1 comment

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 5 points 4 months ago

You should know who that claim comes from and why it is complete bullshit. I hate seeing it repeated so much


I have an unreasonable dislike for sir Glubb. His conclusion is just wrong and based on horrible data. It bothers me that his opinion has lasted this long in the public consciousness

I mean look at this shit bruh

I'd be embarassed to have made this. What made him choose these dates? Wdym the Ottoman empire only lasted 250 years??? Yes, the Roman empire totally ended in 180 A.D. nothing happened after that don't worry about it haha. Don't even look at China, doesn't matter, nothing is going on there. Like???? I hate him


America is coming to its end as an empire but it's not because it reached some arbitrary date set by a Brit trying to rationalize the fall of his empire in a way that absolves its people of any fault.

  • source
  • 21 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 47 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    Maybe we could try not being an empire....

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 4 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 43 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    this definitely feels more like usa’s funeral than usa’s birthday

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago

    By so many metrics the US has already failed.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    We're outside the pattern. Like Rome was.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    There is no pattern. The "most empires fall after 250 years" is just some guy claiming it, there is no facts to back it up, and no historian has ever made such a claim.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    No not that pattern. It's the one where, the closer you get from antiquity to now, the shorter the lifespan of an empire. It's not an absolute, but Rome is the biggest outlier in how long it lasted. In the current age, where empires have much shorter lifespans on average, America is an outlier, proportionately.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Difference is that Rome was able to survive for another thousand years after the fall of the western half of the empire. I severely doubt the US will pull such BS, or if it does it'll be some random ass rump state like Trebizond or Theodoro.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    Rome was continually called Rome, but people harkon back to old empires and see themselves as extending it. It had many civil wars and changes and moved capitals and everything. My point is that if we call that one empire, maybe historians will consider the US as part of the larger Anglo American empire

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Luckily the underground crime economy is keeping it afloat.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    Crossroads? It's not like you have a choice. It started as a gradual slope, but you're mid-slide now and there's no going back to your peak.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    The US didn't start being an empire until after WW2

  • source