The 2024 American election will determine whether or not Oswald Spengler’s philosophy of history is a predictive model for the lifecycle of civilizations, or merely an elegantly enunciated portrayal of all the world’s cultures.
You're glossing over a few decades of Roman history that I believe are most relevant of all - the career of Gaius Marius.
Marius emerged about a decade after the Gracchi Brothers's murders. He got famous fighting the cunning North African Jugurtha with young Sulla as his overshadowed lieutenant.
Gaius Marius was the prototype "new man" (non-aristocrat) populist who served a record seven times as Consul (most men only served 1 year) due to his wealth/generosity and fame.
He reformed the military, turning it from a profession for the wealthy who bought their equipment to a force of common men issued equipment they carried themselves.
Sulla's civil wars, march on Rome, and proscriptions were primarily attempts to purge Rome of Marius and his supporters. A very young Julius Caesar, aligned with Marius by family, narrowly avoided Sulla's death squads.
Trump fits the mold and position of Gaius Marius the best. Space Force could end up his "Marian Military Reforms." Perhaps America is different from Rome in our use of technology and psychological warfare and less brute force meaning the 21st century won't necessarily be as deadly.
I didn’t gloss that it just doesn’t factor into the way Spengler talks about this stage in western development. And Trump really isn’t analogous to a Marius anyway he’s way more like Crassus.
Well this discussion requires an entirely separate article, one that I probably can’t even write bc I’m not an expert on Rome, history, or Spengler! But what I mean is that in the article I analogize Trump and his financial backers to the first triumvirate. In that instance, Crassus is a real estate man. But I’m waiting for the election to write my follow up article which will basically be me saying Curtis Yarvin was right about certain things, regardless of who wins. But if Trump wins I will argue that we can keep Spengler and explain why, and if Harris wins I will argue that I personally will no longer follow him for predicting our current experiences, but defer wholly to Yarvin
Very well done! Glad someone worked this question out.
I think there is one confounding factor you didn't address: Ceasar (and his imitators until Napoleon) lived in an age before Global Telecommunications.
The lowest-ranked Commander in Rome, China or Revolutionary France had more discretion and resources than ANYONE in modern chains of command, simply because their job required making decisions on the spot.
NATO/CIA and Soviet command approaches were only physically possible after FM Walkie Talkies became available during WW2- even as late as 1941 the Wehrmacht ran circles around the vastly more numerous Soviets with a defensive advantage, because the Red Army communication systems were utterly inadequate for the micromanagement Stakva demanded.
Modern Civilizations are at least temporarily Single-Celled Organisms; the lessons we can extrapolate from our Multicellular Predecessors has to take that into account.
This is a fantastic and true comment but I think the military aspect is wholly absent from the modern Caesar. If there even IS one on the horizon, which is still debatable.
I think that putting USA in the same sentence with Roman Empire and even Hitler, Mussolini, etc. is completely missing the point. USA is radically anti-traditional structure which represents the "end of Europe". USA is literally broke for decades in every possible way.
I disagree with a lot of what Spengler wrote, e.g. that 21st century is the time of Caesars. Which Caesars? Is this some kind of joke? I did not read him much and also did not read what you wrote in detail. Europe died long time ago and USA is living on live support for decades. What's the point of even writing about it, except as a joke or example of what anti-tradition looks like in practice.
The point of writing about it is the election. And considering the fact I say in the essay exactly what you said, I’m not sure what the problem is. If you want to talk Spengler we can but to keep it simple, I’m pretty sure he wasn’t talking about America. It seems he wrote America off with barely more than a couple lines. What I’m saying here is that if Trump loses we can basically say Spengler was wrong and look elsewhere. Musk being South African is extremely relevant to this whole thing
Now I read it more closely. You are right, and I agree. Just trying to be a bit too provocative because so many fine people lose so much time unnecessarily on those elections.
This is a brilliant article. Happy I found this.
Comments like this make the effort worth it and I mean that
You're glossing over a few decades of Roman history that I believe are most relevant of all - the career of Gaius Marius.
Marius emerged about a decade after the Gracchi Brothers's murders. He got famous fighting the cunning North African Jugurtha with young Sulla as his overshadowed lieutenant.
Gaius Marius was the prototype "new man" (non-aristocrat) populist who served a record seven times as Consul (most men only served 1 year) due to his wealth/generosity and fame.
He reformed the military, turning it from a profession for the wealthy who bought their equipment to a force of common men issued equipment they carried themselves.
Sulla's civil wars, march on Rome, and proscriptions were primarily attempts to purge Rome of Marius and his supporters. A very young Julius Caesar, aligned with Marius by family, narrowly avoided Sulla's death squads.
Trump fits the mold and position of Gaius Marius the best. Space Force could end up his "Marian Military Reforms." Perhaps America is different from Rome in our use of technology and psychological warfare and less brute force meaning the 21st century won't necessarily be as deadly.
I didn’t gloss that it just doesn’t factor into the way Spengler talks about this stage in western development. And Trump really isn’t analogous to a Marius anyway he’s way more like Crassus.
Could you elaborate on that last sentence? I’m rather rusty on my Roman history.
Well this discussion requires an entirely separate article, one that I probably can’t even write bc I’m not an expert on Rome, history, or Spengler! But what I mean is that in the article I analogize Trump and his financial backers to the first triumvirate. In that instance, Crassus is a real estate man. But I’m waiting for the election to write my follow up article which will basically be me saying Curtis Yarvin was right about certain things, regardless of who wins. But if Trump wins I will argue that we can keep Spengler and explain why, and if Harris wins I will argue that I personally will no longer follow him for predicting our current experiences, but defer wholly to Yarvin
If you could please, reply to this comment when the next article is out and I’ll be sure to read it ASAP.
Very well done! Glad someone worked this question out.
I think there is one confounding factor you didn't address: Ceasar (and his imitators until Napoleon) lived in an age before Global Telecommunications.
The lowest-ranked Commander in Rome, China or Revolutionary France had more discretion and resources than ANYONE in modern chains of command, simply because their job required making decisions on the spot.
NATO/CIA and Soviet command approaches were only physically possible after FM Walkie Talkies became available during WW2- even as late as 1941 the Wehrmacht ran circles around the vastly more numerous Soviets with a defensive advantage, because the Red Army communication systems were utterly inadequate for the micromanagement Stakva demanded.
Modern Civilizations are at least temporarily Single-Celled Organisms; the lessons we can extrapolate from our Multicellular Predecessors has to take that into account.
This is a fantastic and true comment but I think the military aspect is wholly absent from the modern Caesar. If there even IS one on the horizon, which is still debatable.
My money is currently on the "America as Byzantium" idea. Like that a lot.
Yeah I’ve been on that for a while. I never developed it further than making the observation, but Luttwak wrote a book on it about 15 years ago.
I think that putting USA in the same sentence with Roman Empire and even Hitler, Mussolini, etc. is completely missing the point. USA is radically anti-traditional structure which represents the "end of Europe". USA is literally broke for decades in every possible way.
Have you read Spengler
I’m actually starting to wonder if you even read this essay actually….
I disagree with a lot of what Spengler wrote, e.g. that 21st century is the time of Caesars. Which Caesars? Is this some kind of joke? I did not read him much and also did not read what you wrote in detail. Europe died long time ago and USA is living on live support for decades. What's the point of even writing about it, except as a joke or example of what anti-tradition looks like in practice.
The point of writing about it is the election. And considering the fact I say in the essay exactly what you said, I’m not sure what the problem is. If you want to talk Spengler we can but to keep it simple, I’m pretty sure he wasn’t talking about America. It seems he wrote America off with barely more than a couple lines. What I’m saying here is that if Trump loses we can basically say Spengler was wrong and look elsewhere. Musk being South African is extremely relevant to this whole thing
Now I read it more closely. You are right, and I agree. Just trying to be a bit too provocative because so many fine people lose so much time unnecessarily on those elections.
“Just another pointless election” yeah I’m pretty sure me and you mostly agree