The fall of the Republic?

that mercanary one sounds familer could it be bcause that is what we are doing today in the us

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well it has to happen eventually - all things end. In America's case, due to the stack o' cards-pyramid scheme setup of Capitalism, I'd have to agree with this guy.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Of course the United States will not always be top dog. In the history of the world empires and kingdoms have come and gone. A one time the Babylonians ruled the area of the Fertile Crescent. They were succeeded by the Persians and Medes who were in turn succeeded by first the Macedonians/Greeks and then the Parthians. Greece was succeeded by Rome which was in turn succeeded by Germanic tribes in the West and Turkish Muslims in the East. Spain, Austria, France, England, all have had their place in the sun only to be succeeded by another country. It is not a question of if the United States will stop being the world's superpower but a question of when this will happen.

A more interesting question is, which country will be the next superpower.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Human Empires collapse because the invisible and the unknowable will always have an incalculably greater effect upon our world than anything the human mind can discern.

In the end you have belief... or you have nothing.

 

This isn't the philosophy forum, so can you please show us the proof that it was the 'invisible' that caused the downfall of Rome as opposed to the solid and logical reasons explained above?

 

The nation will fall precisely because it is NO LONGER a republic.

It is an empire, and empires eventually collapse under their own weight.

Cut military spending in half, ban most types of advertising, and bring back prohibition...all will be well.

 

And this will do what exactly?

 

I see no such solid or logical reasons only people speculating about things which they know nothing about.

My caveat was 'anything the human mind can discern' which you clearly didn't understand as you now ask me for proof.

If you want to slander Christianity then be my guest but please do it in the correct forum.

 

This has nothing to do with me slandering Christianity, it has to do with the fact that you are saying something about a well document event in history, and I was merely pointing out that unless you have a reasoned argument with proof, then this is not the right forum to be presenting that information. There were no invisible factors, and it would even be different if we didn't know why the Roman's fell but we do, so there isn't even a need for an alternative explanation.

 

We do? And it's something that all qualified historians and archeaologists agree to? If so, what is it?

I've read numerous histories on Rome and the Roman Empire, and one thing I found out for sure is that no two historians agree. So ...when did that change?

Baron Max

 

Please see this link for a thorough historiography of the decline of the Roman Empire.

 

Stop the bleeding!

 

There are reasons Baron, and even though historians may agree which was the largest factor that ultimately led to the fall, those reasons are still valid. It's not something that just happened for no discernible reason, so I don't see how someone can attribute that to a higher power.

 

Well, that's easy ....the higher power made all of those reasons happen. See? Simple, huh?

Baron Max

 

*sigh*

 

It's the socialized approach that's bankrupting us!

All you Ron Paul fans out there, what do you think he would do to resolve this crisis? I haven't looked it up, but I'd imagine he'd shut the whole system down.

The federal government was never meant to provide healthcare and retirement services. It was to provide for national defense and interstate commerse. That's about it.

The socialized approach leads to bankruptcy and then to dictatorship:

A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.​

 

Whos that from...Tocqueville?

 

It's attributed to late Scottish Enlightenment intellectual, Alexander Tytler, but appears in no known work ever written by him (and so was probably attributed to him as a means of giving it some added academic weight). As such I've seen it attributed to others as well (including Arnold Toynbee the 19th century British historian who was somewhat pessimistic about democracy in the context of people he didn't consider "civilized", but who also does not seem to have written the quite down in that form.)

The quote seems to have started appearing in the mid-20th century and was popularized by conservative intellectuals, including Ronald Reagan. I'm not sure when the misattribution started.

Edit: That's not to say that there's anything wrong with the quote. Take what wisdom from it you see in it, whoever may have written it.

 

I agree wholeheartedly!

I'm curious ....what democracy ever collapsed to become a dictatorship? Has there ever been such a happening in history?

Baron Max

 

de Tocquevelle never wrote anything as clumsy and dumb as that.

He had his take on the problems of democratic government, and was perceptive about them - but in his day the idea was a new one, and no one knew what was going to happen in the US.

? Joke?

All forms of government have collapsed, throughout history - the loose fiscal policies of kings and dictators often primary movers in such events.

One of the benefits of democratic rule is supposedly the fact that the poor outnumber the rich always, and can impose taxes and obligations on them, so that the rich cannot avoid the immediate personal consequences of profligate governmental spending or promiscuous warfare. Thus the rich and powerful - historically the source of loose fiscal policy and careless war - are led to more responsible behaviors from self-interest.

That's the theory, anyway.