[Cincinatus]

Many writers for a long time have compared America to Rome, usually in the alleged parallel of a supposed acquisition of an "empire." On that basis, it's a strange comparison, considering that Rome exploited its conquests for gold and slaves whereas we funnel money and blood into our "colonial acquisitions."

A better analog might be with the fall of the Roman republic. Two factions ("parties") vied for political control of the state in the first century BC -- the Optimates (the Roman "establishment" patricians who thought that control of the state was best left to the social betters) and the Populares (prominent citizens who thought the same, but used the emotions of the mob to assure their control on power). Populist demagogues threw public spectacles to win adherents. Patrician senators raised armies, marched on Rome and assumed dictatorial power and proscribed their opponents (i.e., killed and took the property of their enemies). The mindless mob was pacified with gladiatorial games and public feasts. A constant propaganda war was waged in the public "media" of the time (the courts, the forum and the games).

It wasn't the empire that destroyed the republic -- it was the corruption of the people, who stopped believing in it and looked to a strong man, a savior who would wash away the corruption of the old republic and "fix things."

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Thank you.

: )

[Arlis]

“It wasn’t the empire that destroyed the republic — it was the corruption of the people, who stopped believing in it and looked to a strong man, a savior who would wash away the corruption of the old republic and “fix things.” “

Ah - perfect description of what put Obama in office, and what looks like will put Trump after him.

Different flavors of the same type: give us a king! shouted the Israelites. Weak people want a strong dictator who they think will fulfill their fantacies in spite of all prior evidence that says otherwise...........