US VS G7

[Altair]

Rome fell after it stopped being able to keep the barbarians out due to the decline of internal management mechanisms etc. Basically: They got soft, the others didn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Western_Roman_Empire

Comparing the US with Ancient Rome is, while fun, also probably a pretty solid venture into false analogy land

Ineffective,  cruel,  incompetent emperors probably had something to do with it as well.

Commudus,  Severus,  Nero,  Tiberius,  Caracalla,  Caligula,  even the strongest empires can only withstand inept leadership for so long before things start to collapse.

But you are correct,  comparing the modern day USA to ancient rome is a false analogy.

America tearing down the liberal democratic order it spent decades building,  praising dictatorships and oligarchies while openly antagonizing allied democracies will cause a much quicker collapse of international prestige,  power and wealth than the slow collapse of the Roman empire.

 

[tomahawk6]

Ineffective,  cruel,  incompetent emperors probably had something to do with it as well.

Commudus,  Severus,  Nero,  Tiberius,  Caracalla,  Caligula,  even the strongest empires can only withstand inept leadership for so long before things start to collapse.

But you are correct,  comparing the modern day USA to ancient rome is a false analogy.

America tearing down the liberal democratic order it spent decades building,  praising dictatorships and oligarchies while openly antagonizing allied democracies will cause a much quicker collapse of international prestige,  power and wealth than the slow collapse of the Roman empire.

Maybe Canada and the rest of Europe should help the US financially or if the US wanted to screw allies the US could just go full on isolationist.

 

[Good2Golf]

Maybe Canada and the rest of Europe should help the US financially or if the US wanted to screw allies the US could just go full on isolationist.

Nothing the world hasn't seen from the U.S. before, with the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which many economists attribute world-wide deepening and prolongation of the Great Depression.  Only this time, seems the U.S. is in much better position to screw over the rest of the world (until the Dragon calls in its debt marker).  Not sure that's something to be proud of...but it is the will of the people...

Regards
G2G

 

[Altair]

Nothing the world hasn't seen from the U.S. before, with the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which many economists attribute world-wide deepening and prolongation of the Great Depression.  Only this time, seems the U.S. is in much better position to screw over the rest of the world (until the Dragon calls in its debt marker).  Not sure that's something to be proud of...but it is the will of the people...

Regards
G2G

I believe the world is more or less banking on this being a short term blip that has to be withstood before things return to normal in 2020.

At which point the USA has a lot of work to do trying to rebuild its reputation and relationship with its allies. Even then,  I don't think Europe or Canada will fully trust them again,  knowing that they can elect a populist with no regard for allies at any time.

Never mind if it goes on beyond 2020

 

[tomahawk6]

PLan on Trump winning in 2020.

 

[Good2Golf]

PLan on Trump winning in 2020.

...and 2024 and 2028 and...

 

[Altair]

...and 2024 and 2028 and...

would there need to elections at that point or would he be president for life like his good friend Xi?

 

[Edward Campbell]

PLan on Trump winning in 2020.

Anyone, anywhere, who is NOT planning on Trump being president until 2024 is a strategic nincompoop. In fact I suspect that the Trump Party might be a major factor in US politics for a generation.

Good, old fashioned, English liberalism was hijacked, in the 1940s, '50s and '60s by a (largely American) 'new liberal elite' that was unconcerned with individual rights and liberties and was focused, instead, on issues like productivity and lifting society, at large, out of poverty. They did a lot of good ... they gave us a 'new world order' that, by the 21st century, had lifted more people out of abject poverty in 50 years than had happened in 5,000+ years of recorder history. But in the process they excluded the 'ordinary' American, Brit, Canadian and Dane from the political process and they tried to move globalization from the economic realm to a broader social realm ... where, in my opinion, it does not belong. I think the populist reaction, Trump in America, Brexit in Britain and now Doug Ford in Canada, is the logical and even (by only a few) predictable result.

My, personal view, is that in Canada the Conservatives are trying to reclaim the 'classically liberal' ground, but the federal party may be split by one faction that wants to move very quickly. In Britain I see the Conservatives in ruins, split between those want to appease the populists, those who want to carry on as the 'new order elite' and those who want to reclaim traditional liberalism. In America I think the populists are in control of both the Tea Party and the Trump Party factions and I think the Democrats are on a long term, left leaning course. Someone needs to reinvent the Eisenhower Republicans with middle class, Main Street social and economic values.

 

[observor 69]

I think many people who vote Liberal would be delighted to vote for "  Eisenhower Republicans with middle class, Main Street social and economic values."
If only the option existed. 

 

[Altair]

Anyone, anywhere, who is NOT planning on Trump being president until 2024 is a strategic nincompoop. In fact I suspect that the Trump Party might be a major factor in US politics for a generation.

Good, old fashioned, English liberalism was hijacked, in the 1940s, '50s and '60s by a (largely American) 'new liberal elite' that was unconcerned with individual rights and liberties and was focused, instead, on issues like productivity and lifting society, at large, out of poverty. They did a lot of good ... they gave us a 'new world order' that, by the 21st century, had lifted more people out of abject poverty in 50 years than had happened in 5,000+ years of recorder history. But in the process they excluded the 'ordinary' American, Brit, Canadian and Dane from the political process and they tried to move globalization from the economic realm to a broader social realm ... where, in my opinion, it does not belong. I think the populist reaction, Trump in America, Brexit in Britain and now Doug Ford in Canada, is the logical and even (by only a few) predictable result.

My, personal view, is that in Canada the Conservatives are trying to reclaim the 'classically liberal' ground, but the federal party may be split by one faction that wants to move very quickly. In Britain I see the Conservatives in ruins, split between those want to appease the populists, those who want to carry on as the 'new order elite' and those who want to reclaim traditional liberalism. In America I think the populists are in control of both the Tea Party and the Trump Party factions and I think the Democrats are on a long term, left leaning course. Someone needs to reinvent the Eisenhower Republicans with middle class, Main Street social and economic values.

The Trump Party will be around for a long time, but how big is the Trump party?

Trump was elected president on a razor thin margin, with disenfranchised Democrats staying home or voting for trump. Trump did better with Latinos and Blacks than Romney did in 2012, what are the chances that happens again?

I don't think Democrats are going to sit at home fuming that their guy or gal didn't win the primary this time around, there is going to be a strong anti Trump movement come next election,and assuming the democrats don't pick the second most hated politician as their flag bearer, I don't think it's foolish to think that this may be a one time blip.

 

[QV]

I will disagree with you there Altair.  The way I read it is there is only one thing that will sewer Trump for the next election and that is a crash in the US economy.  I believe in the last election the one thing holding him back from a larger victory was how unsure everyone was with this bombastic celebrity as president.  So long as the world isn't in WWIII and the American economy is humming along nicely (with all that entails) I think you will see a much larger victory in 2020 because the fence sitters will see that he hasn't wrecked the country and that in fact things have improved for most Americans.  The tax breaks, reduced regulations, potential for peace with NK - these are all huge things that a large majority of people approve of - despite what MSM says.     

If things get worse for most Americans, such as a significant economic down turn or the brink of nuclear war, then yes he will lose.  Hopefully none of those things happen, despite the wishes of folks like Bill Maher.

   

 

[Cloud Cover]

Things will get very ugly south of the border after the mid terms if the Dems take one or both legislatures, Trump and his base will rail like hell against them and have a perfect target to blame everything and nothing on, the main thing is lay blame and take credit at the same time. 

"Of course, populist protest is only partly economic. But even where that protest is cultural, it is fueled by way of mainstream neoliberalism, sanctimoniously pronouncing its policies to be based on scientific economics. Yet populists’ views about the economy are, to put it kindly, often ambiguous. Tea Party activists generated rage against the Affordable Care Act as a big-government imposition on them and a benefit to undeserving others—until Trump tried to repeal it and many noticed that it provides their health insurance .... Populism might be interpreted more consistently as holding that society, rather than government per se, can and must circumscribe the economy within its compass. Hence the opposition to trade treaties. This view is not obviously wrong. “Ideas, knowledge, science, hospitality, travel—these are the things which should of their nature be international,” John Maynard Keynes wrote. “But let goods be homespun whenever it is reasonably and conveniently possible, and, above all, let finance be primarily national.”

The North American Free Trade Agreement launched a far more extensive international economic regime than Keynes even imagined. It focuses less on trade per se—by the time it was negotiated the United States had already lifted nearly all obstacles to manufactured imports—than on protecting investors’ property rights and thus supporting their ability to move across borders."   - Jonathan Schlefer "Market Parables and the Economics of Populism: When Experts Are Wrong, People Revolt" Foreign Affairs July 24, 2017

About the Eisenhower years, some of those were the St Laurent years in Canada until he was beaten by...a populist leader in charge of what soon became a factionalist party.  Since then, Conservatives have only governed when they are unified under a leader they believe in. This is also why our current PM is a populist, many of his own MP's do not trust him or even like him.

 

[observor 69]

While I can't disagree with the points made by QV....

The new batch of politicians starting to campaign in their home districts are encountering voters who primary area of concern is healthcare.

 

[Remius]

Rome fell after it stopped being able to keep the barbarians out due to the decline of internal management mechanisms etc. Basically: They got soft, the others didn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_the_Western_Roman_Empire

Comparing the US with Ancient Rome is, while fun, also probably a pretty solid venture into false analogy land

There are a whole pile of reasons why the Roman Empire fell.  Death by a thousand cuts including economic ones.

I agree that it is a false analogy but there are many similarities that we are seeing.

Altair mentioned the inept leadership but I would label more as unpredictable leadership and inept government.  But other more comparable issues:

- Retreating from the world.  Rome abandoned their furthest territories.  Receding their military to deal with other issues.  Pulling forces from South Korea, Europe and the Middle East would be similar to Rome leaving Britain, Africa and the territories along the Rhine. 

- Immigration pressures.  Rome saw an influx of Goths seeking refuge in Roman territory.  They were fleeing the Huns and others.  similar to what we see at the Mexican border as well as in Europe.  Very similar. 

- A stagnation in the economy.  They stopped and reduced foreign trade to the massive imbalance in wealth among the population. 

Heck, just look at the financial crisis of 33 Ad, very similar to the US housing crisis.

One only has to look at Julius Caesar as well.  Very much a populist wanting to return the land to the people but also tried to make himself dictator for life to make it happen...

 

[Altair]

There are a whole pile of reasons why the Roman Empire fell.  Death by a thousand cuts including economic ones.

I agree that it is a false analogy but there are many similarities that we are seeing.

Altair mentioned the inept leadership but I would label more as unpredictable leadership and inept government.  But other more comparable issues:

- Retreating from the world.  Rome abandoned their furthest territories.  Receding their military to deal with other issues.  Pulling forces from South Korea, Europe and the Middle East would be similar to Rome leaving Britain, Africa and the territories along the Rhine. 

- Immigration pressures.  Rome saw an influx of Goths seeking refuge in Roman territory.  They were fleeing the Huns and others.  similar to what we see at the Mexican border as well as in Europe.  Very similar. 

- A stagnation in the economy.  They stopped and reduced foreign trade to the massive imbalance in wealth among the population. 

Heck, just look at the financial crisis of 33 Ad, very similar to the US housing crisis.

One only has to look at Julius Caesar as well.  Very much a populist wanting to return the land to the people but also tried to make himself dictator for life to make it happen...

History does tend to repeat itself.

 

[Altair]

And more of the G6 + 1, President Trump blasts Germany via twitter.

Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
The people of Germany are turning against their leadership as migration is rocking the already tenuous Berlin coalition. Crime in Germany is way up. Big mistake made all over Europe in allowing millions of people in who have so strongly and violently changed their culture!


1.Publicly undermining one of USA's most important allies.
2.Flat out lying about their historically low crime rate.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/06/18/trump-says-crime-in-germany-is-way-up-german-statistics-show-the-opposite/?utm_term=.5f67916d1094

Notably, Merkel's biggest challenger on immigration policy is on record as saying just last month that crime in Germany was the lowest it had been in decades.

Interior Minister Horst Seehofer had released new crime figures in May that pointed to an overall decline in Germany during the past year. The figures showed that 5.76 million crimes were reported in 2017 — a drop of 5 percent from 2016 and the lowest number since 1992. Given the increases in Germany's population, Seehofer told reporters in Berlin, this meant that Germany's reported crime rate was at the lowest it had been for three decades.

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=Altair]
2.Flat out lying about their historically low crime rate.

[/quote]

Good job on Germany for figuring out how to lower their crime rates.



Cologne police ordered to remove word ‘rape’ from reports into New Year’s Eve sexual assaults amid cover-up claims
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/cologne-police-ordered-to-remove-word-rape-from-reports-into-new-year-s-eve-sexual-assaults-a6972471.html

Cover-up' over Cologne sex assaults blamed on migration sensitivities
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12085182/Cover-up-over-Cologne-sex-assaults-blamed-on-migration-sensitivities.html

German authorities accused of migrant attack cover up
Mass circulation Bild newspaper says police in several reluctant to disclose information about refugees’ involvement in crimes
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12090655/German-authorities-accused-of-migrant-attack-cover-up.html

 

[Jarnhamar]

There are a whole pile of reasons why the Roman Empire fell.  Death by a thousand cuts including economic ones.

Would it be fair to suggest after the Roman empire fell education, literacy, sophisticated architecture, advanced economic interaction and the rule of written law stagnated and suffered. Not to pick up again until 1000 years later during the renaissance?

 

[Remius]

Would it be fair to suggest after the Roman empire fell education, literacy, sophisticated architecture, advanced economic interaction and the rule of written law stagnated and suffered. Not to pick up again until 1000 years later during the renaissance?

Historically that is how it is viewed but it is somewhat more complex.  More and more scholars are pointing to that period as one of cultural change rather than a fall per se.  There are a few works on how late antiquity to early middle ages are being considered more and more as one period.

The empire split into various city states, kingdoms etc.  Many of which maintained roman traits for a while after the "fall". 

The U.S in a short time span is abdicating its role as the leader of the free world.  We may see geo political blocks form in the wake of that and old alliances break as a result of it.  And do we see a break up of the republic itself?

the question is who fills the void?  Russia, China?

The one big difference with the fall of the Roman Empire is technology.  Rome never had an industrial revolution and its slave based society prevented any real advancement on that front. 

 

[Altair]

Historically that is how it is viewed but it is somewhat more complex.  More and more scholars are pointing to that period as one of cultural change rather than a fall per se.  There are a few works on how late antiquity to early middle ages are being considered more and more as one period.

The empire split into various city states, kingdoms etc.  Many of which maintained roman traits for a while after the "fall". 

The U.S in a short time span is abdicating its role as the leader of the free world.  We may see geo political blocks form in the wake of that and old alliances break as a result of it.  And do we see a break up of the republic itself?

the question is who fills the void?  Russia, China?

The one big difference with the fall of the Roman Empire is technology.  Rome never had an industrial revolution and its slave based society prevented any real advancement on that front.

Both

https://globalnews.ca/news/4265214/shanghai-cooperation-organization-summit/

Chinese President Xi Jinping hailed the entry of India and Pakistan into a Chinese-led bloc at a closely orchestrated gathering Sunday that stood in stark contrast to the G-7 summit that ended in disarray.


Xi welcomed Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Pakistani President Mamnoon Hussain, calling their presence “of great historic significance” in opening remarks at this weekend’s summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in the northern Chinese port of Qingdao. The two South Asian nations joined the bloc as full members last year.

“More member states means greater strength of the organization as well as greater attention and expectations of people of regional countries and the international community,” Xi said Sunday.

“We also share greater responsibilities in maintaining regional security and stability and promoting development and prosperity,” he said.