Except that what we are living through isn’t the collapse of the Roman Empire. It’s the Birth of the Roman Empire and the collapse of the Roman Republic.
If we don’t put a stop to it at it’s beginning, we’re looking at a few hundred years of oligarchy under a line of emperors who vary from corrupt and stupid, to capable but evil.
Except that what we are living through isn’t the collapse of the Roman Empire. It’s the Birth of the Roman Empire and the collapse of the Roman Republic.
Counterargument: the leadership change is well thought out, but the economic part isn’t at all. The US system is built on consumption => the first thing people cut back under existential duress is consumption. I still don’t see a well hashed out plan on replacing consumption with something else to drive the economy. Of course the US could go and start annexing new territories to maintain “growth” but I suspect it isn’t really a sustainable approach, and thus far they just let trump talk shit about it as a tool of distraction rather than a concrete plan.
TL;DR: empires need to have viable economies. The US isn’t ready to switch away from a consumer society, and scared people don’t consume.
It’s important to remember that the fall of the Roman Republic was not the story of an evil dictator destroying a Free People™, but that of a sickened plutocratic oligarchy refusing to listen to its people for long enough that the people became directly hostile to the state, and when a political crisis came, it could not call upon the people to save it, considering - perhaps not entirely incorrectly - that to be ruled by an autocrat was not really any worse to them than being ruled by a sufficiently callous and ruthless oligarchy.
a sickened plutocratic oligarchy refusing to listen to its people for long enough that the people became directly hostile to the state
Exactly. The only real difference is that modern Caesar (Trump) happens to be an idiot. But it’s the same hostility to the status quo that gave him power.
Our only hope is that his ego and stupidity prevent him from succeeding. Unlike Caesar who saw the need to consolidate his power with the people, Trump just assumes he already has or doesn’t need it, and instead is focusing on petty vindictive bullshit.
Caesar may even have genuinely believed in the popular opposition, to some degree - he was a lifelong populare when the norm was to waver between populism and conservatism as suited one’s political career. Trump has no beliefs, because he has no thoughts.
Of course, notably, Caesar didn’t kill the Republic. The man who came after Caesar killed the Republic (Augustus).
So when Trump ‘goes’, we still may need to be vigilant…
Except that what we are living through isn’t the collapse of the Roman Empire. It’s the Birth of the Roman Empire and the collapse of the Roman Republic.
If we don’t put a stop to it at it’s beginning, we’re looking at a few hundred years of oligarchy under a line of emperors who vary from corrupt and stupid, to capable but evil.
Counterargument: the leadership change is well thought out, but the economic part isn’t at all. The US system is built on consumption => the first thing people cut back under existential duress is consumption. I still don’t see a well hashed out plan on replacing consumption with something else to drive the economy. Of course the US could go and start annexing new territories to maintain “growth” but I suspect it isn’t really a sustainable approach, and thus far they just let trump talk shit about it as a tool of distraction rather than a concrete plan.
TL;DR: empires need to have viable economies. The US isn’t ready to switch away from a consumer society, and scared people don’t consume.
gawddammit. I’ve been hoisted by own grammar petard. I’m usually pretty careful.
It’s important to remember that the fall of the Roman Republic was not the story of an evil dictator destroying a Free People™, but that of a sickened plutocratic oligarchy refusing to listen to its people for long enough that the people became directly hostile to the state, and when a political crisis came, it could not call upon the people to save it, considering - perhaps not entirely incorrectly - that to be ruled by an autocrat was not really any worse to them than being ruled by a sufficiently callous and ruthless oligarchy.
The comparison may still be apt.
Exactly. The only real difference is that modern Caesar (Trump) happens to be an idiot. But it’s the same hostility to the status quo that gave him power.
And a loser, don’t forget that.
Our only hope is that his ego and stupidity prevent him from succeeding. Unlike Caesar who saw the need to consolidate his power with the people, Trump just assumes he already has or doesn’t need it, and instead is focusing on petty vindictive bullshit.
Caesar may even have genuinely believed in the popular opposition, to some degree - he was a lifelong populare when the norm was to waver between populism and conservatism as suited one’s political career. Trump has no beliefs, because he has no thoughts.
Of course, notably, Caesar didn’t kill the Republic. The man who came after Caesar killed the Republic (Augustus).
So when Trump ‘goes’, we still may need to be vigilant…
Does that make Musk, Mark Antony?
I have the impression that Neo-Roman Empire would collapse within a couple decades, since it consists solely of Nero(s).
and the collapse took a long, long time. It took longer for rome to collapse than the US has existed.
Don’t worry we’ll be spared that thanks to global heating.