How can one man be so based

Is the book itself worth reading?

that's one prescient motherfucker

>denying reality to own the brittards
based indeed

Favourite book!

Man & Tecnics is also amazing too. Dangerously underrated thinker.

Darwinism isn't exactly reality. Though evolution itself is quite true. Heck, even the theory itself evolves.
I think Spengler was wrong in pessimism. Of course, if you want to keep the civilization alive, it's all you're going to get. However, there is more to life than one life.

Holy based

Yes. The German prose is quite enjoyable too.

He went overboard with the cultural relativism IMO.

He also believed in 'cultural mathematics', as in 'Greek mathematics' being different from 'Western mathematics'.

I am about to finish the first part and it has been a great and enjoyable read, interesting takes on mathematics, arts and philosophy. There is far more to get from the book than the usual meme quotes that are posted around.
I haven't reached the Caesar part yet so maybe I have the wrong understanding of Spengler but I wager we have already reached that period but not in the form of an authoritarian leader, rather of a system with its ideology that is expansive in its nature (globalism)

It seems compelling argument to me

>sham-democracy
oxymoron

Attached: 1504947413691.jpg (358x344, 30K)

So some authoritarian racist ass hat made the trivial observation that we live in a society, big woop. Reactionaries want to infantilize society and return to the obligate safety of conforming to some kind of idealized authority. It's the Oedipus complex of radical politics. It's for children that don't have the backbone to even think about the questioning of societal conformity that leads to progressive social change. The intellectual backbone of reaction is merely eloquent babbling. Far from based.

Read him you dumbass

no thanks. I don't even read political theory from people that I agree with, far beneath me. And if it's a laugh I am looking for, I prefer the middlings. My only interest in politics is the in situ observation of the polis, and believe me when I tell you, it's a shitshow. Precisely because all the little ideologues have the nerve to believe they have the answers. Tested facts, pragmatic inquiry, and my own moral sentiments are the only thing I need for politics. I can plainly see what the man is advocating for, falling into his reason-traps is the last thing I want.
Look at his champion, Opie the faggot. He thinks Spengler is some sort of seer for pointing out the trite that has been unavoidable for every person with eyes and ears since the industrial revolution began, and Spengler was far from the first to pigeon-hole living in a society with his pet ideology.

>Reactionaries want to infantilize society and return to
the exact antithesis of Spengler m8
You are incredibly off the mark here

Confirmed for not having read the book.

I'm telling you to read him because you are completely wrong in your idea about him.

I'm sure he believes that. No, he's a toddler that wants to be a big strong man just like his daddy when he grows up to be a big strong infant.

Ahahaha, just read some Wikipedia articles and it seems you are right, and I am half right. I have the unapologetic habit of talking out of my ass for a lol. I will read decline of the west. See here, I've been taking alot of amphetamines while scholarly listening to devo, New Traditionalists in particular. The two endeavors will mesh perfectly together.

Before I went into this I had a very vague idea about Spengler, I had probably only seen the title of his book and the people discussing it some time ago. My point still stands; progressive conservatism, fascism, reaction, anything advocating a new age conform to some idealized authority from the past is an oedipal retreat. Men wishing to return to the safety of infancy. What we really need to do is snuff this dumpsterfire of a phoenix and return to gametecy before we run out of fuel. As humanity has been degenerate since conception. And that is the truth contained in Genesis that nobody wants to talk about.

>haha btfo conservatards if i don't read right wing arguments i can't be easily convinced by how good they are! Chaoo treehouse 4 lyfe btfo btfo
That's it. I'm voting for Trump

this kind of response is why I have no qualms about mocking people I don't bother to understand. you want to argue? Well those arguments mean nothing to me, so get bullied loser. Conservatards have been btfo. Mixing reason with politics just poisons everyone with toxic vitriol. Argument is fun but not when there are real-world consequences. The human facility of reason is incredibly weak and is wrong more often than not, and can never reach the truth. Just take your facts like a scientist and use the pragmatic maximum to decide what we should do according to our moral sentiment. notice how wildly our explanations for the world vary. Notice how unified we are in how we feel about the things we agree upon. For example, everyone who isn't broken agrees that killing other people is wrong. The only way we motivate ourselves to do otherwise is through argument. Has history continuously proves, relying on reason to inform your ethical deliberation will transform you into a bloodcrazed sheep.

Let me correct myself
*Killing people* murder* "other people" is a dehumanizing operation we carry out through reason. We don't murder abstractions, we murder actual people. Only through reason can we convince ourselves that spooky "others", who are OK to kill actually exist.

What makes you think anyone on the internet gives a shit about your verbose excuse for why you think reading is ultra gay? How narcissistic can you be?

I bet you kill small animals

I just want everyone to stop fighting about things we have no hope of reaching a common understanding of.
I love my neighbors plant animal or fungi, I inconvenience and endanger myself for their sake, and feel guilty if I do not. Rest assured that if I kill a loved one, I do my best to put them down clean.

Fucking kill yourself. Other people think this is retarded too, right? I mean, this isn't representative of this board... right

Sorry if I triggered you ratiocinatard, but reason is fucking stupid and we should all unironically get lobotomized so we can love each other.

this is all i ever see when people make these spengler threads

Take the Toynbee pill

Attached: 220px-A_Study_of_History.jpg (220x339, 27K)

>Reactionaries want to infantilize society and return to the obligate safety of conforming to some kind of idealized authority

Why is this bad?

What is his thesis?

I guess it could be desriable for a conformist bootlicker, too pussy for liberty, who thinks everyone needs nanny nation-state to set the menu and make us eat our vegetables.
To me someone like that is like a child with severe autism, or worse, a fucking coward. Absolutely not to be trusted with any sort of vital decision making.

This is the power of the old blood.

Yikes...lots to unpack here

Yeah, he's pretty far up his own ass. As if reason isn't the best way to understand what exactly the real-world consequences are and how best to modulate them. Unfortunately there's a lot of such pseudery here, but it's still not as bad as most other boards.

you type like a conformist bootlicker

The point is reasoned argument for or against a policy is for people that don't understand what the practical consequences of a policy will be, and has no bearing on what those consequences will be. Reason is great for understanding, and just that. Reason itself is not a normative operation. Reason is not logic and thus it should be kept on a short leash.

>be a noncomformist like me
>libertarianism umm no thats problematic sweetie
>in anarchic society everyone is equal
>how is equality enforced if not by an authoritarian structure? Uhh... fuck you fascist!
So tiring. The only true anarchism is anarcho capitalism. Leftist anarchy is a contradiction and a spook.

As if going along with your puerile notions wouldn't just be another brand of conformity. You abdicate reason as a standard, yet employ (poor) reasoning in attempting to convince of us its 'toxicity'. You're not as insightful as you think you are, not by a large margin.

You seem like a stupid woman to be honest

you sound like a woman. and a retarded one at that

You're talking about rhetoric, not reason. The power of emotinally-appealing rhetoric over the average, reason-deficient mind. Which is what you're recommending?

Attached: 562.png (1597x1600, 532K)

Do you really just go around the internet throwing people you may or may not agree with into the "people you disagree with" pigeon-hole?
I now feel forced to pigeon-hole myself, I'm something of a radical centrist supporting deliberative democracy, agapistic socialism and radical inquiry, with an emphasis on positive liberties and biocentric communitarianism. I'm enthusiastic about anarchy, but I don't recognize it as any sort of organizing force. You are just some dumbass that doesn't know what they are talking about. You have overdosed on toxic memes and shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a polite political discussion. Now fuck off.

No I am talking about reason, dilettante. You think I don't know the difference?
>Individualist non-conformity
disgusting
I am a proud trans woman.

Why are you fags unironically arguing with an admitted moron who acknowledges not reading anything before feeling entitled to vomit his/her/its haughty projections about something they know literally nothing about? You're falling for the most obvious bait in the world

Didn't read all that self involved horseshit but please explain how anarchy wouldn't in practice only ever amount to unrestricted capitalism. Anarchy promoting egalitarianism is the most retarded lie in political theory ever

shut the fuck up

Not the other guy who said this, but I will literally vote a straight republican ticket in the next election just because you pissed me off. Then I'll post about it and call it based just because I hate you that much.

>I pissed you off
AHAHAHAHAHA
BUTTHURT BUTTHURT I LITERALLY BRAINRAPED YOUR PUNK ASS

Attached: gnJVisS.jpg (840x496, 44K)

Lol of course you're a tranny. Few people in the world are so pathetically narcissistic (dsm-5 narcissism not colloquial)

Hope 4 more years were worth this moment. I live in a swing state :)

Give me a Spengler reading chart.

Attached: us.jpg (1200x800, 97K)

Why is Spengler so popular among the 14 year old white Yea Forums crowd?

Get ready to die by femcock cisfag

All right mods, let's shut this parade down. The tranny got enough You's to forestall its suicide another week

Nice bald assertion. Meanwhile irl the only one protesting Spengler is a literal mentally ill tranny faggot, so...

Exactly. Egalitarianism can not be enforced without the State.

I will if you tell me where that neat pic is from

>being mean to trans people
I hate to break it to you but I'm not trans, actually this is Chad speaking. It's the truth but you probably won't believe it, you sure swallowed the trans lie with glee. Really says something about how petty you are.

Except the cycle won’t repeat because by that time we will be Brazil

What is the point of this post.

Do you think someone will read it and say

Wtf I'm a commie retard now.

Yea Forums really has the best bait of any board

This is so trannysparent

It's the punchline and the audience is the joke. You aren't clever enough to be in on it.

Seriously? Fire fighters in Notre Dame.

>/pol/ comes out of the woodwork for a vain attempt at stoogian damage control

XD that's fucking rich

You don't need one. Spengler's most well known and comprehensive work is the Decline of the West. If you don't want to dive into that right away, try Man and Technics. Just read those two and then you can read his other shorter political works/speeches like Prussianism and Socialism, the Hour of Decision, etc. DO NOT read an abridged edition of the Decline.

>'Greek mathematics' being different from 'Western mathematics'
But that is the case. Read Modern Science, Metaphysics, Mathematics by Heidegger

he was a profound supporter of the civilization cycle, we are still yet to see what way Western man is ultimately heading

Attached: Spengler.png (217x320, 70K)

is this peak christfaggotry?

Wow so powreful....

Might as well have somehow inserted a "do americans really do this" if you were going for arbitrary off topic bait

based

I don't think this is unique to Spengler, I've heard this cycle theory a few times before. While romantic, it's important to meditate on the fact that foretelling the decline of a civilization is a hypothesis based on such an incredible amount of factors, many unknown and arbitrary, that it's essentially a blind guess.

Gibbons famously posited that the fall of Rome was due to Christianity for whatever that's worth, though I don't see Christianity growing in the West to a major extent in the future.

I would say we're definitely in the plutocratic sham phase and have been for a while. I think that the next revolutions in AI may either save us or create the so called tyranny phase. Or it'll just be same old same old.

>Gibbons famously posited that the fall of Rome was due to Christianity for whatever that's worth
Its worth nothing. That is one of the clearest examples of an historical hypothesis that is actually, literally possible to disprove. Like as close to the experimental method as history will ever get.

I wouldn't say Gibbons theory is possible to "prove", but when was it disproven?

>read something about math written by a guy who doesn’t know math
nah

Fuck off and stop blogging you attention starved retard.

See Peter Heather, famous Roman historian. The fact that the east and west split provides the closest example of an experimental set up to see what the actual causes of the fall of the west were, while the east thrived for another few hundred to a thousand years. Both were christian, the east actually more emphatically so. The idea that it caused some sort of institutional or cultural rot is clearly retarded when you think about this.

According to Heather, the obvious answer is the west's immigration problem. It was the obvious externalities like this that caused the fall. Gibbons was too much of a partisan and too focused on his own culture to really consider the east properly.

Anyway Heather works at Oxford or some shit so don't pretend like he's a Trump partisan. He's written like 3 books on the fall of Rome and no one considers Gibbons a legitimate source for actual historical theories.

Bump

I swear to god that literally no one read spengler and everyone just reads the summaries or at best the abridged versions.

Honestly most of his criticisms are scathing on the graeco roman world. He also spends enormous amounts of time attacking inherited ideas from the 19th century on the hubris of European civilization at the time.

I get that the whole Caesarism thing is very relevant to our time and Yockey explored it extensively, but he barely flushes it out until the very end of volume two. Most of the Caesarist stuff as seen in the memes today is from Prussianism and Socialism + Yockey.

read everything until spengler

Elaboration on why not to read the abridged copy?
I own it, and from what I've heard, there is a lot of dense and abstruse explanation made by Spengler than can, at least for the sake of expedience, be left out (assuming that's what the abridged version actually does)

FULL REPRINT FUCKING WHEN?

Can you tell is Yockeys Imperium any good?

When will they finally make a biopic with Hank from breaking bad?!

Attached: 90536DF5-F819-4A1B-8F69-2599B06B4042.jpg (960x576, 111K)

>attention starved retard
Hey! Check your privilege neurotypical. I have an extreme case of ADHD and can't help the dopamine cravings. Ableism isn't cool.

Attached: cc1.jpg (619x453, 28K)

The abridged versions are usually fine. Mine just drops a lot of the comparative charts and shit.

is there not one?

> wrong about evolution
> is a faggy pacuck
> "Christianity is the godfather of Bolshevism"
> dismisses everything based on 'muh anglos'
What exactly was he right about? Didn't he think Russia was going to overtake and control the West...even the Soviets crashed...lmao he literally got nothing right, what a pleb

Name ONE THING he got right haha

Attached: girls laughing.png (449x401, 490K)

whoa

it would basically consist of one book

read that book

He's completely right though.

The history of all hitherto existing geometry is the history of Euclidean Geometry.

Point and line, angle and magnitude, fraction and line-segment, plane-figure and geometrical object, in a word, organizer and organized, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, without a revolutionary reconstitution of geometry at large, to the common ruin of mathematics.

In the earlier epochs of history, we find almost everywhere a complicated arrangement of shapes into various orders, a manifold gradation of vegetation. In ancient Rome we have the coastline of Britain and the infinite similarities of shucks of corn; in the Middle Ages, infinite self similarity within the churches and mosques of Europe; in almost all of these cases, again, subordinate gradations...

Arktos seems to be working on an English
one. It's still in print in German I believe.

Don't be autistic, he was basically a polymath well versed in math and the sciences

I've been toying with the idea of publishing a series of high quality artisan books, then selling them online. Considering a Spengler reprint with parts of Kissenger's thesis as the introduction, leather bound,gold leaf edges, rubber stamp illustrations, laser cut image of Spengler's face on front cover.

If you've got an extra grand laying around I'll make you a copy.

>Didn't he think Russia was going to overtake and control the West...even the Soviets crashed...lmao he literally got nothing right, what a pleb

He literally said communism wouldn't last in Russia because it was a western idea.

Reading through Decline now and some of the stuff he says are just so shockingly prescient, guy really had his finger on the pulse.

>Considering a Spengler reprint with parts of Kissenger's thesis as the introduction, leather bound,gold leaf edges, rubber stamp illustrations, laser cut image of Spengler's face on front cover.
mad men

why does he go by hank when his name is Issac Schraeder

>he was basically a polymath well versed in math and the sciences

Attached: 9B890B7D-707F-42C6-8762-DAD45A23C15B.gif (355x201, 2.78M)

Absolutely

He received a classical education meaning he was better educated in a broad sense than anybody in the past century

lmao he looks like Aleister Crowley

>Kissinger
dropped

Kissinger's Spenglerian interpretation of Metterinch's European peace is one of the greatest books of the last century.

Don't waste your time on nu-Yea Forums.
Some retard put Spengler on a "based /pol/ chart" and now every retard here think he is "le ebil bald man" and oppose him on principle.

based

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-04-19 at 8.29.39 PM.png (1530x1076, 312K)

The next U.S. diplomat who talks to the CCP Chairman that offers to export their women should except the offer to solve the incel problem.

I head Kissinger's thesis was on Libgen, do you know under what title?

The Meaning of History: Reflections on Spengler, Toynbee, and Kant

Attached: D37EE52E-608D-4488-B68B-5698133165ED.gif (344x426, 714K)

So if he was right about the West, the best course of action is to embrace Christianity and approach the public sphere with two faced ruthlessness to take what one can from it. Propagate and when it all collapses your progeny will build a new culture from the mulch of Christian faith.

?

Communism was a Jewish idea.
It didn't last in the West either.

The hour of decision is entertaining in a 'based and redpilled' way. Man and technics is also interesting, especially the resentment from primitivust urges.
Decline of the west is undiluted trash though. I don't get how this is the one book that received fame. It's a particurily bad brand of cultural relativism denying non-social reality altogether. Even the tranny apologists don't go as far as spengler. The historiography is shaddy at best. Spengler isn't above grossly misrepresenting things or having 'educated guesses' (proven wrong) to fit his grand narrative.

You could also read Bourbaki, you know, actual mathematicians.
If anything the real game changer in math history was Leibniz and some people following the same ideas afterwards, conceptualizing the general formal system of formal objects. But formal systems were already made since ancient Greece.

I said to myself "If this is just going to be 'omg the reactionaries back then think the same thing I think now!'" that i was going to be disappointed. I'm disappointed.

Attached: Screenshot_20190407-140542_Omnichan.jpg (1080x577, 59K)