/lit/ - Literature

>>19977683
Of course.

>>19832624
shit wrong pic

Wait.
So does he actually say degeneracy bad, Islam bad?

Or does he merely lay out a philosophical model of development, culture to civilization, becoming to being, and so he's just describing the state of finds, since Napoleon, as natural situation.
Or both?

How do do his ideas tie to Hegel's and do they influence Heidegger?

>>19205673
When the ordinary thought of a highly cultivated people begins to regard "having children" as a question of pro's and con's, the great turning-point has come. For Nature knows nothing of pro and con. Everywhere, wherever life is actual, reigns an inward organic logic, an "it," a drive, that is utterly independent of waking-being, with its causal linkages, and indeed not even observed by it. The abundant proliferation of primitive peoples is a natural phenomenon, which is not even thought about, still less judged as to its utility or the reverse. When reasons have to be put forward at all in a question of life, life itself has become questionable. At that point begins prudent limitation of the number of births. In the Classical world the practice was deplored by Polybius as the ruin of Greece, and yet even at his date it had long been established in great cities; in subsequent Roman times it became appallingly general. At first explained by the economic misery of the times, very soon it ceased to explain itself at all. And at that point, too, in Buddhist India as in Babylon, in Rome as in our own cities, a man's choice of the woman who is to be, not mother of his children as amongst peasants and primitives, but his own "companion for life," becomes a problem of mentalities. The Ibsen marriage appears, the "higher spiritual affinity" in which both parties are "free"--free, that is, as intelligences, free from the plantlike urge of the blood to continue itself, and it becomes possible for a Shaw to say "that unless Woman repudiates her womanliness, her duty to her husband, to her children, to society, to the law, and to everyone but herself, she cannot emancipate herself." The primary woman, the peasant woman, is mother. The whole vocation towards which she has yearned from childhood is included in that one word. But now emerges the Ibsen woman, the comrade, the heroine of a whole megalopolitan literature from Northern drama to Parisian novel. Instead of children, she has soul-conflicts; marriage is a craft-art for the achievement of "mutual understanding". It is all the same whether the case against children is the American lady's who would not miss a season for anything, or the Parisienne's who fears that her lover would leave her, or an Ibsen heroine's who "belongs to herself"--they all belong to themselves and they are all unfruitful.

No. He believed that the decline of the west would be preceded by a benevolent dictatorship lasting hundreds of years. He did not foresee neoliberalism and environmental degradation.

why did he consider the nazis too racist?

>Der Hamburger Historiker Volker Weiß vertrat in einer Rezension zu Oswald Spengler – Eine politische Biographie für H-Soz-u-Kult die Ansicht, das Buch enthalte gravierende Ungereimtheiten und handwerkliche Mängel. Die zu Spengler verfügbare Forschungsliteratur habe der Verfasser in seiner meist sehr oberflächlichen Behandlung völlig ignoriert. Vielmehr weise die Literaturauswahl auf seine politische Beheimatung hin: „Die überwiegende Präsenz der Produkte einschlägiger Kleinverlage lässt die Arbeit zu einem Selbstgespräch der äußersten Rechten werden.“ Insgesamt präsentiere Maaß eine unreflektierte Spengler-Apologetik, vermengt mit vielfachen Hinweisen auf eigene Publikationen, die anstelle der Fachliteratur herangezogen werden. Weiß kritisierte, dass ein renommierter Fachverlag wie Duncker & Humblot ein solches Werk von Maaß überhaupt verlegt habe, was weder aus wissenschaftlichen noch aus verlegerischen Gründen nachvollziehbar sei.[9] Ende 2013 nahm der Verlag die Spengler-Biografie von Maaß aus seinem Programm. In einer Presseerklärung heißt es dazu: „Obwohl in dem Buch selbst keine extremistischen Positionen vertreten werden, verwahrt sich der Verlag mit diesem Schritt ausdrücklich gegen eine Vereinnahmung für die politische bzw. ideologische Agenda des Autors.“[10]

>In a review of Oswald Spengler - A Political Biography for H-Soz-u-Kult, the Hamburg historian Volker Weiß took the view that the book contained serious inconsistencies and technical defects. The author completely ignored the research literature available on Spengler in its mostly very superficial treatment. Rather, the selection of literature points to his political home: “The overwhelming presence of the products of relevant small publishers makes the work a self-talk of the extreme right.” Overall, Maaß presented an unreflective Spengler apologetics, mixed with multiple references to his own publications that were replaced by Technical literature should be consulted. Weiss criticized the fact that a renowned specialist publisher such as Duncker & Humblot had even published such a work by Maaß, which was not understandable for either scientific or publishing reasons. [9] At the end of 2013, the publisher removed Maaß's Spengler biography from its program. In a press release it says: "Although no extremist positions are represented in the book itself, with this step the publisher is expressly protecting itself against being appropriated for the author's political or ideological agenda." [10]

>"Although no extremist positions are represented in the book itself, with this step the publisher is expressly protecting itself against being appropriated for the author's political or ideological agenda." [10]

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Maa%C3%9F

Why is blatant censorship like this allowed in contemporary academia?

Someone recently suggested Spengler to me, given my comment about the psychological necessity of religion.
Anyone have something rather short I can read at the office tonight? I'm basically going in to tally up some nonsense, and I'm gonna loiter at my desk for about 4 hours.

Hard disagree, OP.
“Based” captures the world-feeling of the contemporary Western man—at least those who are still in their right minds—better than any single word has ever done for its respective time.

How are we not supposed to resent being born at the ass end of our civilization, completely cut off from either taking part in it or steering it to a better fate? Is this what fate had in store for us, to cruelly force us to watch it crumble and not be able to do anything about it? It's all so depressing to think about.

I hereby proclaim myself an enemy of Reason. Reason is antithetical to spontaneity, to love - to life itself. Reason kills culture, reason has been the pitfall of all great civilizations. Reason is when people start questioning the validity of their existence, reason is that which prompts us to question whether life is worth living - worth perpetuating. There can be no high arts in reason, there can be no justification in celebrating the tragedy that is life when reason takes hold of ones soul.

>>17876965
It actually is, but a Caesar will rise before the downfall

>>17831188
He was, indeed, short-sighted.

>>17753784
Caesarism

>muh SOVL

Why didn't he count the Inca as a hochkultur

I have the abridged, Is there more to be learned by reading the full version?

>>17167584
Replace worker with farmer and you got a Spengler quote.

In diesem Buche wird zum erstenmal der Versuch gewagt, Geschichte vorauszubestimmen. Es handelt sich darum, das Schicksal einer Kultur, und zwar der einzigen, die heute auf diesem Planeten in Vollendung begriffen ist, der westeuropäisch-amerikanischen, in den noch nicht abgelaufenen Stadien zu verfolgen.

What should I read before I start Spengler? I tried to read him but there were too many references I didn't get.

Post authors to help me understand current state of Democracy in USA, and its delegitimization and collapse.

ez

>>16628938
Western art is dead and done. Only SCIENCE remains to be explored. Did you even read him?

>>16253165