Spengler: Criticism & Tribute

Revilo Oliver from http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/08/spengler-criticism-and-tribute/ onceived before the !irst "orld "ar is Oswald #pengler$s magisterial wor%& Der Untergang des Abendlandes '(unich& 1)18*. Read in this countr+ chiefl+ in the brilliantl+ faithful translation b+ harles !rancis ,t%inson& The Decline of the West '-ew .or%& two volumes& 1)2/-28*& #pengler$s morpholog+ of histor+ was the great intellectual achievement of our centur+. "hatever our opinion of his methods or conclusions& we cannot den+ that he was the opernicus of historionom+. ,ll subse0uent writings on the philosoph+ of histor+ ma+ fairl+ be described as criticism of the Decline of the West. #pengler& having formulated a universal histor+& undertoo% an anal+sis of the forces operating in the immediatel+ contemporar+ world. 1his he set forth in a masterl+ wor%& Die Jahre der Entscheidung& of which onl+ the first volume could be published in 2erman+ '(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 its prevision that subse0uent events have now shown to have been absolutel+ correct& to recogni7e that its author 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+. 1he publication of #pengler$s first volume in 1)18 released a spate of controvers+ that continues to the present da+. (anfred #chroeter in Der Streit um Spengler '(unich& 1)22* was able to give a prcis of the criti0ues that had appeared in a little more than three +ears8 toda+& a mere bibliograph+& if reasonabl+ complete& would ta%e +ears to compile and would probabl+ run to eight hundred or a thousand printed pages. #pengler naturall+ stirred up swarms of nit-wits& who were particularl+ incensed b+ his immoral and preposterous suggestion that there could be another war in 4urope& when ever+bod+ %new that there 9ust couldn$t be an+thing but "orld :eace after 1)18& $cause #anta had 9ust brought a nice& new& shin+ ;<eague of -ations.= #uch ;liberal= chatterbo>es are alwa+s ma%ing a noise& but no one with the slightest %nowledge of human histor+ pa+s an+ attention to them& e>cept as s+mptoms. ?nfortunatel+& much more intelligent criticism of #pengler was motivated b+ emotional dissatisfaction with his conclusions. @n an article in Antiquity for 1)2A& the learned R. 2. ollingwood of O>ford went so far as to claim that #pengler$s two volumes had not given him ;a single genuinel+ new idea&= and that he had ;long ago carried out for himself= B and& of course& re9ected B even #pengler$s detailed anal+ses of individual cultures. ,s a cursor+ glance at #pengler$s wor% will suffice to show& that assertion is less plausible than a claim to %now ever+thing contained in the 1welfth 4dition of the Encyclopaedia ritannica. ollingwood& the author of the Speculum !entis and other philosophical wor%s& must have been bedeviled with emotional resentments so strong that he could not see how conceited& arrogant& and improbable his vaunt would seem to most readers. @t is now a truism that #pengler$s ;pessimism= and ;fatalism= was an unbearable shoc% to minds nurtured in the nineteenth-centur+ illusion that ever+thing would get better and better forever and ever. #pengler$s c+clic interpretation of histor+ stated that a civili7ation was an organism having a definite and 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

infantile imbecilit+ to senile decrepitude. -apoleon& for e>ample& was the counterpart of ,le>ander in the 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 of the 4ighteenth D+nast+& and hina at the time when the ; ontending #tates= were welded into an empire. 1hat means that we face an age of world wars and what is worse& civil wars and proscriptions& and that around 20/0 the "est 'if not destro+ed b+ its alien enemies* will be united under the personal rule of a aesar or ,ugustus. 1hat is not a pleasant prospect. 1he onl+ 0uestion before us& however& is whether #pengler is correct in his anal+sis. Rational men will regard as irrelevant the fact that his conclusions are not charming. @f a ph+sician informs +ou that +ou have 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$s ;pessimism= aroused emotions that precluded rational consideration. @ am inclined to believe that the moral level of his thin%ing was a greater obstacle. Eis ;fatalism= was not the comforting %ind that permits men to throw up their hands and eschew responsibilities. onsider& for e>ample& the concluding lines of his !an and Technics '-ew .or%& 1)32*: ,lread+ the danger is so great& for ever+ individual& ever+ class& ever+ people& that to cherish an+ illusion whatever is deplorable. 1ime does not suffer itself to be halted8 there is no 0uestion of prudent retreat or wise renunciation. Onl+ dreamers believe that there is a wa+ out. Optimism is cowardice. "e are born into this time and must bravel+ follow the path to the destined end. 1here is no other wa+. Our dut+ is to hold on to the lost position& without hope& without rescue& li%e that Roman soldier whose bones were found in front of a door in :ompeii& who& during the eruption of Fesuvius& died at his post because the+ forgot to relieve him. 1hat is greatness. 1hat is what it means to be a thoroughbred. 1he honorable end is the one thing that can not be ta%en from a man. -ow& whether or not the stern prognostication that lies bac% of that conclusion is correct& no man fit to live in the present can read those lines without feeling his heart lifted b+ the great ethos of a noble culture B the spiritual strength of the "est that can %now traged+ and be unafraid. ,nd simultaneousl+& that pronouncement will affright to h+steria the epicene homunculi among us& the puling cowards who hope onl+ to scuttle about safel+ in the dar%ness and to batten on the deca+ of a culture infinitel+ be+ond their comprehension. 1hat contrast is in itself a ver+ significant datum for an estimate of the present condition of our civili7ation G Three Points of Criticism riticism of #pengler& therefore& if it is not to seem mere 0uibbling about details& must deal with ma9or premises. -ow& so far as @ can see& #pengler$s thesis can be challenged at three reall+ fundamental points& namel+: '1* #pengler regards each civili7ation as a closed and isolated entit+ animated b+ a dominant idea& or Weltanschauung& that is its ;soul.= "h+ should ideas& or concepts& the impalpable creations 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 biological lawsH 1his logical ob9ection is not conclusive: (en ma+ observe the tides& for e>ample& and even predict them& without being able to e>plain what causes them. Cut when we must deduce historical laws from the four of five civili7ations of which we have some fairl+ accurate %nowledge& we do not have enough repetitions of a phenomenon to calculate its periodicit+ with assurance& if we do not %now wh+ it happens.

'2* , far graver difficult+ arises from the historical fact that we have alread+ mentioned. !or five centuries& at least& the men of the "est regarded modern civili7ation as a revival or prolongation of 2raeco-Roman anti0uit+. #pengler& as the ver+ basis of his h+pothesis& regards the lassical world as a civili7ation distinct from& and alien to& our own B a civili7ation that& li%e the 4g+ptian& lived& died& and is now gone. @t was dominated b+ an entirel+ different Weltanschauung& and conse0uentl+ the educated men 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 uni0ue historical phenomenon. 1he 4g+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+& seeing its own concepts in the records of an earlier civili7ation*& and each died leaving no offspring 'or& alternativel+& no subse0uent civili7ation thought to see in them its own concepts*. 1here is simpl+ no parallel or precedent for the relationship 'real or imaginar+* which lin%s 2raeco-Roman culture to our own. #ince #pengler wrote& a great historical discover+ has further complicated the 0uestion. "e now %now that the (+cenaean peoples were 2ree%s& and it is virtuall+ certain that the essentials of their culture survived the disintegration caused b+ the Dorian invasion& and were the basis of later 2ree% culture. '!or a good summar+& see <eonard R. :almer& !ycenaeans and !inoans& <ondon& 1)/1*. "e therefore have a se0uence that is& so far as we %now& uni0ue: (+cenaeanIDar% ,gesI2raeco-RomanIDar% ,gesI(odern. @f this is one civili7ation& it has had a creative life-span far longer than that of an+ other that has thus far appeared in the world. @f it is more than one& the interrelations form an e>ception to #pengler$s general law& and suggest the possibilit+ that a civili7ation& if it dies b+ some %ind of 0uasi-biological process& ma+ in some cases have a 0uasi-biological power of reproduction. 1he e>ception becomes even more remar%able if we& unli%e #pengler& regard as fundamentall+ important the concept of self-government& which ma+ have been present even in (+cenaean times 'see <. R. :almer& !ycenaeans and !inoans& cited above& p. )A*. Democracies and constitutional republics are found onl+ in the 2raeco-Roman world and our own8 such institutions seem to have been incomprehensible to other cultures. '3* !or all practical purposes& #pengler ignores hereditar+ and racial differences. Ee even uses the word ;race= to represent a 0ualitative difference between members of what we should call the same race& and he denies that that difference is to an+ significant e>tent caused b+ heredit+. Ee regards biological races as plastic and mutable& even in their ph+sical characteristics& under the influence of geographical factors 'including the soil& which is said to affect the ph+sical organism through food* and of what #pengler terms ;a m+sterious cosmic force= that has nothing to do with biolog+. 1he onl+ real unit+ is cultural& that is& the fundamental ideas and beliefs shared b+ the peoples who form a civili7ation. 1hus #pengler& who ma%es those ideas sub9ect to 0uasi-biological growth and deca+& oddl+ re9ects as insignificant the findings of biological science concerning living organisms. @t is true& of course& that man is in part a spiritual being. Of that& persons who have a religious faith need no assurance. Others& unless the+ are determined blindl+ to den+ the evidence before us& must admit the e>istence of phenomena of the %ind described b+ !ran7 4. "in%ler& (.D.& in !an" The ridge et#een T#o Worlds '-ew .or%& Earper& 1)/0*& and& of course& b+ man+ other writers. ,nd ever+ historian %nows that no one of the higher cultures could conceivabl+ have come into being& if human beings are merel+ animals.

Cut it is also true that the science of genetics& founded b+ !ather (endel onl+ a centur+ ago and almost totall+ neglected down to the earl+ +ears of the 1wentieth entur+& has ascertained biological laws that can be denied onl+ b+ den+ing the realit+ of the ph+sical world. 4ver+ educated person %nows that the color of a man$s e+es& the shape of the lobes of his ears& and ever+ one of his other ph+siological characteristics is determined b+ hereditar+ factors. @t is virtuall+ certain that intellectual capacit+ is li%ewise produced b+ inheritance& and there is a fair amount of evidence that indicated that even moral capacities are li%ewise innate. (an$s power of intervention in the development of inherited 0ualities appears to be entirel+ negative& thus affording another melanchol+ proof that human ingenuit+ can easil+ destro+ what it can never create. ,n+ fool with a %nife can in three minutes ma%e the most beautiful woman forever hideous& and one of our ;mental health e>perts&= even without using a %nife& can as 0uic%l+ and permanentl+ destro+ the finest intellect. ,nd it appears that less drastic interventions& through education and other control of environment& ma+ temporaril+ or even permanentl+ pervert and deform& but are powerless to create capacities that an individual did not inherit from near or more remote ancestors. 1he facts are be+ond 0uestion& although the #ecret :olice in #oviet Russia and ;liberal= spitting-s0uads in the ?nited #tates have largel+ succeeded in %eeping these facts from the general public in the areas the+ control. Cut no amount of terrorism can alter the laws of nature. !or a readable e>position of genetics& see 2arrett Eardin$s $ature and !an%s &ate '-ew .or%& Rinehart& 1)6)*& which is sub9ect onl+ to the reservation that the laws of genetics& li%e the laws of chemistr+& are verified b+ observation ever+ da+& whereas the doctrine of biological evolution is necessaril+ an h+pothesis that cannot be verified b+ e>periment. The Race Factor @t is also be+ond 0uestion that the races of man%ind differ greatl+ in ph+sical appearance& in susceptibilit+ to specific diseases& and in average intellectual capacit+. 1here are indications that the+ differ also in nervous organi7ation& and possibl+& in moral instincts. @t would be a miracle if that were not so& for& as is well %nown& the three primar+ races were distinct and separate at the time that intelligent men first appeared on this planet& and have so remained ever since. 1he differences are so pronounced and stable that the proponents of biological evolution are finding it more and more necessar+ to postulate that the differences go bac% to species that preceded the appearance of the homo sapiens. '#ee the new and revised edition of Dr. arleton #. oon$s The Story of !an& -ew .or%& Jnopf& 1)/2.* 1hat such differences e>ist is doubtless deplorable. @t is certainl+ deplorable that all men must die& and there 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 of decreeing b+ the "arren K#upreme ourtL 2ang& 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 these uncertainties 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. ,nd to 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 show that the #penglerian historionom+ cannot be accepted as a certaint+. @t is& however& a great philosophical formulation that poses 0uestions of the utmost importance and deepens our perception of historical causalit+. -o student of histor+ needed #pengler to tell him that a decline of religious faith

necessaril+ wea%ens the moral bonds that ma%e civili7ed societ+ possible. Cut #pengler$s showing that such a decline seems to have occurred at a definite point in the development of a number of fundamentall+ different civili7ations with& of course& radicall+ different religions provides us with data that we must ta%e into account when we tr+ to ascertain the true causes of the decline. ,nd his further observation that the decline was eventuall+ followed b+ a sweeping revival of religious belief is e0uall+ significant. Eowever wrong he ma+ have been about some things& #pengler has given us profound insights into the nature of our own culture. Cut for him& we might have gone on believing that our great technolog+ was merel+ 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& it answers a certain spiritual need inherent in us& and that we derive from its triumphs as satisfaction analogous to that which is derived from great music or great art. ,nd #pengler& above all& has forced us to in0uire 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 us from the vast and turbulent ocean of eternal barbarism. !or that& we must alwa+s honor him.