oliver revilo - spengler criticism and tribute

8/12/2019 Oliver Revilo - Spengler Criticism and Tribute

1/5

Spengler: Criticism &TributeRevilo Oliverfrom http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/08/spengler-criticism-and-tribute/

onceived before the !irst "orld "ar is Oswald #pengler$s magisterial wor%& Der Untergang desAbendlandes'(unich& 1)18*. Read in this countr+ chiefl+ in the brilliantl+ faithful translation b+harles !rancis ,t%inson& The Decline of the West'ew or%& two volumes& 1)2-28*& #pengler$smorpholog+ of histor+ was the great intellectual achievement of our centur+. "hatever our opinion ofhis methods or conclusions& we cannot den+ that he was the opernicus of historionom+. ,llsubseuent writings on the philosoph+ of histor+ ma+ fairl+ be described as criticism of theDecline ofthe West.

#pengler& having formulated a universal histor+& undertoo% an anal+sis of the forces operating in theimmediatel+ contemporar+ world. his he set forth in a masterl+ wor%&Die Jahre der Entscheidung& ofwhich onl+ the first volume could be published in erman+ '(unich& 1)33* and translated into 4nglish'The Hour of Decision& ew or%& 1)35*. One had onl+ to read this brilliant wor%& with its lucid

anal+sis of forces that even acute observers did not perceive until 26 or 30 +ears later& and with itsprevision that subseuent events have now shown to have been absolutel+ correct& to recogni7e that itsauthor was one of the great political and philosophical minds of the "est. One should remember&however& that the ama7ing accurac+ of his anal+sis of the contemporar+ situation does not necessaril+prove the validit+ of his historical morpholog+.

he publication of #pengler$s first volume in 1)18 released a spate of controvers+ that continues to thepresent da+. (anfred #chroeter inDer Streit um Spengler'(unich& 1)22* was able to give aprcis ofthe critiues that had appeared in a little more than three +ears toda+& a mere bibliograph+& ifreasonabl+ complete& would ta%e +ears to compile and would probabl+ run to eight hundred or athousand printed pages.

#pengler naturall+ stirred up swarms of nit-wits& who were particularl+ incensed b+ his immoral andpreposterous suggestion that there could be another war in 4urope& when ever+bod+ %new that there9ust couldn$t be an+thing but "orld eace after 1)18& $cause #anta had 9ust brought a nice& new& shin+;es are alwa+s ma%ing a noise& but no one with theslightest %nowledge of human histor+ pa+s an+ attention to them& e>cept as s+mptoms.

?nfortunatel+& much more intelligent criticism of #pengler was motivated b+ emotional dissatisfactionwith his conclusions. @n an article inAntiquity for 1)2A& the learned R. . ollingwood of O>ford wentso far as to claim that #pengler$s two volumes had not given him ;a single genuinel+ new idea&= andthat he had ;long ago carried out for himself= B and& of course& re9ected B even #pengler$s detailedanal+ses of individual cultures. ,s a cursor+ glance at #pengler$s wor% will suffice to show& thatassertion is less plausible than a claim to %now ever+thing contained in the welfth 4dition of theEncyclopaedia ritannica. ollingwood& the author of the Speculum !entisand other philosophicalwor%s& must have been bedeviled with emotional resentments so strong that he could not see howconceited& arrogant& and improbable his vaunt would seem to most readers.

@t is now a truism that #pengler$s ;pessimism= and ;fatalism= was an unbearable shoc% to mindsnurtured in the nineteenth-centur+ illusion that ever+thing would get better and better forever and ever.#pengler$s c+clic interpretation of histor+ stated that a civili7ation was an organism having a definiteand fi>ed life-span and moving from infanc+ to senescence and death b+ an internal necessit+comparable to the biological necessit+ that decrees the development of the human organism from
http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/08/spengler-criticism-and-tribute/http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/08/spengler-criticism-and-tribute/


2/5

infantile imbecilit+ to senile decrepitude. apoleon& for e>ample& was the counterpart of ,le>ander inthe ancient world.

"e were now& therefore& in a phase of civili7ational life in which constitutional forms are supplanted b+the prestige of individuals. C+ 2000& we shall be ;contemporar+= with the Rome of #ulla& the 4g+pt ofthe 4ighteenth D+nast+& and hina at the time when the ;ontending #tates= were welded into anempire. hat means that we face an age of world wars and what is worse& civil wars and proscriptions&

and that around 200 the "est 'if not destro+ed b+ its alien enemies* will be united under the personalrule of a aesar or ,ugustus. hat is not a pleasant prospect.

he onl+ uestion before us& however& is whether #pengler is correct in his anal+sis. Rational men willregard as irrelevant the fact that his conclusions are not charming. @f a ph+sician informs +ou that +ouhave s+mptoms of arteriosclerosis& he ma+ or ma+ not be right in his diagnosis& but it is absolutel+certain that +ou cannot re9uvenate +ourself b+ slapping his face.

4ver+ detached observer of our times& @ thin%& will agree that #pengler$s ;pessimism= aroused emotionsthat precluded rational consideration. @ am inclined to believe that the moral level of his thin%ing was agreater obstacle. Eis ;fatalism= was not the comforting %ind that permits men to throw up their handsand eschew responsibilities. onsider& for e>ample& the concluding lines of his!an and Technics'ew

or%& 1)32*:,lread+ the danger is so great& for ever+ individual& ever+ class& ever+ people& that to cherish an+illusion whatever is deplorable. ime does not suffer itself to be halted there is no uestion of prudentretreat or wise renunciation. Onl+ dreamers believe that there is a wa+ out. Optimism is cowardice.

"e are born into this time and must bravel+ follow the path to the destined end. here is no other wa+.Our dut+ is to hold on to the lost position& without hope& without rescue& li%e that Roman soldier whosebones were found in front of a door in ompeii& who& during the eruption of Fesuvius& died at his postbecause the+ forgot to relieve him. hat is greatness. hat is what it means to be a thoroughbred. hehonorable end is the one thing that can not be ta%en from a man.

ow& whether or not the stern prognostication that lies bac% of that conclusion is correct& no man fit to

live in the present can read those lines without feeling his heart lifted b+ the great ethos of a nobleculture B the spiritual strength of the "est that can %now traged+ and be unafraid. ,nd simultaneousl+&that pronouncement will affright to h+steria the epicene homunculi among us& the puling cowards whohope onl+ to scuttle about safel+ in the dar%ness and to batten on the deca+ of a culture infinitel+be+ond their comprehension.

hat contrast is in itself a ver+ significant datum for an estimate of the present condition of ourcivili7ation G

Three Points of Criticism

riticism of #pengler& therefore& if it is not to seem mere uibbling about details& must deal with ma9orpremises. ow& so far as @ can see& #pengler$s thesis can be challenged at three reall+ fundamental

points& namel+: '1* #pengler regards each civili7ation as a closed and isolated entit+ animated b+ adominant idea& or Weltanschauung& that is its ;soul.= "h+ should ideas& or concepts& the impalpablecreations of the human mind& undergo an organic evolution as though the+ were living protoplasm&which& as a material substance& is understandabl+ sub9ect to chemical change and hence biologicallawsH his logical ob9ection is not conclusive: (en ma+ observe the tides& for e>ample& and evenpredict them& without being able to e>plain what causes them. Cut when we must deduce historicallaws from the four of five civili7ations of which we have some fairl+ accurate %nowledge& we do nothave enough repetitions of a phenomenon to calculate its periodicit+ with assurance& if we do not %nowwh+ it happens.


3/5

'2* , far graver difficult+ arises from the historical fact that we have alread+ mentioned. !or fivecenturies& at least& the men of the "est regarded modern civili7ation as a revival or prolongation ofraeco-Roman antiuit+. #pengler& as the ver+ basis of his h+pothesis& regards the lassical world as acivili7ation distinct from& and alien to& our own B a civili7ation that& li%e the 4g+ptian& lived& died& andis now gone. @t was dominated b+ an entirel+ different Weltanschauung& and conseuentl+ the educatedmen of 4urope and ,merica& who for five centuries believed in continuit+& were merel+ suffering from

an illusion or hallucination.4ven if we grant that& however& we are still confronted b+ a uniue historical phenomenon. he4g+ptian& Cab+lonian& hinese& Eindu& and ,rabian ';(agian=*& civili7ations are all regarded b+#pengler 'and other proponents of an organic structure of culture* as single and unrelated organisms:4ach came into being without deriving its concepts from another civili7ation 'or& alternativel+& seeingits own concepts in the records of an earlier civili7ation*& and each died leaving no offspring 'or&alternativel+& no subseuent civili7ation thought to see in them its own concepts*. here is simpl+ noparallel or precedent for the relationship 'real or imaginar+* which lin%s raeco-Roman culture to ourown.

#ince #pengler wrote& a great historical discover+ has further complicated the uestion. "e now %nowthat the (+cenaean peoples were ree%s& and it is virtuall+ certain that the essentials of their culturesurvived the disintegration caused b+ the Dorian invasion& and were the basis of later ree% culture.'!or a good summar+& see


4/5

Cut it is also true that the science of genetics& founded b+ !ather (endel onl+ a centur+ ago and almosttotall+ neglected down to the earl+ +ears of the wentieth entur+& has ascertained biological laws thatcan be denied onl+ b+ den+ing the realit+ of the ph+sical world. 4ver+ educated person %nows that thecolor of a man$s e+es& the shape of the lobes of his ears& and ever+ one of his other ph+siologicalcharacteristics is determined b+ hereditar+ factors. @t is virtuall+ certain that intellectual capacit+ isli%ewise produced b+ inheritance& and there is a fair amount of evidence that indicated that even moral

capacities are li%ewise innate.(an$s power of intervention in the development of inherited ualities appears to be entirel+ negative&thus affording another melanchol+ proof that human ingenuit+ can easil+ destro+ what it can nevercreate. ,n+ fool with a %nife can in three minutes ma%e the most beautiful woman forever hideous& andone of our ;mental health e>perts&= even without using a %nife& can as uic%l+ and permanentl+ destro+the finest intellect. ,nd it appears that less drastic interventions& through education and other control ofenvironment& ma+ temporaril+ or even permanentl+ pervert and deform& but are powerless to createcapacities that an individual did not inherit from near or more remote ancestors.

he facts are be+ond uestion& although the #ecret olice in #oviet Russia and ;liberal= spitting-suadsin the ?nited #tates have largel+ succeeded in %eeping these facts from the general public in the areasthe+ control. Cut no amount of terrorism can alter the laws of nature. !or a readable e>position ofgenetics& see arrett Eardin$s$ature and !an%s &ate'ew or%& Rinehart& 1)6)*& which is sub9ectonl+ to the reservation that the laws of genetics& li%e the laws of chemistr+& are verified b+ observationever+ da+& whereas the doctrine of biological evolution is necessaril+ an h+pothesis that cannot beverified b+ e>periment.

The Race Factor

@t is also be+ond uestion that the races of man%ind differ greatl+ in ph+sical appearance& insusceptibilit+ to specific diseases& and in average intellectual capacit+. here are indications that the+differ also in nervous organi7ation& and possibl+& in moral instincts. @t would be a miracle if that werenot so& for& as is well %nown& the three primar+ races were distinct and separate at the time thatintelligent men first appeared on this planet& and have so remained ever since. he differences are so

pronounced and stable that the proponents of biological evolution are finding it more and morenecessar+ to postulate that the differences go bac% to species that preceded the appearance of the homosapiens. '#ee the new and revised edition of Dr. arleton #. oon$s The Story of !an& ew or%&Jnopf& 1)2.*

hat such differences e>ist is doubtless deplorable. @t is certainl+ deplorable that all men must die& andthere are persons who thin% it deplorable that there are differences& both anatomical and spiritual&between men and women. Eowever& no amount of concerted l+ing b+ ;liberals&= and no amount ofdecreeing b+ the "arren K#upreme ourtL ang& will in the least change the laws of nature.

ow there is a great deal that we do not %now about genetics& both individual and racial& and theseuncertainties permit widel+ differing estimates of the relative importance of biologicall+ determined

factors and cultural concepts in the development of a civili7ation. Our onl+ point here is that it is highl+improbable that biological factors have no influence at all on the origin and course of civili7ations. ,ndto the e>tent that the+ do have an influence& #pengler$s theor+ is defective and probabl+ misleading.

Profound Insights

One could add a few minor points to the three ob9ections stated above& but these will suffice to showthat the #penglerian historionom+ cannot be accepted as a certaint+. @t is& however& a greatphilosophical formulation that poses uestions of the utmost importance and deepens our perception ofhistorical causalit+. o student of histor+ needed #pengler to tell him that a decline of religious faith


5/5

necessaril+ wea%ens the moral bonds that ma%e civili7ed societ+ possible. Cut #pengler$s showing thatsuch a decline seems to have occurred at a definite point in the development of a number offundamentall+ different civili7ations with& of course& radicall+ different religions provides us with datathat we must ta%e into account when we tr+ to ascertain the true causes of the decline. ,nd his furtherobservation that the decline was eventuall+ followed b+ a sweeping revival of religious belief is euall+significant.

Eowever wrong he ma+ have been about some things& #pengler has given us profound insights into thenature of our own culture. Cut for him& we might have gone on believing that our great technolog+ wasmerel+ a matter of economics B of tr+ing to ma%e more things more cheapl+. Cut he has shown us& @thin%& that our technolog+ has a deeper significance B that for us& the men of "estern civili7ation& itanswers a certain spiritual need inherent in us& and that we derive from its triumphs as satisfactionanalogous to that which is derived from great music or great art.

,nd #pengler& above all& has forced us to inuire into the nature of civili7ation and to as% ourselves b+what means B if an+ B we can repair and preserve the long and narrow di%es that alone protect usfrom the vast and turbulent ocean of eternal barbarism. !or that& we must alwa+s honor him.

oliver revilo - spengler criticism and tribute

Documents