Learn from the fall of Rome, US warned

Source: Financial Times

The US government is on a “burning platform” of unsustainable policies and practices with fiscal deficits, chronic healthcare underfunding, immigration and overseas military commitments threatening a crisis if action is not taken soon, the country’s top government inspector has warned.

David Walker, comptroller general of the US, issued the unusually downbeat assessment of his country’s future in a report that lays out what he called “chilling long-term simulations”.

These include “dramatic” tax rises, slashed government services and the large-scale dumping by foreign governments of holdings of US debt.

Drawing parallels with the end of the Roman empire, Mr Walker warned there were “striking similarities” between America’s current situation and the factors that brought down Rome, including “declining moral values and political civility at home, an over-confident and over-extended military in foreign lands and fiscal irresponsibility by the central government”.



Read more: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/80fa0a2c-49ef-11dc-9ffe-0000779fd2ac.html

Unlike some people who are running our country. Into the ground.

I wish we could leave superpower to somebody else and look after our country.

America had it's time during the second half of the 20th Century. That time has passed.

still can. But time is growing short.

"America had it's time during the second half of the 20th Century. That time has passed.

And that will be *'s legacy.

With a republican house & senate since 1994 (except a 1-vote majority in the senate for 2 years), and republican neocons in office, this country didn't stand a chance. It wasn't just bush. It was all of the enabling, rubber-stamp REPUBLICANS that killed this country.

:kick:

Arrogance will be our undoing....:shrug:

Yeah, right.

it's time for you proles to clean up our mess, "Clean up on isle America".

It looks like we're not going to get to steal the IOUs in social security, although we're going to keep trying (you could well be stupid enough), it's now time for us to move on to the next flock of sheep so you'd better get busy.

When George Washington was freezing at Valley Forge, the British officers were guests in the warm, wealthy homes less than 20 miles away in Philadelphia. it was only after they realized the George Washington's misfits were actually going to win that the wealthy ruling class got behind him. I have always said that real change comes from the bottom up, not the top down. When the American people unite and work together there is nothing that can stop them, but unfortunately those in charge benefit by keeping the people divided and blaming each other while the ruling classes enjoy the fruits of the working class labors.

It is only when we, the masses of aware citizens, come together to foment change will anything happen that benefits us. Change has to come from us, not from the leadership. Why would the leadership change? They're well taken care of. Those in power, those at the top, have forgotten what it's like to have to struggle and juggle just to get by.

United we stand, divided we fall, which is why they love to divide and conquer.

"I have always said that real change comes from the bottom up, not the top down. "

Whatever country, whatever century--the ones at the top always want to preserve the status quo. Why wouldn't they--obviously it's been good to them.

Rome was at its height of Power with the defeat of Carthage and Macedonia in the early part of the Second Century BC i.e. c 175 BC). The history of Rome after that date is one of INTERNAL politics NOT foreign Politics (Except as Foreign actions affected domestic Politics). Rome Destroyed Carthage in the Third Punic Rome (c 146 BC) but the Army in that War was viewed as a shadow of the Army that had defeated Hannibal. The next big movement in Rome was a fight between the poor and the rich over HOW Rome should use its power. The Gracchi wanted Rome to enforce an Old law that restricted Land Ownership to 600 acres per person and to use an grant of a country to Rome (From its previous King who saw the writing on the Wall) to pay those landowners who had more than 600 acres (This is an approximate figure the actual number you can look up). To this proposal the Roman elite killed both of the Gracchi (one they beat to death in the Senate, the other they shot down with his supporters by Cretan Archers imported to Rome for that purpose). This movement was then taken over by Maius, who reformed the Army into a Mercenary army from its Militia Roots. The problem was this permitted Maius to win several battles but it provided Sulla the means to set up his Dictatorship and had Maius killed. This movement was hard to stop so it was taken up by Julius Caesar and Augustus, but both did NOT want any radical reforms. Both took power as a grant of power from the Poor, but did nothing to upset the ruling elites more than they had to to stay in power. Thus the large landowners who depended on Slaves to work their lands were kept in power. The reform movement was corrupted to become one of Free food and games to the masses ho live din Rome Proper. Real reforms were not done, especially after Augustus Death and the abolishment of the Tribal Assembly (Where the poor had some power).

Under Augustus the final break was the moving of the Army to the Frontier, thus making a clear break between Rome and its Army (And importation from these legions to act as the Praetorian Guard use to police Rome). For the Next 400 years the Italian Peninsula provided few if any troops to the Roman Army. This was a deliberate Policy, to keep the masses of Rome untrained and unorganized so that the Ruling Elite could crush the masses with the Roman Army at any time (And such actions were done, given that after the Assembly was abolished with the Death of Augustus the only way the poor of Rome could protest was in the form of a Riot).

Now Rome did reach its greatest expansion in size under Trajan (c117AD) but the Roman Army under Trajan contained no more than 30 legions (Unlike the 60+ legions at the Time of Caesar, which was a drop from the time of Scipio Aficanus, the man who defeated Hannibal). This declined continued do to the desire of the land owners to keep their slaves and any Freeman working for them under their own control. Thus by 410 AD The Roman empire in the West could only raise Two Legions. but we are beyond the era the Speaker was speaking of. We are now in the Fall of the Empire in the West, not the Fall of the Roman Republic (Through it should be noted, Rome Considered itself a Republic doing its whole existence, form the abolishment of the Kings of Rome in or around 500 bc till the Fall of Constantinople to the Turks in 1453, people under the Roman Empire called it the Roman Republic NOT the Roman Empire).

You seem to know history pretty well, I wonder if you know when the first corporations came in to existence?

I've come to believe the preeminence of corporate person hood over the individual to be the Trojan Horse, most threatening to our, take your pick, empire or Republic. Long before Dwight Eisenhower gave his farewell speech warning of the dangers from the rising power of the military industrial complex, in 1864 as our nation's greatest tribulation was coming to a close, Abraham Lincoln expressed an even greater fear; the rise of corporations or "money powers" as he referred to them. Later the Supreme Court would go on to recognize corporations as persons and money as free speech, thus defiling the intent of the Constitution's opening statement of "We The People".

It seems to me, today many of those in power believe there is no public interest or good, and that everything should be privatized from prisons; thus giving an incentive through lobbying to criminalize behavior, to medical care; thus giving an incentive via lobbying to deny health care in service to the almighty dollar, to privatizing mercenaries; thus giving an incentive to wage war for profit, with the added result of draining resources from the nation's military.

I believe if the wealthy Patricians of ancient Rome lived today, they would no doubt incorporate with the sole purpose of magnifying their power at the expense of the people.

In the Middle ages Churches were viewed as being owned by the Saint they were named after. Now such Churches were get into legal problems and the question came up was who was defendant? The courts ruled it was the Church as a "legal" person. This is how Corporation started, as the names of Charities (or other non-profit groups) who had no real owners.

Starting in the Renaissance, for profit corporations were started. These difference from non-profit as having owners (Some were "Joint Stock" Companies and other forms that would be hard for us to see as Corporations and in a lot of text books NOT called Corporations but that is another story). The late 1500s and early 1600s saw these balloon, but the Courts developed a distaste for them and made them de-facto illegal except if the Parliament expressly authorized them (This power was adopted by the States after Independence). Example of such Parliament authorized for profit corporations was the Hudson Bay Company and the East India Company (Both formed in the 1600s).

Now while for-profit corporations were rare, non-profit corporation were encouraged by the law. These not included Churches but other charities. This started to change in the early 1800s. The Railroads were formed up and needed huge amount of Capital to be built, but no one had that much money to do it themselves. The Railroads organizers lobbied the states to Incorporate the Railroads. This started the great Corporation movement of the 1800s. By the 1850s most states had passed laws giving the power to form Corporations to the state's Secretary of State (or other state office). These general incorporation laws are how Corporations are formed to this day. The day of having to have a special bill forming a corporation died out in the mid-1800s.

Now what is a Corporation is and even then a subject of hot debate. In the decision most often cited for the statement that corporations are "person" that rule is NOT made (and avoided). The only comment in the decision is a head note written NOT by the US Supreme Court Justice but by the Supreme Court reporter saying it was a decision of the Court (It had been the decision of the Court from which the appeal came from, but was NOT part of the Written decision). There is a report of a Congressmen who had served in Congress when the 15h Amendment was proposed saying it was a secret agenda of Congress when the 15th Amendment was passed to protect corporations, but no other evidence of such Secret agenda had even been found (But was good enough for Justice Fields when he wrote the lower court decision, at that time Supreme Court Justice also sat on the Circuit court of Appeals, one Supreme Court Justice per Circuit Court).

Even today, the court has had a problem with the "person-hood" of Corporations. Several times that "Person-hood" has been denied (i.e. a Corporation is a person for purpose of the 15th Amendment, but NOT for the Fifth Amendment). Restrictions as to donations to politicians have been upheld as to Corporations while being struck down as to individuals (The court did this without discussing the person-hood of Corporations, if I remember right Scalia even supported this position).

My point is for-profit Corporation were ALWAYS viewed as threats to the Society, but at times viewed as "Necessary Evils". The big boom of Corporations was the 1800s, with more and more restrictions on them in the early to mid 20th century. This movement seems to end by the 1960s but only reversed in the 1980s. Corporations are easy to form today, a lot of people form them (They are the preferred form of business replacing the Partnership and the Proprietorship). The real dangers is NOT corporation per se (Most of which are no bigger then the Partnership and the Proprietorship of old), but cooperations with lots of money. These need to have restrictions imposed on them to prevent them form harming the Country as a whole.

In many ways if you look at the Ruling Elite of Ancient Rome they fulfill many of the functions (including evil functions) that corporations do today. The Roman elite held a much higher segment of the wealth of the country do the rich today, but if you look at corporations, instead of Stock Holders of Corporations, I can make the argument that they are roughly the same thing, which includes the same ability to harm the country while benefiting themselves.

for the reply.

Thank you!

I think I must have slept thru some of those history classes too
:(

To "Class Conscience" you will read about Canals and railroads but NOT how they were financed. Even at the time the financing of the Railroads was suspect (For example when The State of Pennsylvania first offered to sell its Janel to the Pennsylvania Railroad in the late 1850s, the Railroad refused for the deal contained a provision that the Canal be kept open. When that provision was removed the deal was accepted. The Pennsylvania Railroad first made the proposal for the two were already sharing the same track outside of Johnstown (The Little Conemaugh River Gap was two narrow for two hand dug railroads, and the canal had its up the Gap first.

Some background: The Pennsylvania Canal had a "Western Section" between Johnstown and Pittsburgh, and Middle section between Hollidaysburg and Harrisburg. The line was connected to Philadelphia by a railroad. The main problem of the Canal was connecting Hollidaysburg with Johnstown, Allegheny Mountain and the Eastern Continental Divide was in between. In the 1830s the Railroad engines of the day could NOT climb the 3 % grade a railroad would have to use to get over the Mountain. On the other hand stationary Steam engines could pull heavier loads then the Railroads engines of the 1830s. so a series of incline were build between Johnstown and Hollidaysburg, with the Inclines connected by Steam locomotives running on a flat track. By the 1850s Steam engines had improved so that you could by the 1850s run steam locomotives over Allegheny Mountain. The grade was just under 3%. Both the Pennsylvania Railroad and the Canal decided to build such a direct line between Hollidaysburg and Johnstown in 1854. The only problem was when it came to the part nearest Johnstown they was only room for one set of hand dug tracks and the Canal laid their's first.

The canal was owned by the state oF Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania Railroad was owned by a private Company. The above is RARELY taught in School, for it shows GOVERNMENT could do as good a job as Corporations. The canal was competitive with the railroad and superior to it between Johnstown and Hollidaysburg do to how it had laid its trace. The Pennsylvania Railroad had also laid its trace, building Horseshoe curve to do so (The Janel had a similar curve on the Mountain, but it is called the Mule-Shoe Curve). Both tracks ran parallel except as they near Johnstown where the Railroad had to use the tracks of the Canal.

In history books they may mention the canal and how it was replaced by the Railroad, and imply the canal was a state finance failure. In fact the Canal was a success, it connected the two halves of the state and dropped freight prices immensely (Through it was slow, the mail and passengers generally went by stagecoach for it was faster). The Pennsylvania Railroad (PRR) started in the 1850s to exploit a different rail route then the Canal Railroad was using between Philadelphia and Harrisburg and ran a more direct route than the canal between Harrisburg and Hollidaysburg (A route was also built between Johnstown and Pittsburgh via a Direct Route as opposed the the Canal which went along the rivers). The problem was Allegheny Mountain. The PRR did NOT have a route over the Mountain for two years, sending its packages via the Canal Inclines. Then both the Canal and the PRR built they rail lines over the Mountain.

The history books generally point out the Railroad took over the canal, but forget the mention that the supplies to built the railroad came by the Canal. Furthermore, while the canal had NEVER paid off the bonds issued to built the Janel, they were being paid off (The main problem had been the state had offered to build NOT only the main line Canal but several other canals in different parts of the state, most were profitable but at least rates then the Main Line AND cost almost as much to built). The decision to sell the Canal was made by the State based on an offer by the PRR to take over the bonds. THe PRR wanted to eliminate its only competitor, so when the Legislature added the clause about NOT closing the Canal, The PRR rejected the deal. When that clause was removed the PRR took over the Canals and slowly shut them down.

The above is NOT taught in History, for it shows that Corporate America care less about the Country but only about its bottom line. Many of the canals shut down cut off whole industries. The PRR used its monopoly position to up rates (and used those rates to help control the Pennsylvania Legislature, a joke of the late 1800s went this way "There is the Pennsylvania Railroad and its wholly own subsidy, the State of Pennsylvania". At the same time the Senators from Pennsylvania were referred to as the Senators from the PRR.

You do NOT read about such corporate corruption in history class for School books avoid it like the plague. You have to read it outside of History books. School History can give you an outline of History, but the history itself is distorted to reflect what the people who wrote the history book want you to know (and for School History books the number of book are limited and what they contained is often what corporate America what you to know and not know).

My point is if you really want to understand history you have to read about it, it is NOT taught properly for true history will offend someone (including yourself), you just have to accept history for what it is, how we came to be what we are today.

I am in the state next to you, Ohio, and grew up in Indiana. The canals played a big part in early Ohio, but I never realized the part of the railroads played into the demise of the canals by the Corporations. Fascinating. It always boils down to greed and profit.

and ObamClintWards - Claudius?

Caligula was a flash in the pan in the grand scheme of things, remembered for his excesses - and the loss of potential when he fell into madness in the first year of his reign; by many accounts he was a good and decent person before that - more than his long-term impact.

I could only wish that Bush was a Caligula; that would mean that he'd be gone (one way or another) by now.

is not found in the political arena. This has to be an up-swelling from the masses - us, the concerned, aware citizens of this country. As he said, "We the people". Now, how to go about it ... :think:

and political civility at home" and start pushing for the death penalty for pre-marital heavy petting.

Their "moral values" seem to embrace crime and corruption over any kind of love or compassion for their fellow human beings.

Which is a bit sad, really...

doesn't only mean sex and drugs... it also means stealing from the poor and middle, to give to the already wealthy. (And there many more examples of their moral bankruptcy (e.g. their lust for blood), which they will also ignore.)

starting unnecessary wars and murdering innocent civilians. And throw in torturing people, incarcerating without trial.... Should I go on?

Mr Walker’s views carry weight because he is a non-partisan figure in charge of the Government Accountability Office, often described as the investigative arm of the US Congress.

While most of its studies are commissioned by legislators, about 10 per cent – such as the one containing his latest warnings – are initiated by the comptroller general himself.

In an interview with the Financial Times, Mr Walker said he had mentioned some of the issues before but now wanted to “turn up the volume”. Some of them were too sensitive for others in government to “have their name associated with”.

“I’m trying to sound an alarm and issue a wake-up call,” he said. “As comptroller general I’ve got an ability to look longer-range and take on issues that others may be hesitant, and in many cases may not be in a position, to take on.

“Our very prosperity is placing greater demands on our physical infrastructure. Billions of dollars will be needed to modernise everything from highways and airports to water and sewage systems. The recent bridge collapse in Minneapolis was a sobering wake-up call.”

Mr Walker said he would offer to brief the would-be presidential candidates next spring.

“They need to make fiscal responsibility and inter-generational equity one of their top priorities. If they do, I think we have a chance to turn this around but if they don’t, I think the risk of a serious crisis rises considerably”.

Which is why a progressive tax scheme should be applied, since those with more are benefitting more -- and are consuming/leveraging more of our infrastructure.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

that was all it took for this POS to "pick up whar his daddy lef' off".

Check out this stuff coming from Family Security Matters, which is apparently associated with the Center for Security Policy. Philip Atkinson advocates the overthrow of the US government making Bush the first permanent president. He thinks Caesar was successful and that we should actually ditch democracy in favor of the strategy and tactics of ancient Rome.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1574242

they are advocating nothing less than genocide in Iraq and repopulating the country with Americans. If this represents the core of support for our president, then we as a nation are in deep trouble and need to pull out of Iraq IMMEDIATELY! If I was a soldier fighting under the command of this sick, demented fool I would be deeply concerned.

that * hasn't seen this. Oh wait, let's just hope no one has read this to him.

What gives with some of these people? What the hell are they thinking??????

If I dont rembember wrong, Cæsar was killed by his fellow Senators, so If GWB belive he can make a new empire out of the US Republic he may be in for a ugly suprise...

In fact, He was newer a monarch. The first Monarch in the Roman Empire was Octavius Julius Cæsar Augustus. He was a extremely clevery man who managed to cloack the Empire in the cloth of a Republic. Is that was GWB are doing, making the Empire, but manage to sell it in the cloack of a Republic?

And for the Record. In the Empire of Rome, the Name Augusust was from Octavians time the name of the Reign Monarh, the name of Cæsar was the name of the "crown-prince". Verry often the was the name of a man who the monarch either trusted or it was the son of the monarch. For some curius reason it was verry seldom the son who herriaged the Throne. Not since Nero... Even in the East Roman Empire or Bysant this verry odd system was working in houndres of year...

Hehe, Absolutely.. They are maybe hiding in the Cloaca Americana when they are planing and ploting they "next turn". I love to se Carl Grove and CO sitting down there in the dark and plotting for the overturn of the US Republic, and make a new empire.

I wonder if a Democratic President behave like this "empire-builders" what the reaction to it have been in the Media and over the US?.. If a Democratic President with some "emperors attitude" and a comtempt for all brances of goverment, who deside to use "exutive order" from the top to rule the land have been aloved to behave like this President and this Administration have been doing for the last 6 year?...

If President Clinton who almoust lost hes prezidency over some verry fancyfull use of the sigar and som other stuff, what can de Congress dont to to Mr Bush, who probely have tramped more than One law in his prezidency...

Mr Bush once promised to restore "honor and respekt" to the Hwite House.. 6 year after he manage to destroy ALOT mot than President Clinton had done i 8 year.. And he may destroy the whole Repulic in the next 18 month, if he deside to do so...

He has once "lost his lips" and told to the press that wil be more easy to rule if US was a dicatorship.. He may get as he wishes...

But be bright side is that every amercian who want to travel over "the pond" to live in Europe is welcome with open arms. We need some good working americans here.. And its not THAT dificult to get used to a "Socialized health care system" My guess is... Ok, you may get to pay more taxes and have to live in a other culture, but I do hope that you are meet with welcome and not rocks and stones..


Diclotican

Learn to spell man - your diatribes are hard to read at best...

DU does have a spell check, you know...

On Edit: My many and sincere apologies - you're from Norway - I wish I could speak and write a second language as well as you can.

Again - accept my sincere apologies and welcome to DU!!!

God what an ass I am...

Sir

Yes, I am from Norway, and not verry good in Engelish writing by the way.. But I Understand engelish good, both reading and hearing, but my writing is little under par so to se...

And I acept your apologies, I know I can be dificult to understand sometimes. And I should have used the spell check more than I do;)

Wel, everyone can be a ass sometime. But the good ass admit when they do mistake.. The BAD ass never admit to anything;)

I wouldn't mind reading it, but can't find it on the GAO website.

Too late.

There was a point where it was too late and most Romans didn't even find out for a few hundred years.

The fact is that all Empires fall, once we became an Empire the deal was sealed, the only question is how long till the fall and how hard will we fall.

My own opinion about 6 years ago was that we had 50-250 years but I never counted on Bush, now I expect that it will be more like 15-100 years.

That being said it isn't all bad news, it's just the end of an empire not the end of the world.

Amazing how much damage one republican administration can cause.

OTOH Clinton did reverse some of the damage, at least to where we had some hope of paying off the national debt. Then Junior came along and wiped out all of Clinton's positive results.

All of Bush's (and the GOP's) policies are unsustainable - from foreign policy to monetary to budgetary policy.

Now someone needs to wake up our Dem leaders in DC and tell them to get busy...

consumption, consumption, consumption and more consumption.

Is that the Roman empire lasted over 1,200 years. Our country is less than 1/4 of that in age. There is no way we are going to make it 100 more years with our current situation. People should come to grips with the fact that no country has ever maintained ongoing supremacy -- all great nations have fallen just as this one will, in time. Its not like the rapture or Armageddon (alleged one time events) -- the world changes and power shifts all the time. Remember the Soviet Union? The Ottoman Empire? The Roman Civilization? The French? The Mayans? The Chinese (ahem, welcome back)? The British Empire? The Mongols? The Prussians? The Greeks? The Aztecs? The Persians? Corruption, overextension and loss of unity in the government always leads to downfall.

Interestingly, I think an argument can be made that the connectivity of today's world is speeding the visible decline of this country. It used to takes decades to lose a good war or to become bankrupt. Now we can see it on almost a daily basis.

Today:

High level officials serve themselves rather than their country leaving messes for others to clean up.
The government fears the people.
Other countries' fear of this nation has replaced their respect for this nation.
Taxation overburdens the people.
Infrastructure and social programs crumble to support the military.
The ideals upon which the country became great are forgotten.

I grew up believing in the ideal of this country and hold our founders in the utmost respect for their courage, dedication, and sacrifice. But somewhere the grand ideal was lost. All we are left with is a patriotic stirring on the 4th of July for something not many people could explain as the founders meant it anymore.

Roman empire, indeed.

That would be us, too, I guess. Sigh...

Hate to fall back on a trite one: "What will we tell the children???" But, what WILL we tell the children?"

Welcome to DU. A good thing you pointed out here. Many of us have said similar things here. Sad that, for the most part, we're just preaching to the choir. Glad to have you with us.

We show so much ego by comparing America to Rome. This has been the primary exercise of every Western empire, to try to re-create Rome. Well, it's never happened. Rome was a beast, stretching over a thousand years, and if you count the Byzantine empire as Rome, actually lasted over two thousand years.

Even the Chinese empires have never beaten that run

So is America like the Roman Empire? Well, there are certain parallels, sure, but they are shared by all empires. So... Are we going to be the founders of the society of an entire continent for the next three thousand years, for better or worse? Fuck no.

No, as far as empires go, we don't even rate Mongols. We're much closer to Macedon. A flash in the pan, showing great military power and a surprising amount of cultural transfer, but utterly incapable of maintaining what we've taken. We'll be noted and discussed in future history books, which is more than can be said of some such as the Khazars or Jutes, but we will be no Rome.

W hat?

on this cretin so many more people can be killed and our people and their infrastructure go begging. three cheers for the dem congress.

Now move along citizens, nothing to see here...

(Here to insert little sarcasm-thingy, if I knew how to do it)...

is it acceptable to like the French again? ;-) Evidently hotdogs and hamburgers were served at lunch, perhaps with *gasp!* French fries?!

I just recently figured it out myself. I do believe it's - colon, then the word "sarcasm" (without the quotes of course), and then another colon.

I figured it out one day when I replied to a post that had one of those thingies in it, and I looked at how it was written in the set-up for the reply. Then I simply tried it myself.

Let's see if I got that correctly:

:sarcasm:

YESSSS!!! It worked! Sorry about the phraseology in trying to describe this. We Luddites do the best we can.

When you're posting a message look just above the Subject window and you will see a link called, Smilies lookup table. Click on that and you can choose from our wide selection by just clicking on the one you want. :hi:

I wondered about that because looking at the post to which you're replying doesn't always show the actual written keys to the smilie.:dunce: :think: :hi:

Yep, that's the thing. Can't see the link unless you're in the process of posting a message. :hippie: :toast: :beer: :hi:

Not likely. Just too silly for me.

:+ :evilgrin: :hippie: :toast: :P :smoke: :silly: }( :freak: :crazy: :dunce: :headbang: :spray: :blush: :beer: ;) :spank: :rofl: :hi:

:sarcasm:

It Worked!!! Thanks for that, and for the welcome as well.

this is really alarming, considering the source.

It is alarming, indeed. I've been worrying about this for awhile, myself.

What goes up must come down, whether it's the dinosaurs, the Roman Empire, or the Soviet Union - and quite likely - us, also.

“The budget should be balanced, the treasury refilled, public debt reduced, the arrogance of officialdom tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands curtailed, lest Rome become bankrupt”
Cicero, Quintus Tullius

E.G. Paris Hilton!

Bread and Circuses, except that Amerikkka can't provide bread, just circuses! Unf**king believable!

:mad: :puke: :mad:

Media read that. I know bushits don't give fuck and it doesn't seem like the other two do.

Those "declining moral values" are central repuke themes.

"Man's Dominion Over Nation" are licenses by the new religions to exploit nature, natural resources, animal-life and even other human beings according to various myths of inferiority.

Second Roman Empire?

What the US is just a big bully with a compliant local population which lives on American Idols!

It "elected" an "idiot" as pResident, not once, but twice!

When it cannot handle a bunch of insurgents in a third world country, it does not say much about the army! Super power?

An empire demands taxes from its subjects!

The present rape of resources and people, using mercenaries, from invaded and occupied countries is not what represents an empire!

Sorry, but other than self-seeking politicians, the US gets NO support from the people around the world it is subjugating!

In my humble opinion - neither an Empire or a Super Power - just a Banana Republic going down the toilet!

Hello

Good writen, but I have the feeling that many americans are not found of that type of writing.. Or maybee its little higher under the roof here than some other places...

And Indeed, they "elected" a idiot as presisent, not once but twice.. And show what that have completed... God know that the next president have a lot of work ahead of him.. Not just to fix ting that is brooke home, but to fix the broken thing abroad... Maybe the next 4 president in US have to work hard to "repear" the problems this menaic have given the US...

If anyone dreamed of the "next roman empire" they must rembember that on the border of the empire it was allways a war going on.. And as some other har writend.. The Roman Empire was needing more and more troops to full its army.. And the Mercanises who fuld the ranks of the army was not trusted when it come to it.. The visigoths is maybee the best know, but not the vorst of the plundres of Rome.. But the idea of the Roman Empire outgrow both the East and the Vest Roman Empire.. The last Empror of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation was overthrown in 1806 when Napoleon fired the last emperor and retired the whole idea of a Roman Empire.. So the idea of a Roman Empire was strong living in Europe, long after the Roman Empire was burried and stone dead...

Diclotican

We are probably dead already too
"So the idea of a Roman Empire was strong living in Europe, long after the Roman Empire was buried and stone dead..."

Thank you for the friendly welcome;)

The US have still a fighting shance, if you want to, to build on a Constituion the rest of the world sine the Revolution in the engelish provinces in the Americas in 1776 have admired. If you want to fight against the power that is loving to make a new "roman empire". if the US Citiziens WANT to have a democratic Republic you get it. If you fail, you may get a Empire with a really stupid "president for life". If the rumor about a group that want mr Bush as "president for life" is true, Then US is in some really big problems.. I count the days to Mr Bush is out of office.. And I REALLY hope the next president is working hard to repair the big damage the current Administration have build up, not just against Europe, but for all the nations who are been insultet by this ADMINISTRATION...

First they give the "long finger" to the rest of the world over Iraq. And now they are DEMANDING that we shall helpe US to fix IraQ. and the worst part is that UN are doing that, witount give US a black aye or someting like that in the process.. If I was the current general Secretar in UN, I wold told Mr Bush som really hard facts about insuling the only WORLD BODY who can help him in Iraq..

I do hope US wil be a living democracy after mr Bush. I hope the next president are trying hard to fix the problems this maniac Administration have given US and the rest of the world for many years.. But I am afraid it is bad times ahead.. The fact that the US today mimic the Germany in the 1930s is scary enougt if you ask me.. And I know a lot of the 1930s in germany... (Reading for the most part then...)

But then they dont have the Internet. So it is hope in the end of the tunnel after all;)

Diclotican

the Corporations destroyed it that was their intention

the irony is they destroyed the very thing that protected them

THEY FAILED

now they must pay the price for all that GREED

Rome, which once had the best, most organized and disciplined army of the era, became more and more reliant on mercenaries for defense...Mercenaries that high-tailed it when the Visigoths came to town...and do i have to even mention the environmental issues with the lead water pipes?

Caligula, who thought he should be treated as a god, Elagabalus, who imprisoned and executed those who criticized him, Commodus, who was lazy. led a life of debauchery and had his underlings sell imperial favors, and Domitian, who developed new tortures, harassed philosophers and Jew, and executed officials who opposed his policies.

in our pet food, baby toys, air, water, and beaches, bankrupted government and devalued currency, unimpeded global climate change, 2 stolen presidential elections, the mortgage meltdown,...


Yes, I would say its conclusive: much worse than Nero, our Crusader-in-Thief.

If "The American Empire" fails or falls, its because We The People stopped participating in the process and didn't oversee OUR elected officials.

You can't teach anyone anything they don't want to hear about.

Bush and friends have a record of profiting from destroying things. Google "bush failed businesses" and watch them take the money and run. Our money.

I mean, aren't the Clintons already hooked up with outsourcing consultants in India? Or was that article a joke.

Trouble is,the Indians and others who hate us but don't mind the jobs will eventually have the same problems foisted on them.

The obscenely rich man's Disneyland.

The crash will happen when that belief goes away. And it WILL go away, because everything in the OP is true.

I'm sorry, but I think it's already too late.

FOX Cable TV advocates do, but seem to be missing out on FOX Broadcast Channel, which airs some stuff that makes me blush in embarrassment in under a nanosecond. And my sense of humor can be dirty at times too!

Let's face it. Morals are different for each and every person and are not always defined by a person's religion or lack thereof.

I think everybody wants a family that cares for one another, is responsible, etc. But those are goals rather than actual morals.

Everybody has a different opinion on most things. Even people we agree with for the most part probably have some nuanced part of their argument that we may disagree with. In fact I think that's partly why DU is always submerged in civil strifes amongst its patrons.

Morals are opinionated goals. What we'd like things to be like. But as much as we wish them to be a template for society, another person's template may not match yours exactly.

Personally I do not believe the same things the hardcore Christian Right does. Does that make me morally inferior? Does that mean my family's morals have declined in some way? I think not.

I also believe that those who use religion to structure their morals do so purely on the interpretation they want their beliefs to hold.

For instance the teachings of Christ are absolutely nothing like the hatred and bigotry that Right Wingers spew. Yet they do it in his name. These same people read the Old Testament which was a book written based upon Hebrew beliefs and does not mention Christ at all, to take from it the strict social rules that it provides its reader.

The New Testament which is centered around Christ and actual Christian beliefs, is far more tolerant and so the hardcore right wing Christians ignore it and take claim to the book that is in line with their beliefs, not their actual religion.

If America's morals are "declining", one could easily make the case that the author may have based that on our country's recent disdain for human life. The uncaring nature about the murder of innocent Iraqis or the soldiers we sacrifice for the cause of oil and big business. Or even our unwillingness to help the poor and the sick in this country. It is a moral goal to help those less fortunate than ourselves that is expressed by actual Christian writings. With the state of Health Care in the country and the ever growing poverty disparity in this country, these easily could be what the author meant.

But I don't think morals should be written into law or forced onto others and I do not believe there is one set in stone version that complies with the beliefs of all Americans. Part of what is wrong with our country is our close minded, puritan-like beliefs about sexuality, nudity, certain types of speech and any type of open minded dialogue at all.

It really makes our country look bad when we criticize other, more open countries for their views on subjects we would consider "provacative" when their crime rates are lower and populace is healthier and happier as a whole.

I don't know I just felt inclined to interject my two cents.

Rp

This post highlights several reasons why we do NOT want to be an empire: immorality, militarism, corruption.

However, what about the more fundamental absolutely immoral premise in the word "Empire"?

...and immune to the forces of history.

Seriously, some of us have been pointing this out for years and we're always met with that American exceptionalism crap.

And he will be given a big 8 or 9 figure a year job after he leaves the White House for services rendered.

which was a mere 35 years ago,

so how are these mental giants going to 'learn' from a civilization almost 1500 years ago?!

Some of these people would still praise King George even enslaved, with the rubble of their once-owned houses and neglected infrastructure piled up to the level of their ears, all whilst rapturously --literally-- watching Republicans fiddle
err, I mean play guitar
while Washington, NO and the rest of the nation either burns or drowns.

No warnings will ever penetrate such deliberately thick skulls... it's time to stop wasting our breath,
they cannot be saved from themselves, nor their party, nor their glorious commander guy, we'll have a difficult enough time saving our own skins.

I will stick it out.

Got a question, maybe a statement even, but I may be wrong.

THIS was the guy that was just on 60 minutes a few weeks ago, which was a re-run from a show that was aired shortly after the first of the year.

THIS is the guy!

http://www.cbsnews.com/sections/i_video/main500251.shtml?id=2534935n

U.S. Headed For Fiscal Crisis?
In Full: David Walker, comptroller general of the U.S., totaled up our government's income, liabilities and future obligations. He concluded the numbers don’t add up. Steve Kroft reports.

Watch the video - I thought I recognized his name.

U.S. Heading For Financial Trouble?
Comptroller Says Medicare Program Endangers Financial Stability
This segment was originally broadcast on March 4, 2007. It was updated on July 8, 2007.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/01/60minutes/main2528226.shtml

is the result of implementing conservative ideology. So many Americans have been sold on that ideology that they think we are going in the right direction. This speech will sound to them like liberal ideology.

There needs to be more progressive media or else we will never get the message across.

If not, get thee to your local college and enroll in a history course immediately. Can you say, "deja vu all over again?" I thought you could.

I often find it incredible that * has a degree in history. He must have slept through his classes, that's for sure. :banghead:

K & R, BTW. :kick:

I mean lets be realistic, unless America suddenly wakes up and realizes we're falling apart far more then we think then the politicians aren't going to pay attention to the problems pointed out here until it's too late.

We're already like 9 trillion dollars in debt, more then the debt of the nations in the world combined, how the heck are we going to pay that back? I mean according to national debt figures we haven't had a true surplus where we our debt since 1 year under Eisenhower (although Clinton did almost completely stop the growth of the national debt towards the end of his term).

I think the neo-cons just show exactly why we're falling apart when it comes to their 'war on terror' and using terrorism to justify a war in Iraq. If we listened to the Neo-cons we would be at war not only in Iraq, but also in Iran, North Korea, Cuba, and any other nation (especially Arab ones) that the neo-cons feel even slightly threatened from. We have to get out of the mindset that we're the most powerful nation in the world and have to do everything ourselves if the rest of the world disagrees with us.

I think that the war on terror is actually exactly what the terrorists want us to do, it'll speed up our destruction by making us arrogantly overspreading our military too much and wasting billions and billions on wars.

I try to be optimistic, but -- Scary, isn't it? :scared:

I don't know how many around here have degrees in history (I don't), but most of us are smart enough to see the implications of what is being said here. And we all know the old saw about what happens to those who ignore history.

Let's see... slavery, murder as public entertainment, sexual depravity far beyond anything seen today, ritual sacrifice, ritual suicide ("devotio"), child abuse....

...And then along came Christianity, and the Empire went to Hell.

Ok, they are not into the lions thing, but I bet they would be if they could get away with it. Look at Cheney's canned hunts... and we don't know what the Perverts party does when no one is looking, maybe they try to copy the Romans...

:evilgrin:

It thrived as a pagan power and collapsed after becoming christian. So much for fundie logic.

Rome, at its height, was a Military Dictatorship. The problem for Rome was that it NEVER did land reform till it fell. Land reform was needed as early as 150 BC, but to reform land meant taking laden from the Rich and giving it to the poor. Rome Refused to do that. In fact the area where you had the greatest amount retention of land by the poor and the least retention of land by the Rich was Greece and present Day Turkey, which also was the first area to go Christian. This area The Roman Republic Survived till 1453.

The first area to fall to the Barbarian was the Western Empire, the least Christianized part of the Empire. Pagans gods were still being worshiped as the Barbarian were invited in the suppress the peasants.

Anyway, from around 230 AD, Rome has several problems it was never able to resolved until almost 700 AD. First was the watering out of the Spanish Silver mines. This caused a Money shortage for Rome, which Rome solved by slowly debasing its currency during the 200s. By the Time of Diocletian the currency was almost worthless (Mostly copper in what was suppose to be Silver Coins). Diocletian tried to solve the problem, but Failed. Constantine took Diocletian's ideas and implemented them but to do so he had to fine a new source of Coinage. He did so by converting to Christianity, for this permitted him to loot all the Pagan Temples for the Gold and Silver. What Temples the Christians took over in the 300s, the Christian were careful to turn over all the Gold to the Emperor. Constantine and his successor kept the coinage in devised constant for the next 800 years (Another Reason Rome Survived in the East).

AS to the Roman's themselves, during the period up to about 100 AD, the Romans had a tendency to refer to themselves as Romans, and to areas outside ot Italy by the name of the Area or as something separate from Italy. After about 200 AD, the people of the Empire (including Italy) started to refer to the WHOLE EMPIRE as "ROMANIA", as if the empire was one country, not conquered provinces of Rome (This corresponds with the Granting of Roman Citizenship to everyone in the Empire). This concept of Unity is what kept the Empire together till it disintegrated after 450 AD.

As to the Christians, in addition to helping Constantine reform the Currency, Christians also provided a way for the Emperor to communicate. The Christian Church from the First Century adopted the same system the Empire did as to Provinces (the Roman Catholic Church use of Diocese and Parishes come from the use of such terms in the late Empire). Prior to Constantine it was possible to use the Pagan temples to spread the decrees of the Emperor, but these temples was were you went to worship the gods, not to hear what the temple leader had to say. The Christian churches were different, instead of a place you went to, to give to the priests your offering to the gods, you went to Church to hear the world of GOD. Churches therefore had to be bigger then temples, for temples only had to hold the image of the god, while a Church had to hold all the people who came to hear the word of GOD AND to share in the Communion. This made the Christian Church a good vehicle to send messages down to people, and the Emperors after Constantine used it as such (As did subsequent rulers of various parts of Europe until the invention of the Modern Newspaper in the mid-1800s). One side affect of this role of Christianity is that AFTER the empire in the West had fallen, the Church Survived and acted as a means of communication between the Eastern Emperor and the West, this continued till the Pope Crowned Charlemagne in 700 AD).

Rome had a problem, how do you NOT tax the Rich AND FIGHT off two huge threats (Persia and the Goths)? Till the Empire lost both the West and Egypt it was unwilling to arm its peasants. When both fell (476 as to the West), mid-600s for Egypt first to the Persians and then to the Arabs, the Empire was left with the sole part of its Empire where the Concentration of Wealth had had the least affect (The peasants had much of the land). Heraclius (October 5, 610 - February 641 A.D.) did the needed reforms, arming his own peasants to first defeat the Persian and then to fight off the Arabs. To do so he gave up Egypt, but arming of his peasants was what was needed and he did it is the part of the Empire that had had large populations of Christians since the time of Christ (Through he gav up on Palestine and Syria rather then try to hold onto them).

I do NOT want to go into all the reason for the fall of the Empire in the West, but Christianity was an attempt to keep the empire together as it fell apart. Christianity failed to keep the Empire together but survived the Fall of the Empire to carry the good parts of the Empire into the Middle ages and today. Christians did NOT cause the fall, but were the chief side affects of the Fall in the West.

You are arguing with a strawman that you created.

I said with humor that it fell "after" Rome became christian. And that's a fact.

You put the words "caused" into your post suggesting falsely that I had used that term or suggested it. I did not.

What I wrote is a historical fact and your post only underlines it.

And my post was made in humor.

I hate when people get history Wrong, for it leads to further errors. Thus my comments for the implication of what you said, while you are saying you did not mean that, was clear and needed to be clarified. Thus my comments, to clarify the situation, which you have done.

You weren't clarifying anything. You either mistakenly misread my post or you posted to imply that I'd said that christianity "caused" the fall of the empire.

The language in my original post was clear enough. People understand the word "after" and don't confuse it with the word "cause" which you oddly attributed to me and then argued against which is silly.

We'd be able to afford things like national healthcare, infrastructural improvement, paying down of outstanding debts and making social security solvent.

Then again, punishing those who don't pay taxes (usually the rich) would also probably yield the same results.

Unfortunately, it seems common sense is not a virtue here any more.

generally fix it.

thousand including the Byzantine (Eastern) Empire, 2500 including the Holy Roman Empire. I don't think the US has anything like that staying power.

I just don't have time to read them all. But really, some wonderful information here. I'll have to bookmark it for later reading.