Smug Git
Arrogance Personified
Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35658 |
You might have had a different opinion if you were a Roman getting overrun by the forces of barbarism/whatever. But 'failed' is to be taken relative to aims; to the extent that Roman society was supposed to last forever, it failed, but that's a pretty naive aim, I think. Although I would say that if you wish to trace the effects of Roman empire through to current day, you could do that sort of thing for many other societies, too. In fact, even identifying the various periods of the Roman Empire as being parts of the same whole isn't uncontentious, as are all identity assignations between temporally seperated instances.
On the main topic, I'd say that, of course, the US will lose its current pre-eminence at some stage, and some other nation or nations will become more powerful and more wealthy than it. That's a failure if you view the task of America remaining pre-eminent for ever as a societal imperative, but if you hold that view, I think that you are aiming too high. A more realistic target for what can be handed to the Americans of the future is not to fuck things up for them, I would say, rather than trying to hand them a permanent mandate to Rule the World. Then, if (when) they fuck things up for themselves, or are naturally displaced by another nation, at least it won't be because the Americans of the present mortgaged the future for jam today.
Losing prominence doesn't have to be a catastrophic thing, anyhow; it can be slow. It may not even be as a result of falling wealth or capability on an absolute scale, either, but rather, the result of being overtaken. Anyone who can't cope with that idea is perhaps either deluded or else headed for a lifetime of disappointments.
__________________
I want to live and I want to love
I want to catch something that I might be ashamed of
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|