Americans sign petition to repeal the First Amendment
- Thread starter Gotholic
- Start date
MrBishop
Well-Known Member
The problem for most wasn't big GVT...it was too much land and not enough governance.
Distance and the issues of communication compounded things for the Romans
WWII and the debt incurred to the Americans componded things for the Brits.
Rome took over Egypt during it's conquests..but this was after Egypt became splintered into provinces, each with their own taxation and army. When the first foreign armies came, there was not enough cohesion to prepare an army in defence. It fell several times, finally falling to the Romans..who fell and thus Egypt fell with Rome.
Distance and the issues of communication compounded things for the Romans
WWII and the debt incurred to the Americans componded things for the Brits.
Rome took over Egypt during it's conquests..but this was after Egypt became splintered into provinces, each with their own taxation and army. When the first foreign armies came, there was not enough cohesion to prepare an army in defence. It fell several times, finally falling to the Romans..who fell and thus Egypt fell with Rome.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
Interesting rationales.
2minkey
bootlicker
ohmigawd you're actually asking somewhat of an interesting question.
well the romans and the brits lost theys dicks because they overextended themselves across the globe. so yeah we seem to be following a similar pattern. not sure about them chinezers. i should know. got a book about science and tech in tradtional china upstairs. don't remember if the author talked about when they petered out.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
- Are you saying the Roman Empire had a financial collapse becuase the Gov't expanded far and wide? ... say it ain't so.
- The Brit's have devolved into a socialist state with cameras on every corner? ....say it aint so.
- The Chinamen are doing fairly well, at least on paper.
Seems like "progressive" ends poorly. How does such greatness devolve?
A final question: How does creating more restrictive laws create more freedom? (can you see how one can legislate their own demise?)
2minkey
bootlicker
and now maybe you should back off on this 'blame "progressive" for everything' and maybe just see what kind of historical patterns there actually are.
britain fell from prominence long before there were cameras everywhere. don't confuse cause with a later phenomena that likely has nothing to do with whatever descent from greatness cause could be identified.
china's reform allowing more economic freedoms IS PROGRESSIVE, particularly considered in context.
rome's overexpanded empire is what did it in - not "big government" in the way you would criticize it today at all. they were not providing medical benefits for single moms with leprosy.
drop the ideology and see things for what they are.
and i thought there was almost going to be a discussion here.
britain fell from prominence long before there were cameras everywhere. don't confuse cause with a later phenomena that likely has nothing to do with whatever descent from greatness cause could be identified.
china's reform allowing more economic freedoms IS PROGRESSIVE, particularly considered in context.
rome's overexpanded empire is what did it in - not "big government" in the way you would criticize it today at all. they were not providing medical benefits for single moms with leprosy.
drop the ideology and see things for what they are.
and i thought there was almost going to be a discussion here.
Progressive, the standard, though incorrect, public assumption definition
or
Progressive, the political movement that is an offshoot of the typically unpopular liberal movememnt which is the crippled child of the wildly unpopular communist movement started in the late 1800's?
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
OK I'll give you that brow-beater.
From what I've observed in a general sense. People by nature like structure, "ducks in a row" to a fault. In natural social order they develop artificial power structures by pecking-orders or politics, thus we get our humble politicians. Politicians evolve into whores in their quest to gain power, they like to wield their power and do "something-X" on a grand scale leaving their mark.
This is unfortunate becuase there comes a point, over-saturation of law in where the balance between civility and freedom is not equitable anymore.
We were once based on laws of individual freedoms with the inherent danger of being in that free state. No longer. In our Utopian visions we have over legislated ourselves to create artificial notions of theoretical equality and safety by removing rights of the many to appease the few, the "progressive" thinking crowd.
I'm not saying we shouldn't have freed the slaves, we just needed to understand "all man is created equal" and apply the right as such.
In most cases, your large Empires have fallen by over extended political means of power and coription. It is a scenario that has played out over and over, minus some famines et.al.
I do agree that corporations should not have the same inalienable rights as humans. I do believe I should have inalienable rights, which are being whittled away at an accelerating rate.
As American bumper stickers go, since they were on horse drawn wagons, this is an equation for a big assed train wreck.
From what I've observed in a general sense. People by nature like structure, "ducks in a row" to a fault. In natural social order they develop artificial power structures by pecking-orders or politics, thus we get our humble politicians. Politicians evolve into whores in their quest to gain power, they like to wield their power and do "something-X" on a grand scale leaving their mark.
This is unfortunate becuase there comes a point, over-saturation of law in where the balance between civility and freedom is not equitable anymore.
We were once based on laws of individual freedoms with the inherent danger of being in that free state. No longer. In our Utopian visions we have over legislated ourselves to create artificial notions of theoretical equality and safety by removing rights of the many to appease the few, the "progressive" thinking crowd.
I'm not saying we shouldn't have freed the slaves, we just needed to understand "all man is created equal" and apply the right as such.
In most cases, your large Empires have fallen by over extended political means of power and coription. It is a scenario that has played out over and over, minus some famines et.al.
I do agree that corporations should not have the same inalienable rights as humans. I do believe I should have inalienable rights, which are being whittled away at an accelerating rate.
As American bumper stickers go, since they were on horse drawn wagons, this is an equation for a big assed train wreck.
2minkey
bootlicker
jesus dude don't you ever put the fucking bullhorn down? your "progressive" utterly ignores that ECONOMIC MODERNIZATION was a major focus. NAH, CHINA HASN'T DONE THAT AT ALL.
The bullhorn will get dropped when we're all talking the same language.
Progressive, in a matter of state, has a meaning. It's not related to progress.
ResearchMonkey
Well-Known Member
Two werds. Hong Kong.
catocom
Well-Known Member
word meanings keep changing.
At one time I considered my self to be progressive, and it's good in 'business'
to some extent.
Now though it's a bad thing in gov....Again.
(what I've been called has come full circle several times)
(liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, libitarian, independant, progressive, asshole...)
It all comes back to..."you will know them by their 'works'"
The way things get spun these days, it all still comes back to what's in the
heart, and right now, the trust has been Completely lost, and 80% of the
gov. DC peoples, look like Madoff.
Looks to me like they think they'll just spend the dollar into oblivion, then join
the EU and make a new currency, and not have to pay it back.
Baaaaad move.
Ain't gonna happen.
At one time I considered my self to be progressive, and it's good in 'business'
to some extent.
Now though it's a bad thing in gov....Again.
(what I've been called has come full circle several times)
(liberal, conservative, democrat, republican, libitarian, independant, progressive, asshole...)
It all comes back to..."you will know them by their 'works'"
The way things get spun these days, it all still comes back to what's in the
heart, and right now, the trust has been Completely lost, and 80% of the
gov. DC peoples, look like Madoff.
Looks to me like they think they'll just spend the dollar into oblivion, then join
the EU and make a new currency, and not have to pay it back.
Baaaaad move.
Ain't gonna happen.
Progressive has meant American Communist (OK, minkey, not exactly, but for point of reference it's close enough) since (I thought) the 19teens. Turns out it goes back to the 1880's. They've relabeled themsleves several times (liberal is common) since they get beaten back every time they stand up. Unfortunately, their ideas have slowly entered our public thinking (after all, who wouldn't want to help the crippled children).
Erosion of American values can be traced by following the many incarnatiosn of the Progressive movement.
I do recall a time when liberal wasn't a bad thing. Hell, even Democrats used to be Americans. (the group has moved, more than the majority of its members)
Erosion of American values can be traced by following the many incarnatiosn of the Progressive movement.
I do recall a time when liberal wasn't a bad thing. Hell, even Democrats used to be Americans. (the group has moved, more than the majority of its members)
