The heirs of May 68 have imposed the idea that everything has the same value...

>The heirs of May 68 have imposed the idea that everything has the same value, that there is no difference between good and bad, truth and falsehood, beauty and ugliness. … They have proclaimed that all is permitted, that authority, civility, and respect are finished, that nothing is any longer great, sacred, or admirable.
Why do leftists/marxists have a hard time admitting they destroyed social order and they do the dirty work for the ultra capitalists?
Spengler warned about this in 1918.

Honestly what is it with the French?

>and they do the dirty work for the ultra capitalists?
As opposed to the right?

both work in the directions dictated by money. The left however do most of the dirty work, obviously.
The French... hard to say what makes them more degenerate than other europeans, but May 68 can be traced back to 1517 where people started to follow emotions instead of logic... all europeans lost common sense already by the end of 16th century.

>They have proclaimed that all is permitted, that authority, civility, and respect are finished, that nothing is any longer great, sacred, or admirable.
So what's the problem

...

Poor splenger, this is the quality of his intellectual offspring?

I don't think they're degenerate, they have a very refined and almost European exoticism to them, it's no accident Asians love the French. So I guess what I'm saying is, what does it say that the culture probably singularly responsible for muh equality and muh democracy is simultaneously so fascinating?

The French aren't slouches in the intellectual department, either. Can you refute them at their own game?

>what does it say that the culture probably singularly responsible for muh equality and muh democracy is simultaneously so fascinating?
It's pretty easy to picture a bunch of upper middle class kids trying to destroy "2000 years of oppressive Catholic morals''.
There is nothing fascinating about 18 year old kids who were super protected by their parents trying to transform the world according to an ideology than have no clue about its final goals and it's logical implications.

That's the point where all leftists after making their revolutions blame someone for ''betraying the pure ideals''. They are dumb enough to think about the logical consequences and they are think they are too superior to admit error.
That's basically the french mindset you find exotic

>than
*they
>it's
*its

It's fascinating insofar as what you perceive as a degenerative influence expresses itself in such starkly intellectual terms. Listen, I don't worship the French, my point is you have to understand how it is these forces arise in the first place, why history in general gravitates towards these conclusions about itself, towards these ideas.

>I don't worship the French
I didn't accuse you of worshiping them, I simply said what you find exotic about them it's their moral relativism, their inability to see the logical implications of their actions and their upper middle class mentality of transforming the world.
>my point is you have to understand how it is these forces arise in the first place
It's almost impossible to find how these ideals are born, but you can analyze the ones who promote it to have a better understanding.. it's a start

Can people stop trying to meme Spengler? He was a hack with hardly anything new to say

one possibility about the french behavior.. back to Cathars when they thought they were so pure and so better than others they wanted to live closer to the sun so they could see light better.

how they influenced the french society centuries later I have no clue, or if they had any influence at all.

>I share a board with these people

Yes, but that's my point: it's precisely that lacksadisical relativism that people find so fascinating, that liberated sexuality and """""free thought"""""".

Trust me, I read Evola, I'm not a faggot apologist, but I am interested in what it is about these forces that is nevertheless so captivating at this point in time (doesn't have to be the French, just that sheen of living the """high life""" in late stage capitalism)

Or, y'know, the massive revolution that dominated a quarter of a century and completely rewrote the political and social map of europe

>I'm not a faggot apologist, but I am interested in what it is about these forces that is nevertheless so captivating at this point in time
That's a question I have no answer.
>why these ideas conquer the minds of people
It's a long investigation, probably would take years to study the roots of them and why people love it.

I think Tradition collapsed for the same reason Eden "didn't work out": paradise is boring. Or, to put it in a more refined way, reality is time and time is reality, as long as we are alive, we can't help but transcend our contemporary forms of thought, even one as laudable and life-affirming as Tradition.

Maybe there really is something more inherently satisfying in the Western lifestyle that everyone, from bored teenagers in the suburbs to bored teenagers in third world countries, are craving for. What would you say to that? How, in other words, can the light possibly compete with the promise of a better life immanent to the world, a world that seems like it's the only thing there is?

>What would you say to that?
One thing that must be considered is that the upper middle class "bored teenagers'' in europe can afford to make revolutions or live by their ideals because usually they don't suffer the consequences of their actions.
The desire to transform the world is something many people have but few can put into practice (like political action - may 1968 or russia 1917).

I think all of the revolutionaries share the same idea that earth can be a paradise and they have the formula to make it happen

>Why do leftists/marxists
Marxists had entirely different focus in '68, you moron.

>can be traced back to 1517 where people started to follow emotions instead of logic...
You mean all those hundreds of years when most Europeans were convinced, based on nothing other than church teachings, that a particular preacher in Roman Judaea had been the unique incarnate son of a deity, had performed miracles, and had once risen from the grave after being dead for three days... they were following logic, not emotions?