Harry Frankfurt. Continental philosophy is not so different from schizophrenia, except that it has this strange innate ability to impress particularly fashionable undergrads. I repeat: please take your "profound" word-salads out of here.

>>4467630

I'm not even much of a leftist you idiot. You assume that because I disagree with your entire mission I must also get down on your level and disagree with you in a dimension you can understand and admit to disagreeing with me on, and in doing this you're sorely mistaken. I am telling you to leave, not because you have certain political views, but because you're exactly the type to do the drowning-out of discourse you accuse me of doing, with your vague sophistries and framework-specific proclamations. This has nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with affronts to the very most basic cognitive functions - your affronts.

>>4467676
But I would advocate that there can be empation of people. I think democracy can be extended to the economic sphere like in the Spanish Revolution or the Paris Commune. But I am in complete disagreement with the idea of a vanguard fostering revolution and taking power in the name of the people. But maybe we should not get into the shit flinging.

But like you I don't like the current left. Like the people who say studying gender queer theory is important and all that stuff.

>>4467676
>and much more sinister amongst the constant equality talks. The right have an authoritarian approach that I can respect.

The only thing hypocritical and sinister here is you.

>>4467690
Well the guy is just stating his opinion.

>>4467692
I have no stake in it. I'm apolitical. I'm calling what I see. Politics doesn't interest me other than the philosophy behind.

>>4467712

Are you actually me?

>>4467718
That was what I was trying to tell you all along.

>>4467731

Let's go with an easy litmus test: what's your opinion on contingency? If your answer matches my answer, I'll be convinced you're me.

Spengler is to be taken with a massive grain of sault. Right wingers jack off to him to he really is a poor mans Carl Schmitt in terms of being a theoretician of reactionary traditionalism.

The dangerous rightwinger that is a theoretician for the far-right in modern European politics searches for Schmitt for ideas.

That guy that is disenfranchised with modern society and longs for the time when tradition and hierarchy were more strict, reads Spengler as history. (big mistake)

And finally, that misunderstood teenager that listens to Burzum and neo-folk, faps to Evolas nonsense writings.

>>4467673
Yes. Perhaps religion in general in a while.

>>4467678
Who said Indian culture can't peak again? The point was that Buddhism was the "concluding thought" of Indian culture, but it doesn't mean that a new one can't be born again.

An example (albeit fictional) of this happening is the Church of the Children of Atom from Fallout 3

I think OP tackled the Core Spenglerian argument, that Culture is organic and that it begins with a deep sense of spiritualism and respect for the unknown and gradually develops into Materialism and Nihilism. Technology is not a sign of progress but actually a mask which signals decay as the people lose religion and try to live their lives seeking "fulfillment" and happy endings when in reality life is a Tragedy

>>4467781

But a newly-born culture isn't quite the same as the culture that was BEFORE that culture, huh? They're two different things, right? And besides, even if I'm wrong according to the laws of the Spenglerverse, my point is that the entire Spenglerverse is preposterous - just like all Continentaverses. If I'm wrong according to the rules made up by your Continental demigod, so be it, I am: my point is that the rules are arbitrary and driven only by agenda.

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIfnKm98q78j2ZNcfSQhhCQ

>>4467751
I take Humes sceptic stance that A->B is and has always been a fallacy. The future is fundamentally unpredictable without probability and interpretation.

>>4467792
>all dat projection

Why are you so unhappy and why do you blame society?

>>4467792
So what would the opposing argument to that be?

>>4467799

Aww you aren't really me then. I take a stance similar to Leibniz when it comes to contingency, but tempered, of course, by Kant's criticisms of rationalism, the methodological developments of Analytic philosophy, and the development of phenomenology.

>>4467800
It would simply have a different religious foundation. A culture's development as Spengler noted had less to do with race/ethnicity and more to do with geographic location. So basically what would have to happen is a new religion would have to be born and give a certain "world-feeling" that the Noble class will determine and interpret for the people

>>4467813

Sounds good. As I said though, this isn't particularly important to me.

Spengler is to be taken with a massive grain of salt. Right wingers jack off to him to whe he really is a poor mans Carl Schmitt in terms of being a theoretician of reactionary traditionalism.

The dangerous rightwinger that is a theoretician for the far-right in modern European politics searches for Schmitt for ideas.

That guy that is disenfranchised with modern society and longs for the time when tradition and hierarchy were more strict, reads Spengler as history. (big mistake)

And finally, that misunderstood teenager that listens to Burzum and neo-folk, faps to Evolas nonsense writings.


Still, I like Spengler far more than the other two, Schmitt was pseudo-Hegelian that dressed his Machiavelian politics in the monolithic foundations of Law and State. For this, Schmitt was invaluable in showing how far totalitarianism can theoreticaly go.

But Spengler really talks about characteristics of Western history and civilizations that everyone can identify and acknowledge. And despite making many historicist claims his arguments about decline and degeneration and not that far from the philosophy of history of Hegel or Nietzsche.

March 17, 1904
At last! My expedition and I arrived at the site of disembark in good condition. Our journey from Santa Eulària des Riu (a small town, and quite a change from Birmingham!) went very smoothly. We left port with a crew of Moors and plenty of provisions, and I am glad to say that we made excellent time to Alexandria. It is good to be back within the capable grip of the Empire, I will say. We depart for the supposed location of the ruins tomorrow. Despite our acting on mere rumours, I have confidence that this journey will bear fruit. I can feel it!
March 18, 1904
Today, we departed. Several Egyptians led us to roughly dozen camels, and affirmed my conviction that the ruins did, indeed, exist. They call it cursed ~ these locals are charming ~ but have agreed to lead us there. Our sketch artist, a mister Carlson, has been drawing the dunes. I will say, he is quite talented. Hopefully, we will find some artefacts that suit him.

A little rough, haven't looked at it in a little while but it's the only thing I have on hand.

>>4467811
Damn. Except for Kant it's not even that close.

>>4467805
I'm not unhappy, I'm a brave pessimist because I realize the reality of life. Why are you a Cowardly Optimist?

Life is a struggle between plants, animals, and humans. All living things try to force their Will on the Earth, and Heirarchy is the natural form of mankind. I don't blame society for anything, I just point out the cowardly optimism that has become normalized.

>>4467808
Not sure, the counter argument would be that history is actually linear and we go from fire, to horse, to engine, to spaceship, and utopia happy ending.

>>4467822
i don't read Spengler AS history, but I have to say he presents us with a delightfully fresh and out-of-the-box way of viewing history. I mean the idea of history being Copernican is really interesting to think about, true or not. It's completely different from how history is traditionally thought of and taught

>>4467831
Schopenhaur pls go

So what do you guys think about Spengler's views on Progress?

Liberals think that multiculturalism, socialism, equality, welfare, affirmative action, etc. are steps towards "progress". But Spengler says Progress is actually decay, because it is essentially the killing of the Aristocratic class (the people Toynbee was talking about) via class/race warfare.

>>4467853
Killing the aristocratic class off is a debatable prospect with two sides seeing it in different ways. It is literally the goal of Marxist socialism, and is the bane of capitalism.

Spengler saw history as Mathematics, which is one of the most brilliant things I've ever read about. The whole first part of The Decline just talks about Math. It's insane

>>4467831
>Why are you a Cowardly Optimist?

I'm not, I'm a realist, I believe in statements that corresponds with actual observable reality.

Life is a struggle between plants, animals, and humans. All living things try to force their Will on the Earth, and Heirarchy is the natural form of mankind.

Appeal to nature, also a very one eyed interpretation of nature, would you then argue that an anthill is one organism or a bee hive? Or the bee and the flower? There's 1000000000 examples of cooperation and peaceful coexistence of mutual benefit in nature, even among humans. Do you see tigers walk around killing everything they see or dominating anything? In herds of deer stags don't dominate, studies of eye movement suggest they are democratic like swarms of birds.

Humans are more akin to living swarms than pyramids of dead stone. That is just as true as your statement.

I don't blame society for anything, I just point out the cowardly optimism that has become normalized.

No you are making a case for outdated ignorance to fit a stupid agenda and utopian fantasy of yours.

>>4467822
Hmm Hegel had a fundamentally different view of history than Spengler. He believed in progress and Frederic Nietzsche was also a sort of an optimist. After the death of god he said that future people could remake culture and create a higher culture. He had great hope. Although I would say all these figures have interesting views regarding history.

>>4467115
> implying society wasn't corrupt and degenerate before

>>4467875
>But muh secret golden age. And the past is always better.

>>4467872
The idea of "Natural Equality" is one of the most pernicious delusions that has ever afflicted mankind. It is a figment of the human imagination. Nature knows no equality. The most cursory examination of natural phenomena reveals the presence of a Law of Inequality as universal and inflexible as the Law of Gravitation.
The evolution of life is the most striking instance of this fundamental truth. Evolution is a process of differentiation --of increasing differentiation -- from the simple one-celled bit of protoplasm to the infinitely differentiated, complex life forms of the present day.
And the evolutionary process is not merely quantitative; it is qualitative as well. These successive differentiations imply increasingly inequalities. Nobody but a madman could seriously contend that the microscopic speck of protoplasmic jelly floating in the tepid waters of the Palaqeozoic Sea was "equal" to a human being. But this is only the beginning of the story. Not only are the various life types profoundly unequal in qualities and capacities; the individual members of each type are similarly differentiated among themselves. No two individuals are ever precisely alike. We have already seen how greatly this dual process of differentiation both of type and individual has been affected the human species,
and how basic a factor it has been in human progress. Furthermore, individual inequalities steadily increase as we ascend the biological scale. The amoeba differs very little from his fellows; the dog much more so; man most of all. And inequalities between men likewise become ever more pronounced. The innate differences between members of a low-grade savage tribe are as nothing compared with the abyss sundering the idiot and the
genius who coexist in a high-grade civilization.
Thus, we see that evolution means a process of ever-growing inequality. There is, in fact, no such word as "equality" in nature's lexicon. With an increasingly uneven hand she distributes health, beauty, vigor, intelligence, genius -- all the qualities which confer on their possessors superiority over their fellows.
Now, in the face of all this, how has the delusion of "natural equality" obtained -- and retained -- so stubborn a hold on mankind? As to both its antiquity and persistency there can be no shadow of doubt. The slogan of "equality" was raised far back in the remote past, and, instead of lessening, was never more loudly trumpeted than to-day. It is a curious fact that just when the advance of knowledge and the increasing complexity of civilization have enhanced individual differences and rendered superior capacities supremely important, the cry for equality should have become fiercer than ever, should have been embodied in all sorts of levelling doctrines, and should have been actually attempted in Bolshevik Russia with the most fanactical fury and the most appalling results.

>>4467886
Here is obviously something requiring careful analysis. As a matter of fact, the passion for "natural" equality seems to spring primarily from certain impulses of the ego, the self, particularly from the impulses of self-preservation and self-esteem. Every individual is inevitably the centre of his world, and instinctively tends to regard his own existence and well-being as matters of supreme importance. This instinctive egoism is, of course, modified by experience, observation, and reflection, and may be so overlaid that it becomes scarcely recognizable even by the individual himself. Nevertheless,
it remains, and subtly colors every thought and attitude. In his heart of hearts, each individual feels that he is really a person of importance. No matter how low may be his capacities, no matter how egregious his failures, no matter how unfavorable the judgement of his fellows; still his inborn instincts of self-preservation and self-love whisper that he should survive and prosper, that "things are not right," and that if the world were properly ordered he would be much better placed.
Fear and wounded vanity thus inspire the individual to resent unfavorable status, and this resentment tends to take the form of protest against "injustice." Injustice of what? Of "fate," "nature," "circumstances," perhaps; yet, more often, injustice of persons -- individually or collectively (i.e., "society"). But (argues the discontented ego), since all this is unjust, those better placed persons have no "right" to succeed where he fails.
Though more fortunate, they are not really his superiors. He is "as good as they are." Hence, either he should be up with them -- or they should be down with him.
"We are all men. We are all equal!"

>>4467831
>Life is a struggle between plants, animals, and humans. All living things try to force their Will on the Earth, and Heirarchy is the natural form of mankind.
And realising this you call yourself a pessimist. So you consider the state of things a bad thing instead of embracing life as it is. You still measure life against some hypothetical arbitrary ideal and consider life bad in comparison. Which makes you an otherworldly bitchmade nigga who can't into amor fati really. Nothing brave about it.

Life is a struggle involving plants, animals, and humans. It is a struggle between individuals, social classes, peoples, and nations, and it can take the form of economic, social, political, and military competition. It is a struggle for the power to make one's will prevail, to exploit one's advantage, or to advance one's opinion of what is just or expedient. When other means fail, recourse will be taken time and again to the ultimate means: violence. An individual who uses violence can be branded a criminal, a class can be called revolutionary or traitorous, a people bloodthirsty. But that does not alter the facts. Modern world-communism calls its wars "uprisings," imperialist nations describe theirs as "pacification of foreign peoples." And if the world existed as a unified state, wars would likewise be referred to as "uprisings." The distinctions here are purely verbal.

Talk of world peace is heard today only among the white peoples, and not among the much more numerous colored races. This is a perilous state of affairs. When individual thinkers and idealists talk of peace, as they have done since time immemorial, the effect is always negligible. But when whole peoples become pacifistic it is a symptom of senility. Strong and unspent races are not pacifistic. To adopt such a position is to abandon the future, for the pacifist ideal is a static, terminal condition that is contrary to the basic facts of existence.

As long as man continues to evolve there will be wars. Should the white peoples ever become so tired of war that their governments can no longer incite them to wage it, the earth will inevitably fall a victim to the colored men, just as the Roman Empire succumbed to the Teutons. Pacifism means yielding power to the inveterate nonpacifists. Among the latter there will always be white men — adventurers, conquerors, leader-types — whose following increases with every success. If a revolt against the whites were to occur today in Asia, countless whites would join the rebels simply because they are tired of peaceful living.

Pacifism will remain an ideal, war a fact. If the white races are resolved never to wage war again, the colored will act differently and be rulers of the world.
~Oswald Spengler Selected Essays [paraphrased]

>>4467886
>unscientiffic subjective value judgements of the "intensions" of evolution

GTFO.

This shit is getting too Continental for me. One last reminder that you guys are fashionable schizophrenics.

>>4467872
The argument that life is a struggle is actually actually based off >>4467844 pic related

>>4467824
oh fuck, wrong thread

>>4467901
Life is Tragedy. You live, you try to do things to lessen suffering, and you ultimately die. Tell me, why is man the only creature in the world that asks "why do I exist"?

>>4467902
But I agree with this

I think Schopenhaur Neitschze and Spengler seem to follow the same line of thought, but split in their own directions. They all share a common foundation so it seems

>>4467921
Seems like a good deal to me, death persuader. Not that it isn't silly to claim that all life inherently acts according to negative hedonism.

>>4467895
Hit and miss, this is obviously bullshit, this is just what spoiled immature psychophants tell themselves in their own self pity. This is a complete representation of what 'equality' means its nothing but a strawman attacking an impossible position.

>>4467921
Life is not tragedy or anything like that. You can imbue meaning and purpose into life and derive quite a lot of fun from life. Remember existence precedes essence.

>>4467936
Yes, life is a drama full of tragedy. Every life, idea, culture, civilization, and discovery eventually succumbs to the relentless march of time.

Only by coming to terms with our mortality can we truly begin to appreciate the brevity of our lives. Life is short, all the more reason to live life Passionately! I believe that our task is to make our lives as meaningful as possible, to leave something behind, to make something of ourselves, to live in a way that we can be proud of ourselves.

The creeping onset of deafness pushed Beethoven to work even harder in life to express himself musically before he died. It is through a feeling of a limited time, that men are inspired to express themselves as fully as possible.

>>4467915
So it's based on another armchair sophist? So it's lie based on conjecture based on guess based on someone thought it would be nice if, right.

>>4467959
Not him, but you know I never understand why ol' Schop gets so much hate from people. "HURR ARMCHAIR", "HURR FAGGOT BUDDHIST". Maybe try countering some of his arguments?

>tfw no job

I just want a job

>>4467965
>Maybe try countering some of his arguments?

I just did I called their foundation invalid.

>>4467953
Amen to that

I think the essential difference between the Traditional man and the Modern man is the view of death.

Traditional man does not fear death, because he is a strong believer in his religion and believes he will enter Utopia upon death.

The modern man does fear death, he see's the progression of time as a step-by-step process towards a final Heaven on Earth, where there is no disease or death. Hence why cultures which have grown senile are so obsessed with science and technology- because they are cowards who can not face the true nature of life- tragedy.

>>4467953
I don't see why you'd have to call yourself a pessimist with those views.

>>4467970
Why would you want that?

>>4467983
You are a coward who don't dare to fight death, you just do the basest of all defence mechanisms 'playing dead'. Stupid fatalist.

>>4467983
Easy for you to speak. The death of god was inevitable and its is natural us. Me and you we are human beings.
But capitalism will bring deliverance for the future.Assuming it does not destroy the earth. But I think socialism can be possible with capitalism bringing up the technology to such a level where scarcity can be chewed away. There is no reason to be blindly cynical about the future.

>>4467983
So the former has imaginary solutions while the latter attempts to find actual ones. Which makes the latter not more cowardly, just less stupid.

>>4467993
I consider anyone to harbor utopian/pacifist ideals to be a cowardly optimist, because he wants life to end in a happy ending, when that is contrary to the basic facts of existence. A brave pessimist is someone who knows that Utopian ideals are perfectly stagnant and will never come true, thus we must face life for what it is.

>>4468006
No reason not to fight for the future. The Spanish Anarchists and the Communards created a better world for themselves. That being said it did end with a lot of them getting their brains splattered against walls.

>>4467999
You want to "fight death" because you fear it. You are an hopeless optimist, you can not handle the tragic nature of life, which is that it is short.

>>4468001
Never said the death of god was inevitable.
Again, you are only confirming what i just said. You think Capitalism/Science/Socialism will save mankind, when in fact, it will not. THERE IS NOTHING THAT WILL USHER A UTOPIA FOR MAN AND THIS WORLD.

UTOPIAN IDEALS ARE PERFECT AND STATIC.

Life is change. History does not ever end. When an entire society chases after utopian fantasies, it is a sign of old age. Every civilization, no matter how formerly great has ended. Fairy tales of heaven on earth through tolerance and understanding are foolish dreams. A people must INSIST on their own existence, because no one else will.

>>4468009
It is better to live on your feet than die on your knees.

>>4468006
>Utopian ideals are perfectly stagnant

Only to the retard without imagination.

>>4468006
An pessimists still wants life to have a happy ending, he just thinks it impossible. He has the same shitty ideals as the optimist, he just doesn't believe they can be realised. By claiming to be a pessimist you judge life negatively. To judge life negatively it must be negative as opposed to something better. This something better must be some hypothetical ideal.

To be a pessimist is to be an idealist without hope, it's to cling to impotent beliefs. If you would abandon these otherworldly ideals, you could approach life purely for what it is, not in comparison with something fictional. When the very notion of utopia is ditched, you stop being a pessimist because you have no illusions in relation to which life itself can be judged negatively. Pessimism and optimism both severely lack realism and are both different forms of cowardice. Not to mention idiotic, since you really have nothing to judge life by. You know nothing else. Pessimists are like fish talking shit about water.

The role and interpretation of Christianity has changed in the Western World over the last 1000 years. At one time, the Catholic church, under Pope Innocent III, was nearly more powerful than the king himself, with the reformation this role in society changed as there was no longer an intermediary between God and man. The state lost its legitimacy paving the way for democracy and decay in western civilization. Western man's desire for redemption now manifests itself with government theory.

>>4468021
Only to the Pessmist, like I said.

But keep chasing your fantasies, and I wish you good luck with that

>>4468014
>You want to "fight death" because you fear it. You are an hopeless optimist, you can not handle the tragic nature of life, which is that it is short.

I want to embrace dead head on. I don't give a shit about your prescription. You are afraid of life. Probably because you never achieved anything.

>>4468028
How am I afraid of life, when I just gave you several reasons for why you should LIVE IT and embrace its brevity, rather than chase foolish dreams?

>>4468014
Listen I don't think it will be a perfect world. But history does change and progress is possible. There is regression. But look how much it has progressed it not static. The world is much better than was in the past.
It is remarkable that we are even able to have a conversation right now by using this technology capitalism has developed for us. Anyway why can't socialism be achieved in the future. Technology and man are not fixed and can progress. Technology is always upgrading technology. Hell in the future we could genetically engineer a new race.

>>4468036
Chasing dreams is part of life, idiot your pessimism is also a dream, go figure.

>>4468039
Because technological development and cultural development are inversely related. As the technology grows, the culture dies more. This is the basic idea Spengler was trying to get across.

By the way, the specific reason for why technology and science and stuff won't save mankind is because the West is on a path towards Caesarism. It's a long but fixed march which you can either choose not to participate in, but it will happen nonetheless. Caesarism will stunt any hope of Utopia, see Julius Caesar, or ChinShurHuangdi, or the Umayad Caliphate

>>4468049
Okay I need some proof for that claim.

>my spooks are better than your spooks

>>4468040
wat

>>4468054
see
>>4467239
and also read that book it's quite good

Caesarism is a form of political rule that emulates the rule of Roman dictator Julius Caesar over the Roman Republic, in that it is led by a charismatic strongman whose rule is based upon a cult of personality, whose rationale is the need to rule by force, establishing a violent social order, and being a regime involving prominence of the military in the government.


In Democracy in America, Tocqueville suggested that democracy was capable of breeding its own form of despotism, albeit one without the edges of Jacobin or Bonapartist dictatorship with which Europeans were all too familiar. The book spoke of "an immense protective power" which took all responsibility for everyone's happiness-just so long as this power remained "sole agent and judge of it." This power, Tocqueville wrote, would "resemble parental authority" but would try to keep people "in perpetual childhood" by relieving people "from all the trouble of thinking and all the cares of living."
~Alexis de Tocqueville

>>4468049
Its habbegning
> technology and science and stuff won't save mankind is because the West is on a path towards Caesarism.
Why is Caesarism developing. That seems like a bunch of conjecture and spooky bullshit. Why would the west follow this course.

>>4468057
You are chasing a dream yourself. If optimism is a dream, pessimism must also be, and realism is the balance.

>>4468063
That is the way it has always been. Personality cults are not a recent trend. Also citing a bunch of examples from the past is not evidence. Post evidence that your so called Caerism is occurring. It just seems like spooky nonsense to me.

>>4468063
2spooky4me

Do you actually tell your friends this stuff?

>>4468077
But muh happening. The past was so less despotic. People are such sheeple obeying their goverments that is why I like fascism.

>>4468065
Because Democracy is wholly unworkable in the world of the future.

There are 2 centrifugal forces pulling liberalism apart. The first is a demographic one. The white population in europe has roughly stabilized or has gone negative, and meanwhile the foreign population is growing at an exponential rate. Foreignors have very different views on how government should be run, and this will express itself in elections. As these populations grow, democracy will become increasingly unworkable because of the two very different ways of life clashing.

The second force which will destroy liberalism from within has to do with Energy. In the industrial world, economic growth is entirely dependant on energy growth. Without energy there is no economic growth. We are reaching a point where oil is becoming increasingly rare, and there will be serious problems in the next 5 to 10 years. Government's legitimacy will undermined, bankers, immigrants, everyone will be blamed. Basically, the Happening will Happen. See the graphs

In response to the Chaos, a Strongman with a cult of personality will arise like every other time in history, and he will consolidate power through sheer force of Will. "Roman Hardness", because the only alternative is chaos.

>>4468093
>I can predict the future

Yeah, no.

>>4467115
>Speng

Nope.image

>>4468093
I agree there is a crisis of energy. But I predict two things. There will be increased government regulation. The governments do follow a preservation principle. Or capitalism will produce another alternative energy. There is no reason why energy problems cannot be fixed by a new source. Problems regarding foreign hordes have been a concern since time long forgotten. History is not fixed and they will be assimilated eventually. It would be denial of history to say otherwise.

>>4468093
>Because Democracy is wholly unworkable in the world of the fu
So you base all this on 1. darkies don't do democracy. 2. Oil is running out.

> the world of the fu
>fu

Closing thread up.

>>4468093
>See the graphs.
Post your information.

>>4468114
>>4468101
We are living in a mighty age, corresponding from Cannae to Actium.

Caesarism the private politics of men determined to rule at any cost. It follows several stages historically. Up to you to decide if these things are happening.

1. Bread and circuses
The parasitic theft from the productive parts of society to pacify the urban masses with gifts and entertainment.

2.Ressentiment
Politicians exploiting peoples jealousy by inciting class warfare. Self appointed demagogues use the masses to gain power, always looking for another "victim" group to add to their voter base (Obama?)

3. Phillistine world improvers
This is the levelling of society, suffocating creativity and individualism through myriad rules laws and regulations leading to a childlike nation beholden to the state

4. War of all against all
As the system matures, class warfare becomes intense and makes the democratic process unworkable.
Short term, ad-hoc solutions are used to keep the system from collapsing, the Executive becomes increasingly powerful because Congress can't agree on anything.

ANY OF THIS SOUND FAMILIAR?

Elections increasingly focus on the personalities of politicians instead of party platform, paving the way for future strong men.

The path to Caesarism is a gradual century-long process, every crisis brings it one step closer.

5. Imperial fervor and a flight towards Caesarism
As democracy expands it becomes increasingly unable to manage its problems; this leads to short terms solutions to keep the system from collapsing. Crisis becomes endemic. So long as WEstern Civilization exists, the tendency will towards increasing the concentration of power in the hands of one man.

6. Constitution
People lose respect for the institutions of the state as it becomes ineffectual

The final stage is when armies shift their allegiance from the idea of the state to Private individuals.This marks the imperial age.

>>4468143

This has occurred in every single age. Politicians always exploit people.
There is no reason say it is increasing in this age. You are just repeating what people have always said.

>>4468118
100 hours in mspaint

based crudely on recent population statistics and basic peak oil theory

>>4468166
Please point me to the time where there was endless regulations, shitload of welfare, politicians inciting class warfare, and armies which are dedicated to PEOPLE rather than nations?

>>4468177
Lol.

>>4467115
asap schrader.jpg

>apres moi le epic deluge society is going downs kids these days what is this music is this even music lol silly clothes the present sucks i wish i was at home straddling my top hat
— a certain type of cunt, every era of human existence

>>4468177
Can't use latex and gnuplot.

Closing up thread.

>>4468183
Well there is a problem of overregulation but some regulation has helped immensely. Welfare is another benefit it is better than people starving on the streets edge lord. Politicians always star shit. That has always occurred.

What do you mean armies dedicated to people? They are usually used by imperialists or not used at all. Why would I die for my nation over some abreast notion such as duty. Constant warfare between nations was a tragedy that killed hundreds. This peace is immensely opreferable.

>>4468189
People always say this to discredit Spengler and then quote Plato, but Spengler never said any of those things

>>4468199
Detective Hank isn't the only one mentioned in this thread though, I was referring to reactionaries in general.

>>4468196
>Well there is a problem of overregulation but some regulation has helped immensely. Welfare is another benefit it is better than people starving on the streets edge lord.

So you agree that we have a childlike nation which is completely dependant and beholden to the state.

>What do you mean armies dedicated to people?

I mean mercenary armies. Think Alexander the Great or Chi huang Di. Both had their own personal armies.

In the West we will see the rise of mercenary armies once the Happening happens

>>4468183
End of the Roman Republic certainly has it (if you discount the regulation bit which doesn't make much sense in that specific historical context) which makes sense given that's what the person was originally drawing on who made the point. The 1930s, definitely. Arguably Revolutionary/Napoleonic France. Certainly plenty of periods of Renaissance Italy could be described in that way, and probably plenty of late medieval / early modern situations as well. It's hardly a unique combination of things.

It's true that it rarely bodes well for the idea of a functioning state with liberal norms of good governance, but, you know, that's hardly the normative state of mankind.

>>4468213
>End of the Roman Republic certainly has it

THATS MY POINT. It was the "end" for a reason! Where do you think I'm getting this from?

>>4468213
I disagree with 1930s America, Napoleonic France and Renaissance Italy certainly did not have any comparable system of Bread and Circus, Resentment, regulation, class warfare brought on BY politicians (not urbanites). Today we have all those things ten fold

>>4468184
>>4468200
So you don't think the foreign population will outgrow the white population, and you also don't think peak oil will happen?

>>4468143
Thanks Obama!

>>4468216
Well it's hard to keep track of who is who and who's making what point with this sort of thing.

But the point is, that's an incredibly facile analysis. Things are so much more complex than that; they don't necessarily recur. You can't just point to a couple surface similarities and blindly assert from this that the two situations are identical. The times have changed immensely since then, and even if they hadn't, both are unique, complicated, contingent historical moments. You can't just assume this shit. I'm not saying it's impossible; it often seems likely to me. But your standard of argumentation is not strong enough. History does not work in cycles, nothing is given, so you can't just assert that the situation is repeating itself. You need to analyze that shit.

And then the other point is that, yeah, this shit has also happened at other times without being the harbinger of the end of civilization or of the inevitability of Caesarism. Not to mention that your whole argument relies on the existence of private armies which presently don't exist - this is, you have to admit, a bit of a weakness in your argument.

This is all wrong. The real cause of the Decline of the West is Jews and Cultural Marxism

>>4468248
I can't tell if you are being facetious or not.

>>4468246
>History does not work in cycles

But the whole point of this thread was to demonstrate that it DOES. And every history teacher will tell you that you can predict the future by looking at the past.

>Not to mention that your whole argument relies on the existence of private armies which presently don't exist

Of course they don't exist, we are not in the Imperial stage yet. I already said, there has to be some sort of Happening first. As long as western civilization continues to exist power will concentrate into the hands of less and less people, until it finally comes down to One man. This is something we can clearly see as well as our gradual abandonment of traditional government institutions, see pic

>>4468232
>I disagree with 1930s America, Napoleonic France and Renaissance Italy certainly did not have any comparable system of Bread and Circus, Resentment, regulation, class warfare brought on BY politicians (not urbanites). Today we have all those things ten fold

I didn't say 1930s America, I said the 1930s.

And if you don't think that revolutionary and Napoleonic France had class warfare or resentment, you're mad. They went and they executed all the nobles. You really think there's more class warfare now than there was then? Talk to me when all the bankers are hanging from lamp-posts. I'm sure the Revolt of the Ciompi was unrelated to class warfare and resentment as well. I have no idea what your distinction is meant to indicate between class warfare brought on "by politicians" rather than by "urbanites" but come on. And both of these economic systems had enormous amounts of regulation, albeit they were fundamentally different economic systems from ours so it looks different. The idea that we have 10x as much resentment and class warfare and regulation simply does not hold.

>>4468253
I'm dead serious. The West would still have culture had the revolutions of the 1960s not happened. It all comes down to the Jews and they even published it all

>>4468267
I need some evidence. Are you sure you are not straw manning it?

>implying psuedoscientific 'witchcraft' didnt exist before religion
Its a back and forth cycle to the beginning of mans sentience til he dies out as a species. Humanity will swing back to a formal way of living with many rules and rituals eventually - although it probably wont be called religion just as science and philosophy replaced sorcery and alchemy.

>>4468266
In my original post >>4468143 I outlined the several characteristics that one can look at to predict Caesarism. Today, we have all of those things. In Napoleonic France we did not have all of them, sure there was class warfare, but where was the Panem et Circuses? The childlike nation dependant on the state? Increase in executive powers? Mercenary armies? You only pointed out 2 or three things that mightve happened, but today we are experienceing every single one of them on a grand scale

>>4468263
I don't think that's been demonstrated at all. I think it's been asserted. I think that you can analyze the present and you can try to foresee the future by looking at the past, but you can't simply deduce the future from the past. I think nothing is inevitable; it could always have been otherwise.

>Of course they don't exist, we are not in the Imperial stage yet. I already said, there has to be some sort of Happening first. As long as western civilization continues to exist power will concentrate into the hands of less and less people, until it finally comes down to One man. This is something we can clearly see as well as our gradual abandonment of traditional government institutions, see pic

My point is that it's hard to argue that our present situation is exactly like that of the Roman Republic, just look at these 4 criteria, when one of those criteria doesn't presently exist. You can't treat something both as your evidence for it being like the Roman Republic, and as a conclusion drawn from it being like the Roman Republic.

>>4468276
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism

They were literally all Jews

>>4468290
I'm not saying we are going EXACTLY like Rome, but surely we can see what happened in Rome and find parallels and similarities which we can FOR THE FUCK OF IT make predictions. Of course its all conjecture and speculation, I'm just reading into this for the entertainment value. In my opinion a lot of Spenglers predictions have come true.

>>4468177
...These graphs are unbelievably shitty. Like, presentation quality aside, I mean.

Semantic content of the first graph: the population growth of "whites" is decreasing over time, while the population growth of "foreigners" is increasing over time, both at a constant rate (I think?). When the population of "foreigners" surpasses that of "whites," democracy becomes unworkable, and the population growth of whites becomes negative.

Semantic content of the second (which doesn't even have a label on its y-axis): Same thing, except "whites" become "energy consumption," "foreigners" become "energy production," and democracy doesn't become unworkable.

This is the fucking shittiest thing I've ever seen.

>>4468293
Alright that is not proof of a jewish conspiracy. Furthermore the Frankfurt school is irrelevant politicians could care less about it. You are taking a knee jerk reaction to this topic. I need concrete evidence of this jewish plot. How excatly has the Frankfurt school fundamentally ruined Western Civilization?

>>4468289
The French Revolution and the subsequent Napoleonic regime massively centralized the state (or, arguably, continued the existing process of centralization). It created a huge welfare scheme (the amelioration of poverty having been one of the central goals of the Revolution), and it obviously had private armies, that being the primary mechanism by which Napoleon came to power. Under your own definition, it's impossible to call Napoleon's government anything other than a regime of Caesarism. And, of course it only fell with the aid of outside circumstances, but nevertheless the fact is that within two generations France had established a strong republic.

How was the establishment of USSR not an example of Caesarism under Lenin and Stalin? Certainly I think that if you're going to deny that one, your words have no meaning - in many ways the regime of Stalin was far worse than any Caesarism. Yet within a decade of the death of Stalin, the conditions had normalized, and within a generation, the regime had peacefully fallen, and a democracy been created - one which immediately got fucked over by external enemies, it's true, but that's hardly Stalin's fault.

Things are always more complicated and less doomed than you seem to think. As long as people keep being born, new people who can do and create new things, change is always possible. Peak oil, that's a different story. But this stuff is by no means a foregone conclusion.

>>4468305
They are two separate graphs. one shows how rising foreign populations make democratic institutions hard to work with. The other shows how an energy crisis will happen. dont mix them up

>>4468317
I didn't. I gave separate summaries of both. I just used the "/"s in my last sentence because what I was saying applied to both graphs.

>>4468303
What's the point of predicting just for the fuck of it?

We can make conjectures, sure, but if we want them to be anything other than us just fucking around, if we want them to have any relation to reality, it behooves us to look deeper than surface similarities.

>>4468293
Why would feminism be bad? Women should have equal rights.

>>4468308
>the Frankfurt school is irrelevant
This. If you're going to pin the blame on someone, choose someone who actually mattered, not a bunch of people writing gigantic books about film and urban theory that no one ever reads. The Frankfurt school has had about as much practical impact as Zizek.

>>4468316
Napoleon was the first step towards Caesarism, but not quite yet. It's hard for me to explain this, so please take a look at this because this is what I've been referring to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spengler%27s_civilization_model#Political_epochs (look at the Western section). Napoleon was the domination of money over politics, but not quite Caesarism.

>USSR
It can't be Caesarism because it occurred in Russia. Russia was still culturally infantile, and was only subverted by Marxism due to external forces. Caesarism can not happen until the "Winter" stage of the civilization. Communist Russia was the result of a Metamorphosis

>>4468263
>And every history teacher will tell you that you can predict the future by looking at the past.
And every Ferrari dealer will tell you that you gotta go fast.

Not to mention that nearly all predictions of the future turn out to be wrong, because, eh, life is complex and eh, there are all kinds of factors, you know, differences, unpredictibilities that can't be accounted for.

>>4468317
> one shows how rising foreign populations make democratic institutions hard to work with
No. No, it doesn't. The entire semantic content of that graph is what I said in >>4468305 . If I accepted every piece of that information as true, I would still only have been informed that when the foreign population surpasses the white population (or, as an alternative interpretation of this terrible graph, when the white population begins to decrease), democracy becomes unworkable. I would still not have been informed as to "how rising foreign populations make democratic institutions hard to work with."

>>4468308
>the Frankfurt school is irrelevant

Then why is it taught in the liberal arts of basically every University in the west?

>>4467115
tradition comes from an earlier cuture with moral standards and an earlier priesthood... what the fuck this guy want to say?. if you go deep enough in the tradition you find the true of everything

buttercups pls take the /pol/ away

>>4468348
You're arguing against facts on the basis of abstract theories. That's not generally a position that I have a lot of sympathy for. "This isn't Caesarism because it doesn't fit the schema for the time when Caesarism should develop" - well, I think that's more a problem for the schema than for Napoleon. And this Russia thing, you know - aren't you doing the same thing as Marxists who say that the only reason the USSR failed is because it began when capitalism had not yet advanced to a sufficient stage for the dictatorship of the proletariat to be created? Put another way, isn't it just a different side of the coin? It's still a state where this thing happens. And I think all of this goes to the point that this is much more complex than you or Spengler are willing to admit.

>>4468359
Jeff Goldblum for President

>>4468335
Because traditionally Men gave women protection from being raped and pillaged from other men in exchange for having kids and raising them. They would stay at home and be protected while the man would go out and earn a living. BAM Feminism happens and now Men and Women have to compete for jobs, women have to balance raising kids and having careers, and suddenly everyone is more poor and the family unit is destroyed thanks to divorces and sexual liberation and whatnot. Freedom without responsibility as they say.

>>4468364
BECAUSE THE JOOZ PLANNED IT ALL OUT.
It was taught briefly in my history class really we went over Classical Liberalism more in my class. You are just nervous about liberalism in society and you look to blame a single movement and the jews for societies ailments.

>>4468373
Pretty much. It is blind worship of the past for the past's sake.

>>4468376
Actually, it wasn't the Jews, it was Bolshevik Russian Communists.

See Yuri Bezmenov
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gnpCqsXE8g

>>4468364
So is fucking Bakunin. When was the last time he was relevant to politico-cultural discourse?
Academia=/=Mainstream culture.

>>4468385
Nope, it is respect for Heirarchy and the unknown. Maximum fertility, the aristocratic class were the leaders. Some people prefer this way of life

>>4468381
Alright i concede there are some problems with it. But women are as smart as men. They are competent in their careers. My former boss never rested from work. Many women will rase kids granted but they should have the option to have their own life independent of men. Intellectualism should be encouraged. I don't want my wife to be a dumb cow who can't hold a discussion. You are just regurgitating age old fears.

>>4468389
>Cultural marxism is not mainstream

TOP

LEL

KEK

Are you serious? Shit's all over the media. Multiculti, feminist, anti-racism, sex liberation ALL STEMS FROM CRITICAL THEORY WHICH WAS CREATED BY JEWS. Don't believe me? Look at the founders

>>4468381
If you're going to capitalize gendered words for no apparent reason, at least be consistent with it. Also, you missed the chance to sneak "Women and Men" in there.

>>4468389
We were taught about Hobbes. Does that mean the absolutist conspiracy is ongoing.

>>4468394
No feminism != dumb women

See Victorian England

>>4468401
Look I reject the more militant forms. Like all men are evil and I think the concept of a rape culture is a bunch of bs. But women should have the same opportunities.

>>4468381
>>4468394
The problem, surely, isn't feminism. It's a social climate which demands that everyone has to work a career job to be fulfilled. It's an economic climate that has held down wages so that you can't raise a family on one person's wage, that's used the introduction of women to the workplace to hold down real wages. It's the deeply consumerist ethos of our society. It's the whole economic and political and spiritual system that we live in. It has nothing, fundamentally, to do with feminism.

I agree that it's much better if one parent can stay at home and the other can go out and work and provide for them. But I don't see any reason to mandate which parent does what in any individual relationship. Let people work it out themselves.

>>4468380
Caesarism is a rule that emulates Julius Caesar, who came about at towards the "Winter" stage of the Apollonian culture. Since we are using Spengler's definition, we should use those standards to call someone a Caesar, no?

>>4468308
>How excatly has the Frankfurt school fundamentally ruined Western Civilization?
it ruined videogames they used to be for real gamers now they're just for girls and casuals

>>4468364
concepts like diversity and multiculturalism aren't unique to the Frankfurt school and if you taught most of the people in that infographic in basically any University in the west you'd be fired for being too boring

>>4468407
This.

>>4468409
If you can have someone who fits all the criteria of a Caesar, but who can't be called one because he doesn't fit in at the right historical moment of Spengler's cycle, I'd say that's a problem for Spengler's definitions. I see no reason to use his standards if they're patently wrong.

>>4468407
I agree that Feminism was actually society's solution to increasing Consumerism by getting women into the labor force and into the marketplace. BUT, is it a coincidence that Feminist theory was almost entirely created by Jews? Jews already owned many aspects of our consumerist society (media, banking) so the argument still stands. Jews are responsible for the decline

>>4468419
You really this shit is planned out. Isn't more likely that you are just finding a problem with consumerism and taking it out on the jews.

I think we can agree that Spengler is more meta oriented and is only relevant within a metaphysical context

>>4468419
Wow the Jews serve the same purpose Capital serves for stupid communists for stupid neo-nazis.

>>4467940
I agree, our sense of equality( to my understanding) came about when we realized that we are all born more or less "equal" in our capacities to learn. take for example those child-geniuses who plateau at 16 or even better the ones who end up as complete shit-heads who work at mcdolands.

This is why we have a thing called Equal Opportunity.

>>4468425
So it's all a coincidence. Ok

Aaaand /pol/ ruined the thread. This is why we can't have nice things.

>>4468432

>>4468396
Have you read anything from the Frankfurt group? Like, actually read it?
Half their shit is about like aesthetics and film, and most of it is the type of stuff that no one actually reads except for PhDs who would never so much as leave their study to go to an activist rally. Like, the most influential one is Habermas, and he's not Jewish and a bit out of step with the rest, anyways.

If you want to blame someone for multiculturalist theory and shit, look to Lukacs or the French theorists. This is like blaming Heidegger for the state of modern society - no one gives a fuck about him. Hell, if you're going to be critiquing random people based on tenuous connections, then there's always Kant. The Frankfurt School loved him. Obviously, this means it's all his fault, the Germans are actually evil, and we should all be Berkelean idealists.

>>4468442
i'll never understand their profound devotion to spamming infographics about jews

>>4468443
>implying there isn't a Zio-Illuminati-Globalist-Rothschild-Kleptocracy hell bent on enslaving the world

>>4468432
Where are the citations for the graph's evidence?

>>4468449
1 ZOG ZOG ZOG ZOG ZOG ZOG ZOG ZOG

>>4468447

>>4468374
I watched Dancer in the Dark on Sunday... Much more coherent than I expected it to be, but still weird and fucked up for sure. I wasn't expecting it to be so political, either. Why was Bjork in the movie? Was I really supposed to think she was Czech? Why couldn't they have just said she was from "Russia" or something; that might've been believable. Although I guess her accent would still have been wrong.

I'm sure old Lars thinks he's clever for casting her so strangely.

>>4468443
Hell some of these guya are not even jewish.

>>4468263

>>4468443
Some of these guys are not even jewish.

>>4468432
Jewish privilege is being 1% of the population and owning 80% of the media

Now we can use their own theories agaisnt them :DDDDDDDDDDDDDDD MERIKA YEAHJHA

GUYS GUYS GUYS

WHAT IF

WHAT

WHAT IF

THE ILLUMINATI

IS THE CAESARISM?

These threads have objectively proven that every person on Spengler's side of the fence is insane.

OP here, back from my grocery shopping

what the fuck happened

what happened... to my thread

>>4468485
I don't mind you moderate fascists. But your neo-nazi cousins came in.

>>4468485
>grocery shopping

That's not very Traditionalist. Shouldn't you be farming and praising Jesus for the harvest?

>>4468432
>Cencus article
>Cencus
Quality source you've got, there.

Also, Jesus Christ. Take a fucking statistics course and learn A) how to make a proper graph, B) how to draw conclusions from your data, and C) some basic logical fallacies and how to recognize and avoid them. The way things work isn't "Either it's a coincidence or it's a conspiracy." Like, the human population density of our solar system is pretty low. The human population density of our planet's surface is, by comparison, very high. Does this mean it's a fucking conspiracy? (I'm really hoping you're not a Young Earth Creationist, because if so, then I've just screwed the pooch.)

>>4468492
How is Spengler Fascist? More importantly, how can Spenglerians be neo-nazis when Spengler SPECIFICALLY DENOUNCED ANTI SEMITISM AND RACISM?

Fucking leftists generalizing everything that doesn't coincide with their beliefs. FUCK IM TIRED OF READING THIS SHIT

>>4468485
/pol/ happened:
>>4468248

>Yfw according to Spengler there was no African civilization

>>4468485

You posted a retarded quote.
A retarded quote expressing a retarded outlook.
This was bound to happen.

>>4468500
>implying he called spenglerians neo-nazis
you read imageboard posts as well as you read history i see

>>4468461
>von Trier
Has anyone done a review of Nymphomaniacs yet, or have critics not been allowed to see it so far?

>>4468506
except for Egypt (inb4 egypt was blacklel)

>>4468500
This argument is terrible and I'm tired of it. Anyone can say that they're against anti-Semitism and racism, but it doesn't mean shit if they're still also super anti-Semitic and racist.

>>4468519
>implying I'm the same person as the Jew poster

>>4467115
I think that Walt's brother in law can relax a little bit with his theories.

>>4467551
>You realize what you are saying has been said for a very long time. People in every age say that their age is more degenerate.
I'd argue that it is. I've at least lived in several cities and towns around the worl and there's a clear difference in will and vitality between young areas and old ones, and booming areas and declining ones. Even immigrant communities show that difference after a few generations

>>4467115
You can't just get up and say "Oh dear, I haven't been nearly christian enough today. Think of the children", it doesn't work like that. Also, the idea that embracing tradition is the only way for a society to survive is horseshit, any evidence being tangential at best. Despite what people such as Gibbon and presumably Spengler (I haven't read him) might say, it's highly unlikely that a society would collapse because of the introduction of a new religion or the abandonment of there old one, that's merely a side- effect of an increasingly educated population that learns of things independent of the original religious norms.

>>4467676
Criticizing the opponent for its authoritarianism while reserving the right to it for yourself is the pinnacle of hypocrisy, you half-wit.

>>4467712
>I have no stake in it. I'm apolitical.

This has been the most retarded thread I have read in a while, I will from now on try to get every /pol/ related thread deleted from this board. /s4s/ is more cogent than this drivel.

What the fuck? But Lao Tzu and the Buddha especially (I can't speak for Rousseau) lead to greater solidarity and strength in their respective cultures. Into the trash-filter this thread goes.

>>4468512
>What is Aksum
>What is Ethiopia
>What is Benin
>What is Mali
>What is Songhai
>What is Oyo
>What Asanteman

take your ignorance elsewhere pls

>>4469210
Ehehehe took a while for someone to spot my privilege of cultural hegemony.

>>4469228
>when people are discussing books I havent read it makes me angry because I dont understand

>>4469229
This

>>4469741
>books
>reactionary blogs for you misfits in identity crisis to fuel futile internet argument and having a unique internet "identity".

Cry more faggot.

Were the beats the Second Religiousness spoken of by Spengler?

>>4467115

This stupid son of a bitch.

CIVILIZATION IS THE GREATEST "ANTI-TRADITION" IN THE PHYSIOLOGICAL (AND THEREIN "MENTAL") HISTORY OF THE HUMAN RACE.

What a fucking schmuck. If there was a hell, I'd wish...well nothing I suppose. That type of megalomaniac spirit of revenge is something unleashed by the idiotologies of civilized life.

>>4471161
>anti-spengler
>using yiddish words

>>4471226

I'm anti-"Being an idealistic retard" and anybody who could maintain such a position with a straight face is some (actually) privileged meatbag who creates models of the world of facts out of a fucking plush chair. Fuck that bald asshole.