Creates the groundwork for the most influential philosophical school of thought of the 20th and 21st centuries

Oh god i thought Yea Forums ate my post so I retyped it (slightly differently) and sent it again. I should not be phone posting this late at night.

too bad he was a jewish socialist

Spengler questioned the nature of the 'proletariat' and basically said that it was a completely literary concept that had never existed, and that there was no solidarity between the working class.
He also state that Marx's idea of capitalism did not distinguish between different types of 'bourgeois' finance, e.g. between the 'entrepreneur' who benefits the nation and the 'speculative' capitalist who profits from short term investments in the stock market and ultimately adds nothing, and benefits the most from the system.
Spengler said that Marx basically based his whole conception of history and class relations on the society of Britain, and that ultimately his attempt to apply this to societies with completely different class systems (such as Germany, Russia) would never succeed.

>He also state that Marx's idea of capitalism did not distinguish between different types of 'bourgeois' finance, e.g. between the 'entrepreneur' who benefits the nation and the 'speculative' capitalist who profits from short term investments in the stock market and ultimately adds nothing, and benefits the most from the system.
Based. Fuck rent seekers.

cringe

Well some parts of that seem a bit off.
To point a) the 'proletariat' as it exists in marx isn't some class that has solidarity and access to a mystical inherent understanding of the process of capital (like Lenin and other later soviet marxists would assert). In fact the opposite is true: they do not know what is actually occurring at any given time, nor do they know that they indeed form a class. The proletariat as they exist in reality are simply laborers without capital

Which comes to point b) capitalists who have capital and who socially organize labor. They also take part in an incomprehension of what they are actually doing which is a process of marshalling abstract labor to socially organize time within an exchange relationship to abstractly (and in an idealist way) produce the non material category of value. This is then culturally reinforced through processes of reducing concrete labor to abstract socially useful time, commodity fetish and so on.

What Spengler may be picking up om, and what seems to me the real salient point, is the issue of money. You see for marx one of the essential components of the abstract labor system was the invention of a general /commodity/ to use to equivocate exchange values for labor. This is money. As you know now however, since marx's time our money has been divorced from commodity (gold) and is now merely a paper symbol. This might be where spengler detects an issue: well this productive class is different from this class that functions only as leeches in a credit system; which is true! In fact, a real issue in marxism is that very system of credit which functions using now abstract and WORTHLESS money insofar as the exchange value of commodities are concerned, are we still in capitalism as marx described it? What fresh hell is this? In essence the critique of the bourgeois now has to enter a new stage: yeah rhe labor relations under capital are bad insofar as we are divorced from the concrete and material, alienation, reification, and all attendant absurdities of commodity, but what now of the marxist analysis of the credit system? (Which he does do in capital but I don't understand so well) that's a real new issue.

Oh yea and I should note that I kinda put it inelegantly here. 'Value' is created as a 'spectral objectivity', its slippery but in a word or two its a category formed in the social relations of exchange which then vanishes in the concrete use value of the thing (e.g. the apple you buy only constitutes exchange value when considered in an exchange relationship, its objectivity is becomes use value when removed from this). NOTE that this is not a substance, value is purely the social relationship of exchange, aristotelian category vis a vis the interpretation might be a good way to understand it idk.

Progression. There's organic evolution and its direction isn't in our memes.

His thought processes become brilliantly esoteric at times. The overly rationalist western academia of today cannot enjoy that under any circumstances

>philosophical school of thought
Which was?

Spengler was an NPC. Wrong about nearly everything, except minor symptoms that everyone could see.

Attached: decline.jpg (682x1240, 340K)

Physiognomy doesn't lie.

Attached: EI-wfw3XkAAwAC6.png (783x619, 701K)

Attached: no9z3By.png (376x386, 221K)

I guess he means postmodernism

kek

so basically Spengler refuted Marx's specific historical predictions (which everybody did btw), but not the method of historical materialism, the ACTUAL marxist history

>imagine thinking speculators are not an essential part of modern capitalism just because personally each one of them is not "Productive"
so this is the power of right-wing sociology

You mean class war? An idea that began with Rousseau and was retroactively applied to history?

lmaoooo

Mysticism

Attached: 45753756868.jpg (1914x2112, 1.56M)

>class war
that was Marx's own erroneous take. Historical Materialism has evolved past him

Spengler didnt believe in progress or regress as they would imply he believed there was some way for man to alter the course of civilization. There is no moral judgement of one era of a civilization being better than another, they simply are what the are. He likened them to seasons, an endless and unchangeable cycle. Marx on the other hand posits a sequential series of modes of production overturning each other one after another until finally communism is reached. It's a clear perversion of whigism in line with all modernist ideologies.

>takes racial discussion away from “muh low brow line” into actual cultural/spiritual discussion and dissection
So you’re saying he ruined it

This nigga is literally the flat earther of philosophy.

Attached: Cultures and Civilizations.png (3046x949, 163K)

In review it's funny to see how he views the rulers of Thebes as initiating this process...