Tag: empire

Stop Wasting Time on Jussie Smollett

Ryan Lau | @RyanLau71R

For two months now, headlines of Jussie Smollett have broken across the nation. From stories that a violent Trump supporter attacked him to the eventual revelation that he faked the attack, we saw a slew of obnoxious generalizations. The Empire actor went from being another supporting cast member to a national sensation, from Twitter martyrdom to disgrace.

In recent developments, police charged him with 16 counts of lying about a hate crime. He has since pleaded innocent and authorities have dropped all charges. But now, President Trump has declared that the FBI will look into the case further.

Continue reading “Stop Wasting Time on Jussie Smollett”

Advertisements

The German Empire Lost World War One Before the Start

By John Keller | United States

In 1914, the stage was set for a world war with European imperialism, growing nationalism, and a web of alliances all coming to a head. The “Powderkeg” of Europe, the Balkans, was set to explode for the third time in two years with the assassination of Austro-Hungarian Archduke Franz Ferdinand. The German Empire, a key military power of the Central Alliance, lost the war before a shot was even fired. How is this possible? There are several reasons for this, but they fall mainly into seven themes: The German independence of command structure, the mass alteration of the set military plan, the gross misjudgement of French military power, the inability to calculate the size and power of the Russian military, the underestimation of the British field army, overestimation of Austro-Hungarian military strength, and the failure to keep Italy in the Triple Alliance.

An Independent Command Structure

The first major error of the German military was its structure of independence of command. The German officer corps, deeply rooted with origins in the Prussian military dating as far back as 1525, boasted a strong tradition that if an officer was correctly trained he could act independently of orders because he would simply know what to do. This system, although effective when dating back to the set-piece battles of the 1700’s, proved to be disastrous for the German Empire. An example of this is at the Battle of the Marne, occurring September 5th through the 12th, 1914.

The German First and Second Army were attacking towards Paris and were starting to lose momentum. The French commander, General Joffre, quickly counterattacked against German General Bulow’s First Army’s right flank. Due to Bulow lacking direct orders in the field from von Moltke, the German Chief of Staff, Bulow ordered his men from his left flank to reinforce his right. This created a several mile wide gap between his army and the neighboring Second Army under General von Kluck. Joffre recognized the opportunity, seized the initiative, and ordered the British Expeditionary Force forward, directly into the gap. As the gap widened, panic struck the two German generals and, lacking communication, a general collapse of the German armies ensued. Lastly, the head of the German command, von Moltke, was proven to be an incompetent leader due to his belief that once he set a plan in motion, his generals would be able to swiftly execute it without major issues or direct intervention from his headquarters. This is apparent during the First Battle of the Masurian Lakes and the First Battle of the Marne when von Moltke issued a total of two orders, neither directed towards either of the battle zones. This inability to coordinate attacks and failure of the German generals to cooperate cost them the war.

A Modified Plan

Although the German officer corps was plagued with issues in regards to the autonomy of their generals on the field, they also suffered from Moltke’s constant alteration of the original military strategy. The German military plan, originally formed by Schlieffen, called for a strong right-wing thrust through the Netherlands and Belgium and into northern France, where the bulk of the army would be in position to take Paris and strike the rear of the French military, leading to a swift victory and allowing for the Germans to then swing their full military might on Russia. The problem that arose occurred when Moltke ordered 40,000 men, roughly the strength of a corp, away from Third Army, under General Hausen, which served as the center of the swing through Belgium. These men were strategically redeployed to the 8th Army in East Prussia preparing to fight against Russia in the case of a two-front war. This was further an issue when in September of 1914, when the German attack through Belgium was in full swing and was on the verge of ending the war in the west, von Moltke ordered three divisions, roughly 54,000 men, to the east to support von Hindenburg’s Eighth Army, which had recently won a miraculous victory at Tannenberg. Due to Moltke’s meddling with the original plan, roughly 94,000 men were taken away from the main German thrust into northern France, which led to the Germans being forced to switch from their main drive from the West of Paris to the east, leaving a 296 kilometer gap between the German far right flank and the sea.

Underestimations of the Enemy

Furthermore, the Germans grossly underestimated the military power of the French. With the French defeat in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71, the Germans believed the French army to be weak, and rightly so. In the German Empire, they had a population of roughly 40 million people, in which they mobilized 1.2 million men. The French Empire, which had a total population of 42 million, only mobilized 900,000 men. The aftermath of the war was roughly 139,000 French killed to roughly 28,000 Germans killed. With such a grand victory over an empire that was larger, the Franco-Prussian War showed the weakness the French army had and led to Germany being the undisputed European superpower on land. Germany also believed that France and its army was lacking in quality due to the French army’s failures abroad in their interventions in Mexico (1862-67), their loss to Korea (1866), and their slow victory over Algeria, taking them 17 years to conquer this small nation lacking in modern military equipment, when the Germans defeated France’s modern army in roughly nine months. This all led to the underestimation of France’s military, which, in 1914, boasted a mobilization strength of 2.1 million men and 4,000 artillery pieces to Germany’s 2.9 million men and 5,700 artillery pieces.

Moreover, the Germans had the inability to calculate the size and power of the Russian military. Although Russia had suffered a string of defeats, it had also seen a vast improvement overall. The Russian Empire had suffered a defeat in the hands of the “Allies”, a united alliance of the French Empire, British Empire, Ottoman Empire, and the Kingdom of Sardinia, in the Crimean War of 1853-56. Although the Russian Empire lost the war itself, they had won most of the land battles. They were only forced to surrender when the Tzar ordered a backing out of the war (and the Danube region, giving power back to the Turks) as a result of the need to train the Russian Army. They had sent their men into combat inexperienced and mostly untrained which cost them about half a million men. As a result of this war, Russia was misjudged as weak; however, Russia took from their mistake and started equipping and retraining her army.

The belief that Russia was weak was furthered by a series of 1500 minor mutinies in the Russian ranks up until 1903. At this point, Russia was on the verge of completing its initial reformation policy; however, in 1904 they were at war with Japan in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05. Japan had attacked the Russian Empire without a formal declaration of war. The Tzar was totally stunned by this and ordered a mobilization of forces into Siberia. The problem was that there was only one railway into Siberia and the bulk of the Russian Imperial Navy was in the Baltic Sea when it needed to be deployed against the Japanese in the Sea of Japan. It was clear that the Japanese had the clear advantage in the war, and after about a year and a half of fighting the Russians were defeated, Nearly one-third of the Japanese Imperial Army was killed (86,100 men) compared to the Russians dead of 54,400 men.

The Russians, then returning from a “defeat”, were then tossed into a war-torn empire with the outbreak of the Revolution of 1905. After winning the revolution and a constitution put in place, although the Tzar kept his throne, several political, economic, and primarily military changes went underway. From 1856 to 1905 the Russian Imperial defense budget dropped by 12%, coming to only 56% of the German military’s budget, even though the Russian military was nearly  47% larger. Russian mobilization strength went from a million men and 22 artillery batteries to 3.1 million men and 385 artillery batteries. By the time their new policy was implemented and ready to go, the Russian Empire would be able to raise ten armies fully backed by artillery (an estimated 13,400 artillery pieces). This compared to Germany’s mobilization strength of 2.9 million men composed into eight armies supported by 206 artillery batteries (5,700 artillery pieces). This miscalculation would lead to a brutal campaign that would force Germany to move over 100,000 men away from France, which would be crucial in the first campaign.

In addition to this, the German high command seriously underestimated the British Army and disregarded it as an effective force in the field. A key factor in this assumption was the size of the British professional army. It had only 125,000 men composed into six infantry divisions and one cavalry division backed by only 470 artillery guns. The entire British field army had hardly the strength of a German field army; however, they still had a militia reserve of 285,000 men. In addition, they had only 66% of the artillery one German army would have. To further the German’s belief that the British army was inferior was the recent defeats and poor conduct of the British army. While fighting the Zulu African tribe for control of South Africa, they lost most of their battles despite holding superior firepower. Furthermore, in the Boer Wars, the British Empire had to fight South African militia rebels, and the British suffered nearly 22,000 dead to the Boers 9,000. Although the British had won, thousands of British were left dead or seriously injured at the hands of the South African militia. Moreover, the British Empire had a naval focus. The British Navy boasted nearly 160 modern warships and the German navy boasted a strength of only 87. In addition, the French Navy supported the British Navy with an additional 91 warships. By having twice as many warships, the British spent £173,500,000 on their navy (roughly $267,190,000) and the Germans spent ₰986,523,189 on their total military (roughly $573,000,000). This vast difference would be a key premise that lead to a major underestimation of the British military power.

The Overestimation of an Ally

To add to the miscalculations by the German General Staff was the overestimation of the military strength of Austria-Hungary. The first error of this was that Field Marshal von Moltke expected his Austrian counterpart, Field Marshal Conrad von Hotzendorf, to field a modern and effective army. The Austro-Hungarian army fielded about one million men at mobilization, supported by 1,200 artillery pieces. 26% of the Austro-Hungarian army had equipment dated back to 1895. The remaining 74% of the Austro-Hungarian military had mainly 1903 equipment; however, their artillery force used mainly guns dating back to 1908 and even fewer more modern 1911 guns. The main rifle being used by the Austro-Hungarian field armies was the Mannlicher-Schonauer, a rifle that went into production in 1903. The secondary rifle of the Austro-Hungarian field armies was the Steyr-Mannlicher M1895. This army was expected to decisively defeat 420,000 Serbians using generally more modern equipment, notably pre-modern (post-1900 production) rifles and artillery, as well as roughly 2,000,000 Russians, using mainly postmodern rifles and artillery, due to the modernization after the Russian loss in the Russo-Japanese War (1904-05). Outnumbered and primarily outgunned, the German high command expected the Austro-Hungarian to perform ably and decisively in the field.

To cause this belief among the German General Staff was a recent string of Austro-Hungarian victories. The Austro-Hungarian Empire had a stunning victory over the Ottoman Empire, where they funded a revolution in Bulgaria. This sparked the Russo-Turkish War of 1877, in which the Austro-Hungarians brought their two greatest rivals against each other, which lead to a serious weakening of the Ottoman Empire when the independence of Bulgaria was established in the postwar treaty. This war further benefited Austria-Hungary, because the Russian Empire was forced to back down when they attempted to make Bulgaria a puppet state and assert their dominance in the Balkans, due to the fact the British Empire stepped in and humiliated the Tzar. This caused a restriction on Russian influence in affairs in the Balkans.

With such a stunning result, and wanting to further their gains, the Austro-Hungarian Empire annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1905 and became the undisputed power in the Balkans. This, however, was a major diplomatic and political victory, and not a military victory, which the Germans were depending on their southern neighbors to make in the next war. The Austro-Hungarian Empire’s military problems were furthered by their Chief of the General Staff, Conrad von Hotzendorf, who proved unsuited for his position. He was fancied a military genius by colleagues when this proved to be nowhere near reality. He simply could not deliver a decisive victory when it was needed. He lost battles in Galicia, got, an entire army enveloped and entrapped around the Fortress of Przemysl, and was forced to abandon his positions around Krakow. Conrad von Hotzendorf proved in his many failures that he could not lead the Austro-Hungarian military, and the defeats were only going to add up as the war prolonged.

The Italy Problem

The final issue that brought the German Empire ruin was their failure to keep Italy in the Triple Alliance. The main reason for this was the Austro-Italian complex. Article Seven of the Amended Triple Alliance, written in 1912, states that:

“Austria-Hungary and Italy, having in mind only the maintenance, so far as possible, of the territorial status quo in the Orient, engage to use their influence to forestall any territorial modification which might be injurious to one or the other of the Powers signatory to the present Treaty.”

Between 1848 and 1866, Italy fought three wars of independence from the Austrian Empire. Although independence was eventually granted, Italy still had claims on the Tyrol Region (Trento), Trieste Region, the Dalmatian Islands, and much of the Austro-Hungarian coast on the Adriatic Sea. This all contributed to strained relations between Italy and Austria-Hungary, which created the Italo-German Complex. After Italy gained independence and Prussia unified Germany and formed the German Empire, they became natural allies, as they were the only new nations in the world power struggle of the era; however, as time went on, it was clear that Germany and Italy had different national goals. Germany planned on taking territory from France and weakening Russia as a European power. Italy had very limited plans about war with France, as they had helped secure Italian independence. Furthermore, Italy had made plans to reclaim their lands from the Austro-Hungarian Empire and form an Empire dominant in the Mediterranean and Africa. These plans would cause the final issue, the Ottoman-Italian complex. The Ottoman Empire had formed a secret alliance with the Germans, which was a problem for the Italian Empire. The Ottoman Empire dominated the eastern Mediterranean which made it a prime rival for the Italians, who proved they were on a warpath with the Ottomans in the Italo-Ottoman War of 1911 in which they seized several Ottoman islands and took Ottoman controlled Libya. These all led to the following message from the German Ambassador at Rome, Baron Ludwig von Flotow, to the German Foreign Office in 1914:

“The Minister, who was in a state of great excitement, said in explanation that the entire Ministerial Council, with the exception of himself, had shown a distinct dislike for Austria. It had been all the more difficult for him to contest this feeling, because Austria, as I myself knew, was continuing so persistently with a recognized injury to Italian interests, as to violate Article 7 of the Triple Alliance treaty, and because she was declining to give a guaranty for the independence and integrity of Serbia.”

This culminated in Italy rejecting the Central Powers offer to join them in their war against Serbia, which violated Article Five of the Amended Triple Alliance of 1912, “They engage henceforward, in all cases of common participation in a war, to conclude neither armistice, nor peace, nor treaty, except by common agreement among themselves.” This then further disconnected Italy from the Central Powers and would eventually cost the German and Austro-Hungarians 1.6 million casualties and forced 66 divisions away from the other main fronts.

The German Empire, through their independence of command structure, the mass alteration of their military strategy, the gross misjudgement of French military power, the inability to calculate the size and power of the Russian military, the underestimation of the British field army, overestimation of Austro-Hungarian military strength, and the failure to keep Italy in the Triple Alliance, lost World War One before even a shot was fired. Sun Tzu wrote in The Art of War, “The general who wins the battle makes many calculations in his temple before the battle is fought. The general who loses makes but few calculations beforehand.” The German Empire failed to do the many calculations needed to wage war, and therefore the First World War was lost to them before it was even fought.


Get awesome merchandise. Help 71 Republic end the media oligarchy. Donate today to our Patreon, which you can find here. Thank you very much for your support!

Cease The War In Afghanistan

By Kenneth Casey | United States

American troops have been fighting a war in Afghanistan for over 17 years, making it the longest war in American history. It all began in 2001, in response to the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City.

To understand just how long we’ve been fighting the war in Afghanistan, here’s a list of things that have happened each year since the United States’ invasion:

  • 2001: On the day George W. Bush finalizes his plan to invade Afghanistan, Fallin’ by Alicia Keys is atop the Billboard charts.
  • 2002: The first film of the Spider-Man trilogy is released. 
  • 2003: The U.S. launch an invasion in another middle-eastern country, Iraq.
  • 2004: Mark Zuckerberg and friends launch social media platform Facebook.
  • 2005: Hurricane Katrina causes 1,833 fatalities and impairs the city of New Orleans.
  • 2006: Social Networking service Twitter is created by Jack Dorsey, Noah Glass, Biz Stone, and Evan Williams.
  • 2007: Apple! announces their plan to create the iPhone.
  • 2008: America elects their first African-American president, Barack Obama.
  • 2009: Cryptocurrency Bitcoin is created by an unknown person under the alias Satoshi Nakamoto.
  • 2010: An earthquake in Haiti affects more than 3 million people and results in the death of around 230,000.
  • 2011: The Iraq War concludes, as the final U.S. Troops stationed there are withdrawn.
  • 2012: Hurricane Sandy affects 24 states and causes 233 fatalities overall.
  • 2013: Edward Snowden divulges classified NSA documents to journalists and eventually to the public.
  • 2014: America’s first marijuana store opens in the state of Colorado.
  • 2015: The United States supreme court rules in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide.
  • 2016: For the first time since 1908, the Chicago Cubs win the World Series.
  • 2017: For the first time in 99 years, a solar eclipse was visible to most of America.
  • 2018: Kim Jong-un became the first North Korean leader to step foot onto South Korean soil.

The original intent of invading Afghanistan was to defeat and overthrow the Taliban, which had granted asylum to Osama Bin Laden, the mastermind behind the September 11th attacks. Although you may not agree with Bush on invading the country and think he should have just agreed to negotiate with the Taliban for the handing over of Osama Bin Laden instead, the Taliban government was overthrown as leaders of the Afghanistan government in December of 2001. The U.S. had completed their original mission and could have left the war at this point.

But they decided to stay in order to build up a government in Kabul, Afghanistan, which later proved to be one of the classic examples as to why nation-building is an awful idea. Many people of the Pashtun population of Afghanistan objected to the U.S. building up their own government in Kabul, and the U.S. decided to stay even longer to take on the people they considered enemies of this new government they had helped create.

The U.S. invaded Afghanistan with the intent of accomplishing one thing which caused another problem, and once that problem was fixed another problem came about, and eventually, we got ourselves in such a big of a quagmire that it was basically impossible that we’d ever been able to come out victorious.

Since the invasion in 2001, it’s been reported that almost 2,200 American soldiers have lost their lives in the war. These fatalities to our troops are unnecessary and could have been avoided if we weren’t engaged in this now useless war with no clear strategy or intent ahead. This is the most important reason why we should bring the troops home and cease war.

The second most important reason is our debt. Currently, we sit in over $21 Trillion dollars of debt. In our time in Afghanistan, we’ve spent almost a trillion dollars, estimates Anthony Cordesman, the chair in strategy at the Center for Strategic And International Studies. The government has wasted a lot of taxpayer money overseas in a war that has killed a lot of civilians for over 17 years now. Policing the world should not be America’s job, and Americans do not want their tax money being spent wastefully overseas when, at the very least, it could be spent towards more productive things back home (although preferably just cut).

As Rand Paul puts it: “We went from striking back against those who attacked us, to regime change, to nation-building, to policing their country for them.” Clearly, we’ve steered away from our original intentions in Afghanistan and we’ve faced the consequences of wasting a ton of U.S. taxpayer money and our soldiers dying because we’ve been stubborn and refused to cease the war.

When Donald Trump was elected President of the United States, I was optimistic about his stance on the Afghanistan War. It was often difficult to pinpoint The Donald’s stances on Foreign Policy during the campaign trail, sometimes sounding like a non-interventionist or an isolationist, other times sounding as hawkish as John Bolton. So although his rhetoric on the campaign trail was mixed and confusing, he did claim at one point that getting involved in Afghanistan in the first place was a mistake and one would think to end useless wars and wasted taxpayer money overseas would go along with his so-called “America First” platform that he campaigned on.

Unfortunately, last year he arranged to add around 4,000 more troops to Afghanistan to the already ridiculously high number of troops present in the country. Although for right now it seems his desire to flex the military muscle outweighed his desire to put America first, I hope that by the end of his term he comes to his senses and declares that enough is enough in Afghanistan.


To support 71 Republic, please donate to our Patreon, which you can find here.

Featured Image Source

The Founding Fathers Would Be Furious At What America Has Become

By Jack Parkos | United States

Many people have asked the question-“What would the Founding Fathers think of this policy or that law?”  Many also ask the question of what they would think of modern America in general. They would be furious.

The Founders, while all having their own diverse ideologies and values, believed in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. America has abandoned these values both in policy and morality. This would have the Founders up in arms. Here are just some of the many reasons the founders are rolling over in their graves.

1. Supreme Court Rulings

The Supreme Court has allowed some very unconstitutional laws to be passed, they also have made some unconstitutional rulings. Take the case of Maryland v. King in 2013. Where the supreme court ruled that police can (without a warrant) take DNA swabs from people not yet convicted of a crime.

This is obviously a violation of the Fourth Amendment-but the Supreme Court ruled it wasn’t! The Founders would be enraged at a ruling allowing your DNA to be put into a system-even if you are wrongly arrested. Another example of the Supreme Court ruling wrongly is Roe V. Wade.

This would anger the Founders for several reasons. While we can’t be 100 percent sure, it seems very likely the founders would be against abortion. Regardless of personal stances, none of the founders would agree with abortion being a constitutional right. Roe V. Wade also ruled that the states could no longer make their own decisions on abortion, this would cause many of the Founding Fathers to be enraged.

2. Gun Control

The Founders wrote the second amendment, which says.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

The argument that it was for muskets is untrue. The Founders would not support gun control just because weapons got more advanced. Don’t believe me? Well James Madison, the Father of the Constitution (which includes the 2nd Amendment), allowed for cannons to be used on to protect private vessels.

He wrote this in the Letter of Marque, stating the 2nd amendment protected their right to defend their ships with cannons. The Founders would in no way support banning “assault weapons”. The very idea of this would anger them greatly. They wrote that the right to be armed “Shall not be infringed” not “Shall be open to debate”.

3. Taxes

The Founders fought their revolution over excessive taxes. Today we pay way more taxes then they did. More than the founders could even imagine. The income tax was implemented in 1913, right at this news the Founders would have spoken out against it. Encouraging protests and civil disobedience.

They may have even called for a revolution.  The Founders got pissed off at a tax on tea, how do you think they would feel about income taxes? But the taxes don’t stop at the income. You must pay a tax (and obtain a government-issued license) to hunt and fish. There are too many taxes to list. Obama’s tax code was 74,608 pages long. Neither the Federalists nor the Anti Federalists would have supported this many taxes.

4. Bureaucracy

The Founders also fought the revolution because they had no say in the matters of government. They wrote the constitution to have elected representatives to represent the people’s affairs. But America has fallen into bureaucracy. True, we still have some elected officials, but the bureaucrats have corrupted the system.

The US Federal government has over 2.6 million employees and over 2,000 agencies with various powers. How many of these people are elected officials? The whole point of the revolution was for representation in government. The republic was set up so the people could elect representatives to make laws. But we did not elect 2.6 million people to make decisions for us. This is pure blasphemy!

5. Disregard of the Tenth Amendment

States Rights, or if you prefer the term states powers, have been disregarded by the Federal government. State’s rights have a bad rep nowadays as fighting for states rights is associated with slavery and racism. But this is not true. The Tenth Amendment was a key amendment to the constitution.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

This idea was talked about in the constitutional convention, the anti-federalists wanted to make sure the constitution respected states rights, thus the tenth amendment was born. But it has been ignored.  The supreme court has allowed this amendment to be disregarded to push an agenda.

The Founding Fathers would be furious at this! The tenth amendment would allow different states to make their own choices. Thus allowing more individual choice. You could live in a state that shares values with you (so long as it does not violate the constitution).

But when the tenth amendment is ignored, we are left giving more power to the federal government. The federal government is less local and more tyrannical in nature. The Founders knew this and added the tenth amendment to try to protect the states. But thanks to blasphemous supreme court rulings and awful politicians, the tenth amendment is another part of the constitution the Federal Government has gutted.

6. The Empire

None of the Founders would like our modern American Empire. They fought a revolution against an empire. I have written on the subject of America and it’s imperial tendencies. None of the Founding Fathers wanted an empire. The British Empire ruled all around Earth. The cost of this empire was dropped on the colonies in the form of taxes. This was a reason for the revolution. Nowadays, Americans pay many taxes to maintain constant warfare overseas. America was not meant to be an Empire. The current state of our foreign policy would enrage the founders of our country.

These are only a few reasons our Founding Fathers would be furious at what America has become. This is only the tip of the iceberg. While it is true the Founders did not all have the exact same beliefs, they all would agree that change is needed in America and that we must return to the standards of liberty this country was born on.

America Is Becoming Rome, And Rome Fell

By Jack Parkos | United States

History has shown us that empires have a tendency to fall. It happened to many European powers, but the most common example is Rome. Most historians agree the Roman Empire fell in 476 C.E., while the Eastern half went on to become the Byzantine Empire.

But why did Rome fall? There are several factors that contributed to the fall, but most historians agree that economic hardships, over-expansion, and militarism played a role in its collapse.

 

height-roman-empire-map1.png
The height of the Roman Empire

 

At its height, the Roman Empire stretched from the Atlantic Ocean to the Middle East. It was a very large territory, but with a large territory comes a large responsibility of governing the area. This means maintaining a large military presence in many areas, with barbarians and rebellions prevalent. The need for a large military presence cost the Empire a lot, which meant funds could not go to other areas, causing them to weaken.

But Rome’s problems did not stop there. Rome experenced many economic problems as well, facing mass inflation. The inflation was caused by Rome debasing its currency. It did this to both gold and silver coins. Rome also increased taxes on both the wealthy and the poor.

With it’s constant expansion, warfare, corrupt leaders, and economic troubles, The Roman Empire fell in 476 C.E. Do any of these problems sound familiar? Overspending the military? Inflating currency? If you’re an American, they definitely do.

The United States is an empire in every thing but name. We have 800 military bases across 70 countries. The new omnibus spending bill increases the Military Budget to 700 billion dollars a year. Does this go for our homeland defense? Not at all. How does needlessly reaching our imperial tentacles across the globe protect America?

Rome debased it’s currency (which was based on gold and silver) leading to inflation. What does America have? The Federal Reserve: essentially printing money out of thin air, causing mass inflation and economic problems.

So what does all this mean? The United States needs to learn from Rome. Rome could not keep up with an Empire. America wont be able to forever. It costs too much. We already are over 21 trillion dollars in debt. We keep increasing the overall budget and over spend. This is exactly what Rome did, and Rome collapsed.

America may or may not completely fall like Rome, but we could face a true crisis. The taxpayer will be massively exploited (more than they already are). The economy has already crashed, and it can again.

How can we prevent the downfall of America? It’s pretty simple.

  1. End our “Empire” over seas. You may call me “Anti American” or “Unpatriotic” for this belief, but it is for the betterment of the nation. Focusing our military on national defense rather than our empire could allow us to majorly reduce spending and focus more on our country. This is true “America First.”
  2. Audit, then End The Fed. The Federal Reserve has to go. Money needs to return to a gold standard. The Federal Reserve has lead to so many economic problems. Sound money could majorly reduce inflation. (I will write a more in depth article on Fed soon).

This is history we do not want repeated in America. We should learn from Rome’s mistakes and use it to better the future.


Featured Image Source.