Thread: Reapeating History

Interesting topic... for discussion from what I understand and I am no historian the Roman empire fell because it over extended itself by undertaking military conquests to colonize other countries.

Very soon it was running out money and borrowing from other to sustain its operations. The army was extended beyond its means and the empire became vulnerable to attacks from outsiders.

It was the greed of Rome and its citizens that led to its fall which you can say was a loss of its morals.

Interestingly enough the preeminent historian on the topic, Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, believed that Christianity played a large part in the fall of the empire. Here is an interesting essay on the subject of Gibbon's conclusions.

The selling out of the American working class is going to largely responsible for China and India becoming the economic super powers in the world while the USA and Europe fall behind. The fact that they will finance it with our money is the irony of it all.

The love of a buck by the entrepreneurs killed the goose that laid the golden egg. (American manufacturing) I would say buy American the job you save may be your own but the cow is so far out of the barn that there is little point in closing the door now.

Originally Posted by Bruno

In the case of Rome, they fell because they overextended their conquest. They used the spoils of conquest to finance more conquest and support the decadent life of the upper crust. When the conquests halted, the entire thing collapsed in on itself.

Originally Posted by Amyn

Very soon it was running out money and borrowing from other to sustain its operations. The army was extended beyond its means and the empire became vulnerable to attacks from outsiders.

It was the greed of Rome and its citizens that led to its fall which you can say was a loss of its morals.

Interesting topic. Call me a kook here, but think of some undetermined time in the future looking back on the history of the U.S. and substitute "USA" for Rome in both of the above quotes. I see such an outcome as entirely probable based on past to present similarities.

As humans, we have remarkable qualities and abilities. I think it's undeniable that as humans, we also have a propensity toward greed, malice fear and exploitation. I'm in the Divine camp. Left to our own devices, in my opinion, over and over and over and over and over again we've proven as a species that we won't, as a group, look up from our iPods, gaze into each other's eyes and wrap our arms lovingly around our neighbor on every level from the person living next to us on up to those in power across the globe. Not in the past, not now and not even if with science we advance to where we can hover in a lotus position and travel by thought. Concepts such as The Venus Project are silly unachievable pipe dreams given the flaws I make mention of that are inherent in humans.

Er, ah, I really am a happy positive guy though, honest!

Chris L

Originally Posted by Amyn

Interesting topic... for discussion from what I understand and I am no historian the Roman empire fell because it over extended itself by undertaking military conquests to colonize other countries.

Very soon it was running out money and borrowing from other to sustain its operations. The army was extended beyond its means and the empire became vulnerable to attacks from outsiders.

It was the greed of Rome and its citizens that led to its fall which you can say was a loss of its morals.

Maybe due to greed? Bigger empire, more luxury? Maybe this is consistent with what Rousseau meant?

Originally Posted by Amyn

Interesting topic... for discussion from what I understand and I am no historian the Roman empire fell because it over extended itself by undertaking military conquests to colonize other countries.

Very soon it was running out money and borrowing from other to sustain its operations. The army was extended beyond its means and the empire became vulnerable to attacks from outsiders.

It was the greed of Rome and its citizens that led to its fall which you can say was a loss of its morals.

This sounds very like the USA today I'm afraid.

Hmm, moral decay from within, increased hostility within the civilization directed towards the culture as a whole and an unending series of wars which drained the coffers of state. Sound familiar?

It's my understanding that Rome was overrun by hairy barbarians. Motto: shave more and better. All this thinking makes my head hurt anyway.

Okay, I think a lot of intelligent people are posting here...

But I'm not sure they know what they're talking about: Rousseau. Most of the posts here have nothing to do with R.'s Discourses, although many are vaguely linked. In the interest of sound, Socratic, discourse please refrain from speculating or commenting beyond the question...

exempli grata: Rousseau has nothing to say about religion. Being used to the modern political idea that religion and science are somehow antonymous, many have made the argument "Is religion the cause of the fall of empires". This is not Rousseau's point. He believes that an increase in learning leads to people living luxuriously rather than intelligently, and therefore nations fall. I.E. Rome grew large and rich, and the ruling class used science and technology to improve their quality of life. They stopped being diligent (In many ways Roman) and therefore the nation fell.

Again, I don't question the intellect of anyone involvd here, I just see what seems to be a chronic unfamiliarity with the subject.

Check out the big brain on that guy.

"Richness of apparel may proclaim the man of fortune, and elegance the man of taste; but true health and manliness are known by different signs. It is under the homespun of the labourer, and not beneath the gilt and tinsel of the courtier, that we should look for strength and vigour of body."




Before art had moulded our behaviour, and taught our passions to speak an artificial language, our morals were rude but natural; and the different ways in which we behaved proclaimed at the first glance the difference of our dispositions. Human nature was not at bottom better then than now; but men found their security in the ease with which they could see through one another, and this advantage, of which we no longer feel the value, prevented their having many vices."



"We no longer dare seem what we really are, but lie under a perpetual restraint; in the meantime the herd of men, which we call society, all act under the same circumstances exactly alike, unless very particular and powerful motives prevent them. Thus we never know with whom we have to deal; and even to know our friends we must wait for some critical and pressing occasion; that is, till it is too late; for it is on those very occasions that such knowledge is of use to us."


....Sound Familiar......Gentlemen?