Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Lessons of the Roman Empire for America Today
Heritage Foundation ^ | December 19, 2005 | Rufus Fears

Posted on 12/20/2005 6:04:54 AM PST by robowombat

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last
To: MNJohnnie

This fall of Rome comparison is old and very tired. No one really knows why Rome fell and if you ask 10 historians you will get 10 different answers. How did Egypt fall, how did the Soviet Union fall, how did the British Empire fall?


21 posted on 12/20/2005 6:57:01 AM PST by Casloy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: robowombat

Bump for later read.


22 posted on 12/20/2005 7:03:20 AM PST by Renfield (If Gene Tracy was the entertainment at your senior prom, YOU might be a redneck...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Capriole

Baghdad is said to have been founded in A.D. 762, so it didn't exist yet in the days of Caesar or Trajan. Caesar never got that far east, but Trajan's last campaign was in Mesopotamia shortly before his death.


23 posted on 12/20/2005 7:07:58 AM PST by Verginius Rufus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Casloy

Those ten historians may differ on the finer points but all will agree on a common element that lead to the downfall of the societies you mentioned: internal corruption and political greed.


24 posted on 12/20/2005 7:12:26 AM PST by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SpaceBar
internal corruption and political greed.

I disagree. I don't think anyone knows for sure what caused the fall. Internal corruption and political greed could have just as easily been a sympton and not a cause. Comparing the fall of Rome to an modern nation state is pointless.

25 posted on 12/20/2005 7:18:03 AM PST by Casloy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

You read the entire article in under three minutes?


26 posted on 12/20/2005 7:19:30 AM PST by rattrap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: robowombat

ping


27 posted on 12/20/2005 7:27:38 AM PST by reluctantwarrior (Strength and Honor, just call me Buzzkill for short......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mike182d

Rome no longer exists, not even thru the Catholic Church. Reason, during the Medieval Age, the various post Roman kingdoms and empires did attempt to recreate the Roman Empire, but each time they failed. After 300 years of trying, the Europeans intellects gave up and concluded that they must create their own system which formed the basis for the Renaissance (based on faith and reason, plus rudimentary structures for modern banking and property rights).


28 posted on 12/20/2005 7:38:41 AM PST by Fee (`+Great powers never let minor allies dictate who, where and when they must fight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: rattrap

I normally quit reading nonsense once I recognize it as such. In my case this article was burdened by false analogies, historical distortions of fact, and illogic in the first two minutes. If the premises are faulty, why listen for a conclusion?


29 posted on 12/20/2005 7:45:41 AM PST by OrangeBlossomSpecial (DEAN, KERRY & HERPES : The gifts that keep on giving & giving & giving)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: robowombat
Then the imponderable happened. In the third century A.D., Iran changed from a passive to a powerfully offensive nation under a revitalized religion, a monotheist religion, the wor­ship of Ahura Mazda, the Lord of Truth, the reli­gion that had once been prophesied by Zoroaster. Iran began to sweep into the frontiers of the Roman Empire, which were too stretched in terms of its military and other commitments. As a result, the Persian forces swept right through the fairest prov­inces of the Roman East. At the same time, the Ger­manic tribes formed new federations and coalitions and swept into the Roman Empire in the West, including Gaul and Britain.

What apparently really happened, is that a climate change had occurred that put pressure on the "horse people" of the steppe, who pushed outward against both the Persians and the Germanic tribes, who then pushed against Rome.

Dr. Fears seems ultimately to have missed out on the real problem with Rome: it fell because Roman citizens had lost their energy -- they were decadent, and had decided to hire foreign soldiers to fight their wars for them. In the words of John Adams, they had ceased to be "moral and religious." And so when push came to shove, they found themselves morally unequal to the task of defending themselves.

30 posted on 12/20/2005 7:50:12 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OrangeBlossomSpecial
Because when you don't read the whole thing, then start spouting off comments you run a real risk of looking like a fool. I knew by the time I was through the first sentence there were going to be a ton of comments posted just minutes after a fairly long article that were "opening their mouth and removing all doubt" as Twain would say.

Read First, Then Post. There is no prize for first comment.
31 posted on 12/20/2005 7:56:55 AM PST by rattrap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Casloy
No one really knows why Rome fell and if you ask 10 historians you will get 10 different answers.

All of which are, to some degree, correct. There's rarely a single cause for great historical events -- if we can even properly call a centuries-long process an "event."

About all we can really say is that the Roman Empire fell apart from within at the same time it was being defeated militarily from without. Dr. Fears is correct when he points out the bloat and inefficiency within Roman institutions.

IMHO, such bloat and inefficiency occurs when a government tries to make up for the decay of individual virtue. As John Adams said about our own Constitution:

"We have no government armed in power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other."

The Roman citizenry had to a large extent lost the civic virtues -- a sense of duty to Rome -- and were instead focused on their own affairs and gain. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with the latter, but if it's not balanced by a sense of responsibility to the larger group it becomes decadence. That is the real lesson of Rome, and we can see it at work here.

32 posted on 12/20/2005 8:03:24 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Casloy
Comparing the fall of Rome to an modern nation state is pointless.

That's preposterous.

33 posted on 12/20/2005 8:04:44 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie
Further factual distortions. Sparta was a slave state based, not on the works of the Spartans, themselves, but on that of the , which Sparta controlled brutally.

The actual Spartan citizens were raised like worker bees. Called 'the Upbringing', it, too, was brutal. There was no individual freedom in Sparta. Athens was better, but most of the residents were not citizens with political rights, but resident aliens, or slaves. Think for yourself what this means for present day America.

34 posted on 12/20/2005 8:14:46 AM PST by chesley (Liberals...what's not to loathe?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: robowombat

I find the article to be pretty shallow. But there is one point that applies and that is that I believe the U.S. is indeed at a crossroads as to the question of whether we will remain a constitutional republic or morph into something else. Our constitution has been stretched and trimmed very much in the past 100 years and the process is accelerating. Governance by crisis is very much at the heart of this and I see no end to it. Some of the crises are real and some are manufactured (Clinton was especially good at that though he is certainly not unique). Our freedoms are slowly but surely curtailed and restricted for the "greater good". One of these days(if it hasn't already happened) we will turn a corner and find that the written constitution is largely irrelevant to how the nation is actually governed having been "interpreted" into something it was never meant to be. The outward forms will probably endure but the intent will be long gone.


35 posted on 12/20/2005 8:21:50 AM PST by scory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chesley

Great points. Love your tagline.


36 posted on 12/20/2005 8:23:53 AM PST by MNJohnnie (We do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them.--GWBush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: robowombat
There is too many differences between the Roman Empire and the USA ... During the Roman Empire.. everyones armies pretty much had the same technology .. swords, bow/arrows, maces, etc ... the playing field was about equal as for wartime technology.. the only thing that was different was the size of armies, the conducting of the war, and how well trained the soldiers were.

fast forward today, and we have the advantage of better technology, better military campaign planning, and some intense training on our warriors... comparing the terrorist technology to our military technology is like comparing a geo metro to a ferrari.
37 posted on 12/20/2005 8:24:04 AM PST by Element187
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: r9etb; Casloy
Comparing the fall of Rome to an modern nation state is pointless.

That's preposterous.

Casloy is absolutely spot on. History does NOT repeat. For example, Rome never abolished Slavery, we did. Rome did not have virtually instantaneous communications, we do. Rome did not know much about any of the societies beyond the Med and Europe. We do. To compare the two societies is hysterically stupid. There are "no lessons of history" ok? That is just babble from those who want to use history to rationalize their stupid political opinions.

38 posted on 12/20/2005 8:28:03 AM PST by MNJohnnie (We do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them.--GWBush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Thanks, I like it, too.


39 posted on 12/20/2005 8:33:44 AM PST by chesley (Liberals...what's not to loathe?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
That is the real lesson of Rome, and we can see it at work here.

Absurd nonsense. This is the conventional thinking of certain hard right politicians who try to manufacture "historical proof" to rationalize their current political opinions. Rome did NOT fall from an excess of Government. IF anything, Rome broke down because it had no ability to communicate efficiently over the distance it controlled. It concentrated power in the hands of an Emperor who could not manage the number of task necessary to govern such a large area and the break down of the rule of law. When any thug with an army could decide to try and make his self Emperor, the legitimacy of institutions was destroyed. Rome did NOT fall from an excess of Government. That is just historically incorrect.

40 posted on 12/20/2005 8:34:27 AM PST by MNJohnnie (We do not create terrorism by fighting the terrorists. We invite terrorism by ignoring them.--GWBush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson