On Sat, 2 Jun 2001, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
> Kat, I posted a fairly long and very detailed message on American
> global dominance. Before I reiterate those points, I'd ask that you
> explain _why_, given the evidence that I supplied, and the numerous
> reasons to believe that the state of affairs that I described will
> continue - and in fact increase - you nonetheless believe that the
> United States is, in some fashion, a nation in decline compared to
> other global powers.
Gautam, without doing research I'd instantly grant the conclusion that the
US of A is heads-and-shoulders "ahead" of the rest of the world in all the
ways that are easily measurable--power of the economy, the military,
pervasiveness of cultural influence, and so on....
But are these the things that count? In what ways do nations succeed?
The traditional forms of success--wealth and power--are always followed by
a reversal of fortune, usually brought on by a misapplication of wealth
and power. It seems to me that proving America is big and powerful right
now offers an intellectual challenge roughly on a part with proving that
Rome was big and power in the time of the first Caesars.
I'm more curious to know: in your research have you found any
institutional or national tendencies that threaten to seriously harm the
US's ability to fulfill its mission as set by the founders (which did not
include becoming the world's supreme military/economic power, IIRC)?
For me, the problem is that we seem to have defined our nation's reason
for being as the generation of wealth. These days I often see people
declaring tht the US is "a republic, not a democracy!" as though that
were a good thing in and of itself. The idea is that we are ruled by law,
not the mob...but rule of law is only good, is only *meaningful* as long
as the law retains a certain independence. Independence of fickle surges
of mass opinion, true, but also independence of the fickle prerogatives of
wealth.
Rome was a republic, after all. Once the wealth and power are
sufficiently concentrated, a republic becomes an empire. It may retain
its quasi-democratic institutions, and the law may be revered in word if
not deed, but at some point the scale tips, and (historically) there
really isn't any going back. An empire isn't ruled by law, but by the
personalities of its oligarchs and the courtiers.
The typical progression as I envision it is: republic/democracy -->
empire --> power struggle replaces honest legislative rule --> state
begins to consume itself --> others begin to feed off the chaos....and so
on.
I'm curious to know (in all honesty and without snideness) what people
think America's future holds...besides the obvious, which is more wealth
in the short term.
Marvin Long
Austin, Texas
