Toynbee's “Time of Troubles” in an Age of Civilisational Collapse

IN the view of the famous English philosopher and historian, Arnold J. Toynbee (1889-1975), who also happened to be a committed anti-Zionist:

“man achieves civilization, not as a result of superior biological endowment or geographical environment, but as a response to a challenge in a situation of special difficulty which rouses him to make a hitherto unprecedented effort.”

In his mammoth 1934 work, A Study of History, Toynbee examines no less than twenty-six past civilisations and concludes that collapse is based on internal rather than external factors. Once the leaders of a civilisation stop acting creatively, he argues, by utilising the dynamic forces that carry it onwards and upwards, society gradually descends into reactive nationalism, militarism and, ultimately, extinction.

Unlike Oswald Spengler (1880-1936), who believed that “optimism is cowardice,” Toynbee was of the opinion that - more often than not - meeting the challenges that we face will bring the best out of people. This is correct, at least to a certain extent, but the limitations of Toynbee’s analysis is that he views civilisation as the very hallmark of human progress and that we must be judged by our potential to withstand those factors which seek to undermine it. Toynbee referred to this cyclical phenomenon as the “time of troubles”.

A more realistic analysis, in my opinion, would involve the ability for people to survive amid the collapse of civilisation itself. Indeed, Toynbee - who was influenced by the French philosopher, Henri Bergson (1859-1941) - even believed that a “creative minority” of outsiders must withdraw into the wilderness in order to regenerate their vital forces and then, emerging some time later, disseminate a message of hope to their countrymen. Salvation, if you will, under duress. This temporary withdrawal is rather similar to the Ancient Chinese idea of “riding the tiger,” and Toynbee was adamant that it is necessary for such an elite to “cling and wait” in the hope that civilisation can be salvaged.

Whilst some, like Julius Evola (1898-1974), have proposed that we live in the midst of degeneration as free spirits and maintain our dignity in the face of decline, it is clear that there must come a point when a civilisation has become wholly irredeemable and that to prop it up like a dying man is simply a futile attempt to postpone its inevitable demise. I believe that we have much to learn from Toynbee, but only if we transfer his thoughts about civilisation to our wider quest to survive its ultimate destruction.