• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The fall of Rome equals US today?

The fall of Rome equals US today?

  • Yes, absolutely

    Votes: 9 22.0%
  • Some similarities, but not really

    Votes: 18 43.9%
  • No, not at all

    Votes: 13 31.7%
  • Other (please elaborate)

    Votes: 1 2.4%

  • Total voters
    41
True. I meant that, what's happening is other regions of the world are beginning to pull themselves up by the boot straps. Take China, for example. In effect, US hegemony would decrease as other nations advanced and become ever more self-sufficient. I don't subscribe to the idea that this in itself equates with decline.

I'm talking more about this.


The Romans were "even bigger" till the very end. The Eastern Roman Empire became even bigger until the jihads started taking a toll on them in the XIth century.
 
Inequality doesn't necessarily precipitate collapse.
Are you saying that the continuous decline of the middle class buying power is not a long term threat to the economic helath of America?
 
Dude, it's spurious to attempt any ahistorical comparison, simply because there are the oppressed. You could make just as compelling a case for comparison with Australia, Tibet or Outer Mongolia.

Just one of the reasons and similarities but obama living like royalty while more and more citizens beg for his scraps is a big one.
 
Yes I do... I maybe should have used "ruling class" instead though, which is closer to what I am trying to point out.
The "middle class" of America is not the "ruling class" or the "elite".
 
I put in bold the similarities in your post America has to a Failing Roman empire

Ok. You can find similarities but it's not the same.
The US is not a target of any nation for war because the USA has nukes. Nobody will kill themselves by attacking the USA.

Not letting people starve because they're in a rough patch in their lives is a sign of civilization, not a sign of decay. Failing to help those people get jobs is a sign of incompetence. Get the schools in order and then things will be fine.
 
The fall of Rome equals US today?

You hear this a lot. People pointing out the poarallels between the US today and the fall of the Roman empire. Implying, of course, that we are on the downslope of our phase as a country.

Do you believe this is true? If so, why? If not, why not?

As a history major, most comparisons of today to ancient Rome are completely overblown. Are we under attack by invading barbarian hordes? no. Are we at the point where we have to split into two or three separate political entities? No. Are we at the point where we can't defend and maintain our political borders? No. As far as political corruption goes, the US rates relatively low on the corruption scale vs. other countries according to surveys by orgs like Transparency International. I'd think of more ludicrous reasons that amateur airmchair historians are wrong in comparing the fall of Rome to the us today but I simply don't have the time or patience to list them all.

For the record i voted "some similarities but not really."
 
Ok. You can find similarities but it's not the same.
The US is not a target of any nation for war because the USA has nukes. Nobody will kill themselves by attacking the USA.

Not letting people starve because they're in a rough patch in their lives is a sign of civilization, not a sign of decay. Failing to help those people get jobs is a sign of incompetence. Get the schools in order and then things will be fine.


Of course America is not a carbon copy of Rome but the similarities are numerous. At one time no other nation would "kill themselves" by going up against Rome too. As they became weaker and other nations became stronger this changed which dove tails with America right now. Obama wants to get rid of nukes and cut our military.

The "rough patch" you speak of with food stamps is a misrepresentation. Food stamps is becoming a way of life here for many people just as food distribution was in Rome as it collapsed.
 
As a history major, most comparisons of today to ancient Rome are completely overblown. Are we under attack by invading barbarian hordes? no. Are we at the point where we have to split into two or three separate political entities? No. Are we at the point where we can't defend and maintain our political borders? No. As far as political corruption goes, the US rates relatively low on the corruption scale vs. other countries according to surveys by orgs like Transparency International. I'd think of more ludicrous reasons that amateur airmchair historians are wrong in comparing the fall of Rome to the us today but I simply don't have the time or patience to list them all.

For the record i voted "some similarities but not really."


I can't believe you actually asked that question. Our border with Mexico is a joke.
 
Are you saying that the continuous decline of the middle class buying power is not a long term threat to the economic helath of America?
I'm saying that the presence of those we label as being under-privileged is no indicator of impending doom. As to the middle class, we have no irrefutable proof that their present woes are in any way irreversible. The nature of a cyclical economic format is to predispose its component parts to periods of boom and bust.
 
You mean 'opulence'. This is possibly the most bizarrely inaccurate interpretation of Roman decline I've ever encountered in my entire life. I'd give a lot to see you stand up and make this claim at an esteemed convention of historians.

HA! He should try and do it with a bunch of Ancient History grad students, professors would be too polite. Immaturity (lack of tact) combined with knowledge does cause one to speak out in a forthright manner when one encounters ignorance.
 
Of course America is not a carbon copy of Rome but the similarities are numerous. At one time no other nation would "kill themselves" by going up against Rome too. As they became weaker and other nations became stronger this changed which dove tails with America right now. Obama wants to get rid of nukes and cut our military.

The "rough patch" you speak of with food stamps is a misrepresentation. Food stamps is becoming a way of life here for many people just as food distribution was in Rome as it collapsed.

...

All western countries have similarities to Rome. For crying out loud, the republic is roman creation. the 3 branches of govt is a roman creation. We have eagles, all western countries have tons of eagles everywhere, because romans had eagles everywhere!

You don't need the nuclear capability to ruin the world three times over. Once is enough. Nobody wants to die so nobody will attack the USA. No country will attack the USA, I guarantee it. Tell you what. Cut down the military to 10% and if some country attacks you, I'll give you anything you want. Just name it. I can make it happen.

If it is true, and food stamps are becomign the norm, then it's high time you revision your educational system, not fantasize about the Romans. The Romans had top notch education system till the very end (well, what was back then top notch education). If you think the USA is falling, it's nto falling because of the same reasons as the romans did. It's falling because your govt is screwing up and making petty political games instead of governing!

FYI: Mexico won't invade you. Even their illegals stopped coming in such numbers.
 
...

All western countries have similarities to Rome. For crying out loud, the republic is roman creation. the 3 branches of govt is a roman creation. We have eagles, all western countries have tons of eagles everywhere, because romans had eagles everywhere!

You don't need the nuclear capability to ruin the world three times over. Once is enough. Nobody wants to die so nobody will attack the USA. No country will attack the USA, I guarantee it. Tell you what. Cut down the military to 10% and if some country attacks you, I'll give you anything you want. Just name it. I can make it happen.

If it is true, and food stamps are becomign the norm, then it's high time you revision your educational system, not fantasize about the Romans. The Romans had top notch education system till the very end (well, what was back then top notch education). If you think the USA is falling, it's nto falling because of the same reasons as the romans did. It's falling because your govt is screwing up and making petty political games instead of governing!

FYI: Mexico won't invade you. Even their illegals stopped coming in such numbers.

Did you miss the part where obama wants to get rid of our nukes and is gutting our military?

FYI Mexico has invaded America. Mexican immigrants legal and otherwise outnumber Caucasian voters in New Mexico and soon will in Calif. We have no control of our southern border.
 
Did you miss the part where obama wants to get rid of our nukes and is gutting our military?

FYI Mexico has invaded America. Mexican immigrants legal and otherwise outnumber Caucasian voters in New Mexico and soon will in Calif. We have no control of our southern border.

Obama won't get rid of ALL your nukes. For crying out loud, even before the cold war ended, the USA and the USSR came to an disarmament agreement to reduce the stockpile of nuclear weapons. It's a good thing. Fewer nukes is a good thing for all of us, for all the world and also for americans. The Russians are cutting down on their nukes supplies, so does the USA. If only other countries would also start doing that -> India, Pakistan, China, Israel ; the world would be a better place. (I didn't count Iran because they haven't got nukes yet, but if they do, then they should get rid of them too). As I said, you just need enough nukes to blow the world up once. No need to do an encore.

The reason the southern US border is a joke is due to border control, not the army. And even if it were an army thing, you don't need a military this large as the USA has it now to safeguard that border. Mexico, the country, i.e. the government issuing orders, won't EVER order to attack the USA. I guarantee it. I'll put my bollocks on the line that Mexico won't attack the USA in this lifetime or the next.
 
I'm saying that the presence of those we label as being under-privileged is no indicator of impending doom.
Who was talking about the "under-privilege"? I was discussing the middle class.
As to the middle class, we have no irrefutable proof that their present woes are in any way irreversible.
Nor am I. Our continued path yes, we will be in trouble. But, we can stop the bleeding and move on.
 
Who was talking about the "under-privilege"? I was discussing the middle class.
That's what I was discussing with Sawyer.

Nor am I. Our continued path yes, we will be in trouble. But, we can stop the bleeding and move on.
It'll take care of itself, I'm sure.
 
The "middle class" of America is not the "ruling class" or the "elite".

Technically it is. It is the "middle class" that vote most and hence have the biggest pull. That they dont exercise this vote as everyone wants is another matter. But it is the middle class that is the "power" in US (and most western countries) politics. And that is no difference between the Roman ruling class which was in numbers very small but had the same influence on ruling as the "middle class" has now. That individuals could in Rome and now in the US influence the outcome big time is another matter.
 
On the whole Rome was never a particularly immoral society.

The sex and food that we here about is one thing, but there are some Roman virtues too, but ultimately the society itself was a militaristic feast built on the back of slaves. Not that the Romans were unique in that respect, but still....when Augustus makes Rome a 'city of marble' its because the slaves are in those marble mines in Northern Italy, toiling away for the glory of the Emperor....personally I love Roman history because notwithstanding their shortcomings, there was still a lot of potential there.
 
Moral decay? Rome was far more immoral during its most successful period.
On the whole Rome was never a particularly immoral society.

Calling a society, whether that of Rome in its heyday, or any other society in our past, immoral, means one is applying contemporary standards to the actions of our ancestors. Morality is not a fixed object, it has changed throughout human history.
 
Calling a society, whether that of Rome in its heyday, or any other society in our past, immoral, means one is applying contemporary standards to the actions of our ancestors. Morality is not a fixed object, it has changed throughout human history.

I agree. By our standards they were a violent society - but no more so than any other society of their time - and the Caligulia image of decadent, orgy loving Romans, with the rare exception of some of the ruling class, is pretty much false.
 
The sex and food that we here about is one thing, but there are some Roman virtues too, but ultimately the society itself was a militaristic feast built on the back of slaves. Not that the Romans were unique in that respect, but still....when Augustus makes Rome a 'city of marble' its because the slaves are in those marble mines in Northern Italy, toiling away for the glory of the Emperor....personally I love Roman history because notwithstanding their shortcomings, there was still a lot of potential there.

Honestly there really wasn't much of the sex and food stuff, excepting some early emperors. Point taken on slavery but it was a common practice back then.
 
Usurpation was given as one of the main reasons for the decline of the Roman empire in my research.

Roman usurper - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whether Obama is actually a usurper will be left for history to decide. IMO, he lacked the proper credentials and experience to be POTUS therefor he's encroaching on the WH.

There's nothing to decide, he's not a usurper. His credentials and experiences are irrelevant, he beat the other guys in the election. America voted for him, they wanted him, not your guy. Get over it and stop spewing nonsensical accusations. What bull****.
 
The fall of Rome equals US today?

You hear this a lot. People pointing out the poarallels between the US today and the fall of the Roman empire. Implying, of course, that we are on the downslope of our phase as a country.

Do you believe this is true? If so, why? If not, why not?

Why are you comparing it to the fall of the Empire? Wouldn't the fall of the Republic be a bit more of a parallel?
 
The fall of Rome equals US today?

You hear this a lot. People pointing out the poarallels between the US today and the fall of the Roman empire. Implying, of course, that we are on the downslope of our phase as a country.

Do you believe this is true? If so, why? If not, why not?

Right idea, wrong comparison.

The comparative decline of the United States corresponds more to the fall of the Roman Republic than the Roman Empire.

Oligarchical forces have locked our representative democracy in a perpetual gridlock that prevents them from taking action on the dysfunctions that are slowly grinding away at our society. Political nihilism is at an all time high and our culture has become so despondent that nothing shocks or outrages us unless the other guy did it (which is the same as not at all). The perfect climate for a strong central figure to come and impose his will and sense of direction on the whole body of society.
 
Back
Top Bottom