Alexand96 post=322922 Wrote:Although, I don't necessarily think that our current situation necessarily ends in a monarchic/imperial takeover by our executive branch. Not without another Civil War first.
Monarchy is a dinosaur by now if ever there was one. One possible scenario: a future economic meltdown which present government is held responsible for and can't handle, leading to a coup de'etat. It's highly likely a new leader, like Augustus, will try at first to disguise the abrupt change. mile:
Well, when I said monarchy/imperial, I was really leaning more towards Roman-imperial style government with extremely strong executive and/or judicial branches, with figurehead or puppet legislative assemblies. Not a monarchy ala Old England or France. I agree though, that the most likely cause of such an event would be economic meltdown, perhaps accompanied with or precipitated by some great war or biological catastrophe. Unpleasant things to think about, most definitely.
Quote:Well, when I said monarchy/imperial, I was really leaning more towards Roman-imperial style government with extremely strong executive and/or judicial branches, with figurehead or puppet legislative assemblies. Not a monarchy ala Old England or France.
OK thanks for the clarification, I concur.
Quote: I agree though, that the most likely cause of such an event would be economic meltdown, perhaps accompanied with or precipitated by some great war or biological catastrophe.
Any crisis, even a serious one, probably wouldn't be enough. It would have to stem from something democratic government can't deal with, like the rising national debt i.e. something the present system is responsible for.
Just a quick comment from us mods- its a real pleasure to see a potentially edgy topic debated so well and with such a great attitude. It wouldn't happen elsewhere on the Internet. Thank you.
A key difference is that in the past democratic government wasn't directly to blame, hence wasn't vulnerable.
One could argue that the Civil war was, in fact, the result of a democratic governmental tradition. The issue in this case wasn't one of replacing representative government with an autocracy. Rather, the war provided a bloody answer to the question of state sovereignty vs. federal authority. The logic behind the case for secession was that individual states had voted (democratically) to ratify the constitution some 80 years prior, and so naturally retained the right to vote themselves out of it if their self-interests weren't being served.
In the case of the Civil War, I think you have a point in that democracy itself wasn't threatened. No matter the outcome, the traditions of representative government for both sides were likely too entrenched for anyone to seriously consider changing. My point is that democracies (I dislike calling the United States a democracy, since we are technically a republic, but I understand your meaning) can be fractious and internally unstable. So, in a sense, we are both correct: democracy was to blame, but paradoxically was in no danger.
Nowadays the economy is at grave risk in part because voters insist on keeping spending high and taxes low, so the red ink keeps accumulating, threatening an eventual collapse.
You've identified an important long-term problem: the national debt and it's deleterious effects on long-term economic health. The last 10 years or so really seem to have been a "bread and circuses" decade. The other two really big contributors to the stagnant economy are massive emerging markets upping demand on foodstuffs and goods (namely China and India), and a market setup that rewards reckless risktaking with massive amounts of money.I get depressed when I dwell on the issue of my nation's fiscal irresponsibility...
But yes: if there was ever a threat to our democratic way of life (barring biological or WMD catastrophe), it would be the specter of economic collapse. When ideological push comes to hard-times shove, people seem willing to trade their liberties for a promise of security. As others have pointed out, we would very likely keep the structure of democracy intact, while an executive branch wields massively disproportionate power, kept into place by, say, an "emergency" amendment to the constitution.
Quote:But yes: if there was ever a threat to our democratic way of life (barring biological or WMD catastrophe), it would be the specter of economic collapse. When ideological push comes to hard-times shove, people seem willing to trade their liberties for a promise of security.
And it's not just deficits. The environmental situation is becoming ominous, and again the solutions involve sacrifice--less energy use, less consumption generally--yet that's no more popular that budget belt tightening. Ergo, democracy seems little better suited to addressing this vital issue than the economic one--yet it'll have to be addressed.
Quote:As others have pointed out, we would very likely keep the structure of democracy intact, while an executive branch wields massively disproportionate power, kept into place by, say, an "emergency" amendment to the constitution.
The structure of democracy, or perhaps just the outside appearance? Sort of like Augustus. mile:
So, it seems that most believe that the U.S. looks like late republican Rome, instead of a 3rd century Rome. Hopefully, we will not become a autocratic society; aka. Putin's Russia! At 51, I will not be around to see it. :grin:
Caesar's Ghost (by way of Professor Barry Strauss) has a fews thoughts on the comparison of ancient Rome to the US.
I do not always agree with the Professor, or with Gaius Julius, but some members of our Forum may find the Proconsul's thoughts to be cogent, germane and interesting.
August 20, 2012 Some Roads Lead to Rome 4
by Barry Strauss • Caesar's Ghost, Leadership, Masters of Command •
Kathleen Parker’s op-ed in today’s Washington Post, “All Roads Lead to Rome,” woke up Caesar’s Ghost.
“Hail, Professor!”
“Hail, Dictator!”
Kathleen Parker complains like Cicero, about the times and the mores. Today’s politicians, she says, are constrained “to say as little of substance as possible and to say it often.” The citizenry has become a distracted mob, unable to focus long on anything, and so deluded that they will even cheer the loss of their freedom. It’s all, Ms. Parker says, reminiscent of the Roman Empire.
She has a point, don’t you think, Caesar?
By no means. The story is a caricature both of Rome and of America. Her characters are what she calls the mob and corrupt politicians. The trouble with Ms. Parker’s story is that it leaves out leadership. She makes no room for greatness. You would never know from her account that Imperial Rome gave rise to emperors like Augustus or Marcus Aurelius, to Claudius or Trajan, to Diocletian or Constantine. And what of generals and governors like Agrippa or Agricola or Cerialis? Ms. Parker’s cartoon omits the men who made and maintained the majesty of the Roman peace.
I notice that you say nothing about freedom. Freedom died with Cato, when he committed suicide rather than surrender to Caesar!
Cato died well, all right. Otherwise, he was far from being of service to the commonwealth. Cato’s definition of freedom was the right of three hundred old men to run the lives of 50 million people, without a scintilla of concern for the misery those millions suffered. Caesar thought differently. He took away the freedom of the Roman Senate to abuse the abuse an empire without giving its inhabitants a chance. Peace, bread, and dignity for everyone. That is true freedom, and that’s what Caesar offered in place of Cato’s oligarchy. It was very much beloved by the people.
Bread and circuses, Caesar – that’s all it was!
Was it bread and circuses to send out colonies to ruined Carthage and Corinth? Was it mob rule to plant a colony in southern Spain where the urban plebs could be citizens? Was it bread and circuses to give Gauls the freedom to be Roman Senators? To dignify the lives of Rome’s poor by building them parks and porticoes?
And what of America, Caesar? Surely Parker is right. Our presidential election is a sorry distraction!
You must be referring to the Olympics. The American election is otherwise. It offers the people a clear and genuine choice between two conflicting visions. On the one hand, Americans can expand the welfare state and central control. This vision offers security to a greater number, while accepting a heightened unemployment rate as the price. On the other hand, Americans can cut back the welfare state and central control. This vision offers more risk to ordinary people but also the prospect of more employment in a growing economy.
But what about the mud-slinging and ad hominem attacks? Surely Parker is right that our politics has too much of that?
Every battle begins with skirmishers tossing barbs. It’s not even Labor Day yet. And there will be many skirmishers because the more distinguished a man is, the more followers he has.
The sleazy attack ads will continue all the way to Election Day.
You need to get out more, professor. We live in the real world of mud and blood, not Plato’s republic. On the long march to November, the candidates will give interviews and issue position papers. There will be party platforms and public forums. And then that fine weapon of warfare – the debates.
Let the trumpets sound!
Barry Strauss is professor of history at Cornell and author of Masters of Command: Alexander, Hannibal, and Caesar and the Genius of Leadership (Simon & Schuster, 2012).
Quote:So, it seems that most believe that the U.S. looks like late republican Rome, instead of a 3rd century Rome. Hopefully, we will not become a autocratic society; aka. Putin's Russia! At 51, I will not be around to see it. :grin:
It's very hard to see when the present system may break down. Deficits have been piling up for decades; it'll probably take at least one additional factor like an oil supply interruption.
The "fall" of the Late Empire in the West was more of a slide than a fall. It didn't happen in just an afternoon, it took fifty years or so, and many of the people who lived at that time scarcely noticed, since they were busy with the matters of life and had little time for theorizing.
:-|
Both Rome and the USA suffered from chronic budget overspending on military. But the Romans did so while defending their borders, whereas the USA have overstretched their military obligations around the globe in recent years. The good news is: if they cut back these and concentrate in future only on vital threats to their national security, they can slow down their strategic and financial decline, perhaps even reverse it. The Romans who were threatened in their heartland did not have this option.
Stefan (Literary references to the discussed topics are always appreciated.)
Quote:Both Rome and the USA suffered from chronic budget overspending on military. But the Romans did so while defending their borders, whereas the USA have overstretched their military obligations around the globe in recent years. The good news is: if they cut back these and concentrate in future only on vital threats to their national security, they can slow down their strategic and financial decline, perhaps even reverse it. The Romans who were threatened in their heartland did not have this option.
Unfortunately (for us Americans), I believe that is an oversimplification of a more complex issue. Although the US does spend more on military expenditures than any other nation on the planet, our defense budgets have often been exaggerated in comparison with other types of US government spending. I tried to find something a bit more recent, but as you can see in the pie chart attached, military spending in the US in 2010 was at about 20% of the entire federal budget. I believe this ratio, if anything, has already been shrinking in the past 2 years. Without steering this conversation too far off the "historical analysis" path over to the dark side (politics), I think it is quite clear to anyone with a cogent mind, on both sides of the aisle (or Atlantic for that matter), that the US is going to need to decrease spending on a wide range of programs in the years to come...unless we simply default.
mile:
![[Image: wip2_r1_c1-1-1.jpg]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/PaulHB/wip2_r1_c1-1-1.jpg)
![[Image: Comitatuslogo3.jpg]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v221/PaulHB/Comitatuslogo3.jpg)
