/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18172837]

The biggest redpill going against Spergler and other such theories is the realization that its all a spook, civilizations are a spook, and every single country is ruled by a depraved, cynical, nihilistic, pragmatic and sociopathic group of people that only uses popular sentiments as carriers for their rule but doesnt believe in them and themselves isnt guided by them in the slightest, which has 1 very important implication - no country (in the only sense that would matter for people like Spengler - so in the geopolitical sense) belongs to no civilization except the civilization of its ruling class (duh? its the ruling class that.. rules, and guides, countries) - and the civilization of ruling classes is the civilization of depravity, cynicism, pragmatism and 0 idealism.

as a result, spenglerite models and predictions are flawed.

[Anonymous No.18172871]

>>18172837
>and every single country is ruled by a depraved, cynical, nihilistic, pragmatic and sociopathic group of people that only uses popular sentiments as carriers for their rule
this is based on the (very naive) assumption that people are good natured idiots, which is untrue.

[Anonymous No.18172901]

>>18172871
i never said that the average populace is more good natured than its ruling class. just more naive.

[Anonymous No.18172971]

>>18172837
What the fuck are you talking about?

[Anonymous No.18173007]

>>18172837
The notion that notions are spooks may be itself a spook, or not?

[Anonymous No.18173032]

Read less leftist trash anon. We're in late Roman Republic stage of civilisation. You just happen to be born in the era of inept rulers. Learn to view things from a detached historical perspective. Read Spengler properly.

[Anonymous No.18173073]

>>18172901
it's not about the ruling class being evil, which I wouldn't contest mind you, but society being so fucking petty and worthlessly trivial that the state we're in is due entirely to pandering to their needs.

[Anonymous No.18173139]

>>18173032
Read Fukuyama. The age of ideas has ended.

[Anonymous No.18173210]

>>18173139
Yeah I don't think so faggot

[Anonymous No.18173241]

>>18172837
Terrible post

[Anonymous No.18173284]

>>18172837
spengler was refuted by sorokin anyway
>civilization
modern concept

[Anonymous No.18173293]

>>18173284
>sorokin
literally who

[Anonymous No.18173310]

>>18173032
>You just happen to be born in the era of inept rulers
pseud cope

[Anonymous No.18173334]

>>18172837
No you're just living in the stage of civilization where nothing works anymore and the twerps at the top are disconnected ghouls. "Weak men create hard times." Whatever you think of Enlightenment sentiments, the founders of America for example did not just affect them to wield more power or something, some were more cynical than others but they were pretty much true believers. Civilizations start out very idealist and end decrepit as all the contradictions of the ideal and the realized state have piled up making everyone very disillusioned and the elite then typically make things much worse. You just imagine all stages to be the same as the one you can presently observe, but a deep reading of history suggests otherwise.

[Anonymous No.18173351]

>>18172837
>le evil power-hungry villain spook
a truly pramatic person wouldnt want power, power satisfies a passionate moral impulse, a true cynic nihilist would avoid the danger, risk and commitment of power and just gather material benefits for themselves.

[Anonymous No.18173427]

>>18173334
Yes, that is why the founders said "all men were created equal", and then totally ignored that sentiment regarding hereditary slavery.

[Anonymous No.18173440]

>>18173427
You may want to crack a book. It was a bit more complicated than "we're equal...not."

[Anonymous No.18173505]

>>18173440
Degenerate cope

[Anonymous No.18173523]

>>18172837
You just took the bluepill. Spengler isn't really a redpill either, but he is redder than the one you just took.

[Anonymous No.18173569]

>>18173427
What's that? You're disillusioned by the fact that a civilization's ideals never matches up to reality? Wow I wonder if it's possible the psychic discomfort of this disconnection simply grows until the civilization either becomes a moribund husk to be animated by a new culture or it tears itself apart in self-annihilation? Or I guess nobody ever really believes in anything, and there are no civilizational processes?

Please read Spengler before you try to refute Spengler.

[Anonymous No.18173594]

>>18172837
>and the civilization of ruling classes is the civilization of depravity, cynicism, pragmatism and 0 idealism.
this person is a retard

[Anonymous No.18173643]

>>18172837
All ruling positions naturally attract narcissists because of their need for control and supply, sometimes what they want and what everybody else wants is the same thing, so good happens, however they will always choose their own individual interests above everyone elses, so shit happens most of the time. The greater of their kind will at least give the illusion that they are kind and good willed people. For example Obama, Biden, Trump, all literal narcissists, the difference is that trump is one that doesn't operate a facade and doesn't (can't) know what he is, Obama and Biden know what they are and have an extensive facade, none of them has any emotional empathy or real care about other people. If we collectively understood this maybe we would stop giving them control and come out of the political battlefield to wage a joint war against a problem that will be there regardless who wins the political battle. It won't happen though because as soon as you drop this information you will just be attacked from both sites, people are so entangled with their political leader it is the same as a narcissistic relationship on a grand scale.

[Anonymous No.18173669]

>>18173643
"narcissist" is just what weak-willed faggots call the willfully strong

[Anonymous No.18173780]

>>18172837
Holy fuck what is with you zoomer retards and Stirner? Babbies first existential crisis.

>>18173643
There is no such thing as "narcissism" all of Psychiatry was made up misanthropic kikes, only stupid holes like you use these terms at this point.

[Anonymous No.18174019]

>>18173669
Being a control freak isn't the same as being strong-willed. Needing emotional reactions from others to not fall into a deep depression is not strong-willed. What you could mean is how they assert their control may appear strong-willed. It is control simply for the sake of control. A friend I had with this behavior would have his control threatened by literal signs. If there was a sign that said "Do not enter" he would have to assert control by entering. If someone ignored him he would go ape shit. No such thing as a narcissist that could survive alone. Maybe strong-willed but fragile at the same time. Whatever, strong-willed or not doesn't matter do you really want to be ruled by an individual like that? In their eyes you are a literal object to be used and abused how they see fit, yet here you are taking their side, defending their behavior on a tasmanian bungaloo building forum because it's "strong-willed".
>>18173780
>There is no such thing as narcissism
I suggest you go outside your room for once and meet people, engage in relationships, etc. Who gives a fuck if you are triggered by a word, it's just there to describe certain behaviors and ways of relating to the world that is weirdly abnormal, there is no denying that there are people who engage in these behaviors, you can term them whatever you want if that helps your brain process the information without triggering an anti-jew reaction. Feel free to elaborate on how psychiatry is made up by the jews, I'm interested. To me it seems rather obvious that there are mental disorders and that some of them can be classified to a degree. I would like to put you in a room full of unmedicated (what psychiatry calls) mentally disordered people and see how you do, and if it's all just a jewish illusion.

[Anonymous No.18174055]

>>18174019
they literally are. see Lykourgos. see Numa. the two best leaders of all world history, both what we'd call micromanagers.

[Anonymous No.18174621]

>>18174055
Thanks for the interesting read on them.
>Two (2) Mythological figures
>Numa generally has no signs of narcissism or lack of emotional empathy (from what I could gather)
>Lykourgos of Sparta established a council (that would threaten his control), divided the land equally among his people, transferred his kingship to the child of his dead brother, was said to be mild, forgiving and calm in temper
I don't see it. I wouldn't even call what they did micro-manageing, just normal levels of doing their "job". Anyway I will correct myself and say that all narcissists are control freaks, but not the same in reverse. I guessed you meant the Sparta Lyko, however I stumbled over Lykourgos of thrace which would make a decent example of narcissism, Vlad the Impaler makes for a good example of a psychopathic narcissist. As I said though, good things can come from them too, like tough decision making, or like you said the strong-will which manifests from the absolute need to assert control. Overall it is more the case that it is benefitial to the narcissist while everyone around him suffers.

[Anonymous No.18174691]

Conservative thinking finds solace in cyclical views of history and in preserving or revitalizing a glorious lost past.

If you already know that most ideas of an age are basically ideological spooks, made by people shaped by their times and social conditions as well as the material relations. Then, it follows that there doesn't exist a necessary link or fidelity to such ideas to the present in a binding manner.

But then this begs the question, how does history work, and how does the history of ideas work? The answer is, that its a big complex cascading chain of events that have to led to the present concepts we use in how to think about our society and history.

Whatever our interpretations are we are compelled to imagine different futures as solutions , or we succumb to pessimism and fatalism and are out selected by the winners. But in reality nothing is set in stone.

[Anonymous No.18174854]

So you jsut skipped all the parts where he says it is destiny and that civilizations are an organism that has set lifespans and evolutions and what the individual thinks can go against what history demands but it wont change history?

[Anonymous No.18174972]

>>18174621
ur asserting two words are the same (micro-management and narcissism) and THEN equivocating on one of them. narcissism isn't real. you're a loser and project your loserdom onto winners. kings and chads of the world are "narcissists" because they're kings and chads.

[Anonymous No.18174978]

>>18174691
oswald spengler does not believe in cyclical history.

[Anonymous No.18175029]

>>18174978

Its basically repeating patterns

[Anonymous No.18175277]

>>18175029
no it's not, it's essentialism but one that progresses linearly.

[Anonymous No.18175592]

>>18174972
>Ur asserting two words are the same (micro-management and narcissism)
No. Literally the opposite.
>You're a loser
Hardly.
>They are kings and chads
Kek. They become literal crybabies when you don't give them validation that they exist. They don't even have a concept of self. Also narcissistic isn't the same as narcissism (narcissistic personality disorder). Every king is kind of narcissistic but not automatically a narcissist. You can have them in every area of life. Good to know that I will never feel threatened by a stop sign. Good to know that you would gladly bow down and offer your ass to your "kings and chads", faggot.

[Anonymous No.18176811]

>>18172837
If only you realised that this elite does not necessarily have to be evil and cynical, you would have gone beyond Spengler. A shame.

[Anonymous No.18177000]

>>18175592
>he believes in narcissism as a disorder
>he listens to the psychologists
>he trusts the experts
stopped reading there

[Anonymous No.18178440]

>>18174972
>narcissism isn't real
>>18177000
>he believes in narcissism as a disorder
Narcissism is an obsession with projecting and mainting a particular image of oneself, at others and back at oneself. You can be a total loser and still be a narcissist. Trannies are narcissists.

[Anonymous No.18178474]

can you prove this? why do you deny the possibility of something outright when history indicates it's unlikely? you want to believe in it.

[Anonymous No.18178506]

>>18178440
there's nothing more pro-social or healthy than turning an exemplary life into an exemplar through mimesis

[Anonymous No.18178741]

>>18178506
There is a difference between trying to imitate an exemplary life's image and trying to imitate its behaviour and their consequences. If the image is more important, that's narcissism. That a human impulse can have an idealized manifestation and outcome for one person and situation doesn't erase all the pathological manifestations and outcomes it can and does also have. What you said in no way shows "narcissism isn't real" nor that it isn't a disorder.

[Anonymous No.18178995]

>>18178506
>Pro-social and healthy
You mean lieing, cheating, and abusing other people? I'm not a moralfag but that's definitely not pro-social.
>turning an exemplary life into an exemplar through mimesis
They just fake to be whatever gives them admiration/validation from other people, they don't intend on actually being like it unless it's necessary. "They" don't exist if other people don't show them that they do.
>>18177000
It's a mix of personal experience, psychology (which is probably not really science anyway), and explanations from narcissists themselves. My experience validates that both they exist and their behavior is somewhat predictable with the additional knowledge gathered. Even they themselves admit that they exist and yet here we are. Can you explain why you think it's all made up?

[Anonymous No.18179041]

>>18172837
I wish. The people running society aren't even smart enough for that. I'd dream of an ideal world where the rulers at top were actually intentional

[Anonymous No.18179360]

>>18173139
I don't think he is right about that. But I guess neither of us will live to see who is right.