-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Will the USA eventually "fall"?
- Thread starter Catalyst
- Start date
- Status
BigJonsson
Member
Nuclear explosion in a major city
Alienation of allies leading to Chinese dominance
Alienation of allies leading to Chinese dominance
And I thought I was the only one who's read that and have thought about it..hahaha, one can realize so many things on a simple messageboard.Tenguman said:
But I'm a bit too perplexed to submit a definitive opinion. England survived. Gaul (France) survived. Russia survived. A few others did. But America is a particularly young country...it's a country that has rushed itself in the history of man...and there are so many things wrong with our country it's sickening...although many other countries are screwed up as well. What it boils down to is our leaders' decisions.
So let the Freemasons take over...bahahaha. I dunno. The USA can fall. It might fall. Ever see Red Dawn?
SlickWilly223
Time ta STEP IT UP
Yah, USA won't be a Superpower for all eternity, but it isn't going to be wiped off the face of the Earth anytime soon.
I honestly think that the fall of the US Superpower will happen sometime towards the end of my life, especially the way things have been going lately but hey -- as of right now we're doing better than most countries.
I honestly think that the fall of the US Superpower will happen sometime towards the end of my life, especially the way things have been going lately but hey -- as of right now we're doing better than most countries.
Escape Goat
Member
militarily or economically?
A lot of previous empires rose to power because they were extraordinarily good at invading and exploiting other nations/peoples. However, that kind of expansion can't go on for ever and at some point the whole thing collapses.
The US, on the other hand, seems to be unique in the fact that we suck at imperialism. Early on, our economic prosparity did depend on exploiting the Native Americans and the African Americans. However, the explosive growth in the US's power and prosparity in the last 100 years seems to have been driven mostly by exploiting trade relationships and technology. Our sucesses have come when we've used military power as a bargining chip, rather than as a means for forced expansion. Our attempts at imperialism have consistantly blown up in our faces.
The US, on the other hand, seems to be unique in the fact that we suck at imperialism. Early on, our economic prosparity did depend on exploiting the Native Americans and the African Americans. However, the explosive growth in the US's power and prosparity in the last 100 years seems to have been driven mostly by exploiting trade relationships and technology. Our sucesses have come when we've used military power as a bargining chip, rather than as a means for forced expansion. Our attempts at imperialism have consistantly blown up in our faces.
Cimarron said:
Well, yes and no. The problem that empires from the British all the way back to the Romans had was that they were literally running every place they invaded. They were the government. The problem there is two fold...First, there's little chance an imperialist government will actually work for the needs to the people it rules. Second, it's likely that the regime will end in a violent overthrowing of the imperialist government.
That's what gets these empires into trouble. Even the most well-organized government will eventually crack under the strain of all of these administrative duties, compounded by the fact that the locals don't want them there in the first place. That's what causes these old empires to fall.
Now, the reason why these empires formed in the first place was that it was realized that there are huge economic benefits to be had in large-scale/worldwide trade. So, what they did was engineered it themelves by invading nations and forcing the locals to trade with the empire, usually in ways that were not beneficial to the residents.
In the case of the US, there are very few places where we actually run the government, and yet we enjoy the same economic benefits of large-scale/worldwide trade as the old empires. In fact, in the cases where we've tried to run the government, we usually get our asses kicked.
"Economic imperialism" is going to look very much the same as running a global economy, but it's not going to look like the traditional kind of imperials where you run a bunch of far flung countries.
the USA will fall probably after the war that kills 1/3 of mankind. the USA will probably be hit somewhat. enough so to allow the EU to take the leading role in the world. but that's just what I heard. who knows. but I don't think the USA will be on top for more than a few more than another decade or so.
now if you're talking about the USA falling morally, that already happened decades ago.
now if you're talking about the USA falling morally, that already happened decades ago.
Eh, I think the difference is far less significant than you make it out to be. And strictly speaking, the US controls about as much territory as the old Roman Empire did at its peak, and it wasn't all gained through trade. Also, as I understand it, the early roman empire (while it was still a republic) allowed quite a lot of autonomy.
At any rate, I don't think that difference will save the US. Whether it has been through the force of arms or through the use of arms as a bargaining chip, much of the world is unsettled by the level of control the US has over it. Not to mention that the US absolutely DOES exploit foreign resources, whether direct imperial control is placed over them or not. Outsourcing isn't such a hot topic for nothing. It's basically exploitation, and even Americans don't seem to like it much at this point.
At any rate, I don't think that difference will save the US. Whether it has been through the force of arms or through the use of arms as a bargaining chip, much of the world is unsettled by the level of control the US has over it. Not to mention that the US absolutely DOES exploit foreign resources, whether direct imperial control is placed over them or not. Outsourcing isn't such a hot topic for nothing. It's basically exploitation, and even Americans don't seem to like it much at this point.
"Now, the reason why these empires formed in the first place was that it was realized that there are huge economic benefits to be had in large-scale/worldwide trade. So, what they did was engineered it themelves by invading nations and forcing the locals to trade with the empire, usually in ways that were not beneficial to the residents."
..... We essentially do this now.... yeah we don't absorb nations into our country but we do bitch them economicly by cutting sweet deals for the ruling class/goverment. I fail to see how we are much different than Rome or Britain.
..... We essentially do this now.... yeah we don't absorb nations into our country but we do bitch them economicly by cutting sweet deals for the ruling class/goverment. I fail to see how we are much different than Rome or Britain.
belgurdo said:
Er, actually I don't think there's an empire in history that lasted a thousand years, let alone thousands. Alexander's Macedonia (Greek) empire barely lasted his lifetime. The Mongol empire broke up fairly quickly (not sure how long). The Roman Empire was halved in about 500 years from it actually becoming an empire. The other half (Byzantine) lasted considerably longer but I'm not sure if it was considered much of an empire at that point. Russia was an empire from about the 1700s to the early 20th century. England as a world spanning empire was about 500.
I think it's safe to say the average lifespan of an empire is considerably less than thousands of years.
[Note: I am not a historian. Everything I know about this stuff I know from encyclopedias and the web. Anyone who knows better, feel free to correct me
]
lachesis
Member
When there's nothing else to "spend" or "consume", we shall fall and we deserve to do so.
It just seems like we are not really preparing when that happens, and I just feel very guilty for mother-nature and future generation for all the things we consume and waste.
Believe me, I am not a die-hard environmentalist, but when compared to other nations regarding where they teach the value of "saving" and "preservation", it's outrageous. - this country, we have more shit than we ever needed - with so much power and all, we are not doing shit about it, and I am concerned, confused, and worried. I create so much garbage myself, and where do they go? Alas, we have vast land to be filled up with garbage, but how long it will take? I know I'm very pessimistic about it, but I just cannot help worrying about it and I don't believe that one day some miracle invention will solve everything we've done wrong and remedy the pollution we've caused in USA.
and.. in 50 years, China might be the strongest country, but they won't have no Hooters worth any hoot... so I don't really care.
lachesis
It just seems like we are not really preparing when that happens, and I just feel very guilty for mother-nature and future generation for all the things we consume and waste.
Believe me, I am not a die-hard environmentalist, but when compared to other nations regarding where they teach the value of "saving" and "preservation", it's outrageous. - this country, we have more shit than we ever needed - with so much power and all, we are not doing shit about it, and I am concerned, confused, and worried. I create so much garbage myself, and where do they go? Alas, we have vast land to be filled up with garbage, but how long it will take? I know I'm very pessimistic about it, but I just cannot help worrying about it and I don't believe that one day some miracle invention will solve everything we've done wrong and remedy the pollution we've caused in USA.
and.. in 50 years, China might be the strongest country, but they won't have no Hooters worth any hoot... so I don't really care.
lachesis
ErasureAcer
Banned
If it does...it will have to be a civil war type setting. I can't see any outsiders winning a war against us. Heck we outspend the entire world combined in military budgets(very sickening)...I really wonder if a US army would fire on its own people though...in the case of a civil war. I'm sure they would but if they did...they'd also be destroying the country too. They should be held to a higher standard then average joe and jane america, with no affiliation, who believe taking out a high politician or two will help change things.
Once you get the police state in place though...this country will be torn in two...and well there are signs that is not far away. The way the leaders of this country love to overreact to everything...I'm sure it will only take one guy trying to assasinate the president to put a lockdown on just about everything. Titor may be right.
Once you get the police state in place though...this country will be torn in two...and well there are signs that is not far away. The way the leaders of this country love to overreact to everything...I'm sure it will only take one guy trying to assasinate the president to put a lockdown on just about everything. Titor may be right.
maharg said:
There's a huge difference. "Rome" proper was the size of a city, but it's empire encompassed much of Europe. The problem is that any physical "empire" has to constantly policed to maintain control. It was the same with the British Empire where "home" was simply the UK and the empire that need to be constantly policed was 1/4th of the world.
"Home" requires a lot less effort to run than the "empire". Incidentally it's the policing of these places that made old-style imperialism so morally repugnant.
The US, on the other hand, hasn't had problem with really serious internal strife at "home" since the Civil War. Physically, we have very little empire and a lot of "home".
There's a huge gulf between people being "unsettled" and being literally ruled by an empire as say, India was under the British. That's the difference.
You see "exploitation", I see trade. Civilization requires trade. A technological civilization, no matter who runs it, requires worldwide trade on a vast scale. Any technological civilization is going to have certain goods that it needs to keep the lights on, and it will be especially interested in keeping the trade in these goods open at all costs.
"
You see "exploitation", I see trade. Civilization requires trade. A technological civilization, no matter who runs it, requires worldwide trade on a vast scale. Any technological civilization is going to have certain goods that it needs to keep the lights on, and it will be especially interested in keeping the trade in these goods open at all costs."
Ladies and Gentlemen... here you have it! The exact attitude will bring bring the US of A to its knee's one day.
Nothing is wrong with trade of course but come on. The U.S. doesn't know how to play fair or nice. Everyone is greedy when it comes to money but we are absolutely ridiculous.
You see "exploitation", I see trade. Civilization requires trade. A technological civilization, no matter who runs it, requires worldwide trade on a vast scale. Any technological civilization is going to have certain goods that it needs to keep the lights on, and it will be especially interested in keeping the trade in these goods open at all costs."
Ladies and Gentlemen... here you have it! The exact attitude will bring bring the US of A to its knee's one day.
Nothing is wrong with trade of course but come on. The U.S. doesn't know how to play fair or nice. Everyone is greedy when it comes to money but we are absolutely ridiculous.
mashoutposse
Ante Up
DSN2K said:
No you don't, trust me.
way more
Member
Maybe not. China has been mentioned already as rising above us, but as someone famous said, "Countries with Hooters in them don't attack eachother." Maybe the rest of the world will follow suit, and then there would be no more conflicts. I think the question is whether the rest of the world can accept western democracy.
norinrad21
Banned
China will never become the most powerful country in the world ever.
The reason why the USA will never fall is mainly because of Europe, sure they have their disagrements, but they are all cousins and in no way would they just sit there and allow China to take over, are you crazy? Even Japan would continue to make sure the US stays on top due to the fear of chinese dominance...............i'm sure theres hate in there somewhere
The reason why the USA will never fall is mainly because of Europe, sure they have their disagrements, but they are all cousins and in no way would they just sit there and allow China to take over, are you crazy? Even Japan would continue to make sure the US stays on top due to the fear of chinese dominance...............i'm sure theres hate in there somewhere
mashoutposse
Ante Up
Hournda said:
This is why we need someone in office who realizes that a viable alternative must be developed sooner rather than later.
I don't think hydrogen is the answer. Personally, I've always thought that we should figure out a way to harness the energy of the sun through biological means, not man-made materials. I have zero expertise in this area, but instead of solar panels, how about photosynthetic organisms that naturally create substances that can be used as fuel?
Sirpopopop
Member
Willco said:
Listen to this man.
- Status