United States turning into Rome?

[OrangeEmpire]

Like any great empire that has come before or after it, the theories surrounding the fall of Rome are many. Since the empire crumbled, all other great empires or nations have been compared to Rome, with many coming up short. For many, understanding the fall of Rome is the key to the survival of our great nation, the United States. For much of this century, the U.S. has been compared to the Roman Empire in about every conceivable way. There are those who say that we are following the same path to destruction as the ancient Romans. So, why did Rome fall?

We know the great empire known as Rome no longer exists. Now let's look at what we don't know:

1. Did plagues reduce the population to the point it could not sustain itself?
2. Did civil wars lessen the strength of the empire and weaken the population?
3. Did the army lose its discipline and thus endanger the empire and cause it to be overrun?
4. Did the citizens of Rome become too satisfied and lazy, allowing the empire to crumble due to neglect?
5. Did the empire bureaucracy become too top heavy, eventually causing the empire to collapse upon itself?
6. Did God turn His favor away from Rome due to its sinful nature?
7. Did it fall as the result of barbarian invasions?
8. Did the empire spend too much of its resources on the poor, thus drawing away precious funds from the empire?
9. Was the Roman Empire just too big, making a collapse inevitable?

[volinbham]

I just don't see the comparison to Rome being valid. Our days of colonialism are over. Our actions around the world are to protect our interests but they are not conquests resulting in taxation and tributes.

The gap between rich and poor is often lamented but it is no where near the disparity of that time. We don't have slavery.

The choice of "leaders" (e.g. Senate) is democratized, not based on lineage or which house one belongs to. There is a balance of power among the branches of govt. whereas the leader (Caesar, Augustus, Nero) had much more control. The leader isn't gone for extended time periods conducting wars as was Caesar and Augustus. The military is not conscripted and doesn't operate independently.

In short, I would suggest that there are more accurate analogies than Rome for the U.S. over the last century.

(Sorry about not answering the question though . I'm working on that...)

[OrangeEmpire]

(Sorry about not answering the question though . I'm working on that...)

Heaven's no, I love reading any thing any one has to say!

I would say I tend to agree with you..........

[volinbham]

My readings on the fall of the Roman empire was that it continually evolved from the original Republic into a defacto Monarchy with the ascension and assasination of Julius Caesar.

As it tried to expand, more and more of it's citizens were conscripted into the military. This expanded the gap between rich and poor to extreme proportions. Further, Rome faced continual conflict from virtually every geographic direction. Too much of the military resources were dedicated to conquest and expansion rather than home defense. While the primary resources of the empire were out at the edges, strife between the ruling class grew due to the elected office essentially being restricted to the wealthy. The votes of the poor became viewed as something that could be bought. This monetarization of voting rights inhibited the traditional practice of extending voting rights to new territories (allies or conquests). However, taxes, tributes and conscription were still expected of these territories thus destabilizing them.

In short, the original concept of the Republic slowly faded away.

[LetMeStay]

http://www.volnation.com/forum/polit...-conquest.html

pat buchanan thinks so

[OWB]

Speaking of Rome, when does the new season start on HBO?

[emainvol]

Originally Posted by LetMeStay

http://www.volnation.com/forum/polit...-conquest.html

pat buchanan thinks so

and allvol

[OWB]

allvol123 IS Pat Buchanan.

[allvol123]

Originally Posted by OWB

allvol123 IS Pat Buchanan.

Actually I am not, but the truth is never relevant to you.

[allvol123]

Originally Posted by emainvol

and allvol

You mentioned me, did you need something?

[emainvol]

Originally Posted by allvol123

You mentioned me, did you need something?

nah just messing around.

[allvol123]

Originally Posted by OWB

allvol123 IS Pat Buchanan.

I am guessing you see Pat Buchanan as a pathetic figure, so implying that I am him is some sort of an insult by you towards me. Glad to see you are VN MOD, you should get a UN application.

[emainvol]

Originally Posted by allvol123

I am guessing you see Pat Buchanan as a pathetic figure, so implying that I am him is some sort of an insult by you towards me. Glad to see you are VN MOD, you should get a UN application.

take it easy man, you don't have to make everything so heated. i believe he was ribbing you like he does everyone else.

[emainvol]

on topic, i dont think the US is becoming Rome. That would require a lot more imperialism.

[CSpindizzy]

Originally Posted by emainvol

on topic, i dont think the US is becoming Rome. That would require a lot more imperialism.

How much more is there to go?