Some misc thoughts...

[Bwana]

I recently received an email bearing this quote:

"The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance." ~Cicero - 55 BC

This quote strikes me as being incredibly simplistic and broad but nonetheless sound in principle. The perusal of this quote has caused me to reflect upon the somewhat cyclical historical patterns of all prominent civilizations, and consider the probable implications relating to the current circumstances in the US of A, and indeed the world today.

We today have the dubious privileged of seeing the gradual degradation of what has been the most successful model of democracy and relative personal freedom in the history of mankind. It is unfortunate (but not surprising) to see the people and leaders of this nation following so willingly and with uncanny accuracy the well worn ruts of the once great and now extinct nations and civilizations of history.

The history of these nations, their governments, polices and societies, deserve a moment of our attention. King Solomon once said " There is no new thing under the sun. Is there any thing whereof it may be said, 'see, this is new?'" It has long been held as a wise principle that one learn by observing the mistakes of others rather than experiencing the results of making those same mistakes oneself. Unfortunately, this principle has been widely disregarded in our day.

A quick examination of some of the great nations in history; Egypt, Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome and to a lesser extent 18th and 19th century France, reveals startling similarities in the principles that caused these nations to rise and flourish, only to then almost invariably, self destruct. We see in a broad sense the rise of these nations through unification and purpose that over time and great effort leads to a protracted time of fabulous prosperity. Over time in the societies of these nations can be traced an ever increasing decline in morality and principle as the people of the nation lose all vision of the greater good and focus almost entirely on personal gain and gratification. The effect of this decline is strongly influenced by the leadership of the nation. When the leaders of the nation have attached themselves wholeheartedly to this decline and do all in their power to extend its influence it can be seen that the demise of the nation was soon to follow.

What do these observations of history mean to us today? It can be readily seen that the quote from Cicero in the beginning, although simplistic, applies very appropriately to the circumstances in this country today.

We as a nation are facing what is proving to be an economic crisis of continually growing and unknown proportion. Beginning with unsound government policy and trickling down through the reaches of large corporations and public lending institutions these instance of ignoring sound principle have cost the country dearly and will continue to do so for years to come.

I have scotch in hand and am waiting to see what happens...

[Jacko3]

I keep hearing this talk about the decline of our nation, and yet there is nothing out there to replace it, if the decline were real and true.

Has america made some mistakes? Yes! Do nations decline after many years of dominance? Sure! Have we plowed the path of incongruity with our principles and beleifs? yes! Do all these signs suggest a declining nation? Hardly!

However, I warn that before judgement is declared on this nation, we must look to other nations and their history, while focusing on the basis for the existence of the United States. It is not uncommon for a people of any nation to act and perceive their nation in fear, as we do in some of our perceptions of its decline, or in complete faith, as we equally do in the beleif of its greater tomorrow.

What sets america apart form Rome and other historical failed nation states, is that america is a nation created from a conscious, purposeful, deliberate, and inclusive ideal, that triumphs any individual frailties and major vice, while surviving through careful interpretations, assertions, flexibilities, and an eye for a greater purpose and meaning for a greater tomorrow. This complex tug of war that strains and stretches the political, social , and economic framework, is essential in the continued sucess and existence of any nation prone to introspection as america does, ever so often. In essence, america finds ways to rejuvenate itself from its vast oasis of past and current experiences and through a beleif of a more prosperous tomorrow.

Rome, where Cicero wrote and mused, had none of what america is today, at least not in ways that would have placed Rome firmly in the goodwill of those they oppressed. Subjugation of its people, classism of the most extreme kind (Plebians and Patricians), expansionism not for peace but for plundering, amoral cultural prerogatives, etc, contributed in small parts to the decline of Rome. All that Rome sufffered from, America has avoided with great caution and for good reason, at least up till this time.

Thus, it is possible that with time, as future americans find themselves farther away from the true meaning of being america, the thread that holds together, the important components of this nation, may become frail and less able to hold together, the center of our being. Whther that will happen or not, is matter of conjecture and speculation.

[Armelius]

Plenty of Chinese want to buy up our cheap land because they need living space. I would sell and go over there but it's too expensive. Means the commies won in my book.

[Jacko3]

Plenty of Chinese want to buy up our cheap land because they need living space. I would sell and go over there but it's too expensive. Means the commies won in my book.

LOL!

[Armelius]

Good thing we enticed Japan to bomb us so that more Chinese would live.

[breadbox]

What goes up must come down.

People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.

The key there is "people must learn..." which we all know is something many people refuse to do unless it is at a great cost.

[Cold_Zero]

It has long been held as a wise principle that one learn by observing the mistakes of others rather than experiencing the results of making those same mistakes oneself. Unfortunately, this principle has been widely disregarded in our day.

Bwana, Thanks for this thread. I really enjoyed your musing (not used in a pejorative way) about this topic. The part I have quoted really has struck a chord with me recently. I would even go as far to quote the old adage 'Those who do not learn from their past are doom to repeat it.' And I believe that is exactly what we are doing with our bold and arrogant push for Western European Socialism from the last century. We can all see that in many different ways, it just did not work as well as it is presented in the beginning. Personally, I think that people that are so in love with Socialist models for Government should just pull up the stakes and move to a country where they can find their favorite style. I don't think you should take a country's (United States of America) government and change it into something that it is not.

We have this same problem in our church body these days. People come in and want to hijack our traditional Lutheran churches and turn them into a Nondenominational/Evangelical mega church with contemporary worship. Then there is a mass exodus of parishioners that go looking for another traditional Lutheran church. It isn't as if you can't find nondemon/Evangelical mega churches with contemporary worship services in around time. To be honest, there is nothing wrong with them and our city is flooded with them. But don't hijack our church (country) and turn it into something that it is not, just to stroke your own ego or agenda. Go seek out that church (country) you are looking for and join theirs congregation (government).

I keep hearing this talk about the decline of our nation, and yet there is nothing out there to replace it, if the decline were real and true.

So when Rome fell in the 5 th century, what great Kingdom or Empire existed in Western Europe to take its place? The answer is nothing, because Europe was cast into the Dark Ages due to the power vacuum that fall of Rome and the shift of the Empire East left. So to answer your question, nothing has to be in place in order for America to fall (as a super power) and have something take its place. Personally, I have been thinking a lot about the prospect that either the fall of the United States and Europe in dominance or the fall of Capitalism or some great disaster or plague would cause to force our world (or region) into another Dark Ages. Obviously, this is all speculation, but it does make one think.

Quote »Has america made some mistakes? Yes! Do nations decline after many years of dominance? Sure! Have we plowed the path of incongruity with our principles and beleifs? yes! Do all these signs suggest a declining nation? Hardly![/quote]You seem to support what Bwana is saying to some extend with this Rome vs. USA analogy. I mean sure, after Rome transitioned from a Republic to the Empire and later de-evolved into Tyrannical Dictatorships, Rome did see expansion of its Empire (sphere of influence) and even saw prosperous times. It wasn't as if the fall of Rome was a straight shot down on a linear scale from 49BC to 410 AD. To be honest, looking at the Subprime Mortgage Scandal, its probably more akin to a bubble where things appear to be growing, increasing and when it bursts there is no foundation (the old Republic) to support it.

Quote »What sets america apart form Rome and other historical failed nation states, is that america is a nation created from a conscious, purposeful, deliberate, and inclusive ideal, that triumphs any individual frailties and major vice, while surviving through careful interpretations, assertions, flexibilities, and an eye for a greater purpose and meaning for a greater tomorrow. This complex tug of war that strains and stretches the political, social , and economic framework, is essential in the continued sucess and existence of any nation prone to introspection as america does, ever so often. In essence, america finds ways to rejuvenate itself from its vast oasis of past and current experiences and through a beleif of a more prosperous tomorrow.

Rome, where Cicero wrote and mused, had none of what america is today, at least not in ways that would have placed Rome firmly in the goodwill of those they oppressed. Subjugation of its people, classism of the most extreme kind (Plebians and Patricians), expansionism not for peace but for plundering, amoral cultural prerogatives, etc, contributed in small parts to the decline of Rome. All that Rome sufffered from, America has avoided with great caution and for good reason, at least up till this time. [/quote]Rome had a Republic similar to the United States of America. They also moved away from an agrarian society and depended on foreign food suppliers (Alexandria) to supply their food, just like the United States. We both have/had a break down in societal institutions. They maintain an enormous empire militarily and economically, just like the United States does to maintain its Superpower status. No, your right, Rome had none of the trappings that the United States has today.

[Jacko3]

Bwana, Thanks for this thread. I really enjoyed your musing (not used in a pejorative way) about this topic. The part I have quoted really has struck a chord with me recently. I would even go as far to quote the old adage 'Those who do not learn from their past are doom to repeat it.' And I believe that is exactly what we are doing with our bold and arrogant push for Western European Socialism from the last century. We can all see that in many different ways, it just did not work as well as it is presented in the beginning. Personally, I think that people that are so in love with Socialist models for Government should just pull up the stakes and move to a country where they can find their favorite style. I don't think you should take a country's (United States of America) government and change it into something that it is not.

We have this same problem in our church body these days. People come in and want to hijack our traditional Lutheran churches and turn them into a Nondenominational/Evangelical mega church with contemporary worship. Then there is a mass exodus of parishioners that go looking for another traditional Lutheran church. It isn't as if you can't find nondemon/Evangelical mega churches with contemporary worship services in around time. To be honest, there is nothing wrong with them and our city is flooded with them. But don't hijack our church (country) and turn it into something that it is not, just to stroke your own ego or agenda. Go seek out that church (country) you are looking for and join theirs congregation (government).

So when Rome fell in the 5 th century, what great Kingdom or Empire existed in Western Europe to take its place? The answer is nothing, because Europe was cast into the Dark Ages due to the power vacuum that fall of Rome and the shift of the Empire East left. So to answer your question, nothing has to be in place in order for America to fall (as a super power) and have something take its place. Personally, I have been thinking a lot about the prospect that either the fall of the United States and Europe in dominance or the fall of Capitalism or some great disaster or plague would cause to force our world (or region) into another Dark Ages. Obviously, this is all speculation, but it does make one think.

You seem to support what Bwana is saying to some extend with this Rome vs. USA analogy. I mean sure, after Rome transitioned from a Republic to the Empire and later de-evolved into Tyrannical Dictatorships, Rome did see expansion of its Empire (sphere of influence) and even saw prosperous times. It wasn't as if the fall of Rome was a straight shot down on a linear scale from 49BC to 410 AD. To be honest, looking at the Subprime Mortgage Scandal, its probably more akin to a bubble where things appear to be growing, increasing and when it bursts there is no foundation (the old Republic) to support it.

Rome had a Republic similar to the United States of America. They also moved away from an agrarian society and depended on foreign food suppliers (Alexandria) to supply their food, just like the United States. We both have/had a break down in societal institutions. They maintain an enormous empire militarily and economically, just like the United States does to maintain its Superpower status. No, your right, Rome had none of the trappings that the United States has today.

In order to understand the changes taking place in the US, we need to understand the differences between political systems and economic systems. Generally speaking, the chart below is what was basically obtainable, until the current re-ordering of events in the US. There is always a tendency to confuse both, while they are both distinct.

Political System corresponds to Economic System

Democracy corresponds to Capitalism

Communism/fascism corresponds to Socialism

The United States was basically a pure system where its political beleifs (democracy) aligned with capitalism. In the same vein, countries like Russia were also pure systems where their political beleifs aligned with their socialist economic system.

Europe, on the other hand, have always had a hybrid system--- a democractic government system and a socialist economic ideal.

More recently, beginning with China which used to be a pure communist system, there has been adjustments made to fit communism as a political system to a capitalist economic system.

The US is in essence shifting economic systems, alone, to fit the european style only to the extent that it helps address inequities and misalignment of resources in the domestic economic system. It is the mis-alignment of resources, that led to the excessive greeed and avarice, we now see on wallstreet.

And yes, socialism does a better job than capitalism in "re-aligning" resources. However, capitalism is better at "re-allocating" resources to their best ends. re-alligning resources is not the same as re-allocating resources. Re-alignment is more of moving things around in order to be more effective, while re-allocation is more of a function of efficiency in order to get the best bang for the buck.

There is no evidence to suggest that the european style system is any worse off than the US pure system, which apparently has become ineffective, and not actually failed, as a result of significant lack of regulation and monitoring. Yes, every political system requires regulations and every economic system requires discipline. The US system lacked both in the last three decades. And, the US has routinely shifted economic systems from a socialist economic ideal to a capitalist ideal, and back again, since FDR. So, I am unsure why the current crisis warrants designation as a failure when much of the symptoms of this crisis are more similar to the crisis that Ronald Regan inherited, which was not a failure, than what FDR inherited, which was the closest the US ever came to an outright ecnomic failure. Regan inherited an unemployment rate of 7.8% and peaked at about 10%, almost the same as Obama who inherited an unemployment rate of almost 7.3%, while the state of California for example, is already experiencing unemployment rates of as high as 10%.

While no one took the place of Rome, the US is different on several accounts, and unlike Rome. The world is not ready to let the US loose, simply because its political system (democracy) is perhaps, the most stable globally. Investments are also a function of the relative stability of a nations political system. Rome had little political stability or a continuum of political processes that defied the savagery of a dictatorship, emperor, or fascist. Thus, the Roman system, while a republic, was prone to political instability and uncertainty, that is most unusual or unheard of, in the United States. So, investors still dump thier cash in the US, backed by the full fatih of the federal govt. A currencies value is partly a reflection of the faith investors have in the nations political system, among other variables that affect its value.

Rome did not have this luxury, and so when it fell, it fell hard. Secondly, the US dollar, inspite of its competition, the euro, remains the world's legal tender. That should say volumes for the preception investors have about the dollar and the perception they have about the strength of the US political system . Rome did not have this luxury either. And when Rome wanted their currency to be the global legal tender, it was done by force, threat, and war. The US does not need to use such mechanism to make the dollar strong or be accepted.

And yes, i did try to align my comments with those of Bwana, only to some extent. However, other obvious issues had to be tabled as well.

So, the direct comparison between Rome and the US, while appropropriate, isn't exactly same, when one decides to take into account the organization and processes of their political and economic systems.

But as usual, Cold_Zero, I love the way you present your logic and thoughts--well said. Excellently done.

Modified by Jacko3 at 11:03 AM 3/2/2009
Modified by Jacko3 at 11:58 AM 3/2/2009

[Cold_Zero]

There seems to be two issues that you are trying to refute, Jacko.1. That the US is not in a decline. While obviously there has not been a fall of this great nation, we can speculate all we want if the United States of America is in its golden age Pax Americana or in decline. Obviously history and historians will always be the judge of our times that is the nature of such subject matter. 2. That all analogies in this matter between the Decline of Rome and the US must be a perfect match in order to apply. Obviously the forces during the Roman Era are different than that of our own Era. It does not necessarily mean that we can not apply and learn from the decline of the Roman civilization. There need not be a perfect match in order for certain underlying themes in our two civilizations to exist. I don't think that is what Bwana was trying to argue. He was speaking in generalities and I guess I tend to agree with him.

What I think is more damning than all of this is the fact that all fiat currencies have failed in their lifetimes and we should not expect for ours to be impervious to failure. I think that instead of a barbarian horde coming from Germania, we are more susceptible to an economic fall here in the USA.bud

[Jacko3]

There seems to be two issues that you are trying to refute, Jacko.1. That the US is not in a decline. While obviously there has not been a fall of this great nation, we can speculate all we want if the United States of America is in its golden age Pax Americana or in decline. Obviously history and historians will always be the judge of our times that is the nature of such subject matter. 2. That all analogies in this matter between the Decline of Rome and the US must be a perfect match in order to apply. Obviously the forces during the Roman Era are different than that of our own Era. It does not necessarily mean that we can not apply and learn from the decline of the Roman civilization. There need not be a perfect match in order for certain underlying themes in our two civilizations to exist. I don't think that is what Bwana was trying to argue. He was speaking in generalities and I guess I tend to agree with him.

What I think is more damning than all of this is the fact that all fiat currencies have failed in their lifetimes and we should not expect for ours to be impervious to failure. I think that instead of a barbarian horde coming from Germania, we are more susceptible to an economic fall here in the USA.bud

Very precise assessment. I agree 100% with number 1, but agree partly with number 2, to the extent that while we make those relevant comparisons in terms of both political and economic inputs to both syetms, that we don't reach the same comparative conclusion in outcomes. Its like saying that using 87 octane in a car designed with 93 octane in mind, will always lead to detonation all the time. Some V-6 under these circumstance, will detonate, and some V-6 will retard their timing and reduce horsepower, and nothing more will ever happen to such engines.

[Cold_Zero]

Very precise assessment. I agree 100% with number 1, but agree partly with number 2, to the extent that while we make those relevant comparisons in terms of both political and economic inputs to both syetms, that we don't reach the same comparative conclusion in outcomes. Its like saying that using 87 octane in a car designed with 93 octane in mind, will always lead to detonation all the time. Some V-6 under these circumstance, will detonate, and some V-6 will retard their timing and reduce horsepower, and nothing more will ever happen to such engines.

Re: #2,

Although Political and Economic analysis is very important when studying classic cultures, there are not the only areas of study that must be considered. I guess being a well rounded classicistl; one must consider all the other factors as well.

I am sorry, I didnt follow your analogy with the 87 octane.

[Armelius]

What goes up must come down.

The key there is "people must learn..." which we all know is something many people refuse to do unless it is at a great cost.

That is not my quote. I suggest you edit it. I would never say anything to resemble that.