-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
America vs. Rome
- Thread starter CDRaider
- Start date
CDRaider said:
Yes,the fates will be the same. It is inevitable.
Society is hell bent on consumerism; everyone is made to believe (though media and advertising) that he/she is "not normal" without the lastest electronic games, gadgetry, holidays, drinks, parties etc............
Once people attain that level (and I know that a lot won't - because of their circumstances and finances), they want more ........something 'new' maybe drugs, maybe sexual 'threesomes'; basically, the more you are satisfied, the more you leave a 'hole' open for new excitements that you have developped a hunger for.
Paralells ? In Rome, watching the slaves fight in the colesseum. In America (and in the U.K) Reality T.V.....becoming more and more intrusive all the time, to feed the 'need' for something better. We are satisfied now with what is 'glorified voyeurism' with reality T.V. When coupes have been filmed having sex, what will the next 'need for more stimulation' be ?
RevOxley_501
Well-Known Member
michel said:
excellent post---all my opinions are right there^^^^^^^^^^
CDRaider said:
The Roman Empire lasted a lot longer than we will. I believe America is disintegrating from within just like they did though. There is too little unity and too much insanity. It appears as though people here have demonized, polarized and marginalized each other too much to ever hope for the cohesion necessary to survive a serious threat from the outside.
Heck, many don't even see the need for a secure border, including our own President. That fact right there is enough to make me cynical about our future.
CDRaider
Well-Known Member
Moon Woman said:
i very readily agree with the fact it will happen sooner but not because America is any less moral or what have you then Rome, i just think that the pace of life is quicker. communication is quickers, globalization happens quicker so i think that the parrell still holds true but true porportionality instead of exactally.
Djamila
Bosnjakinja
CDRaider said:
It was a different era. When the Romans entered a country, conquered their armies, and these sorts of things - the medieval people viewed this as a sign that God favored them, and converted, and largely accepted Roman culture and way of life. It was the same with the Islamic expansion. These days, no one still thinks that way. People are resistent to certain American influences, people still think their ways are better and are only willing to compromise on certain things.
Rome also controlled so much more. They say all roads lead to Rome for a reason, it's the Eternal City. No one says or thinks such things about Washington DC.
The Americans have new, modern ways of influence - much more through culture, movies, music, etc... than through military or occupation like the Romans practically exclusively used. The Romans also seemed more aware of the world, and more apt to appreciate things in regions outside their own.
The Romans named the Una river in Bosnia, the "only one", because it was so beautiful. At the settlements of Imunisipia and Kotorac (modern-day Sarajevo) the Romans were not allowed to use their bugles so as not to disturb the beauty of the place. When the Romans conquered Solu (modern-day Tuzla), they surrounded the city, and refused to fire a single weapon at it because they considered it so pretty. They just cut it off from supplies until the people starved to death and surrendered. LOL
It's just different, really. largely because of the era.
ALifetimeToWaitFor....
Myriad
We are so far isolated geographically that we will not fall like the romans. The Romans never had the exclusivity in military technology that we do. Everyone only had convention weapons. They were the best trained army and thats why they conquered. Their downfall wasn't because the forces around them were to strong it was because they were over extended and could not retreat in a effective manner. They couldn't move forces in the way we can. If we want out we can be out in 3 weeks. They also depended largely on conscripts from the areas that they conquered which seems like a oxymoron. Because when the Iranian empire invaded many of the Roman troops defected and joined their army. Secondly the barbarians attacked within 2 years of the Iranian invasion seizing Rome. Also the Romans depended largely on others countries for natural supplies where as the US is waiting for the world to ruin out of oil before we tap our oils fields in Alaska that are in fact larger than all combined oil fields in the middle east. We also supply much of the world with their natural resources such as steel and hold a huge monopoly and sheer fire power. Unless canada and mexico try to invade us which is comical. Plus the U.S. as at least one gun per every person on the mainland that even if anyone invaded we have alot of ****** off people forming militas. We won't fall like so many think with complete destruction. We will fall shortly and rebuild with little real effort. Because thats what we do we live off of war. Every war we start has boosted the economy and has got us out of recessions and depressions. If we get invaded are economy is going to soar and they won't stand a chance. Even a huge co alition of forces because of our geographical location. Granted many will die, but it will not lead to our dimise.
Faint
Well-Known Member
Unless you're on the west coast...then all roads lead to L.A.CDRaider said:
As for the OP/topic, no...I do not see Ameica's fate being the same. In fact, the more likely scenario is that all countries will be under our control. The American empire...if you want to call it that...is dealing with a pathetic "emperor" right now, but even Bush's stupidnomics won't be enough to halt our course. There are definite parallels between ancient Rome and the USA, but overall the pax americana is maintained in a very different way than the "rule by the sword" method of the romans. That empire was inherently unstable. Ours is based on money/resources and a different kind of power. There is a definite fear of our military strength as well, and if not, there should be. The Iraq fiasco does not change the fact that we have the single most advanced/elite/equipped military in the world. But regardless of our guns and bombs, we use ecomomic leverage to tilt things to our advantage and control those we want to control. Just because the majority of the populace are idiots, does not mean the powers that be are. For all we know, the world may already be entirely american/corporate.
This is not to say we do not need to take threats to our way of life seriously. But it is highly unlikely we will fall.
Definitely.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
CDRaider said:
Not much in my opinion. Perhaps only in that during the early Empire, Rome was a democracy with a Senate - it was a democracy limited by law. That's pretty much where the analogy ends.
If someone were able to use the Armed Forces to turn the democracy into a dictatorship, yes.
Rome began as a Republic of farmers and tradesmen, but became an oligarchy of plutocrats as the powerful and ruthless found ways to concentrate wealth in their own hands. The unemployed masses became so numerous Rome had to institute a welfare system of food distribution and free/low cost entertainment to prevent insurrection.
The original Roman Republic developed into an tyrannical Empire. Rome feared and envied its neighbors and used its increasing political and economic leverage to gradually annex them.
Rome found it advantageous to govern not by direct dictatorship, but through local political puppets, thus preserving an illusion of autonomy in effectively conquered territories.
Rome was not above direct military intervention or outright invasion. The public was easily lead along with warnings of dire threats or stories of political slights or insults.
Rome plowed a huge percentage of its GNP into military adventurism and glorification of all things military. They were not as militarily competent as their reputation suggests. They conquered through persistence. They were willing to bankrupt themselves rather than accept defeat.
The US is following an astonishingly parallel course. Same motivations, same strategy, same actions, same results. We are the New Rome -- at the point of developing from a Republic into an Empire.
The original Roman Republic developed into an tyrannical Empire. Rome feared and envied its neighbors and used its increasing political and economic leverage to gradually annex them.
Rome found it advantageous to govern not by direct dictatorship, but through local political puppets, thus preserving an illusion of autonomy in effectively conquered territories.
Rome was not above direct military intervention or outright invasion. The public was easily lead along with warnings of dire threats or stories of political slights or insults.
Rome plowed a huge percentage of its GNP into military adventurism and glorification of all things military. They were not as militarily competent as their reputation suggests. They conquered through persistence. They were willing to bankrupt themselves rather than accept defeat.
The US is following an astonishingly parallel course. Same motivations, same strategy, same actions, same results. We are the New Rome -- at the point of developing from a Republic into an Empire.
Comet
Harvey Wallbanger
Djamila said:
Istanbul was Constantinople now its Istanbul not Constantinople; so if you have a date in Constantinople she'll be waiting in Istanbul! (Couldn't help the They Might Be Giants song)
America will fall, just like every other civilization in the past. Things come and go and new things will take their place, that is the way of things...
I do agree with MoonWoman on one part though: we are disintigrating from within just as much as we are from the outside in.