What is Digg?179 Comments
- Napoleone, on 12/30/2007, -7/+62I'm working for the preservation of our republic; as for the empire, I couldn't care less.
- Napoleone, on 12/30/2007, -2/+29What makes you think all empires share the same life-span?
- Paktu, on 12/30/2007, -6/+31That was a surprisingly well-informed article. The comparison to Roman farming is especially apt- America has moved from small, family owned farms like what Rome had in the early days of the Republic, to massive, corporate owned farms (in Rome, these were called Latifundia).
- dgeise, on 12/30/2007, -14/+36If only Dubya was smart enough to understand this...
- tehxen3, on 12/30/2007, -10/+25Digg parallels the decline of aging liberal hippies.
- tmbrwolf19, on 12/30/2007, -0/+15Being an Empire doesn't mean there is a required amount of time to remain in power. The British Empire lasted about 500 years, Roman about 2200.
Wars during the Roman empire lasted decades. It sometimes took several years just to march an army to the enemy. Today, we can mobilize and have troops fighting in country within all of 2 days. Trade goods used to take months to reach the mother country, now make it there in a matter of days. Even communications with used to take several weeks, now can be done instantaneously. See what I am getting at? As technology and the way we live our lives accelerate, so does the life span of dominance. It has taken China less than 60 years to go from a relatively weak economy, to the world's largest producer of goods with trillions of dollars in trade a year. It took American about 200 years to go from colony to superpower. And unlike previous empires, America doesn't hold political power over very many nations.
The fact is, even if America turns around drastically, it can not stop the economic success of China or India, so its days are numbered. Oh, and those illegal aliens are probably one of the few things maintaining a fractured and outsourced economy. - amrizzle, on 12/30/2007, -9/+20Good read.
Empires come and go, America is no different. - Protonz, on 12/30/2007, -3/+13Democracy is not all that great of a thing. "Power to the people" is the slogan of most socialist nations like Venezuela, or Cuba. It is an illusion that the 'people' have some kind of power, but what is this power exactly? I don't want my neighbor to have the power to steal from my paycheck or put me in a prison for crimes without a victim (ie. drug laws, prostitution).
Power to the individual. - fadeout, on 12/30/2007, -4/+14There was a book called "the rise and fall of great powers" by Paul Kennedy about this, link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_and_Fall_of_ ...
It was actually a bestseller for a while and to some extent was the catalyst for the neo-conservative movement in that it caused many conservative policy wonks to take up a more aggressive foreign policy stance to bring America back to the top.
FYI, it was knee jerk then just as this blog is now... America's economy bounced back from the great depression and the explosion of the Japanese (and European) economies. We survived Korea, Vietnam and the other asinine foreign adventures, all of which were far worse than Iraq. America still has lots of resources, entrepeneurs and potential. Who knows what will happen? - Rotzooi, on 12/30/2007, -6/+16Even if he was (and the people who act as his brain are), he wouldn't give a toss. It's me me me, money, power, securing money and power for his family and the families that aide him. He is building an empire for himself, not so much as for the U.S.
- legendxx, on 12/30/2007, -11/+20This is hilarious.. The United States has been in much tougher situations than we are now.. and we've gotten through it. Not that we shouldn't be concerned about the direction we're heading... Anyone majoring in History with any kind of concentration in Western World History will tell you this.
- BigW, on 12/30/2007, -5/+12When the next president bails from Iraq and we take on a much more isolationist policy, just wait and see. The next Bosnia will pop up somewhere and the world will be back at our door asking for help again. Everyone in the world wants America to butt out until something comes up that they don't want to deal with and then they all come running.
If we do take on an isolationist policy I hope we stay completely out of other countries' business (and stop giving them massive piles of money every year too). - l00s3r, on 12/30/2007, -1/+8The government lavishes the Aggro-Corps with billions in corporate welfare. Small farms just can't compete. Half of the farm subsidies go to the richest 10% of the farms.
- Veni_Vidi_Vici, on 12/30/2007, -2/+9I'm working toward the preservation of our democracy as well. With just a republic we would have a select few in the political elite with all the power who are not being subject to their own laws.
oh wait....
Power to the people, not to the elite. - amrizzle, on 12/30/2007, -4/+11Empires back then lasted a long time, now with all the technology we have and corruption, I would doubt any superpower can last that long.
- Beveridge89, on 12/31/2007, -0/+7BlueStarr, the world is always worse with several superpowers, or with the vacuum created without one, than one with global hedgemony. The USA is not perfect, nowhere near, but comparitively it is better than what has come before it, or what will come from its fall.
- inactive, on 12/30/2007, -4/+10Somehow i knew someone would put a ron paul in here. They even invaded my battlefield 2 game with spam (oh sorry, "promotion" as he called it) every 5 minutes and just moving around enough not to get booted.
- BigW, on 12/31/2007, -0/+6Yes.
- brycelb, on 12/30/2007, -11/+17"The choice is yours."
Thanks, I choose to bury your tired spam. - RDEB, on 12/30/2007, -2/+8The difference between the other empires and the American empire is the global interconnected economies. If America "falls", then so will most of the world to some extent. What would China do, if America stopped buying its goods, or India if America stopped outsourcing call centers etc. I don't see a complete failure of the American empire, but a balancing to the rest of the world. As our economy maintains or slows in growth, the developing nations will increase their growth rate. As the world economy balances, there will be rough patches. I think all of this is null since we will probably see greater political turmoil in China, and the affects of Global warming occurring sooner then the completion of economic re-balancing.
- InformedCrab, on 12/31/2007, -0/+5No way. Power to the people doesn't mean power to the people unless the people are informed, proactive, and responsible, among other things; otherwise, it's just power to those who can pander to the people, power to the demagogues.
- ScottMitchell, on 12/31/2007, -2/+7Have you ever been to Canada in February?
- PhilLesh69, on 12/31/2007, -1/+6Rome prospered as a true democracy when their military was comprised of land owners, farmers. They fought away enemies. They defended the democratic republic.
Rome failed when they departed from a republic and embarked on empire. The military was no longer land owners, and they embarked on conquering foreign lands. They became an empire, and lost the virtues of a republic.
Once Caesar crossed the rubicon river, that was the end of a representative government. And the end of Rome. Eventually they were only left with total collapse and eventually the middle ages, etc. - RobotBuddha, on 12/30/2007, -1/+6He also thinks one of the ways we can save ourselves is by locking up 'the gays'. As much as he may or may not be right on some angles, there's so much crazy in him that I wouldn't put much trust in anything he puts forward.
- blademanx, on 12/31/2007, -0/+5What the hell are you talking about?
- Duilen, on 12/30/2007, -5/+10Read Orson Scott Card. He writes about US parallels quite a bit in his Enders Game series.
- topbravo, on 12/30/2007, -12/+17Any way you slice it, America is still the best place to be sans having your own private island. Many people die just trying to come here.
God Bless the USA! - inactive, on 12/31/2007, -0/+5We are a Constitutional Republic and that is what we should be striving to preserve.
Someone far wittier than I once remarked that, in a democracy, two wolves and a sheep take a majority vote on what’s for supper, while in a constitutional republic, the wolves are forbidden on voting on what’s for supper and the sheep are well armed.
Neither the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution even contains the word “democracy.” In a democracy, the majority rules and individual rights are irrelevant. If the majority votes that half of your income be confiscated before you can even by groceries, oh well. If the majority votes that you must educate your children in a certain location because you live on a certain side of an arbitrary line, oh well. If the majority votes that you must be disarmed and defenseless against violent criminals, oh well. If the majority votes that your religion be designated an “outlaw religion” and that you and all other practitioners be committed to mental institutions, oh flipping well. - BossKey, on 12/31/2007, -0/+4Leaning on the Rome example is simply you extrapolating from an insufficiently small sample size.
Alexander Tyler did a bit more study. He wrote that “The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years."
The US has been around for...
uh oh... - Groovemaster, on 12/30/2007, -9/+13You assume the American empire has a hope in hell of lasting anywhere near as long as the Roman empire.
The Roman Empire lasted from 752 B.C to 1476 A.D., for a total of about 2228 years. America's been around for just over 200.
If the world turns against Fascist America as hard as they turned against Fascist Germany I give the USA 100 more years before they crawl back into their shell, tops. - sonnybobiche, on 12/30/2007, -4/+8As far as the Roman parallel goes, it was the increasing amount of power accorded to the proconsul that ushered in the height of the empire, not its downfall. The downfall was due to barbarians constantly invading and attacking a weakened military. (sounds familiar, no?)
- Trebis, on 12/31/2007, -0/+4"History, they say, doesn't repeat"
Actually....it does. I think you got the phrase backwards. - inactive, on 12/30/2007, -2/+6a proper candidate is 'tired spam' in the New America.
- masterm1nd, on 12/30/2007, -3/+7Every empire falls -- so does every non empire not fall? No you idiot.
Everything ends at some point, not just empires or quote unquote 'empires'. - vault, on 12/31/2007, -1/+5That's not true, in the 90's it was Japan and there absolutely was competition. As the second largest economy with all the "Made in Japan" bs people were scared they were going to replace us after watching 'Rising Sun' and suddenly becoming financial analysts (well the same chicken little types as now with China were, at least).
Guess what? Didn't happen: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Asian_Financial_ ... - robberry, on 12/31/2007, -1/+4You probably think you've made a valid argument, but you haven't. The article demonstrated several examples of empires in decline, and showed several similarities between the paths those empires took and the path America is taking now. If you wish to *actually* refute the article, you need to show that there are important dissimilarities between those declining empires and America. Or you might try pointing out several historical examples of empires which were similar to America now, and which were able to maintain their existence for several more decades or centuries. Neither of these options is as easy as accusing Ian Welsh of cherrypicking his examples-- and then offering no proof of your accusations-- but if you want to make your case, that's what you're going to have to do.
- inactive, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3Regardless of whether you think his comment in spam, he is still right. No other candidate is offering anything but the status quo. They are merely two sides of the same tarnished coin.
- PhilLesh69, on 12/31/2007, -1/+4Whether or not a person appears to be smart enough to understand this, there is an historical precedence in the progression between the Roman Republic and the Roman empire.
People seeking profit over the welfare of the society know this, they understand the historical methods of taking a republic into an empire.
If you don't understand the benefits of a republic and the harms and risks of an empire, you probably will not see how bad our situation really is.
I feel sorry for you folks. Do some research. Fast, before it is too late. - akamurph, on 12/31/2007, -1/+4I just don't understand comments like yours - are you saying this from experience? If so, why do you live in the USA? If what you say is true, why do SO MANY people migrate to the USA? It certainly contradicts what you are saying.
- BossKey, on 12/31/2007, -1/+4The greatest economic expansion in the history of the United States, and perhaps the world until then, was made when liberal ideas became embedded in American society. Coincidence? The 40-hour work week. The New Deal. The civil rights movement. Giving the vote and rights to women. Youth culture, rock music.
Therefore, you are full of crap.
Go to any of the countries where traditional conservatism remains the order of the day, and you find yourself in the poorest, most backwards countries on Earth. No women's rights. A self-defeating acceptance of established authority with no courage to challenge. Intense racism to the point of ethnic wars. An inability to improve beyond the status quo. No new industries. Poor economies. Poor availability of food and clean water. Resistance to Western values. A few very rich and a mass of poor.
If you want real, traditional conservatism, as it has been practiced for thousands of years, you are free to move to where it is still practiced. But America's greatness was its ability to get away from all that. - GonadHunter, on 12/31/2007, -4/+7Does that include not funding Israel's existence anymore?
- vicsvenge, on 12/30/2007, -3/+6history doesn't repeat itself but it does rhyme. at least they could try to get mark twain right. i stopped reading after that.
- annonimality, on 12/30/2007, -3/+6Punctuation is our friend. Use it.
- RobotBuddha, on 12/30/2007, -1/+4Why? If it collapses, hasn't it proven that it needs to be reformulated and begun again differently?
- phatvolvo, on 12/31/2007, -3/+6Well, the Empire doesn't consider a small one-man fighter to be any threat, or they'd have a tighter defense. An analysis of the plans provided by Princess Leia has demonstrated a weakness in the battle station. But the approach will not be easy.
- phrenzy, on 12/30/2007, -1/+4I think you could argue that the Roman empire is actually still very much alive - it just transcended the need for a centralized government in Rome itself once the Catholic church essentially became the ruling power. The entire western world is simply a continuation of a decentralized Rome.
- mattyd12466, on 12/31/2007, -2/+5"Any way you slice it, America is still the best place to be sans having your own private island. Many people die just trying to come here.
God Bless the USA!"
what a stupid and ill informed thing to say... 1st off, people trying to get into the US are often from really crappy places already...not Canada, not parts of Europe for examples. 2nd... People die trying to get into lots of other conties too you know, France, England, Canada, Australia all have similar problems...and in what way does that make america "great"? - EarlOfLade, on 12/31/2007, -4/+7Let's see...
1. He is American
2. Probably right winger
3. He has no knowledge about world history
4. He is totally brainwashed with "USA #1!" *****
5. He has never been outside his state or country
6. He will vote for Ron Paul
7. He thinks Ann Coulter has a lot of good points.
8. He believes that every muslim is a terrorist
9. He thinks G. W. Bush is one of the great American presidents.
10. He doesn't like wetbacks, chinks, towelheads or ***** or any other non-white non-christian person.
How much more do you really need? - inactive, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3If Terence McKenna is to be believed (not that I'm saying he is), then these empires will go through their cycles of ascension, supremacy, and decline at an increasing pace over time.
- TrevorBradley, on 12/31/2007, -0/+3I'm firmly in the "Love Ender's Game/Speaker for the Dead, disgusted by OSC's comments" camp.
The man writes eloquently on how it is unfair that one group be isolated and quarantined while others rise to greatness, the best argument against the Star Trek prime directive I've ever read (Speaker for the Dead), and yet comes across as a complete ***** in many of his comments. -
Show 51 - 100 of 179 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is