The Fate of Empires

I was reminded of an old magazine article after reading what others have written on this topic – in this case the current political troubles besetting the USA (see 'Rolling Stone' – August 6, 2020)  

 

I kept a copy of (the now defunct) Blackwood’s Magazine, dated December 1976, because of a very interesting essay entitled “The Fate of Empires” by Lieutenant-General, Sir John Bagot Glubb, (1897 – 1986) also possibly better known as Glubb Pasha. Glubb was a highly decorated, distinguished British military man who had a long association with the Arab world.

 

This essay traces various, mainly European and Middle Eastern empires, from ancient Assyria (858-612 BCE) through to the British Empire which he dates 1700 -1950. Glubb admits to knowing nothing about the South American, Chinese, Indian or other Asian empires, so they are not mentioned in this essay. 

 

The American “empire” he barely mentions but he does suggest that this was an “internal empire” – taking over the North American continent, with all its riches, from the indigenous peoples, began after the war in 1812, with the Westward Expansion. It really started in earnest, however, in 1845 with the idea of a Manifest Destiny - “from Sea to Shining Sea” – so there was no real need to look elsewhere. 

 

With slight variations the general “age” of these empires was about 250 years and they all follow a similar pattern. While I might not agree with all his ideas – he was writing from a very British viewpoint some 45 years ago – generally what he wrote then is an accurate time line relating to the various stages of an empires rise and fall.

 

Ten generations – 250 years - is a pretty standard life-time of an empire. In summary, Glubb suggests the following as an approximate flow of events relating to any empire’s eventual fate:- 

 

1.     The Age of Pioneers (the outburst).

2.     The Age of Conquests.

3.     The Age of Commerce.

4.     The Age of Affluence.

5.     The Age of Intellect.

6.     The Age of Decadence.

This age, Decadence, in Glubb’s opinion, is marked by:

a.     Defensiveness

b.     Pessimism

c.     Materialism

d.     Frivolity

e.     An influx of foreigners

f.      The Welfare State

g.     A weakening of religion

h.     Too long a period of wealth and power

i.      Selfishness and civil disobedience 

j.      Love of money

k.     Loss of a sense of duty.

 

Generally though Empires fall largely as a result of external causes.

 

My point in quoting from this essay is to highlight the fact that, quite possibly, America (the USA) is now quite far down the path of decadence (refer Rolling Stone article). Also depending on when one considers America to have begun it’s empire 1812 or 1848 – it is quite far either into or approaching its second century. 

 

So what is next? Which country will rise to form the next Empire? I am no soothsayer so I will not make any predictions on the future of the USA or any other country. 

 

I’m not game enough!!

Why aren't we outraged?

I will not post the whole of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – even though it is just two pages in length. It is easy enough to find on line. 

But I intend, in what follows, to highlight the egregious, even contemptuous disregard of this vital document by some nations – even the fact that the USA, for some unfathomable reason, has not agreed to implement all thirty articles. China and Saudi Arabia are amongst the worst offenders – as is Israel.

We should all be outraged at the failure of many nations to hold by the Articles of this Document that they have signed.

Read on:- 

Article 1:- All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

NB. Australia, USA, Saudi Arabia, Israel, China ….. Take note.

Article 3:- Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.

NB. Australia, USA, Saudi Arabia, Israel, China …. Take note.

Article 5:- No one shall be subject to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

NB. Australia, USA, Saudi Arabia, Israel, China …. Take note.

Article 9:- No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

NB. Australia, USA, Saudi Arabia, Israel, China …. Take note.

Article 11 (1):- Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. 

NB. Australia, USA, Saudi Arabia, Israel, China…. Take note.

Article 17 (1):- Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.

Article 17 (2):- No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

NB. Israel especially take note, in relation to their treatment of the Palestinians.

Article 23 (2):- Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

NB. Australia (and I’m sure many other countries) …. Take note.

Article 25 (1):- Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well being of himself and his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

NB. Australia, USA and I’m sure many other countries …. Take note.

Article 26 (1):- Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages …

NB. Australia …. Take note.

Article 30:- Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person and right to engage in any activity or to perform and act aimed at the destruction of any rights and freedoms set forth herein.

NB. All nations …. Take note.

War is sweet to those that know it not.

I always thought that this old saying was of Roman origin but apparently it is from ancient Greece - from the Greek poet Pindar (518BC – 438BC), to be exact. I have no knowledge of the Greek language but have a fragmentary knowledge of Latin and Pindar’s original Greek is the origin of the Latin proverb "Dulce bellum inexpertis" which is translated (more or less) as, “War is sweet to those that know it not”.

The continuation of what Pindar wrote is; “but the experienced man trembles exceedingly at heart on its approach.”

I believe that this proverb is as true today as it was 2500 years ago.

In the name of God, why start a war? Why?

It is my firm belief that human ego and pride are the reasons. These two give rise to the widespread misconception of “us” and “them”. Us being always better, more intelligent and culturally advanced than them and that “our” God is better than “their” God. Therefore it matters not how we treat such inferior beings – God is on “our” side!

It takes two to tango – as the old saying goes. It stands to reason that differences of opinion will arise (humans being the fickle creatures they are) therefore it will always be necessary for there to be (to use a Churchillian phrase) more “jaw, jaw” and less “war, war”. And “jaw, jaw” is always less costly in human life and material than “war, war” – always.

The current standoff between the USA and North Korea will not end without some serious negotiations and plenty of “jaw, jaw”. A conflict is unthinkable and should not be considered. Conflicts always, repeat always, leave a host of unintended consequences to contend with afterwards. Imagine what would happen to the about 25 million North Koreans if the regime was defeated in a conflict – who would govern the country? Who would police them and restore law and order (very different from what they had known before)? What would happen to the millions of refugees who would try to flee the conflict? Who would feed and care for them? Who would finance and help rebuild the country? Would South Korea have the means or the inclination to reintegrate a heavily indoctrinated populace into a new order of events (for North Koreans) and thereby increasing the South's population by about 50%? Would China? Would the USA?

Remember it took about eight years (or so I believe) to reintegrate East Germany into the now unified Germany.

While I am certainly no expert on North Korea I have a strong suspicion that the current leader may adopt the end idealized by Hitler and invoke the “Gotterdammerung” approach, “If my Kim family cannot rule the country anymore then no one will” – kind of thing. Remember North Korea is a nuclear country and they have the will and the means to lay waste to the entire country.

 This sort of thing is not to be contemplated – ever.

It’s not the Economy, stupid – it’s people!

Homelessness in any society is a measure of its Moral Compass and Social Conscience. In Australia, where I live, the latest figures provided by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) in 2011, record that there were 105 237 homeless people (49 out of every 10 000 people in the country). In the Northern Territory this reaches the staggering figure of 700 in every 10 000! This astonishing number reflects the very poor status of the Original People of Australia - the Aboriginal. We should hang our heads in shame.

In the USA – the wealthiest country in the world – on any night in January 2013 the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) reported there were 610 042 homeless people (19 out of every 10 000 people in the country). According to the Walking Shield website that caters for Native Americans there were 90 000 Native American families that were homeless - using the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights 2003 figures. This is now 2014 and, with respect, I suggest that there will not have been much improvement since 2003.

These figures – statistics – are an appalling indictment of the way current economic theory and capitalism are disconnected from “real” life.

Everyone is worried about the “economy” but they forget or ignore the fact that the “economy” would not exist without people. People ARE the economy. Look after people – pay them a liveable wage – and the economy will prosper. The low paid will have more money to spend after the essentials have been catered for. This is both the ethical and the morally correct thing to do.

The “multiplier effect” is, I understand, something like 1.5 – for every $1 in increased basic wage (for the low paid) there is a $1.50 benefit for the “economy”; increased spending power, increased taxes for governments, reduced requirement for social security benefits and generally better health and well-being for the recipients. This is the “churn” effect that money has - what goes around comes around and then some!

I remind my one loyal reader that over one hundred years ago Henry Ford said that every worker should be paid enough to buy what he makes!

It is not the “economy”, stupid – it is people!!

Now it is Assad for Syria – what if …?

Recent reports in the media indicate that analysts now consider the best option for Syria (and for stability in the Middle East) is if Assad regains control of Syria. Well now – isn’t that good news!

Ooops! Sorry we made a mistake!

I have said before (as my one loyal reader has pointed out) the Syrians are an intelligent people with a very long, if rather turbulent, history going back millennia. As I also pointed out it is very poor policy to try and pick winners when it comes to any country’s governance, but particularly in the Middle East. And then what about the one hundred thousand (and counting) Syrian casualties later?

For the sake of humanity and in the name of whatever you consider God to be, leave Syria to the Syrians and back off!

And now there is Afghanistan. The Afghanis are an intelligent people with a very long, if rather turbulent, history going back millennia. They have fought off invaders ranging from Alexander the Great to Genghis Khan to the more recent Soviet invasion and prevailed. Once more – trying to pick winners in this area of the world is an impossible, and pointless task.

In their recent history the Afghanis have lost many uncounted thousands of civilian casualties to the Taliban, the Soviets and NATO (read USA) actions. More importantly are the people any better off with NATO interference? 

The Afghanis are capable of sorting themselves out, one way or another. Just leave them alone. Back off!

Will this be another “Ooops” moment? You bet.

Now, just for a moment let us speculate. What would have happened if former President G W Bush and his cronies had come to a similar conclusion about Iraq? Maybe, just maybe, Iraq (and stability in the Middle East) would have been better off under Saddam Hussein. As afore mentioned, it is very poor policy to try and pick winners when it comes to any country’s governance, but particularly in the Middle East. And particularly for the five hundred thousand plus (and counting) Iraqi (and US and allied) casualties later.

Just like the Syrians and Afghanis, the Iraqis are an intelligent people with a very long, if rather turbulent, history going back millennia. Mesopotamia – the Land between the Two Rivers – was the cradle of civilization and extends at least as far back as recorded history, to about 3000 BC (remember the Babylonians?).

Ooops! Sorry we made a mistake! But was the mistake about the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) or was the mistake about invading Iraq in the first place?

Or maybe both? Why can’t we (that is the USA and the West) just leave well alone and back off?