Why exactly do civilizations fall?

Jews

Print this out, take three darts, and throw them.

>Public baths
>Centralization
>Anarchy
I got these, what does it mean?

It's not the only factor but it makes sense that it contributes

The proliferation of bath houses, which became hotbeds of political anarchy in reaction to the increasing centralisation of the late empire.

Almost sounds believable, doesn't it?

>But why does that happen?
Invasions happen because large host gathered and decided to fuck shit up (see central Asians)
Plagues happen because trade allows disease to spread fast (See plagues in Roman empire)
Natural disasters happen because someone left a woman drive or copulated with person of the same sex (See Sodoma and Gomorrah)
People fail to adapt, because they think when they act like their noble ancestors everything will be OK (See salafism)
Civil wars happen when two fractions of society hate each other (See Sulla and Marius) or when ideology/religion overcomes suppression (see Hussite wars or Russian civil war)

Name one successful centralized anarchist civilization. Also public baths create pruney fingers which are more inclined to drop weapons thus less effective armies

It's not really a "factor", it's a meme.

Holy shit I'm dying

Also nobody's mentioned economic mismanagement yet

>Degeneration
>Lack of military recruits
>Soil erosion

How did I do

Beacuse G*rmanics envy truly civilized people and feel the need to destroy civilization

Demoralization, Jewish influence, Spiritual barbarism

"Degenaration" doesn't mean anything. Roll again.

Soil erosion causes failing crops, thus widespread malnutrition. Those who haven't fled for more fertile regions produce only sickly children who are unfit for military duty. The civilization is unable to defend itself and easy picking for rivals.

When a culture does not pertain to the interests of itself, then it's degenerate.

>but why does that happen
ecological pressure,

Christianity, inertia and lack of religiousness. Huh.

So basically, any change destroy Civilizations?

...

It's an utterly trite and reductionist statement that basically sounds like a 3 year old trying to make sense of the world. It adds nothing of value to any discussion while at the same time makes the person saying it feel like they've obtained some sort of esoteric knowledge academia's been hiding from them. It's the historical equivalent of suburbian moms posting "live, laugh, love" on Facebook.

>weak people make bad times

Whoa... What an enlightening and substantive message.

"Degenaration" in context of culture means only "Society got worse". What you said has nothing to do with it.

Only in the minds of retards

Interest payments on government debt become unplayable, mainly caused by the pension meme

>"no u bad"

Wonderful argument buddy.

degeneration? are you actually believing the dumbest of nazi propaganda or is that a /pol/ meme

But it's still true.

It's not my fault if people have rendered a term meaningless, when it's not

Clearly if something exists, and then ceases to exist, or if something is prosperous and influential, and then ceases to be so, it must have experienced some form of degeneration. Either it was a failure to adapt, or self-sabotage, natural circumstances, etc. The causes that are self-imposed are what's degenerate.

NOT WELCOME

please don't tell me you think the roman empire fell because of "degeneration"

They shit on their balls.

Nobody's disputing that it's true. It's about as true as saying "fire is hot". Yeah no shit, bad men do bad thing. Truly everyone's more the better knowing this mysterious secret. You've hit the nail on the head, yep.

I don't really know much about Rome beyond the basics, so I definitely wouldn't want to culture on Roman culture and everyday life.

But based on what I know, I think a big mistake was encouraging the Caesarian warlord culture, but at the same time, it was probably necessary, so you can't blame that exclusively. When you start digging into it, you discover the deficiencies of the republic and that's where things get way too complex to actually find a reason.

encouraging the ceasarian warlord culture? what do you mean by that?

>I don't really know much about Rome
Should have just left it at that. Your post reads like something that would be in my email's spam folder

We haven't even discussed anything

>It's not my fault if people have rendered a term meaningless, when it's not
It has meaning. A meaning that's so vague you must specify what do you mean by it.

The meaning you attempted to force upon the word doesn't match it.

>something is prosperous and influential, and then ceases to be so
>Something good became bad
Wrong, it didn't had to be good to begin with

>Either it was a failure to adapt, or self-sabotage, natural circumstances, etc.
Failure to adapt implies lack of change, change is critical in "degeneration".

>The causes that are self-imposed are what's degenerate.
Incorrect, there is no need for it to be self-imposed.

Only way how you can make it into something concrete is making it (genetic) degeneration.

The way you speak implies culture serves no purpose to and has no effect on a civilization.

Civilization exists for a reason. Beyond the basics of providing security and organizing people in order to provide defense and resources, we also have how well it imposes and projects itself onto the rest of the world, the health and prosperity of its members compared to others, its cultural output and so on. It might be hard to measure what civilization is "the best", but there's a clear distinction between passive and stagnated civilizations and thriving ones. Now we have some sense of what is good and what is bad that most people can agree on - so we don't get lost in relativistic and nihilistic nonsense. There's no God to tell us what is good and bad, but you're stuck her on Earth so you can at least agree that having food and shelter is good. It might be hard to tell in the moment, and alarmists are constantly complaining, but it's not hard to gauge in hindsight the vitality, influence and resourcefulness of a civilization. Clearly a civilization like Rome was more vigorous than some crappy city-state elsewhere.

When a civilization lacks the ability to maintain these things, it has begun its degeneration and a replacement is sure to come along and end its misery. That's where failing to adapt come in. There's nothing which suggests that "change" is degenerate by definition, that's /pol/ talk. A lazy bum that can't muster up the will to change his ways is a degenerate. A healthy person who changes for the worse is degenerating.

There are cultural attributes that provides for the good and cultural attributes that provides for the bad as established two paragraphs earlier. A lazy people won't have an abundance of resources, an uneducated people won't produce works of science and an uncreative people won't produce art. People aren't born with these skills, they are learned. Culture and state is what puts us on the path of adopted certain attitudes and skills.

Essentially, inequality and wealth concentration leads to stratification of society that rigidifies and introduces external populace as the new underclass as they flock to enrich themselves from the developed civilization, this replacement of culture and values will cause clashes that lead to its downfall.

>t. weak person who creates hard times

>A lazy bum that can't muster up the will to change his ways is a degenerate.
you don't seem to understand what the word degenerate implies.

Degeneration, is progression in the wrong direction. If a lazy bum works hard, that is progression, if a hard worker becomes lazy that is degenerate.
Ass-fucking, todler-touching, and trans-spegetti is not progress my any means, it is symptoms of the necrosis that our society is undergoing. The rapid degridation in intelligence due ot mistrust of the education system (rightly deserved, for the education system is failing to do what it was made to do), greedy politicians who are easily bribed by oligarchical elites to pass laws that benefit them, the death of piety, hyper-individualism (selfishness) and consumerism (gluttony). Society continues to degenerate as Rome did. Watch as Rome falls user.

Listen you idiots. Rome fell because of massive economic problems from the Crisis of the Third Century, diseases, military defeats and being a logistical nightmare to effectively run. It did not fall because they "Grew Soft”, they were fighting just as hard at their end as they were at their beginning. It did not fall because they had "cultural exhaustion" or "moral decline”, unless you want to count a growing disparity of wealth as such. The Romans partied harder during their rise than they ever did during their decline.

Yes.

But also stagnation.

>Why exactly do civilizations fall?
millenials, or their attitude

t. millenial numale soyboy with an ethnic studies degree

>Degeneration, is progression in the wrong direction. If a lazy bum works hard, that is progression, if a hard worker becomes lazy that is degenerate.
If you ask me, a passive self-sabotaging mentality is still degenerate. It's implied that the bum probably was in that state at some point anyway. So I don't get why you'd complain about that.

>The way you speak implies culture serves no purpose to and has no effect on a civilization.
I'm speaking purely about semantics. To remind you what the argument is about: The word "degeneration" is too vague to describe a historical event. You are attempting to force upon it some deeper mystical meaning, because it is a cool sounding latin word. As I said it can be given such a meaning, but only if you use it in the meaning of B.A. Morel's theory and I am beggining to think it's the meaning the author meant. After all it was written before Fallout NV popularized the word and /pol/ turned it into it's meme.

>When a civilization lacks the ability to maintain these things, it has begun its degeneration
>When civilisation loses ability to maintain good qualities, it has begun to get worse
ok...
>replacement is sure to come along and end its misery
Wrong, ability to maintain good quality can come back.

>A lazy bum that can't muster up the will to change his ways is a degenerate
But he did not "degenerated", he remained a bum. Degeneration (the word we are talking about) is, by fucking definition, a process, process in which something gets worse.

> A healthy person who changes for the worse is degenerating.
Boy, I hope you don't talk like that to your parents, when they get ill.

>There are cultural attributes that provides for the good and cultural attribute...
Irrelevant.

>It's implied that the bum probably was in that state at some point anyway.
nope. The bum ended up there because of bad life choices.

>should i read a book? nah a pithy little saying about history following a nice predictable little pattern that happens to align with my contemporary political inclinations is good enough for me

decay of spiritual values and descent into materialism

>sociological explanations for the fall of rome
>equating the fall of rome to the modern world

You mean like when ancient Greeks started to explain shit in different way than just calling it gods? Or the whole reaissance bussines?

>But why does that happen?

All things that go up must come down.

Millennials didn't buy enough diamonds

>he fell for the "modern world is different" meme

We're the same idiots as we were back then

The only thing this millennial is killing is himself.

HARD TIMES MAKE HARD MEN

HARD MEN MAKE SEXY TIMES

women

SEXY TIMES MAKE SEXY MEN

SEXY MEN MAKE HARD TIMES

Myst 3 actually had 4 great quotes about this:
>Energy powers future motion
>Nature encourages mutual dependence
>Dynamic forces spur change
>Balanced systems stimulate civilizations.

Bad luck

The Versailles effect.

t. soy boy

being literate and not dying of infectious disease does make a difference

Since when have fags topples a civilization?

If reactionaries are to believed, every 30 seconds.

>It makes sense though

It really doesn't. Hard times tend to create desperate men acclimatized to hard times, while capable survivors, they are not necessarily good leaders. Good times tend to afford men better opportunities for education, and the ability to practice skills beyond the ones necessary for survival, and thus better leaders. We look at figures like Caesar and Napoleon as proof of hard times creating hard men, but that's just survivor bias; history wont remember the survival driven sorts who either made the situation worse in the long run or did nothing to improve it.

This.

Survivor bias is one hell of a drug.

t. another millennial hating his own generation

>at its height Rome has ridiculously decadent emperors who openly crave boipucci
>during its decline Rome becomes increasingly uptight and christian

Rome had to few kids to support their army because then fucked each other more than their. women

...

Ultimately because they are plagued with the brilliance and the burden of humanity.

Humans can turn any system to shit after a few centuries.

The Jews

Benis in Anis replaces Benis in Vagoo.

Den u ged dis. Fug.

...

Whatever makes my political ideology sound more credible

So the question is which caused the other? Will we ever know?

>uptight tradition lead Rome to height of it power
>because Rome become local super power there were no one that seriously challenged their rule which lead to decadent emperors
>decant emperors waste or mismanage Rome power chasing boibucci which lead to decline
>at the time of decline people try to reverse changes by being uptight but its to late
>Rome fall but the local powers arisen in its place are rather uptight and they start their rise to greater power

"you forgot to say no homo"
>empire dies

Decadent emperors were mostly before the decline started. The decline really first became visible under Marcus Aurelius, when the empire's borders started to blur and fragment.

Exactly.

this x1000
If you ask someone in 1500 why the roman empire fell, they respond:
>because of a lack of unifying religion and the turmoil between christianity and paganism
if you ask someone in the mid 20th century they respond:
>because of a lack of a national ethnicity and hegemony, for each roman there was 10 barbarians under their rule
if you ask some one today, they respond in a way that justifies their political/economic ideology
>slaves took over muh working famer jobs, no middle class
>lack of DEMOCRATIC FREEDUMS(because lets face it, democratically elected officials like DRUMPF would have made just as good emperors)

I see somebody projecting hard.

excuse you, im a radical centrist, and as such have no personal biases on historical or modern politcs. Please retract that statement, 'twas just a drumpf shitpost laddo

Jesus you normies he's asking what more meta makes civilizations fall and no god damned memes

As a Central Radical I must refuse as your position was far from unbiased and clearly leaning away from being radical.
For your behavior you deserve thousand boots to the head.

...

oswald spengler told me a society is destined to fall the moment a culture becomes a civilization