I assume you’re talking about decadents from a conservative Islamic lens.
- As I just said: Decadence is a human condition that all civilizations inevitably reach after long periods of prosperity, yet it is their last stop. As Ibn Khaldun explains, Stability leads to saving, which drive consumption, which initiates demand for luxury, which drives innovation, which leads to prosperity, & then further luxury, resulting in indulgence, from there decadence, decadence induces corruption, & corruption leads to oppression, hence death.
Decadence leads to corruption which leads to oppression equaling death? Can you be more specific?
- Self-gratification & self-indulgence. Civilizations start with barbaric lifestyles, & end in them too. For instance, immodesty has always been associated with crude uncivilized cultures, commoner/rural/nomadic/barbaric culture, while modesty is associated with the noble & civilized. Civilizations start in immodesty, then modesty, then succumb back to immodesty.
Self-gratification, self-indulgence, immodesty are all vague concepts.
Would you consider them more internally detrimental to a civilisation rather than externally?
(Note: after reading your last paragraph I think I know where you stand for the most part.)
For example public beheadings for witchcraft and other such things. In meany ways public executions are self-gratifying, self-indulgent, and immodest. Though you might claim otherwise, many conservatives in the West wouldn’t mind invading said society.
- Self-gratification & self-indulgence. Civilizations start with barbaric lifestyles, & end in them too. For instance, immodesty has always been associated with crude uncivilized cultures, commoner/rural/nomadic/barbaric culture, while modesty is associated with the noble & civilized. Civilizations start in immodesty, then modesty, then succumb back to immodesty.
Some try to cling onto barbaric teachings which stagnate their societies.
- You mean, decadence kills nations? Absolutely. It's just math.
We’re not just talking about nations.
Do you think the Aztec Empire died out due to too many human sacrifices to their gods?
I don’t think you understand how vague you’re being when talking about decadence.
Though you will probably think Allah gave them smallpox.
Can you give me estimates after you properly define what you mean by decadence?
- & those things were the sign that those societies have failed. The West today reached levels of decadence never heard of before, naturally, since they also reached levels of stability, prosperity & wealth never heard of before. Decadence happens at the height of prosperity, it doesn't give the impression that the end is near. On the contrary, the prosperity & success only warrants more of it because the people believe they must be doing something right, otherwise how come they are prosperous. But that doesn't last, for corrupt societies are failed societies. You're no different from Greeks, or Romans, or even the Arabs. In Andalusia, long periods of prosperity & stability made the Muslims of the country indulgent: music, parties, obsession with luxuries...etc, they couldn't hold up against their resolved enemies with it counted.
Okay so mainly due to war and conquest then. Does that make war and conquest justifiable on that count? Do you think it’s justifiable in the modern era?
Wouldn’t you also consider the ones conducting said wars are partaking in self-gratification, self-indulgence, and immodesty? In other words, decadence.