Rome at the end had constant warfare. America has extreme internal divisions which I think is the #1 threat.
Probably more like the Soviet Union.
It already has. Our society and culture is a giant cess pool.
Our values are skewed. And I’d need a good 10 minutes to outline everything, but I’m currently on the road working.How so?
Our values are skewed. And I’d need a good 10 minutes to outline everything, but I’m currently on the road working.
Well it's a natural product of the us vs them politics.I think the emergence of an appetite for a "strong man" type leader is a bad sign.
Or it's a sign that we're sliding into neo-fascism.Well it's a natural product of the us vs them politics.
We can WOB with any country on earth.Economically and militarily we’ll still be a force to recon with for decades to come.
It can be both and many other thingsOr it's a sign that we're sliding into neo-fascism.
Well autocorrect sucks!!We can WOB with any country on earth.
Say what you want about LBJ and Nixon at least they paid for wars. Unlike Dubya Bush, Obama, etc etc.All empires crumble. The American neoEmpire will be no different. We've over expanded ourselves militarily. We've devalued our currency chasing liberal pipe dreams. We've allowed ourselves to be divided into a myriad of 'us vs them' groups. Once America decided to be the world police and arbiters of "justice" this outcome became inevitable.
Like the subject line says...Rome.Is there any civilization in mankind’s history that has remained fully intact for more than a few hundred years? This merry-go-round can’t last forever.
#1 could also be be included in the problems if you include reliance on low-paid, unskilled labor which is showing itself currently with the labor shortage, the supply chain issues.Most historians have the Roman Empire lasting
about 500 years. (27 B.C. to 476 A.D.)
Some of the factors which led to the Fall of the
Roman Empire:
1. Overreliance on slave labor
2. Inflation and military overspending
3. Government corruption & instability
4. Invasions by barbarian tribes
America has been in existence for about 250
years and we now have problems with #2 & #3
as listed above.
Rome at the end had constant warfare. America has extreme internal divisions which I think is the #1 threat.
Most historians have the Roman Empire lasting
about 500 years. (27 B.C. to 476 A.D.)
Some of the factors which led to the Fall of the
Roman Empire:
1. Overreliance on slave labor
2. Inflation and military overspending
3. Government corruption & instability
4. Invasions by barbarian tribes
America has been in existence for about 250
years and we now have problems with #2 & #3
as listed above.
#4: Have you seen what's happening on the southern border?
Those "Barbarian" tribes were in fact organized civilizations who migrated from Northern Europe over a couple of centuries and eventually encroached on the Roman Empire. There is much more to it than that, but there is an entire history of the Goths, Visigoths, Jutes, Vandals, Luxembourgs, and a few others that were gradually moving East, West, and South.barbarian tribes?
You people need a Mackindergarten lesson. Seriously...research Sir Halford Mackinder, the father of geopolitics, who had influenced Kissinger, Spyckman, Brzezinski, Hitler's guys et al. Read The Grand Chessboard by Zbigniew Brzezinski.
Who rules Eastern Europe commands the Heartland
Who rules the Heartland commands the World Island
Who rules the World Island commands the world
Mackinder’s Heartland Theory
- Mackinder gave this theory in 1904.
- He offered a very original approach to the regional geopolitical structuralization of the Eurasian continent and the identification of the functional value of its spatial segments.
- His doctrine suggested that the geopolitical subject (actor) that dominated the Heartland would possess the necessary geopolitical and economic potential to ultimately control the World Island and the planet.
- Mackinder’s gave the theory of a world power shift which is widely known as the “Heartland Theory”.
- It reflects the intricate dynamics of geography, political power, and military strategy, interwoven with demography and economics. It is these dynamics and relationships, which Mackinder viewed as strengths, that characterize the Heartland and speak to its importance.
- According to Mackinder, the geographically connected landmass of Europe, Asia, and Africa, what Mackinder called the “World Island”. This is centrally positioned in the world. Mackinder called it the Heartland.
- To Mackinder, this geographic positioning means that as a united force, the World Island could both project power in a way that demonstrates her global supremacy and protect herself against external powers.
- This theory regards political history as a continuous struggle between land and sea powers with the ultimate victory going to the continental power.
- Mackinder predicted that whoever got the balance of power in its favour would rule-the World Island and who would rule the World Island would rule the World.
- Its simplicity and boldness have been achieved at the cost of accuracy regarding the historical and the geographical details.
Why? Explain why you think masculinity is toxicI think the emergence of an appetite for a "strong man" type leader is a bad sign.
Shouting your ignorance from the mountaintop with a bullhorn, I see. It was precisely this reason that Zbig wrote his book in '97. Asia possesses 75% of the world's resources and 75% of the world's population.Wow. 1904
Before the discover of "oil". Seems mostly irrelevant today then.
Why? Explain why you think masculinity is toxic
You stated that the hunger for having leadership form a strong man is troubling .How about you explain how you came up with this idiotic response?
That's simplistic. Clinton blessed China's accession to the WTO. EU nations are not in agreement with Biden on Ukraine. They see how they are being sacrificed (energy prices have already exploded because of our meddling). Food prices are mushrooming. All this for a war we will not fight.We were already in decline but power-hungry politicians and the Trump-effect will be very hard to overcome.
No I didn't. I said the appetite for a "strong man" type leader is troubling.You stated that the hunger for having leadership form a strong man is troubling .