'Murica! (182 Viewers)

Hængebøffer

Senior Member
Jun 4, 2009
25,185
No. I don't want the world to burn. And America burning isn't the world burning. I sympathize with the ordeal that American citizens will have to face soon, but I can't deny that I am relishing at the thought of America crumbling to its knees.

One thing I can't get over though is your arrogance, not you per se, but the American arrogance. If we're hurting everyone else must too, or like @ALC said we're too big to fall.

How many nations have been divided, invaded or manipulated to make them cooperate with the ever so great United States of America, who very soon won't be all too United. I sympathize with people sure, but there is no organization that I want to see crumble more than America. I absolutely despise your nation. A nation of terrorist, but it's justified if you got the power and money, and that the killing aren't done in front of you.
Come on. This is just bs. We should be very critical of The States, but they're still the best alternative.
The world isn't a Disney movie.
 

IliveForJuve

Burn this club
Jan 17, 2011
18,931
I haven't heard of it actually, will check it out though.

But yeah the parallels between Roman Republic and the States are very apparent, and one of the things I find oddly funny is how both use the circus and the bread to distract and control their own.

The old will fall and a new one will rise. Until the planet decides to explode or mankind made it explode.
From the context of history, studied over centuries, all empires, ancient and modern, despotic and beneficent have come to an end. Great powers, superpowers and even hyperpowers have eventually lost their position of preeminence. So it is not unreasonable to predict that the same will eventually happen to today’s hyperpower USA.

However, given that the world is far more connected, interdependent etc., than any other time in history, it is plausible that the rest of the world will eventually rise more rapidly than the USA, and this may feel like a decline of USA (i.e. we could see a decline in relative standards, but not in absolute standards). It is plausible that we will see a world more united and equal than ever before in history, with democratization of knowledge, commerce and opportunity being a key driver.
 

Ocelot

Midnight Marauder
Jul 13, 2013
18,943
In terms of economic power it's only a matter of time before China overtakes them (they've done it with total GDP PPP already, but that's not saying that much).

Political power...I'd say it's insanely difficult to predict. Mostly because there's no one to really take over hegemony, the only candidate is China and they have no real interest in seeing the US fail, they're way too mutually dependent on each other economically.

Of course US hegemony is bound to end at some point, but I don't think anyone can credibly predict whether that will be in the next decade or two, or rather in a century.

- - - Updated - - -

Have you heard Dan Carlin's Hardcore History podcast? There are sooo many parallels between the Roman Republic and the US, its crazy.
Dan Carlin's stuff isn't bad, but he still places narrative above all. His material is really well sourced and all, but it still pushes a particular side of the story, and especially when it comes to something as complex as the downfall of the Roman empire, there are a lot of perspectives of equal value.

- - - Updated - - -

Come on. This is just bs. We should be very critical of The States, but they're still the best alternative.
The world isn't a Disney movie.
True as well.
 

Ocelot

Midnight Marauder
Jul 13, 2013
18,943
Yeah every historian suffers from the same, but I'd argue that Carlin is a bit worse in that regard, he's an entertainer first and historian second.

That makes him so good at what he does of course.
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,877
Yeah every historian suffers from the same, but I'd argue that Carlin is a bit worse in that regard, he's an entertainer first and historian second.

That makes him so good at what he does of course.
He does entertain, no doubt. But every credible historian I quoted in my thesis was as bad or worse 😃
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,877
:tup: Guess you know more about this than me tbh :D
Imo Carlin should steer away from comparisons that have no place (macedonians & Napoleon for instance), pointing out what we have today as a direct consequence (mongols and communication) and setting up quotes too neatly. Thats the three things which disqualifies him as a historian imo. But as I said, that goes for the majority of so called historians. Only two who managed to draw straight lines effecrively are Patricia Crone and John Darwin
 

Ocelot

Midnight Marauder
Jul 13, 2013
18,943
Imo Carlin should steer away from comparisons that have no place (macedonians & Napoleon for instance), pointing out what we have today as a direct consequence (mongols and communication) and setting up quotes too neatly. Thats the three things which disqualifies him as a historian imo. But as I said, that goes for the majority of so called historians. Only two who managed to draw straight lines effecrively are Patricia Crone and John Darwin
Don't know those two, but will check them out.

Had a bad introduction to Carlin too, first thing I of him I listened to was his WWI podcast, and he started off with the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, but...in his story of the assassination there were quite a few things that were simply wrong, like that sandwich myth.
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,877
Don't know those two, but will check them out.

Had a bad introduction to Carlin too, first thing I of him I listened to was his WWI podcast, and he started off with the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, but...in his story of the assassination there were quite a few things that were simply wrong, like that sandwich myth.
Yeah, that was a bad start. The rest of Apocalypse is balls out though
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 9, Guests: 154)