the roman and american empires

Originally posted by stumason
but got the idea for a republic of the Greeks, who where far more advanced before them.

The romans had contacts with the advanced etruscans, infact the last Roman Rex was Tarquinus Superbus, an etruscan. They also had contacts with the greeks in southern italy. Not every greek state was a democracy, and the idea isn't specific to the greeks. I don't doubt that there was some influence, but the Roman Republic was a sensible enough idea that it might not've required foreign influence.

Then around 50BC (again, I hope my memory serves me), Gaius Julius proclaimed himself Caesar (Emperor/king), and became Julius Caesar.

Caesar's name was already Caesar. The Romans had an interesting sytsem wherein a person had three names, a clan name, family name, and personal name (of which there were onyl a dozen of so in the republic). So his family probably called him Gaius, while his lineage was the Julian line, and his family name or something was Caesar. His, and huis successors, rule, was so powerful that the name became a word for ruler. Even outside of Rome. The Russian Tsar, the German Kaiser, and possibly even the persian Shah, are all 'corruptions' of that title.

Also, technically, Caesar was made Dictator by the people, he didn't proclaim it. Dictator was a position wherein ultimate emergency power is given to one man for no more than a term of one year or so. They can 'dictate' laws and such. Caesar was made 'Dictator for Life'.

Bankruptcy was what ruined the Romans, not anything else, as that was all a consequence of the diminished financial power of the Empire and its ability to maintain the military.

Not entirely sure about that, there were certainly other factors that lead to the demise. They seemed to be unable to generate enough manpower, even thru conscription, to fight their wars, and at the end seemed to have adopted a policy of allowing the barbarians to settle in their borders and only fight modest defensive wars against them.

But truly, the parallels can be taken on a certain level and there is much to learn. But THe united States is a completely different beast than the Roman Republic or Empire. The Republic at least was torn apart, I would say, largely because it allowed private individuals to maintain command of large professional armies. This lead to power struggles between them, as in Caesar v. Pompey and the other dictators earlier. The US has a volunteer army that is commanded by the office of the president. So if the US were to become an empire, I just can't see it happening in any way similar to what happend to rome.

Its possible that something like what happened in greek city states could occur tho, with a smaller, influence weilding section of the population making the country more of an oligarchy, which ends up abusing power and becomming corrupt, and then being overthrown by a tyrant. Of course, the greeks usually welcomed a tyrant, because he was an improvement over the oligarchs.

But even that seems rather strained.

[edit on 23-1-2005 by Nygdan]

Originally posted by djohnsto77
I believe the EU matches better than the U.S.

But why, outside of it being in europe?

Another thought is the possibility that the American Empire is merely an extension of the Roman Empire which simply re-organized itself during the dark ages, and continued on under different names in the following centuries.

I recommend Indigo_Child's essay posted here on ATS a few months ago. It describes this concept which I find interesting.

The Empire Never Ended: A brief history of the NWO

The basic premise of this thread - which you all keep responding to - is wrong. There is no U.S. or American Empire. America makes no territorial demands. If the U.S. was "imperial", we would still "own" the Phillipines, Mexico, Panama, Kuwait, Iraq, Germany, France, Belgium, Luxemborg, and many other nations that we have liberated form other conquering nations.
So, let's get our stories straight on this.

Now, I agree there are some historical commonalities, viewed inside the proper historical context, such as being surrounded by barbarian nations who's people continue to pour across the frontiers "in search of a better life" than they could ever hope to find in their home countries. Also, life was better on average for people inside the Roman Empire than outside it. Pretty much the same situation exists today in the world. Once Rome halted it's conquests andtried to settle back inside it's borders (about 120 A.D.) other countries had much to envy and little to fear. Think the Roman Empire was an evil abomination? Read your history and compare life in the empire with what life was like for 1,000 years after it was gone.

Anaother parallel. If the 21st century barbarians (radical muslims, for example) are allowed to win, you're looking at Dark Ages II, which would be way worse than the first time around.



[edit on 1/23/2005 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by centurion1211
If the U.S. was "imperial", we would still "own" the Phillipines, Mexico, Panama, Kuwait, Iraq, Germany, France, Belgium, Luxemborg, and many other nations that we have liberated form other conquering nations.

What if you were to replace the word "own" with the word "control"?

As in this quote, "I want to own nothing, and control everything" - J. D. Rockefeller I.

Originally posted by stumason
Bankruptcy was what ruined the Romans, not anything else, as that was all a consequence of the diminished financial power of the Empire and its ability to maintain the military.

There is your comparison to modern day USA.

Well, that and religion becoming an official arm of goverment. After Constantine offically adopted the Cross as his helm and made Christianity the offical (or else) religion, it was all pretty much downhill.

The established Vatican and Popes eventually became more powerful than any government. You know the rest of the story.

It all parallels to today in my observation. But it shouldn't be any huge suprise. Look at our architechture. We modeled DC on Rome.

Too bad really. Jefferson never intended the greedy and "tyranical Priests" to get their hands on power here. But they have, only in the form of modern Evangelical Ministers so thick with the ruling party as to be inseperable.

Woe the fall of America to the smothering embrace of Christianity.

Originally posted by RANT
Well, that and religion becoming an official arm of goverment. After Constantine offically adopted the Cross as his helm and made Christianity the offical (or else) religion, it was all pretty much downhill.

The Roman Empire always had an official religion. Before Constantine, it was the pagan religion of the ancient Greeks. Besides, that wasn't the reason the Roman Empire fell; it was overextension of its territory beyond what its treasury and armed forces could control, coupled with corruption within the Senate and from emperor to emperor.

The closest modern equivalent to the Roman Empire was the British Empire at its height (late 1700's - early 1900's). The U.S. is a new phenomenon, historically.

P.S. -- Bush is no more attempting to make Christianity the official religion of the U.S. than Clinton was attempting to ban Christianity in the U.S. Neither men in these examples had either the intentions or the power to do such a thing.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by djohnsto77
I believe the EU matches better than the U.S.

But why, outside of it being in europe?

Mainly because it is in Europe, but being in Europe brings in a lot of things other than location because of its past history. Also, the Roman Catholic church structure (which is really what it's left of the ancient Roman Empire) is in Europe and that may be very integral to an end-time antichrist NWO scenerio.

Originally posted by ThunderCloud
The U.S. is a new phenomenon, historically.

Or perhaps the U.S. is the same phenomenon, conspiratorially.

The closest modern equivalent to the Roman Empire was the British Empire at its height (late 1700's - early 1900's). The U.S. is a new phenomenon, historically

The reason the British Empire fell was due to those bloody Germans!! Two World Wars took their toll, and after the second, we had neither the stomach or cash to fund our Army in fighting the natives.

Originally posted by LadyV.....even silly things like cereal and tennis shoes...LOL When I was a small child, if your mother fed you cereal for breakfast it was awful and cheap....same with tennis shoes...now cereal is $3 to $4 a damn box and tennis shoes are waaaaaaay too expensive and the things to wear! LOL I fear American is on way down, to take it's turn on near the bottom.

You are too enlightened a woman to date yourself in such a fashion!!
"Sneakers" or "Kicks" or "Ice Creams" ( that one has me mystified), but Tennis Shoes went the way of the Dino looooooong ago!

Today's America resembles the Spanish Empire the most. the Roman Empire dealt too much with a lag in competing world powers. The English empire wa too much of pure over reach.
The Spanish has all the elements that we have now:
- competing world powers ready to challenge economically/militarilly/influencally
- religion a huge distraction to proper governance
- foriegn adventurism unseating domestic growth as a point of focus; Spain dominated its large empire politically, socially, and economically and lost it by taking it's eye off of all those things.
- the time line is also in perfect alignment: Spain's power was from about 1516 to 1715. The US will bee looking at it's "Centennial" of empire some where around 2045 or 2050. Think of now until then & after.......doesn't bode well for the American Empire.

Originally posted by bunkbuster

Originally posted by centurion1211
If the U.S. was "imperial", we would still "own" the Phillipines, Mexico, Panama, Kuwait, Iraq, Germany, France, Belgium, Luxemborg, and many other nations that we have liberated form other conquering nations.

What if you were to replace the word "own" with the word "control"?

Then you'd've removed any meaning of 'empire' to it. Empires own.

RANT
The established Vatican and Popes eventually became more powerful than any government

Because the government left and was overthrown. All that was left was the papacy. Infact, I get the impression that the papacy was not really powerful, secularly, until the lombards fell apart, well after the empire.

thundercloud
The Roman Empire always had an official religion. Before Constantine, it was the pagan religion of the ancient Greeks

I would say that the official religion of Rome was the cult of the emperor, since it was required to make religious oathes on behalf of the emperor. Non greco-roman cults were perfectly permissible.

"Brother will hand over brother to death, and the father his child; children will rise up against parents and have them put to death."

"When you see the desolating abomination standing* where he should not (let the reader understand), then those in Judea must flee to the mountains,...."
*The participle standing is masculine, in contrast to the neuter.

The Lesson of the Fig Tree. "Learn a lesson from the fig tree. When its branch becomes tender and sprouts leaves, you know that summer is near. In the same way, when you SEE THESE THINGS HAPPENING, know that he is near, at the gates."

"Wherever the corpse is, there the vultures will gather."

I've been studying this for awhile now.

The main thing I've discovered is that you can't think of the Roman empire as on continuous cycle. It had several recognisable cycles within it. Revolutions, Civil wars, and Defeat in a major war mark the ends and beginnings of these cycles.

The fall of the Etruscan/Roman monarchy marked the end of one cycle and the begining of another.

The city state of Rome was never a democracy.Sure some people could vote for members of an elite but that isn't really democracy.

These cycles are very important. Once I've done a bit more rersearch I'll write something for ATS but to give a gyst. The harmony or conflict between nations seems inexorably tied to these cycles. The core nations of the EU (Germany, Austria, Italy, France, Belgium, Luxemburg, Holland, Denmark, and Norway) all ended a major cycle in 1945 and because they started a new cycle together their relationship within the EU is fairly harmonious.

And yes there do appear to be some similarities between the Roman cycles and the U.S cycles. but I've got alot more to do.

[edit on 24-1-2005 by John bull 1]

Originally posted by John bull 1
The city state of Rome was never a democracy.Sure some people could vote for members of an elite but that isn't really democracy.

It was, however a republic, with assemblies of the city fathers and general public, a Senate and a tribal assembly.

The Founders of the republic purposely looked to and emulated the Roman Republic, so that might explain some of the similiarities you are seeing.

Consider, for example, that they wanted to make the executive branch out of two Consuls, rather than a single president.

The US is in a very difficult position in the world because it has been the only real super power for quite some time. Just look at the fact that thousands of our citizens were murdered in 9/11, but as soon as we try to do somthing about it, the world gets scared that the super power is going to go from nation to nation and wiping out civilization. Sure....label us an empire for trying to take out terrorist countries that have long before 9/11 been murdering people through out the world. But, because the US is the super power, lets blame it all on them, label them an "EMPIRE" and hate them because their is a chance they might go nutts and wipe out the world. Come on people! Wake up! Ask Germany or Japan if we ever tried to occupy them. Our military is in the middle east to solve a 50+ year problem that no one would finally take the steps to solve. That is get these terrorist countries on task before they cause another 50 years of death and chaos in the world. Maybe the terrorists need to blow up a few more buildings in other countries for them to care?...Maybe some people just dont' care much because .......oh it wasn't their family members lost.
Time will tell. When our troups come home and these countries are booming in 10-15 years......maybe we can have more respect for the soldiers that are dying over there for the greater cause of bringing a safer future to not just the US, but many others.

Rome was not a demcracy, but neither is the U.S. Both were/are Republics. In the case of the Romans, internal strife, civil wars, corruption, and the influx of barbarians into their ranks contributed mainly to their demise. Almost every Roman Emperor from 90 AD on was asassainated. Yes, they were spread out very thin, with many fronts to fight on. But, as the years went by, they also needed the manpower to support their forces. Hence, the indoctrination of the Goths, Vandals, and others into their army. These same soldiers took that knowledge, and brought it back to their homelands, to be used against the Romans in the future.

Mr Carberater:

I must say you raise some valid points, although somewhat oversimplified. I have to lean on agreement that America exists under a Republic. But hey, NOBODY ever talks about Canada! your closest allies. Canada should CERTAINLY be looked at in great detail. There is a corruption that doesn't stick in Canada. Canada is similar, but different in so many ways. We are a well oiled Capatalist culture, that resembles the US in terms of economics more than anybody in the world, save for the fact that we deal in huge amounts of Natural Resources, which makes us rich. What I find totally different in Canada is the level of leverage from International people that is NOT existant there. For example, our media's entire rubric appears more honest and to the point. As for our Government, you should see some of the stuff that goes on in Provincial Parliaments. For example, in Cowboy land (Alberta, mainly Calgary), Ralph Klein? who was wearing a cowboy hat in Parliament stood up and called on another Politician, right on TV, saying something like, "lets go." Marlboro cigarettes, as my knowledge has it, has NEVER been alllowed to be sold in Canada, ever. We never supported the war in Iraq and Canadians have a pessimistic view of their southern counterparts.

So, where does that leave Canada? Well, in a fairly clean position. The point. There are other democracies, or whatever you want to call them, out there that don't seem to be going toward the same end as the US. In this way, it seems as though some parts of the world are "detached" from their chaotic rule. And the one thing about Natural Resources is that you don't have to listen to International Bankers and the like too much, since you have the greatest currency in the World, specially in the near future.

As for Rome and America, hard to compare, since the problems here are more complex due to technology and the fact that we could kill the entire planet in probably less than a day now.

Originally posted by LadyV
LOL I fear American is on way down, to take it's turn on near the bottom.

Excuse me LadyV, but we were on the bottom,230 years ago.

We just had to crawl up to the top and we're not about to give it up! Not with out a fight!

Any takers? You'll end up LOSING!

EDIT: I'm talking about anyone (nations) that try to topple the U.S.!

[edit on 24/1/05 by Intelearthling]