Spengler Today

In our time, we can no longer imagine the effect that the 1918 publication of the first volume of Oswald Spengler’s magisterial work, The Decline of the West, had on the German public. Published almost at the same time as the German defeat, this book provided a profound philosophical and historical answer within the climate of depression that prevailed at the time. In general, the two events had the following similarities: first, the chance of their coincidence (apart from the delays in printing due to the war). Second, they gave rise to the attempt at a new morphological explanation of universal history, that is, a presentation of the history of the various cultures which, like plants, grow and disappear.

Heroic Pessimism, the Meaning of History and Spengler’s Politics

Of course, this type of interpretation of historical facts is not new. Already in the Renaissance period, the Italian Vico, in his philosophy of history, had defended similar ideas. But before Spengler, no one had supported this principle in such a consistent manner and had drawn, in such a detailed way, a comparative picture of the evolution of the great cultures of the past. Parallels could therefore be drawn to assess the future of our Western culture, or, as Spengler liked to call it, Faustian culture: a long agony of its strength, a gradual aging and, finally, the end, the conquest by young and uncultured peoples, the decline in the grey desert of an uneventful fellah existence.

It was the first time that an avant-garde thinker had declared war on the optimistic Western faith in eternal and irreversible progress. In addition, Spengler developed a completely pessimistic interpretation of the phenomenon of history. Yet Spengler always disagreed with the charge of absolute pessimism; he scoffed at the oft-made comparison between the decline of the West and the sinking of a ship. Rather, he advocated a heroic pessimism, like the Roman legionary who, under the lava rain of Pompeii, remained steadfast at his post. But the sensational title of his book, inconceivable before 1914, was, in the dark days of the collapse of Germany, the cause of the success of the work, which, however, required a great deal of knowledge on the part of its readers. Few are those who, before as well as after Spengler, have felt the passion of this scholar cum political writer so vividly themselves.

While, inspired by his grandiose philosophy of history, he completed the second volume of his Decline of the West, he sought to give political advice to Forstrat (forest administrator) Escherich and his group of right-wing radicals, the Orgesch (Escherich Organization). He also tried to bring about a change of direction in the newspaper Münchner Neueste Nachrichten. Later, while corresponding with the commercial councillor Reusch of the GHH (Gutehoffnungshütte)1 and with Roderich Schlubach, president of the Patriotische Gesellschaft (Patriotic Society) of Hamburg, on the political issues of the day, he worked on an unfinished book, Urfragen, and collected documents on universal history before 2,000 BCE. Over the years, his scientific work increasingly focused on the history of ancient cultures: Chinese antiquity, the ancient Orient, pre-Columbian America and the prehistoric cultures of the Mediterranean basin.

Although he refused to engage in real political activity in practice, Spengler nevertheless gladly assumed the role of a political master of the German people. Among those who could not accommodate themselves to the new political reality of the period between 1919 and 1933, many saw him as such. Undoubtedly, he could, at that time, have been the great spiritual master of the anti-democratic conservatives in Germany. His influence, thanks to his talent and his expressive and fascinating formulations, surpassed that of Moeller van den Bruck, author of the widely read book The Third Reich.

Several of his political writings of the period are violently polemical in nature (without much objectivity) and, thirty-eight years after the author’s death, resolutely outdated. The Weimar Republic found in him a ruthless critic and an implacable adversary. He did not see, or did not want to see, the possibilities of an evolution of conservative political thought on a democratic basis.

However, one must know and appreciate the fact that Spengler always rejected Hitler and National Socialism, despite the efforts made to win him over to this cause. On the famous “Potsdam Day,” he declined an invitation from Goebbels to speak on the radio. He seems to have had a premonition of the catastrophe of the Second World War. While he showed equal contempt for democracy on the one hand and demagogic and racist National Socialism on the other, he praised Mussolini and developed a conception of a Caesar relying exclusively on the army and disdainful of the mob. During the crisis of the autumn of 1923, he is said to have approached General von Seeckt in this regard, but when the latter prudently rejected his proposal, Spengler spoke of him with disbelief and contempt.

Spengler as a Guide Today

Two of Spengler’s writings are still relevant today and worth rereading. The first of these works is a political work of 1919, entitled Preussentum und Sozialismus (Prussianism and Socialism). In this work, Spengler tried to overcome the controversies between capitalism and socialism (the Marxist version) that were relevant at the time; Spengler wanted to revisit this problem in the light of completely new premises. For him, this opposition lies in the fact that liberalism is an essentially English ideology, while socialism is essentially a Prussian one. English society is based on the differences between rich and poor, while Prussian society is based on the principles of command and obedience. According to Spengler, the philosophy of the British state can be traced back to the Vikings and that of the Prussian state to the orders of chivalry. For the former, it is the gain that matters, and for the latter, it is the service. Karl Marx, however, neglected these basic differences or did not want to admit them. It has, as a result, degraded socialism to the level of lower-class capitalism. Spengler, on the other hand, advocated socialism as an ethical, not as a materialistic economic principle.

Of course, Spengler’s theses are somewhat exaggerated, yet they are perhaps less alien to reality than Marx’s reduction to the bourgeoisie/proletariat contrast, where reality is compressed into a rigid theoretical corset. In 1919, the work, which appeared at a time of spiritual renewal, was enthusiastically received in the circles of young intellectuals. Later, the conventional left/right dichotomy trampled these theses into the background of ideological debates. Spengler himself, under the influence of friends such as the great industrialist Paul Reusch, prudently abandoned some points of his theory. Now, after half a century of the reign of the liberal motto “Get rich!” and after the anarchist protest movement and late Marxism, we will find, in this writing, precepts for living a future that will be oriented according to the best ideals of the past.

Spengler’s second work which could serve as a guideline today appeared in the summer of 1933 and is entitled Deutschland und die weltgeschichtliche Entwicklung (Germany and the Evolution of World History). This text was to be the first volume of The Hour of Decision. The second never appeared. The publication of this book, marked by the circumstances of the moment (a few months after Hitler’s seizure of power), caused a sensation. He was the first — and for twelve years the only — blunt and unsparing critic of the Hitler regime.

In fact, Spengler approved, in principle, regime change. He shed no tears at the demise of the Weimar Republic. But he bitterly disapproved of the noisy and exuberant celebration of the victory. He asserted that the real problems had not yet been solved and that the old divisions in society, in the form of the contrast between the left and right wings, were perpetuated within the victorious party. Spengler seems to have foreseen the Röhm affair that occurred a year later. He warned the nation against the “Praetorian Guard,” which usually rises in the aftermath of victory and, after it, becomes useless and must be set aside.

Events have belied many of the considerations of this work. Spengler, for example, overestimated Japan and underestimated the United States, which he believed was well on its way to decadence. On the other hand, two of his prophecies have come true and today are of a burning topicality: the world revolution of the colored peoples — the great struggle of the colored races against white colonial rule and, partially associated with this struggle, the world revolution of the whites, that is, of the white proletariat against its ruling strata, bearers of “culture.”

Spengler’s highly exaggerated formulations may seem inadequate for their time, when Germany had six million unemployed and the proletariat was reduced to utter misery. But in these assertions, we discover a surprising political foresight. Despite them being confusing for the present and the near future, they become prophecies valid for the long term.

For a long time, Spengler remained in the shadows behind his work, refusing the positions offered to him by the universities and leading a solitary, independent and unmarried life. Thus emerges the figure of a timid man, hostile to the world, especially when he felt even more isolated as a result of his critical attitude towards the National Socialist regime. However, the publication of his important correspondence from the years 1913-1936, published by C. H. Beck in Munich in 1963, rid us of the image of a philosopher cut off from the world, locked up in his ivory tower. Many interesting personalities were Spengler’s correspondents. Among them, we have already mentioned Paul Reusch, the president of the GHH; there was also the ancient historian Eduard Meyer, the Kulturphilosoph Leo Frobenius, and Elisabeth Förster-Nietzsche, the philosopher’s sister (with whom Spengler broke contact because of her fanatical enthusiasm for Hitler). Spengler traveled whenever his financial position permitted. Almost every year he went to Italy. He also went to Spain, the south of France, Scandinavia and Finland. It has never been clear whether a plan to travel to Russia was actually carried out. He took a much greater interest in others than one might be tempted to believe: he encouraged talent, advised young scholars, and in his personal correspondence he revealed himself to be a man of humor and wit.

However, he was not spared tragedy either. While writing his book, which turned the world upside down, he was repeatedly disgusted with paper and felt a deep aversion to his life as a convict of writing. He had a thirst for action and hands-on activity. Many of the harsh aspects of his personality stem from a sense of frustration. In addition, since his youth, Spengler had poor health. Never, in his letters, were there any interruptions to the complaints about unbearable migraines, neuralgia, stomach aches, jaw operations… He had to sacrifice many trips and visits because of these incessant illnesses. Barely 56 years old, he died suddenly of a heart attack on 8 May 1936. Spengler’s name has been forgotten. But there are many things that call for its return.

N.B. Criticón was a magazine that wanted to be a forum for all forms of conservative ideology. In its columns, Catholics, Protestants, liberals, national conservatives, nominalists and universalists expressed themselves. It is precisely thanks to these controversies that the journal found its raison d’être. Too often, it is believed that there is only one conservative ideology, with anti-communism as its common denominator. Nothing could be further from the truth. All the quarrels of history are potentially present in all ideologies. Communism, even in its apparently most rigid forms, is no exception to this rule. It is time for people who are interested in political ideas to know that -isms preceded by the prefix anti- are only expressions of a desire to preserve the status quo. And that means getting out of the game of life.