• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Second Dark Age (2 Viewers)

When the Western Roman Empire fell in 476 AD, Europe didn’t descend into pitch-black oblivion. Trade persisted in pockets, monasteries preserved scraps of learning, and the Eastern Empire continued on as Byzantium. Yet stagnation gripped the West for centuries. Aqueducts decayed into ruins, literacy withered to a privilege of the few, and once-thriving urban centers shrank into muddy villages. Progress didn’t vanish - it froze. The population dwindled, economies contracted, and the grand ideas of antiquity - reason, engineering, governance - faded into obscurity, waiting centuries for a Renaissance to revive them. Today, as the West grapples with demographic decline, eroding trust, and absurd population growth in the Global South, we might ask: are we teetering on the edge of a new 'dark age'? Not a collapse into literal darkness, but a dimming of the liberal, enlightened systems that dragged us out of the first one - a modern Dark Age with a regressive soul.

On Competence and Trust

A hot topic in the news today is the ongoing 'competency crisis' which is being used to explain declining test scores, lowering average IQ, worsening infrastructure, planes falling out of the sky, and our sudden interest in banana republican Caudillos insistent on dissolving our institutions. Since 2000, U.S students have slid in global and domestic measures, which seems to lend legitimacy to this hypothesis. PISA scores show a 28-point drop in math, science has dipped 10 points, and reading has dipped between 5 - 10 points in addition to ACT scores hitting a 30-year low. I found no longitudinal data for IQ, but proxies (like SAT scores) fell ~20 points, representing an average IQ loss of ~2-3 points which is very significant over a short period, reversing the Flynn effect. The country is rife with anti-intellectualism and distrust in our institutions, government, and professional class dropping to historical lows. In the 1960's ~55%+ said "most people can be trusted". In 2023, Pew trends estimated ~25 - 30% with the same sentiment, a reduction of about half. In 1958, Pew search showed that 73% of people trusted the government. That number is 16% today. Media confidence, congress approval, and trust in our professional class and intellectual institutions are all performing the same or usually worse.

On Population and The Global South

The contemporary West faces another serious problem: its population. In 1950, Europe and North America were 22% of the population. Today, it's about 12% and falling steadily - projected to fall to 8% by 2050. Meanwhile, Africa's share rises from 9% to 25%. This is a substantial fact which will become relevant later.

This massive shift has profound implications for global stability, sustainability, and global power structures. Africa and India already have absurdly large populations and these populations continue to rise exponentially. Many of these countries are sustained directly or indirectly by massive amounts of foreign aid through IMF, the UN, and non profits. ~60% of Indian STEM PhDs studied abroad, pointing to a broader trend of brain drain and a massive dependency on Western institutions (which are evidently in decline). Even with this support coming from increasingly strained Western governments, 600 million in Africa lack electricity, India's cities choke on pollution, and few governments show any interest in long term environmental sustainability goals. These countries are extremely urbanized, with 40% of India's urbanites living in slums and 80% of sewage flowing untreated into rivers like the Ganges, similar trends hold in Africa. Climate change continues to displace millions (143 million projected by 2050).

Few, if any countries in the global south have any interest in the liberal tradition unless it was imposed on them by colonial overlords or IS a conditional imposition on them as a conditional for receiving foreign aid (which we can't assume will be around forever). Many of these nations echo pre-feudal stagnation - 70% of Indians prefer same-caste unions, tribalism and ethnic strife persists in Africa, wildly stratified class problems persist, and corrupt governments (or no government at all) is more common than a pluralist democracy or republic. To make matters worse, these countries align themselves with Eurasian powers like Russia and China, committing themselves to an anti-Western, pro-authoritarian pact.

On the 'Caudillo' and the Dark Age

Finally, there is the threat at home. Social, class, and ethnic strife in the West has given rise to classes of populist politicians like Donald Trump who, despite the common refrain, represents something far closer to a Central or South American Caudillo than someone like Hitler or a European monarch. These populists, in my view, prey on declining social trust, eroding institutions, and class stratification to consolidate wealth and power for the vultures looking to pick the empires carcass clean, much like Ricimer did in his day. Increasingly, we find ostensibly 'nationalist' or 'patriot' groups like MAGA aligning themselves with the Eurasian axis of Russia and China, praising their institutions and leaders while denigrating our own. People - especially the older generations - seem confounded: "how could this happen to my America?".

The answer - to me - is a simple one: the erosion of the WASP consensus and the inability of liberal democracies to act on the Schmittian exception and prevent the rise of populism and 'Caudilloism'. The contemporary West has no consensus culturally, ethnically, or politically. It is a low trust, chaotic, disjointed, ignorance-worshipping mass of angry peasants which is governed by a sclerotic, ineffective, and will-less democracy which has been (in many ways) rightly identified as no longer having the ability to maintain a status quo. The fracturing and atomization of our nation has left us an identity-less mass with no coherent metanarrative to guide our sociopolitical angst, always feeling betrayed and so, so desperate for just a crumb, a small nibble of a solution from our elites. Such an environment is, of course, fertile ground for the ambitious populist.

And so we enter the Dark Age. There is perhaps no better way to predict the future than to look at what the freshest faction of elites are maneuvering toward. There are some we can look to: namely, 'small tech' oligarchs like Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen. They more or less conclude that there are trends (some of which I've mentioned) which are irreversible and the only thing that will save us (well them, actually) from the impending Dark Age is this 'effective accelerationism' which posits AI and technology will extricate the nobles and aristocracy from the burgeoning slum class and give way to a technocratic neo-feudalism to ride out the Kali Yuga. To be clear - I greatly resent this class of people and I think they represent exactly the elite class you would expect from late stage liberal capitalism, but I do think their premonition about societies future state is prescient, even if their solution is self serving.

In conclusion, I admit some of my blog post here is somewhat hyperbolic, if sincere. I don't think we're heading for some inevitable chaos, but I do think the trends are ominous and I do hold that few, if any, are presenting real solutions to any of these issues. Liberals are too concerned with tact and presentation and conservatives insist on being regressive and anti-intellectual, only expediting the process in many ways.

Sources:

(Edit: Listed them originally, but they blew up my post size. Will happily provide citations if asked for)
 
Last edited:
The Dark Ages delayed industrialization and gave the Earth more time to breathe before we flooded it with carbon.
 
I would suggest that people read "a canticle for Leibowitz"

It is a science fiction novel read through a meta-historian lens that plumbs the themes of Spengler and Toynbee.
 
When the Western Roman Empire fell in 476 AD, Europe didn’t descend into pitch-black oblivion. Trade persisted in pockets, monasteries preserved scraps of learning, and the Eastern Empire continued on as Byzantium. Yet stagnation gripped the West for centuries. Aqueducts decayed into ruins, literacy withered to a privilege of the few, and once-thriving urban centers shrank into muddy villages. Progress didn’t vanish - it froze. The population dwindled, economies contracted, and the grand ideas of antiquity - reason, engineering, governance - faded into obscurity, waiting centuries for a Renaissance to revive them. Today, as the West grapples with demographic decline, eroding trust, and absurd population growth in the Global South, we might ask: are we teetering on the edge of a new 'dark age'? Not a collapse into literal darkness, but a dimming of the liberal, enlightened systems that dragged us out of the first one - a modern Dark Age with a regressive soul.
Yeah no thank you. Whig history is a pernicious lie and the "dark ages" is an excuse for Protestants to write off 1000 years of Western Christendom. The 17th century was worse for europe than any medieval century. Oh and "reason" actually brought the dark ages to France via Sir Robespierre
 
I would suggest that people read "a canticle for Leibowitz"

It is a science fiction novel read through a meta-historian lens that plumbs the themes of Spengler and Toynbee.
No thanks.

Any science books you can recommend?
 
Oh and "reason" actually brought the dark ages to France via Sir Robespierre

Reason has been a pillar of Western thought from Plato to the early church fathers. The most radical enlightenment revolutionaries bastardized the tradition, if anything.

Yeah no thank you. Whig history is a pernicious lie and the "dark ages" is an excuse for Protestants to write off 1000 years of Western Christendom. The 17th century was worse for europe than any medieval century.

I was intentional about adding the caveat in my OP that the 'dark ages' weren't literally so. No historian worth his salt still holds this position.

No need
Don't need this shit here ar all.

From my handful of interactions with you I was already aware that you're averse to facts and data, although I admire the honesty of stating it outright.
 
Reason has been a pillar of Western thought from Plato to the early church fathers. The most radical enlightenment revolutionaries bastardized the tradition, if anything.
Reason as the end all be all? No. Rome and Greece still held onto the myths whereas the entire construction of the Enlightenment was dedicated to the end of superstition.
 
No thanks.

Any science books you can recommend?
I understand.

You do not wish to expand yourself beyond your very limited comfort zone.
 
Reason as the end all be all? No. Rome and Greece still held onto the myths whereas the entire construction of the Enlightenment was dedicated to the end of superstition.

Plato thought we could reach the Demiurge through reason, which is about as 'end all be all' as it gets. I don't happen to agree with him in a strict sense, but certainly this tradition has been with us for some time now.

What the enlightenment brought us were brute facts and the empiricist tradition which - I would agree - has ironically narrowed our ability to reason since in order for empiricism to hold, all observation must be filtered through the senses, which is problematic for obvious reasons.
 
From my handful of interactions with you I was already aware that you're averse to facts and data, although I admire the honesty of stating it outright.
Remaining ignorant seems to be his thing.
 
Plato thought we could reach the Demiurge through reason, which is about as 'end all be all' as it gets. I don't happen to agree with him in a strict sense, but certainly this tradition has been with us for some time now.

What the enlightenment brought us were brute facts and the empiricist tradition which - I would agree - has ironically narrowed our ability to reason since in order for empiricism to hold, all observation must be filtered through the senses, which is problematic for obvious reasons.
Alright at least you are fair, the rest of the post is quite spot on
 
From my handful of interactions with you I was already aware that you're averse to facts and data, although I admire the honesty of stating it outright
Are you sure it is I and not you with this natural adversity? 😉
 
Are you sure it is I and not you with this natural adversity? 😉

Considering you routinely respond to my thoroughly reasoned, data-supported hypothesis with minimum effort verbal diarrhea - yes I am sure.
 
Considering you routinely respond to my thoroughly reasoned, data-supported hypothesis with minimum effort verbal diarrhea - yes I am sure.

Maybe reevaluate using your frontal lobe would result in a different opinion.

Sorry about your diarrhea, you can try over the counter meds for that.
 
Unfortunately... or maybe fortunately... any historical allegories are inappropriate. Of course, you can exaggerate to black and white concepts, but if you seriously evaluate events, then it is inappropriate to compare some historical events with others with a difference of centuries... and the author raised the time period of one and a half thousand years and this... It doesn't fit.

Somewhere I once heard from an American in Syria, "Morality is eternal." I agree, but it's just changeable.
100 years ago, the vast majority of humanity were racists, Nazis, and xenophobes. It was absolutely normal.
500 years ago, slavery was absolutely natural in most countries of the world.
1,500 years ago, the genocide of the enemy did not bother anyone.
You don't have to go far. Gaius Julius Caesar, one of the key characters in Western civilization, caused damage to the gene pool of Europe with his wars, according to various estimates, more than Hitler... Of course, he killed fewer people in numbers... but there were also much fewer people in Europe. However, the first emperor is admired, and Hitler is despised...

However, returning to the topic of the possibility of the next dark century... Yes and no. For European and Western civilization, of course, it is already coming... but not for humanity.
The huge difference in these two events is one and a half thousand years, that in the past, the countries of the Middle East and Asia, which in fact became leaders for 500 years, could not preserve the achievements of the fallen Roman Empire, neither scientific nor technical, and this is explained by weak globalization, infrastructure, and cultural rejection... However, today China fully draws on all the technological achievements of the declining West, and it will not only preserve, but also multiply these achievements. So the progress of mankind will not stop.
It is possible and most likely that there will be shocks and a drop in living standards, but it will be so short-term, there will be a decade or two, that humanity will not be affected in any way.

It's much more interesting how the new leaders of the planet will write the collapsed Western civilization into history... with sad lyrical admiration... or as greedy tyrants of the planet, who built an isolated world for themselves and exploited the whole World.

In general, we live in interesting times, you are the last generation of the Great West, and in fact you will be responsible for the failure... although, of course, the ongoing processes have much longer symptoms, but who would be interested in this.
 
Reason as the end all be all? No. Rome and Greece still held onto the myths whereas the entire construction of the Enlightenment was dedicated to the end of superstition.
Reason is not the end all and be all- but it did give us modern science and technology. The fact that it doesn't have ALL the answers to life is not a license to get rid of it or think that talking about virgin births and resurrected dead men is what led to modern science and tech.
 
Reason is not the end all and be all- but it did give us modern science and technology. The fact that it doesn't have ALL the answers to life is not a license to get rid of it or think that talking about virgin births and resurrected dead men is what led to modern science and tech.
Most scientists were devout Christians
 
Most scientists were devout Christians
In the early days of science, sure- saying otherwise could have gotten them killed at the time. And of course culture and tradition change slowly. Even Newton wrote more about alchemy than he did about calculus or gravity. Many of these early scientists, however, made their claims not because of such beliefs, but in spite of them- often in violent and life-threatening opposition to the Church.


But there has been a gradual but dramatic shift away from that over the centuries. It has become clear that not only don't scientists need such metaphysical and superstitious grounding of religious belief to do good science, they do much better without them. Today, 92% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences, the most elite group of scientists in the US, are agnostic or atheist. Similar results hold when looking at The Royal Society of London- the equivalent organization for the UK. We are back to what things were like with the pagan Greeks and Romans, before Christianity.

 
In the early days of science, sure- saying otherwise could have gotten them killed at the time. And of course culture and tradition change slowly. Even Newton wrote more about alchemy than he did about calculus or gravity. Many of these early scientists, however, made their claims not because of such beliefs, but in spite of them- often in violent and life-threatening opposition to the Church.

Biggest myth is the galileo affair
But there has been a gradual but dramatic shift away from that over the centuries. It has become clear that not only don't scientists need such metaphysical and superstitious grounding of religious belief to do good science, they do much better without them. Today, 92% of the members of the National Academy of Sciences, the most elite group of scientists in the US, are agnostic or atheist. Similar results hold when looking at The Royal Society of London- the equivalent organization for the UK. We are back to what things were like with the pagan Greeks and Romans, before Christianity.
No wonder science has stagnated
 
Biggest myth is the galileo affair
Please expand.
No wonder science has stagnated
It has not.

1744666843454.png
 
Please expand.
Per AI;The Galileo affair was more about the interpretation of scientific evidence, the role of the Church in matters of faith and science, and Galileo's own sometimes confrontational approach than a simple conflict between science and religion.
It has not.

View attachment 67565384
 
Per AI;The Galileo affair was more about the interpretation of scientific evidence, the role of the Church in matters of faith and science, and Galileo's own sometimes confrontational approach than a simple conflict between science and religion.

It turned out the Church had been wrong about this for 16 centuries. If they were wrong on this, what else could they be wrong on?

Even though science has been wrong on many things too, it has proven to be a far more effective and fruitful mindset and approach- and one that has not only NOT needed religion- but done better the more it has put it behind.
 
It turned out the Church had been wrong about this for 16 centuries. If they were wrong on this, what else could they be wrong on?



What was the Church wrong about?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom