SEARCH
STATISTICS: 433 entries, 757 comments
LAST UPDATE: 01.17.08 11:13am BROWSE BY CATEGORY Christianity Meets Culture (46)Church (62) Culture (16) Guest Bloggers (3) Mission Trips (16) Money (2) Music, Poetry, & Scripture (73) My Life (74) News (51) Observations (25) Postmodernism (31) Recommendation (46) Site Related (12) Social Justice (11) Spirituality (21) ARCHIVES BY DATE September 2007June 2007 April 2007 March 2007 January 2007 November 2006 ADDITIONAL PERSPECTIVES Internet MonkI was thinking... Martin Roth Online Thinking Out Loud Aaron B Smith Next Wave Beautiful Feet e~mergent kiwi Matt Gough ORGANIZATIONS I LIKE MosaicMosaic Life Mars Hill That the World May Know Compass Arts Gospelcom.net Crossroads Ministry National Alliance to End Homelessness PEOPLE I LIKE Charlie PeacockBrian McLaren David Roche McNair Wilson Leonard Sweet Brennan Manning Garison Keeler
| July 25, 2005
The American EmpireCategory:
Culture
Recently a friend struck up a (rather serious) conversation about how America, as an empire, could be heading toward the end of it’s run. All the signs are pointing that direction and history is proof that it happens. Here’s a brief synopsis of a book he read that outlines the whole scenario. Sir Glubb was a British military officer who spent his career in the Mid-East and observed that the life cycle of empires is predictable and had been repeated many times in history. He categorized phases of the empire life cycle and calculated an average life span of 250 years (Rome is the outlier at 1000 years). His categories are as follows:
Each age is easily identified by the heroes in the popular culture. The book: When The Empire Strikes Out, by William R. Goetz which references this book: The Fate of Empires and Search for Survival 1981, by Sir John Glubb, William Blackwood and Sons Ltd., Edinburgh Posted by pablohart on July 25, 2005 04:43 PM |
| Archives | My testimony | |
interesting and unsettling stuff. also see another book "the world is flat - a brief history of the 21st century" by thomas friedman.
Why is "influx of foreigners" and "influence of women" included in the Decadence category??? hasn't the U.S., by its very definition, been an influx of foreigners since its inception? and what is so decadent about the "influence" of women?
I know, it does seem a little counter-correct to put "influence of women" in the decadence phase, but if you think about it, it did happen that way in our country. Women have only recently been able to influence society in the same way men have previously. It's just an indicator, nothing against women. I'm sure some people would get very upset by it though.
Oh, and it doesn't say WOMEN contributed to the decadence, or decline, of society. It just puts that indicator, or sign, in the same list as the other signs of that time.
I like the way you brothers bounce off of each other! :) Checks and balances.
Add your comment