21–30 of 46 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He was an antidemocratic thinker I do not consider that disqualifying by itself. Plato and Socrates viewed democracy critically, too. I do agree, howeve, that the author paints an awfully one-sided picture of Spengler.
Very different to be anti democratic when Plato and Socrates were alive than in the 20th century.
Controversial in United States because americans don't like to read the writing on the wall
Depends on who is doing the writing on the wall. Lately it mostly seems to be graffiti artists.
Controversial in United States because americans don't like to read the writing on the wall
Interesting that the essay fails to mention his support of Mussolini or that he considered Judaism to be an disintegrating element and that Jews are guilty of "money thinking".
I find the writer‘s glowing admiration for Spengler disturbing. He was an antidemocratic thinker, whose books are pure speculative fiction. What the author calls „unorthodox“ methods, used to get a „holistic“ picture of historical developments, are (scientifically speaking) plain rubbish. Spengler wanted a dictator. He did not like Hitler, but was a Mussolini fanboy.
Yeah he never pretended otherwise. I'm not sure what your point is here - that there shouldn't be any antidemocratic thinkers? There should only exist people who like democracy?
Worth noting that not only was Spengler a key intellectual figure in promoting fascism (despite his later private opposition to Nazism), his 'Cesarian age' concept - predicting a dictatorship to succeed democracy - is at the root of much neo-nazism today. Specifically occult nazi ideologues like the Order of the Nine Angles have referenced his work in their eschatology. Not sure that promoting the work of an anti-mod…
> predicting a dictatorship to succeed democracy Polybius take on this is a permanent anacyclosis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anacyclosis
Looking back on that century with a couple of decades' distance, I'd say oligarchy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you please summarise the predictions for us? It'll take me a while to get to, and through, Der Untergang des Abendlandes [1], so I'm unlikely to reply in a timely manner otherwise. From what I know so far[2] I am prejudiced against it, in that ascribing seasons to civilisations (Spring/Summer/Fall/Winter) strikes me as being parallel to "technical analysis" for stocks: possibly useful for historians in descript…
There are a lot, and I'm by no means an expert myself, but a few that seem fairly recognisable in our world today would be >New civilizations emerging at the periphery of the declining ones' sphere of influence >A rise in strongmen or dictators (ceaserism) >resurgent popularity of religion
> New civilizations emerging at the periphery...
Well, they're unlikely to emerge within another's sphere, aren't they? Unless they're exceedingly civilised, civilisations behave like cuckoos to their neighbours.
> A rise in strongmen or dictators
Good point. I'll keep this in mind when reading Spengler, but as for two famous strongmen, I believe more parsimonious explanations are:
(a) Putin : neo-feudalism is what one gets when russians spend the 1980's deciding the capitalists had valid criticisms of communism, then the 1990's deciding the communists had valid criticisms of capitalism.
(b) Xi : his decisions are backed because they are popular in china, not the other way around.
and as for the third, I'm willing to wait until 2021 to collect more data, but note that his military has been, in writing, disinclined to cross the Rubicon.
> resurgent popularity of religion
[citation needed] Even in the US context, imx much more religious than ours, religion isn't resurging. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_States#...
TL;DR: unfalsifiable, true, false?
TIL Alea iacta est referred to ἀνερρίφθω κύβος (and is referred to by finyish du wedzha). https://laudatortemporisacti.blogspot.com/2017/12/let-die-be...
I think the real question is, why is this trending on HN at this particular moment in time, as opposed to six months ago, one year ago, etc, seeing how Oswald Spengler has been around for a minute, and, I’d imagine, had books written about him before. What change has caused interest in Oswald Spengler to increase? Forgive me if I’m being sensitive. It’s just, you know, the whole democracy thing, that little anti-semi…
For all people don't like the conclusions he came to in his own time, he made falsifiable predictions about the future and I'd much rather people debated those than the merits of the man who made them.
To your point, I think that not only are his predictions about the future falsifiable, but the structure itself has issues. I don't disagree with the whole notion of the cycle of seasons applied to civilizations. I think that is actually a very useful frame that connects humankind to nature and the circle of life that we could do more of. But if he wishes to use the vehicle of the cycle, then he must accept all of its implications, not just the ones which are convenient to him. From "winter" comes "spring." But according to the article "this ‘feeling’ is a remembrance rather than an anticipation. " Why should we accept this frame?
> The time of birth and rejuvenation is forever finished, metaphorically speaking. In this present phase, Spengler’s prophesising limns an authoritative ruler or ‘new emperor’ who emerges in response to the disintegration of culture. He called this the Caesarian age.
It is true that many empires of old were hereditary monarchies of strongmen rulers. Perhaps even today we see authoritarian governments with long running proto-monarchs. But will their tenure survive their lifespans? Have they built a resilient enough structure to do so? The truth is that if his own analogy holds, nature eventually "conquers" man, and winter always gives way to spring. Every empire crumbles back into nature under a relatively long timespan. If this is the case, isn't his idea of a Caesarian age somewhat optimistic and naive? Perhaps even ironically so for someone so commonly known as a pessimist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are a lot, and I'm by no means an expert myself, but a few that seem fairly recognisable in our world today would be >New civilizations emerging at the periphery of the declining ones' sphere of influence >A rise in strongmen or dictators (ceaserism) >resurgent popularity of religion
Hmm. Guess I'll have to do some reading after all. > New civilizations emerging at the periphery... Well, they're unlikely to emerge within another's sphere, aren't they? Unless they're exceedingly civilised, civilisations behave like cuckoos to their neighbours. > A rise in strongmen or dictators Good point. I'll keep this in mind when reading Spengler, but as for two famous strongmen, I believe more parsimonious ex…
How would you describe christianity in the roman empire? I might considerit a 'new civilization' once it was adpoted.
In the US, religion is in severe decline in any place near or in a city. Rural religious communities are hanging on by threads. I've seen church closings and communities that have adopted agnostic beliefs fairly qucikly in the last 4 years. Immigrants do bring a lot of religious people here but their children usually do not conform to those beliefs.
