The Decline and Fall of the American Empire

Is it really a bad thing if America's "Empire" crumbles? A country is made of its inhabitants, and citizens. I think it could be a good thing. Our society is bloated, from prices to sizes to ourselves. A bit of a makeover is beyond needed at this point.

reply to post by hotbakedtater


Well good and bad are subjective. To which subject are you referring to when asking this? The American people, or the people of the world? In what time frame are you talking about?

Overall.. it's just another cycle. It's simply what happens to empires.

It may end up being a catalyst for new growth after a decade or so of turmoil, but I think this is a matter of perspective. It could be argued that all which was great about the American Empire indirectly paved the way for the torturous decline.

I think we can objectively say that many U.S. citizens will suffer through out the decline. Much more so than in our ascension. Still, it can also be thought of as merely a hard lesson learned for a foolish, sick bully.

It's not 100% bad, imo. More like an unfortunate state of affairs for the coming years of the land I was born in. Fortunately, I'm free to roam around!

reply to post by 46ACE

reply to @TASKFORCE4256
Thank you my friend & Peace
Lets Restore Our Republic!

The analogies with other empires and articles posted by the OP are very interesting, and I am familiar with Niall Ferguson's writings on the matter.

What concerns me, greatly, are the differences since the last empirical decline (global/national populations - size, WMDs, dominance of zero- tolerance-on-demand supply chains, high-tech post-cash/post-gps/post-dna/post-globalization (of) personal data and identity control issues...which lead me to speculate that the potential abuses of imperial power that Mr Ferguson alludes to being characteristics of the end of empires, has the potential to be a very unattractive phase indeed?

As could be the turbulence entering the vacum of power this will create...of course, on the plus side, if we don't wipe ourselves out on a whole planet scale, somewhere there will be great opportunity and creativity at the heart of new emerging powers, perhaps?

Originally posted by curioustype
As could be the turbulence entering the vacum of power this will create...of course, on the plus side, if we don't wipe ourselves out on a whole planet scale, somewhere there will be great opportunity and creativity at the heart of new emerging powers, perhaps?

Without a doubt. I anticipate that if we can make it through these next couple of decades without a nuclear war, or severe climate change & ecosystem collapses, technological innovations will pop up all over the east, and most our problems for the remainder of the century will be wisely addressed before becoming a real issue.

reply to post by unityemissions


In addition, I just read another great article from Niall Ferguson on his website, I recommend readng it, it has the freshest assessment I have seen yet:

02/12/2010
In China's Orbit
link to article

The dilemma posed to the "departing" power by the "arriving" power is always agonizing. The cost of resisting Germany's rise was heavy indeed for Britain; it was much easier to slide quietly into the role of junior partner to the U.S. Should America seek to contain China or to accommodate it? Opinion polls suggest that ordinary Americans are no more certain how to respond than the president. In a recent survey by the Pew Research Center, 49% of respondents said they did not expect China to "overtake the U.S. as the world's main superpower," but 46% took the opposite view.

Coming to terms with a new global order was hard enough after the collapse of the Soviet Union, which went to the heads of many Western commentators. (Who now remembers talk of American hyperpuissance without a wince?) But the Cold War lasted little more than four decades, and the Soviet Union never came close to overtaking the U.S. economically. What we are living through now is the end of 500 years of Western predominance. This time the Eastern challenger is for real, both economically and geopolitically.

The gentlemen in Beijing may not be the masters just yet. But one thing is certain: They are no longer the apprentices.

I guess you'd say he found his recent research visit to China convinced him further of the fact that a return to the way the world was before the financial crash, looks pretty unlikely...?

USA declines economically to a second rate nation like England, Piffle!!! Who will take our place. Let's look at the facts: China? not likely their economy (we'll use GDP throughout this example) is 1/3 the size of the US economy roughly the equivalent of California and Texas combined in real GDP term. So in 15 years they are going to grow GDP 300%? Hey are those flying pigs out there? neither is in the realm of reality. How about India? GDP less that a 1/4 of the US economy 400% growth in GDP in 15 years? how about those flying monkeys? So you see the only 2 serious challengers on the world stage really aren't. While we are currently in a pickle it is far from fatal. I remember in the 80's the prediction was we had lost our "Yankee Spirit" and Japan was wiping their kiester with greenbacks and buying every building in downtown New York they could put put their mitts on. I spent time in Japan inside some of their most successful companies and I was truly impressed by the hive. However their supposed strength turned into a fatal flaw and their decline in is the history books. In the end, we stayed on top and we will again. This country is nothing if not resilient. We are already on the way back. The signs are in the wind if you care to sniff. The worm is turning and we'll stay on top. We have the keys to the world's economy and we're not about to let anyone else drive !!!! P.S. read my lips, it wasn't Bush stupid. We all helped build this speed bump with debt.

btw, how long has the US actually been an empire?

the country is less than 300yo.

shortest empire in history.

gimme a break, it will not be declining anytime soon.

I just bought some more canned goods. Bring it on, a little anarchy is good now and again.
The Fed is finishing off the final blow to our great nation, and were watching Antiques Road show.

The US was done years ago. The federal reserve was the beginning of the end of the Republic.
The dollar is where it is because the US was used as the "Bank of the world" on the reserve currency to get things done.
The US government spent trillions to get the money where the banks wanted it. After that, "Globalization" was used to drain all of the "wealth" that the citizens had left.

Once the dollar fails and the exchange rate between the US dollar and foriegn currencies hits 1 to 10 the powers that be will have enough justification to create a North American Euro type currency and there will be no more USA.

It's all part of a plan and the citizens don't have a say in it.

I'd say we've got less than 2 years before there is a gold recall in the US (to pay off the debt to the fed) and the only legal tender allowed will be the New Amero ; backed by foriegn currencies and paying dividends to the same so that former US citizens will end up paying more of their hard earned cash to the rest of the world in perpetuity.

All according to plan.

It's all about the money.

reply to post by bladerunner44


The linear thinking... it burns!!!



Every factor is part of a larger integral whole. When you affect one, the rest will wobble. So factors causing a rising GDP in developing nations will affect our GDP. Factors contributing to a declining GDP here will affect developing nations.

Besides, the numbers are sort of arbitrary, considering the fact that there's layers and layers of fraudulent accounting practically everywhere. What's a 24T GPD when it takes $200 for a big mac?

There's a whole lot of wild cards that makes your linear thinking look ridiculous.

looks like I need to pack up my bags for a planned migration to Australia, Canada, Brazil or Argentina since the US is gonna crumble apart and has no opportunities here.

reply to post by badgerprints


The Republic isn't going anywhere.

Even if a new North American Dollar emerges by 2020, that doesn't mean the US is gone. We have changed currencies a number of times in our nation's history.

The idea that we will no longer be the US is just paranoid doommongering.

The NAD would still be a "Petrodollar", pegged to a North American Energy Cartel and the 4 plus trillion barrels of shale and bitumen oil shared by Canada and the US. Thats enough oil to sustain North America for over 500 years at current consumption rates. It could also sustain the entire earth, even if consuming 36 billion barrels a year, for over 100 years.

The United States has always been a dynamic and evolving national entity. From the Continental Congress to the present, the Union has never been static or set in stone.

We adapt and overcome.

People thought the 1960s was the decline of the so called American Empire. Or the 1930s, or the Civil War or so on. Which one was it? Now when America really falls, does that mean no more America? No more existence of Americans? Culture?

Originally posted by deltaboy
People thought the 1960s was the decline of the so called American Empire. Or the 1930s, or the Civil War or so on. Which one was it? Now when America really falls, does that mean no more America? No more existence of Americans? Culture?

Even if Yellowstone went critical, America would still be around in one form or another.

Sure the Intermountain West would be under meters of ash and the skies would be blackened, but that wouldn't stop people elsewhere from lighting fireworks on the 4th or having Turkey on Thanksgiving.

reply to post by Mdv2


Great choice with the Cole paintings. They really capture the ideals at play so nicely. I've been fortunate enough to have seen all of those paintings in person.

American hubris is taken for granted by the rest of the world while we remain ignorant but for the historically and politically aware and a good sprinkling here on ATS
You know who you are
Nice thread, Thanks MdV

Originally posted by masqua

Originally posted by tristar
I will object to your assumption's as to the reason " why "

That's nice. I love conversation.

Any reasoning behind your objection or is that all you have?

Sorry that my one line wasn't adequate enough, i guess i should have known better.

Back to topic.

What i object to is comparing the U.S. to the Roman Empire, although similar in many ways, that alone does not allow to make a parallel comparison. To begin with, the current push to automate the financial sector has created a precedent across the board in slashing the cost production cost of goods.

As for a theocratic state, sure that has always failed no matter what part of the globe it originates from, myself, i tend to view any theocratic and monarch system a complete waste of modern day energy. It simply serves no purpose other than maintaining whatever King or Queen's wealth at the expense of its citizens. ( See recent case involving the British crown requesting assistance from the government in order to have funds for its many castles.)

Originally posted by SaturnFX
There is one way out of this

a massive federal investing in technological innovation. Thats all that need happen here. reduce the military spending by half and spend that in ushering in new groundwork for american industry. holographic tech, robotics, etc...things the private sector can explode on and create worldwide demand.

-share- the tech with the american public with conditions that 80% of manufacturing and development be done on our shores...

That's been the problem for decades. We have had the technical advantage and we have let it slip away and outsourced for higher profits ourselves to death Or the Military deemed it too sensitive just to see it end up on the shelves in Japan or Now china in some retail shop a few years later as a consumer product.

Remember the EV-1? Now Japan is selling us many electric cars. The list of example after example is too numerous to even contemplate.

Coincidentally I was in the midst of writing an in-depth rant on this very topic when I read this topic a few hours ago when it was first posted stay tuned.

Originally posted by tristar
Back to topic.

What i object to is comparing the U.S. to the Roman Empire, although similar in many ways, that alone does not allow to make a parallel comparison. To begin with, the current push to automate the financial sector has created a precedent across the board in slashing the cost production cost of goods.

Seems some confuse the words Decline and Collapse.

Originally posted by fooks
btw, how long has the US actually been an empire?

the country is less than 300yo.

shortest empire in history.

gimme a break, it will not be declining anytime soon.

That is why the world is laughing at US for being the shortest living empire ever.

Even Iran is calling the US an amateur empire with teenage hormones which forced it to make so many mistakes which brought it to this situation.