So some authoritarian racist ass hat made the trivial observation that we live in a society, big woop...

Yeah I've seen this posted on Spengler threads before kek

This is a very confusing problem because German reactionaries would see themselves as "Dionysian Apollonians" in their attempts to restore order and a new civilization (an Apollonian sentiment) through the Dionysian means of brutality, force of will, and playfulness or philo-Germanism in regard to interpreting their past. This would be contrasted to the "Apollonian Dionysian" character of people like Jews and liberals, whom they saw as a civilization-destroying force that made extreme pretenses to Apollonian means such as reason, debate, concern for progress in history as a mask for their fundamentally Dionysian anti-civilizational character (their sentiment not mine). However, I would say that Nietzsche wanted different things than more politically inclined reactionaries like Spengler so the might not be any confluence to speak of in terms of their terms

>racist
what a meme word

ah okay.
i sorta disagree that comparisons can't be made (at least not on a 1:1 basis), but i totally see what you're saying about "Apollonian Dionysians" and "Dionysian Apollonians".
liberals do have the veneer of Rationality, hence why they're always touting how they're the party of intellectuals, but they're also the biggest dionysians in terms of WORSHIPING emotions, and revolving their entire rhetoric around emotions.

that's what right wingers like to believe, and they are right to some degree. Just as the pot that called the kettle black was right in some degree, ironically.

Attached: 1527507155964.png (708x569, 316K)

your "Apollonian Dionysian" and "Dionysian Apollonian" reminds me of the yin-yang symbol.
the black yin, with a core of yang. (Order, supporter by emotions)
the white yang with a core of yin. (Chaos, with a mask of reason)

Spengler is an intellectual midget. He sees extremely vague and simplistic trends (or as is mostly the case, thinks he does) and decides these all indicate immutable laws of history. Then he fools gullible retards into thinking he has a crystal ball vision of the future when the progress of history is vastly more complex and random than he is willing to admit.

Address Kaczynski's reaction as a 'return to the obligate safety or conforming to some kind of idealized authority' please

>calling anarchy reaction

you have no idea what you're talking about, history is actually a rather short story and really easy to get caught up on. the idea that human history is ancient and not understandable is pushed by the educational system to reduce thought.

I'm not, I was just framing OP's claim as extremely lacking in reach and insight.

he hasn't read spengler it's obvious why do you bother replying

>why do you bother replying
to make my point about history my homo

I haven't read much Spengler but I read enough of Decline of the West to know that you have read even less of him than I have

well youre doing a pretty shit job at framing if you need to reach for an arbitary thinker with an unrelated ideology to take your shot.

If spengler intended it in that sense he would have said so. He uses Nietzsche's concept of Transvaluation of values in the transition between culture and civilization, where people begin to look at their cultural values differently. I'm not 100% sure if i understand but i think he's saying that the religious culture people live by instinct but irreligious civilization people live by ideology, in that the instinct to live is lost and they have to tell themselves how to live with made up political and moral systems. So every late Roman is internally a Stoic and every late Westerner an ethical socialist.

If you read even one page of it you would not have posted this.

why should I resort to basing my claims on evidence? Spengler definitely treated that sort of scientific approach with disregard.

hurr

a) we live in a society of a certain culture
b) culture is in decline
c) culture is defined by the play element (cf. Huizinga)
d) hence the play element is in decline
e) to invert cultural decline, the play element must be reinstated
f) hence I conclude gamers must rise up

Attached: jc denton happy.jpg (602x602, 51K)

>progressive social change
define progress

the way you frame that:
> i think he's saying that the religious culture people live by instinct but irreligious civilization people live by ideology, in that the instinct to live is lost and they have to tell themselves how to live with made up political and moral systems
just sounds like current Democrat Party. They hate traditional religion (which in this case, is Christianity) and yet have transvalued all the core ideals into their political ideology (altruism, cutting off your foot so illegal immigrants can have shoes), and treat their political party essentially in the same way as a religion, complete with their own fanatic zealots (e.g. antifa).

the fact that it keeps happening over and over and over (as Spengler noted) is extremely interesting. Why? Is it human nature? some coordinated criminal conspiracy? Aliens? lol, i dunno, curious though

So is leftypol saying that social criticism is inherently cringeworthy? Maybe y’all will stop whining then

That’s why /pol/‘s entire system of beliefs is based off avoiding a Jewish drawing