Notices
Results 1 to 57 of 57

Thread: "The American Era?"

  1. #1 "The American Era?" 
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    Some people compare the present day United States with the Roman Empire and say that the dominance of the US, just like that of Rome, is only a temporal thing.
    Throughout history any great empire has seen times of power and times of decline. Does that mean the US must fear the end of it's "American Era", or is the American hegemony something completely different than that of empires of the past?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,697
    I think the US is headed down a dangerous road, it's starting to loose it's diversity that made it what it once was. I foresee freedoms of the people in the US slowly being degraded and the rest of the world almost flipping over to be more American then America. It appears to me the US is being lead by religion more and more, this can be very dangerous.

    This is really a hard question to answer without bringing politics on board.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Sophomore buffstuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow...
    Posts
    157
    Sadly, I think your right. But I don't think that the US will decline as much as most empires from history have. Even though it may decline, the US will still have a say in things. If what history proves will happen to the US, the next "empire" will probably be from Asia, maybe China?
    Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something. -Robert Heinlein
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,697
    Quote Originally Posted by buffstuff
    Sadly, I think your right. But I don't think that the US will decline as much as most empires from history have. Even though it may decline, the US will still have a say in things. If what history proves will happen to the US, the next "empire" will probably be from Asia, maybe China?
    Yah, I don't think the US will fall hard. If anything it will become far less powerful then it once was. The debt the US is building will eventualy catch up and cause a very crippling impact.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Sophomore buffstuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow...
    Posts
    157
    thats true, unless they can find a way past it.

    Make Canada pay rent perhaps?
    Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something. -Robert Heinlein
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    columbus indiana
    Posts
    5
    I agree. America will not fall hard but it will fall as it did in the Great Depression. Personally, I think it will be Canada. Canada is so quiet, you dont hear anything from them, they will rise up and kick everyone's ass.
    Big Bang theory.... dont make me laugh.-God
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,697
    Quote Originally Posted by science_nut06
    I agree. America will not fall hard but it will fall as it did in the Great Depression. Personally, I think it will be Canada. Canada is so quiet, you dont hear anything from them, they will rise up and kick everyone's ass.
    LOL, I doubt that. They just don't have the population
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Maastricht, Netherlands
    Posts
    861
    We are living in quite an interesting age, as it seems large corporations have taken over the role of government, at least in the sense of controlling the masses. They are the ones giving us the bread and the entertainment. I don't think we are living in an American Age, but rather in the Age of the Corporation.

    More interestingly, is the fact that these corporations are footloose, and internationally based. They are prowling the earth for the cheapest place to create their products and the most expensive place to sell.

    Eventually, I believe, the people will break free of this, or the market will plummet because of increase of technology, but one way or another, the megacorporation will eventually fall. Whether it is for good or for worse, I know not. History is full with turning points towards either.

    Mr U
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,697
    Quote Originally Posted by HomoUniversalis
    We are living in quite an interesting age, as it seems large corporations have taken over the role of government, at least in the sense of controlling the masses. They are the ones giving us the bread and the entertainment. I don't think we are living in an American Age, but rather in the Age of the Corporation.

    More interestingly, is the fact that these corporations are footloose, and internationally based. They are prowling the earth for the cheapest place to create their products and the most expensive place to sell.

    Eventually, I believe, the people will break free of this, or the market will plummet because of increase of technology, but one way or another, the megacorporation will eventually fall. Whether it is for good or for worse, I know not. History is full with turning points towards either.

    Mr U
    I think you might be on to something, also religion has become a corporation in and of itself, at least some religions. They are very money oriented these days. Then you get down to it everything leads back to control and power.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    Interesting point HU.

    Still I think corporations have only so much power as we, the consumers, give them. If we want them to stop polluting, we simply refuse to buy products from polluting companies. This way we make pollution unprofitable. In the same way we can make 'the big corporations' give social security to their employees, fight global warming, etc.

    So I think the people can indeed as you said break the power of the corporations, but not by destroying the free market but by using it more effectively.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Maastricht, Netherlands
    Posts
    861
    Striking works. Yes. But when have you last heard of a major strike against one corporation. These companies are as powerful as a government, and through advertisement they control the information that reaches us.

    If we think about Nike, we don't think about the poor children somewhere in the East. No, we think about shoes. If we think about Federal Reserve System, we think about money, not about Rothchild!

    The public is easily influenced in their line of thought, and corporations dominate that influence. The majority of America supports the war, at least economically, and the corporations got what they wanted. Another four years of tax breaks and assurance that it will be their way, not the JFK highway.

    Another major issue is the footloose property of major corporations. They are internationally based, and if Americans start to strike, and stop working, they'll just move to Europe, or India, or China. That's an important issue Unions are more than aware of in these days. If we mess with corporations too much, and it'll start affecting profits, they will move even more, and the American Economy will be drained even more, with disastrous effects for the US public.

    In Europe, the same is happening. The public faces a grave danger as the corporations have the power to abandon a nation, and leave it to it's fate.

    Where once the capitalists had power through firing and hiring cheap labor, now they have power through switching between companies. Sure, it is unlikely they will hop every year of so, but the power of suggestion rules supreme.

    In the end it is doubtful that the corporations will completely move from the United States, because the government is so nice to them (something they might not get in other countries), and because the major banks also have a lot of economical power in the US, but it is the power of suggestion. The US has seen the destructive power of outsourcing and merely the suggestion that another company will leave, in my opinion, will be enough to silence the public.

    (especially after every American has seen the stories on CNN, and the likes, about how bad Outsourcing is for the US)

    Am I a conspiracy theorist? Perhaps, but than again, few major events have occured in the history of man that did involve some conspiracy.

    Mr U
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by buffstuff
    If what history proves will happen to the US, the next "empire" will probably be from Asia, maybe China?
    China is actually an empire.... that is why if any one has seen any ancient chinese films... the ruler of china is known as the emperor and not king.... around time of the birth of christ, what China is now, was actually made up of sveral countries.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    133
    You are forgetting that the U.S. was created less than 300 years ago. The Roman Empire spanned 1500 years. I do not see the United States crumbling very soon. It will eventually, like all empires, collapse. New nations will come to be, and eventually they too will collapse. Althought corporations do have a large influence on American culture, they are not fullly dominant. If the people ever find a need to rise up and overthrow their government to preserve their country, I believe they will do it.

    Quote Originally Posted by science_nut06
    Personally, I think it will be Canada. Canada is so quiet, you dont hear anything from them, they will rise up and kick everyone's ass.
    ahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
    Crazy Canucks.
    - sploit -
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Sophomore buffstuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow...
    Posts
    157
    I take back what I said, I think the US will NOT crumble, but stay in dominance. No stats or facts, just wishful thinkijng.
    Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something. -Robert Heinlein
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    New Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4
    Take a gander at THE LONG ENERGENCY by James Howard Kunstler (2005, Atlantic Monthly Press) whose subtitle is "Surviving the converging catastrophes of the 21st Century" for a glimpse of the non-political reasons why America as an empire would seem to have a much shorter life expectancy than the Romans. We in the West have built our entire way of life on a hydrocarbon economy whose extraction peak is already passed, and blithely ignore the collateral effects therefrom, like global warming, aquifer depletion and a coming global water shortage, insane population boom accompanied by territorial land grabs by homo sapiens, to the detriment of many other diverse species, suburban sprawl that only further commits us to the automobile as a way of life, etc. These are fundamentally resource allocation questions on a finite planet, but anybody that dares mention these looming problems is politically marginalized by short term thinkers who want a few more squeezes from the goose (that laid the golden egg) before bequeathing these mutlivariate problems to their grandchildren and beyond.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16 Re: "The American Era?" 
    j
    j is offline
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    431
    I think Jett has summed up the situation very well.

    In addition, change in complex systems is usually not linear, but sigmoid [I don't have a citation]; this is why those who worry about catastrophic global climate change are so worried now.

    However, US public opinion and political policy are [contrary to current evidence] also complex systems. Faint rumblings of discontent with current policy can blossom into a demand for change quite rapidly. So there is still hope that disaster can be avoided.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    ... is the American hegemony something completely different than that of empires of the past?
    Many claimed that the "New Economy" stock market was fundamentally different from the Old, and that bubbles and burst were a thing of the past.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by jett
    We in the West have built our entire way of life on a hydrocarbon economy whose extraction peak is already passed, and blithely ignore the collateral effects therefrom, like global warming, aquifer depletion and a coming global water shortage, insane population boom accompanied by territorial land grabs by homo sapiens, to the detriment of many other diverse species, suburban sprawl that only further commits us to the automobile as a way of life, etc.
    It wouldnt be the first time an empire goes down by the hand of nature, instead of by human violence. Salinization of irrigated fields brought down one of the mesopotamian civilisations (I'll see if I can find a source for that), and the Aztecs have suffered some severe setbacks because of overexploitation of their soil.

    Quote Originally Posted by j
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    ... is the American hegemony something completely different than that of empires of the past?
    Many claimed that the "New Economy" stock market was fundamentally different from the Old, and that bubbles and burst were a thing of the past.
    Nice comparison Even though it's impossible for me to imagine, our present world of US-led stability may be as temporal as the Pax Augusti.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Sophomore spidergoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    165
    I like Kunstler's ideas, I want to get his book. His website about the architecture of nowhere is fascinating and funny.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Sophomore spidergoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    165
    Sorry, the geography of nowhere:

    http://www.kunstler.com/index.html
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    j
    j is offline
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    431
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    It wouldnt be the first time an empire goes down by the hand of nature, instead of by human violence.
    I always believe economic forces are the primary cause of the falls of governments.
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    Salinization of irrigated fields brought down one of the mesopotamian civilisations (I'll see if I can find a source for that), ...
    I didn't know that; please do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    ... Even though it's impossible for me to imagine, our present world of US-led stability may be as temporal as the Pax Augusti.
    Which lasted ...?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    Found it It's a text in my physical geography book, about Sumer and the Babylonian kingdoms. Around 2400 BC six centuries of irrigation had caused an accumulation of salt on the fields (the result of the evaporation of water containing a small concentration of salt). Archeological evidence confirms that in this period wheat production dropped from 300 kg/ha in 2400 BC to just 100 kg/ha in 1700 BC. The Sumerians also switched to barley, which is more resistant to salt than wheat. As a result of this the Sumerian cities declined in size and the Babylonian kingdoms took over control. A few centuries later the Babylonians had the same problem (this time their irrigation canals where filled up with a thick layer of silt, making them unusable).

    I read about the Azteks in 'Le monde tropicale' by Pierre Gourou, but as that book dates from the 1940s I'm sure there's a newer source

    About the Pax Augusti, I would date it around halfway the 1st century AD. It refers to the period of relative peace during emperor Augustus, and it's supposed to be the golden age of the Roman empire.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    j
    j is offline
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    431
    I remember now; the economic forces there are definitely secondary to the technological ones. First known example of technological waste having a deleterious effect on the environment?

    And the Pax Augusti is generally used to refer to a very brief period, just the reign of Augustus? As opposed to the Pax Romana, which lasted from the ascension of Augustus until 69 A.D?

    The Year of Four Emporers; hmm, no mention of economic forces in the article I found, or environmental or technological ones; just personality driven politics.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Sophomore spidergoat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    165
    Modern agriculture relies heavily on irrigation, and we have the same problem with accumulation of salts.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    N.Y.
    Posts
    270
    Wow and gosh oh golly, Jett.
    I wish I woulda wrote that.
    So many zingers in so little time and space.
    Bravissimo.

    You''re sure to stay marginalized, communicating that effectively.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Blairsville, GA
    Posts
    11
    Jett,
    You spoke of a coming global water shortage. I have not heard of this and was wondering where there is more reliable info on the subject.(please tell me it didn't come from the internet inventor) I know we have had large scale desalination plants since the '60s so it seems this technology would prevent that problem.

    Cheese
    "As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality. " Albert Einstein

    "It is well that war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it." Gen. Robert E. Lee
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard spuriousmonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,193
    Quote Originally Posted by j
    I always believe economic forces are the primary cause of the falls of governments.
    Could we maybe then speculate the the increasing difference between rich and poor in the USA might lead to an unstable state which will lead to the collapse of the US?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27 I am re-posting to this thread because 
    j
    j is offline
    Forum Bachelors Degree
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    431
    I think this may be the beginning of the end of the possibility of an American Era.

    The 2008 presidential race has begun, and I do not see a candidate of either of the primary parties with the intellect, education, experience, and popular attraction who both could win the electoral college and redeem American reputation abroad [not to mention getting us out of this nasty little fiasco in Iraq].

    However, I also can not see that any sane person would want to take on the issues facing at this point.
    Why do they want us to believe Conspiracy Theories?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,148
    If your not quite saturated yet with information about the war in Iraq and in Afghanistan here's something you might like to read.


    http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1203-21.htm

    In a nutshell the PNAC and US oil had the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan in the playbook before 9/11 and were waiting for an excuse to trigger the invasion. Most of it is known stuff but there's a few interesting angles worth reading (except for pro-war advocates who obviously wont like it and will no doubt revile it).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29 Re: "The American Era?" 
    Forum Junior Kolt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    Some people compare the present day United States with the Roman Empire and say that the dominance of the US, just like that of Rome, is only a temporal thing.
    Throughout history any great empire has seen times of power and times of decline. Does that mean the US must fear the end of it's "American Era", or is the American hegemony something completely different than that of empires of the past?


    "The Fall of the Roman Empire" ...An expression we have all heard countless times. But is it true? Well, Technically yes. Yet technicalities are for textbooks. Let's think in practicalities. Did Rome really fall? No.

    Rome changed. Rome relocated. Everything that was Rome did not necessarily come to an end. It was recycled, remodified, redistibuted and in some ways, improved upon. The Byzantium empire was essentially the sequel to the Roman empire. Now grant you this was 'not' a quick, smooth nor painless transition. People died, positions of power were lost and the entire image of Rome appeared to ...well....disappear. But the principles remained. The mechanism that was Romes state-government continued on. The Byzantium reigned for another thousand years and by the renasecnce era it began to spread and change into Russia's empire.

    The United States is still in it's infancy. Are we the most powerful nation on the planet? Yes. But why? Our Millitary> Well, we do have the means to initiate highly advanced technological warfare. But would our final assault be any greater then Russia's or China's? No doubt we are masters of urban combat but to what degree. When it comes to who presses the big red button first, I think we are about even-steven with all the other major powers.

    Economy> Of course our economy is kick-ass when compared to Ethiopia or Afghanistan but in relation to Europe, Great Britain, or Japan, even now, economical supremecy is still in debate. And since business and trade between our countries is such a major factor, judging the superirority of our country by it's economy alone is a bit incomplete.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    i do have problem trying to compare the US with prior world powers. the intent has always been domination even to the last fallen world power the USSR. if the US is set on world domination were not doing a very good job of it.

    the US has little choice in trying to influence world politics, since we are part of so many world treaties. if some nation attacks, S Korea, Israel or any of about 70 countries, we will be at war or liable to protect that Nation.
    we also have an obligation to the world community that any free nation or democratic society has rights we will help protect. the obligation factor comes from the people since the people have come from the world. this in itself is a new world factor. almost all Americans have ancestry from other parts of the world.

    as to how long this will last, should be of interest to you and yours if not from the US. most here are not very happy about just what is expected of us or the effects it has on our society. the nation itself was built on isolationism and has been a bitter thought to ignore, but could happen.

    as to the 08 elections. yes, we do have many candidate potentials that are well versed on world affairs, have the smarts and abilities to solve a few more problems. we also have some that could draw us into that for mentioned and dis-involve us from world events. with all due respect for the future of mankind, i hope this is not the case.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey
    Quote Originally Posted by j
    I always believe economic forces are the primary cause of the falls of governments.
    Could we maybe then speculate the the increasing difference between rich and poor in the USA might lead to an unstable state which will lead to the collapse of the US?
    this is truly a mis-conception of the US system. of the top 25 very richest US citizens, most were very poor and started some business in a garage or their parents basement. some of these were not even Americans when they started out but have all lived the American Dream. by the way these same folks have given more back to the people of the planet, then most nations have in their existence.

    that same dream is afforded all people of the world including the American. move to America, work hard, play by the rules and you can become most anything or attain wealth. at the lowest end of the scale people have more, do more and enjoy life more than any time in the history of any society.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32 Re: "The American Era?" 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    Some people compare the present day United States with the Roman Empire and say that the dominance of the US, just like that of Rome, is only a temporal thing.
    Throughout history any great empire has seen times of power and times of decline. Does that mean the US must fear the end of it's "American Era", or is the American hegemony something completely different than that of empires of the past?
    Of course like Rome, the British Empire, the French XVIII Siecle, essort then the decline of Chinese and Ottoman empires, the United States had their bottom phases, and then their apoges, and will have their declins (which is predicts all the time, but never audited). But the decline will begin with what?
    -- Decline planetary with less influence of their culture?
    -- Decline of the countries with military or armed gangs who resists their? (Somalia)?
    -- Or a future decline and possible monetary face a la montee de la china and India and other countries, which will cause a decline cultural (competition in Bollywood) and military (continuously improved quality of Indian and Chinese armies and volontee of interventionisme).
    However, the next thirty years will always domines in Atlanta (well I think).
    « SOLDATS !!!
    je vous ramènerais en France; là , vous serez l'objet de mes plus tendres sollicitudes. Mon peuple vous reverra avec joie, et il vous suffira de dire, "J'étais à la bataille d'Austerlitz", pour que l'on réponde, « Voilà un brave» Napoléon 1°
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    16
    The parallel is real
    The seat of an empire want stability both in its domestic and vis-Ã*-vis its rivals and potential adversaries

    In this sense was like the Roman Empire at its end, "US empire" is internally corroded by corruption d'etat, nepotism, clientelism, the return to all-out religious and headed by a small conclave people who have lost all sense of the realities of real-politik

    From the economic point of view if financial power is still real, significant acceleration of crises (a accerleration correlate with the technical financial transactions via computer that can handle billions quickly and virtually without real and concrete base) sets largely American economy has bubbles, which are all a limit to explode in series (how many financial crises in 30 years period that has the scale of the existence of an Empire is very short?)

    For the military aspect, the ratings suggest that with due until 2020 from the point of view of the conventional USA have no opponent has their height and even if the external adventures of the empire are quite disastrous in recent times , it is not levied basically the defense capabilities of American technical point of view. Once again, it could be "fighting spirit". This aspect is also existed under the Roman Empire or on the end preferred increasingly delegate their defense to Federated and other aids. To say it is not yet isolationism and the US military is not for tomorrow, the competition for natural resources to ensure that at least ...

    From the point of view and cultural influence (and this includes small themes precedents 3) we find the balance envy / hostility had succité the Roman Empire in its time for its neighbours with the USA. This is, however, unstoppable when it was this level of influence over the known world (currently at the planetary scale)
    Being the leader of the world is very rewarding but moinde faux pas that everyone will draw you in the back at the slightest opportunity, small (or smaller everything is relative) s'arrangeant unions for transients facades to make you evil and facilitate your chute (with the syndrome "unite us comrades, we will be caliph in the place of the Caliph finally especially me ....")

    From the point of view technological advance is great and will remain so as long as the state money will be a minimum stable; If there collapse of the economy, not on the search engine which is a predominance of remains a priority

    Voili some tracks of reflexion
    Something in common with the Roman Empire can be found; You can also find differences
    The USA are isolated geographically. Shots of dozers barbarian eventual seem difficult
    The United States has many allies who weigh in the balance Military
    The economy is are any different if a collapse can be faster than in ancient times a rally can be as spectacular
    The influence of the media is preponderant in the domestic and international radiation of culture, ideas and politics, phenomène maitrisent well as the USA and n'xistait little or no in the Roman Empire (at least not in this Scale speed)
    The ruling dynasties are relatively short, there is little risk of ending up with 30 years of Nero, Caligula or Caracalla in power (even if the advisers are still somewhat the same, alternating Democratic / Republican is still minimal)
    The army has more power nuisance policy (a part of loco-regional influences) in any case no risk of coup d'etat in series and the Emperor assasinat quia this drive has many periods d instability in Rome

    Here are a few avenues of reflection, I repasserais if something comes to me more ...
    « SOLDATS !!!
    je vous ramènerais en France; là , vous serez l'objet de mes plus tendres sollicitudes. Mon peuple vous reverra avec joie, et il vous suffira de dire, "J'étais à la bataille d'Austerlitz", pour que l'on réponde, « Voilà un brave» Napoléon 1°
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    Some very interesting points there Cornichon :wink: I'll reply in a few days.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    ( I changed my mind and decided to delete this. )
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Its hard for me to imagine a more diversified country on this planet, than the USA. Except for a few Natives Americans (so called), every person has roots in some other culture. The unique thing is the conversion from those past to the current, which each group as done (usually 2nd generation) since America was formed.

    Cultures are said to have failed from with in. Corruption to moral issues. I think a good deal of *will* or the desire to maintain, is involved. The US may be headed that way today, with its apparent self interest attitudes and be darned with the rest of the world and their problems. GW Bush, has acted on the world stage, no sense of isolation and encouraged world trade, cooperation and enforcing existing treaties. US$ values have fluctuate before and will do so forever. World markets all trade and use that dollar for trading. I don't think this will change, but if it were to change to the Euro, pound, yen or whatever, that would make absolutely no difference to the US or its economy.

    Coal cannot replace oil. Coal would have to be liquefied and the auto industry reformed. Oil as fuel is what all transportation uses, electrical power for our homes and factories comes from 50% coal fired generators (less than 2% use fuel oil). Bio-fuels, such as Ethanol could replace oil, but hurt all those Nations that now export oil, much more than you might expect. Corn, wheat and all grains are up two three hundred percent already from our meager attempt to convert to 10% bio, with all meat which eat feed are not far behind.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4
    The USA is going to face a "decline" some time in its future. Ithink that this will entail the US losing its global dominance to China, Russia or a European Confederation. The USA will remain a world power but not a superpower. Its citizens will keep striving toward the "American Dream" and its economy will continue to flourish but it will no longer eclipse the rest of the world.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Locke
    The USA is going to face a "decline" some time in its future. Ithink that this will entail the US losing its global dominance to China, Russia or a European Confederation. The USA will remain a world power but not a superpower. Its citizens will keep striving toward the "American Dream" and its economy will continue to flourish but it will no longer eclipse the rest of the world.
    The biggest force, from the USA comes in the form of Business. Trillions of dollars are spent on foreign projects or from foreign business inside the US or from investments, each year. Since the Federal Government, at least the past 7 years, has encouraged this inter action. Also the US has made a concentrated effort to encourage the UN to become a power in world.

    The people of the US, do not seem to desire the being "The world only Super Power" or being asked to police their problems. I agree that the Nation will go on, the people, under our very special system, will pursue that dream and flourish, but in part its from the desire for the world to live in some form of unity and allowing others societies to have what we now have.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    62
    Interesting thread.

    Yes, you can view US as the great empire right now, but in actual reality, British empire is what it is today is still strong.

    If US declines, then I would say the next empire would definitely be the European Empire. I don't know.

    Speaking of Asia or China, they had their empire long time ago....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    The British Empire, was probably the greatest SP in history for several reason, bringing on what a good many nations later became. Laws, political systems and a good deal of social programs around the world. I might add as a historical event, that Nation dominated in two periods, not just one.

    The US, for all practical purposes was not a power at all in world affairs, until WWI, then moderately. The dominance of both the USSR and the USA, came about after WWII, which was short lived for the USSR. The climb and fall of any society, dynasty or military superiority, is not based on what was, but what is to compare to. China, Russia or even Japan could rise to the definition of Super Power as could the European Community or any group of Nations, which seems to be in the future of the world. Not to cause panic, it could even be from Islamic Nations which have modernized political policy, joining in a common purpose not necessarily for the bad or detriment of others.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4
    I would dispute the above claim that Japan could become a superpower. I do not think that the countries of Asia would tolerate a militaristic Japan, not after the unspeakable atrocities it committed during World War 2. If anyone has any reasons to the contrary, please state them.[/list]
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Sophomore numb3rs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    166
    the america era ended in 1980-1990's america right know is just being supported by other countrys
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Locke
    I would dispute the above claim that Japan could become a superpower. I do not think that the countries of Asia would tolerate a militaristic Japan, not after the unspeakable atrocities it committed during World War 2. If anyone has any reasons to the contrary, please state them.[/list]
    War in the mid-20th century and whats perceived war today are two different things. Much of the difference is based on what all parties did during that WWII. If you want to talk 'atrocities', you might look to Germany and/or Russia, which between the two killed off more innocents, including POW's with totals in the 25-45 millions by some historians.

    Japan, was however a passing thought. They are, by choice, not going to build a competitive military. What they do offer is one of the worlds economic powers and thats today. They are also involved in high tech and educating their people to be involved in many field of futuristic activities, including Space Technology, Medicine and Nanotechnology.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Quote Originally Posted by numb3rs
    the america era ended in 1980-1990's america right know is just being supported by other countrys
    Nonsense!!! However your reasoning might be interesting....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4
    I agree with jackson33 that the Soviet Union and Germany committed atrocities of unparalleled magnitude. However I will dispute your passing claim that Japan committed none of its own. The foremost among the atrocites committed by the Empire of Japan would without a doubt be he Rape of Nanking. My arguement in my previous statement was simply to state that Asia will never allow Japan to remilitarize itself. By my thinkng to become a superpower a country needs formidable military strength to coincide with economic strength.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by numb3rs
    the america era ended in 1980-1990's america right know is just being supported by other countrys
    are ya suggestin' that cold war ended the american era?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Sophomore numb3rs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    166
    after the cold war was when america started going down hill
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    4
    Give me any example of how America has gone downhill since the end of the cold war.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    France
    Posts
    16
    Why should there be no sudden collapse of the USA?

    It is unlikely visible on the horizon, of course, but look at the history of the Roman Empire, the entity historically the most comparable to the USA. The empire, contrary to legend historiographical instilled in the minds of Europe since Gibbons has not been a slow and irreversible decline. He remained large and powerful until the end of the fourth century and disaster unexpected and unlikely to Adrianople (378) who opened the mass migration of peoples Germanic (and a few others). And yet, this is the western part which has morflé period, when it was going badly, mainly due to demographic decline accelerated. The Empire East has quickly recovered the bar via Theodosius and it is well covered more than eight centuries additional thank you for him.

    But broadly speaking, it is an unlikely event (always the imponderables), which precipitated the fall of the western part (after 378 and up to 476, the decay is evident, particularly given the importance of new peoples and fédéeés Federated mercenaries who barbarisent the army and creating political instability by refusal of integration and acculturation, with a prime ambition of a few leaders in addition to those already present major noble families).

    America has several internal and external dangers that threaten and can play the role of precipitator elements:
    -- Irredentism increased by some States
    -- Mistrust of the federal state
    -- Increasing selfishness of certain states or groups of states that do préoccuppent as their needs, not focus on their business models (west and south-west partillement latinisés, grouped around the CA ...). The individualism, selfishness, autocentrisme ... encouraged by modern society can lead minds frankly think in those terms.
    -- Increased inter-ethnic tensions and / or social groups around: Latinos, WASPs, Black supremacists type Farrakhan .... Who said that facing an economic crisis and therefore major social, solidarity could exist as in 1929, when the feeling of being a nation was, in the West, an entirely different caliber?
    -- Terrorist movements of large-scale finding support at the international level, in populations increasingly excluded from globalization, including in industrialized countries.
    -- Riots social type Los Angeles, but on a larger scale
    -- The old classic: the war too. Or confrontation with a major power; what effect on the social and economic structures.
    -- The economic conflict
    -- Climatic disasters
    -- Large waves of migration climate more than 300 million people and more likely to travel by giant waves as a result of climate change (as the Germanic peoples) and demographic pressure.

    All these factors may act separately or in various combinations. You can add châînes micro-events (resurgence of forms of religious sectarianism, social and / or ethnic forms of aggressive attacks and paralysis of services, particularly scandals ....); gratin is the timing that decides everything, it was the match. Anything that can be painted in a long-term, is the backdrop socio-politico-economic field is: to what extent will it fuel?

    When one studies it closely, the French Revolution represents such a sum of almost anecdotal chance came in a period of time, in an order and the moments that is chosen to wonder if there was not anyone one who manipulated the chance (if you look in particular over the period July 89-September 92, is blowing: Louis XVI is a sequence of events so statistically impossible that any deity has to intervene, saying "you are my guys you're going to take full mouth whatever happens ").

    To return to the USA: I predict their destiny in the larger Italian (fragmentation).

    In my opinion, the United States are declins and its causes must be sought in a U.S. political class and especially poor untrained for External Relations.
    « SOLDATS !!!
    je vous ramènerais en France; là , vous serez l'objet de mes plus tendres sollicitudes. Mon peuple vous reverra avec joie, et il vous suffira de dire, "J'étais à la bataille d'Austerlitz", pour que l'on réponde, « Voilà un brave» Napoléon 1°
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by HomoUniversalis
    We are living in quite an interesting age, as it seems large corporations have taken over the role of government, at least in the sense of controlling the masses. They are the ones giving us the bread and the entertainment. I don't think we are living in an American Age, but rather in the Age of the Corporation.

    More interestingly, is the fact that these corporations are footloose, and internationally based. They are prowling the earth for the cheapest place to create their products and the most expensive place to sell.

    Eventually, I believe, the people will break free of this, or the market will plummet because of increase of technology, but one way or another, the megacorporation will eventually fall. Whether it is for good or for worse, I know not. History is full with turning points towards either.

    Mr U
    I was going back through, and I really have to agree with HU.

    Corporations have successfully lobbied for international treaties that prevent individual governments from using protective tariffs of any kind.

    The purpose of a protective tariff is to protect yourself from this kind of abuse. If a corporation wants to go to Bangladesh because the people there are too poor to demand any workers' rights, a protective tariff ensures it won't be any more profitable for them to go there than to stay here, if they want to sell to our market.

    Of course, Bangladesh might then respond by tariffing any number of our products..... but I wouldn't be too afraid of losing a lot of sales from it....


    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    Interesting point HU.

    Still I think corporations have only so much power as we, the consumers, give them. If we want them to stop polluting, we simply refuse to buy products from polluting companies. This way we make pollution unprofitable. In the same way we can make 'the big corporations' give social security to their employees, fight global warming, etc.

    So I think the people can indeed as you said break the power of the corporations, but not by destroying the free market but by using it more effectively.
    First you need laws requiring them to put that kind of information on the packages of their products.


    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    Quote Originally Posted by spuriousmonkey
    Quote Originally Posted by j
    I always believe economic forces are the primary cause of the falls of governments.
    Could we maybe then speculate the the increasing difference between rich and poor in the USA might lead to an unstable state which will lead to the collapse of the US?
    this is truly a mis-conception of the US system. of the top 25 very richest US citizens, most were very poor and started some business in a garage or their parents basement. some of these were not even Americans when they started out but have all lived the American Dream. by the way these same folks have given more back to the people of the planet, then most nations have in their existence.

    that same dream is afforded all people of the world including the American. move to America, work hard, play by the rules and you can become most anything or attain wealth. at the lowest end of the scale people have more, do more and enjoy life more than any time in the history of any society.
    The wealth disparity is an illusion created by the fact the poorest Americans really aren't all that poor.

    In dollar amounts, of course some people are mega-rich and others are comparatively not very well off, but only comparatively, and only in dollar amounts.

    I mean: in dollar amounts Bill Gates may have billions and billions of dollars, but on the ground level there's nothing for him to buy with it. In a purely materialistic sense, he probably doesn't live any better than somebody with 100 million.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Forum Sophomore timel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    107
    Simply speaking, USA is compared to Rome empire, because some people are willing to spread out democracy with no other interrest( )

    Cold war has been quite this fight between Democracy and Communism.
    Russian would have won they would have become the Rome Empire who would have spread Communist empire and Ideology.

    Now, outsiders of the USA dislike this tendency of the states to want to rule all around democracy.(sorry politic Irak- Iran etc...)
    So they compare USA to Rome.
    Rome did collapse by the way!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Locke
    Give me any example of how America has gone downhill since the end of the cold war.
    You mean other than what you see around you today? Or do you mean something that people can prove the end of the cold war caused?

    The end of the cold war put in jeopardy the careers of a massive bureaucracy that had been built up around fighting *something*. Without the USSR, they didn't have *something* to fight, and therefore no way to justify their payroll.

    Talking with the children of military officers during the time (I was too young to be on such terms with their parents), there was a genuine feeling that most cuts in military spending would come out of their paychecks, or take the form of slower promotions.

    Basically, without an enemy, you have bunch of people with no real jobs. They're working now, but they know they won't be working for long. Unless a massive amount of jobs open up somewhere else in the economy, there's no where for them to go when the ship sinks.

    The Internet bubble kind of disrupts the chain of evidence, because it seemed for a while like it might be the place all those people would be able to go.... but then it burst. So we had to go with plan "B": Invent a new enemy. In the end, our real decline is the decline in the credibility of the claims behind the justification for so many of our peoples' jobs. People just aren't believing us when we cry "wolf" anymore.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Nirgendwo und Ueberall
    Posts
    1,300
    So many European countries rely on the success of the US economy and will fight to keep things up and running. We do have powerful foreign competition but just a Rome wasn't built in a day, likewise it didn't fall in a day and neither will we. The decline of our economy could put us into a state of affairs similar to that of The Great Depression quickly, but the potential crippling of foreign economies whose success is contingent upon our own will do anything in their power to save themselves and thus support us to the fullest extent in a crisis situation. Our enemies may see an economic problem and take advantage of it, however, which is a fear I share with many others.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    54
    Interesting to read all the talks, guys. I'm merely marginally interested in American politics or the history of Rome. But I have conducted a minor study on the history of inflation in Rome (or debasement of their currency), and compared it in a quantitative manner with the data of UK and US. The curves are really comparable, except that the inflation rate of the US is far greater than that of Rome. That was many years ago, and I never post it anywhere. Unfortunately, I lost the computer file. If I could find it again, I might post it here.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Ever since the Great Depression, we've had this ideology that says inflation isn't bad, because it forces people not to hide money under their mattresses. (It'll depreciate if they don't spend it)

    We might be wrong.

    One observation I like to make of the current economy is that the hoarding (attempted hoarding) of real estate, and stuff like gold can easily take the place of the outright hoarding of money, and create pretty much the same effect.

    In bad times people look for investments that are seen as traditionally weathering the storm. The trouble is if everyone grasps onto the same investment type, because then all we get is local inflation. (Which doesn't last, as we've seen with the collapse of the housing market.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    54
    What I found in my investigation is that inflation CAUSES drop of GDP. The so-called Philip's curve is nothing more than a myth. I post the article "INFLATION AND THE ECONOMIC CYCLE" on
    http://www.philosophychatforum.com/b...?p=63659#63659.

    By the way, the US$ lost at least 90% of its value during 1929-1999.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    2,178
    The English after they knew the Germans were going to be defeated, in World War One. Crossed into enemy controlled territory.

    To end a strike by the dye workers, the English used their troops to force a settlement and put the plant, back into the hands of rather ruthless owners. That is all England cares about, their profits and goods. Made by underpaid people.

    Sounds a little like the U.S. and China.


    Sincerely,


    William McCormick
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •