On Spengler and the Death of Darwinian Rationalism and the Decaying Utopia of Liberalism

March 1st, 2021

Spengler proposes that rational evolution obscures the lines between forms, putting forward that creatures as well as epochs do not so much scatter and blur into each other, but rather that they emerge at once, wholly fresh as a new species or a new period. Just as we recognize the different stages within our life very clearly, when put under the scrutiny of the rational, scientific eye it loses its understanding and defining characteristics, thus the fine details are blurred in effort to create a cozy formula.

Just as so, he argues that evolution under the rational, English lens is not a cause for life growing, but rather for it disappearing. That it defines forms from each other based upon the event that it blurs away and grows into other forms. What then can one call one form wholly and distinctly from the other? Why then do we not suggest that all forms are the same and therefore do not exist at all?

So this got me to thinking:
The liberal sense of equality musters a force (albeit an unconscious one) for the economic advantage of people of that vibrational character to survive in the world. Nietzsche had termed such people as the "many-too-many" (the "superfluous") who operate on a very superficial existence and thin the fabric of quality in order to stretch out and accommodate the horrendously increasing population with a greater quantity.

This is opposed to the true Aryan vibrational personality, by which what makes an Aryan is not just based upon genetics alone, but rather it is a certain stoic mentality and honest aesthetics that accompany one to give them the full mode of the Aryan. Simply put: this certain personality is typically best found in the European, but we can even see such similarities with cultures such as Japan.

However, the many-too-many naturally develop a kind of politics not necessarily to wage war, but to find the best economic advantage that will maintain a steady way of life and ensure they are always provided with Starbucks coffee, Netflix, Gamestop's newest game, and the latest, somewhat improved smart device. To do this, they need racial and gender equality to rally the like-minded under a roof called "compassion". Under this pretense of "compassion", these similar minds must be brought down or brought up to the same economic level in order to generate their utopia where as long as you follow the ever-blurred rules, you will achieve the social credit needed to survive. This is essentially the easy way out: the same harmony of the Christian God whom promises you everlasting life in his Heaven as long as you obey his rules and generate enough karmic points.

The liberal is none other than the modern, rational puritan: the midwit. And as Spengler describes evolution as the disappearance of a form or an epoch into undefinable blurs, so is evolution's social name – progressivism – the disappearance of itself into the undefinable blurs of equality. This is the death of humanity should this mental disease infect the whole world.

So then the question is presented: should we install a proper eugenics program to decrease the power of the many-too-many? Others have come to this conclusion, but I do wonder if it would be necessary at all? As with John Calhoun’s mouse utopia experiment, the population will reach its peak before it begins to wane, and, by the looks of it, this seems to only last within the full lifetime of the millennial whom refrains from having children. The more counter-life indoctrination is pushed, the more it eggs on the collapse of the liberal utopia. The issue then is not a matter of suppressing their numbers as they are already doing this themselves, but rather it is how we hold our place and liberties to live the way we choose.

The question therefore becomes: who in the end will still be holding the cards? Whoever remains will be the carrier seed of the new civilization. The struggle is not an instantaneous, absolute triumph, but as long as we hold to our Earth and build the foundation needed, we will secure our victory and reign as the stars of the New Dawn.

"There is no more conclusive refutation of Darwinism than that furnished by paleontology. Simple probability indicates that fossil hoards can only be test samples. Each sample, then, should represent a different stage of evolution, and there ought to be merely 'transitional' types, no definition and no species. Instead of this we find perfectly stable and unaltered forms persevering through long ages, forms that have not developed themselves on the fitness principle, but appear suddenly and at once in their distinctive shape; that do not thereafter evolve towards better adaptation, but become rarer and finally disappear, while quite different forms crop up again.

And along with this existence there is given also a definite energy of the form – by virtue of which in the course of its self-fulfillment it keeps itself pure or, on the contrary, becomes dull and unclear or evasively splits into numerous varieties – and finally a life duration of this form, which (unless, again, incident intervenes to shorten it) leads naturally to a senility of the species and finally to its disappearance."

Decline of the West, vol. 2, by Oswald Spengler


Spengler, Oswald. Decline of the West: Perspectives in World History. 1928. Edited by David Payne. Translated by Charles Francis Atkinson. Published by Random Shack. Vol. 2. 2014.