If you narrow historical events down to a simple black and white scenario? Maybe. I guess I could see your points and how you come to the conclusion that this kind of expansionism is good or even necessary. I am not even blaming you for your attitude that you would rather want to see the United States as the global player than any other country. But I would say you have to look at each case individually and from the perspective of it's time. We live in 2020 and not 1920 for example. So I can not give you some generic answer here. But if we take the examples you named here, from the Byzantine Empire to European Colonialism. Have you ever heard the term Pax Romana? I quote :
The Pax Romana (Latin for "Roman Peace") is a roughly 200-year-long period in Roman history which is identified with increased and sustained inner hegemonial peace and stability (though not meaning without wars, expansion and revolts). It is traditionally dated as commencing from the accession of Caesar Augustus, founder of the Roman principate, in 27 BC and concluding in 180 AD with the death of Marcus Aurelius, the last of the "good emperors".[1] Since it was inaugurated by Augustus with the end of the Final War of the Roman Republic, it is sometimes called the Pax Augusta. During this period of approximately 207 years, the Roman Empire achieved its greatest territorial extent and its population reached a maximum of up to 70 million people – a third of the world’s population.[2] According to Cassius Dio, the dictatorial reign of Commodus, later followed by the Year of the Five Emperors and the crisis of the third century, marked the descent "from a kingdom of gold to one of iron and rust".[3]
It is a historical term for this kind of phase that you describe. Or so I would say. I quote :
Those who take their safe life in America, free from being picked on by other countries, free from sanctions and civil war, those who are spoiled, are often the most clueless and the most likely to be hippies. They have no idea that American hegemony has a big part to do with that. They would have less, as most countries not in the west have.
But here is the point. This term is kinda applied to several super-powers. Like Pax Britannica and yeah there is also Pax Americana. What it marks is a peak, a kind of end in stability. What I want to say here is it is a fact of history that no Empire, Super Power call it what ever you want will be on top for ever. What ever if that is a good or bad thing is up to debate. But it is a fact of live if you so want. And nothing you do can change it you can maybe slow down the decline but it happens nonetheless. Maybe what we experience right now is simply a decline of the United States at least in foreign policy, influence and power since the United States has focused to much on the outside and not enough on the inside spending more and more resources here. In fact one could even make the argument many of the military interventions of the recent decades have been used to distract from inner political problems like a crumbling infrastructure, declining education, growing income inequality, drop in public health like the ongoing opioid endemic and so on. However nothing works for ever. And the US is today politically more divided than ever. I am not saying the US is going into a civil war any time soon or it will give up all their military bases completely. But the similarities between the Roman Empire and the United States today are quite striking in some more abstract comparison right before the Roman Empire started to lost its grasp and started to decline. Maybe you will now see a lot more turmoil within the United States. We have to wait and see I guess. I think Chinese business man Jack Ma makes a good point here :
"Where did the money go?" Is a very good question here.
The Pax Romana (Latin for "Roman Peace") is a roughly 200-year-long period in Roman history which is identified with increased and sustained inner hegemonial peace and stability (though not meaning without wars, expansion and revolts). It is traditionally dated as commencing from the accession of Caesar Augustus, founder of the Roman principate, in 27 BC and concluding in 180 AD with the death of Marcus Aurelius, the last of the "good emperors".[1] Since it was inaugurated by Augustus with the end of the Final War of the Roman Republic, it is sometimes called the Pax Augusta. During this period of approximately 207 years, the Roman Empire achieved its greatest territorial extent and its population reached a maximum of up to 70 million people – a third of the world’s population.[2] According to Cassius Dio, the dictatorial reign of Commodus, later followed by the Year of the Five Emperors and the crisis of the third century, marked the descent "from a kingdom of gold to one of iron and rust".[3]
It is a historical term for this kind of phase that you describe. Or so I would say. I quote :
Those who take their safe life in America, free from being picked on by other countries, free from sanctions and civil war, those who are spoiled, are often the most clueless and the most likely to be hippies. They have no idea that American hegemony has a big part to do with that. They would have less, as most countries not in the west have.
But here is the point. This term is kinda applied to several super-powers. Like Pax Britannica and yeah there is also Pax Americana. What it marks is a peak, a kind of end in stability. What I want to say here is it is a fact of history that no Empire, Super Power call it what ever you want will be on top for ever. What ever if that is a good or bad thing is up to debate. But it is a fact of live if you so want. And nothing you do can change it you can maybe slow down the decline but it happens nonetheless. Maybe what we experience right now is simply a decline of the United States at least in foreign policy, influence and power since the United States has focused to much on the outside and not enough on the inside spending more and more resources here. In fact one could even make the argument many of the military interventions of the recent decades have been used to distract from inner political problems like a crumbling infrastructure, declining education, growing income inequality, drop in public health like the ongoing opioid endemic and so on. However nothing works for ever. And the US is today politically more divided than ever. I am not saying the US is going into a civil war any time soon or it will give up all their military bases completely. But the similarities between the Roman Empire and the United States today are quite striking in some more abstract comparison right before the Roman Empire started to lost its grasp and started to decline. Maybe you will now see a lot more turmoil within the United States. We have to wait and see I guess. I think Chinese business man Jack Ma makes a good point here :
"Where did the money go?" Is a very good question here.
Last edited:
