How A German Historian Predicted The Decline Of Western Civilization 100 Years Ago

Is Western Civilization in Decline? I think nearly everyone in the manosphere would agree that it is.

There is a lot of discussion these days about America and the other nations comprising Western Civilization being in decline, and there is certainly a lot of evidence to support this claim. Whether it be dying populations among the Caucasian races that created the civilization, unchecked immigration rapidly replacing native populations in Europe and the United States, evidence that America is currently and has been behaving as an imperialistic empire but is now slowly losing its power around the world, a culture that seems to completely disregard the importance of family, the building block of civilization, or a loss of religiousness and sense of purpose, signs that something is wrong are everywhere.

You may be surprised to learn that many of the things that have been happening to Western Civilization were written down in a predictive model of history written by German historian and philosopher Oswald Spengler nearly 100 years ago.

Oswald Spengler, Prophet of Western Decline

That said, Spengler has his critics, as do many misunderstood geniuses. Right or wrong, most of the attacks on his civilization model are made by those who cannot see the forest for the trees. Because of this, his genius work has largely gone unrecognized in modern times. As with many truths, “… in every culture and society there are facts which tend to be suppressed collectively, because of the social and psychological costs of not doing so,” as stated by researcher Peter Dale Scott. A lot of people seem to be turned off by a predictive model of history since the psychological cost of admitting that humans are subject to the same cycles in nature as other animals is quite high.

Whether you agree with his ideas or not, they’re intellectually fascinating, and worth a look. This article only scratches the surface of Spengler’s epic civilization model.

The Four Seasons

Spengler equated the four cycles in human civilizations to the seasons: Spring, Summer, Autumn, and Winter. In compiling his work, he studied the 8 High Cultures thought to have existed: Babylonian, Egyptian, Indian, Chinese, Mayan/Aztec, Greek/Roman or Classical, Arab and, finally, Faustian, or what we call Western civilization. He believed each of the eight civilizations went through phases, just like the seasons. While some of those cultures are still with us, they have not been dominant cultural forces since their Winter. For example, China was referred to as a Sleeping Giant until it picked up on some of the vitality of the West.

In Spengler’s model, each culture goes through a formative Culture Stage, followed by a decadent period known as Civilization. The culture period makes up the “organic” Spring and Summer of a civilization, and is when the civilization is inspired by its own art and religion. Autumn and Winter make up the Civilization phase, in which the society becomes inorganic and is based only on the organization created during the Culture phase. The creativity seen in the Culture period slowly fades away. The civilization stiffens, and becomes overpopulated, metropolitan, and uninspired. For the purpose of this article, we will focus mainly on Western Civilization and its expression of the four seasons.

Roughly speaking, each season makes up about 250 years. This procession of “seasons” happened to all civilizations Spengler studied. Spengler said that by using his civilization model he could make predictions so accurate they would astonish people. Indeed, since 1918 through the present day, his predictions for Faustian/Western Civilization have been spot on.

The full civilization model is available here.

Four Seasons

Spengler’s civilization model – as organic as the four seasons

The Culture Phase: Spring and Summer

Spengler wrote Western civilization entered its Pre-Culture stage before 1000 AD. During that time, there is what he calls, “Chaos of primitive expression forms. Mystical symbolism and naive imitation.” As with other civilizations coming into being, in Faustian civilization there is a lot of apocalyptic imagery in this period and a fascination with death. Architecturally, the Romanesque cathedrals constructed around this time mark the beginning of the new Faustian culture form. In literature, collective epics like Beowulf and works such as The Song of Roland are published. Politically, there are “tribes and their chiefs. As yet no Politics and no State.

Moving into Spring, there is a “powerful cultural creation from awakening souls, unity and [cultural] abundance. Great creations of the newly-awakened dream-heavy soul. Super-personal unity and fullness.” Some of Faustian Civilization’s expressions of this idea were as follows: The Holy Grail romances such as Perceval, the Story of the Grail are written. Architectural style shifts from Romanesque to Gothic Cathedrals. Gregorian Chant evolves as a musical form and we hear polyphony becoming the great Western musical form. (While we are discussing polyphony, an important note is that Spengler considered infinity to be the central, motivating idea behind Faustian/Western civilization. It is expressed in its music as polyphony, in its mathematics as infinitesimal calculus, and finally through Manifest Destiny/boundless exploration conducted by Western civilization which ultimately led it to the ultimate infinity – space.)

Politically, there is the formation of “national groups of definite style and particular world-feeling: ‘nations.’ Working of an immanent state-idea.” This is sub-divided into “The two prime classes (noble and priests). Feudal economics; purely agrarian values,” transitioning into “Actualizing of the matured State-idea. Town versus countryside. Rise of Third Estate (Bourgeoisie). Victory of money over landed property.”

Moving into Summer, we see these developments in the Culture: “Ripening consciousness. Earliest urban and critical stirrings.” In Faustian civilization, the dominant literature shifts from Grail romances to novels such as Don Quixote and Shakespearean plays. Architectural forms once again shift from Gothic Cathedrals to princely palaces and polyphonic musical forms evolve into Baroque, which is the period of the birth of Classical music. In politics we see “conflicts between aristocracy and monarchy. The political center shifts from castles and estates to the cities.

Spring_Summer

Political Epochs in Spring and Summer

1. Feudalism. Spirit of countryside and countryman. The “City” only a market or stronghold. Chivalric-religious ideals. Struggles of vassals amongst themselves and against overlord. 900-1500 AD.

2. Crisis and dissolution of patriarchal forms. From feudalism to aristocratic State. 900-1500 AD.

3. Fashioning of a world of States of strict form. 1500-1800 AD.

4. Climax of the State-form (“Absolutism”) Unity of town and country (“State” and “Society.” The “three estates”) 1500-1800 AD.

5. Break-up of the State-form (Revolution and Napoleonism). Victory of the city over the countryside (of the “people” over the privileged, of the intelligentsia over tradition, of money over policy.) 1800-2000 AD.

The Civilization Phase: Autumn and Winter

The body of the people, now essentially urban in constitution, dissolves into formless mass. Megalopolis and Provinces. The Fourth Estate (“Masses”), inorganic, cosmopolitan.

We have now entered the Civilization phase as Summer transitions into Autumn. The intellect of the civilization, fully developed, begins to sterilize away the culture’s early organic nature. Spengler calls it, “Intelligence of the City. Peak of strict Intellectual creativeness.” In the West, the Enlightenment occurs during this time. Classical music peaks and then declines as an art form, further marking the shift into the Civilization phase.

The civilization becomes metropolitan, first overpopulating its cities, only to eventually begin dying out once Winter arrives. In Autumn, true art dies out in favor of metropolitan “art for the masses.” Politically, there are “struggles between the aristocracy and the bourgeoisie, Revolutions, and Napoleonism.” The American Revolution occurs during Autumn. Also in autumn we see “urban rise; peak of disciplined organizational strength.” This is the peak of the civilization, which is then followed by a “fissure in the world-urban civilization; exhaustion of mental organization strength; and irreligiousness rising.”

According to Spengler, Western world has entered Winter and its civilization is ending. He describes Winter as the “dawn of Megalopolitan Civilization. Extinction of spiritual creative force. Life itself becomes problematical. Ethical-practical tendencies of an irreligious and unmetaphysical cosmopolitanism.”

Over the coming decades, Spengler expects the intellect of our civilization to fade, people to stop reading and thinking as the civilization as a whole loses interest in thought, and the government to become autocratic/tyrannical. Art will further devolve into “meaningless subjects of fashion.” The population comprising the civilization will continue dying off as it loses touch with the myths and culture it was founded upon. We are also experiencing the “spread of the Final World Sentiment” of our civilization as the spread of Socialism around the world. As government becomes autocratic we can expect “primitive human conditions slowly thrust up into the highly-civilized mode of living.” Our great works and most of our technology will fade and lie in ruins as the population comprising our civilization fades away. First the countryside and then the cities will depopulate (as seen in the Rust Belt and now cities like Detroit.) Spengler says we should also expect conquests of our now-exhausted civilization by “young peoples eager for spoil, or [foreign] conquerors” as the imperial machinery of the State falls apart.

Keep in mind – this was all predicted in 1918 by Spengler even though it sounds as if it was written today!

Winter_Sun

Political Epochs in Autumn and Winter

1. Domination of Money (“Democracy”). Economic powers permeating the political forms and authorities. 1800-2000 AD.

2. Victory of force-politics over money. Increasing primitiveness of political forms. Inward decline of the nations into a formless population, and constitution thereof as an Imperium of gradually-increasing crudity of despotism. 2000-2200 AD.

3. Private and family policies of individual leaders. The world as spoil. Egypticism, Mandarinism, Byzantinism. Historyless stiffening and enfeeblement even of the imperial machinery, against young peoples eager for spoil, or alien conquerors. Primitive human conditions slowly thrust up into the highly-civilized mode of living. After 2200 AD.

The Future, Echoing Roman Civilization

In the Winter of Roman politics there was a shift from the Roman Republic to Caesarism, or government led by a charismatic strongman. Eventually, the idea of representation broke down and there was a shift to bloody “force politics.”

Of course, our current government is modeled on the Roman system. There are even similarities between the two dominant parties. In Rome, the two dominant parties were the Optimates and Populares, the Republicans and Democrats of their day. This form of representative government eventually stops working because the system of checks and balances interfere with each other, causing gridlock. Force politics (killing people) eventually comes along to break the gridlock. (As an aside, some historians say it’s possible we entered this era in 1963 with the assassination of JFK by the military-industrial complex.) Arguably, this predictive model is spot-on with the current situation in the Western world. So, if Spengler’s model is correct, we are awaiting the rise of a dictator to come along and smash the rotten edifice of democracy sometime this century.

Democracy_Greece

Spengler thought Democracy was the form of government of a civilization in decline

Spengler on Democracy

Spengler did not have a very high opinion of democracy. He believed it was the form of government of a civilization in decline, and interestingly the idea of mass democracy arrived in the Winter of Faustian/Western Civilization. Spengler viewed democracy as a weapon of moneyed interests, who use the media to create the illusion that there is consent from the governed. To him, the notion of democracy is really no different than living under a plutocracy (government by a wealthy elite.) Using the media’s propaganda, money is turned into force and controls people’s lives.

The leftist causes that have dominated the last century, such as equalism, feminism, and Socialism, to Spengler, were only tools used to assist the moneyed powers to be more effective.

The decline is also marked by increasingly authoritarian leaders as the democracy breaks down. Monetary powers permeate the government, eventually destroying it. This is where we currently are on Spengler’s timeline, which leads to what Spengler expects will happen in the West: The rise of a a Caesar as democracy, dominated by money, crumbles under its own corruption. People will cease to participate in elections, and the best candidates will remove themselves from politics. Spengler thinks blood is the only force that can conquer the force of money.

A New Spring After the Winter?

Spengler’s predictions of decline, as prescient as they have been over the last century, may leave you feeling a sense of hopelessness after studying his work. However, as one culture and civilization fades away, it’s very likely another will arise as part of this organic cycle.

John David Gebser later studied Spengler’s work, and believes a new consciousness will emerge from the ashes of the old civilization. Just as Western civilization was built upon the ashes of Ancient Greece and Rome, a new civilization may well be built on the ashes of our own.

The Decline of the West, published in 1918 and largely unknown today, is work that very well could be among the greatest ideas ever conceived by the human mind. It smashes the linear model of history (always moving upward) presented in the public school system, and instead presents the idea that throughout history man and his civilizations go through periods of birth, growth, decline, and death.

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh’s book Free Speech Isn’t Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.

Read More: Why Sex Selfies Signal The Decline Of Western Civilization

175 thoughts on “How A German Historian Predicted The Decline Of Western Civilization 100 Years Ago”

  1. I’ll have to read , still don’t know of a collapse is upon us nut there is definitely a decline , I was just watching ” once upon a time in America ” and now reading this the sentiment has set in.

  2. What I find fascinating is that this was written in 1918… perhaps the “peak” of western civilization. Although it WAS published at the end of the Great War, which was the single largest destructive blow that brought about the decline, one wonders, what made this man turn his mind to decline and dystopia when he was living at the Very Best Time? (The war, certainly, is reason enough–I just wonder if he was that prescient or if he was already pondering such ideas before the war broke out)
    Another great (and long) read is Jacques Barzun’s From Dawn To Decadence: 1500 to Present. I think I paid $50 for my copy, and it’s shockingly less than $15 new now. A great holistic read by an old French historian and cultural critic in his 90s, and recommended by the great Keith Richards!

    1. Maybe , if he was studying other civilizations , he linked it to the first half of the Peloponnesian war which eventually ended Athens . But the only thing is the time scale doesn’t match up . Our he thought that since the world now played on a bigger scale the time tables increased

      1. Gasset is underrated and unknown. Pity, his whole take on the mass man explains why we can have so many idiots coming out of places like Yale and Harvard: brilliant in their tiny narrow speciality of all human knowledge, who then lacking humility, fail to realize they are at the same level of knowledge as a lay man in all other subjects. He also hints that intelligence does not equal wisdom or knowledge of the truth.
        Also, don’t forget the civilization cycles as described by Plato, Aristotle and Ciscero, among a few others from the ancient past.
        And finally Smokingjacket, technology and civilization are on different tracks. So long as the text books used to teach surgeons are not destroyed, surgery should still progress even as a cultural dark age takes over. It won’t progress as quickly, may even stall and backslide a little, but tech and knowledge are just tools. The problem for progressives is they believe history is exactly like technology, rather than seeing that they are separate.

        1. “He also hints that intelligence does not equal wisdom or knowledge of the truth” I would suggest that it’s identical to the divergence between cleverness and intelligence. You can educate a person to be clever like a performing parrot, but, intelligence, although not on the same order as understanding and wisdom, is nevertheless an innate state that cuts across a variety of different domains, like men who are naturally intelligent with their hands, like a good surgeon and other men who can use them to play the guitar singularly. This type of intelligence beyond the mere mechanical manipulation of instrument and hand is dependent on intelligence and not mere cleverness, and, it’s much more pronounced in males than females.

    2. A good book, I just love that it was written when Barzun was in his 90s!
      Spengler’s take on what is decline is a little idiosyncratic. In short he regards a healthy civilization as one where great genius manifests itself spontaneously and organically. He didn’t see this happening in 20th century Europe.
      He spends a good deal of time discussing music so I’ll use an example from there. Spengler believed (I think correctly) that the height of European music was the baroque fugue as composed by Bach and his many lesser contemporaries. Spengler argues that Bach’s brilliance isn’t so much the shocking thing as how effortless and organic it seems to someone who reads his letters and biography. Spengler asserts that if someone travelled back in time and asked him how he could have managed to compose something so perfect as the little fugue in g minor or the saint Matthew’s Passion he probably would have blinked and said something like “well I had a nice commission that week and I didn’t want to lose it.” He goes on to compare Bach unfavorably with Wagner who he feels had to nearly kill himself to write each note and produced a much less excellent corpus (I have no idea why intellectuals all seem to love to beat up on Wagner).
      It’s a long book and there are countless other similar examples from nearly every field of endeavor but that’s the one that stood out for me. His analysis of math is also very interesting.

      1. Interesting. There have been a few threads here on classical music here, and what I’ve found interesting is the *audience* of music today versus then. For example, when certain pieces like the Rite of Spring were performed, they caused riots. I hear them today, and have very little reaction besides like or dislike. It’s interesting to ponder what are these great differences. Were the audiences much more musically intelligent, and could understand and analyze pieces better than today where we just hear a catchy refrain and smile? Was the lack of competing forms of media a factor in focusing all one’s attention on the music? Were there stronger norms and rules and this was a social backlash for breaking them?

    3. Spoiled rich white kids with guns = white on white war mongering.
      The Caucasoids biggest fail is their arrogance & ignorance.

      1. Yes. Start with the later portions of Vico’s “New Science”. He lays out ground work/formula that all the “End of West” writers used, including Nietzsche.

  3. Fascinating subject. Very disappointed to learn that Spengler didn’t come up with the phrase “enjoy the decline,” or the bit about screwing as many sluts as possible before the whole thing collapses.
    I’ve always meant to read this. I’m a bit unsure about any kind of ‘historicism’ – to use the word in the Popperian sense that history can be predicted, except he does seem to have done rather a good job of doing just that. Specially the bit about slutty women everywhere. I imagine the first world war wouldn’t have inspired him with much optimism for the future, although perhaps his ideas pre-dated that cataclysm.
    I’m fine with the idea that history may be cyclical, and it’s a welcome change in a sense from the idea of progress that is drilled into our heads and which seems to equate with more and more social liberalism, but equally the problem with this kind of history is whatever the commonalities with previous civilizations there are also discontinuities, particularly with regard to technology, which however advanced it may be, may not have exhausted itself quite.

  4. Good to see that there are other people who can recognize patterns and pickup the subtle symbols and signs that are all around us. Simple laws of nature that have been known for thousands of years.
    Many decide to ignore or dismiss these laws on the premise that they are hard to prove or that they make no logical sense. But even if you can ignore them or don’t understand yet, that will not make them less true.
    And one such law is the law of seasons.
    Everything in life works based on those seasons, and there will always be shifts between one to another. Days will turn into Night, Summers into Winters and Life to Death. And just like that Civilizations will rise and they will fall.
    But of course, we reject to believe that, as we would rather like to believe that we are for some reason special. Sadly, we’re not.
    Winter is coming, and we have the front seats.

    1. And it happens each and every time when women get into power, meaning having “power” to influence important things (that they have no real understanding of) by constant bitching, and stopping doing what they are good at.

      1. What do you consider women to be good at? Women have high emotional intelligence and are generally more diplomatic than their male counterparts, but nevermind that…

        1. “Emotional intelligence and diplomacy” will be very useful when negotiating if she can be raped or beheaded. Women are defenceless, weak and easily frightened. That is why they cannot lead a society. Any society that has matrirchy hasn’t gone past 1 story huts. Google it.

        2. You’re a misogynistic prat. Women may be physically weaker than men but we are tougher than you in other ways (which is why we have children and you don’t). And women are no more “easily frightened” than men lol, get out of the 1950s please…

        3. Actually Mesopotamia aka the world’s first civilised society afforded women leadership roles and seemed to have done very well out if it. Same for most other Pagan societies. Patriarchy, on the other hand, was so ineffective it even harmed the people it was supposed to benefit (male conscription, for instance). Don’t argue History with somebody who actually knows it, and you can shove you patronising Google crap up your arse.

        4. In another comment, you claimed that only in politics and STEM were men still leading due to “discrimination” (basically, whenever women are losing, it’s due to unfairness) while you crow about superiority and tease men as losers when you’re winning (a bad winner and sore loser, what a surprise.)
          My wife loves so-called reality TV about different women who spend a lot of time fighting with other women over imagined or over-exaggerated slights and insults. Women as more diplomatic? Hahahaha! Any honest woman can tell you that women are hyper aggressive and easily slighted and this is why they get into spats far more easily than men.

        5. Why are you talking as if it’s 800 AD or something anyway? I don’t think we really need to physically fight our enemies anymore. *sigh*

  5. That which has been is that which will be,
    And that which has been done is that which will be done.
    So there is nothing new under the sun.
    Is there anything of which one might say,
    “See this, it is new”?
    Already it has existed for ages
    Which were before us.
    There is no remembrance of earlier things;
    And also of the later things which will occur,
    There will be for them no remembrance
    Among those who will come later still.
    Ecclesiastes 1:9-11 NASB
    Written by King Solomon the wise man around 1000 BC

    1. Great quote, great verse, but..
      “there is nothing new under the sun.”
      choosing your own gender pronouns on facebook or wherever. If that’s subject to eternal cyclical return we are genuinely stuck in a nightmare

      1. There was a roman emperor who had gender surgery. But I can’t remember his name.
        Edit : I found him, but it’s not clear if his attempt was successful. ihttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elagabalus#Sex.2Fgender_controversy

        1. interesting, elegabus seems to have been the caitlyn jenner of his time, had five wives, divorced them was very gay, played rent boy and was assassinated and beheaded with his mother at 18. But did he like to be referred to as ze?
          I can if they could build a viaduct they could do something similar down below

      2. Eh, you don’t really seem to get it. Of course King Solomon isn’t saying that the exact same thing has already existed before.
        He is saying that it might appear new, but that it has indeed already existed in another form.

  6. I am glad people are looking into Spengler.
    I would also suggest Julius Evola. Great philosopher from that period. Believed in masculinity and traditionalism as well as cyclical nature of history simmilar to Spengler.
    In my opinion the Whig vision of history, one where it moves in a straight line towards progress (the same vision modern liberals have) is the biggest blue pill myth around.
    It’s what justifies uselless degenerate social change, because “progress”, and it has to happen and it’s 2016 smh !
    http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/038/200/933.jpg
    No, history is a cycle, and now we are in a decline. According to Evola we are living in the Age of Kings of Labor. That is the last stage before great social cataclysms and a great restart.
    https://media.8ch.net/neoreaction/src/1427316104887.png
    It’s very interesting to see how Spengler’s and Evola’s vision of history overlap. The simmilarities between our times and the late roman empire are eerie.
    Right now, modernity is reaching it’s peak. It will soon be devoured because of ethnic frictions between first worlders and third worlders as well as declining birth rates and decadence, cynicism and loss of hope and meaning.
    Great cataclysms await. We are witnessing the last stages of a dying civilizaton.
    But soon enough the great restart will hapen. We are living in interesting times gentlemen.

    1. I’m currently reading Evola’s Ride the Tiger. It’s a dense, fragmented and multifaceted critique that nevertheless breaks through the low cloud cover that Spengler’s much more pessimistic assessment never achieves.

      1. Looking at your other comment I guess that you are talking about medicine and other advancements.
        I would generally agree, but I don’t think that was Spengler’s point.
        He does not value technical achievements because as long as these don’t prevent that their culture gets overthrown, they are worthless for the actual advancement of humanity.
        What good, relatively, is the technology of our ancestors as it has been lost?

        1. But, Spengler was influenced exclusively by German Romanticism, honestly do you think that even 10% of the people who read this blog have any interest in Wagner’s Operas and the poetry of Holderlin?

        2. Of course not, but I think there wouldn’t be much of a difference for Spengler anyway. What change for humanity brings any kind of achievement when it will eventually be lost? You said it yourself. The cultural achievements might be there, but who actually cares about them now? What is culture worth when nobody cares about it?
          Meaning, in total, that there hasn’t been an actual advancement of humanity made.
          The only difference from all these great cultures is that we now have a good chance to survive and learn from this decline.
          No matter how pathetic our armies might get, through technology we still hold most of the power. It could be that we will be the first to learn from this.

    2. Evola is becoming more and more relevant with every day.
      Winter is coming, time to build the wall and join the night’s watch in the fight against mindless zombies.

    3. I almost completely agree. But surprisingly enough I think that this decline right now is a good thing.
      Yes, I am even saying that feminism is a good thing. At least right now.
      Every great civilization had power until it’s cultural and general decline obviously.
      We however are the first to be able to still overpower our “enemies” regardless of our pathetic army or armies. With technology we have achieved a level of stability that can currently not be overthrown by our enemies.
      Don’t get me wrong we will obviously still have a hard time but it’s just perfect in that regard too. Western civilization is made up out of many extremely intertwined, yet semi independent countries. That means when one country falls or just fails (doesn’t have to be through war) the others will learn from it. Remember, until now no culture had the chance to learn out of this one grave mistake.
      Certainly, those are interesting times as we live at an everlasting turning point for humanity.

        1. Yeah, to some degree it truly seems planned. Especially the thing with the mass immigration. Because we cannot be subverted by force at this point so they have to do it sneakily and slowly with a Trojan horse. It’s almost scary that these people are only acting on their own stupidity.
          But I personally think that they really only recognize our relative success and just want to share it with the world in their typical naive manner.

        2. “It’s almost scary that these people are only acting on their own stupidity.”
          I would not discount the possibility that this is done consciously out of malice.
          The most common theories is that it is an attempt to destroy Western society by organized jewish activism combined with collaboration from R-selected scum and opportunists.
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PSPTGTpzbiI

          http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-OhQgcShhrcM/UzK1ob9KrRI/AAAAAAAAM38/CsUJ7V30L9E/s1600/kalergi+4.jpg

        3. Well, I certainly don’t want to undermine our enemy’s general malice, but I still tend to believe that this too is based on utter naïveté and “doing the right thing”.
          There are not many who actually just do things for the sake of being evil and destruction.
          They see these last remainders of former glory and power simply as threat to their own “good” world view and well being.
          I have to say that the data you provided is obviously something, but I think of ideological movements still more like waves. I don’t deny that there are people and even people of power that deliberately try to subvert our culture and yes some do so simply out of hatred.
          My opinion is that there isn’t really that much of organization or a master plan but more of a general push in a certain direction. There are radical peaks and lows of people of that movement that work together situationally.
          I think there has to be some saying for such typical, mindless collectiveness of weaklings and cowards…
          Oh, right, “together we are strong”.

        1. Justin Trudeau is like the worst man to ever exist on the face of the earth.. Either that or it is all a really good act.

    4. The Rising Tide of Color: The Threat Against White World-Supremacy (1920), by Lothrop Stoddard,
      96 years old and spot on….Stoddard saw the problem very clearly almost 100 years ago too.

      1. An let’s not forget “The Camp of the Saints”.
        The french author even recently commented on the current invasion, saying “I told you”.
        galliawatch.blogspot.com/2015/09/jean-raspail-we-are-only-at-beginning.html

      2. If you like Stoddard’s “The Rising Tide of Color”, you should also check out “The Revolt Against Civilization : The Menace of the Under-Man” (1922). It explains how the decline of the West can be traced back to the French revolution and how the process can be reversed!

    5. Which book(s) by Evola do you recommend that cover his civilization all theories? What books by him to recommend overall to this community?

      1. The trinity of works that relate to modern decline of Evola’s work are :
        Revolt Against the Modern World, Men Among Ruins and Ride the Tiger.
        All are relevant to masculinity but for a different reason.
        In the first Evola describes his ideal society of traditionalism where a man can fully realize himself. Simmilar to a vision of society neomasculinists might envision.
        His second one was not a theoretical book, but an APPLICATIONAL book, where he proposed solutions to enact his vision of society upon the post WW2 broken world. He starts off by discussing the fascist movements of Italy and Germany, pointing out where in his opinion they succeded and where they failed. He later became disappointed with what he saw around him and became dissilusioned in regards to a collective solution to the decline. Then he wrote his final book in the series.
        Ride the Tiger is probably the most iconic one, and most relevant to the discussion of civilizational downfall and PERSONAL action one can take during such.
        “Ride the Tiger” is essentially a less hedonistic “Enjoy the Decline”. While in “Enjoy the Decline” Aaron Clarey argues one should stop giving a fuck and just fuck hookers, because why not, in “Ride the Tiger” Evola proposes individual self actualizations and elevating oneself to an aristocrat depite the struggles of soulless modernity. This is the essence of “Ride the Tiger”.
        In my opinion this echoes the problems denoted by Roosh and Neomasculinity, wherein men try to find a way to self-actualize despite living in a degenerate world.
        All 3 are relevant to Neomasculinity and the ROK community.
        The first one mirrors the desire for a harmonious society and how it should look like, which can inspire ROK in regards to their vision of a perfect society in line with tradition.
        The second one mirrors somewhat ROKs struggle to find a traditionalist solution to a modern world. In fact the term -neo masculinity should hint at that. All though due to it’s treatise on fascism and it’s qualities it is less relevant to ROK.
        The third one is great as a more MGTOW type of PERSONAL solution to the current decline. It can inspire men to be moral and aristocratic in times where moral plebes have taken hold of society. It mirrors our desire for spiritual development in the world of social justice.
        Therefore, I would mostly recommend “Revolt against the modern world” and “Ride the Tiger” as the most relevant to the ROK community.
        His other books are interesting but less relevant to ROK than the previously mentioned ones.

    6. “It will soon be devoured because of ethnic frictions between first worlders and third worlders as well as declining birth rates and decadence, cynicism and loss of hope and meaning.”
      This is becoming more and more true with every passing year.
      As time progresses I gradually and gradually become more willing to accept the idea of a Caesar or fascist regime.
      Anything beats this stagnation and rot.
      Every day it feels like I am listening to the screams of idiots.

  7. Spengler is partially correct, but, overall he fails to appreciate the positive impacts that both science and technology are having on humanity.
    From the field of medicine for example, in 1918 any patient presenting symptoms of brain tumors would have a grim prognosis, often dying with excruciating pain, discomfort and distress. In 2016, a competent and seasoned Neurosurgeon can operate on up to four patients a day with varying types of tumors with success rates of 70% or more, and, this is a result of vast improvements in technology, surgical techniques and anesthetics that have greatly improved the prognosis. Similar types of progress have been made in all the other field of medicine too, and, mortality rates have risen while infant death births have fallen dramatically in the same period.
    The problem with academics and writers like Spengler is that they measure all of civilization with a cultural yardstick that proclaims that everything is in a state of decline which when you examine it objectivity is not entirely accurate.

    1. “From the field of medicine for example, in 1918 any patient presenting
      symptoms of brain tumors would have a grim prognosis, often dying with
      excruciating pain, discomfort and distress.”
      I see what you mean, but in my mind, this kind of progress is hugely overrated : what’s the point of expanding life span just for the sake of expanding life span ?
      We live longer than ever, and yet we’re dumber than ever. We’re spiritual corpses. Spineless creatures with technological skeletons.
      If our technological progress was really worth it, we should all be Michaelangelos right now. The world should look like a work of art. And yet here we are, the self centered hedonistic faustian generation.

      1. “We live longer than ever, and yet we’re dumber than ever. We’re spiritual corpses. Spineless creatures with technological squeletons” When you see people who are extremely ill, especially children, you experience a different side of humanity. Even the most confident and powerful men in our world are humbled by the sight of the surgeon’s knife.

      2. It’s also improving things only on the fringes. Yeah, if I’m born deaf, the internet opens up whole new worlds to me. And if I have some obscure disease, modern surgery can operate on my brain. But what about the rest of the 99.9999% of us? I’d argue that life is worse for everyone else.

        1. How is it worse? Everyone eventually ends up in a hospital? I suppose you’re asking a more philosophical question like what’s all our good health for when the majority of men are confined to boring, soul destroying work in an office that makes no demand upon body, mind or character. The peculiar, but, obvious point is that the majority of people take their good health for granted and don’t appreciate it until it’s either disappearing or gone. Patients who survive, especially if they’re young after a serious illness or regain their mobility after a road traffic accident generally value life and its worth phenomenally. It’s a shame that it takes such extremes to awaken this appreciation in people and oddly this is the corollary to your observation that we often feel the world has gotten worse, because our potential as men is being drained away by the mediocrity and dullness of the world we’ve created, especially in terms of the neurotic and tedious way many men just become mere obedient drones after 30 years of age.

      3. I don’t think technological progress is an indication of a great civilization. The ability to create technology is something that is build in and no matter what it will always advance.

      4. “If our technological progress was really worth it, we should all be Michaelangelos right now. The world should look like a work of art. And yet here we are, the self centered hedonistic faustian generation.” — That’s because given the greatest tools for creating and storing information, as well as a communications revolution the world has never known…(computers, Internet, Smartphones), the people, with access to this technology choose not to become Rembrandt, Michelangelo, or DeVinci with the resources at their fingertips, but instead concentrate on uploading videos of kittens falling off tables.

    2. I would agree, but would point out that your observation shares the same cyclical characteristics of a market bubble. While it may extend the length of a season, it in no way prevents the season from ending, or the bubble popping. It’s just a bigger bubble that makes a much greater pop.

      1. Human beings have always tried to transcend (especially males) the strict and often cruel laws of nature. Medicine, Technology and the Arts are all different attempts to fulfill this same desire.
        I’m not so sure that one fine day we’ll will reach a state where we’ll actually either escape or control the popping bubble, however, it’s difficult to envisage this in a society where the male “wandering” principle for exploration and detached perfection has become either neutered or happy with domesticity under the rule of one’s incurious and literal minded wife.

        1. That’s the liberal dream, though, isn’t it? Going back to Locke, Paine, even earlier. The denial of human nature and of natural law; the view of man as somehow separate from the natural world. The blank slate.

    3. Advances in medicine and such have actually weakend our genes . People that would generally die out now have the chance to breed

        1. I don’t think he is. You are for certain. Your small brain is only able to repeat the most mainstream things, and complete the most simple tasks. In short, you don’t think, you mimic.
          Hitlers rise to power were dependent on people like you, just like the rise of Feminazi.
          Without a huge apparatus supporting you and your illogical ideas, you would be long gone.

      1. Well, it’s not a question of genetics, but, sensible adaptation to the potentials of technology in surgery. You are a soldier for example and God forbid anything happens to you in the field, however, the use of prosthesis and devices that can be rewired to damaged parts of the brains, rightfully gives these ex-soldiers an almost near normal level of life again. Logically, if we followed your advice we’d let our fallen comrades die out after they’ve been injured because they’re no longer “useful”. We have to be very carefull when we end up valuing human beings in purely pragmatic terms as it potentially opens up a moral abyss.

        1. That’s not what I’m talking about . I’m talking about people with terminal diseases that can be transmitted through the placenta , genetic birth defects , and so on . It’s obviously helped in military application but so has the invention of the gun and artillery.

        2. You can’t separate surgical intervention upon these lines, maybe you’re talking about eugenics which I don’t subscribe to. None of us should play God, we’ve no right to.

        3. Not talking about improving genetics , merely stating that improvements in medicine have allowed people who wouldn’t generally be able to reproduce be able to . Which over time has weakened our genetics

        4. Mutations are actually good for the overall population as they allow for the development of natural resistance when diluted across a large sample. Besides, I’ve never believed that you can or should measure human worth purely in such stark terms as ethically it’s almost impossible to draw a line between acceptable and unacceptable conditions and it justifies abortion which I’m opposed to.

        5. Mutations are not terminal diseases and such , that’s merely evolution . I’m talking about science allowing people to live far longer than their god intended them too . As for abortion , if I had a child that was born with an crippling abnormality or had a advanced warning I would terminate it . Ethics are fun to talk about but allowing someone to live just for the sake of it does not benefit humanity as a whole . We are only as strong as our weakest link . If we allow people with illnesses and abnormalities to breed and passes these on it weakens us as a whole

        6. ” I’m talking about science allowing people to live far longer than their god intended them too ” In a world without religious faith this is what people not only expect but indeed demand.
          ” As for abortion , if I had a child that was born with an crippling abnormality or had a advanced warning I would terminate it” Yes, but, that’s the extreme case, with about a child born with a hearing or sight difficulty or a male who has genes that predisposed him to homosexuality, can we justify abortion in these cases?
          ” If we allow people with illnesses and abnormalities to breed and passes these on it weakens us as a whole” Every human being has the potential to generate some offspring with a particular condition, this doesn’t mean they’re weakening us as a whole.

        1. Any case studies or peer reviews are relatively hard to come by. No scientist could get the funding to prove that modern medicine has lead to a weaker gene pool . But behind closed doors it’s a big topic of discussion

        2. How so ? If anything modern medicine goes against Darwin . It’s adds an intangible . We have many articles comparing ourselves to primates who don’t have what we have . Their lack of medicine means only the strongest and most able to adapt survive .

        3. Darwin was an euginist, White supremacist, and misogynistic(literally)
          Remember this was created during colonial times. Bad comparison evolution is just a Theory too

        4. If you have a group of whatever species and let them breed with out interference , for the most part ,only the strongest genetics will make it through . If you , however , through some intangible into the mix , in this case modern medicine. Animals from that group that would normally not live to able to reproduce are reproducing therefor passing on undesirable traits .I’m not saying its bad , but it is fact

        5. All humans contain bad traits only difference is we can identify them.
          I already asked for proof and you don’t seem to budge.
          But thing is wouldn’t modern medicine counter act said effects?

        6. As I stated before , you’d be hard pressed to get funding for a study that points out a serious flaw in modern medicine but having been around people in that field it comes up often in conversation. There are traits specific to sex (thyroid cancer ) and race (sickle cell ) some are unavoidable no matter what you do and some can be prevented by having a mixed child .

        7. I see, despite very little evidence and demographic support…..you choose to believe this. Idealism is a disease brother

        8. So how many classes have you had on microbiology, toxicology , and genetics ? You’re 18 kid , can’t learn everything from behind a computer

        9. I can’t give any study or peer review that would be worth your time . But just read history, or before written history , about the conditions which the human body was exposed to and what it was susceptible to and what it is susceptible to now. You could feed a whole castle in medieval times with the caloric intake of one American and look at what they did. Through time and our “civilization” . These traits have disappeared, men have to have “testosterone replacement therapy ” now , the fuck?

        10. Calories are nonsense, it’s the GMO processed nonsense we eat now days that’s fattening everyone
          Fyi we have an immune system.

        11. Caloriac intake has played a great if not the greatest role in human development. It’s the reason the population is as high is at is , it’s why the average height of humans has increased , it plays a role in the development of the brain and the body .

        12. LMFAO, you didn’t do your research?
          First it’s banned most of the world, 2nd it brought a lot of farmers out of businesses making food more expensive(which made hunger in host countries 3x bigger)
          3rd, they lead to a lot of health problems, why do you think the companies don’t want any labeling? Or why the said growers Don’t eat the same products they grow

        13. I know maize is the first GMO, thing is it’s also extremely unhealthy and mainly used for industrial purposes

    4. There’s not room in the article to go over everything he has to say but Spengler wrote a whole book on the role of technology called Man and his Technics relating to technological inertia and its place in the West. In short, his view is that it is not so much technological power that reveals ascendancy in a civilization but said civilization’s confidence in its own ideals, something that the West is sorely lacking since at least WWII.

      1. I love the paintings of Vermeer one of the great Dutch masters (perhaps world master) of still life painting. I even spent an entire week in Delft one summer meticulously retracing his steps from certain paintings and views at particular times of day to get a more fulsome appreciation of his skills. At the end of the process, I realized, despite buying the natural raw materials he would have had to adulterate through his pastes and paints etc, that we’d now never be able to even copy faithfully what he done. The reason for this relates to our loss in the sensibility that he and his fellow members of the craftsman guild had back then. We’ll never regain that discipline and craftsmen, as it was produced by the patriarchal and tradition social order he inhabited. So, what you state is actually very true- techne- to borrow Heidegger’s use from Greece cannot create in itself the pinnacles and ideals of what our civilization is capable of.

    5. Yes, we are able to do wonderful things with science and technology. But we are doomed to repeat the cycles of empires described above, because human nature doesn’t change.
      The only question is how much of our current science and tech will be left in the rubble for the next empire to build on.

      1. A lot, look at medieval times compared to early Rome.
        Rome was just a Greek like city state that at the end of the 400 AD as as advanced as medieval Normandy

    6. They have had the cure for various cancers for ages, people in the med industry are covering it up and making profit.

    7. Technology advances in those times as well. However culture determines what happens with them. Either something amazing beautiful is done with them or as with our spiritual decline creating shit.

  8. This makes a lot of sense. I had the chance to see the pyramids of Egypt in 1985. While there I said to myself that there is no way these people here are the same people that built these pyramids.
    Chine was a super advance state/nation and brought gunpowder and paper etc. to the world and look at them now. What makes a civilization is cultural and not technology and advanced things based.

      1. The real progress is the socialization between men. It is measured or an indicator is the technical achievements and art. Those things show a society that encourages and allows individual thought and expression. The kind of things that make life great.

    1. Thats how I feel when I walk the streets of any large Western city – I see ocean of third world faces and think – these are not the people who built all of that

      1. They did most of the physical labor.
        And if you’re referring to America, a great deal of the intellectual labor as well.

      1. World prosperity and technology advance as white people increase as proportion of world population.
        World prosperity and technology decline as white people decrease as proportion of world population.
        What’s happening as to white people demographically now in the world? Declining. And so will the state of the world.

    2. Yes I bet the Ancient Egypt was taking over by “peaceful migrants”..In 2000 yeas they will say the same about Sweden “There’s no way these people build this”.

  9. Fascinating. There are also 4 seasons to a man’s wardrobe : Winter, Spring, Summer, and Fall. Knowing where your color palette lies is crucial to building a winning clothes ensemble. I would rank it as the single most important factor in building the killer wardrobe.
    No wonder the Nazis had the coolest uniforms. Their dramatic use of black and red fit perfectly with their blonde hair, fair skin, and blue eyes. Had they selected autumn tones they probably wouldn’t have conquered anybody.

    1. While what you say is true. Black and Red are winter type colors. It is good for guys with big contrast between skin color and hair or guys with darker skin and hair. To me they are closer to a Spring type, due to very stark white skin and tendency towards light hair and eyes, and maybe a few Summer types. Although they had a fair amount of autumn type brunettes as well.
      https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/51/1c/6b/511c6bd3c17d433dfaf37c7071de2f97.jpg
      Black and White tend to fit everybody. Not to mention their SA units were “brownshirts” as opposed to “blackshirts” in Italy. Black was the color of SS units.
      https://41.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m8tganmwDo1rzvfwko1_500.jpg
      Not to mention Hitler’s attraction to the color “gold”.
      http://hollywoodprop.com/Hitler0.jpg
      (min 1:04)
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kW2lmm7PqdM

      1. You make some fair points, Sir. Though Autumns do not look good in blacks and whites. That can be a problem since autumn tones don’t project a strong image in business wear. As R.Don Steele says “If it’s brown, flush it down.” Maybe Hitler eliminated the SA to get rid of those ghastly brown shirts they were wearing and couldn’t talk any fashion sense into that homo Ernst Rohm.
        Determining one’s color palette can take a fair amount of work as not everyone fits cleanly within each season. The benefits to enhancing your appearance as well as streamlining your wardrobe are well worth the effort.
        Here’s a simplified guide I assembled to help the neophytes get started. Consider your action persona and tactical requirements so you can be color coordinated no matter what life throws at you :

  10. I feel like it’s mostly because people are incapable of accepting or even facing hard truths. Essentially, it’s because we’re surrounded by spineless faggots too mentally weak to take a necessary and difficult course of action.

  11. But Western decline isn’t coinciding with the rise of another great civilization. We can look through history and see that where great civilizations were supplanted as a result of competition and a superior civilization overcoming the old decaying leader, it coincided with human progress (e.g., European imperialists taking over the third world, British replacing the Spanish, Americans replacing the British). Where great civilizations are overwhelmed by barbarians due to internal decay or inferior numbers, poverty and backwardness follow (the Dark Ages after the fall of Rome, Eastern Europe under the Russians vs. Germans/Austrians, immigrant dominated areas of the West).

  12. This sounds similar to Fate of Empires by John Glubb. It’s a very short read and describes similar phases of empires before they fall.

  13. Yes, white people > rest.
    Now back to this whole legal rape thing. Does it bother you that alot of you would have been at the emasculate end? How would you then, in good conscience, have made your return to these forums? There wouldn’t be much masculinity, or return of kinglyness in such an re-entry imo.

  14. On a related note, another important read from German history is Martin Luther’s “Table Talk.”
    A key takeaway is that Luther ended Germany’s obedience to Rome. By doing so, he strengthened Germany’s sovereignty – something that other countries in Europe were not pleased with (particularly those that wanted to control Germany). This is an important part of the 95 theses that is often ignored.
    The great irony is that now we have a German Pope. This fact would be incomprehensible in Luther’s time. I am not big on conspiracies, but after reading Luther, I am starting to think we have a conspiracy in the making – an attempt to further weaken the German spirit
    In short, by embracing a German Pope, Germans are automatically distancing themselves from Martin Luther. On some level, it’s like an eradication of their history – a indirect censoring of one of their greatest thinkers.

    1. Luther’s legacy to Germany was a continuous religious divide that made the country regress in many aspects and led to a 30 year war, an Ur-Katastrophe that destroyed Germany, depopulated it and turned it into a ghost nation made up of over 100 kingdoms, duchies and state-cities, “ein machtloses Reich” for almost 300 years. And you call that good? Someone needs to check the history or have his head examined.
      Let alone the fact that Reformation opened the floodgates to all the shit we have to deal now…

      1. He did his part, though Calvinism and Puritanism were probably worse in terms of accelerating the decline. He did realize at least one of his errors toward the end, in his last book…

        1. I’ve always felt contempt for everything Luther did, wrote, and stood for but even I am sure that he would be horrified to see what his ideas led to.

      2. “Let alone the fact that Reformation opened the floodgates to all the shit we have to deal now…”
        The Reformation was the inevitable reaction to the what the Latin western church became after they fell away from Orthodoxy in the Great Schism. Unfortunately, Spengler like all western Europeans is still seeing history from his flawed Heterodox perspective.

      3. I am only judging him by his words/ideas. I will have to look more into the effects he had though. But as far as a first read of the man (primary source), I was very impressed.

  15. Have been hearing a lot lately about Spengler on verious conspiriacy radio podcasts. Good to know a little about him. Have some contextual understanding

    1. I find this theory interesting, but the author also claimed Millenials will be the generation to save us all.
      “David Brooks reviewed the follow-up book about the next generation titled Millennials Rising (2000). “Millennials” is a term coined by Strauss and Howe.[61] Brooks wrote: “This is not a good book, if by good you mean the kind of book in which the authors have rigorously sifted the evidence and carefully supported their assertions with data. But it is a very good bad book. It’s stuffed with interesting nuggets. It’s brightly written. And if you get away from the generational mumbo jumbo, it illuminates changes that really do seem to be taking place.”[46] Further, Mr. Brooks wrote that the generations aren’t treated equally: “Basically, it sounds as if America has two greatest generations at either end of the age scale and two crummiest in the middle”.[46]
      In 2001, reviewer Dina Gomez wrote in NEA Today that Strauss and Howe make their case “convincingly,” with “intriguing analysis of popular culture.” While conceding that the book “over-generalizes”, Gomez also argues that it is “hard to resist the book’s hopeful vision for our children and future.”
      So far it is hard to see it that way. Outside /pol/ and the alt-right and a few other niches, millenials tend to suck ass.

  16. This… fits with my Arithmistory. (I’ll be renaming one of the laws to “Spengler’s Law”, I suppose) If the rest of my theories hold up as well…
    God help us.

  17. Reminds me a little of “Sex and Culture”, J.D. Unwin (1934). A study of something like 80 primitive tribes and 6 past civilizations/ empires. It’s a very dry read, as he goes through multiple examples from the different peoples studied. The author is a product of his time, so he is not able to completely stop himself from introducing some Freudian BS into his explanations, but the bottom line is:
    In every example, these cultures began to rise when women were required to be virgins at marriage and to be monogamous for life. All of these cultures began to decline when women were given rights, were not required to be virgins at marriage, when divorce was common, and marriage was in decline.
    Since this book was published in England in 1934, Unwin describes the degree of sexual decay in his time as being substantially less advanced than it was by the end of other empires. Of course, what we see now in 2016 is quite different from 1934, and exactly matches the behavior of all empires just before their collapse.
    He also points out that there is a lag of about three generations, or 100 years, between when restrictions on female sexuality begin to decay, and when the effects are fully felt, as the old social structures based on monogamy take time to fall apart.
    Basically, feminism and female sexual promiscuity are not some new invention, but a typical feature of declining civilizations. Unwin also argues that absolute monogamy doesn’t last; that it’s always succeeded by a stage of increasing female rights and promiscuity, leading to the decline of the society. The cycle often ends with an invasion from another, patriarchal, monogamous society, and begins again.
    It’s available as a pdf scan on archive.org, but otherwise hard to find.

      1. So 51% of the population shouldn’t be allowed to vote? As for “we”, are you involved in government? Then it’s not up to yet to “let” people vote or tell the gender that contributes to most votes every election that they can’t vote just because you happen to disagree with their personal and political opinions.

        1. I hope you realise going back to the pre-suffrage days would mean you also wouldn’t get a vote, since back then only wealthy male landowners did? Most of the world’s dim seems to be part of the male population anyway so it would make more sense for you guys to not be allowed to vote if it ever came to that and was based on gender.

        2. So? Is majority rule suppose to be a good thing?
          Thing is the more people vote the less it counts
          And yup immediate goes for childish sexist insults, grow up

        3. Something to keep in mind is that back then, “wealthy” landowners were largely the only ones allowed to vote but they also were the only ones paying most of the taxes since there was no federal income tax. I think that’s appropriate since it’s a naturally progressive tax. People with more land paid more. Don’t you think?
          Keep in mind too that back then, most land was owned by “poor” people such as farmers. Large corporate farms largely didn’t exist back then. There were large plantations run by slaveowners, but most crops were raised on a few acres plowed by oxen. These farmers fed the nation and comprised most of the workforce. Women rarely wanted equality since there weren’t too many A/C office jobs back then for women to complain about the office being too cold before going on a shopping spree during lunch hour. Even so, most women worked in the fields. Being a housewife was a luxury for the newly growing middle class (ironically made up of women who then gripes about how tough they had it. Wonderful to be a white woman in a chivalrous western nation, yes?)
          What a delightfully insular universe modern women in western cultures grew up in. Yet, even with all that protection, so many are miserable and man hating. No matter how many designer bags, blood diamonds, or 2 year leased cars they buy on credit, they can’t fill the hole of insecurity that men don’t respect them as equals.
          Because we can’t. For obvious reasons. I’m truly sorry. I wish I could, but I have to earn a living. You wouldn’t understand.

    1. In one way, there is no greater time to be alive as a player. Women are at their most promiscuous while civilization hasn’t yet collapsed.
      In another way, I’d trade in all in for having married a virgin while young and raising a large family in a civilization that was flourishing.
      But since we don’t get to choose the cycle we are born into, best to make the most out of where we are and prepare our progeny to take advantage of the next phase in the cycle.

  18. Two things Spengler didn’t anticipate are nuclear weapons – which can annihilate entire cities, and artificial intelligence – which will probably surpass human intelligence in our lifetimes. Those forces would have to factor into any future predictive model.

  19. For those of you who haven’t read The Fate of Empires and Search for Survival:
    this 26 pg. essay by Sir John Glubb, it’s a MUST READ. Like so much other valuable info i’ve picked up from ROK and RVF, this offers many “ah ha” moments and some real introspection where the west stands as we speak. Somewhat freightening, but very useful insight. “http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf

  20. Could anyone post a link to where I can purchase Spengler’s unabridged volumes in English? I searched Amazon but did not find any such copy.

  21. Very informative article, thanks Relampago. Though I have done no formal study on the subject, with what I have read out of interest throughout my life, it’s depressing how much modern humanity thinks it’s reinventing the wheel, and thinks it knows better than those that came before us. You hear a lot about the leaders and wise men of old learning what they could from those that came before them and preserving the knowledge as best they could, because someone had always gone through something analogous to their current issue at some stage in the past. The opinion I have arrived at, is that though history and innovation march relentlessly forward (with periodic setbacks), human nature and social development are indeed cyclic. There is no reachable utopia, and nor should there be; to reach such a place would invite stagnation – and stagnation is death.
    So many believe we stand on the shoulders of titans, when we’re actually mired knee-deep in our own shit.

    1. Western art is described by many as search for infinity. That’s definitely what comes to my mind looking at those pictures.

  22. Great write up and summary of Spengler’s work.
    One thing I keep noticing in the cyclical history theory of civilization literature, is that Classical/Greek-Roman gave way to Western/Faustian…but what did the great ME empires lead into when they collapsed? China? Japan collapsed into Faustian and took South Korea with it. Zulu? Americas? Can someone enlighten me as to how these groups rebounded if they weren’t wiped off the map? And what can we say of people’s who never achieved civilization?
    historically, it would seem that only the Europeans are the ones who rebound. In the West, after Rome fell, they had about 200 years of disorganized government before things stabilized and Western/Faustian began to rise. But I don’t know enough history beyond European to know how these other places recovered and if they did.

  23. This matches my own analysis, arrived at independently, strongly supported by the fact that Rome – from its founding to its decline – lasted 1200 years, and it’s been 1200 years since Charlemagne and his Paladins established Western civilization.
    We’re looking at a 400 year dark age, during which the orcs multiply and attack civilized men. Our goal must be to form the structures and organizations that will survive during this period.

    1. Ha ha. You get up voted just for having the balls to compare yourself to one of the giants of the philosophy of history, bro.

  24. If you want more analysis into looking at history through cycles check out Martin Armstrong’s https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/. Mainly economics related, but he also has extensive knowledge of ancient civilizations and the cycles they went through.
    He maps out the cycles decades ahead of time and then unfold according to plan. FYI, global real estate peaked last Fall 2015.
    He’s even able to map out daily movements in commodities ahead of time.
    It seems so unreal I wouldn’t believe if except I’ve been looking at his stuff for over a year now, and it’s legit.

  25. One of the reasons I was looking forward to the ROK meetup is because the comments on here are more interesting and show more signs of intelligence than most mainstream news items I would see that people post on Facebook for example.

  26. Ravi Batra wrote something called “The Golden Age” which was very similar to this. I believe it was the cycle of the scholar, warrior, priest, and merchant.

  27. Spengler was correct…as far as he went. However, an accelerant (Leftism) has been set over western civ and is currently dissolving it from within. What comes next, unfettered leftism, shall not be pretty. It never is.

  28. the problem with this is that “Western Civilization” has never been fully in vogue, i.e. slavery, colonization, misogyny, xenophobia, and tribal instincts all have hindered democracy/republicanism from being what it should be. Thus, I don’t by into the German’s argument, especially, one dating back 120 or so year.

  29. Before Spengler, every Pope since the 18th Century has predicted the fall of Western Civilization. From Pope Piux IX’s Syllabus of Errors to Pope St. Pius X’s encyclicals in the 19th Century, even up to Pius XII during WWII, they all predicted the fall of the West and their predictions are downright prophetic.

  30. I think Spengler also argue that civilisations decline when they loose their central idea, for Spengler that idea was Christianity. Christianity certainly has tanked and is merely an idiotic mockery of liberalism.
    We are also in a ‘matriarchal’ phase of civilisation, clearly a decline. Civilisation is a male achievement. The large structures needed to fight wars are male or to build massive projects are male/patriarchal. One notes that the Roman empire in its final phases was noted for its laws protecting animals and easy divorce laws etc.
    Women, with their tendency to embrace and welcome lack the sceptical and hard reasoning to sustain civilisation. Their political power means the western world has lost all masculine power.
    European Women, such as German women and Swedish women, invited in their own rapists, thinking embracing kindness would transform the outsiders. They willingly betrayed the blood of their fathers and mothers. Reminds me of a girls I dated, lost thousands trying to help the local junkie kid. The poor things just aren’t built for recognising reality.
    Matriarchal societies are non existent, they always collapse.

  31. He was right about the trend toward decline though cyclical theories of history are nonsense in themselves.
    He did see the signs right and in some cultures they hold true though they are largely valid in Western culture and similar societies in similar situations; there’s no innate inevitability.
    Cyclical historians are proponents of rigid dogmatic states that they propose as the solution to problems. Spengler wanted Germany to be the leader of this, Toynbee the British Empire, de Riencourt apparently chose the US….
    But these guys are correct in their reading of the signs in Western culture.

  32. Spengler did not predict the decline of the West. The decline of the West was already ongoing when he wrote his classic “Decline of the West”. For the elites of the interbellum (1918 – 1939), the decline of the West was already strikingly obvious, and others of that generation wrote on the same topic with even greater accuracy than Spengler.
    Around the same time Spengler published “Decline of the West” (1918 – 1922), Lothrop Stoddard published his classic “The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy” (1920) and his equally classic “The Revolt Against Civilization: The Menace of the Under Man” (1922) that not only explained why Western civilization was declining (tracing the decline back to the French revolution), but also explained how both dysgenic breeding patterns among Whites and dysgenic immigration / breeding behavior by non-Whites kept accelerating the decline of the West by weakening the gene pool.
    Let’s also not forget about Adolf Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” (1924 – 1927), which integrates the findings of Spengler and Stoddard with those of eg. travel author John Foster Fraser – “The Conquering Jew” (1915) and industrialist Henry Ford – “The International Jew” (1920 – 1922), explaining how dysgenic breeding patterns go hand in hand with cultural subversion by Jewish intellectuals in steering and accelerating the decline of the West… a pattern that was later also recognized by eg. the infamous Joseph McCarthy in the ’50s… and that has become dead obvious in recent decades.

  33. Lothrop Stoddard expressed the same position in his books “The Rising Tide of Color” (1920) and “The Revolt Against Civilization” (1922). He also explains how the decline of the West goes back to the French revolution and how the process can be reversed. I highly recommend both books!

  34. Kennedy was shot by Oswald alone PERIOD. Did he have help or was he put up to it? That we will most likely never know. His brother told me in Dallas Lee did it all by himself. Most likely he did. Did the CIA love it ? Yes they invented break dancing at the CIA at 1:00 PM Texas time on 11-22-1963. Most people have a strong opinion, and very few ever study the (REAL) FACTS.

  35. Twice in less than an hour Jack ordered the SS to take the bullet proof top off. For that reason alone it was really the Presidents fault he got shot.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *