/lit/ - Literature

>>11828567
He's reserved for the cognitive and historical elite. There's perspective created that's meant for the masses, and he's not it. Spengler was a huge influence on Kissinger, who is arguably one of the most influential people in modern existence, yet Spengler remains esoteric and obscure. You'd think there'd be more interest in him by that alone. I'd wager he's known by the elite.

because the truth hurt

He was an arch-modernist, wrote a big universal history and shit like that. It went out of fashion a good while ago.

Read Egon Friedell if you want more of that. It can be hard to find his "A Cultural History of the Modern Age" (three books).

>>11828668
this

>>11828567
Because he's a shit thinker who said nothing worthwhile. Always remember people used to take Blavatsky seriously, too.

>>11828668
this

>>11828567
Why does he look so much like Crowley?

>>11828567
People really don't like the idea of cutting out Ancient Greece & Rome from the concept of Western Civilization.

>>11829026
Blavatsky never had the influence that Spengler had on other great thinkers, like Heidegger, Adorno, or Wittgenstein.

>>11828567
>>11828665
>>11828668
>>11828723
>>11829002
>>11829026
>>11829030
>>11829039
>>11829067

I purchased his two volumes on ebay and am currently reading through the first. This guy is clearly on a level many who aren't in the elite or don't take red/black pills won't take seriously. His analogies are fucking godly. He relates and contrasts different eras and cultures like it's child's play.

If you don't care about history, and you obsess about trivial shit like modern politics, ephemeral societal conflicts, and race bait, you're not going to understand a single chapter in this book.

>>11829039
He doesn't really. The fatter anglo nose stands out

>>11829039

In addition, I would prefer if people stopped talking about him on 4chan. The people on this website will focus on his looks and his personal quirks than the content of his work, just as they did with H.P. Lovecraft. However, Lovecraft is a sci-fi/horror writter. Spengler writes in the realm of sociology and philosophy.

>>11828665
Which is strange since out of all philosophers of that era, especially German ones, his works are highly readable. I read Preussentum und Sozialismus in the original German before I was competent in either philosophy or the German language.

Yet Heidegger's works live on in both right and left-leaning thought even though his works can still be arcane to those who know philosophy and are probably little more than word salads to those who don't, German speaker or no.

Then again Spengler was more historian than philosopher.

>>11829294
>nazis
>great thinkers
Sperg-tastic post.

>>11829395
>Heidegger
>not a great thinker

>>11829395
>he isn't at one with dasein

Because most sociological and historical schools of thought since his death have been uncomfortable with unironic use of phrases like "Dasein" or "Being-in-itself" and the idea of society is a biological body with individuals qua cells has gone out of style. Also most pre-WW1 and interwar historical and sociological thought seems naive when you know about WW2.

>>11829552
>nazi
>great thinker

>: The Book

>And I can only hope that men of the new generation may be moved by this book to devote themselves to technics instead of lyrics, the sea instead of the paint-brush, and politics instead of epistemology.
>he thinks these things can be separated
Let me guess, a Catholic?

>>11829656
>And I can only hope that men of the new generation may be moved by this book to devote themselves to technics instead of lyrics, the sea instead of the paint-brush, and politics instead of epistemology.
What did he mean by this? No seriously, why the hell did he say this?

>>11828668
Indeed. The truth hurt, and wept, and suffered, and died for our sins. Amen.

>>11829656
>the sea instead of the paint brush
wut does this mean, what does the whole quote mean? someone help a brainlet out

>>11829613

>>11829552
>>11829570
Heidegger thought the average nazi was an überpleb, a foul techne worshipper.

His idea live on, nobody has monopoly of truth

>Purchased decline of the West on amazon
>Thought it was part 1, bought another one titled part 2
>Turns out the first is an abridged edition
>The second is volume 2, to which I have no Volume 1

his thesis is seductive but his work itself is ultimate just another work of literature rather than rigorous history

>>11830180
That only makes it stranger that many of his predictions were scarily accurate, as opposed to someone like Marx, who spent so much time to get a firm epistemological basis for his 'scientific' socialism, and then ends up getting so much wrong.

>>11830180
>>11830222
I don't think either of you actually understand Marx or Spengler.

>>11830296
yes i do

>>11828567
>>11830296
just read northrop frye's review of it, spengler btfo'd

>>11830325
what did he say?

Can any of you here help me find a book? I think it had a picture with a guy wearing a helmet on the cover. Might have been called anarcho-futurism or something. Used to see it on some reactionary charts that got posted around here.

>>11830392
It's probably Man and Technics by Spengler

>>11830392
archeo-futurism

Spengler wasn't forgotten, the academia is just ashamed of him.
Adorno , Carrol Quigley and many others mention him in a demeaning way but ultimately can't escape his thought.

>>11830429
What did Quigley say about Spencer? I've been reading Tragedy and Hope and I'd be interested to hear about any differences in their thinking about the evolution of civilizations and cultures.

>>11830429
Adorno wasn't really demeaning. He himself said that Spengler's academic contemporaries were unable to address him and just tried to ignore him instead.

>>11829039
I wish people paid more attention to crowley than spergler.

Are his other books worth reading? The Hour of Decision, Man and Technics, Prussianism and Socialism?

>>11830459
Man and Technics most definitely. Haven't gotten around to the other two yet but I will.

>Wir sind in diese Zeit geboren und müssen tapfer den Weg zu Ende gehen, der uns bestimmt ist. Es gibt keinen andern. Auf dem verlorenen Posten ausharren ohne Hoffnung, ohne Rettung, ist Pflicht. Ausharren wie jener römische Soldat, dessen Gebeine man vor einem Tor in Pompeji gefunden hat, der starb, weil man beim Ausbruch des Vesuv vergessen hatte, ihn abzulösen. Das ist Größe, das heißt Rasse haben. Dieses ehrliche Ende ist das einzige, das man dem Menschen nicht nehmen kann.
Hit real hard.

>>11830445
Quigley tries to expand Spengler and Toynbee categories of civilizations but in my opinion expand the categories to the point of uselessness.
He says that Spengler was "unscientific" which is fair but doesn't mean he was "wrong".

>>11830446
Yes but he also went full retard and said that "socialism would prove him wrong and end the spenglerian life-cycle of civilizations"
In the "prims" essay if I recall correctly.

>>11829663
>>11829689

Spengler believed that the cultural flourishing period of the West was over, and that we are now in the civilization stage. Essentially he thought the zenith of artistic achievement was behind us, and so instead of focusing on trying to make art which will never amount to anything, people should focus on the Spenglerian ideal of seeing out the civilizational stage to its destined end.

>>11830078
Try ebay for an unabridged edition anon

>>11830078
>mfw started to read Volume 2 to see what's going on later in the work and the first chapter is basically a primer on pseudo-Hegelian pre-Heideggerian Germanic metaphysics

>>11830471

Out of anything and everything I have ever read, that passage is easily one of my favorites.

>>11830504
>>11830471
In the Queen's English, please, Fritz?

>>11830503
>Starting with volume 2

>>11830510
I listened to an audiobook of Part 1 a few years back

>>11828567
Some reason some people are forgotten, usually those who dispute the idea of brighter tomorrow, and other modern ideas. They are not brought up, even to be debunked. Oswald Spengler and Otto Weininger come to mind.

>>11830515
Did you at least check online for the maps and tables from the book?

>>11830551
I don't remember, it was a while ago

>>11830508
>We are born into this time and must bravely follow the path to the destined end. There is no other way. Our duty is to hold on to the lost position, without hope, without rescue, like that Roman soldier whose bones were found in front of a door in Pompeii, who, during the eruption of Vesuvius, died at his post because they forgot to relieve him. That is greatness. That is what it means to be a thoroughbred. The honorable end is the one thing that can not be taken from a man.

>>11830579
Sounds pretty Alt Right

>>11830581
how so

>>11830670
Rome fetishism and an obsession with Kantian notions of duty

>>11829304
based. how much did it cost you? I member getting them for 25 euros

>>11830678
analogy is not fetishism

>Kantian notions of duty

i guess

>>11830581

Based.

Spengler is exactly the kind of author we the alt-right could, with some re-interpretative work, claim ownership to. It's only fair, since leftist academia has been doing the same thing to plethora of authors for the last few decades.

>>11830849
Please no, the alt-right is (and was) a sinking ship full of intellectual lightweights and bandwagoners. It, as a movement, needs to grow up, read some more, and commit fully to being right wing, at which point it can join the intellectual tradition that is there waiting for it, Spengler included.

I miss Jonathan Bowden.

Something most people don't know about him, is that there are loads of his unpublished works in an archive and which haven't been translated yet. Why this hasn't happened is quite a mystery. In these later works labeled "Spatwerk",this was going to be a new work called "A study of history" that was to be more systematic and include all civilizations in that analysis. What is interesting is that, he revised quite a bit of his initial theories concerning cyclical history, and was more interested on the origin of civilization as destiny and its relationship/opposition with nature. In fact he throws that completely out of the window, and re-arranges a total world history going from 100.000 bc to 3000 bc during which mankind kick-starts civilization. The difference is, that between the periods of prehistory and civilization there is a rising tempo and rhythm, something in the will or destiny which allows for it to happen. Consequently the first period is "The Age of Lava" (100.000 bc), where humanity is spat out from the earth and begins to propagate but remains primitive. Second "The Age of Crystals"(20,000 bc), where the formless takes from and man gains spiritual awareness. Third, "The Age of Amoebas" (8000 bc) when wandering proto-civilizations form which are synthesized to create even bigger ones (he names some with mythological names like Atlantis, Kasch and Turan). He therefore abandons the idea that civilizations are completely unique, but are synthesized from prior ones. And more importantly Civilization is the final stage in a greater world historical pattern.

>>11830988

I don't disagree, but I don't see alternatives to the alt-right. Conservatives do not pose a threat at all to progressivism.

To progressives, someone like Scruton is nothing more than a figure of fun, someone who a gender studies student is going to cite in an essay, just for show, and them promptly dismiss in one sentence or two.

You see the term ''edge'' come up a lot in discussion relating to gender studies or cultural studies, about how they need to conserve this ''edge'' in order to really challenge the patriarchy or white supremacy or whatever they feel is wrong.

The alt-right is young and energetic and threatening, moreso than conservatism. It has this ''edge'' that's so desirable in contesting authority.

The problem with the alt-right is that a lot of them are dumb, and I'm the first to say that as a reactionnary myself ; /lit/ isn't wrong when it comes to /pol/ in this regard.

>>11831070
anywhere i can read more about this?

>>11831124
Problem with the alt-right is that they're anglos. France is the country to look at right now.

>>11831130

https://www.jstor.org/stable/2710047?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

>>11831155
thank you, my man

>>11831124
What do you mean by dumb?

>>11830078
libgen.io
>>11830180
caesarism is happening before our eyes as is the kind of socialism he predicted, and he also predicted Nazi Germany just as Nietzsche did. You're either very naive or haven't read Junger's critiques in The Worker, Dominion and Form which elaborates on Spengler's qualms with socialism. Granted, i disagree with them on Socialism, i think they were being deceitful, but to say they didn't understand it is silly. They were both brilliant and heavily involved in that milieu of thought and there's absolutely nothing in Capital that's beyond Spengler who was well acquainted with Hegel, mathematics, economics and political theory/philosophical history.

>>11831070
That sounds like bullshit but i'll believe it

>>11831167

Strawmen progressive positions because they haven't read important authors, like someone contesting the notion of ''cultural appropriation'' without having read Edward Said or at least being familiar with what he said. Also, focusing too much on empirical data as opposed to thinking in conceptual terms (only looking at crime statistics relating to race as opposed to doing that + reading up on essentialism or the debate concerning natural vs social inequalities in enlightenment philosophy, for exemple)

To the alt-right's credit though, a significant number of progressives are complete NPCs, with no better idea as to where their notions or sensibilities come from.

>>11831256
There's no need to read Edward Said, because he was a charlatan and that time can be better spend instead.

Also it's not really a strawman position anymore when a significant amount of progressives actually do cry 'cultural appropriation' at the most inane matters.

>>11831170
How was Spengler deceitful when it came to socialism? I'd say he predicted the decline of socialism and its inevitable fate quite well.

>>11830471
https://youtu.be/DSwAd2T41-o

>>11828567
Because everyone outside of the far right is delusional.

>>11828567
I didn't forget about him, but it's too bad they killed him off in the last season.

>>11829039
I literally thought this thread was about him

>>11828567
because society is not an organism, the metaphor is hackneyed. had he bothered to read the relevant ethnographic literature before writing the decline of the west, he'd certainly have produced something different.

>>11832312
cultures and civilizations absolutely do function as organisms, they go through all the stages of life: birth, youthful flourishing, mature adulthood, and decline in old age

>ethnographic literature

like what, enlighten us please

>>11832359
You mean that you haven't read the ethnographies written by armchair anthropologists about people they'd never met on continents they'd never seen? The ones about people who, in the best of cases, had maybe been briefly visited by an anthropology student or poorly documented in the diary of a colonial official with no anthropological interest? Because that's what there was at the time Spengler started writing.

>>11831256
>Strawmen progressive positions because they haven't read important authors, like someone contesting the notion of ''cultural appropriation''

here is the thing man, they are reacting to the person who is progressing that idea. Insofar as they are responding to them its not a straw man. They have been given the wrong definition by the person trying to enforce the idea that cultural appropriation is not okay.

>>11831256
>>11832993
I think Rene Guenon provides a good critique on colonialism from the right.
>They have been given the wrong definition by the person trying to enforce the idea that cultural appropriation is not okay.
Are there any texts that point out the schizophrenia of supporting multiculturalism while complaining about cultural appropriation?

>>11833246
The hell I would know but I think my gf told me about how this is a manifestation of neuroticism verbatim.

Terrible scholarship, unwarranted conclusions, and poor methodolgy, ultimately leading to his completely baseless assertions about society, culture, and historical determinism.

His pseudoscientific grand narrative is literal fascism, so it's unsurprising that it's almost entirely fascists who take him seriously 100 years later.

>>11833411
umm sweaty spengler hated the nozis

>>11833411
>His asertions are wrong because they are fascist, and that's problematic

>>11833429
t. didn't read the post I replied to

>>11833415
I didn't say anything about Nazis, did I?

>>11833434
You didn't reply to any post

>>11832449
you have no idea what you're talking about.
spengler could have gone out among the people he decided to make a monomyth about. instead, he worked like a sartre. cultural anthropologists who write ethnographies live among the people they write about for at least a year, and learn the language, go through all the daily customs and habits, of the people.

this board is so pretentious.

>>11833465
Reading comprehension

>>11832359
comparing cultures and civilizations to organisms is reductive and lazy.

so i made this post listing relevant ethnographic literature on myth & ritual, but it holds up here, too.

>>11833009

>>11833411
Thought you were talking about Foucault for a second there.

>>11830581
(((Alt Right)))
What a shit buzzword to try and group+demonise a set of ideals

>>11829304
His take on history is fucking retarded and is only 'profound' to psueds who have never read one book on the periods he talks about. Jesus Christ, his opinion on the emergence of baroque art as a sign of the mastery of the western tradition is hilarious. It was a sign of a decline in communal medieval civilization and the overabundance of renaissance ideas and aesthetics. The 17th and 18th century was a time of crisis where the majority of Europe was disillusioned by the ideals of the past and how it translated into art. They ran out of ideas, and the repetition of historical trends in a desperate attempt at capturing the genuine push in the previous two centuries. He even categorized the 12th century as the death of 'arabised'(lmao) culture of the ME stretching back before Alexander. Imagine being this retarted. I don't blame him as much because of the circumstances in which he wrote his works but the edgelords unironiclly taking his theories seriously should be gassed. I almost killed myself when he tried to generalize the whole of medieval Europe as being created in the 9th century completely disregarding Italy because his assumed it developed exactly like France and Germany. Anybody who creates a historical book in order to further a grand theory are confirmed midwits

>>11833609
>>11832312


Spengler never said his work on history is scientific, which is quite surprising since he was a scientist in his professional life. You seem to have read the work but entirely ignored the introduction where he sets up his methodology, in which he entirely disregards cause & effect arguments in the study of history. Instead his starting point are the Goethean ideas of becoming, form and actuality and the Schopenhauerian will. He doesn't create a monomyth like Cambell does. In fact quite the opposite his "grand narrative" is entirely non-eurocentric and free of "grand direction" in history. In fact history driven by men's wills is directionless and leads to nothing of significance in the long term of the history of nature. His methodology is quite unique in that regard , it is quite non-humanocentric and he compares cultures and civilizations to organisms not because it is an analogy from experience but because culture and civilization are smaller units in the grand narrative of nature. In other parts he mentions the draining of nature's natural resources as something unique or the global reach by Faustian civilization. If you don't want to label that approach to a total world history, then you can say it is more like comparative history which even if it fails it is still impressive in its ambition.

>>11833709
/thread

>>11829294
then look at the faustian and classical civilization under a larger umbrella called western civilization. If you cared to read the book you would understand why they are distinct

>>11833609
Aren't times of decline also times of artistic and philosophical innovation? e.g. Greek antiquity

>>11831289
lmao... if you choose to read spengler over said, it's because you need easy ideas that aren't relevant anymore written in an armchair -- and are unable to digest complex ideas with relevance written by someone who visited the places he wrote about

>>11833609
/thread

>>11833868
I read both, and Said was indeed just a charlatan, as is the whole feeld of postcolonialism which he spawned. Spengler has empirical problems, but he nonetheless makes accurate predictions and has profound insights. Said has empirical problems and makes up for it with nothing.

Visiting the places you write about means jack shit when you write romanticizing nonsense.

>>11830988
Bowden was a paedophile.

>>11833892
nah

>>11833900
Yes.

>>11833868
What’s difficult about Said? I’ve never read him but the concept of orientalism viewed from a post colonial perspective doesn’t seem especially difficult.

>>11833912
It isn't. Said just gives his own internal biases free reign and then accuses anyone who criticizes him for this as "oppression under the guise of objectivity". Foucault did the same thing when people called him out on his cowardice after the Iranian revolution.

I know postmodernism is a bit of a boogeyman now thanks to Jordan Memerson and his ilk, but Said is everything wrong with postmodernism.

>>11833892
Source?

>>11833972
He raped me when i was younger

>>11833972
one of his political opponents

>>11833609
t. anthropocentrist

>>11833411
>literal fascism
kek

>>11833471
>Spengler should have lived amongst the Ancients spanning the rise and falls of their civilizations
(you)

>>11833411
as opposed to metaphorical fascism

>>11834090
As opposed to insufferable pedantry.

Wait, no. It's says here that those things aren't mutually exclusive at all.

>>11834250
yikes

>>11833483
how is any of this modern ethnography even remotely relevant to spengler's work

>comparing cultures and civilizations to organisms is reductive and lazy.

>>11833768
what did you mean by Greek antiquity? If you mean 4th and 5th century BC then that was a golden age, a time of youthful cultural flourishin

>>11833868
>>11833411
>>11833869
militant anti-grand narrative post modernist retards are the next iteration of the militant fedora atheists. they just entered university and finished anthropology 101 and are on here regurgitating said and foucault because they think they are somehow enlightened now by rejecting everything

>>11834079
this. dumb ethnography poster should go back to working on his phd in intra-tribal cuckholdry

>>11830476
>Yes but he also went full retard and said that "socialism would prove him wrong and end the spenglerian life-cycle of civilizations"

That's just a flaw of Adorno. He makes great criticisms but then has to resort to utopianism to prevent himself from going insane.

>>11833483
Imagine thinking that typing up a brief bibliography and linking to it in another thread makes your opinions worthwhile

>>11833483
>comparing cultures and civilizations to organisms is reductive and lazy.
It's not reductive unless you have a limited view on either of the comparisons. Memes themselves live like organisms. In fact, I'd go on to say that life itself is nearly Universal.

>>11833609
you clearly didnt understand the book, he addresses the fact that Europe has been 'declining' in a sense since the 17th century, it is a multifaceted phenomenon with different 'peaks' of expression, much like counterpoint actually.

>>11828567
Because it's horribly depressing and you can't just pick it up and read.

I've been working on decline of the west for a while now and it really demands that you have a competent grasp on nearly all of history before you can really understand the examples he uses.

I don't know if I buy his historical determinism or what not, but he was definitely prophetic. Definitely under-rated.

>>11833411
all of humanist sciences are pseudoscience. You cant apply scientific standard of hypothesis, testing and replication to any of it..

>>11835963
Yeah, I guess we're actually descended from dragonkin after they made contact with the extraterrestiral psylocybin that bestowed sentience on them, and that this history is equally as real, valid, and pseudoscientific as the written accounts of the Philadelphia Convention.

>>11836059
According to postcolonialism, yes

>>11836059
biology and chemistry are sciences unlike sociql pseudosciences eetard

>>11836068
You shouldn't use words you don't understand

>>11836076
Are you alright? Do you need a doctor?

>>11836095
>You shouldn't use words you don't understand
I mean, according to some postcolonialists in the field, the interpretation of indigenous stories of history (aka myths) should be regarded as just as epistemologically valid as those of western historians.

>>11831256
>focusing too much on empirical data as opposed to thinking in conceptual terms
They are certainly right in doing this about these issues.
"Conceptual terms" leads you to completely insane systems here, with no exception. Empiricism is the only way to tackle nature. The "societal problems" that are discussed are matters of nature and not made for rationalistic a priori study.

>>11836103
My mind can barely contain that thought despite the fact that I know it's true.

Jesus, /lit/ goes full retard when discussing Spengler.
It is obvious from most of the posts that almost nobody here read him at all. Not to mention other scholars from the same subject.
Why even engage in a discussion you don't understand? If you call him just a "fascist apologizer" you are obviously out of your element.

Also
>Tfw you want a gravestone just like his

>>11836690
What does his gravestone look like?

are spenglerians to anthropology what jungians are to psychology (ie cranks)?

>>11835140
alright dip shit

>>11836396
How does one do history empirically?

>>11836703
What’s with the anthropology fetish ITT? Spengler was a historian, not an anthropologist.

>>11836904
people who haven't actually read the work nor have the faintest idea what it's actually about see the word 'culture' and come crawling out of their graduate student cubicles

>>11833609
>and the overabundance of renaissance ideas and aesthetics

uhhhh, no sweaty. Architect here, you're full of shit.

>>11829577
>the idea of society is a biological body with individuals qua cells has gone out of style
I find it to be quite the opposite
use of organic analogies in relation to cybernetics/nonlinear dynamics studies wrt social processes is the logic du jour

Honestly, its a shame Spengler lived several decades before cybernetics and study of complex systems were a thing.
His analogies are incredibly similar in certain points to what Manuel Delanda does in his own work on western history

>>11829689
"the sea" here, I believe its related to the design of big ass ships.

Swap it for "the air" or "the space" nowadays

>>11830476
>He says that Spengler was "unscientific" which is fair but doesn't mean he was "wrong".

what i find funny is how useless calling Spengler unscientific is.

Its like they didnt read the entire first half of the first volume of Decline of the West, where Spengler admits himself that he isnt doing rigorous, "scientific" history

Has anyone read pic-related? Does he do a good job of continuing the Spenglerian tradition?

why is spengler jocked so hard by people who are in a panic about the state western civilization?

if they took his thesis seriously they would understand theres nothing to be done

>>11833709
10/10 couldn't do better myself

>>11837644
god no.
fuck him he completely slaughtered spengler

might as well fucked Spengler's corpse and spit on his grave after, it would've been less insulting

>>11837652
i find that those people generally haven't actually read spengler.

most people who talk about spengler haven't actually read spengler.
those types pushing spengler so hard have, at best, read an extremely short summary that horribly distorts what spengler talks about

From what I've heard it's that historians don't try "ask the same questions" he did, anymore.

>>11837598
Also architect here, you're a fucktard

>>11837722
Ive read Decline like 5 times and while I do shill spengler a lot I am fully in the 'there is nothing we can do' camp which at least saved me from being an edgy reactionary.

>>11837614
>I find it to be quite the opposite
I had multiple professors dispute the idea's validity when I was taking classes for my history degree. I guess it depends on the context but the idea of society as a unified body with composite parts was widely accepted by policy makers, politicians and authority figures in the 19th and 20th centuries.

>>11837644
I had to look this up.
>Imperium advocates the creation of a pan-European empire ...
>The mission of this generation is the most difficult that has ever faced a Western generation. It must break the terror by which it is held in silence, it must look ahead, it must believe when there is apparently no hope, it must obey even if it means death, it must fight to the end rather than submit. ...The men of this generation must fight for the continued existence of the West...
This is literally the opposite of what Spengler was saying on at least two levels, and this is just one quote I pulled from a review. You should try actually reading The Decline of the West instead of glancing at the title and presuming he shares alt-right, Nazi, or other white supremacist kinds of diagnoses and prescriptions, which is usually something like the following: western civilization is the most advanced and powerful on earth in history and is being artificially poisoned and subverted by outside enemies, who can be identified and eliminated, thus restoring the glory, honor, and vitality of western civ. This is directly contrary to his thesis in Decline.

I am really dumbfounded seeing how many people say this book or the author bears any intellectual resemblance.

>>11837734
It's only done because people like Yockey need to pretend to have some valid foundational beliefs in their ideology and appeal to whatever scholarship they can get their hands off if they think idiots will believe what the ideologist wants them to believe. They drag the names of better thinkers down with them for the sake of political or financial gain. It's just how things work.

>>11837728
>'there is nothing we can do'
Pretty life denying desu. One of the things in which I firmly disagree with Spengler on. History is full of nations and civilizations reclaiming their own destinies, even after hundreds of years of failure.

>>11837748
>History is full of nations and civilizations reclaiming their own destinies, even after hundreds of years of failure.
Name one that Spengler doesn't account for

>>11830849
>we the alt-right could, with some re-interpretative work, claim ownership to
Haha holy shit

>>11833606
They're all pretty terrible ideas. It's worth throwing them all into the same fire.

>>11837726
how am I wrong?

the entire evolution of baroque architecture is exactly the steady disconnection from Rennaissance's limitation on classical orders back to a return to the dramatic intensity of the gothic

Literally what Spengler talks about

>>11837732
>the idea of society as a unified body with composite parts
thats not really a very good definition of what spengler pictured though

>>11837748
I mean we may have a caesar that aligns with something some people want, but we are not a Springtime culture and that's just how it is. According to Spenglerian logic it is fully possible that Russian(alien) intervention in the Second word war permanently altered and 'broke' the normal development of the west. He talks about this happening in the book- the Aztecs are the main one he examines. Hitler looked a hell of a lot like a Caesar, if not HItler then another similar figure may have arisen, but what we got was not that at all. Unless a Trump like figure emerges in America and pulls a coup, it seems the West is not going to go properly into universal empire but simply decay as invaders stream in. The races themselves will probably continue to exist, and mix, and etc. If Russia is a birthing people then the next 1000 years will see their development.

Unless of course modern technology and its consequences have ended the time of SPenglerian civilizations and we are becoming something entirely new. EIther this has already happened, or it could happen in coming decades and centuries. Humanity may not even exist in a discernable form in the future centuries.

>>11837773
It was in vogue when he was alive moreso than it is today.

>>11837776
Hitler was a shit proto-caesar. and thats why he got destroyed.

if we want to get an idea of a faustian caesar will look like, then we need to look at Roosevelt

>>11837797
He got destroyed because of Russia, which was an outside force. Im no Hitler fanboy, he's just the guy who seems to fit the bill, FDR works as well and was a de facto dictator but had no plans for universal empire as far as I know, which makes him not really work.

>>11837781
sure.
but we're talking about spengler right?
his idea of cultures as organisms isnt really about a "unified body with composite parts"

more like a rhyzome of sorts. an "organism" in the sense of being like a diagram.
an autocatalytic system that emerges from a certain confluence of conditions (spring), grows (summer) and achieves a steady state (autumn and winter). think sigmoid functions representing a chemical reaction

>>11837825
Now nobody is talking about Spengler, you're just masturbating

>>11837817
>but had no plans for universal empire as far as I know

mate... he laid the foundations for the global american empire for goodness sake

>>11837835
Actually that was done when WW1 left basically every Western country but the US a debtor and the US a creditor

>>11837835
That's not Caesarism though, the Roman republic is the proper analogy.

>>11837838
sure, but it was Roosevelt who set up the foundations for the military-industrial complex that supported the american empire

>>11837840
Why?
>>11837848
The American empire had already existed from 1898, when the Spanish-American War ended.

>>11837853
...because they are both Republics. The US has no Caesar lol, and the 'empire' over Europe is not really an empire.

>>11837832
im fine with this. spengler-anon can keep masturbating ill be a voyeur *tips 5 tokens*

>>11837856
you're completely missing the point

>>11837853
you too, but for different reasons

>>11837874
So what is the point? I'm not contesting that FDR played a major role in cementing the military-industrial complex at a central place in American life.

>>11837874
How can I be missing the point, Spengler termed the period 'caesarism' we have had no Caesar, we are a Republic still

>>11837711
What specifically do you disagree with?

>>11837734
Nothing you've said here addresses anything in Imperium...

>>11837973
>Nothing you've said here addresses anything in Imperium
yes it does, those are quotes from the fucking book. with regard to the first thing in green text, even though its not a quote its easy to find the prescription. he directly advocates for cleansing the western civ of a set of intellectual elements and creating an "Empire of the West"

>>11837797
>Hitler was a shit proto-caesar. and thats why he got destroyed.
Considering how many empires joined in to take him down, I wouldn't call him shit.
Though it was mostly the Soviet Union.

This is a bit OT, but how do you guys think that Asian powerhouses (India-China-Korea-Japan-Indonesia) fit the Spenglerian model? I only have a surface level knowledge on them.

>>11836696
You could just have googled
>>11837884
Give it some time, we entered winter in 1991. We still have 225 years of ceasarism development (if I'm not mistaken)

>>11838086
>We still have 225 years of ceasarism development (if I'm not mistaken)
I don't like running with exact numbers. It may be that the generational interaction follows a metastructure to make it accurate, but I think that technology will change how this goes. AI itself might be such an alien.

>>11838064
Spengler says that India, China and Japan already collapsed and are now not original civilizations.
Carrol Quigley corroborates this thesis but adds the fact that each one is trying to develop a new civilizational cycle.

The bigger question is Latin America and Africa
I don't remember any author mentioning where they are headed.

>>11838108
Latin america isn't looking so hot, Africa is what we gotta keep our eyes on.

>>11838111
10/10 analysis Anon, great insights

>>11838111
South Africa and Rhodesia were the powerhouses in Africa. South Africa is going the same way as Rhodesia now.

>>11836696
its a gray cube with golden letters engraved in it
i still remember spending this sunny october day at his grave in central munich two years ago.
is there a more comfy thing to do than reading a book at the authors grave?

>>11838016
This is the first time you've heard of the book and you're using a single out of context quote to whine about how "dumbfounded" you are. How can you sit there and say you don't understand how the author bears resemblance to Spengler when you have absolutely no fucking clue what's in the book? You're a pseud, plain and simple. You don't have to read the book, but don't talk like you did.

>>11838086
His tombstone looks like one those big puzzle blocks you have to push in LoZ Ocarina of Time.

>>11832091
#MeToo

>>11836899
you dont.
its not science.
calling it science is newspeak.

>>11837776
Hitler was more liek Napoleon, not Caesar.

>>11837797
this guy couped us fed govt like Augustus

>>11838064
they dont

durrrr society is a living organism. what do you think of my big explanatory power.

>>11838163
not single, multiple quotes. second, go ahead and look up the context on any of them, doesnt change a thing. it goes directly against spengler's arguments. i have more than "no fucking clue what's in the book," i've read more than enough to tell it has nothing to do with spengler. you're the pseud. you asked the question, you just seem to be really upset that spengler and the decline was not what you thought it was.

>>11838390
Most entities are living organisms, or behave in a very similar fashion. Among actual living organisms, intelligence and problem solving seem near universal, as seen in the Japanese mold tests. Yes, fungal mold solves problems to get to your(its) food.

Dmitri Blyaev conducted scientific breeding tests (Soviet Union didn't believe in DNA, so they had to do it hands-on) and found out that hereditary traits move in groups and directions. Simply selecting for tameness had an effect on pigmentation (melanin, which is connected to adrenaline), communication, identity, cognition and playfulness.
https://youtu.be/0jFGNQScRNY

Entities were always known as spirits, nowadays as memes and memeplexes. There's a reason you can likely tell the religion / entity housing this man. Same for religious fundamentalists, nations, ideologies. They all shape their followers / portals. Those following glutton will bloat to hideous forms, lust will alter clothing, behavior and colors, add trinkets and so forth. Every entity we feed shapes us, including emotions.

Things move in directions, and to the entities we are like soil, whereas they are the organisms. It is no accident that nations have always been associated with beasts; "the Russian bear, the German hawk..."

>>11838361
South Korea is ruled by a witches' coven, China has hidden Caesars... I don't know.

>>11833609
but decline, crisis, and disease basically constitute his whole narrative, I'm pretty sure he thought the ideal civilization was something like the Aztecs and that it's been all down hill from there (Friedell even claims that the Aztecs didn't sacrifice humans, that it was only the other tribes!).
>>11833709
I pretty much agree, but would you claim that his stubborn belief in 'die großen Männer' as the driving force of history isn't a part of his book? Still no monomyth, but you've definitely heard it all before, just like his romantic musings on inspiration and personality etc.

>>11831256
>>11831289
Basically, the alt-right doesn't really read. Or, like, they read news articles and shit. Once you start reading you stop being alt-right, because even if you remain traditionalist, conservative, or reactionary, your views inevitably progress beyond "hurr fuck the dindus"

Who needs that label anyway? The grunt propagandists will keep doing their thing, alt-right might be a useful buzzword from their point of view, but there's no reason why thoughtful reactionary discourse needs to be attached to it at all.

>>11838749
If you read "news articles and shit" about real world events you are more in align with reality than 99% of Ivy League humanist departments which puts you by default on a stronger position.

I trust an uneducated reporter from Texas to tell me more faithfully about reality of open borders than some communist living on tax payer money at Ivy League musing about beautiful brown people.

>>11838749
>"hurr fuck the dindus"
This is a pathetic strawman. Plus, you're wrong about it. There's that one beautiful book written by a /lit/tard, filled with the word nigger. H.P Lovecraft had quite colorful view on negroes. You made the assumption that reading means reading by the hierarchical structure you had placed on literature.

The monotone hategroup is mostly intelligence agencies and shills anyway. Or this is what the altrighters claim. You underestimate the level of paranoia there. Knowledge about jews puts everybody at odds with them.

>>11838770
>This is a pathetic strawman
that's not a strawman, because alt-right is not a person with specific views, it's just a buzzword, and it's usually what alt-right is taken to mean in mainstream media.

Why does thoughtful reactionary discourse need to be associated with that label?

>>11838813
>and it's usually what alt-right is taken to mean in mainstream media.
Why would you take anything from the mind control grid?

>>11837817
>He got destroyed because of Russia, which was an outside force.
that he tried to conquer LOL. inb4 muh inevitable russian conquest. that was a nazi larp.

>>11838758
>If you read "news articles and shit" about real world events you are more in align with reality than 99% of Ivy League humanist departments which puts you by default on a stronger position.
ermm... those news articles are written by this kind of faggot. nice attempt at being anti-elitist.

>>11838821
Soviets were arming themselves heavily, and were conducting pre-emptive purifications of ethnicities, such as the Finns.

>>11838662

>die großen Männer

this is where I'm confused about Spengler, how can you be an historical determinist and also belief in Great Men as the driving force of history?

Is it that the archetypes and the stages of culture and civilization are deterministic, when what exactly happens within is up to the individual will?

so is it such that great men are bound by the rigid rules of the game, but within those rules they are free to act and influence history as they wish?

>>11838826
>those news articles are written by this kind of faggot
I never said to stop critical thinking when reading them. I said they will help you more than humanist Ivy League diddler.

and I referenced one specific reporter from TX by the way, whose reporting has been great.

>>11838827
Russia is only interested in tiny shitholes like Finland or the Ukraine. They would never bother invading Germany if not for the war. The thesis that the Russians were keen on confronting the Germans is very strongly criticised... Besides, Goebbels thought Hitler's anti-Russia policy was kikeish.

>>11838830
Read Taleb. News is not giving you remotely authentic picture of world.

>>11838847
and what, you think that Ivy League faggot is even remotely closer than direct reporting from the locals?
Again, I never said to stop critical thinking.

>>11838842
>Russia is only interested in tiny shitholes like Finland or the Ukraine. They would never bother invading Germany if not for the war.
Doubt.

>>11829656
nope. Chesterton disagreed with him because he was too fatalistic.

>>11830579
this is straight out of norse mythology lol. Germans are like a monkey that was trained to be human but nevertheless at the slightest push is ready to leap back into monkeyhood

>>11838919
you got the analogy backwards, everyone else is the monkey

>>11838919
Germans are the progenitors of the machine-people, just as jews are of the apemen.

>>11838949
yeah I'm sure the cradle of the industrial revolution that is England had nothing to do with this

>>11838353
someone fucking gets it
the guy introduced the Exception in the executive branch of the US gov.
In a schmittian sense he was a proto-caesar. In a Spenglerian sense he was also a proto-caesar due to his use of economic aid programs and institution of welfare as political tools

>>11838828
>how can you be an historical determinist and also belief in Great Men as the driving force of history
maybe you should go read him and understand how it works

>so is it such that great men are bound by the rigid rules of the game, but within those rules they are free to act and influence history as they wish?
No. More like that within the dynamics of World History of cultures, Great Man arise who assume their will and fate and "Become" Great Man. They do not shape history in the sense that the long process of World History changes with their actions, but rather that they assume an important role within their time and place.

Think Napoleon, or Alexander. Man of their time who assume the becoming of their culture and take it to its eventual conclusion.

You can also picture certain great artists or architects who create their work within their moment in their culture, shaping that which was already embrionic in the underlying spirit of a culture.

it has to do with World Historic fate and fully assuming its Becoming

>>11838828
>this is where I'm confused about Spengler, how can you be an historical determinist and also belief in Great Men as the driving force of history?
He doesn't really believe in Great Men as a driving force, but he does believe in certain Great Men as a manifestation of their historical epoch.

>>11839155
Proto-caesars are the same as Caesars?

>>11839408
no. But they advance the Becoming of actual caesarism.

Seeds in relation to a tree

>>11839183
Now that's based

>>11839439
A added isn’t a tree
The initial claim was that FDR was an American Caesar
Now he was a proto-Caesar
Way to move the goalposts niggerfaggot

>>11838912
Chesterton is reddit.
Lewis is proper talk.

>>11839461
you're not very good at reading comprehension are you?

>>11839683
Your mum was good at sucking my dick

>>11838749
altright seems to be used mainly as a pejorative outside of actual memes like Richard Spencer

Bump

>>11838426
>IT WASNT JUST 1 QUOTE I READ AT LEAST 2 I SWEAR! READING A FEW DISPARATE QUOTES GIVES ME THE AUTHORITY TO SHIT ON A 600 PAGE BOOK!
gr8 b8 m8, but seriously you should read it if you're that interested in it

>>11838445
societies aren't entities. they are fragmented in ways that living organisms are not. quit simplifying everything and start trying to conceive of pure difference.

>>11828567
Idk dude I loved him in Armageddon though. That part where he blew up the asteroid and killed himself was a real tear jerker

>>11842515
Wrong

>>11842515
>t. left-of-center urbanite bugman

>>11828567
JESUS CHRIST MARIE THEY'RE MINERALS

>>11843012
Jesus Christ Marie these are not dead scientific forms of Nature these are the profound analogies of living Cosmic beat

>>11842515
if societies aren't entities then why the fuck does the word 'society' exist in order to denote a collective unit of humans that together form a distinct entity

fucking moron NPC

Where should i start with him? Is the abridged version of decline of the west worth reading?

Bump only worthwhile thread in weeks

>>11843314
Read unabridged Decline, in German if you can but translations are fine.

>>11843249
lmfao.

society doesn't denote a collective unit that together forms a distinct entity.

no society has an independent existence either.

>>11843685
yeah waste your time on this outdated armchair mythologizing. don't read modern historians or anthropologists that have the advantage of nearly a century of further developments in the philosophy of their disciplines underpinning their works.

keeps coming up that the majority of users on this board need things to be simple and general as possible. wonder why

>>11843249
>constantly talk about "NPCs" on a basket weaving forum
>everyone else is a soulless husk! I'm a special individual!

It used to be that freedom of speech ended with intellectual pollution, not offensiveness. We should bring that back. If you're ever caught saying tfw no gf or calling people NPCs, you should have your tongue cut out.

>>11843940
>don't read modern historians or anthropologists that have the advantage of nearly a century of further developments in the philosophy of their disciplines underpinning their works.

They also have the disadvantage of being written temporally far from the event, pozzed to max with liberal mental illness and other required Ivy League Elite brainwashing.

I wouldn't trust them to tell me honestly and accurately about history of anything that doesn't conform to their progressive echo chamber

>>11843965
t. npc

>>11844006
>the best way to understand an event is to write from as close a proximity to it as possible relying solely on your own hermeneutic abilities in interpreting primary sources that also come from as temporally close to the event as possible
Imbecile

>>11844175
Definitely lot better than reading Ivy League scholar write "fuck white men and fuck Europe".

>>11844193
What's so great about white people? I'm not European I could give a fuck about it

>>11844202
Whats so bad about them I need to listen to libshits tell me how guilty I am to negroid slavery and now I need to have somalis in my fucking town to pay respects?

>>11844213
>them
You've revealed yourself as a non-white, opinion disregarded. Ignore this false-flagging faggot

>>11842515
>they are fragmented in ways that living organisms are not
Your gut does most of your thinking and it doesn't tell you shit.

>>11843923
>no society has an independent existence either.
We are a collection of cells (which are a collection of highly processed molecules, which are collectives of simple molecules, which are collectives of atoms, which are collectives of protons, neutrons and electrons, which are in turn, collectives of quarks which are something), but we are our own entities despite this, and so are our cells and all of the sugar they use.
These entities I spoke of, they are what we are to our cells. Christians are the body of Christ.

>>11844251
Nice analogy
Did you know that Spengler denies the validity and value of 99% of analogies?

>>11843940
Contemporary advantage to any era or people is purely one of data storage and technology. We have finally understood that mammals did not win over a class warfare with dinosaurs! Hooray!

>>11844260
Analogy? All I spoke is fact. An analogy would be to call this a fractal truth, but I have to say that I have no idea of its form.

>>11844261
>Contemporary advantage to any era or people is purely one of data storage and technology
That's kind of a big deal.
>>11844264
>These entities I spoke of, they are what we are to our cells
That's an analogy, fuckwad

>>11844266
>That's kind of a big deal.
If you don't understand any of it to the point where your predecessors did, it only means cooler toys in a larger quantity.
>That's an analogy, fuckwad
No it's not. It's a way to tell you how it is. It de facto is how it is. That's why you recognize things by their symbols. It's how we spot feminists, satanists, jews, Christians, Finns, Germans, niggers.

>>11843940
>>keeps coming up that the majority of users on this board need things to be simple and general as possible
Says the guy who outs himself as a Real Stupid Person as he only acknowledges the current Academia's Status Quo on history and philosophy as Truth -

You know, as Stupid People are Educated to do.

>>11830579
I wonder what the soldier would think if he found out people talk about him 2000 years later.

>>11844273
He'd probably blush a bit and get awkward.

>>11844271
>If you don't understand any of it to the point where your predecessors did, it only means cooler toys in a larger quantity.
More people are technologically literate today than at any point in history. More people are literate at all than at any point in history. More people know more about the past than at any point in history. Are you implying that an impending "dark age" somehow makes the tools available to modern scholars useless, or somehow less valuable? The scenario you're positing isn't the actual way the world is.
>No it's not. It's a way to tell you how it is. It de facto is how it is.
I spot a faggot and his name is (You)

>>11844288
>>More people are technologically literate today than at any point in history. More people are literate at all than at any point in history. More people know more about the past than at any point in history.

You could say the exact same during 1911, 1914, 1917, 1920, 1929, 1933, 1936, 1939, and possibly even in 1945.

This sort of quantitative assessment of "welfare" is completely ignorant.. this is sort of blindess that gets you Brexit and Trump.

>>11844298
pee pee poo poo

>>11844298
>You could say the exact same during 1911, 1914, 1917, 1920, 1929, 1933, 1936, 1939, and possibly even in 1945.
And you'd be right. The difference is that I'm talking about the present, not the past.
>This sort of quantitative assessment of "welfare" is completely ignorant.. this is sort of blindess that gets you Brexit and Trump.
I'm talking purely about the production of historical knowledge and useful historical scholarship.
In other words >>11844300

>>11844288
>More people are technologically literate today than at any point in history.
There are also more people currently alive than have been at any point in history. Relative to population size, I don't think there's been a big change. Overall IQ drops, philosophy is abandoned, just to mock modern society with a zero sum approach. I suppose the potential survivors can salvage this. Given that IQ doesn't drop too much.

>I spot a faggot and his name is
I saw a repeating principle of a pattern and I simply continue it. It works. I use it. It's not an analogy, it's a deduction. We are not the end-all of entities. We don't need eyes to see colors. Our eyes merely tell us when and how to organize the colors we can see. Though there are plenty of filters for that organization, and even the colors (depressed people see the world as more grey).

>>11844308
>production of historical knowledge
We aren't making new primary sources, where do you get this then?

From the minds of liberals jerking over how great they are? It's almost irrelevant. Academia is completely shut-out from competing views (compare Ivy League research and results).

Go and try make research about what a mistake American Revolutionary War was, or that Nazis had somethings right or that Communiusm was bad. You get btfo.

>>11844310
>We don't need eyes to see colors. Our eyes merely tell us when and how to organize the colors we can see.
Is this supposed to make sense?
Also I don't really see how you can pretend to be arguing in good faith when you completely ignore the role of information technology in modern life, choosing to hand-wave everything about modernity other than 'muh population boom' and 'muh IQ'
Did it ever occur to you that there are factors that contributed to that population growth, like medical and agricultural techniques that are only possible because of computers?
I'm sure it didn't, don't answer
You're a fucking idiot

>>11844325
>Is this supposed to make sense?
Yes. Close your eyes and imagine a red apple.
Blind people have their visual center activated when they touch things with their fingers.

>>11844324
You've never actually taken a college-level history class, have you?

>>11844329
I'm a high school dropout

You produced zero arguments.
Either you create new primary sources (which we don't) or you make up your own shit in your echo chamber (which liberal idiots do)

>>11844328
I still don't understand how this is supposed to be relevant to this discussion, or why I should care. Your regurgitation of medical fun facts doesn't really make me want to care about what you're saying, or agree with you.

>>11844325
>Did it ever occur to you that there are factors that contributed to that population growth, like medical and agricultural techniques that are only possible because of computers?
Yes, but there is so much more to it. If we didn't send tons of aid to Africa they couldn't purchase it and their populations would be more manageable, and they wouldn't be an ecological disaster.

>>11844332
>I still don't understand how this is supposed to be relevant to this discussion, or why I should care
It's the entity-discussion I'm focusing on. Technology doesn't mean jack shit if people get worse.

>>11844331
>I'm a high school dropout
Then you're probably speaking from a position of resentment, and definitely speaking from a position of ignorance.
>>11844336
It would definitely be an ecological disaster, they'd have corpses all over the place. You know, from all the starvation?
>>11844339
>Technology doesn't mean jack shit if people get worse.
I'm not talking about the quality of human beings, I'm talking about the production of historical knowledge and the facilitation of meaningful research into the past. I'm not interested in anything you have to say about what you see as a decline in some abstract quality of an abstract aggregate of all humanity. You seem like a pretty low-IQ human being yourself, in fact. I hope you never reproduce.

>>11844349
>Then you're probably speaking from a position of resentment, and definitely speaking from a position of ignorance.
The irony of this coming from the Great Liberal who will not even for a minute consider alternative viewpoints of History such as that French Revolution by any metric was a mistake or that yes, Communists were worse than Nazis and their worship in Ivy League is nothing sort of sick and perverted behavior.

Of course I resent You, because you would chuck me into a wood chipper if you could.

>>11844357

>>11844349
>It would definitely be an ecological disaster, they'd have corpses all over the place. You know, from all the starvation?
If the population never grew to that size to begin with. Mass starvation of humans has never destroyed ecosystems permanently, only locally (very small location) and temporarily. However, mass producing low iq, no education people has been disastrous, and was done for political reasons above all else.
>I'm not talking about the quality of human beings
That's a problem. Human society, with its higher number of members requires more overall
>, I'm talking about the production of historical knowledge and the facilitation of meaningful research into the past.
Meaningful? As in, pushing forth a class warfare underdog revolutionary triumph story into the evolutionary history of mammals and birds? That's what humans(low quality) do.
>I'm not interested in anything you have to say about what you see as a decline
Of course not. You are a programmed robot. A replacement human, a tool. Humans require things like beauty. Living inside autistic grey blocks is not good enough for humans. It has never been.
>in some abstract quality of an abstract aggregate of all humanity.
Says the leftard who is so ideologically possessed (by an entity) they can't understand distinctions between entities and their relation to the collective.
>You seem like a pretty low-IQ human being yourself, in fact.
Yeah, well it's just 130. Good enough to see past the illusions, not good enough to be a genius.

>>11844390
desu I don't care how high your IQ is

>>11844396
>desu I don't care how high your IQ is
Oh no. What do I do now?!

I'm not here to please creatures like you. I'm here to help you with your infestation.

>>11844402
t. a rat living in a wall

>>11844357
>because you would chuck me into a wood chipper if you could.
Now that is just sheer projection

>>11844421
You don't even understand entities. This means they have free reign over your body and its actions.

>>11844421
Each progressive revolution has been a massacre by any other name where people like me get staked, burned or shot, starting from the overthrow of Stuarts.

>>11844430
You need to find a historian other than Nick Land to listen to. I hear Jordan B. Peterson books are cheap this time of year.

>>11844434
How about you refute him instead, or learn some introspection?

>>11844434
That's not an argument, but you can't really refute me either so you will just bully me I guess.

>>11844435
What am I supposed to be refuting?

>>11844443
The Violence of the Progressive Revolutions, which at minimum is backed by 400 years of History, which will be very hard to argue against.

>>11844443
The thing about massacres and progressive revolutions.

>>11844438
Your argument boils down to “I feel threatened by my political opposites and don’t want to be murdered :(“

>>11844450
Still better than
>Oh no those people have {good qualities}, let's murder them!

>>11844450
Yes, woe is me, the person who doesn't want to get murdered by progressives. Getting murdered is based and redpilled!

>>11844448
>>11844449
Oh, that. No, I can’t refute it. It’s true. Revolutions are violent. So is counterrevolution. Modern life is very violent. Sometimes people commit atrocities in the name of an idea. I agree.
I do object to the assertion that because I went to college I want to throw my interlocutor into a wood chipper. It’s not true. I just want you to fuck off.
So no I can’t refute it because it’s true I don’t understand what it has to do with my claims. I really think every one of you is a moron, though. I cannot respect your opinions.

>>11844463
>I do object to the assertion that because I went to college I want to throw my interlocutor into a wood chipper
and I, do not believe you.
>I just want you to fuck off
by forcibly removing me with help, of course.

The jig is up.

>>11844463
>I do object to the assertion that because I went to college I want to throw my interlocutor into a wood chipper.
More so it's the obvious assertion that you are ideologically possessed. Your current personal feelings about the matter are of little importance. Once it becomes trendy to prove that you are a part of "your team" over another, you are willing to do anything. I mean, you can even accept modern society. It's like eating school food. There are no longer any reasonable limits.

>>11844467
I don’t give a fuck what you believe
Fuck off

>>11844470
Fuck off

>>11828668
this

Also because of stigma. The conservative revolution in general was viewed in a negative light because of the evil shadow cast by nazism over all of 1900's germany and german culture.

The funny thing is that most authors of the KonRev were more or less opposed to nazism (Spengler, Niekisch, Junger, Klages...), while arguably the most pro-nazi of the bunch (Heidegger) is still widely studied today. History goes down weird paths sometimes

>>11833609

this post is factually incorrect

>>11844473
>>11844479
Wow, that's quite aggressive behavior from our Peaceful & Tolerant Leftist. Aren't words violence according to you?

>>11844486
It's not weird at all. Heidegger is accepted by the Academia so it's okay to read him, because he has Left's Seal of Acceptance.

>>11828567
because he was an anti-britbong "socialist" and the anglobongs won the war and (re)wrote history after 1945. probably for the better all things considered. saying this as a german. fascism doesn't suit us well.

>>11844430
With the assumption that you would do the same. Violent change only comes with violent resistance. Don’t pretend that you won’t do the same to him if you could.

>>11844503
>With the assumption that you would do the same
How classy, Leftist blaming the victim and framing himself acting in self-defense over 400 years of progressive murder rampage.

>>11844490
What I find odd about this is that I haven’t actually told you anything about my politics but you assume that I’m part of a conspiracy between democratic socialists, liberals, communists, and whoever else you can think of to kill you and everyone like you
It’s fucking crazy
I hope you’ve been b8ing the whole time
The level of dishonesty that someone like you has to live with is astounding
Our entire society is founded on violence, you are complicit in violence

>>11844506
What genocide are you a victim of?

>>11844511
> Our entire society is founded on violence, you are complicit in violence

and then he wonders why I am paranoid about him having power over me.

>>11844506
Lmao that is what u are doing right now! Many times the ‘progressives’ of their times can their demands rejected and punished for it. Anytime before revolutions you can see people asking for reforms and getting desperate for change. Pretending is just gross negligence of history

>>11844517
> We asked but we couldn't win with vote or legislation so we started shooting you.
And then he wonders why I am paranoid about him having power over me.

>>11844516
Hey guess what? Your paranoia is my problem because you have just as much control over the state as I do. Assuming we’re both Americans.

>>11844523
>paranoia is my problem because you have just as much control over the state as I do
I am not a liberal, democrat, or socialist, so my power over the state is about 0.

>>11844520
>vote or legislation so we started shooting you.
You know democracy only came from the very first event that you are whining about right?

>>11844520
The fact that you unironically see an unbroken continuum of ‘progressive’ ideology stretching back 400 years shows that you have no fucking clue what the particular movements that have constituted the history of liberalism and socialism (those aren’t synonyms btw, for the high school dropouts among us) actually stood for or accomplished within their particular contexts, or their relationships between each other. You view history as a titanic struggle between the good guys (people you identify with) and the bad guys (people who do bad things). This is the most boring and superficial possible way of viewing history but I guess it’s the best to hope for here. If you weren’t so afraid of progressivism (not that such an aggregate of ideologies can possibly be said to act as a coherent unity across centuries) you might progress beyond Moldbug.

>>11844527
Can you vote?

>>11844538
>The fact that you unironically see an unbroken continuum of ‘progressive’ ideology stretching back 400 years shows that you have no fucking clue what the particular movements that have constituted the history of liberalism and socialism
Not an argument. And liberalism started going hand in hand with socialism after 1789 (the libertarian tradition of liberalism got squashed after Constitution replaced Articles of Confederation).

> You view history as a titanic struggle between the good guys (people you identify with) and the bad guys (people who do bad things).
I do consider not getting terrorized good.

>>11844541
> Actually believes in the insane construct of "1 man 1 vote = Government of the people, by the people, for the people"
Even if we accept this baseless, insane, logically inconsistent, ignorant of reality idea, there are more of you than more of me, which just, again, results me getting the bullet.

>>11844538
>You view history as a titanic struggle between the good guys (people you identify with) and the bad guys (people who do bad things).
> This is the most boring and superficial possible way of viewing history but I guess it’s the best to hope for here.
> If you weren’t so afraid of progressivism (not that such an aggregate of ideologies can possibly be said to act as a coherent unity across centuries) you might progress beyond Moldbug.
Says the guy that is in love with metaphysical construct of material dialectics of history that he'd be willing to shoot people who don't agree with it.
Shaking my damn head, son.

>>11838108
>The bigger question is Latin America and Africa
>I don't remember any author mentioning where they are headed
>any author
....well

>>11844561
That guy was racist so he is wrong.

>>11844553
>1789 (the libertarian tradition of liberalism got squashed after Constitution replaced Articles of Confederation).
Socialism only became a legitimate force with the Paris Commune in 1871 though

>>11839180
bingo

>>11844581
That's starting the causality engine too late.
Then again, I've been accused of being paranoid and I would put it at least as far as back as Hobbes.

>>11844590
>I've been accused of being paranoid and I would put it at least as far as back as Hobbes.
you don’t say...

>>11843940
>I believe in unbridled progress

there's really no better sign than this to tell that someone is a retard and an NPC

>>11845340
Retard

>>11845346
if you consider just the West, then first of all most of these metrics are meaningless, and second, increased materialism and consumerism has led directly to shittier and unhappier lives.

>>11845431
nice mental gymnastics

> this chart about overwhelming prosperity atually shows that we live in 1929 depression!
kiys

>mfw my Spengler thread reaches bump limit
very nice

>>11845482
Make another

>>11845512
no you should do it

>>11844557
>Says the guy that is in love with metaphysical construct of material dialectics of history that he'd be willing to shoot people who don't agree with it
You don't have to believe me when I tell you that this isn't true, but I'm going to tell you again anyway. This isn't true. You know nothing about my politics.

>>11845431
>if you consider just the West,
You realize that during the time period that is covered by these charts, the most powerful of the various nation-states that constitute Western civilization had world-spanning empires, right?

>>11845670
You stated as much in your love letter and oath to progressivism. It alone rests on the said understanding of time and development of the world.

>>11845684
I don’t think you’re a reasonable person. I hope I never meet you in real life. I’m sure you’d put a gun to my head, given the chance, on the flimsy pretext that you think I would take it away f rom you and put you in prison if I were ever elected president. You frighten me, anon. Your obstinate stupidity is a horrifying thing.

>>11845728
Ah, yes, the classical "I'm just shooting you in self-defense", the excuse of every progressive revolutionary out there.

You don't need to worry about meeting me.
Your post is the entire reason I will forever stay quiet and subdued, and probably eventually enslaved or shot by whatever the progressives cook up*

> * unless a literal miracle happens and you all find yourself insane and fix yourselves.

>>11845733
Actually I think a lot of revolutionaries have been very open about the fact that they kill people who pose no physical threat to them.