degredation of our (the american) society

[Edric O]

Edric, I think that the Rome-Carthage/USA(West)-USSR(East) analogy fits the mold really well. And it shows that the, towards the end, the society that degrades from within is not united. Well before the end of the Roman empire, the Huns were actually a Roman client state (settling in what is modern-day Hungary) that the Western Roman Empire used to fight the Eastern Roman empire. With the war in Iraq, we've seen the first cracks in what you might call the Western Empire -- the United States and the Europeans. Will we fight each other? Maybe not with actual weapons, but we clearly need to go our separate ways. The Europeans no longer need the US to protect them military, and the US no longer needs the Europeans as a bulwark against some great external threat.

Well, the Roman Empire only started breaking apart in the 3rd century AD - some 300 years after defeating Carthage. Even if we account for the fact that the USA is burning through the Roman model of history at an accelerated rate (going through the same stages about 3 times as fast), that still puts the American/European split (or whatever) 100 years in the future.

Also, I have to point out that while the USA-Rome comparison is useful as a general guideline, the USA isn't really Rome, and the future of the USA looks like it will bring many things that have no parallel in Roman history (like the end of the global oil supply, or environmental disasters, or who knows what else).

And by the way, our nuclear technology means that if the world ever collapses into new Dark Ages, it will be the end of the human species. We'd better hope that, when Western civilization does meet its end, it will be a DIFFERENT end than the one of the Roman Empire (IMO, world revolution beats world collapse any day ;) ).

But that, I think, totally ignores the mindset the Roman people had adopted. We see a long line of insane Emperors, who were affected more by whim and fancy than they were actual reason or policy. They were not really conservative, nor were they really liberal. I think this sounds familiar enough to us already, if a bit extreme. And again, the Romans are a bit extreme in all things when compared to the Western world. Legalized and taxed prostitution, brutal bloodsports, severe legal penalties and public displays of punishment. Yet, this is still similar to our public obsession with sex, ever-increasing violent displays of entertainment, and ever-decreasing legal and commercial integrity.

Give it a few decades. We're still just barely out of the Second Punic War, in the glory days of the Republic. Caesar, Augustus and the birth of the Empire are still 100 Roman years (about 30 years in the accelerated US timeline) in the future. Bush isn't an emperor; he's some insignificant consul. You'll know the first emperor when you see him.

We Americans living today do not have a great depression, or a great war, or a great revolution or any great struggle with which to define ourselves. So, unable to define ourselves within America, we disown America.

...or, on the contrary, resort to blind flag-waving patriotism. That is also a growing trend in America, if you remember.

We rebel against its governing men and women, whoever is in power.

In all fairness, some leaders deserve to have people rebel against them.

We declare our love for places like... Europe, or China.

Well, Europe is better than America - but that's just me being my European self. ;D

As for China - who actually likes China??

We declare ourselves teenage communists.

Oh, that was more of a 60's and 70's trend. Today the libertarians seem to attract far more disgruntled teenagers than we communists do.

We declare ourselves atheists, because God is for kids.

Just like the Romans declared themselves Christians, because Jupiter and the old gods were for kids and uneducated fools? ;)

We do this because we feel that it will give our lives meaning. Upon closer examination, it really doesn't. This is the classic, being-liberal-because-mainstream-society-isn't, or, because-among-my-generation-liberalism-is-cool syndrome.

There is no indication that this generation is any more liberal than the previous one. It's more polarized than the previous one, with hardline liberalism and hardline conservatism being very popular among young people, but the liberal/conservative ratio has remained close to 50/50 (it was 55/45 among 18-to-25 year olds, last time I checked...).

And, please, go ahead. It's one of the many outlets for your frustration and aggression that has been given to your by your forebears, but whose legitimate target has been removed by those same forebears. I'd rather have some guy tell me about the merits of nihilism and how Lenin-wasn't-such-a-bad-guy than have that same guy go around with a gang and bust up a 7-11.

I don't see the connection between nihilism and Lenin... And I think you're a bit frustrated with people who vent their frustration. ;)

That's from my American perspective, but I suspect that the European disillusionment with itself is something similar.

Hmmm, well, there was a surge in popularity for racist, pseudo-nazi and neo-nazi groups in Europe during the late 90's, because of the ethnic tensions created by the large number of immigrants arriving in Europe at the time, but that popularity seems to have waned in recent years.

[Edric O]

I don't recall Carthage inflicting any great defeats on the Romans. They were at war with them three times, and lost every one of them.

They almost won the first two. Particularly the second. Does the name Hannibal sound familiar? ;)

As for great Roman defeats, how about those inflicted by Hannibal at Lake Trasimene and Cannae? Cannae was the single greatest defeat in Roman history; Hannibal's 30,000 men utterly annihilated 10 Roman legions (100,000 men) in a single day.

[Anathema]

Never heard about those two battles, but that doesn't surprise me (I haven't spent much time in delving military history). I don't think Hannibal's far fetched attempt to cross a chain of mountains with elephants qualifies as an almost situation.

However those are only battles, if you look at the bigger picture you see that the Carthagians lost all three wars. Not an impressive record.

[nemafakei]

When I appear to make sweeping generalisations below, I'd like to point out that I am noting overall trends, rather than suggesting that all instances fit the models.

There is a vicious cycle of nuclear families breaking up and lack of parental impetus to ensure children have a sense of duty or responsibility (who then go on to start hasty and unstable families of their own). And the irresponsible procreate better than the responsible. Now, that's just one factor, one phenomenon. But we see because households with more working parents have less time to keep children in order, they are more and more often appeasing them to shut them up. When they do and get whatever they want at home, they expect to do so everywhere - in public, in schools, at work. And when they don't they don't co-operate.

As to moral guidance, perhaps the retreat of religion from schools and public life has had an effect on that, perhaps because religion was a source of morals and it has yet to be replaced. But given that religion is no longer an assumed truth but a controversial and often contradictory topic, it doesn't provide safe grounding on which to base morality.

What we need to regenerate society is a more dynamic and versatile source of ethics than religious dogma.

[Caid Ivik]

Well, the Mongols never really had a culture in the first place, so they couldn't grow decadent.

Mongols were one of the best organizers in the history. Not only most eastern khanates and Russian state became organized units like the western ones (in some ways even more stable) by adopting their political traditions, but their cybernetical perfection could be visible also in literal and other spheres. Today's XML is a digital application of how they were organizing scriptures already 700 years ago. And this is just a part, as their culture became strongly merged with chinese.

We look at them as inferior only because our view at them as immorally brute, as they surely were. However this is just a part of the reality.

[GUNWOUNDS]

@Edrico--->

[GUNWOUNDS]

It's my opinion that the very fact that this world is all there is, is what should motivate us to do what's right. When I find the world as all there is, I appreciate the world itself more and work towards making it livable for my and my children. That involves expecting others to do what's right, and that can only start with myself. Not to say that you would appreciate this world any less.

that is a nice sentiment Acriku but unfortunately most people who believe that this world is all

[Anathema]

Mongols were one of the best organizers in the history. Not only most eastern khanates and Russian state became organized units like the western ones (in some ways even more stable) by adopting their political traditions, but their cybernetical perfection could be visible also in literal and other spheres. Today's XML is a digital application of how they were organizing scriptures already 700 years ago. And this is just a part, as their culture became strongly merged with chinese.

We look at them as inferior only because our view at them as immorally brute, as they surely were. However this is just a part of the reality.

In China the Mongols founded their own Yuan dynasty wich ruled the realm just as previous dynasties did, and eventually the Mongol Yuans became so entangled with Chinese custom and statecraft that they became Chinese themselves.

Novovgrod (commonly seen as the proto Russian state) was an autonomous vassal state and was never ruled by Mongols.

As for their connection to digital technology, I have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Mongols were good strategists, but other then that they were little better then savages.

[Dante]

I've always wanted to see a heterosexual parade.

Heterosexuals don't go around saying "be proud of being hetero" and make up parades and shit.

Nothing against gays, but when they go prancing around annoucing that they are gay and have to hold a parade to announce it, then it is stupid.

"I get sick of listening to straight people complain about, "Well, hey, we don't have a heterosexual-pride day, why do you need a gay-pride day?"

[GUNWOUNDS]

The nuclear family makes plenty of sense.

You have a mother.... you have a father.  The child needs both in order to develop correctly.  Else you have problems.  Its as simple as that.  Its not a myth.  Its simple development facts.

Many of the young black men growing up in the ghettos in america have no father figure to teach them how to be a real man.  This is a problem.  I live in North Carolina and blacks make up 15% of the population in the state but 60% of the population in the prisons.

Many professionals in different fields attribute this to improper family structure. 

Its simple you need a good mother and a good father to help you develop healthy mental processes and emotions.  We all need healthy father and mother figures.  Else you get people with distorted family values and ideas.

Sure a single mother can raise a child or maybe a grandmother can do it alone... but at what cost?  Many women who never had a strong father figure end up being porn stars or hookers while many men without strong father figures end up being prison inmates or thugs or homosexuals.  Having a proper strong father figure is critical.

[DukeLeto]

Sure a single mother can raise a child or maybe a grandmother can do it alone... but at what cost? Many women who never had a strong father figure end up being porn stars or hookers while many men without strong father figures end up being prison inmates or thugs or homosexuals. Having a proper strong father figure is critical.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but did you not just say that being homosexual is equivicable to being a felon, porn star, or hooker?

And you wonder why the prevailing notion here is that you're a clueless, stuck-up, insensitive bigot.

And as for your "Leave it to Beaver" analogy...Beaver Cleaver had a classroom of ten kids, his family had a seemingly endless supply of money, and they lived in a world with no wars, poverty, strife, crime, or pain.  A lack of "traditional family values" are not the only thing seperating us from utopia; indeed, they really have little or nothing to do with it.  My guess would be the high unemployment rates, tremendous social inequality, and continuous warfare have a little more to do with the world's problems than a few gay pride parades and single mothers.

And don't even get me started on how you want no single mothers yet simultaneously want an across the board ban on abortion...

[Dante]

The nuclear family makes plenty of sense.

You have a mother.... you have a father. The child needs both in order to develop correctly.

[Wolf]

Haha, Edric, I think I am venting my frustration with those who vent their frustration, I still think that, minus that, what I'm saying has merit. Boiled down to a few words, if there is any degredation to our society, it is the result of a modern culture that cannot satisfy the aspirations and desires of the people that inhabit it. People feel less and less meaning to what they do in life, and a commercialized consumer culture can do little to help that.

[GUNWOUNDS]

And don't even get me started on how you want no single mothers yet simultaneously want an across the board ban on abortion...

I dont want single mothers and i dont want abortion being used as a form of contraceptive.

What i want is for men in this society who have become spoiled and decadent to stand up, marry/support the woman they impregnated and become a real man and a real father.

[Dude_Doc]

What i want is for men in this society who have become spoiled and decadent to stand up, marry/support the woman they impregnated and become a real man and a real father.

Even if a family is perfect with a housband, a wife and a kid, the whole social status can also decide what kind of family it is. Maybe the housband is forced to deal in drugs, or rob people in order to survive - to even exist. Maybe his wife is forced to become a prostitute in order for the family to exist.

Equivicable? ... well Dukeleto all sin is sin... unrepentant liars go to hell too. All men are wretched without God. So yes i guess all sin is "equivicable".

It is quite interesting that those who have money and power can quite easily follow those rules, and somehow end up in heaven. On the other side, the ones we call "less fortunate" - who are maybe forced to lie, to rob, deal in all kinds of "black business", in order to survive, well - they all go to hell.

[GUNWOUNDS]

Even if a family is perfect with a housband, a wife and a kid, the whole social status can also decide what kind of family it is. Maybe the housband is forced to deal in drugs, or rob people in order to survive - to even exist. Maybe his wife is forced to become a prostitute in order for the family to exist.

It is quite interesting that those who have money and power can quite easily follow those rules, and somehow end up in heaven. On the other side, the ones we call "less fortunate" - who are maybe forced to lie, to rob, deal in all kinds of "black business", in order to survive, well - they all go to hell.

That is a lie... nobody is force to do any of those things.

[Anathema]

IIRC, a quote by O'Rourke:

The notion that poverty causes crime is an insult to the poor.

A good point, but one sided. Social status and environment do have effect on what kind of person you're going to be and statistics prove it. What other explanation is there for the fact that kids who grow up in poor families have problems later?

Of course, if you have the willpower you can stay clear of drugs and crimes and work your way up. But not nearly everybody is like that, and such self made men would maybe have accomplished even more if they were raised in a more suitable environment.

[GUNWOUNDS]

IIRC, a quote by O'Rourke:

The notion that poverty causes crime is an insult to the poor.

A good point, but one sided. Social status and environment do have effect on what kind of person you're going to be and statistics prove it. What other explanation is there for the fact that kids who grow up in poor families have problems later?

Of course, if you have the willpower you can stay clear of drugs and crimes and work your way up. But not nearly everybody is like that, and such self made men would maybe have accomplished even more if they were raised in a more suitable environment.

this is incorrect as well.

[Anathema]

Amongst the poor there is a *comparatively* higher crime rate and comparatively more drug problems.

Prince Harry's tasteless costume is IMO the result of lacking parenthood (remember that his mother died years ago. I can't say much about Charles' father skills though), thus making him into a spoilt brat. Raising your kids the right way is the most important thing here, but still:

If you're born poor and are raised in a poor environment with lots of crime you will have to fight harder to turn out right.

[GUNWOUNDS]

Amongst the poor there is a *comparatively* higher crime rate and comparatively more drug problems.

Prince Harry's tasteless costume is IMO the result of lacking parenthood (remember that his mother died years ago. I can't say much about Charles' father skills though), thus making him into a spoilt brat. Raising your kids the right way is the most important thing here, but still:

If you're born poor and are raised in a poor environment with lots of crime you will have to fight harder to turn out right.

i believe that being rich is just as hard a fight as you will have to guard yourself against decadence and immorality.

Its easier for a rich man to sleep with 1000 hookers than a poor man no?

Its easier for a rich man to buy drugs no?

Its easier for a rich man to kill someone and get away with it no?

Its easier for a rich man to do anything evil as he has far more resources.

REMEMBER what i said earlier.... all sin isnt crime.

[GUNWOUNDS]

As for dante's silly "everyday is hetero day so there needs to be a special homo day"

thats a very poor analogy.

[Anathema]

Sorry, I thought we were arguing about crime only rather then sins (a broader term)

Rich born people are subject to other temptations then poor, true. I just thik that they are more likely to stay on the right side of the law then poor people.

[Dante]

What i want is for men in this society who have become spoiled and decadent to stand up, marry/support the woman they impregnated and become a real man and a real father. Obviously something your father hasnt instilled you if you cannot understand that simple phrase.

Perhaps concentrating on not impregnating women at all unless you plan to follow through would be a better plan? Besides, abortion is not a contraceptive, it's a way out when things go wrong.

Religion teaches moderation, restraint, and sacrifice. Obviously someone without a spiritual faith cannot appreciate this as all men are wretched without a relationship with God.

So you say. Some of us prefer to find the bright side without flights of fancy.

Dante says that christians can be vile persons.

[GUNWOUNDS]

[Wolf]

Dante, I disagree with your assertion that a relationship with an insubstantial entity is impractical. You already have relationships with insubstantial entities all over the place. Anything you believe in that is an ideal, for example. Or, when you meet someone for the first time and like them so much you start imagining all the wonderful things about them that must be true. Your conception of "American," even, is an entity as insubstantial as God. You've met many Americans, I'm sure, but which one of them was The American? A very practical idea to have if you like to criticze Americans using the oft-exercised debate technique called "vast generalization" -- and in the end its something that's absolutely insubstantial! So, obviously, not all things that are insubstantial are impractical, just the things that you feel are impractical.

*EDIT: This has been getting a little off-topic, too, I might add.