@TG:
I don’t say that the US will fall tomorrow, or in my lifetime. But: it will fall, and i think it will not dominate the world for a time as long as the romans or chinese did….
Doubtful…
Not at all … ;)
sound republican system, well…. “sound” is relative… two parties just grow corrupt…and look at the number of ppl voting…35% ???
Generally those who are angry vote. Why vote when everything is going fine? The way the republic system is set up (checks and balances between three branches, Constitution, Bill of Rights) is for the most part, fine. If the two parties get to corrupt or out of line, then it will be the people who respond: in form of communist uprising. 8)
Well, if only those that are angry vote, then it is surprising that your system works at all. Imagine:
I am angry, i vote a party to change as much as possible (assuming such a party exists in the US ;) ). The ones who don’t want change, don’t vote.
Who will get the majority in the parliament? If only those who complain vote…. then i really wonder!
except for the increasing economic growth ( you need to tell me howmany years you take for averaging),
That is the measured standard. Usually you can find economic growth along with other charts that include per capita and GDP…
:) not that this helps me. I do come from a scientific background… How does GDP translate ;)?
And american “standards” are known not to be world-wide standards necessarily :) :)… inches, gallons… ;)
most/all of the “old empires” had vast natural ressources as well
Through conquest? Or was it just Rome alone?
Through the area they ruled. Rome, China for example, being the two greatest and longest lasting empires. And the Ottomans held a great empire for a very long time without these ressources.
and they also stopped expanding after some time
Which generally marked their decline (rule of thumb, no Empire collapses when it’s still conquering away). In the US case, it is different.
Sure, just by definition conquering empires don’t collapse, that’s more than a rule of thumb. Look at Alexander the great: As soon as he died during his conquests his empire crumbled away.
And saying that is saying China declined for most of its time, or (West) Rome declined for 360 years, after your logic. Not counting Byzantine, which declined much longer, didn’t it (should be about 800 years, after your logic)? The 250 year decline of the Ottomans of course should not be forgotten.
I would not say that “stopping conquest” was the important thing. More the end of “being threatened in its existance” and “fighting wars” (that’s a difference to conquest). Often, the end of conquest was followed by a time of cultural achievements….
From this point of view, it is hard to say where i would put the US into.
They surely still do wage wars regularly, but their existance is not threatened from the outside. They had a period of cultural “blooming”… american style, but still. Plus: Most of the smartest brains in the US have been imported (just like Rome had to do in the later times)… difficult, but still i cannot see any evidence that the US will dominate this planet for the rest of humankinds time.
