I have heard a lot of people saying, that the US is showing signs of a empire about to fall.
Anyone who can come with some examples from fallen empires to compare to this?
Also general fallen/demise of empires thread.
>>1388948
What would you describe as being in decline? Currently we have the most powerful military in the world, and the means to project such power to any corner of the globe we wanted to. We have an enormous economy and culturally we are dominant. I would say our society is stagnating a bit, but it's not like that can't be changed. At most we're becoming a little decadent, but I would say we're far from collapsing.
>>1388948
>fundamentally flawed financial system, promoting inequality and causing crisis in regular intervals
>complicated global logistic structure vulnerable to disruption
>massive overconsumption of resources, risking depletion
>destruction of ecosystems on a massive scale, causing a great extinction event
>dependence on cheap! oil for almost everything
>threat of nuclear warfare
>destruction of arable soil leading to desertification
>disruption of water cycles leading to desertification
>dependence on mined fertilizers and depletion of sources (especially phosphorus)
enjoy the ride while it still lasts
get laid
do drugs
travel
plant some trees
have fun
>>1389140
>plant some trees
but you said enjoy the ride
>>1389177
I enjoy watching trees I planted
and I get fruit
fruittrees are also nice to have around, when the supermarkets are empty
but feel free not to do it, if it's not your thing
>>1389215
>watching trees grow
was what I meant...
The USA isnt an Empire about to fall, but it has competition because the rest of the world is catching up.
In the first world people see the ruined mining or industrial cities, but dont see how hundreds of millions of people have become middle class in the rest of the world.
The rest of the world cant go back to being how it was decades ago.
>>1388948
>I have heard a lot of people saying, that the US is showing signs of a empire about to fall.
From who? High schoolers?
>>1389244
Various places.
Because of these events happening now, there are many people talking about it.
I also find it a bit exaggerated.
But it is still an interesting subject.
>>1389462
What events? The U.S. hasn't had a major, nationwide civil disruption in quite awhile, at least nothing out of the ordinary for most cunts.
>>1389227
>The USA isnt an The USA isnt an Empire about to fall, but it has competition because the rest of the world is catching up.
When civilizations rest on their laurels and rely on military to enforce it's economic might, this is a solid predictor of decline.
>The rest of the world cant go back to being how it was decades ago.
Why not? If America loses its world cop status and various conflicts break out, we could go back decades, if not a century or more.
>>1389462
The thing is that we live in modern times. We don't have millions of barbarians seeking to look and burn Washington, DC.
The US might go through a major depression and even it might even default on its debts.
But you aren't going to be rapped by Huns anytime soon.
I doubt the US will 'collapse' but I think its time as the ascendant power of the world is waning.
The US became dominant in a time when they were practically the only guys in the game who didn't get fucked by massive conflict - and had the opportunity to be the world's financiers in rebuilding / filling markets that the decrepit Europeans couldn't fill anymore.
It's still going to take several decades at least, though, unless you guys manage to really shit the bed.
>>1389553
The world economy is so interdependent on the US economy - if the US economy does collapse, so does the world's.
And with all its infrastructure, natural ports, land, and resources, the annoying thing is, of all the nations of the world suffering from such a collapse, the US is in the best position to bounce back.
Unless there's a full scale nuclear war irradiating the US, Russia, Europe, the Middle East, and China end to end - in which case the shitposters in Australia shall inherit the Earth.
>>1389140
>fundamentally flawed financial system, promoting inequality and causing crisis in regular intervals
Funny how even America's "rivals" disagree with you. There is just one financial system, and it's a global one. US Treasury bonds aren't just held by China, they're held worldwide for a reason. I don't think US financial policy is perfect, but it's literally the opposite of "fundamentally flawed".
>>1389027
Meh, this is my problem with the "MAGA" meme... We've never been any greater. We have more economic, political, cultural, and military power than we've ever had.
We'd pretty much have to conquer another planet to be any greater, and seeing as how we already stuck our flag on the damned moon...
>>1389584
>shut posting Australians take over
Literal Mad Max
But I would be down to spectate that
>>1389603
Well, it is fundamentally flawed - but so is the whole world's. ...and no more stable and honest economic model can compete with fiat currencies, so even if the house of cards does collapse, we'd probably just build it up all over again. (And watch it collapse again, and build it again, and watch it collapse again, and built it again, and...)
>>1389027
Yet we're not using any of it. Russia got away fine in Ukraine, and China in the South China Sea, and ISIS is growing more powerful every single day and we're doing less to stop it than our rivals are. Ability means nothing if it's going to waste.
>>1389623
None of those issues are worth our full military attention (and/or are actually working to our benefit, at the moment), but there's, yes, always the risk of death by a thousand paper cuts. At the same time, we do thousands of minor military operations to maintain the status quo, as well as the threats thereof.
On the other hand, I don't think it matters which of these two nuts wins the election, we're going to see some serious wars in the next administration.
>>1389584
The way things are now, most major nations of the world could cause a major economic collapse if their own internal economy crashed completely. We see realtively minor things like Brexit causing chaos all around, imagine if a substantial part of the global economy suddently ceased to be.
I'm talking Japan, China, Germany, France, UK, Russia, US. Maybe even minors like Brazil or Italy could cause an irreparable crash if their roles on the global economy stopped without a warning. We have to remember that the human psyche plays a huge role in economics. Major financial players get desperate and make huge mistakes during crysis. You don't need to move 40% of the world's wealth to cause everything to crash. You just need to kick a "small" support and the whole house goes crashing down.
I keep thinking the world market will be our downfall some day. It's too fucking unstable.
>>1389633
What wars would Trump cause? He only wants ISIS.
>>1389550
I guess one of the concerns is, if the US defaults on its debts, then who is going to pay for all the various social services that make the global system work, including law enforcement? Don't you think people will be rioting for food or prescriptions? People might just keep the peace out of the good of their hearts, but that is really optimistic.
>>1389637
Still holds true that, in the event of a world economic collapse, the US is in the best position to come back from it (so long as it doesn't coincide with or result in nuclear armageddon).
There's no real way to make the world economy stable though. The most profitable model requires infinite growth in a finite world, so it's gonna have a crash/rinse/repeat cycle no matter what you do.
>>1389637
I'd like to point out that boom and busts are mostly due to opinion.
Just because the economy goes into a recession doesn't mean some guy goes around and destroys factories and erases technology from existence.
Shit is still there.
>>1389644
>have world reserve currency status
>default on debt and thus abandon it
It still boggles my mind that there are folks so psychotic in charge as to even think of threatening to do this. But, as we all know, Idiocracy was a documentary, so...
>>1389651
NTG, and I kinda get your point - but it's also true that abandoned factories kinda destroy themselves.
>>1389651
We also have to know how to use that technology, otherwise it is worthless. All it takes is one generation that, because of dire hunger or warfare, doesn't know how to use technology, or even be able to read, and centuries of technological gains could be wiped out. What is a computer to someone who can't read, and what is a telephone cable to someone who has never used a telephone? It's just scrap.
>>1389606
Those are material gains and as great as they are they can be so much better, socially we have no values and the citizenry is severally divided compounded by social programs and initiatives that cannot be sustained.
>>1389651
That's true, but I was talking about a collapse. Complete economic collapse. It has never happened before to any major nation. What we've seen so far in our history, like in 1929, were crashes. Not collapses. Stock exchanges go down hard and fast and that starts eating away the actual means of production.
But in a collapse, the means of production go down first. A country ravaged by war is the only good example I can think of to explain this scenario. Imagine having a third world war were for some reason or another Germany is, once again, blown to smithereens. Back in 1918 and 1945, the world could make do without them. Nowadays? I wouldn't be so sure.
It's like our global market is completely forgetting the fact that from time to time we like to blow ourselves up. How can China and the US be major economic partners and, at the same time, absolute political and military rivals? What is both go to war? What happens to the crazy amount of imports and exports between the two countries?
Those things are what make me think a third world war is almost impossible. It would be economical suicide for any major country to attack another at this point of the global market game. The stakes are way too fucking high.
>>1389766
Logically and reasonably, it SHOULD be impossible. Globalization should consign wars between the great powers to the dustbin of history.
But, well, humans aren't logical. Every now and then humanity goes full retard.
>>1389643
Hasn't he straight-up declared that if Mexico doesn't pay for the wall he'll DoW them?
>>1389783
He intends to hold the money illegals send to mexico.
>>1389786
How?Wouldn't that constitute the largest invasion of privacy ever enacted by a democratic nation?
>>1389789
Now you're catching on!
>>1389789
Who cares, they're criminals, they are not protected by the constitution.
>>1389809
Not as long as Mexico takes responsibility for their citizens
![man-laughing[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/2Cyz398.jpg "man-laughing[1].jpg")
>>1389815
>>1389789
Well, there's no Fourth Amendment right to prevention of money transfers yet. He could have the Department of Treasury put in currency controls to prevent capital flight, but I'm not sure how he would do this so that it applies only to legal residents and citizens. Have Congress pass a law saying that foreign remittances require proof of legal residence or citizenship? This assumes that Congress is even willing to work with him on his agenda, which is doubtful.
>>1389643
...and China, and Russia, and Iran, and pretty much anyone else Obama has ever "shown weakness" towards, anyone we're on bad terms with today, as well as anyone or anything that threatens Israel.
So, basically, all the same folks Hillary would start a war with - plus Mexico.
>>1389462
By many metrics we live in the most prosperous, most peaceful period in human history. Violent crime in America is minuscule compared to previous decades. Even our debt and fiscal situation have upsides.
People in economic forecasting and strategy firms, at least those publishing books, almost all predict America will remain a dominant superpower through the 21st century.
Nobody can tell the future but those promoting dystopian predictions usually have an agenda to push. That or they're just ignorant, like those who predict calamity if Trump won the election don't know that the office of the Presidency is the weakest leadership position in the western world, legally speaking.
>>1389817
Mexico has way too much to lose to risk pissing off the POTUS. They will pay.
>All of East Asia has been buying loads of weapons in response to growing Chinese pressure
>Russia substantially increasing military expenditures, bolstering its border forces
>NATO urging members to increase defense spending, placing more troops on the border to Russia
>China overhauling its military, militarizing the South China Sea is clear defiance of the US, increasing military spending
>Shinzo Abe of Japan looking to change the Japanese constitution to allow them to fight wars
>Saudi Arabia and Iran fighting proxy wars in each others back yards
The world looks like it could be one black swan event from something calamitous.
>>1389861
Not only that, I heard Iran gave russia the billions they got from the nuke deal and asked vlad to build them an army.
>>1389827
>and China, and Russia, and Iran,
Why are redditors tgis dumb? Canyou put a source of Trump saying something bad about Putin? Can you post any source about Trump vs China? Can you post any source about Trump declaring war on Iran other than a better trade deal? Why are you such a lier/dumb person?
>>1389869
No anon you don't understand, if we don't literally bend over to every shitty one-sided deal controversial countries throw at us, it's equal to wanting war!!!
>>1388948
If america falls it will fall in the national scale but most likely we will have a balkanization and more entities will form and then we will probably see an "AU" formed of those countries plus mexico and canada (and quebec if they decide to leave after such an event)
>>1389886
No, none of that would ever happen
>>1389886
Actually a big global war could work wonders for US unity... provided they won it, of course.
>>1389869
Trump says he wouldn't have been so weak in the Ukraine and would have considered the military path an option. Trump threatens China on a regular basis, and says much the same in regards to the south China seas. Trump poo-poo'd all over the Iran deal, when the alternative was to let them go nuclear with no monitoring, eventually forcing military action.
>>1389882
Trump seems to consider not using military action, or even taking steps to avoid having to do so, to be a sign of weakness, and considers any threat to Israel an existential threat against the US - as does Hillary. The only saving grace for her is that her catch phrase isn't "you're fired'
Thankfully, the president doesn't have near as much power as we all seem to think... On the other hand, that also means it doesn't matter who is in office - tensions are going nowhere but up on every front, so a nasty war or two is pretty much inevitable in the next four to eight years.
>>1389902
You're confusing military action with all-out war. The kind of action Trump advocates is deterrence, which the US always used to use but in recent years we haven't been. Most countries would think twice about their actions with US troops eying them down.
>>1389918
Most wars in modern history began with a limited military action. Plus military action is pretty addicting, and makes non-military solutions more difficult with repeated application. Use the hammer often enough, and every problem quickly starts resembling a nail.
>>1389938
The United States not using military action doesn't change anything though. Russia won't leave Ukraine because we stop sending them bread baskets. China won't leave the SCS because we send them takeout. ISIS isn't going to die because we let shamed someone for complaining about Muslims. All of them would absolutely love for us to become more passive with out intervention, it just makes them more aggressive with theirs because they know they can get away with it. They already are, in fact. We need to be vigilant in all problems because otherwise the serious ones will be ignored.
>>1389952
>ISIS isn't going to die because we let shamed someone for complaining about Muslims.
Nah, it's going to die because there's no more power vacuum to expand into and they can't survive without that.
>>1388948
The English before the Norman invaders.
>>1388948
Jon?
Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society
- Aristotle
>>1389991
Too bad that quote is a total fabrication, friendo
>>1389991
he never said that
>>1389981
>Implying we won't create another one to be filled by the muslimbrotherhoodalquedatalibanmuchadeenwhateverthehellwerecallingthelatesttipofthisendlessiceberg due to our inability to learn from /his/.
>>1390011
I for one look forward to hearing about HORUS in ten years.
>>1389140
>Massive overconsumption of resources, risking depletion
This has always scared me. Are there ways human ingenuity can overcome limited resources? Like renewable energy, effective recycling, or astral mining?
>>1390257
The only sustainable way is to spread across the entire Sol system.
>>1390257
We theoretically can overcome it but the problem is that prognosis about "when" will we run out of resources are horribly inaccurate(otherwise we would run out of iron for instance by 1990 or something like that) which
1) causes companies to doubt in usefulness of investment into astral mining, recycling(outside of industries operating with metals like silver or gold - they recycle shitton and invest in the tech) and renewable energy(which is a scam in many ways and requires gigantic improvements).
2) causes social animosity to those problems which makes government less likely to invest in them
So I wouldn't be surprised if we'd run out of them when it's too late.
The biggest problem is arable land though because we don't know about any "outsider" source of it in our reach(like asteroids for resources). In countries like the Netherlands, which have enormous agricultural output for their size, the business is getting less and less profitable on year-to-year basis because the amount of fertilizers needed to grow anything on their much-overexploited soil is increasing yearly and it gets worse and worse. The "solution" for this problem is basically - "big" farmers and various corporations use loosened restrictions on land purchases in countries that aren't as "damaged" and continue doing what caused their own land to ruin, sometimes(very common for Africa) - even worse. In case of Africa we're literally talking about growing monocultures for decade and then leaving a patch of sand behind. While for countries like Netherlands - more "balanced" agricultural cycle would be enough for the land to recover, for Africa it's death sentence - it'll take decades until it'll be good enough for pastures.
The most obvious solution for this is to restrict the international land purchases and introduce "balanced" agriculture worldwide but before you deal with that you need 3rd world, mainly Africa, to finally make use of their own land to feed themselves(cont.)
>>1390319
Aren't Google and Amazon making huge advances in the theoretically fundamental technologies involved in asteroid mining ?
>>1389216
Maybe you should stop smoking all those trees
>>1390319
>The most obvious solution for this is to restrict the international land purchases and introduce "balanced" agriculture worldwide but before you deal with that you need 3rd world, mainly Africa, to finally make use of their own land to feed themselves(cont.)
however they don't have money to afford educating their farmers how to cultivate their land to avoid desertification, they don't have money for various infrastructural developments(melioration etc.) and one of the ways to obtain those is to sell arable land to big western banks.
Obviously the problem of the entire thing is that the country that won't introduce "balanced" farming will have far larger efficiency - they will produce much more food and it'll be much cheaper, leading to either them dumping other markets with it or will simply make the population in the countries that introduced that regulations relatively poorer than they were before it.
The other, high-tech solution seems to be soil-less farming but the price of food grown like that may be just too high. It offers a solution for farming inside of big cities though, which may make it affordable(due to lower logistical costs).
Overall I have doubts if we'll be able to both feed our population's growth and not destroy the farmland to the point where we won't be able to feed them in the near future.
>>1390326
They are but this is all half assed. The weakness and faultiness of private space programs is also to blame, I guess.
Had there be real need of them you'd see first attempts at mining in a year since the programs started. That being said we will be mining asteroids, however we may experience some "material austerity" before we'll get there.
>>1389027
>>1388948
Not an Empire but 80s/early 90s SFR Yugoslavia would probably be the best comparison to the impending disintegration of America.
>Racially/religiously diverse, but highly fractious even in the best of times
>"Brotherhood and unity" ideology that has been the status quo for decades has begun to crack.
>Collapsing economy
>Decade-long series of increasingly inept leaders
>Support for secession (i.e. Texit) is at it's highest levels since 1860
>>1389670
Besides the need for some windows and machinery, those building look pretty much good to go for actual productive enterprise.
>>1389140
this applies to almost every nation
>>1391922
that's why it will not just be an US collapse, but one of global civilization
>>1388948
>US
>Empire
Good thing it isn't one.
None of the popular atheists know Scripture well enouh to settle debates; neither do I follow the popular nor do your deluded retarded memes apply to me. My post was antitheist. I somewhat doubt your kind can learn new proper words.
>>1392282
Think you got the wrong thread there m80.
>>1392178
Yeah it's not an empire. it is of cause a democracy, just one state equal to every other state of the planet
did you also know, that the US did not fight any war since 45?
they just did necessary military interventions against dictators
of cause to liberate oppressed people and spread democracy
>>1390257
Start eating bugs.
>>1393003
>it is of cause a democracy
It is not. It is a federal republic.
> just one state equal to every other state of the planet
Not even close
>necessary military interventions against dictators
Vietnam?
Read
"Dereliction of Duty: Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, The Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies that Led to Vietnam" (1997) by then Major H.R. McMaster as part of his PhD dissertation.
<pic LtGen McMaster (then MajGen in 2014)
>>1393747
I think he was being sarcastic.
...Cuz it's either that or something akin to pic related.
>>1390257
Limited resources are overrated.
In most cases, the shortages are largely artificial, and in nearly all cases, the shortages are technologically surmountable - it's just that surmounting them isn't as profitable as allowing them to remain limited.
This is among the reasons why asteroid mining on any real scale isn't going to be a thing for a long while. If you bring back a ridiculous amount of a precious resource, it ceases to be precious, and while we rarely learn from history, folks can do the math without having to remember what happened to the Conquistadors after they came home with all that gold, only to die destitute after they crashed the market.
>>1393789
Shit game
>>1393816
Good eye candy and great /pol/ memes though.
The Ottoman Empire is a perfect example.
>>1393839
Some /pol/ jubers love it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=az7ZwW1bff8
>Comstock's vision is more about Islam than it is about Christianity.
>ucantmakethisshitup.jpg
I fucking love history.
It is by far one of my biggest interests.
>>1389550
>rapped by the Huns
Straight outta Cytia
