Speaking of fatuous comparisons of America to the Roman Empire, here's Victor Davis Hanson from an interview on RWN:
"Politically they [such comparisons] are absurd. We do not send proconsuls to demand taxes to pay for basing troops. In fact we do the opposite--pay lavishly for bases that protect others. The imperial senate was impotent, and civil war was common after AD 200 -- we have a stable Congress and little strife. For all the European venom, George Bush is not a Caracalla or even Diocletian. The classical topos of luxus, decadence brought about by affluence and leisure -- read Petronius, Suetonius, or Juvenal -- well, that is a real concern. Self-loathing and smug cynicism from an elite are the first symptoms and we see that clearly among those pampered and secure, who nevertheless ridicule the very system under which they operate in such a privileged fashion -- most notably in the arts, on the campuses, and in the media. A Jessica Lange or Barbra Streisand is right out of a Petronian banquet or perhaps sounds like a Flavian princess spouting off at dinner before returning to Nero's Golden House. Norman Mailer is a modern day Eumolpus bellowing on spec, and a Michael Moore a court-jester brought in to stick his tongue out at his benefactors for their own sick amusement."
The whole thing is swell and worth a read.
I dunno, Mr. Head.
Kinda disappointed you linked to it, but I guess it makes a valid point. RWN leaves a bad taste, I think it's the war-lust we discussed some earlier.
There may be a need, but we as Americans needn't relish it, or cheer for casualties. That's what terrorists do.
The roman empire comparison is mildly interesting, but I think we both agree it is innacurate and irrelevant.
Posted by: Sylvain | November 11, 2002 04:18 PM
Mostly agree,
The only comparison I see between Rome and the US is only in comparitive technological levels to the rest of the world. Other than that, there really isnt a great deal of parrallels between the two.
RWN isnt that bad, not that distinctive from several dozen other blogs of the same type, however he scores killer interviews.
Posted by: John | November 12, 2002 05:43 AM
Right. I didn't link to RWN per se, but to Victor Davis Hanson, whom I've come to respect for his depth of knowledge and his opinions. I've never read RWN, so I'm not especially concerned with whatever else may be on the site. I grabbed the link from VodkaPundit (I think).
While the Rome comparison is inaccurate, I wouldn't call it irrelevant. It's an idea that various people throw around in an attempt to make the whole Imperalist America argument work, and it deserves to be beat down whenever possible.
Posted by: --iaw | November 12, 2002 09:07 AM
You know, I rather like the comparison to Rome, but I don't necessarily think of it as a way to characterize the U.S. as imperialist. I think of it more in terms of a large (partially in the case of Rome) democratic power that has succeeded in exporting much of its culture to other areas of the world. Now, Rome did that by actually taking over the government of those areas, and we do it mostly by exporting popular culture, but Roman culture also came with being turned into a province. Along with niceties like running water and good roads.
I also think we have some cultural parallels: comparative affluence (including a great divide between rich and poor), decadence (in both good and bad ways), and a certain mob-rule tendency bred into our culture by our form of government. The mob rule thing is both good and bad. Like New York City, it can mean a freewheeling, adventurous spirit. And there's a sense that the average joe has at least a shred of political power. Also like New York City, it can mean life according to Thomas Hobbes (dull nasty brutish and short), much of it spent navigating the now-endemic casual rudeness.
But when I have offhandedly compared the U.S. to Rome in conversation, it's generally been with a mixture of affection and concern. We're a big unwieldy state, which necessarily carries some difficulties. We're decadent, we're crass, we're materialistic, we're one step shy of a vomitorium (unless you're a teenage girl, in which case you've probably got one). But you can basically do your thing here, and if people won't be happy about it, they can't by law make you stop unless it's physically harmful to others.
Now I'd better go read the Victor Davis Hanson piece so I'm not just shooting my mouth off.
Posted by: Valencia | November 12, 2002 09:25 AM
The very name RWN makes me shudder, but I agree with you about Victor - he's very erudite and makes excellent points.
Posted by: Valencia | November 12, 2002 09:40 AM
Okay, I read the interview, and it wasn't as bad as I'd imagined. A few sticky points-he subtly admits to the oil connection and treating SA with kid-gloves because of that oil, which I think is an incorrect course of action for that regime.
Posted by: Sylvain | November 12, 2002 06:03 PM
Yes, "irrelevant" is the wrong word.
I appreciate the comparison, limited as it is.
America is experiencing a New Empirialism that can only vaguely be compared to the Old.
Posted by: Sylvain | November 13, 2002 05:29 PM
« | Main | »