US Empire - Roman Empire Jonathan Freedland, in this September 18 Guardian article looks at the analogy between the present day USA and the Roman Empire. Freedland consults with Britain’s leading historians on the ancient world, who are all struck by similarities between the two. Among the factors compared are the following:
1. Rome was the military superpower of its day – as the US dominates the world today in military terms.
2. Although America does not have formal colonies as Rome did, some historians consider the founding of America and the 19th century push westwards an exercise in empire-building. And, as Freedland points out, “the US has military bases, or base rights, in some 40 countries across the world - giving it the same global muscle it would enjoy if it ruled those countries directly.”
3. The Romans knew that “it is not enough to have great military strength: the rest of the world must know that strength - and fear it too. The Romans used the propaganda technique of their time - gladiatorial games in the Colosseum - to show the world how hard they were. Today 24-hour news coverage of US military operations - including video footage of smart bombs scoring direct hits - or Hollywood shoot-'em-ups at the multiplex serve the same function. Both tell the world: this empire is too tough to beat.”
4. “Rome understood that, if it is to last, a world power needs to practise both hard imperialism, the business of winning wars and invading lands, and soft imperialism, the cultural and political tricks that work not to win power but to keep it.” While Rome seduced its conquered peoples with togas, baths and central heating, the Americans offer “Starbucks, Coca-Cola, McDonald's and Disney, all paid for in the contemporary equivalent of Roman coinage, the global hard currency of the 21st century: the dollar.”
5. The Romans ruled by proxy wherever they could – a favourite technique of contemporary US – the Shah in Iran, Pinochet in Chile, etc. And “Just as Washington's elite private schools are full of the "pro-western" Arab kings, South American presidents or African leaders of the future, so Rome took in the heirs of the conquered nations' top families, preparing them for lives as rulers in Rome's interest…. Not that it always worked. Rebellions against the empire were a permanent fixture, with barbarians constantly pressing at the borders. Some accounts suggest that the rebels were not always fundamentally anti-Roman; they merely wanted to share in the privileges and affluence of Roman life. If that has a familiar ring, consider this: several of the enemies who rose up against Rome are thought to have been men previously nurtured by the empire to serve as pliant allies. Need one mention former US protege Saddam Hussein or one-time CIA trainee Osama bin Laden?” Contribution by: Hannah Slavik Date entered: 9/26/2002 12:42:17 AM
Bush - Hitler Analogy A German regional newspaper, Schwäbisches Tagblatt, reported on Thursday that Germany’s justice minister, Herta Daübler-Gmelin had told a small pre-election gathering: "Bush wants to distract attention from his domestic problems. That's a popular method. Even Hitler did that." The Bush administration, already irritated by Mr Schröder's stance on Iraq, reacted angrily. The White House spokesman, Ari Fleischer, described the reported comment as "outrageous". Ms Daübler-Gmelin denies having made the comparison between Bush’s tactics on Iraq and those of Adolf Hitler. Contribution by: Hannah Slavik Date entered: 9/26/2002 1:00:09 AM
