Is the west dangerously close to collapse?

[howlingwolfpaw]

hey thanks for providing the spark to ignite a discussion on the subject!

[howlingwolfpaw]

oh and based on an age poll I am older than about 80% of the forum users, not that it matters just that your condescending tone of "son" is misplaced.

[momuuu]

Sorry sir!

Is a slow replacement of the way democracy works and the way capitalism works really a collapse? Or is that a step forward?

The way I see it populism is ruining democracy a little (extremists with little constructive opinions like Trump and the og populist Geert Wilders) although cant we claim that Hitler was a populist too? Capitalism struggles because the end result of capitalism is that all wealth is sucked up by a few. Already most big branches (for example food industry) are controlled by an incredibly small amoumt of companies, which kinda goes against the core idea of capitalism. With such fargoing globalization some bad sides of capitalism seem to intensify.

But Im all for communism so let the golden ages of equity begin!

[howlingwolfpaw]

Sorry sir!

Is a slow replacement of the way democracy works and the way capitalism works really a collapse? Or is that a step forward?

The way I see it populism is ruining democracy a little (extremists with little constructive opinions like Trump and the og populist Geert Wilders) although cant we claim that Hitler was a populist too? Capitalism struggles because the end result of capitalism is that all wealth is sucked up by a few. Already most big branches (for example food industry) are controlled by an incredibly small amoumt of companies, which kinda goes against the core idea of capitalism. With such fargoing globalization some bad sides of capitalism seem to intensify.

But I'm all for communism so let the golden ages of equity begin!

Yeah maybe collapse is not applicable in a scenario like that. But where is the next step? forward? or two steps back, one step forward. The danger though is how to transition from a system that is so overtly corrupt that those guilty of the fraud and crimes do not care because the media is so corrupt that people do not even believe anything is wrong. As you stated capitalism is a every man for them self mentality that fosters greed and monopolistic success. Which is unsustainable, who are the new leaders (usa) that we are looking to? Trump? Clinton? Another oligarch puppet to maintain the status qua? A collapse may lead to some good things or not... depending how it can be transitioned. There is a lot of delicate infrastructure, and connections that have been made by that corporate complex that now people are conditioned to depend on. Namely food and energy production. A chance for a peaceful transition would be to start with some of the ideas Sanders brought to the table (though slightly incomplete). Going through socialism to end up in communism. I always though communism sounded great but the trouble is that it has a hard time competing with capitalism. Though the truth is that it does not matter exactly what type of system is in place. It matters who are the people in control of it and their motives. But any form of government is a degree on the scale of anarchy to communism because we all come together as a society to determine common laws and regulations to create a more harmonious society free of the ills of cultural anarchy. The problem is with capitalism is that it is a form of institutionalized anarchy that sets rules, but then allows for exploitation of people, resources and the rules with the right loop holes.

Why I think we are in a dangerous place now is that so many people are seeing the corruption and fraud of the DNC and Republican parties election process... The parties are really divided within themselves. (well at least a lot of info comes my way!) so how long will people tolerate that when they finally realize its all a sham.... I pray for peace for those that need it and for those who are or may not realize the harm they do.

[iNcog]

-- deleted post --

[Dolan]

100 years ago someone wrote a book about the decline of the west. The intellectuals got together and talked about it. Now those intellectuals are dead and the world is still spinning.

The pessimists and Internet cracks will of course claim that 'This time it's different'.

It doesn't mean that Spengler was wrong in "The Decline of the West". According to his schema of historical development, the West is in the 4th and last stage (winter phase), in which money has already won, there is no trace of any spirituality left, everything is viewed through a materialistic/rationalistic lens, and we are headed towards Caesarism, the last phase of our civilisation. But this could take a few hundred years. If Spengler lived today, he would probably see the popularity of Trump as a sign that the last stage of the Western civilisation is approaching. An epoch which is marked by the "victory of force politics over money". The former money-centric system gives way to an authoritarian model that promotes collective values, such as health and social justice. So Spengler believed we are witnessing the coming of the age of Caesarism, in which force politics will trump money politics.

There's still time to see if he was wrong or right. Some of the things he says could be interpreted to have been confirmed, but one could also say he lived right at the beginning of his 4th phase of civilisation, so his description of historical phases might be a type of self-fulfilling prophecy. That he didn't really predict anything, he just described some developmental patterns in the lives of civilisations, using his observations as a citizen of a Western country and making analogies with historical accounts of past civilisations.

Those who believe, for example, that there is no longer a "Western culture" (that can only be found in Western states only), that it has dissolved into a global culture, which claims to bring about multiculturalism, might think Spengler was wrong and we are entering a totally new type of historical phase.

Others still might think that technological progress will pretty much usher in a new type of history. Heck, they might even claim we could jump out of history, by modifying our biology. The ideas do exist at the moment. A Spenglerian might interpret them as desperate attempts at turning our civilisation into an ahistorical one, and thus escape his predictions.

Note: Btw, Spengler or his historical theory was not pessimistic. He was only describing the life cycle of civilisations, like a scientist describes the developmental stages of a plant. Though Spengler never claimed his account was scientific, he believed you can only talk about history in "deep" or "shallow" terms (much like in poetry), but not in scientific terms of precision.

[Le Dragon]

100 years ago someone wrote a book about the decline of the west. The intellectuals got together and talked about it. Now those intellectuals are dead and the world is still spinning.

The pessimists and Internet cracks will of course claim that 'This time it's different'.

It doesn't mean that Spengler was wrong in "The Decline of the West". According to his schema of historical development, the West is in the 4th and last stage (winter phase), in which money has already won, there is no trace of any spirituality left, everything is viewed through a materialistic/rationalistic lens, and we are headed towards Caesarism, the last phase of our civilisation. But this could take a few hundred years. If Spengler lived today, he would probably see the popularity of Trump as a sign that the last stage of the Western civilisation is approaching. An epoch which is marked by the "victory of force politics over money". The former money-centric system gives way to an authoritarian model that promotes collective values, such as health and social justice. So Spengler believed we are witnessing the coming of the age of Caesarism, in which force politics will trump money politics.

There's still time to see if he was wrong or right. Some of the things he says could be interpreted to have been confirmed, but one could also say he lived right at the beginning of his 4th phase of civilisation, so his description of historical phases might be a type of self-fulfilling prophecy. That he didn't really predict anything, he just described some developmental patterns in the lives of civilisations, using his observations as a citizen of a Western country and making analogies with historical accounts of past civilisations.

'It will happen any time now. Just wait and see.'

In thirty years you will be making the same claims and nothing will have changed.

[Dolan]

I'm not making any claims though. I just explained, in short, what was Spengler's position on this subject.

And according to his account, the last stage of a civilisation can take hundreds of years to unfold. So, it surely is not just about 30 years. It's more than a lifetime.

That's why usually, these subjects are nothing to be concerned about, since if they happen, they will happen over a number of centuries.

[Le Dragon]

By 'you' i meant Spengler.

Followers of these theories will always insist that their claims will eventually materialise, and feel comfortable knowing that they can never be proven wrong.

[Dolan]

I dunno, if the West doesn't evolve into Spengler's stage 4 called Caesarism, in which the politics of force overrides the politics of money, and we don't get authoritarian regimes with collectivist values in the next few hundred years, then Spengler will be proven wrong.
Also, if the Western civilisation evolves into something completely new compared to other past civilisations, then again, Spengler will have been proven wrong, if anyone cares by that time.

What I did notice in Spengler's analysis is that typically a civilisation starts as a culture, animated by something like a collective soul. In the first stage, this culture shows signs of great motivation to discover, to create, because it's animated by a spiritual will to assert itself. As it gradually enters the 2nd, classical, age, people become divided in classes, as well as rural and urban areas. The culture defines its own styles and traditions, as well as institutions (churches, nobility, monarchy) which define it. Once the city culture becomes defined by mercantilism and lavish expenses, the culture becomes a civilisation (stage 3). A civilisation is more than just a local culture, it aims at expanding itself, conquering more territories, spreading its influence over other cultures. It usually refines its political institutions until public affairs are decided democractically. Social status is no longer a question of traditions, it's just a question of property, money, ownership. Eventually this civilisation enters its last stage, called Caesarism, in which their style and arts are nonsensical, academic and intellectual qualities are despised, the whole thing becomes like a civilised jungle, in which the most powerful wins and the masses are living under authoritarian regimes. Money are less important and collective values are praised more (such as health, security).

During the last stage, the civilisation has lost its spiritual motivation to create or have its own style. Everything is rationalised, filtered through the neutral lens of science, there's no will to expand anymore, because the civilisation doesn't have any common values anymore, or their values are generic ones which support their status quo institutions. This way, the civilisation becomes vulnerable to external attacks or migrations, from people who are still in stage 2 in their culture and are strongly animated by a will to conquer and assert their own culture. They are attracted to the luxuries and material success of the stage 4 civilisation, but are baffled by their nihilism and lack of common beliefs.

[Le Dragon]

I dunno, if the West doesn't evolve into Spengler's stage 4 called Caesarism, in which the politics of force overrides the politics of money, and we don't get authoritarian regimes with collectivist values in the next few hundred years, then Spengler will be proven wrong.
Also, if the Western civilisation evolves into something completely new compared to other past civilisations, then again, Spengler will have been proven wrong, if anyone cares by that time.

What I did notice in Spengler's analysis is that typically a civilisation starts as a culture, animated by something like a collective soul. In the first stage, this culture shows signs of great motivation to discover, to create, because it's animated by a spiritual will to assert itself. As it gradually enters the 2nd, classical, age, people become divided in classes, as well as rural and urban areas. The culture defines its own styles and traditions, as well as institutions (churches, nobility, monarchy) which define it. Once the city culture becomes defined by mercantilism and lavish expenses, the culture becomes a civilisation (stage 3). A civilisation is more than just a local culture, it aims at expanding itself, conquering more territories, spreading its influence over other cultures. It usually refines its political institutions until public affairs are decided democractically. Social status is no longer a question of traditions, it's just a question of property, money, ownership. Eventually this civilisation enters its last stage, called Caesarism, in which their style and arts are nonsensical, academic and intellectual qualities are despised, the whole thing becomes like a civilised jungle, in which the most powerful wins and the masses are living under authoritarian regimes. Money are less important and collective values are praised more (such as health, security).

During the last stage, the civilisation has lost its spiritual motivation to create or have its own style. Everything is rationalised, filtered through the neutral lens of science, there's no will to expand anymore, because the civilisation doesn't have any common values anymore, or their values are generic ones which support their status quo institutions. This way, the civilisation becomes vulnerable to external attacks or migrations, from people who are still in stage 2 in their culture and are strongly animated by a will to conquer and assert their own culture. They are attracted to the luxuries and material success of the stage 4 civilisation, but are baffled by their nihilism and lack of common beliefs.

I was speaking generally. It doesn't matter if Spengler's ideas don't hold. Someone else will come up with a new doomsday prediction, and the conspiracy quacks will latch onto it.

[Dolan]

Yeah, well, Spengler's idea wasn't about doomsday or conspiracies. It was more like applying biological ideas to historical evolution. Some people did interpret these ideas as pessimistic and self-defeating. But I think it was a misunderstanding. A civilisation going into decline is not some catastrophic event, it's something that takes places over centuries. Somewhat similar with what happened to the Roman empire, their decline was a gradual process, even though occasionally it was marked by violent events.

Truth is some old institutions do not die so easily. For example banks or financial markets. These institutions have existed for hundreds of years. They have gone through lots of major crises, in fact, the 19th century was just a series of financial crises. And still, banks didn't disappear, financial speculation didn't go extinct.

It is possible that we could be headed towards changes that happen on a bigger time scale than of just one or two centuries. For example, the internet brought a type of exponential change to pretty much everything. So today, social and political change is accelerated, events are taking place and spreading their effects almost instantaneously. That means both a very unstable world and a very adaptable/flexible world.

[howlingwolfpaw]

I dunno, if the West doesn't evolve into Spengler's stage 4 called Caesarism, in which the politics of force overrides the politics of money, and we don't get authoritarian regimes with collectivist values in the next few hundred years, then Spengler will be proven wrong.
Also, if the Western civilisation evolves into something completely new compared to other past civilisations, then again, Spengler will have been proven wrong, if anyone cares by that time.

What I did notice in Spengler's analysis is that typically a civilisation starts as a culture, animated by something like a collective soul. In the first stage, this culture shows signs of great motivation to discover, to create, because it's animated by a spiritual will to assert itself. As it gradually enters the 2nd, classical, age, people become divided in classes, as well as rural and urban areas. The culture defines its own styles and traditions, as well as institutions (churches, nobility, monarchy) which define it. Once the city culture becomes defined by mercantilism and lavish expenses, the culture becomes a civilisation (stage 3). A civilisation is more than just a local culture, it aims at expanding itself, conquering more territories, spreading its influence over other cultures. It usually refines its political institutions until public affairs are decided democractically. Social status is no longer a question of traditions, it's just a question of property, money, ownership. Eventually this civilisation enters its last stage, called Caesarism, in which their style and arts are nonsensical, academic and intellectual qualities are despised, the whole thing becomes like a civilised jungle, in which the most powerful wins and the masses are living under authoritarian regimes. Money are less important and collective values are praised more (such as health, security).

During the last stage, the civilisation has lost its spiritual motivation to create or have its own style. Everything is rationalised, filtered through the neutral lens of science, there's no will to expand anymore, because the civilisation doesn't have any common values anymore, or their values are generic ones which support their status quo institutions. This way, the civilisation becomes vulnerable to external attacks or migrations, from people who are still in stage 2 in their culture and are strongly animated by a will to conquer and assert their own culture. They are attracted to the luxuries and material success of the stage 4 civilisation, but are baffled by their nihilism and lack of common beliefs.

i found this post to be intriguing and eerily representative of what is happening RIGHT now....

Post 9/11 that caesarism authoritative leadership has been seen in acts such as the patriot act, the creation of homeland security and the rule and influence of the military industrial complex. To exert that rule new wars and sanctions have been created to keep other countries in line. More and more people the people are trading freedoms for "security". The arts and culture have also been eroded, from cartoons that were meaningful with messages to todays cartoons that are random and crazy like humor. Art being more about "feely things" expression and less about content. (from a 20th century evolution to modern art) Society valuing sports and entertainment more than doctors and real life heroes. The corruption and transformation from friendly neighborhood police to militarized clones of the SS. And more examples of where our culture and sense of self have diminished.... and who is our main enemy? foreign terrorist that want the wealth of the west, migrate to European countries and have such a strong sense of their selves, insist those countries change for them.... WOW

I would say we are well into that 4th stage. and with points about how technology speeds that up I think it is possible to see a larger and quicker collapse than previous time in history. People are way too disconnected with authentic genuine living and providing for themselves and rely on cheap imported goods and consumerism. And energy, and the threat of nuclear weapons that could wipe out all those systems in a few hours.

you can call it pessimistic if you want and keep your head in the sand thinking oh it wont happen til later.... its like playing the game of hot potato.... but i do not see it that way, I see it as a chance to be proactive to prepare either myself, or for my hypothetical children. blessed are the preppers!