The Fall of Pax Americana

[Makalakumu]

Wasn't the Roman Empire, whether Republic or Imperius, still an empire because it took over lands and territories based on trade/military might? In both cases, the Romans were the ones who dictated trade/tax/travel in these territories.

People in territories in the Republic time were granted citizenship in many cases. The Romans assimilated conquered people and "taught them a better way of life". So, trade/tax/travel was controlled by the people who lived there, rather then a central nexus located in Rome itself. In the Imperium, this changed, depending on the Emperor in power.

 

[loki09789]

Oh! Oh! This could be a new thread! Think about the concept of corporate totalitarianism, then you don't have to squint so hard...

It's fiction. "That's all I have to say about thayat"

 

[Tgace]

Paul M - regarding your point about my motivations, I do have a bias. I believe that I have a grasp on many of the matters of this world, allowing me to form opinions regarding them - some of them are very strong indeed! Yet, I would not say that I am as blind as you fear. My opinions evolve in the face of new information. I would say that have a nasty prediliction for re-evaluating what I believe. This is done in order to meet my goal of being more deductive - more scientific. In the end, I find paradoxes amusing and education - a hallmark of a relativist.

You opinions evolve...but all I see is the same stuff. I think you just take the information and "make it fit" into your viewpoint. See the thread...

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13647

and refer to the cog. diss. stuff. We all do it.

 

[Makalakumu]

You opinions evolve...but all I see is the same stuff. I think you just take the information and "make it fit" into your viewpoint. See the thread...

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13647

and refer to the cog. diss. stuff. We all do it.

Perhaps, then again, you have only known me a short period of time. I apologize if its not mecurical enough for you...the process is in many ways like throwing a stone into a lake. Does the level of the water change when one rock is thrown into it? It all depends on the size of the rock and the size of the lake. So, I guess its all about trusting my word until your sample size increases...

How about we talk about the topic more and less about my "agenda".

I think this is a cool topic!

 

[loki09789]

Perhaps, then again, you have only known me a short period of time. I apologize if its not mecurical enough for you...the process is in many ways like throwing a stone into a lake. Does the level of the water change when one rock is thrown into it? It all depends on the size of the rock and the size of the lake. So, I guess its all about trusting my word until your sample size increases...

How about we talk about the topic more and less about my "agenda".

I think this is a cool topic!

But if the lake is frozen solid, the rock will not even penetrate the surface

It is hard to separate agenda with topic when you counter every disagreeing point with one of two responses: you don't know what you are talking about or my interpretation of the Roman business practices are more right.

It is a 'birds of a feather' set up so it will only lead to a one way discussion. Have fun.

 

[Makalakumu]

But if the lake is frozen solid, the rock will not even penetrate the surface

It is hard to separate agenda with topic when you counter every disagreeing point with one of two responses: you don't know what you are talking about or my interpretation of the Roman business practices are more right.

It is a 'birds of a feather' set up so it will only lead to a one way discussion. Have fun.

The specific heat of water and the density anomaly it undergoes when it changes phase prevents large bodies from freezing solid. With that being said, even that ice can be broken. Think truck in late spring...

Strawman.

My arguments have been crafted a little better then that. How about a little credit? Also, if I have superior knowledge on a subject and you make a point using a misconception, can we continue the discussion without first attempting to correct what you know about the facts?

If you are resistant to this correction and choose instead to accept the misconception, are you the one guilty of having a "close mind?"

Any classification argument has those who wish to lump and those who wish to split. This discussion is not possible unless you know the characteristics that are being used.

upnorthkyosa