RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ?

RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Politesub53 -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/6/2012 4:44:14 PM)
History has shown it to be the case. Despite everyone blaming Nero, Rome actually burnt itself out with continual warfare. The constant wars with the Persians did for both nations regards the middle east and gave way to the rise of the Muslim Empire.

fucktoyprincess -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/6/2012 6:31:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 History has shown it to be the case. Despite everyone blaming Nero, Rome actually burnt itself out with continual warfare. The constant wars with the Persians did for both nations regards the middle east and gave way to the rise of the Muslim Empire. Whether it is war, or simply other expenses, once an "empire" becomes very large, it is expensive to operate. Simply not sustainable long term (if one wants to maintain the same standard of living and level of security). So many lessons to be learned from history that so very few seem capable of truly internalizing.

slvemike4u -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/6/2012 6:36:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee One could argue that the Roman Empire never fell. Really ? How so ?

slvemike4u -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/6/2012 6:39:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee One could argue that the Roman Empire never fell. One would be wrong. Yeah,but I still want to hear how "one" could possibly frame such an argument LOL.

Aylee -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/9/2012 7:21:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee One could argue that the Roman Empire never fell. Really ? How so ? Yep. The argument is that the Roman Empire still exists today in the form of the Roman Catholic Church. The Bishops of Rome were not over run by barbarians. They were able to convert them. What is a Cardinal? A prince of the Catholic Church. The administrative units of the late Empire were called dioceses, after the Emperor Diocletian. We have cannon law which is more or less descended from Imperial law. The term "father," Latin "pater." Priests are Roman "patricians." Patricians were the male upper class individuals. Judges, keepers of literature, keepers of history. Literally priests. The concept of judge and the concept of priest were identical in Greek and Roman antiquity. ETA: The Roman Empire never fell. It just transformed.

vincentML -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/9/2012 8:45:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee One could argue that the Roman Empire never fell. Really ? How so ? Yep. The argument is that the Roman Empire still exists today in the form of the Roman Catholic Church. The Bishops of Rome were not over run by barbarians. They were able to convert them. What is a Cardinal? A prince of the Catholic Church. The administrative units of the late Empire were called dioceses, after the Emperor Diocletian. We have cannon law which is more or less descended from Imperial law. The term "father," Latin "pater." Priests are Roman "patricians." Patricians were the male upper class individuals. Judges, keepers of literature, keepers of history. Literally priests. The concept of judge and the concept of priest were identical in Greek and Roman antiquity. ETA: The Roman Empire never fell. It just transformed. You are right! Tiz true. A tip of the hat to you. But with respect to influence and power isn't that like saying the British Empire never fell; it just transformed into a Commonwealth?

vincentML -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/9/2012 11:05:19 AM)
~FR~ Cmon! Does this look like Rome falling? 6 minute video. Mesmerizing. Flight of the Spirit!

Aylee -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/9/2012 12:59:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML isn't that like saying the British Empire never fell; it just transformed into a Commonwealth? In many ways. It has been argued by historians that the British Empire was really nothing more than trade routes. Trade routes that pretty much still exist today.

MrRodgers -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/9/2012 1:26:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML ~FR~ Cmon! Does this look like Rome falling? 6 minute video. Mesmerizing. Flight of the Spirit! Well, we'll have our technological orgasms now and then and continue to proficiently manipulate the electron but over the long term and in the big picture, we will need to enlist allies Imilitarily and financially that will act permanently in a shared world view of military and financial dominance. The US is likely at it's naval 'peace time' limit politically and financially now.

MrRodgers -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/9/2012 1:32:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML isn't that like saying the British Empire never fell; it just transformed into a Commonwealth? In many ways. It has been argued by historians that the British Empire was really nothing more than trade routes. Trade routes that pretty much still exist today. Except that the British did turn their colonial conquests into vassal states. Changed their govt. their currency, their business relationships and local law. Same with most European colonialism. The Brits also changed their schools and curriculum. All were subject to the crown including their banking.

vincentML -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/9/2012 2:46:35 PM)
quote: The US is likely at it's naval 'peace time' limit politically and financially now. Keeping an eye on China. They have one 'new' aircraft carrier they purchased from the Ukraine. Originally for scrap metal. Now they are making it sea worthy.

vincentML -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/9/2012 2:49:03 PM)
quote: we will need to enlist allies Imilitarily and financially that will act permanently in a shared world view of military and financial dominance Maybe the Brits. But who else? We do not have allies as in WWII We just have a bunch of silly wars Neverending if Romney/Ryan ascend to the throne

Politesub53 -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/9/2012 4:29:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML isn't that like saying the British Empire never fell; it just transformed into a Commonwealth? In many ways. It has been argued by historians that the British Empire was really nothing more than trade routes. Trade routes that pretty much still exist today. While not based soley on trade routes, or even trade, much of that is true. Trade played the largest part, with the military protecting much of it. Hong Kong, for example, was completely trade based. After the Opium war, it was in effect a tax free trading point.

Edalphi -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/10/2012 8:54:11 AM)
Income inequality itself is not a reason for fall. Historically, periods with an expanded middle class have been very short. America has ideology that opposes rioting because of poverty ("it is your own fault"), and it does not have organizational structure to fight ruling class (the major purpose of two major parties is to confuse people and cement the oligarchy rule). Plus Bush and Obama regimes have substantially stepped up the police state buildup. Most economists predict major dollar crisis within few years. It is certain, and will be a substantial fall. Nobody knows how big it will be, and if it will cause total economic collapse. Empire will shrink for sure as the military spending at current levels will become impossible (they never cut it voluntarily). Considering the US is centrally planned economy and the government is strong, it is hard to believe they will loose control. The most likely things will just get gradually worse for most people. Empire fall means a decrease in global influence. It is already happening. There are efforts to replace it with some kind of global power structure where the same people and families maintain control.

missiesfavourite -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/20/2012 9:19:40 AM)
no you are not ... not even close Rome: founded 753bc, kingdom to 508bc, republic to 30ad, empire to 395ad, then divided in to western and eastern part, western empire to 476ad, eastern empire to 1453/1461ad ... compared to Rome the USA appears just like a footnote in history try to do better for the coming 10 to 19 centuries to be a worthy match

missiesfavourite -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/20/2012 9:41:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee One could argue that the Roman Empire never fell. Really ? How so ? Yep. The argument is that the Roman Empire still exists today in the form of the Roman Catholic Church. The Bishops of Rome were not over run by barbarians. They were able to convert them. What is a Cardinal? A prince of the Catholic Church. The administrative units of the late Empire were called dioceses, after the Emperor Diocletian. We have cannon law which is more or less descended from Imperial law. The term "father," Latin "pater." Priests are Roman "patricians." Patricians were the male upper class individuals. Judges, keepers of literature, keepers of history. Literally priests. The concept of judge and the concept of priest were identical in Greek and Roman antiquity. ETA: The Roman Empire never fell. It just transformed. ouch that really hurts most of that - pardon me - is pure rubbish ... in Rome (as well as in a few other cities that had republican constitutions) the population was divided in patricii and plebeii ... in Rome etc. some/many of those patrician FAMILIES still exist although without their former privileges FAMILIES! thus no priests, at least no Roman catholic ones ... Pater/padre/vater/father ... in indoeuropean languages in different variations means what we all know it means, and has been used as an honorary title in all these languages for thousands of years ... the rest is too tiresome to put right ...

vincentML -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/20/2012 10:08:47 AM)
quote: ouch that really hurts most of that - pardon me - is pure rubbish ... in Rome (as well as in a few other cities that had republican constitutions) the population was divided in patricii and plebeii ... in Rome etc. some/many of those patrician FAMILIES still exist although without their former privileges FAMILIES! thus no priests, at least no Roman catholic ones ... Pater/padre/vater/father ... in indoeuropean languages in different variations means what we all know it means, and has been used as an honorary title in all these languages for thousands of years ... the rest is too tiresome to put right ... 800 Dec 25, Pope Leo III crowned Frankish warrior-king Charlemagne as heir of the Roman emperors at the basilica of St. Peter's at Rome.

kalikshama -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/20/2012 10:27:30 AM)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Empire#Political_legacy Several states claimed to be the Roman Empire's successors after the fall of the Western Roman Empire. The Holy Roman Empire, an attempt to resurrect the Empire in the West, was established in 800 when Pope Leo III crowned Frankish King Charlemagne as Roman Emperor on Christmas Day, though the empire and the imperial office did not become formalised for some decades. After the fall of Constantinople, the Russian Tsardom, as inheritor of the Byzantine Empire's Orthodox Christian tradition, counted itself the Third Rome (Constantinople having been the second). These concepts are known as Translatio imperii. When the Ottomans, who based their state on the Byzantine model, took Constantinople in 1453, Mehmed II established his capital there and claimed to sit on the throne of the Roman Empire. He even went so far as to launch an invasion of Italy with the purpose of "re-uniting the Empire", although Papal and Neapolitan armies stopped his march on Rome at Otranto in 1480. Constantinople was not officially renamed Istanbul until 28 March 1930. In the medieval West, "Roman" came to mean the church and the Pope of Rome. The Greek form Romaioi remained attached to the Greek-speaking Christian population of the Eastern Roman Empire, and is still used by Greeks in addition to their common appellation.[280] The Roman Empire's territorial legacy of controlling the Italian peninsula would serve as an influence to Italian nationalism and the unification (Risorgimento) of Italy in 1861. The Roman Empire also contributed its form of government, which influences various constitutions including those of most European countries and many former European colonies. In the United States, for example, the framers of the United States Constitution remarked, in creating the Presidency, that they wanted to inaugurate an "Augustan Age".

missiesfavourite -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/20/2012 10:27:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML 800 Dec 25, Pope Leo III crowned Frankish warrior-king Charlemagne as heir of the Roman emperors at the basilica of St. Peter's at Rome. yes he did - in title (and most if not all German kings that followed up to 1803; and adding the title of King of Jerusalem too after the crusades) ... but the city of Rome itself was no part of it (at least for most of the time) - it was the capital of the papal state until the Risorgimento of Italy some more examples: the English Kings also had the title of King of France ... I think Elizabeth II was the first British monarch who dropped that one it did not change much of French history at least after England surrendered Calais ... and the baby son of the Archduke of Liechtenstein's ruling family is the heir of the Stuart claim of the British crown (the "Stuart pretender" if somebody might call it a title) - but for the last three centuries the Stuart claim of the British throne had not much to do with who actually reigned in the UK there is a BIG difference between a title and power or rule ...

vincentML -> RE: Are we Rome...destined for a big fall ? (9/20/2012 10:49:59 AM)
quote: but the city of Rome itself was no part of it (at least for most of the time) - it was the capital of the papal state until the Risorgimento of Italy Which Pius IX futily resisted. Some people just don't know when to quit. Was that not when the final whimper occurred and the world was left with a masquerade in flowing robes and pointed hats? Nevermind Benito's delusion. No matter how you parse the words or slice the kings I think there is something to be said for the notion that the heart of Ancient Rome beats faintly in the catacombs of the Vatican. Oh, for those good old days, hey, Benedict? Oh, Ye Princes of Rome. Or was that Maine?

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125