Delete comment from: Captain Capitalism
But Rome did decline in less than two hundred years after the end of the Punic wrs. It can be argued, I certaintly would argue, that it started to decline from its greatest glory after Sulla and Marius. Yes the empire borders grew and the city of Rome grew more wealthy, however, closer inspection shows that it was during this period that the middle classes that made up Roman society began to disappear. And the wealth of Rome was simply a city tacking wealth from its provinces and consuming it in ever more hedonistic displays (D.C anyone?)
Rome was founded by the citizen farmer, much like colonial America, however, as time went on land, and wealth, began to coalesce into the hands of a few. The transition from republic into imperium formally started the clock on the Roman civilization.
Why? Simply because while the empire would thrive under the rule of elightened despots (Augustus, Trajan, Hadrian, Arelius, Diocletan, and Constantine) it would stagnant during midly capable emperors (Cladius, Appius, and many others) and sevrely regress under mad or incompetent emperors.
Even worse, the imperium system closed off the doors of leadership too all but a few. Rome, like America is now or was, was extremely adaptable, however, the transition to imperium stopped that.
This is why I will forever return to in my writings, or conversations with friends, about the need for more than a passing analogy to Rome. America is declining, but the decline doesn't mean the end of empire. No, it means the decline of the American Dream. I fear of a future were our 'empire' reminds unchallenged in the world, yet it is increasingly supported on the backs of ever impoverished Americans.
Remember, the Soviet Union was impoverished, especially compared to America, yet they were still the equals and rivals of America during their day. A soceity does not have to be prosperous to be powerful.
Jun 27, 2012, 8:55:18 PM
Posted to As Rome Went, So Will America