if enough people cared, then he wouldn't have been elected.... Gore may have got 50%+ of those who voted, but he got about 35% of those eligible to vote.
While it is true that the majority of the American public are ignorant apathetic scumbags (read non-voters), the relevant fact which you chose to ignore is that if Jeb hadn't committed an act of treason then GWBush would not have been elected. Also, we're talking about Bush. Not Gore. Bush.
The fact is that Bush committed an act of treason by stepping into the office under those conditions.
It makes me wonder, once again, why the original Bill of Rights didn't have 11 original amendments, The 11th Amendment should have been "The right to privacy".
Because it was unnecessary as were all the others with the exception of the 10th. Is your right to privacy specifically forbidden by the constitution? No. Then you *do* have this right.
The fact that the current administration (and to a lesser degree the previous too many administrations) has completely raped the constitution doesn't change what it says.
Well, if that's true then he sure did a piss-poor job. Usually when people rig an election, they don't seed it with screwed up unpunched and doublepunched ballots.
If you had read and thought about his post you would have realised that he was talking about a completely different issue than the fiasco on election day.
Jeb stole innocent Americans' right to vote. Since they were not allowed to vote, they obviously had nothing to do with the ballots at all since they didn't touch any.
Does this clear things up for you, or are you intentionally trying to mislead people about the issue at hand?
Yes, the U.S. will probably get some oil out of the deal, but we aren't going to get anywhere near enough oil to pay for this mess. Anyone that thinks otherwise simply doesn't know what they are talking about.
Anyone who thinks the ultra-capitalist US government with the full backing of the major corporate players would do a damn thing if they weren't certain to return a healthy profit has no clue at all what they are talking about.
Learn a little history for all of our sakes. pull your head out of the darkness and look around.
What the U.S. is interested in is stabilizing the region, a happy Iraq is our goal.
Innocent idealism like this is cute in a 5 year old. If you are any older than 5 then it starts to look like cluelessness. Even if that really is *a* goal the other goals are far less good natured. The fact that that isn't really a goal is evident by our unwavering support of Israel. Everybody involved in the Israeli issue are filthy scumbags the Israelis no less so than the Palestinians, but we're completely one-sided.
Please stop spewing your uninformed garbage. It makes us Americans look stupid.
Um first off Bush is the president. He may not have been "the majority elected president", but by the laws and rules of the US, he is the president.
No he isn't By the laws and constitution of the US every person gets to vote. Jeb Bush stole this most fundamental right from 10s of thousands of voters. There is no worse crime that can be committed against an American (as an American rather than as a human being). This is the only reason that the election was even close enough to cause the fiasco at election time.
That is why Bush is a traitor. That is why patriotism demands *not* supporting him in any thing he does.
Hey, our troops are fighting for us across the ocean,
They are not fighting for us. They might believe they are, but they are not. This isn't an attack on the soldiers, it's merely a response to your comment.
There was no threat whatsoever to us posed by Iraq. Don't believe that? Well, let's see a scrap of proof. Since we're doing this to save the world from WOMD, when does Rumsfeld go on trial for providing them to Iraq? Seriously. The hypocracy of this administration is apparent to the rest of the world since there news services still do investigative journalism. We don't.
In my opinion, and the opinion of many others, protesting the war after it has started IS unpatriotic.
Your opinion is absolutely wrong. You still have the right to express it, but it is so absolutely false that I'm surprised that you aren't embarassed to say it.
I'll prove it to you. Say I came into your house with the stated intention of raping your sister. Obviously you would protest this action due to your "familyism" (patriotism toward your family so to speak) You are saying that once I got her on the ground and started doing my work that you should stop protesting my actions?!? That is totally insane.
It has nothing to do with the troops as you well know but choose to ignore. Supporting this so called president is not patriotism at all. Almost every action he has taken while in office has been a violent assault on freedom and the constitution.
Now that we have started fighting, people should keep their opinions to themselves,
You really have no concept of what patriotism and America mean,do you? Attitudes like this are generally seen as belonging in China, Nazi Germany, or other totalitarian regimes. That is what is supposed to be the difference between America and these "evil" countries.
How disgusting that someone like you who so hates freedom tries to use it to attack those who support it.
I've heard this "American propaganda apparatus" claim made many times and, personally, I don't see the foundation....I've heard this "American propaganda apparatus" claim made many times and, personally, I don't see the foundation
Where to start.... The fact that Rumsfeld gave Iraq their Anthrax and other weapons. The fact that Rumsfeld ok'd their massacre of the Kurds. The fact that Jeb Bush robbed 50,000 Americans of their right to vote in the last election. The fact that GW went AWOL from his guard unit. Maybe a retrospective analysis of our other military actions and their results. Specifically the fact that most of the time when we go in some where we overthrow democratically elected leaders and install brutal dictators (See Noriega, Pinochet, etc.etc.etc)
There are a few examples for you. That these things are not reported here at all is one of the major reasons that people here can say such utterly idiotic things like, "They hate us because they're jealous".
So you can disagree with the outcome, but you cannot reasonably say that Bush didn't win the election, unless you believe the election procedures should be determined by something other than the law that defines them, and our system of law that interprets them. To continue to say he wasn't elected is to ignore the factual truth of the matter.
What you said is true as far as it goes, but you (as well as most of those you are responding to) ignore the most important part of the whole issue.
Jeb Bush and Kathleen Harris removed the right to vote from 10s of thousands of innocent law abiding Americans. This happened before the election. They did this for the sole reason that the voters in question were Black and Democrat. Given that the most fundamental right of a citizen of a free society is the right to have their voice heard, this is the most outrageous act of treason I've ever heard of in our country's history.
Had this not happened, the election wouldn't have been close enough for any of the events you are commenting on to be at issue.
So in fact Bush was not elected according to the constitution or the laws of our nation. He came to power solely through criminal acts of treason.
This is certainly consistent with his actions since. He has led assault after vicious assault on the constitution. He ordered the FBI off of Al Queda before 9/11 (You do know who John O'Neill was don't you?), he raped the FOIA and ordered government officials to fight the requests that came through the shredded remains of that absolutely essential act.
The ignorance you show in your defense of a traitor is truly sickening.
The bottom line is there would have been no difference in outcome in 9/2001, because the Dems were in power when this was brewing. Surely there would have been a difference in what we did about it though.
The person that you're forgetting is John O'Neill.
Doesn't the fact that the DD of the FBI resigned because, in his words, Bush ordered him to lay off of Al Queda a month before 9/11 even make you wonder how it could have been different?
Sometimes a step backwards is needed to move forward. An end must come to this chaotic dictator, the cost is too high to allow him to brutilize any more people, those casualties that do occur with war will be far less than if he does stay in power.
organisms dont evolve in order to better survive their environments and whatnot. random mutations are constantly happening, and if it just so happens that a certain mutation results in the organism being able to reproduce more efficently than usual, then that organism's new mutated genes are passed on.
But antibiotics create the situation to which the resistant organisms are adapted. If you take antibiotics for one day, then you have killed all of the bacteria which can't survive one day. All the rest are weakened somewhat, but the ones that are left are all able to do this. Also, the ones with the better resistance than the others are stronger, hence more likely to reproduce more quickly.
So MTV, Fox, And Hip-hop have corrupted old retired people in Florida?
No. At least the old retired people were granted the opportunity to attempt to vote.
This is as opposed to the 10s of thousands of people Jeb raped of their most fundamental right as a citizen. Look it up and realize that Bush is *the* worst criminal traitor this country has ever seen.
I take EVERYTHING my government tells me with a large amount of cynicism and suspicion.
As is your duty as a citizen of a (supposedly) free society.
Call me paranoid or a wacko
No. I'll call you a patriot since that is what you are by being "eternally vigilant". It's sad that so many people don't realise that going along with your government right or wrong isn't patriotism. It's treason.
Any proof of that? Economic cycles that took about a lifetime then still take about a lifetime; which means things are evolving slower (since life expectency is higher). Political movements seem to also be moving slower; like the rise of Thatcherism... I don't see much evidence things are moving faster. This is one of those rumors of the modern age.
Well, I can fly from San Diego to Chicago in 4 hours. How long would it take to ride a horse? I can send a message from Rome to South America in seconds. How long did it take at the height of the Roman Empire? About 1500 years. In fact at that time, the Romans didn't even know South Americans existed. Information and knowledge travel very quickly indeed. Technology moves much much faster than it did back then.
Huh? What are just picking emperors at random?
Not at all. Caligula was arguably the worst of the Claudian Emperors. Constantine was the (I believe) first Christian Emperor. I then went on to draw comparisons between those specific times and now. Not very random at all, huh.
1) We have a great deal of political and military influence over the empire but still lack direct control. Just like Rome in the early years. The rest of the world is not paying tribute but rather seems themselves as weaker partners
Fair enough.
2) There are still strong counter forces
Yes, but they are well informed, technologically advanced counter forces. Much more so than in the Roman days. Our society has much more in common with Carthage at the time of the Punic wars than it does with Roman society at the same time. In Carthage, public officials were openly for sale just like America. Almost any action, no matter how disgusting or depraved, was ok as long as it made money. Exactly as in America. In Rome, a public official taking a bribe was practically unheard of. For one the person would be an outcast from society and also the penalty for this was death. It was ok to get rich, but there were some things that just were not done. Polybius draws comparisons where Carthage is at one extreme, Rome is in the middle, and Sparta is at the other extreme where no man could own more land than any other, and acquiring wealth was to be despised. He makes good points about how this prevented Sparta from becoming a major player on the world stage.
3) A major increase in trade is occuring do to the safety of transportation (or in this case international trade and finance system) under Roman (American) control.
Partially due to America, certainly.
Springer isn't that popular nor that depraved. The vast majority of Americans live in stable households, hold down steady jobs, are very law abiding, and frankly have monogomous sexual relations... That is not a society on the verge of collapse by any standards. As for bread and circuses I see no large government directed mass entertainment projects with minor exception like July 4th and the Olympics. It simply isn't happening
I believe Springer is still the most popular daytime TV show. The depravity isn't Springer's show as much as it is the fact that people watch it. There are Massive Corporate Media directed entertainment projects. Generally they tell the government what to do, so it works out to essentially the same thing. Again, analogies don't map exactly. Our economy is based on manipulating people into buying lots of worthless crap they don't need. This is not a healthy condition. It is one sign of a decadent society.
Except the real wave of martyrs are mainly second century not first 80 years after the Claudian emperors.
Right. Like, say, more toward the time of Constantine as I said? There never really was a "wave" of martyrdom. There were a few cases here and there. The total number was around 2000 (according to Gibbon). A lot of it was just revisionist history by the Christians.
As it was during the days of Augustus. Augustus was a rise in rationalism. The mystery cults were a counter force but it wasn't for many years until they became a mass movement.
Well, Augustus was also the first Roman person to be declared a god. Not very "Rational" that.
First off it isn't my analogy I was commenting on this Roman analogy that gets brought up often.
Sure, but you modified the analogy which made it yours. I further modified it and pointed out flaws in the analogy.
Second in the time of Augustus most of what would later be the empire had all sorts of mutual defense treaties and economic treaties with Rome. They didn't have any sort of formal vassel status and they didn't pay tribute. Mostly they just had bases on their territory and some limits placed on their foreign policy (which is a lot like today). Vassel status wouldn't come for a very long time.
True enough.
Anyway if America is Rome then in the analogy Europe would be what will become a vassel state.
In a strict analogy, perhaps so. Again many things are different and Europe is aware of the history. Whether or not they can learn from it is another question.
Using a Roman timeline we somewhere in the age of Augustus Ceasar.
No, we're way past Augustus. Analogies are never perfect, so you can't really draw a direct correlation, but our culture is more like a split between Rome under Caligula and Rome under Constantine (post conversion).
The sickening decadence and depravity endemic to our society (think Springer, SUV's even after 9/11, a populace who watches news programs which are completely geared to manipulating them and maintaining their ignorance. Bread and circuses.) is reminiscent of Roman society under the Claudian Emperors. The religious zealots eager for martyrdom and the excommunication or torture and murder of anyone who has a different thought during the rise of Christianity is frighteningly similar to the zealots we have here today. Muslims have their similar wackos, but most of the rest of the civilized world is moving away from the sickening idea of fundamentalism.
That means for the next 150 years we get stronger not weaker. 300 years from now we are still the undisputed power. 500 years from now a major (but declining influence)
Again, things move faster. Also Rome would have fallen much sooner if they hadn't still had the image of invulnerability. The barbarians could have moved earlier than they did.
When Rome finally did fall it took the entire empire down with it. The fall happened from the outside in, now from the inside out. In other words: Europe falls first, falls harder and falls for longer
Much of Europe was part of the Roman Empire. They are not part of the American Empire. The ties are deep economically, as they are throughout the world. You make a large mistake in your analogy. The Europeans (and Asians) are not ignorant, and they are most certainly not barbarians.
Perhaps I'm taking the comparison a little too far, but the similarities between the US and the Roman Empire at its height (before it imploded) have been jumping out at me even more lately.
I don't think you're taking the comparison too far at all.
I just read "The Rise of the Roman Empire" by Polybius which was written during the republic; about 100 years before Julius Caesar. I'm currently halfway through "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" by Gibbon.
I have been amazed by the similarities between the US in its earlier years and Rome during the republic when it was on the rise.
The similarities between Rome in its decline and The US currently are even more striking.
It's truly frightening.
We show all of the signs of a society in its decline.
Sure enough, there was incredible fraud occuring in Florida (most of which only came out after the election was decided).
The major fraud in that election in Florida happened some months before the election when Jeb had his Secretary of state illegally rob 10s of thousands of citizens of their right to vote.
This won't show up in this sort of system and it is far more significant than any of the other issues since the election wouldn't have even been close had the laws of our country been followed.
Slashdot Mirror
The reason winCE won out was becase it was better. Deal with it.
I'm not too up on the whole PDA market, but I definately missed the bit about wince even competing well, yet alone winning.
What is it that I missed?
if enough people cared, then he wouldn't have been elected.... Gore may have got 50%+ of those who voted, but he got about 35% of those eligible to vote.
While it is true that the majority of the American public are ignorant apathetic scumbags (read non-voters), the relevant fact which you chose to ignore is that if Jeb hadn't committed an act of treason then GWBush would not have been elected.
Also, we're talking about Bush. Not Gore. Bush.
The fact is that Bush committed an act of treason by stepping into the office under those conditions.
It makes me wonder, once again, why the original Bill of Rights didn't have 11 original amendments, The 11th Amendment should have been "The right to privacy".
Because it was unnecessary as were all the others with the exception of the 10th.
Is your right to privacy specifically forbidden by the constitution?
No.
Then you *do* have this right.
The fact that the current administration (and to a lesser degree the previous too many administrations) has completely raped the constitution doesn't change what it says.
Well, if that's true then he sure did a piss-poor job. Usually when people rig an election, they don't seed it with screwed up unpunched and doublepunched ballots.
If you had read and thought about his post you would have realised that he was talking about a completely different issue than the fiasco on election day.
Jeb stole innocent Americans' right to vote. Since they were not allowed to vote, they obviously had nothing to do with the ballots at all since they didn't touch any.
Does this clear things up for you, or are you intentionally trying to mislead people about the issue at hand?
The funny thing about that quote (to me anyhow) is that the relevant stock prices were listed as well.
Forrester is down. MS is up.
I hope that's the April Fools bit, but I doubt it.
You forgot The Matrix: Spectral Decomposition.
Yes, the U.S. will probably get some oil out of the deal, but we aren't going to get anywhere near enough oil to pay for this mess. Anyone that thinks otherwise simply doesn't know what they are talking about.
Anyone who thinks the ultra-capitalist US government with the full backing of the major corporate players would do a damn thing if they weren't certain to return a healthy profit has no clue at all what they are talking about.
Learn a little history for all of our sakes.
pull your head out of the darkness and look around.
What the U.S. is interested in is stabilizing the region, a happy Iraq is our goal.
Innocent idealism like this is cute in a 5 year old. If you are any older than 5 then it starts to look like cluelessness. Even if that really is *a* goal the other goals are far less good natured.
The fact that that isn't really a goal is evident by our unwavering support of Israel. Everybody involved in the Israeli issue are filthy scumbags the Israelis no less so than the Palestinians, but we're completely one-sided.
Please stop spewing your uninformed garbage. It makes us Americans look stupid.
Lol, I'd love to know what n00bie moderated Miguel de Icaza as "Redundant." Looking forward to m2 on that guy :)
I assume it was the type of "n00bie" who's been around longer than you and knows that Miguel has a UID lower than 600,000.
Just a guess though.
Um first off Bush is the president. He may not have been "the majority elected president", but by the laws and rules of the US, he is the president.
No he isn't
By the laws and constitution of the US every person gets to vote. Jeb Bush stole this most fundamental right from 10s of thousands of voters. There is no worse crime that can be committed against an American (as an American rather than as a human being). This is the only reason that the election was even close enough to cause the fiasco at election time.
That is why Bush is a traitor. That is why patriotism demands *not* supporting him in any thing he does.
Hey, our troops are fighting for us across the ocean,
They are not fighting for us. They might believe they are, but they are not. This isn't an attack on the soldiers, it's merely a response to your comment.
There was no threat whatsoever to us posed by Iraq.
Don't believe that? Well, let's see a scrap of proof.
Since we're doing this to save the world from WOMD, when does Rumsfeld go on trial for providing them to Iraq?
Seriously. The hypocracy of this administration is apparent to the rest of the world since there news services still do investigative journalism. We don't.
In my opinion, and the opinion of many others, protesting the war after it has started IS unpatriotic.
,do you? Attitudes like this are generally seen as belonging in China, Nazi Germany, or other totalitarian regimes. That is what is supposed to be the difference between America and these "evil" countries.
Your opinion is absolutely wrong. You still have the right to express it, but it is so absolutely false that I'm surprised that you aren't embarassed to say it.
I'll prove it to you.
Say I came into your house with the stated intention of raping your sister. Obviously you would protest this action due to your "familyism" (patriotism toward your family so to speak) You are saying that once I got her on the ground and started doing my work that you should stop protesting my actions?!?
That is totally insane.
It has nothing to do with the troops as you well know but choose to ignore.
Supporting this so called president is not patriotism at all.
Almost every action he has taken while in office has been a violent assault on freedom and the constitution.
Now that we have started fighting, people should keep their opinions to themselves,
You really have no concept of what patriotism and America mean
How disgusting that someone like you who so hates freedom tries to use it to attack those who support it.
I've heard this "American propaganda apparatus" claim made many times and, personally, I don't see the foundation. ...I've heard this "American propaganda apparatus" claim made many times and, personally, I don't see the foundation
Where to start....
The fact that Rumsfeld gave Iraq their Anthrax and other weapons. The fact that Rumsfeld ok'd their massacre of the Kurds. The fact that Jeb Bush robbed 50,000 Americans of their right to vote in the last election. The fact that GW went AWOL from his guard unit.
Maybe a retrospective analysis of our other military actions and their results. Specifically the fact that most of the time when we go in some where we overthrow democratically elected leaders and install brutal dictators (See Noriega, Pinochet, etc.etc.etc)
There are a few examples for you. That these things are not reported here at all is one of the major reasons that people here can say such utterly idiotic things like, "They hate us because they're jealous".
Hope this helps.
So you can disagree with the outcome, but you cannot reasonably say that Bush didn't win the election, unless you believe the election procedures should be determined by something other than the law that defines them, and our system of law that interprets them. To continue to say he wasn't elected is to ignore the factual truth of the matter.
What you said is true as far as it goes, but you (as well as most of those you are responding to) ignore the most important part of the whole issue.
Jeb Bush and Kathleen Harris removed the right to vote from 10s of thousands of innocent law abiding Americans. This happened before the election. They did this for the sole reason that the voters in question were Black and Democrat. Given that the most fundamental right of a citizen of a free society is the right to have their voice heard, this is the most outrageous act of treason I've ever heard of in our country's history.
Had this not happened, the election wouldn't have been close enough for any of the events you are commenting on to be at issue.
So in fact Bush was not elected according to the constitution or the laws of our nation. He came to power solely through criminal acts of treason.
This is certainly consistent with his actions since. He has led assault after vicious assault on the constitution. He ordered the FBI off of Al Queda before 9/11 (You do know who John O'Neill was don't you?), he raped the FOIA and ordered government officials to fight the requests that came through the shredded remains of that absolutely essential act.
The ignorance you show in your defense of a traitor is truly sickening.
The bottom line is there would have been no difference in outcome in 9/2001, because the Dems were in power when this was brewing. Surely there would have been a difference in what we did about it though.
The person that you're forgetting is John O'Neill.
Doesn't the fact that the DD of the FBI resigned because, in his words, Bush ordered him to lay off of Al Queda a month before 9/11 even make you wonder how it could have been different?
Sometimes a step backwards is needed to move forward.
An end must come to this chaotic dictator, the cost is too high to allow him to brutilize any more people, those casualties that do occur with war will be far less than if he does stay in power.
The Dictator to whom you refer is Bush?
organisms dont evolve in order to better survive their environments and whatnot. random mutations are constantly happening, and if it just so happens that a certain mutation results in the organism being able to reproduce more efficently than usual, then that organism's new mutated genes are passed on.
But antibiotics create the situation to which the resistant organisms are adapted.
If you take antibiotics for one day, then you have killed all of the bacteria which can't survive one day. All the rest are weakened somewhat, but the ones that are left are all able to do this. Also, the ones with the better resistance than the others are stronger, hence more likely to reproduce more quickly.
Although all I play on it is Karateka (sp?). That damn bird...
Bird nothing. I never figured out how to stop the princess from kicking me square in the nuts.
So MTV, Fox, And Hip-hop have corrupted old retired people in Florida?
No. At least the old retired people were granted the opportunity to attempt to vote.
This is as opposed to the 10s of thousands of people Jeb raped of their most fundamental right as a citizen. Look it up and realize that Bush is *the* worst criminal traitor this country has ever seen.
While you're at it do a search for John o'Neill.
Ballistic is cool.
We investigated the colloidal scattering properties of jello from the 10th floor of FT at UCSB.
Solid to liquid in no time.
Rather unlikely. After all, you have to check that the transmission has ended with no errors.
You know, it's smart alecky people like you who at least double the time to market for all the new technology.
Check for errors.. Bah!
You're probably the type who'd want to test the code before it goes into production.
Sheesh, what next? Put dummies in cars and smash them into walls?!?
I take EVERYTHING my government tells me with a large amount of cynicism and suspicion.
As is your duty as a citizen of a (supposedly) free society.
Call me paranoid or a wacko
No. I'll call you a patriot since that is what you are by being "eternally vigilant".
It's sad that so many people don't realise that going along with your government right or wrong isn't patriotism. It's treason.
Any proof of that? Economic cycles that took about a lifetime then still take about a lifetime; which means things are evolving slower (since life expectency is higher). Political movements seem to also be moving slower; like the rise of Thatcherism... I don't see much evidence things are moving faster. This is one of those rumors of the modern age.
Well, I can fly from San Diego to Chicago in 4 hours. How long would it take to ride a horse?
I can send a message from Rome to South America in seconds. How long did it take at the height of the Roman Empire? About 1500 years.
In fact at that time, the Romans didn't even know South Americans existed.
Information and knowledge travel very quickly indeed.
Technology moves much much faster than it did back then.
Huh? What are just picking emperors at random?
Not at all. Caligula was arguably the worst of the Claudian Emperors. Constantine was the (I believe) first Christian Emperor. I then went on to draw comparisons between those specific times and now. Not very random at all, huh.
1) We have a great deal of political and military influence over the empire but still lack direct control. Just like Rome in the early years. The rest of the world is not paying tribute but rather seems themselves as weaker partners
Fair enough.
2) There are still strong counter forces
Yes, but they are well informed, technologically advanced counter forces. Much more so than in the Roman days.
Our society has much more in common with Carthage at the time of the Punic wars than it does with Roman society at the same time. In Carthage, public officials were openly for sale just like America. Almost any action, no matter how disgusting or depraved, was ok as long as it made money. Exactly as in America. In Rome, a public official taking a bribe was practically unheard of. For one the person would be an outcast from society and also the penalty for this was death. It was ok to get rich, but there were some things that just were not done. Polybius draws comparisons where Carthage is at one extreme, Rome is in the middle, and Sparta is at the other extreme where no man could own more land than any other, and acquiring wealth was to be despised. He makes good points about how this prevented Sparta from becoming a major player on the world stage.
3) A major increase in trade is occuring do to the safety of transportation (or in this case international trade and finance system) under Roman (American) control.
Partially due to America, certainly.
Springer isn't that popular nor that depraved. The vast majority of Americans live in stable households, hold down steady jobs, are very law abiding, and frankly have monogomous sexual relations... That is not a society on the verge of collapse by any standards. As for bread and circuses I see no large government directed mass entertainment projects with minor exception like July 4th and the Olympics. It simply isn't happening
I believe Springer is still the most popular daytime TV show. The depravity isn't Springer's show as much as it is the fact that people watch it. There are Massive Corporate Media directed entertainment projects. Generally they tell the government what to do, so it works out to essentially the same thing. Again, analogies don't map exactly. Our economy is based on manipulating people into buying lots of worthless crap they don't need. This is not a healthy condition. It is one sign of a decadent society.
Except the real wave of martyrs are mainly second century not first 80 years after the Claudian emperors.
Right. Like, say, more toward the time of Constantine as I said?
There never really was a "wave" of martyrdom. There were a few cases here and there. The total number was around 2000 (according to Gibbon). A lot of it was just revisionist history by the Christians.
As it was during the days of Augustus. Augustus was a rise in rationalism. The mystery cults were a counter force but it wasn't for many years until they became a mass movement.
Well, Augustus was also the first Roman person to be declared a god. Not very "Rational" that.
First off it isn't my analogy I was commenting on this Roman analogy that gets brought up often.
Sure, but you modified the analogy which made it yours. I further modified it and pointed out flaws in the analogy.
Second in the time of Augustus most of what would later be the empire had all sorts of mutual defense treaties and economic treaties with Rome. They didn't have any sort of formal vassel status and they didn't pay tribute. Mostly they just had bases on their territory and some limits placed on their foreign policy (which is a lot like today). Vassel status wouldn't come for a very long time.
True enough.
Anyway if America is Rome then in the analogy Europe would be what will become a vassel state.
In a strict analogy, perhaps so. Again many things are different and Europe is aware of the history. Whether or not they can learn from it is another question.
It took centuries for the Roman empire to fall.
Things move much faster now.
Using a Roman timeline we somewhere in the age of Augustus Ceasar.
No, we're way past Augustus. Analogies are never perfect, so you can't really draw a direct correlation, but our culture is more like a split between Rome under Caligula and Rome under Constantine (post conversion).
The sickening decadence and depravity endemic to our society (think Springer, SUV's even after 9/11, a populace who watches news programs which are completely geared to manipulating them and maintaining their ignorance. Bread and circuses.)
is reminiscent of Roman society under the Claudian Emperors.
The religious zealots eager for martyrdom and the excommunication or torture and murder of anyone who has a different thought during the rise of Christianity is frighteningly similar to the zealots we have here today. Muslims have their similar wackos, but most of the rest of the civilized world is moving away from the sickening idea of fundamentalism.
That means for the next 150 years we get stronger not weaker. 300 years from now we are still the undisputed power. 500 years from now a major (but declining influence)
Again, things move faster.
Also Rome would have fallen much sooner if they hadn't still had the image of invulnerability. The barbarians could have moved earlier than they did.
When Rome finally did fall it took the entire empire down with it. The fall happened from the outside in, now from the inside out. In other words: Europe falls first, falls harder and falls for longer
Much of Europe was part of the Roman Empire. They are not part of the American Empire. The ties are deep economically, as they are throughout the world.
You make a large mistake in your analogy. The Europeans (and Asians) are not ignorant, and they are most certainly not barbarians.
Perhaps I'm taking the comparison a little too far, but the similarities between the US and the Roman Empire at its height (before it imploded) have been jumping out at me even more lately.
I don't think you're taking the comparison too far at all.
I just read "The Rise of the Roman Empire" by Polybius which was written during the republic; about 100 years before Julius Caesar.
I'm currently halfway through "The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" by Gibbon.
I have been amazed by the similarities between the US in its earlier years and Rome during the republic when it was on the rise.
The similarities between Rome in its decline and The US currently are even more striking.
It's truly frightening.
We show all of the signs of a society in its decline.
Sure enough, there was incredible fraud occuring in Florida (most of which only came out after the election was decided).
The major fraud in that election in Florida happened some months before the election when Jeb had his Secretary of state illegally rob 10s of thousands of citizens of their right to vote.
This won't show up in this sort of system and it is far more significant than any of the other issues since the election wouldn't have even been close had the laws of our country been followed.