Started By
Message

re: Which ancient civilization is the most similar to America?

Posted on 3/11/15 at 2:17 pm to
Posted by Upperdecker
St. George, LA
Member since Nov 2014
30678 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 2:17 pm to
Rome, then Athens. Democratic republic is important here. The republic portion is key. The senators of Rome had great power, party politics, and were all of the upper class, similar to our Congress and federal government officials today. This isn't a democracy like Athens where every citizen had a vote and every vote counted
Posted by bulldog95
North Louisiana
Member since Jan 2011
20743 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 2:34 pm to
Currently, there are a total of fifteen territories of the United States, five of which are inhabited: Puerto Rico, Guam, Northern Marianas, United States Virgin Islands and American Samoa. The 10 uninhabited Territories are Palmyra Atoll, Baker Island, Howland Island, Jarvis Island, Johnston Atoll, Kingman Reef, Wake Island, Midway Islands, Navassa Island and Serranilla Bank.

Don't forget several countries were we have military bases.

Japan
Turkey
Germany
South Korea
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
110076 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 2:50 pm to
quote:

How are we Rome? We have not conquered most of the civilized world, we don't base our success on the overtaking and acquisition of new territories. We certainly don't take the same approach as Rome in defeating our enemies, we don't wipe them out completely.


1) Ask the Native Americans about that.

2) America has conquered tons of land. It's called Manifest Destiny. Look it up. America is satisfied with the amount of land it holds. It's from Sea to Shining Sea. We don't want more, or we would have conquered Canada and Mexico well over a century ago. What it isn't satisfied with is the lack of American ideology in the world, and we seek to conquer people in a different way. That's what we sought to do with countless countries, like Japan, China,Russia, and the most obvious example in Iraq. The average American doesn't understand why democracy doesn't appeal to everyone but power hungry maniacs. We now conquer through our ideology, not with soldiers.

3) It's no longer economically viable to conquer people like it was during the time of the Romans. If the Romans somehow survived to this day, their empire would be fractured much like it is today. Subjugating a people that are realistically a 3 month journey was a way of cutting costs back in the day, especially if you wanted to build roads. Plus some trade routes could take 5 or more years to complete. Now the world is much smaller than it was under the Romans, and the infrastructure is almost seemless that you can now make a physical trade with someone from China in less than 24 hours.

The reason we conquer far off people is for infrastructure and cost reasons. Once the infastructure was in place, then countries started getting out of the colony phase. It was no longer the smartest option. Everyone is now on the same page on how trade works, so it's now better to let different groups of people govern themselves instead of exporting soldiers to force these people to do it. If all technology went out and we went back to the Roman period of technology, you bet your arse we would begin conquering people again like the Romans did.

quote:

I would say the British Empire was the most like Rome, and has followed a similar path of decline


Britain is a lot like Rome, but you're ignoring the times when Britain was at its most powerful. It was at its most powerful when conquering nations and people was the economically viable way of doing things.

Aside from government structure, I don't see how we have that much in common with Athens.
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
110076 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 3:00 pm to
quote:

That's not even close to what Rome did


Rome also didn't have the convenience of all the lands they conquered to have 97% of the population being wiped out by Smallpox about 200 years before they were even formed. If the Native Americans had the immunities to the same diseases that the Europeans had, it would have been as long and as bloody as anything the Romans did. The Native Americans just didn't have the manpower to really fight us and just did what it took to survive.

You're really comparing apples and oranges here, but the colonists from the start did want to spread from the Atlantic to the Pacific and form an Empire that was the size of Europe. I don't think the bloodshed from the Native Americans would have stopped this due to our vastly superior technology and war tactics. It would have just been longer and bloodier.
Posted by Tiger1242
Member since Jul 2011
32026 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 3:02 pm to
So you just proved my point

First of all Native Americans were not nations that we conquered, they were people living in the land that we took.

Second of all the fact that we are satisfied with the amount of land we have makes us different than Rome.

Thirdly like I said in my last post, the majority of land we gained to accomplish Manifest Destiny was gained through purchases and not war
Posted by Dick Leverage
In The HizHouse
Member since Nov 2013
9000 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 3:09 pm to
One of the best history books in my home library. When I first read it a decade ago, I felt like the last few hundred years of the empire were eerily similar to what we are seeing in America. Self imposed decline from within.
Posted by bulldog95
North Louisiana
Member since Jan 2011
20743 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 3:23 pm to
quote:

First of all Native Americans were not nations that we conquered, they were people living in the land that we took.




Great Britain (revolutionary war and war of 1812)
Axis powers (WW1and WW2)
Mexico (we may have paid them but kicked their butts back to mevico after the Alamo).


Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
110076 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 3:30 pm to
quote:

First of all Native Americans were not nations that we conquered, they were people living in the land that we took.



You could say the same thing about the Gauls, the Britons, and the Germanic tribes Rome invaded. Yeah, they dealt with Carthage, but it was more than just civilizations they conquered.

quote:

Second of all the fact that we are satisfied with the amount of land we have makes us different than Rome.



Not really. They overtook really all the land they wanted and could handle, which is about the same for us. Romans had no intent of conquering Russia, India, and China due to the insanity of it. Romans ruled over the Mediterranean, which was the world to them. Anywhere else was just outliers for them and only good for trade.

And while we are satisfied with the lands we hold, Americans are not satisfied with the fact that every other civilization on the planet doesn't have the same ideology as us. That's how we're conquering in this current political landscape. It was economically viable for Romans to conquer these people simply for the roads and stability they could provide. That's why the Europeans conquered Africa and parts of Asia, since it really was chaos and tribes and no infrastructure. They couldn't make much of a profit if the machine itself was broken, so they fixed it and then moved on when it wasn't worth having soldiers over there anymore.

quote:

Thirdly like I said in my last post, the majority of land we gained to accomplish Manifest Destiny was gained through purchases and not war



But the it's the exact same mindset as the Romans had. We just got lucky that they all croaked before they could actually put up any semblance of a fight. The Romans didn't have that luxury, but it was still about spreading their ideology, thoughts, and trade throughout the world. There's no economic reason for us to invade a country in this current environment. There was for the Romans, as there was for the Brits and most of Europe through the second half of the last millennia. America as a whole thinks our type of government and way of life should be the norm worldwide, and anyone who disagrees are kidding themselves. We're still into conquering, but in a more pragmatic way than the Romans were.
Posted by Tiger1242
Member since Jul 2011
32026 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 3:47 pm to
Which is more like Athens IMO. They were set on spreading their ideas and influence throughout the world, but weren't into officially "conquering" as much
Posted by Swoopin
Member since Jun 2011
22031 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 3:51 pm to
A better question is what ancient people is most like the OT.

And to that I would respond the Sea Peoples.
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
110076 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 3:54 pm to
quote:

Which is more like Athens IMO. They were set on spreading their ideas and influence throughout the world, but weren't into officially "conquering" as much



But you're ignoring the fact that conquering is no longer economically viable or really an option. By the time the US got to be a real power player, the atomic bomb had just been developed. Before WWII, it was merely into economics and not the war. Germany, Japan, Briton, France, Italy, and Russia had much more formidable armies than the US did at the time.
Posted by Tiger1242
Member since Jul 2011
32026 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 3:55 pm to
The Egyptians, and Chickren is our God-King
Posted by OFWHAP
Member since Sep 2007
5416 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 3:59 pm to
quote:


But the it's the exact same mindset as the Romans had. We just got lucky that they all croaked before they could actually put up any semblance of a fight. The Romans didn't have that luxury, but it was still about spreading their ideology, thoughts, and trade throughout the world. There's no economic reason for us to invade a country in this current environment. There was for the Romans, as there was for the Brits and most of Europe through the second half of the last millennia. America as a whole thinks our type of government and way of life should be the norm worldwide, and anyone who disagrees are kidding themselves. We're still into conquering, but in a more pragmatic way than the Romans were.


We also fight wars through proxy and install puppet regimes, which is effectively the same as conquering these foreign lands. Instead of taxation, we often seek mineral concessions or alliances to expand our interests/counter threats in the region.
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
89801 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 4:01 pm to
quote:

The similarities between Rome in its decline and modern-day U.S.A. are uncanny.


We're just doing it much, much faster.
Posted by genro
Member since Nov 2011
61788 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 4:04 pm to
Second Temple Jerusalem
Posted by Sentrius
Fort Rozz
Member since Jun 2011
64757 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 4:04 pm to
Rome and its not even debatable.

The demise of the American Empire will be very similar to Rome as well and I hope I don't live long enough to see it.
Posted by Tiger1242
Member since Jul 2011
32026 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 4:07 pm to
I still don't think Rome is the answer, Rome was never a part of another Empire like we were. Hell we are probably closer to Carthage than Rome
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
110076 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 4:10 pm to
quote:

I still don't think Rome is the answer, Rome was never a part of another Empire like we were. Hell we are probably closer to Carthage than Rome



That's just a downright ignorant statement.
Posted by Tiger1242
Member since Jul 2011
32026 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 4:11 pm to
Why is that ignorant?
Carthage started out as a colony and grew into one of the premier powers of the world, dominating trade and markets around the world.
USA did the same...
This post was edited on 3/11/15 at 4:13 pm
Posted by OMLandshark
Member since Apr 2009
110076 posts
Posted on 3/11/15 at 4:16 pm to
quote:

Carthage started out as a colony and grew into one of the premier powers of the world, dominating trade and markets around the world.
USA did the same...


It's more than just that, it's about the mindset and structure. We have the same mindset, structure, and infrastructure as Rome did. Not as much with Carthage.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram