One hundred years ago, the question was everywhere in the air among the educated classes. Aristocracy was on its last legs. Aristocracy had been the key both to social and political order, but like every institution, it had outworn its usefulness. So the question was: what would come next?

For centuries, capitalism had been rising. Like any power interest, it always sought to enlarge its own power. And in democracies, the power of money became king.

Everyone knew, one hundred years ago, that there were scary questions ahead. What would a world based strictly on capitalism, without any respect for tradition, look like? There were many examples of corruption.

But now these questions have been forgotten. Morals are destroyed. And most people believe that hating Christianity and hating western civilization are moral imperatives! Did all this happen organically?

What happened in the sixties? Youth rebellion? But what happened to it? Was it contained the whole time? Were the baby boomers lulled into a sense of false accomplishment, while the power of corruption quietly consolidated control in the background?

>>2771413

>Did all this happen organically?

>>2771415

>Discoveries must be made organically.

Coincidence? Or bots?

Henry Kissinger did his undergraduate thesis on Oswald Spengler's "Decline of the West". That book, to me, represents the highest understanding of history and government yet achieved… But its lessons did not spread among the people. Instead, the opposite happened, and propaganists like Fareed Zakaria and Francis Fukuyama, among many many others, spread feel-good deceptions under a veneer of "smart"ness.

Spengler predicted the crisis that would come when aristocracy was dead, and money-power was able to run unchecked into the finality of corruption. He predicted that crisis would come around 2000, and he was very close.

Kissinger understood history, and he was undoubtedly acting on Spengler's precepts in wielding the immense he did, and perhaps still does. But the people were plunged into a bread and circuses state of utter obliviousness, particularly in the last fifty years

>>2771477

Bots are a vector for pure evil, based on the evidence I've seen.

>>2771530

I've been a bit disappointed in some aspects of Quigley. His interpretations of culture are crude to say the least. He believed he improved on Spengler, but he just simplified things in unhelpful ways, and had absolutely no grasp of the difference between causality and destiny that Spengler emphasized so strongly.

That said, there is much good information in Quigley.

>>2771574

You have no function here, 4chan-style nazi bot, so are you going to keep posting? Just get out, you got baited into spazzing out, and now you are humiliated, are an absolute failure, and have no function.

/deleteself

>>2771524

This is all irrelevant distraction and thread filler.

DIE BOTS

IS 8CHAN CONTROLLED BY CLOWNS?

>>2771777

ahhHHHHAHHHHH

>>2771791

Is control of one chan mutually exclusive of control of another, anon? Are you thinking logically? Are you thinking critically? Are you thinking at all?

>>2771792

Here is the problem with bot posts: they are obviously bot posts. Why would a human be indignant at the suggestion 8chan is comped? There is a spectrum of believable reactions, but getting mad isn't one of them. Therefore, we know this is a bot (there are so very many bots, that it is always a safe assumption anyway)

It's very very useful to notice what bots respond to, and what they want you to believe (though the latter can't always be taken at face value).

If bots respond to questions about whether or not 8chan is comped, what does that tell us?

The bots basically tell us everything we need to know, we just need to simply LOOK.

>>2771897

I have to wonder who the bots think they are appealing to with the anti-Jew attacks on Q. Surely the bots know how much of the 4chan nazism is bot-created… so are they trying to convince those same bots not to follow Q? lol, loserbots are melting down in their own tangled algorithms.