3 ms·
> He also examines those who built literary and political careers around jeremiads against decline alongside promises for rebirth and renewal. I saw this as th
by makeitdouble 5y ago
> He also examines those who built literary and political careers around jeremiads against decline alongside promises for rebirth and renewal.
I saw this as the thrust of the article. People proclaming a decline to raise a sense of crisis at their advantage, and gain a pretext to destroy anything on their path to power. This, happening at at every scale.
- eevilspock 5y agoHe is claiming some new sort of Godwin's law[1], where instead of instead of Nazis and Hitler, the idea is that every polemicist or ideologue will eventually claim to explain Rome's decline and fall. --- [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
- galaxyLogic 5y agoI can see that is like declaring there is voter-fraud everywhere therefore we must make it extra difficult for people to vote
- coldtea 5y ago>I saw this as the thrust of the article. It is indeed the thrust of the article. A pre-determined political point he wanted to make, written up as being about history. The problem is that besides "people proclaming a decline" there are also actual declines in history, and people should be warned, prepared, and take measures against them. And this period looks like very well it could be one (for some areas). To counter this point, he argues that there are never declines in history, going as far as to deny the very real decline of Rome. This has huge denial and "we were always at war with Eurasia" vibes...