Americans and Romans, Europeans and Greeks

Muesli

(53 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-14-03 06:19 AM
Original message

Americans and Romans, Europeans and Greeks

Edited on Tue Oct-14-03 06:32 AM by Muesli

Isn't there a parralel?

A powerful, moralistic, somewhat hypocritical society of people who act. It's power based on a invincible military and huge economy and still on the rise.

and

A squabbling, decadent, group of nations, filled with people who sit and think, instead of working. Reminiscent of a "glorious" past of colonialism and military power.

What will happen if history repeats itself?

Europe will decline into one of the globe's poorest regions.

The USA will turn into a dictatorship first and will then be overrun by some tribal culture 400 years later.

We're doomed :-)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

papau

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-14-03 07:43 AM
Response to Original message

1. the Greek's have never been in the dire condition you imply

"sit and think, instead of working" implies one can not do both - and again - the Greeks (as wel as many many other folks)seemed to show this was not true

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Muesli

(53 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-14-03 08:24 AM
Response to Reply #1

2. wrong word used.

Edited on Tue Oct-14-03 08:30 AM by Muesli

I meant "acting" as in stop debating and start doing.

The Greek mainland however did see a period of relatively strong decline after the Peloponesian war.

Europe's relative decline is also due to wars between almost equally strong opponents.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

joeybee12

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-14-03 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #2

3. I don't think Europe is declining--it's on the rise. We're declining

Thanks to our ignorance and arrogance.

If Dumbo is re-defeated in 2004 and again assumes office, we are doomed!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Patriot_Spear

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-14-03 08:41 AM
Response to Original message

4. No parralel... but there are some interesting observations.

Particularly when you consider the late empire's reliance on native troops while the leadership avoided military service- sound like anyone we know?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Muesli

(53 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-14-03 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #4

5. More came to mind

Edited on Tue Oct-14-03 09:15 AM by Muesli

Caesar convinced the senate and the people that the threat of an attack by the Gauls was absolute and a "preemtive strike" was necessery.

The Romans had their own problems with fundamentalists, at that time it was the christians. There even are some historians who think it is true that the great fire in Nero's reign was a christian terrorist act. I admit it sounds far-fetched, but the fear was real for the Romans.

-edit- spelling

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

joeybee12

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-14-03 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #5

6. Proof that history repeats itself

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Nevernose

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-14-03 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #5

7. Is "convinced" the right word?

If I remember my Plutarch (which would be an absolute miracle), the senate specifiaclly told Caesar NOT to invade the Gauls, and then he did anyway, which is why they summoned him to Rome w/o his army to face charges.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

joeybee12

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-14-03 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #7

8. I think you're right about Caesar being summoned for his actions

I think his actions led to his assasination, because he did this, and the senators were starting to fear him.

Not sure if I'm getting the chronology right, but I seem to recall this chain of events.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Muesli

(53 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-14-03 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #7

9. I'm not sure anymore

Edited on Tue Oct-14-03 09:22 AM by Muesli

You could be right. But I think that they summoned him back without his army out of fear of his popularity with his troops, afraid (justly so) he would try to gain absolute power.

hmmmm... How popular is Bush with the military?

PS. Of course I meant to spell parallel correctly

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

joeybee12

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Tue Oct-14-03 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #9

10. I don't think he's very popular with them these days

Hooray!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Fri May 03rd 2024, 03:05 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.