It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by watchitburn
From what I have observed, it seams that Americans do not want to help themselves.
Or maybe it's the opposite, and that is all that they want, is to help themselves.
Obviously this country is not heading in the right direction. This is evidenced by the continuing downward spiral of the economy. But does that deter Americans? Hell no, they are going to keep on electing big Govt., corporate puppets, and religious zealots.
It is just mind bottling that they continue to vote for Romney, Gingrich or Santorum. What do they hope to accomplish?
Apparently they are not interested in seeing things get better.
"Hey, lets vote for the same scumbags that have been running stuff and hope for a different outcome."
From this point on, I am done with the US. It will get
what it deserves.edit on 22-1-2012 by watchitburn because: (no reason given)
Most of Romes building technology, and the creation of the aqueducts, was all developed by the republic before it became an empire, and Rome never developed a working steam engine. Rome began its decline shortly after it became an empire.
I would say that the flaws in our patent system has much more to do with our flawed legal system than the patent system, and even more to do with our flawed banking system, which JP manipulated for his own purposes.
What is also ignored by institutionalized versions of history is that culturally, the Europeans had always been primarily democratic in nature, and the rise of guilds and the Renaissance was more the result of the deeply embedded cultural traditions of Europe than any contributions of the stagnating cultural movement of the Catholic traditions and the divine rights of kings. Too much credit is given to the grandiose symbols of empire, and not nearly enough credit is given to democratic style governments and the culture that creates these styles of government.
You really don't know anything abut the Roman Republic. They captured most almost all of the territories Rome would capture, would build centers for the cities they captured and roads to connect those cities to the rest of the empire. People captured were made Roman citizens. This greatly improved commerce and so the economic success of the Roman Republic. After Rome became an Empire, it stopped expanding territories. When the Roman Empire tried to conquer Germany, the army they sent in conquest literally disappeared, and they choose instead to built walls to protect their empire.
If you like oligarchy so much, I suggest you pick the third world country of your choice and move there. There are numerous countries in Latin America that should fit the bill.
Your desire for oligarchy certainly is not in line with the concepts on which the U.S. is founded, and certainly isn't how any of the first world nations are ran. So why bother to remain here, if you do not believe in the principles on which this nation was founded?
The Roman Catholic Church viewed anything outside of faith as witchcraft, and that includes most medicine, and all science and technology in general.
You state you like instability, well, oligarchy and empires always create instability. The Roman Empire was always a cauldron of conflict, and China's history of constant warfare as well. When bankers and the super rich have the greatest levels of power, such as in the early days of American Industrialization, instability was the biggest problem.
The people who founded the U.S. definitely believed in democracy. A Republic is a form of democracy. You want to claim that democratic institutions create oligarchies, and that is the opposite of reality. You want to claim that instability is better, and ignore the reality that oligarchies flourish under instability.
The fundamental inventions of gunpowder and cannon had been made by 1300, but the sources are rare, difficult to interpret, hard to date, and often contradictory. The best guess is that gunpowder followed quickly after saltpetre was discovered (that is, a process for its purification was developed) by Chinese alchemists around AD 900 and introduced to Europe via trade routes and travellers around AD 1225, and that cannon were invented in southern Europe just before AD 1300. The period 1300-1600 saw the cannon perfected, chiefly in Europe, and it assumed its classical form. Small arms appeared in this period, revolutionizing armies and warfare. Technical terms are often obscure, however, and writers can be biased and their histories fanciful. The history of developments after 1600 is much clearer and better documented, with reliable drawings and accurate dates. One must always beware of taking some later creation as original evidence, especially pictorial evidence. For example, there are excellent drawings of the siege of Stirling Castle by Edward I in 1304, that look like witnesses of how things appeared, but they certainly are not. There is not a scrap of graphic evidence of how the siege actually appeared, only a few scraps of parchment with writing, and the scene is an artist's reconstruction. Many sources contain drawings added to the manuscript at a much later date, which are in the same vein. It is important, but very difficult, to establish historical authenticity in the sources of technical history.
The Egyptian Mamluks defeated the Mongols (the first such definitive defeat in the West) at Ain Jalut in Palestine in 1260, where "hand cannons" were reported to have been used. These were pyrotechnic devices used to scare horses, not projectile weapons. Such devices were very similar to those used in China, and the pyrotechnic mixtures used are reported in Arabic sources. This shows how the pyrotechnic uses of nitrates preceded their use in projectile weapons, and that care must be used in interpreting early accounts.
I don't think oligarchies flourish in times of instability. When exactly has this occurred?
Sorry, but the largest percentage of witches burned were in fact midwives, not only did they help women in birth, they were often the local doctor.
As far as I am concerned, the whole Catholic Church is nothing but a suckers game of taking advantage of foolish people. There are plenty of well educated fools out there. Anyone with any level of knowledge and ability to accomplish things like heal people was a threat to the Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church responded brutally. This is well recorded history. Your seem to have a great deal of denial and bias on the subject.
Your understanding of the development of firearms is also seriously lacking.
You are making claims for which their is no reliable sources. Your idea that instability creates more freedom is completely the opposite of reality. During periods of instability, people have to spend far more time worrying about security and survival, and far less time concentrating on prosperity. When controlled by a rigid status quo, as opposed to living under a democratic style government, civilization always stagnates.
I repeat, most of the third world. Mexico is a good example. The country is an oligarchy, still ruled by the descendants of the Spanish Conquistadors.
The way to prevent the formation of Oligarchies is with an evenly enforced fair set of rules that establishes a competitive environment.
Call it what you will, democracy, republic, democratic republic, personally I like the term representative government, the U.S. constitution was written on the concept that government should serve the people, liberty and justice for all. You want to claim we are better off ruled by emperors, and that is exactly the opposite of the principles the U.S. was founded upon.
I'd even go so much as to say they wanted more science and technology from their Muslim neighbors and once the Spanish special interests ended, most of Europe sought to gain technology from the East. The Church was one of the first types to get cannons and guns. And that, by the way, was one of the oldest forms of "witchcraft"
How can you claim the church saw technology and science as witchcraft when it was one of the first ones to buy, literally, magical explosive tubes? The Italians all rushed to get their hands on ottoman tech and science as fast as possible.
You're mixing different types of instability. I was speaking of economic instability.
And of course the witch has a big nose with a wart on it. Um, you might want to consider you have been sold a bill of goods.
Actually while the Europeans imported some tech from eastern civilizations, they made the critical breakthroughs.
Read what I posted. The reality is nothing like you describe. Why was Galileo convicted or heresy? Why was heresy a crime?
What are you trying to imply, oligarchical Mexico is economically stable? Military, political, social, it all goes together to create the instability, and oligarchy is the one of the biggest factors. Mexico has never been a stable country.
You can only have an evenly enforced fair set of rules in a stable environment. You continue to ignore the formula to create a first world nation.
If you recognize that representative government works the best, at least 90% of the time, then you should recognize that the key to our way out of this current situation is through representative government. Should we allow a dictator to take over, then we will have sacrificed long term prosperity for short term gain. The cure is worse than the disease.
The longer the Western debt crises smolder on, the darker the outlook for the global economy. Because the US economy is collapsing, American consumers are buying fewer goods from China and India. And because investors are piling out of euro and dollar investments, supposed islands of stability are starting to look shaky as well. In recent weeks, the Swiss franc and the Brazilian real have appreciated so strongly that exporters in those countries have been virtually unable to sell their products abroad.
Italian bank UniCredit has predicted a "synchronous downtrend in the US, Latin America, Asia and Europe." A downtrend that would also engulf the economy that has so far been getting through the crisis better than most others: Germany.
Last year, when they rushed to the aid of Greece and set up a rescue fund for the high-debt nations on the edge of the currency bloc, they managed to calm markets for a few months. But since then, the breathing space following EU announcements has been whittled down to weeks, even days.
...with the world economy facing a slowdown, Germany's enormous dependence on exports, the driving force behind its impressive recovery in the last two years, could now spell doom.
And in Europe, governments need to realize that they can't keep on sitting out the euro crisis. The currency bloc will either break apart or its members will move much closer together on fiscal policy.
Scaling down debt isn't easy, as can be seen in Britain. The government of Prime Minister David Cameron has imposed more rigorous spending cuts than any other traditional industrial nation. The austerity program is coming at a high price. The cuts are hitting domestic demand and have all but wiped out economic growth.