It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Totalitarian America: An Open Question

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 04:26 PM
link   
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the Pax Romana ended after the rule of Octavian, Rome was a republic for a long time before it was an empire, it was through military struggle between the triumpherate and Julius Ceasar's inevitable victory that led to the empire. It was during it's time as an empire that it begin to fall. Remember also that it began to fall long before the barbarians breached the walls, must I reference Caligula?

Edited to add: Most of the "glorious days of Rome" were during it's era of imperial conquest, hence the whole majesty and glory of the god king Ceasar. It was during this time that Rome rose to the power it was known for. It hardly had 1000 years of peace, in fact I'd risk the argument that if Rome had 1000 yearts of peace it would never have made it to the prominent spot in history we tend to lend to it

[edit on 30-4-2005 by Shadowflux]

[edit on 30-4-2005 by Shadowflux]




posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowflux
Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought the Pax Romana ended after the rule of Octavian, Rome was a republic for a long time before it was an empire, it was through military struggle between the triumpherate and Julius Ceasar's inevitable victory that led to the empire. It was during it's time as an empire that it begin to fall. Remember also that it began to fall long before the barbarians breached the walls, must I reference Caligula?

Edited to add: Most of the "glorious days of Rome" were during it's era of imperial conquest, hence the whole majesty and glory of the god king Ceasar. It was during this time that Rome rose to the power it was known for. It hardly had 1000 years of peace, in fact I'd risk the argument that if Rome had 1000 yearts of peace it would never have made it to the prominent spot in history we tend to lend to it

[edit on 30-4-2005 by Shadowflux]

[edit on 30-4-2005 by Shadowflux]


Great points!!!! And I would venture to say that these are the very same points that lay at the inherent "evils"of empire, or "civilization"

In order for a civilization to survive it must rely on the exploitation of outside resources for it's survival. Inherently ANY civilization must rely on the subjugation, and exploitation of another culture, it's land, and it's resources to survive.

That is the inherent nature of "civilization"itself.....one can trace it from the sumerians, to the egyptians, to the greeks, to the romans, to the french, spanish, english, german, and russian counterparts.

In order for one nation to be "civilized it requires another nations subjugation for the supply of its resources. It is a no win situation. Until nations learn to live, and freely trade based upon their own natural resources and technology, you will continuw to see the manipulation of the weak, by the strong in order to further it's goals.

And as I said this isn't just "anti-American"sentiment speaking. It is logical research of the facts that have contributed to both the rise and fall of "empires", and the inherent evils that lie within both their rise and fall.



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join