What immediately caught the eye is the difference in fitness with the (obesity-plagued) US army:
---
The exercises took place in the morning and afternoon, regardless of the weather. First of all, the Roman recruit had to learn the long march: the soldiers travelled 30 kilometres every day with full equipment. They walked half the distance at a free pace, and they had to run the other half.
---
And whereas the societal contribution of the Roman army was appreciated (just like the military were in the caste-system of ancient India), the US military are "appreciated" as lab rats:
That should have been a red flag for citizens of US and vassal (=occupied) countries: like in ancient Rome, the military is supposed to risk their lives in the line of duty.
If the military are "appreciated" as lab rats in USA and vassal states, what about "default" citizens aka "working class"?
That the late Jimmy Carter labeled the US as oligarchy should have been another red flag.
The difference with another empire, which always conformed to trade agreements, international law and continued that behavior as the RF couldn't be greater.
The classis examples that it isn't true are Vietnam and Afghanistan (remember the "hilarious withdrawal"?). And in the US proxy war against the RF in the Ukraine, the RF's technological superiority only matters as long as arms production can be sustained.
True. But I was responding to the question "which is the strongest army?" Neither the Taliban nor the Vietcong could match the US in pitched battles. But they could outmatch the US in political terms. Politics MAY be stronger than guns, but not always.
Bringing the US (or any comparable country) down would be easy for a "home based" militia because of unprotected infrastructure, and the economy can't do without it. Well organized guerilla warfare usually wins although it may take much time and many lives. The "term "strength" has to include intellect. In an occupied country, another means is "sabotage" as the occupiers need some locals.
i've been thinking it will be 2030 for no particular reason.
while collapse of western civilisation is probably headed by climate change, it is clearly headed to decline with money being created out of thin air, unlike gold and lead. Then lets add moral corruption by billionaires and advertsing and fire up the heat with 8.2 billion consumers
Incredible analysis here. The Greenland ice core data as a proxy for industrial activity is genuinely clever and the denarius debasement as the cascade trigger makes so much sense now. Working in resource economics a while back I noticed how extraction costs always get minimized until they sudenly can't. The parallel to oil extraction getting progressively more energy-intensive is kinda unsettling when laid out this way.
There are indeed interesting comparisons to be made between the Roman Empire and the American Empire.
But what make you say that China was an agricultural empire while the Roman empire was a mineral one ?
Precious metals were important for the Roman economy. But Romans also produced their own food (at least within their empire). They were not importing it. And there are even some fairly convincing theories that explain the collapse of the empire by the decline in agricultural yields in North Africa linked to climatic variations.
It seems to me that both empires had just reached their natural limits... the steppes, the deserts, the deep forests where their military logistics were just unable to support their troops.
Thank you waving a red cape for me to charge ;) I don't see it as gold/silver problem (though they are a perfect lagging indicator), it was the expense of keeping slaves that contributed to the fall of the Roman empire. With that adjustment we are in complete agreement ;)
We can see the same feedback effects today. The pandemic put many factories out of business; especially in China. Trump's tariffs create more industrial destruction across the globe. Those global slaves scatter to the wind.
During the pandemic there was a shortage of cars because chip factors making legacy chips went under and it took a while for new fabs to replace them (at higher cost). I believe this problem is now effecting all industries, raising costs. So more feedback.
Bessent recently went after defense contractor CEOs saying they should do stock buybacks and get large compensation until they meet their quotas. literal idiocy. Like reprimanding a few execs is going to change the self-created U.S. manufacturing problems.
It's interesting how humans will accelerate growth when conditions are right but also accelerate decline when conditions deteriorate, those accelerations more man-made than, as you point out, what physical reality necessitates.
Interesting comparison! Knowing little about the Roman army I looked it up:
https://imperiumromanum.pl/en/article/legal-status-recruitment-service-relations-of-soldiers-in-roman-army/
What immediately caught the eye is the difference in fitness with the (obesity-plagued) US army:
---
The exercises took place in the morning and afternoon, regardless of the weather. First of all, the Roman recruit had to learn the long march: the soldiers travelled 30 kilometres every day with full equipment. They walked half the distance at a free pace, and they had to run the other half.
---
And whereas the societal contribution of the Roman army was appreciated (just like the military were in the caste-system of ancient India), the US military are "appreciated" as lab rats:
https://geoengineeringwatch.org/betrayed-100-years-of-us-troops-as-lab-rats/
That should have been a red flag for citizens of US and vassal (=occupied) countries: like in ancient Rome, the military is supposed to risk their lives in the line of duty.
If the military are "appreciated" as lab rats in USA and vassal states, what about "default" citizens aka "working class"?
That the late Jimmy Carter labeled the US as oligarchy should have been another red flag.
The difference with another empire, which always conformed to trade agreements, international law and continued that behavior as the RF couldn't be greater.
I'd like to point out that the strongest army today is not the army with the strongest soldiers but the army with the best technology.
In the end, is all a question of money. With money, you can pay the best soldiers and the best drones.
The classis examples that it isn't true are Vietnam and Afghanistan (remember the "hilarious withdrawal"?). And in the US proxy war against the RF in the Ukraine, the RF's technological superiority only matters as long as arms production can be sustained.
True. But I was responding to the question "which is the strongest army?" Neither the Taliban nor the Vietcong could match the US in pitched battles. But they could outmatch the US in political terms. Politics MAY be stronger than guns, but not always.
Bringing the US (or any comparable country) down would be easy for a "home based" militia because of unprotected infrastructure, and the economy can't do without it. Well organized guerilla warfare usually wins although it may take much time and many lives. The "term "strength" has to include intellect. In an occupied country, another means is "sabotage" as the occupiers need some locals.
honestly i think it may by our final year i think population will start collapsing next year in 2027 ?
i've been thinking it will be 2030 for no particular reason.
while collapse of western civilisation is probably headed by climate change, it is clearly headed to decline with money being created out of thin air, unlike gold and lead. Then lets add moral corruption by billionaires and advertsing and fire up the heat with 8.2 billion consumers
Perché l’articolo fu bannato da Google nel 2018?
Incredible analysis here. The Greenland ice core data as a proxy for industrial activity is genuinely clever and the denarius debasement as the cascade trigger makes so much sense now. Working in resource economics a while back I noticed how extraction costs always get minimized until they sudenly can't. The parallel to oil extraction getting progressively more energy-intensive is kinda unsettling when laid out this way.
There are indeed interesting comparisons to be made between the Roman Empire and the American Empire.
But what make you say that China was an agricultural empire while the Roman empire was a mineral one ?
Precious metals were important for the Roman economy. But Romans also produced their own food (at least within their empire). They were not importing it. And there are even some fairly convincing theories that explain the collapse of the empire by the decline in agricultural yields in North Africa linked to climatic variations.
It seems to me that both empires had just reached their natural limits... the steppes, the deserts, the deep forests where their military logistics were just unable to support their troops.
Thank you waving a red cape for me to charge ;) I don't see it as gold/silver problem (though they are a perfect lagging indicator), it was the expense of keeping slaves that contributed to the fall of the Roman empire. With that adjustment we are in complete agreement ;)
We can see the same feedback effects today. The pandemic put many factories out of business; especially in China. Trump's tariffs create more industrial destruction across the globe. Those global slaves scatter to the wind.
During the pandemic there was a shortage of cars because chip factors making legacy chips went under and it took a while for new fabs to replace them (at higher cost). I believe this problem is now effecting all industries, raising costs. So more feedback.
Bessent recently went after defense contractor CEOs saying they should do stock buybacks and get large compensation until they meet their quotas. literal idiocy. Like reprimanding a few execs is going to change the self-created U.S. manufacturing problems.
It's interesting how humans will accelerate growth when conditions are right but also accelerate decline when conditions deteriorate, those accelerations more man-made than, as you point out, what physical reality necessitates.