 invictus says: "Are We Rome?" is an essay in polemic, not scholarship, and Mr. Murphy does not set out to analyze the deep structural forces of Roman or American history. Instead, he makes a tour of contemporary American politics, and speculates about Roman parallels to very upto-the-minute problems. In many ways, Mr. Murphy's argument is less about America in general than about the Bush administration in particular. Thus he worries about the transfer of government functions to private contractors like Halliburton, seeing an analogy to the Roman system of patronage. The parallels are real and deep rooted. The United States of America is an Empire, using different mechanics than the Romans (and not entirely that different), but an Empire none the less. Both are based on the concept of all Empires, the constant and aggressive acquisition of wealth. the concept of all Empires, the constant and aggressive acquisition of wealth.So, which country isn't an empire by that definition? Our Founding Fathers.....ahhhhhh, (sigh), what wise men. There is an important detail that may escape from attention (regardless of Murphy's book and his analysis, because we haven't read the book and don't know all his points except some clues in this review.) That detail is, Rome had not always been an Empire, nor had always had such an intention or goal. Countless internal and external dynamics caused her to become an empire after 600 years but she began as a kingdom in 8th century BCE (far different than the kingdoms we know, with its unique structure) then evolved into a Republic after a civil war in less than 200 years. Roman Republic is probably among the first examples of a state form we name as "republic", with her parliaments, associa... Well switch "aggressive" with "violent" and you will see what you mean. And the Empire started during the Republic, only later did the Romans acknowledge and embraced it. What "I" mean...sorry about that. Ratilfar, the physical base for the Empire appeared when it became obvious that the elements of the Republic were not working in a rapidly expanding, largely militarized, politically corrupted and a cosmopolitan land, divided into states. Actually, the first signs about the foundations of the Empire did not clearly show up until the social wars, Sylla's despotic regime and then of course Julius Caesar's coup. So at earliest, it began in the first century BCE, when the Republic became almost totally corrupted. NB: This does not mean I don't agree with you about the "Empire dreams" of corporate forces and political groups in America, especially after the 19th century. |
View the Top Clips from May 18, 2007
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|
|
|
