4 ms·

> We are more or less retracing the path of Rome as the Republic expanded militarily until it was no longer practical to run it as a republic and it transitione

by danans 4mo ago

> We are more or less retracing the path of Rome as the Republic expanded militarily until it was no longer practical to run it as a republic and it transitioned to empire. The current military "excursion" seems to be transitioning the US out of being an empire.

rayiner 4mo ago
Rome took some unexpected Ls against the barbarians too. Didn’t change the trajectory of the empire.
- shakna 4mo ago
  The failure to integrate the barbarian Goth refugees is generally marked as the beginning of the fall - and absolutely changed the trajectory of the empire.
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
  - rayiner 4mo ago
    “Failure to integrate” is one way to describe the Goths sacking Rome. But I agree the barbarians did them in at the end. My point was that the Iran fiasco is more like the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest, where Rome backed off after taking a beating. That didn’t mark a transition away from Empire, simply a retreat after a military loss.
    - shakna 4mo ago
      And my point, is the current administration is closer to Caligula and Nero, than they are to Varus. You see this as nothing more than another blip in a long history. I see unstable and dangerous individuals getting standing ovations for failure. "I don't care if they respect me so long as they fear me." - Caligula.
    - rvba 4mo ago
      The Iran fiasco is Suez Canal 2.0
      - arethuza 4mo ago
        Did you mean the 1956 Suez Crisis? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis
    - modo_mario 4mo ago
      >is one way to describe the Goths sacking Rome To be fair they had been in the empire for a good amount of years at that time if i remember well. ...so when comparing to other previous influxes that did get integrated and/or assimilated it does seem apt.
    - constantius 4mo ago
      Teutoburg wasn't a battle but an ambush, and Rome killed almost everyone involved in the next years. This didn't represent a retreat: Germans weren't conquered because they had nothing to conquer. Rather, hopefully, Iran will be to the US what Turks were to Byzantium.
      - rayiner 4mo ago
        > Rather, hopefully, Iran will be to the US what Turks were to Byzantium The Turks conquered Byzantium (and India, etc)?
      - ricree 4mo ago
        > Rather, hopefully, Iran will be to the US what Turks were to Byzantium. An invading force that settles within it and ultimately destroys it before launching expansionist invasions to all of its neighbors?
        constantius 4mo ago
        Haha I was only thinking on the level of "the people who ended the empire", but agree that the analogy is not perfect.
    - bulbar 4mo ago
      Today's world is different. US just lost a lot of credibility in a very important region of the world. They were not able to keep the strait of hormuz open unilateral, nullifying most of their leverage in that region. Gulf States will now strategically look out for other partners. Just like Europe / EU and Canada. Trump tried to leverage a lot of influence in the most stupid way and failed over and over. Does the US even have relevant allies left at that point? Pretty sure they took notes.
- marcus_holmes 4mo ago
  The "trajectory of the empire" is that it became the Roman Catholic Church. Rome still rules a sizable portion of the world's population. I wonder if the USA is going the same way. Democratic Church of America?
  - sally_glance 4mo ago
    Homelander approves.
  - graemep 4mo ago
    Rules? Membership of an organisation is nothing like being a subject of an empire. Its purely voluntary. It has less power over its members than employers do. It cannot tax, only ask for donations. Its not even Rome - its run by people from all over the world. It controls only a tiny bit of territory.
    - bryanrasmussen 4mo ago
      question - do the representatives and elected members of a democracy rule? Rule, under the definition of control or dominion, is "The exercise of authority over a region or people, or the duration of a monarch's reign (e.g., colonial rule)", the word rule is often applied to mean what the leaders of a democracy do, but in most cases rule seems too strict if taking the normative definition, thus there is an informal usage that applies to democratic leadership. The President is often referred to as a ruler, corporate elites are often referred to as rulers; in these informal groups of rulers I think it is reasonable to place the Catholic Church. I am agreeable to say they do not rule, but then we must admit they exert a great influence, in many places and ways greater than the governments that officially hold power.
    - marcus_holmes 4mo ago
      Every single human living in Europe for around a thousand years went to a priest once a week and told them their innermost darkest secrets. There has been no more totalitarian rule ever implemented, anywhere. The North Koreans aspire to what the Catholic Church had.
  - 4mo ago
- mullingitover 4mo ago
  Who were the barbarians, really? Caesar’s conquest of Gaul was basically a massive human trafficking organization that functioned as a pyramid scheme, and Rome only went downhill (in terms of basic human decency) from there.
  - __del__ 4mo ago
    this is a dense comment (there's a lot here to unpack). it sounds like you're saying: once it became clear that conquest with an explicit intended return of large numbers of enslaved people would allow caesar to pay debts and fund further expansion, the pyramid was capped and required exponential expansion to perpetuate its economic aims. and this was the beginning of the end. a model which required autocratic steering to operate.
Terr_ 4mo ago
Either way, I'd just caution that the empire-ness of a country's military or diplomatic reach doesn't necessarily tell us what to expect in terms of its internal hellhole-ness of authoritarianism.
- rayiner 4mo ago
  The two things are related because maintenance of the empire imposes demands on the domestic political and economic structure. Look at the domestic politics during Vietnam and the GWOT.
rvba 4mo ago
The poster above seems to promote the secession of Texas and other states - what is the next step of the russian propaganda playbook to ruin USA
- amanaplanacanal 4mo ago
  Would secession ruin the USA? Hard to know. Secession from the EU has certainly been bad for the UK, but the rest of the EU seems to be doing ok.
  - rvba 4mo ago
    Of course seccession would be bad for USA. Worse for Texas than the states that remained. Note that we heard before Brexit that it would not cause problems, yet it in fact bring benefits as expected by anyone with any idea how economy works. UK has a 6% decline of the economy due to Brexit https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg75npqkq4o https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg75npqkq4o
  - danans 4mo ago
    > Secession from the EU has certainly been bad for the UK, but the rest of the EU seems to be doing ok The UK might have paid the biggest price due to Brexit, but the EU also lost a significant trading partner for it's goods and services. Arguably it was a lose-lose outcome.
klntsky 4mo ago
The empire is not defined merely as "a big state with deep foreign influence". In this context it is about the style of governance rather than strength
tharmas 4mo ago
On the contrary, the goal is energy dominance and it seems to be working. To be clear, I do not support how this is being achieved. In its endeavor the US has made a lot of people furious against it.

by danans 4mo ago

rayiner 4mo ago

Rome took some unexpected Ls against the barbarians too. Didn’t change the trajectory of the empire.

shakna 4mo ago
The failure to integrate the barbarian Goth refugees is generally marked as the beginning of the fall - and absolutely changed the trajectory of the empire.
- deleted 4mo ago
  [deleted]
- rayiner 4mo ago
  “Failure to integrate” is one way to describe the Goths sacking Rome. But I agree the barbarians did them in at the end. My point was that the Iran fiasco is more like the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest, where Rome backed off after taking a beating. That didn’t mark a transition away from Empire, simply a retreat after a military loss.
  - shakna 4mo ago
    And my point, is the current administration is closer to Caligula and Nero, than they are to Varus. You see this as nothing more than another blip in a long history. I see unstable and dangerous individuals getting standing ovations for failure. "I don't care if they respect me so long as they fear me." - Caligula.
  - rvba 4mo ago
    The Iran fiasco is Suez Canal 2.0
    - arethuza 4mo ago
      Did you mean the 1956 Suez Crisis? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Crisis
  - modo_mario 4mo ago
    >is one way to describe the Goths sacking Rome To be fair they had been in the empire for a good amount of years at that time if i remember well. ...so when comparing to other previous influxes that did get integrated and/or assimilated it does seem apt.
  - constantius 4mo ago
    Teutoburg wasn't a battle but an ambush, and Rome killed almost everyone involved in the next years. This didn't represent a retreat: Germans weren't conquered because they had nothing to conquer. Rather, hopefully, Iran will be to the US what Turks were to Byzantium.
    - rayiner 4mo ago
      > Rather, hopefully, Iran will be to the US what Turks were to Byzantium The Turks conquered Byzantium (and India, etc)?
    - ricree 4mo ago
      > Rather, hopefully, Iran will be to the US what Turks were to Byzantium. An invading force that settles within it and ultimately destroys it before launching expansionist invasions to all of its neighbors?
      - constantius 4mo ago
        Haha I was only thinking on the level of "the people who ended the empire", but agree that the analogy is not perfect.
  - bulbar 4mo ago
    Today's world is different. US just lost a lot of credibility in a very important region of the world. They were not able to keep the strait of hormuz open unilateral, nullifying most of their leverage in that region. Gulf States will now strategically look out for other partners. Just like Europe / EU and Canada. Trump tried to leverage a lot of influence in the most stupid way and failed over and over. Does the US even have relevant allies left at that point? Pretty sure they took notes.
marcus_holmes 4mo ago
The "trajectory of the empire" is that it became the Roman Catholic Church. Rome still rules a sizable portion of the world's population. I wonder if the USA is going the same way. Democratic Church of America?
- sally_glance 4mo ago
  Homelander approves.
- graemep 4mo ago
  Rules? Membership of an organisation is nothing like being a subject of an empire. Its purely voluntary. It has less power over its members than employers do. It cannot tax, only ask for donations. Its not even Rome - its run by people from all over the world. It controls only a tiny bit of territory.
  - bryanrasmussen 4mo ago
    question - do the representatives and elected members of a democracy rule? Rule, under the definition of control or dominion, is "The exercise of authority over a region or people, or the duration of a monarch's reign (e.g., colonial rule)", the word rule is often applied to mean what the leaders of a democracy do, but in most cases rule seems too strict if taking the normative definition, thus there is an informal usage that applies to democratic leadership. The President is often referred to as a ruler, corporate elites are often referred to as rulers; in these informal groups of rulers I think it is reasonable to place the Catholic Church. I am agreeable to say they do not rule, but then we must admit they exert a great influence, in many places and ways greater than the governments that officially hold power.
  - marcus_holmes 4mo ago
    Every single human living in Europe for around a thousand years went to a priest once a week and told them their innermost darkest secrets. There has been no more totalitarian rule ever implemented, anywhere. The North Koreans aspire to what the Catholic Church had.
- 4mo ago
mullingitover 4mo ago
Who were the barbarians, really? Caesar’s conquest of Gaul was basically a massive human trafficking organization that functioned as a pyramid scheme, and Rome only went downhill (in terms of basic human decency) from there.
- __del__ 4mo ago
  this is a dense comment (there's a lot here to unpack). it sounds like you're saying: once it became clear that conquest with an explicit intended return of large numbers of enslaved people would allow caesar to pay debts and fund further expansion, the pyramid was capped and required exponential expansion to perpetuate its economic aims. and this was the beginning of the end. a model which required autocratic steering to operate.

Terr_ 4mo ago

Either way, I'd just caution that the empire-ness of a country's military or diplomatic reach doesn't necessarily tell us what to expect in terms of its internal hellhole-ness of authoritarianism.

rayiner 4mo ago
The two things are related because maintenance of the empire imposes demands on the domestic political and economic structure. Look at the domestic politics during Vietnam and the GWOT.

rvba 4mo ago

The poster above seems to promote the secession of Texas and other states - what is the next step of the russian propaganda playbook to ruin USA

amanaplanacanal 4mo ago
Would secession ruin the USA? Hard to know. Secession from the EU has certainly been bad for the UK, but the rest of the EU seems to be doing ok.
- rvba 4mo ago
  Of course seccession would be bad for USA. Worse for Texas than the states that remained. Note that we heard before Brexit that it would not cause problems, yet it in fact bring benefits as expected by anyone with any idea how economy works. UK has a 6% decline of the economy due to Brexit https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg75npqkq4o https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg75npqkq4o
- danans 4mo ago
  > Secession from the EU has certainly been bad for the UK, but the rest of the EU seems to be doing ok The UK might have paid the biggest price due to Brexit, but the EU also lost a significant trading partner for it's goods and services. Arguably it was a lose-lose outcome.

klntsky 4mo ago

The empire is not defined merely as "a big state with deep foreign influence". In this context it is about the style of governance rather than strength

tharmas 4mo ago

On the contrary, the goal is energy dominance and it seems to be working. To be clear, I do not support how this is being achieved. In its endeavor the US has made a lot of people furious against it.