United States: The New Roman Empire

It brings me the most joy to have to write on the parallels between The Roman Empire, and the United States of America.

To give some disclaimers first; Rome was the strongest Western empire at its prime, and today, the United States has taken that position. Add to these, some similarities between ancient Rome and the US play out both in the United States’ social and political arenas.

These similarities, especially from the perspective of a political science student, are the things I would like to flesh out.

I hope you have a wonderful reading experience.

The Roman Empire

Rome is possibly the only civilization in history that I am obsessed with. For the nerd that I am, Japanese and Egyptian history are also things I’m obsessed with. But Rome just stands out in all the ways of conceptualizing history. For me, at least.

Roman history is very rich, and any true understanding of how they went from starting as a village in the middle of who-cares-where to being one of the largest and strongest empires in the history of the world would serve as instrumental knowledge that can help you understand the nature of humans. It can also prove in helping you shape the present, as well as helping you predict the future.

To say the least, I am mostly fascinated by Roman history in the aspect of their many types of leadership. The empire witnessed horrible kings and emperors. Rome had horrible leaders like Nero, Caligula, Tiberius, Commodus, Claudius, etc. To say simply, the first generation of Roman Emperors after the death of Caesar in 44 B.C. were some of the worst examples of Roman leaders.

In the same vein, Rome witnessed the leadership of some of the best emperors to ever exist. It had leaders like Augustus, Diocletian, Trajan, Constantine, Marcus Aurelius (the stoic philosopher), etc. These sets of leaders are people we can also today learn from.

The father of History, Herodotus, after all, believed those who never learn history to be infants. Because they are just products of the dictates of their time since they’ve failed to look back to once upon a time.

The Roman Empire was one of the strongest and largest empires of its time. At its peak, during the 2nd century CE, the Roman Empire controlled vast territories in Europe, North Africa, and parts of the Middle East. It stretched from modern-day Britain in the northwest to the Euphrates River in the east, and from the Rhine and Danube Rivers in the north to the Sahara Desert in the south.

The Roman Empire's strength stemmed from its well-organized military, efficient governance, sophisticated infrastructure, and effective administration. It had a powerful and professional army, which allowed it to conquer and maintain control over such a vast expanse of land. The empire also implemented an extensive road network, advanced engineering, and developed trade routes, fostering economic prosperity and cultural exchange.

“The United States of America being what it is today, what would we say are some similarities it shares with the Roman Empire?” As I try to answer this question, I will also try to point out some things that led to the demise of the Roman Empire, and where some of these factors are also evident in the American Civilization.

If you are not familiar with how the United States rose from being an isolated country to being the strongest nation in the world, I would highly suggest that you read my NEW WORLD ORDER write-up. In it, you’ll find the key details about the rise of the US and some other empires before it. Click on this LINK to read it. It might provide you with some context on this write-up.

History Repeats Itself

There are great advantages to be derived from studying history. A look back into how things previously were. While this is true, there is a need to understand times change, and people change too. Lest they be stuck in the past.

This is one major criticism of Niccolò Machiavelli’s most famous book, The Prince, where he cited multiple instances in history to justify whatever claim he made in the book. This book is supposed to serve as some kind of guide for any political leader. The book was written in the 16th century.

While it is the case that human nature hasn’t changed much to serve as some kind of argument against the use of Machiavelli’s book or really any old book, it is better to instead separate what is useful from what isn’t.

History doesn’t always repeat itself. But it most certainly rhymes sometimes. This rhythmical pattern is what we hope to serve as something to help us learn from history, and also in some way to help us navigate a better future. So, what are some things that today’s United States shares with the ancient Roman Empire? I will start first with their military comparison.

It is important to note that these are general observations, historical contexts, geopolitical factors, and specific societal dynamics that differ between the Roman Empire and the United States. Directly equating them in terms of decadence or other aspects would oversimplify the complexities of both historical and contemporary situations.

So, I want you to recognize that this is all just a poor attempt to have some discussion around this topic. With that out of the way, let’s get into the write-up proper.

Military Industrial Complex

Rome had a very complex and highly disciplined military.

They were still a very small Republic around 509 B.C. until they gradually began expanding. Their first major expansion happened as a result of the war they had with the Carthaginians that lived a sea across them.

Despite the fact that Rome at this point was only used to land-based battles, they managed to copy the shipbuilding techniques of Carthage and they also devised some naval techniques that helped them defeat Carthage during the first Punic War of 264 B.C.

Against Carthage, Rome had three consecutive major victories that ended up with Carthage being wiped off the face of the earth. Naturally, this was followed by Rome being lord of the lands and seas. It was from here that it began establishing itself as a formidable empire. This was all thanks to their unique and complex military.

Thanks to their military-industrial complex, they were able to set a foothold in Africa, Europe, and Asia.

Following the reign of Julius Caesar, the leadership of Rome was followed by multitudes of emperors. In the end, Rome had to throw out the values it was founded upon to become the world's hegemonic (strongest) empire.

In order to uphold the idea of the strongest empire, it was actively ramping up its military. Something the United States also started doing after the end of the second world war (1945). The reality of the United States’ need to remain the world’s only superpower is what President Dwight Eisenhower in this farewell address warned against when he spoke about the establishment of a "military-industrial complex."

The military–industrial complex refers to the relationship between the government, the military, and the businesses that make things for the military. For example, businesses can give money to politicians in elections. Then, politicians give more money to the military. And since military spending is what both the Democratic and Republican parties can agree on, there is rarely ever any need to oppose any military spending.

After WW2 ended in 1945, it was immediately followed by a Cold War (ideological war) between the United States and the Soviet Union (Russia). This ideological war sparked an economic, military, and technological race between both superpowers.

By the end of the Cold War in 1991 when the Soviet Union dissolved, the U.S. was the standing world power and thus needed to uphold that status. This means ramping up military spending and being the world’s police.

Rome and The United States

To contrast the position of the Roman Empire with that of the U.S., it should be noted that Rome was often associated with the concept of "imperial overstretch" wherein it expanded to such a vast extent that it became challenging to maintain control over its territories. Similarly, the United States, as a global superpower, has had military engagements and extensive involvements in various regions, leading to debates about the limits and sustainability of its global reach.

The Roman army became overstretched and needed more soldiers, which they did not have. It is without any reasonable doubt that you need to maintain law and order in whatever new land you have just conquered (or that you want to have political influence over). Otherwise, the people you have just conquered will rebel and overthrow whomever you have appointed to administer the new land.

But Rome didn’t have adequate soldiers to spare for its vast empire. This is also one of the many reasons Rome was quick to give citizenship to anyone within the captured territories. This way, they can be taxed, just as they can be drafted into the military.

Eventually, without adequate protection or money to supply its vast military, the city of Rome finally fell to Germanic Tribes in 476 AD.

Now, in the case of the United States, it appears to have the money and the military to keep up its presence all over the world.

The United States has over 750 military bases in more than 100 countries. For this reason, the United States’ defense accounted for nearly 40 percent of military expenditures by countries around the world in 2022, according to recently released figures from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).

United States’ military spending is more than that of China, Russia, India, Saudi Arabia, United Kingdom, Germany, France, South Korea, Japan, and Ukraine — combined.

I don’t know about you. But that is a lot of money to spend on the military. But of course; with great power comes great responsibility.

I am pretty braindead when it comes to military history, but I know for certain that having a formidable military has its own utility. For example, the U.S.’ military presence in NATO and also in Asia keeps any aggressor in check. Ergo, allies of the U.S. are well protected from any outside threats.

This is especially the case for smaller countries like Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Japan, and Taiwan.

Political polarization

Political Polarization is a division into two sharply distinct opposites; especially a state in which the opinions, beliefs, or interests of a group or society no longer range along a moderate (center) position but become concentrated at opposing extremes.

It's important to note that the political dynamics of the Roman Empire were vastly different from modern political systems. The concept of political parties, as we understand them today, did not exist, and the political landscape was characterized more by personal ambitions, patronage networks, and military power struggles. While there were divisions and conflicts within the Empire, it is not accurate to apply the concept of political polarization directly to that historical context.

So, yet again, this a poor attempt to juxtapose these two Western Hegemonies. I am sure you can forgive my errors, and simply regard this as some kind of commentary from an African perspective.

As the Roman Empire expanded, it incorporated various provinces and peoples into its dominion. This created a divide between the provincial elites and the Roman aristocracy. The provincial elites often faced discrimination and were viewed as less prestigious by the Roman nobility. This division, based on regional and cultural differences, could be seen as a form of polarization between different segments of the Empire's ruling class.

At many points in the Empire’s existence, there were ideological clashes between the people of Rome on different political aspects. For example, Tullius Cicero; the Roman statesman and senator, was keen on upholding the republic in the face of anything that might want to modify or replace the republican system. He was more active during the rule of Julius Caesar as the consul – even before Caesar declared himself as consul for life. This was when a Roman ruler, for the first time, declared themselves as an Emperor.

Caesar cultivated a strong connection with the common people of Rome, particularly through his military victories and populist policies. He implemented land reforms that aimed to redistribute land to the landless poor, which garnered support from those who benefited from these measures. He also organized lavish public spectacles and provided free entertainment to the masses, which helped to maintain his popularity.

He was loved among the masses who believed the senators to be corrupt. This drove the political polarization to a great extent. This is just like the scenario that played out during the 1789 French Revolution where there were two camps that included people who are in support of a new system, and those who preferred to uphold the current system.

It is also similar to the situation that played out during the 1642 English Civil War between the Royalists and the Parliamentarians. The same scenario played out during the 1861 American Civil War between the Union and the Confederates.

All of these are extreme examples of the political divide between two political camps. When liberals and conservatives fail to communicate, they will resort to violence. This is applicable to any other kind of social setting where decisions have to be made. The reality here is that in any socio-political setting, there is a tendency for polarization.

To conclude on Rome, Caesar’s rule as dictator was cut short when he was assassinated on March 15, 44 BCE, in what is known as the Ides of March.

Therefore, Julius Caesar's rule, as a de facto ruler, lasted for a brief period of about five years, from 49 BCE until his assassination in 44 BCE. It's important to note that his assassination marked a turning point in Roman history and set the stage for the subsequent power struggles and the eventual establishment of the Roman Empire under Augustus.

Political polarization In The US

Today’s America is dominated by only two political parties. These two parties represent different ideologies and beliefs. The Democratic party is often considered to be liberal, while the Republican party is mostly considered to be conservative.

It is important to note that because times change, people also change. Therefore the need for diverse perspectives on social and political cases can’t be emphasized enough. So, just like Rome, or truly any civilization, America is today ever so polarized.

Political polarization in the United States refers to the deep ideological divisions and increasing partisan hostility between political groups. Over the past few decades, the political climate in the U.S. has become more polarized, leading to significant consequences for governance, public discourse, and social cohesion.

To start with, there has been a widening ideological gap between the two major political parties, the Democrats, and the Republicans. Both parties have moved towards their respective ideological extremes, with fewer politicians occupying the center ground. This polarization is reflected in policy positions on issues such as healthcare, taxation, immigration, climate change, and social issues.

Political polarization is often reinforced by increased party loyalty and the sorting of voters along ideological lines. People are more likely to identify strongly with one party and vote consistently along party lines, contributing to a more divided political landscape. This sorting has led to geographic, cultural, and demographic divisions between conservative-leaning and liberal-leaning regions in the country.

In our current digital age, it is obvious that social media is a big contributor to the divide among people of different countries today. This division is more rampant in the US since it owns most national and international mediums of communication – whether news or entertainment. This digital experience is what has given rise to the new political phenomenon of identity politics.

The proliferation of media outlets and the rise of social media has contributed to the creation of echo chambers, where individuals are exposed primarily to information and opinions that align with their existing beliefs. This selective exposure reinforces and amplifies ideological positions, making it difficult for different sides to engage in productive dialogue and find common ground.

Political polarization in the United States is a complex issue with multiple causes and consequences. It poses challenges to effective governance, civic discourse, and national unity. Mitigating polarization requires efforts to foster understanding, dialogue, and bridge-building across ideological lines, as well as promoting media literacy and critical thinking to combat echo chambers and filter bubbles.

Both the Roman Empire and the United States have faced political polarization and divisions within their societies. In the later stages of the Roman Empire, internal conflicts and power struggles weakened the empire. Similarly, in the United States, political polarization and deep divisions have become more pronounced in recent years, affecting the country's ability to address critical issues and find common ground.

Conclusion

As I am writing this, the realization has just dawned on me that I have an exam I should be preparing for.

I truly enjoy writing this. I wish only that I can write something akin to a sequel because I have a lot more to say regarding certain characteristics that today’s United States shares with the Roman Empire.

Instead of a sequel, here is instead a summary of other things I would have loved to elaborate on -

Excessive consumerism: The United States is often associated with a culture of consumerism, where the pursuit of material wealth and possessions is highly valued.

Hyper-sexualization in media: Explicit sexual content in media, advertising, and popular culture can be seen as a sign of societal decadence. Critics contend that the saturation of sexual imagery and the objectification of individuals can contribute to the erosion of traditional moral values.

Economic inequality: Both the Roman Empire and the United States have experienced significant levels of economic inequality. In the later stages of the Roman Empire, the concentration of wealth in the hands of the elite led to a growing wealth gap between the rich and the poor. Similarly, in recent decades, income and wealth inequality has been on the rise in the United States, with a significant portion of wealth being concentrated among a small percentage of the population.

Public debt and financial strain: The Roman Empire experienced financial strains due to costly military campaigns, excessive government spending, and economic challenges. In the United States, the national debt has grown significantly over time, partly due to military spending, entitlement programs, and other fiscal policies, raising concerns about the sustainability of the debt burden.

There’s a lot more I would have added, but I must now unfortunately conclude this write-up.

I hope you have a wonderful reading experience. Until next week. Cheers!