Is America the Second Rome? - Part Three.

by Tom Kando

Abstract: This article does the following: (1) It shows that the continuities between modern-day Europe and America are in many ways similar to those between Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome. (2) using an organicist theoretical framework, it traces and compares the births, life spans, transformations, similarities, golden ages, and (possible) declines of America and Ancient Rome. (3) Based on generational theory, it asks whether future American history is likely to repeat Ancient Roman history, including Roman mistakes.

3A. Is America’s Future Likely to Resemble Rome’s Past?
There is no law of history that requires America to replicate Rome’s history. At the same time, we should not be so overconfident as to proclaim the superiority of 21st century society over ancient Rome in its adaptability and its ability to meet challenges.


What if the pace of social change and of human adaptability were more or less constant? In a recent article, Madeleine Kando asked the following question: Do Generations Repeat Themselves? It may be that the pace of social change, and of our ability to learn and to adapt to new conditions, has something to do with the length of a human generation, which covers birth, socialization and maturation.

The length of a human generation is almost a historical CONSTANT, even though it is somewhat longer now than in the past, thanks to modern medicine. Currently, a generation is about twenty five years. Life expectancy in the Western World is now probably double what it was in antiquity. However, the typical Roman woman did not start having babies at 13. Perhaps a Roman generation was somewhat shorter than ours, but not by much.

In recent decades, “futurology” has become faddishly popular. Authors such as Alvin Toffler (Future Shock, 1970; The Third Wave, 1980; Revolutionary Wealth, 2006) and John Naisbitt (Megatrends 1982; Megatrends 2000, 1990; China’s Megatrends, 2010) have told us glibly that the pace of social change is accelerating, primarily as a result of accelerating technological change. Moore’s Law is frequently quoted, to the effect that the capabilities of computers and other digital devices double about every two years. There is a widespread and facile belief that the recent rash of advances in (electronic) technology is ipso facto also resulting in imminent fundamental social change.

 For a more sobering outlook, I refer you to the works of two overlooked early sociologists - William Ogburn (Social Change with Respect to Culture and Original Nature, 1922) and Meyer Nimkoff (A Handbook of Sociology 1964) - and these authors’ Cultural Lag Theory: In a nutshell, this theory argues that culture lags behind technological innovation, and requires considerable time to catch up with it. Of all human endeavors, culture is the most resistant to change. Technology may have made impressive advances, but human nature -which regulates our capacities for learning, socialization and adaptation to change - has not budged in several hundred thousand years.

If Cultural Lag Theory is correct (and I believe it is), we can begin to understand why technological innovation has not changed our lives in the marvelous and miraculous ways predicted by naive Star Trek-like Science Fiction some decades ago. According to those fantasies, we should by now be cris-crossing and colonizing space, we should avert droughts by seeding clouds, we should use flying cars, the work week should be no more than twenty-hours long and society should be largely free from crime, violence, racism and prejudice.

If, as I hypothesize, human nature and the fairly constant length of a human generation through the ages are the prime determinants of the pace of social change, then there is no reason to believe that modern society’s cultural values, social relationships and political arrangements will change or progress more rapidly than they did two thousand years ago. In fact, if the length of a generation has doubled since antiquity, this might mean that it takes us even LONGER today to learn and to adapt to new customs and new habits than it did for the Romans. But I won’t press this point.

The gist of this foray into the sociology of social change is this: History may be more cyclical, repetitive and duplicative than we think (among sociologists, the best known cyclical theory sociologist is Pitirim Sorokin, see his Social and Cultural Dynamics). It is therefore possible that the trajectory of American history will continue to resemble Rome’s.

3B. Is America likely to repeat Rome’s mistakes? Thus, while it is not certain that America will repeat Rome’s blunders, it is possible. The most striking and troubling parallel is military over-extension. The danger that America may be committing “imperial overstretch” was the theme of Yale University historian Paul Kennedy’s book The Rise and Fall of Great Powers (1987). Today, Kennedy’s argument seems pre-scient, as it was made before 9/11 and before the ensuing wars and the vast additional military commitments made by the United States.

Currently, America’s military budget is between $600 billion and $700 billion. This is nearly 4% of GDP, and a higher percentage of it than that of all her NATO allies (Countries by Military Expenditure). US Military personnel is approximately 2.5 million, a quarter of a million of them overseas. There are about one thousand US military facilities in the world, a quarter of them spread out in over 100 foreign countries (see List of US Military Bases).

Kennedy’s concern about US military “overstretch” is justified. His forewarning also uses historical analogies, albeit not the same as mine. One of his precedents for what might happen to the United States is Spain: As part of the Habsburg Empire, 16th century Spain was the world’s foremost imperial power. Its golden age reached well into the 17th century. However, the Iberian government made it its responsibility to protect and defend the Western World’s Catholic status quo. To this end, it squandered its resources on interminable wars, it went bankrupt and it lapsed into two centuries of decline to end up one of the poorest and weakest countries of Europe in the 20th century.

As to America’ prospects, as I said, there is no crystal ball. The US is not yet a military plutocracy, as imperial Rome became. However, the growing inequality and the growing influence of the military-industrial complex are worrisome. To the extent that this country finds leadership that is enlightened, progressive, amenable to change, and representative of the people’s welfare, it will thrive. On the other hand, if we permit ourselves to be charmed by demagogues who wish to lead us back to a mythical past and who only represent the elite’s interests, we are likely to repeat the Roman scenario.

The 2016 presidential election offers a foreboding view of the battle lines: The numerous Republican candidates may disagree on many issues, but on one point they are unanimous: national security is every candidate’s paramount focus, far above the economy or anything else. This is a clear indication that America’s conservative party, for one, is happy to keep the country on a war footing indefinitely.© Tom Kando 2015 leave comment here