Only Time Will Tell
Across millennia, diverse civilizations have come and gone - the only proof of their existence, relics and ruins we find buried deep in the earth or enmeshed within the darkest jungle vines. Across a similar time-scale, 90 per cent of all species that have inhabited the planet became extinct. The only proof of their existence is in the fossil record. It would be rash to assume that our civilization has qualities so unique that would allow us to buck this trend. Eventually our society too will be forgotten. And as long as conditions on Earth continue to support carbon-based life, new societies and civilizations will take its place. This is almost a statistical certainty.
The time taken for an entire civilization to rise and fall is typically centuries, though there have been exceptions to this rule. The Chinese Qin dynasty, for example, was extremely short-lived. But during its brief existence, it laid the groundwork for an extensive imperial administration that would expand and reform under the Han Dynasty that followed it.
A few civilizations collapse in spectacular fashion - others slip into oblivion. All of which raises two important questions. How could something so momentous as an empire or a civilization vanish almost without trace? Is there a set of similar circumstances leading to their downfall?
The source of civilizational failure is probably best understood from within the context of how each is able to prosper, and thence survive, in the first place. Four conditions are of particular interest:
1. Benign environmental states with access to natural resources that guarantee abundant food, and provide water for growing crops, for example, are crucial.
2. Certain socio-economic factors - including a stable population, good governance, centralized institutions, a respected legal system, a diverse and versatile work-force, and adequate financial resources, are keys to societal stability.
3. The social cohesion arising from shared values, the tolerance of diversity, and an appreciation of philosophy, language, history and the arts, all combine to create an identity and purpose that is almost impossible to rupture.
4. Finally, the ability of the society’s leaders to adapt to contextual shifts adds much-needed emotional and intellectual resilience. This is particularly critical where solutions to the most intractable problems facing the society are discovered and implemented, rather than shelved or considered too difficult to resolve.
Obviously, any catastrophic event, such as genocide or plague, can rapidly wipe out an entire population. The Maya, for example, were decimated by the warfare and disease introduced by their Spanish invaders – a collapse expedited by the abrupt imposition of alien systems of faith and governance. This pattern can be seen repeated over and over dating back even to the earliest known civilization of Sumer in Mesopotamia.
Natural disasters, too, can precipitate civilizational collapse, particularly in situations where the food supply is disrupted, or water is in short supply. Scientists judge a severe drought to have decimated the Khmer empire in Cambodia between the 9th and 14th centuries.
The causes of other failures, while more subtle, are no less potent in terms of the end result. In view of mounting evidence, from a number of cases researched by Jared Diamond and John Glubb, possible collapse only becomes clear when a number of entangled factors are already causing life-critical systems to fail, by which time salvage might already be too late. Omens indicating one or more existential problems typically remain invisible to the general populace, while those with the power to change the society’s trajectory routinely ignore such signs, or dismiss them as transient aberrations.
John Glubb was very specific in his research. In his 1976 essay The Fate of Empires, he traced the life cycles of civilizations, finding similarities between them all, including their longevity of around 250 years, and six predictable 'ages' through which each of them passed. The early years are marked by pioneering then commercial development. Wealth generated from trade and enterprise creates material prosperity. By this stage there are already signs of collapse, in large part generated by how wealth is used. It is at this peak of affluence that a decline begins and decadence takes hold.
In this era of decadence a majority of people are induced to indulge in excessive consumption, oblivious to the consequences. An absurdly wealthy elite emerges. But instead of repelling the rest of society, the quest for riches goes into overdrive, becoming an obsession. Encouraged by the availability of cheap credit, those outside the elite aspire to similar levels of excess. They become convinced that wealth is the key to happiness, but in its pursuit become measurably more distressed.
At this point in the life cycle of an empire depravity and distraction come to the fore. In order to distract people from what is really taking place, and as more people are denied access to work, the economy provides diversions. Voyeurism and vicarious pursuits become central to culture. Opting to disengage from reality, people become fixated on celebrity. During the final years of their own empires, the Romans, the Ottomans and the Spanish all made stars of their chefs, for example. Sound familiar? Conspiracy theories begin to circulate as truth fades. Meanwhile, voyeurism takes a more ominous form as the community becomes desensitized to graphic images of extreme violence and torture. Debauchery is rampant. This is our modern-day equivalent of bread and circuses, with obese citizens literally becoming a burden on the state.
Other symptoms common to empires in decline include massive disparities between rich and poor, an undisciplined and over-extended military, and severe financial and economic crises linked to a debasement of the currency. The wealth of empire dazzles. But beneath the surface the unbridled desire for money, power and material possessions means that principles of duty and public service are corrupted by leaders and citizens who scramble for the meagre spoils of an economic system that prioritizes the wrong things — and all at a time when human industry and ingenuity have been needlessly repressed.
Ironically, system failures are often embraced openly by the most influential members in the society as justification for their own dithering. Loath to change things to which they attribute their success, and suspicious of voices raised against this ethos, they remain blind to the actual consequences. Primed to replace fact with fiction, to state that black is white if necessary, their ideology cannot permit a change of mind or a new course to be set. At this stage, the society is already playing out an end-game. Too late to avert a catastrophe, disorder and eventual collapse become inevitable.
These behaviours were clearly evident in the final days of the Holy Roman Empire, which disintegrated from a fusion of external attrition and inner decay. Edward Gibbon noted that the economic viability of Rome relied on successive conquests and slavery. This cycle was unsustainable in the long run. Barbarian raids on distant towns corroded the capacity of the Imperial army to protect the outlying borders. Fewer conquests were undertaken, but this also meant fewer cheaper slaves. As a direct consequence, production, including the building of new infrastructure, ground almost to a standstill. Roads, aqueducts and bridges were all left in a state of disrepair, while fields were left untilled. In spite of this, military spending climbed steeply, becoming a constant drain on government coffers.
Oppressive taxation, too, fuelled inflation - debasing the economy to such an extent that everyday goods could only be bought by the wealthy. Meanwhile urban overcrowding, disease, debauchery, and violent crime became rife, while bandits made travel unsafe. As for entertainment, sporting games, circuses and gladiatorial combats were increasingly used to distract citizens from the inability of the Empire to care for them.
There is no doubt that the ensuing social disruption and instability also led to a decline in morals and civic virtue. Trust in authority evaporated as political corruption gained a hold. Succession was already shambolic when, in 192 AD, the emperor Commodus was killed, strangled in his bath by his wrestling partner Narcissus. Following that event, the elite’s practice of installing and removing emperors at will, or selling the throne to the highest bidder, became routine. During the next 100 years, Rome had 37 different emperors, 25 of whom were assassinated.
Looking beyond the collapse of the Western Roman empire, a variety of common factors, from pressure on public services, religious unrest and social tensions, to overly ambitious military ventures, paranoia among the establishment, intellectual hubris, increasing propaganda, mass entertainment as a distraction from the realities of life, and escalating gaps between the rich and the poor, can all play an indiscernible role in the collapse of a civilization. If several of them converge or fail at the same time, cohesion begins to unravel and collapse is assured. The remnants morph into a distinctively new form, which rises like a phoenix out of the ashes of the old empire.
Moscow, Beijing and Washington do not remotely resemble ancient Rome. It is probably hasty to make direct comparisons between the collapse of earlier empires and today’s superpowers. But some similarities are compelling. Monitoring events over the past half century I am swayed to the view that Russia and the US are being subverted from within by attempts to reconstruct what are perceived to be past glories. Successive American Presidents since Roosevelt, along with Vladimir Putin since 2012 are little more than modern incarnations of a line of ruthless imperators whose abilities are all too human. Xi Jinping might also fit into this category, were it not for the fact that China has not yet reached a point where any downside from self-serving leadership, is greater than the ongoing economic and social benefits flowing to the populace from previous and present reforms.
I am not the only person to be making similar comments. Clues abound. Observations of this nature are commonplace. But what real lessons can be applied to the predicament in which we now find ourselves - particularly concerning wealth and power, and how these are misused and abused? Before we attempt such an analysis it is worthwhile pointing to the major shifts that are occurring in our environment globally that makes life so distinctive for us all today.
The Human Project 3.0
Five patterns have become critical in comprehending the overarching trajectory of what I am beginning to refer to as the The Human Project 3.0. Why that nomenclature? I acknowledge that an alternative, much more popular form of analysis in this context, has been to use successive technological 'revolutions' to symbolize societal advancement. This is why we hear so much about the 4th industrial 'revolution' in terms of the next generation of digitalized processes and tools. I am far more captivated by the evolutionary web of cognitive changes that occur from ontological shifts in consciousness, the chronicle of existence, rather than behavioural changes adopted so as to take better advantage of new technologies.
In that regard I classify Stage 1.0 as life experienced in primitive societies, where everything was embedded in natural cycles, survival was the overarching imperative, and a reliance on gods and myths were vital components of processing purpose. Stage 2.0 was the revelational shift to interior enlightenment and personal autonomy - rather than relying on an 'exterior' unseen other - a process that occurred over several thousand years. Starting with mercantilist thought in the Renaissance, Stage 3.0 represents the modern period, where money and the tools of production became the extrinsic motivating forces - a milieu that persists today but has now become life-threatening.
So back to my flux of five patterns prevalent in Stage 3.0, some elements of which could well precipitate a 'next' stage:
1. New technology has changed how, how frequently, and for what purpose, we communicate and interact. Mobiles, tablets and worn devices ensure we are more intimately interconnected, and more dependent upon each other, as a consequence, than at any other time in history.
We are on track to see myriad instant global transactions become routine. We are relentlessly vigilant to the alerts we set ourselves on social media. It is no longer possible to ignore what is going on in other parts of the world, and mostly we do not try. We cannot hide on remote and inaccessible islands, build walls expecting these to insulate us from those with sundry attitudes and values, or easily shield ourselves from those who intend us harm. We can no longer seek sanctuary in cathedrals and deserted places. The only dependable sanctuary is the truth.
Sooner or later distant events impact us. The heartbreaks of others cave in on us. Yet the idea of a global community-of-mind is still very much a novel one - considered to have resonance in many pre-literate societies, but hardly relevant for these more enlightened times. A radical metanoia is needed if we are to embrace sapiens as the primary unit through which a more conscious coevolution is attempted.
2. Meanwhile economic stratification - the condition within any society where those who trade their labour for a wage and those who become wealthy through their ownership of assets are separated by a social gap – is widening into an unbridgeable abyss. That such a small number of individuals can own half the wealth produced by a population approaching 8 billion people is not only obscenely unfair, it is also vulnerable to classes of problems we have never had to deal with at such scale.
The convergence of robotics, nanotechnology and smart machines brings a degree of speed and precision, incapable of being matched by humans, to even the most complicated tasks, like neurosurgery for example. This conjunction is not just altering the relationship between human and machine. Ultimately it obviates the need for human intervention of any kind. Thus, unless we design it to be otherwise, we can expect conventional work to gradually disappear, creating enormous social disruption as well as a mental health pandemic and huge economic problems to resolve - unless, that is, a renewed purpose and ethos for humankind is finally forthcoming, and we find acceptable ways to ensure wealth is distributed more equitably.
Not all work will be impacted negatively of course. Ironically, the work that is done today but goes mostly unpaid and unvalued, like parenting and housework, will still be done by us and may well be paid work in the future. Professions like childcare, creative and performing arts, nursing and aged care, renewable energy and bio-medical technicians, and coaching, as well as work demanding innovation, design, systemic problem resolution, and compassion-based decision-making, will be in demand.
3. Those things that divide us matter far less than the things that unite us. This fact is not one that would be believed by aliens if they visited our world today. We are all planetary citizens after all - principally and exclusively members of a single human family. Everything else is just made up. Genetically speaking we are 99 per cent identical. Yet we are persistently socialized and taught to believe that the slightest dissimilarity is a cause to be fearful, and that cultural or religious variances in particular fully justify contempt, outrage, and brutality, on the largest and most vicious scale we can muster.
We are taught that competition is more important than cooperation and that scarcity is more real than abundance - which is why we still insist on designing our institutions to reflect those erroneous beliefs. But it does not end there. Today various forms of social media induct us into a psychological malady whereby our increasingly brittle egos must be shielded from the slightest attempt to confront different points of view. These are the outcomes of design flaws in our worldview. They will likely persist until we find the collective courage to tolerate a more compassionate and merciful civilization.
4. The most dominant narrative of our time, assumed and implicitly transmitted in all forms of media, portrays life as one unvarying linear improvement. The product of a model reifying a mix of mostly Western cosmology, scientific realism, Cartesian logic, and the basic pillars of capitalist trade, this is marketed under the label of progress - implying the convenient notion of continuous socio-economic advancement.
However, one specific biological constraint is failing to keep pace with an exponential increase in our application of new scientific knowledge. Technological change is rapid. But our brains evolve at a glacial pace, much as they always have of course, by comparison. Computers now accomplish simple tasks far more rapidly, while robots can calculate faster, and make billions of decisions in real time, far more accurately, than any human being. Indeed, some scientists have pointed to a 'singularity' in the not-too-distant future, where the universal application of artificial superintelligence will trigger runaway technological growth. This hypothesis would result in unfathomable changes to human civilization.
The truth is our capacity to analyze problems and provide solutions to the many diverse issues we have inadvertently created as an integral part of enriching our lives, is now totally outpaced by the tools we are inventing to aid our further development. Even now, machine learning is so rapid and pervasive, that we are willingly delegating huge numbers of critical decisions to robots – from self-driving cars to killer drones. Humans do have a unique capacity to reorder their beliefs in order to reimagine and experiment with new models of knowledge and ways of knowing, but little enthusiasm for bringing this talent to bear on dealing with systemic flaws. If humans are to retain control over the new artificial species we are spawning, the best strategy will be to evolve some form of symbiotic partnering between robots and humans as soon as possible.
5. Finally, the natural environment is changing around us - in large part due to pressures from the rapid rise in human fertility, and thence numbers, during the 20th century, in a population that has easy access to cheap manufactures, industrial methods that destroy large expanses of land and the oceans, as well as individual strategies like inbuilt obsolescence, that encourages our addiction to purchase new stuff while constantly adding to our waste, and an extravagant use of fossil fuel as energy for production and transportation.
If industrial fishing is allowed to continue at current rates, some scientists are predicting the ocean will be empty of almost all marine life by 2050. If industrial agriculture persists, soils will become so devoid of nutrients that yields will plummet. Natural restoration, regeneration and rewilding can occur rapidly. But we can only reverse the enormous damage we have done by taking drastic action to change what we eat and how we manage Earth's resources today.
Over the past half century, at least, we have come to expect a quality of life that is sustainable, constantly improving incrementally, and able to be enjoyed by the next generation. Industrial production enabled that dream to persist without challenge. Even two world wars, along with a chronicle of regional conflicts and civil wars, failed to make much of a dent on that reality.
But now we have an environmental emergency on our hands. It is likely that our grandchildren will inherit a world less stable, less hospitable and considerably less affluent than the one we created. Fossil fuels that powered the industrial revolution are responsible for concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of around 409 ppm - higher than at any other point in the past 800,000 years. Fertilizers that allowed us to generate formerly inconceivable crop yields are now poisoning the soils. Fungicides that inhibit the growth of weeds are destroying hub species in the food chain. Non-biodegradable plastics that brought so much convenience are now a serious threat to the environment and especially marine life. The overall result is rising temperatures, and a consequent loss of biodiversity as species that are unable to adapt to the new conditions become extinct.
And as if this were not challenging enough, we are faced with an even greater emergency. A crisis of consciousness: a condition where we are (i) not fully aware of what is happening to us, (ii) are blind to the systemic signals urgently warning us of the problems, (iii) an inability to break through the cognitive threshold that traps us in a prison of invention just below what is actually needed to 'see' and accept our reality, so as to transform the global problematique.
It requires little imagination to identify the links between these five pervasive patterns in the Human Project 3.0 that I have described, and the four contextual conditions needed for any civilization to endure the decline and eventual collapse noted by Diamond and Glubb. Nor does it need a Ph.D. in behavioural science to comprehend the fact we are consistently breaching all four of these conditions. For example:
1. Although Earth’s climate has warmed and cooled throughout history, the rapid heating we are witnessing today is the result of human activities on an industrial scale. Sea levels are rising. The oceans are more acidic. Glaciers and permafrost are melting. Extreme droughts and floods are more frequent. Vulnerable species are moving to more hospitable regions or dying out. Crops are withering. Entire ecosystems are changing as heat waves become more common in more places around the world. Our current preference is for continuing lethargy, and a forlorn hope that the science is wrong and this cannot be happening to us.
2. Socio-economic stability is wobbling as the dominant neoliberal model falters. The trust previously accorded venerable institutions - including the rule of law and the democratic process - are crumbling before our eyes. The future of work is in doubt as robots usurp all manner of jobs. In the meantime many problems, including removing bias from code, for example, are consigned to the 'too hard' basket owing to the complexity, expense, and sheer political inconvenience entailed in implementing long-term systemic remedies. Our current strategy is to continue striving for economic growth - the oxygen needed to keep capitalism alive, but the single most damaging and unjust factor in our society.
3. Fissures are opening up in society that threaten stability and cohesion. Aggravated even more by the fears and anxieties generated by terrorism, geopolitical ambiguities, political baseness and incompetence, the predatory nature of many institutions, corporate greed, violent crime, and media propaganda, there is nowhere left to turn. As confidence shrinks, and doubts turn to despair, record numbers of people are attempting to solve their worst dilemmas (at all levels) by retreating into the caves of isolationism, taking their own lives, or atoning for their bewilderment by attacking others. Our inclination is to accelerate the cycle of desire and consumption, because we cannot bring ourselves to imagine any kind of substitute for material wealth, and to spend more money on militaristic ventures.
4. All other things being equal, incumbent leaders are in an untenable situation. Unable to fathom a way out of the crises facing humanity individually - the very essence of what they have been told leadership is all about, baffled by what seems by any ordinary measure to be so unlikely, and even less able to implement real structural change to a world-system urgently in need of reform, they doggedly stick to doing what they and their predecessors have always done. And as the present drags them by the throat into darker dungeons of despair, they frantically patch up the present as best they can, playing political games, all the while hoping that the emergencies facing us will fade before their incompetence is evident to everyone.
The Western Roman Empire
Clearly there are many positives to do with our current existence that I am not citing here. As Charles Dickens wrote in his novel, A Tale of Two Cities:
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of light, it was the season of darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, and we had nothing before us.
In such a richly diverse and hugely complicated world, the role of a futurist is not to dwell too much on the present, unless by doing so fresh insights can be acquired, nor to celebrate the immense joy of love and life, of friendships and of nature, nor to remain faithful to the current paradigm as a consequence. Rather, my task is to point out that which is failing the majority of humankind, and why, in the hope that we can turn things around in time to avert catastrophe.
To that end I want to explore in greater detail those factors, identified by Edward Gibbon in his History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, noted by Diamond and Glubb, and to compare these with what we are seeing and feeling today in the growing tensions between the Chinese and US empires.
In the late fourth century, the Western Roman Empire crumbled after a nearly 500-year run as the world’s greatest superpower. While we might blame this collapse on any number of different factors, ranging from military failures to crippling taxation, just four issues emerge as the most plausible explanations for Rome’s decline and disintegration. These factors also happen to align with almost every other documented civilizational collapse.
Two confessions. I am relatively unconcerned about the Earth. Although I cherish my home, and love the diversity of nature, it is simply one planet, in one universe, among many trillions of such systems. It will probably endure long after Homo sapiens have gone. Also I am not inherently anti-American. By mostly citing the US empire as the exemplar for my analysis I am simply acknowledging the status of the US and the role it plays in modern geopolitics. What unfolds within the US empire will most likely become the prototype for the implosion of our current paradigm and world-system. In so many respects, the US today could be our canary in the coal mine.
1. A Decline in Morals and Values
In ancient Rome the decline in morals, especially among the wealthy upper classes, had a corrosive impact on the empire as a whole. Debauched and promiscuous sexual behaviour, including adultery, bestiality and orgies contributed to this, as did religious festivals, such as Bacchanalia, where sacrifices and lewd songs were practised to amuse the mob.
Brothels and forced prostitution thrived. Betting on gladiatorial combats and chariot races was widespread. There was also massive consumption of alcohol as the drive for personal pleasure became intense to the point of mania.
According to the Gallup organization, the perceived state of moral values has been in decline in the US for at least the past 20 years. Naturally not all Americans are thinking about moral values in terms of promiscuity, gambling, drunkenness or adultery. Indeed, most cite the lack of respect or tolerance for others, along with poor parenting, as among their most serious problems.
Conservatives clearly believe moral degradation is a problem though. Newt Gingrich was convinced about this when he stated a country that has been driving God out of public life should not be surprised at all by the problems we have. Certainly fewer people are attending church, and out-of-wedlock births have increased, but these are global trends. Other than that it is difficult to find any evidence of a serious moral decline. The crime rate has fallen in recent years, the abortion rate has declined, divorce is the lowest it has been in decades, while teenage pregnancies are at their lowest in 40 years.
So it seems the debate over morality in America has less to do with moral outcomes and much more to do with prejudices regarding how society should look based on memories of how things used to be. While many conservatives believe America is in a moral slump, liberals might actually agree - though for very different reasons. People on the left tend to be more upset by the perceived greed of the ultra wealthy, a rapidly growing intolerance to non-white Americans, and the acceptance of torture and warfare as foreign-policy tools.
In the end, the debate over morality more closely resembles a bifurcation in which there are two distinct monologues. But this might be a problem in itself.
2. Social Cohesion
Any society relies on common values and a shared sense of identity to guarantee unity and social stability. Patriotism, and nationalistic ideals, for example, act as the glue through which both domestic and foreign policies remain tolerable for most citizens. This cohesion is now fraying and the fault lines can be traced as far back as the late seventies.
This is an important point for many observers leaping to blame Donald Trump for the current divisions across the US. Newt Gingrich, it must be remembered, came to Congress as a rabid conservative with the singular ambition to tear it all down and build his own and his party's power out of the rubble.
Notwithstanding overt racism, the US had been a relatively egalitarian, secure, middle-class democracy with frameworks in place that supported the aspirations of ordinary people, for almost the entire first half of the 20th century. An unwritten contract governing the American dream was simple: work hard, obey the law, care for your family, and you will be rewarded - not just with a decent life, but with the prospect of a better one for your children.
This promise came with a series of riders that marginalized large numbers of Americans, such as blacks and other minorities, women, veterans, and gay couples. But the nation seemed to have sufficient tools to correct its own flaws. And it used them. So while the US had its share of injustices and inequities, it also had the powers of self-correction. Then the late seventies saw fundamental changes that were to rupture the surface of social unity. The flattening of average wages, deindustrialisation, the financialization of the economy, income inequality, the growth of information technology, the flood of money into Washington, and the rise of the political right, all had their origins at this time. Almost overnight the US became more entrepreneurial but less practical, more individualistic but less cohesive, more free but less equal, and more tolerant but less fair.
These same patterns continue to this day. The country has transformed from a fundamentally conformist, Christian, white-majority nation, into an ever-more multicultural melting pot. Not that you would realize this given that the mainstream media remains in the hands of the white ruling class. But now the social structures embedded within the Constitution are falling prey to the excesses of billionaires, the greed of Wall Street, and the suppressed interior sensibilities of a nation forged out of genocide, slavery, guns and bombs.
Donald Trump blatantly seized on these various contradictions and divisions to protect his own interests. A liar and a rip-off merchant, he is just symptomatic of the times, which is why it was so easy to predict the outcome of the 2016 election. It is harder to say whether this ethos, that continues as ripples on the surface of American society, will hasten the decline of US influence around the world before other related factors topple the empire.
3. Political Corruption
One such factor that could do just that is political corruption. It is no longer a secret that many representatives and Senators are in the pockets of major corporations, ranging from Goldman Sachs through to Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and Raytheon. Most effort in Washington centres around short-term political gain. Meanwhile, as taxpayers are cheated and the country dives deeper into debt, the middle class, so long a driving force of US prosperity, is crushed.
No matter. There is no conscience nor principled leadership any more. There are no patrician politicians whose careers are inspired by the ideal of public service. Right across the Western world, politics has descended into a fraudulent farce. No government truly serves the public interest today and this universal failure feeds the growing insecurity.
The US has been a plutocracy in all but name for decades. Democracy is nowhere to be seen in Washington DC. In its place, constant mudslinging and ideological bullying grinds rational decision making, fairness, and compassion, as well as the longer-term security and well-being of citizens, into the marble of the Capitol. Secret donations buy policy outcomes, while the will of the people goes unheeded. Meanwhile members of Congress and Senators alike, assume they are entitled to profit from their sinecure, later trading on a life in politics to join a rarefied class of the global super-rich.
Nor is the carnival of corruption in Washington all about money. It is also about power. While Donald Trump came across as an incoherent, uninformed, narcissist, the Machiavellian plot by equally unprincipled American establishment figures, determined to destroy a legally-elected president, rather than one installed by ruling interest groups, must eventually reveal the extent of corruption in US politics and the corporate media.
This, of course, is consistent with the scene in Rome centuries ago. The Praetorian Guard - the personal bodyguards of the Emperor - assassinated and installed each new ruler at will, even auctioning the position off to the highest bidder at one stage. This decay also extended to the Senate, which failed to temper the excesses of the emperors due to its own widespread corruption and incompetence. As the situation worsened, civic pride waned and Roman citizens lost trust in their leaders.
Is it any wonder then, that increasing numbers of Americans consider the game to be rigged against them, or that increasing numbers of foreigners insist the US has lost its moral authority to lead? Unfortunately, once the social contract is shredded, only fools still play by the rules.
4. The Economy
Recent figures released by the US Census Bureau reveal that one in six American citizens now live in poverty - the highest number ever reported by that organization. While a large majority of Roman citizens failed to share in the incredible prosperity of Rome, the same is now true of the US.
Many of the nation's domestic problems - across education, infrastructure, housing, welfare and health care, for example - must be attributed to a lack of spending in these areas relative to defence. Military-related expenditure this year, for example, will be around $721.5 billion, compared to a spend of $66 billion for education and $47.9 billion for housing.
This does not include many military-related items that are outside of the Defence Department budget, such as nuclear weapons research, IT infrastructure, fuel, weapons programs, bloated bureaucracies, and personnel, pensions to military retirees, widows and their families, interest on debt incurred in past wars, State Department financing of foreign arms sales, and militarily-related development assistance. Neither does it include defence spending that is domestic rather than international in nature, such as funding for the Department of Homeland Security, counter-terrorism spending by the FBI, and intelligence security spending by NSA, although these programs contain certain weapons, military and security components.
Apart from the paranoia generated by the attacks on the World Trade Centre in 2011, the root cause of overspending on defence seems to be related still to the idea of US exceptionalism. The sense of being more virtuous, more advanced, smarter, more charitable, more liberated, (and possibly more misjudged) than others, is overbearingly ingrained within the American psyche.
Part of this mentality is a presumption that the United States, surrounded by potential rivals, must have the capability to intervene almost anywhere in the world at short notice. Perhaps even more than that, it implies a haughty belief that the US should be able to buy anybody, bully those it cannot buy, and kill those that cannot be bullied – all the while living in total impunity because it is, after all, the leader of the free world.
Although this policy has been a disaster for US security - as demonstrated by the aftermaths of successive interventions from Korea and Vietnam to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya - there is still an unwavering belief that spending more money on defence ensures a safer nation, in spite of how the money is spent or how much is wasted. This in a world where the climate emergency is much more of a threat to American sovereignty than any imagined or real threat from China or Russia.
There is absolutely no doubt the levels of defence spending during the Trump era cut deeply into welfare and other domestic programs such as infrastructure. The latest round of proposed budget increases recently requested by Joe Biden will struggle to negate the widespread suffering encountered during the past few years, and could continue to undermine security as well. President Eisenhower noted the foundation of a strong and safe America should be a vibrant economy, and a healthy, well-educated, and politically engaged citizenry. Budgets from the past six occupants of the White House have undermined each one of these pillars of a secure society.
Unfortunately, the entire US economy is assembled around and depends upon conflict. War has been the main substitute for the loss of manufacturing overseas. To maintain current living standards, and to preserve its international status, the US needs a war every 4 years. Without that basic requirement economic growth begins to slow, social unrest increases, and survival becomes problematic. The entire rationale of the nation now rests on its capacity to engage in war - and its military is geared up for that moment whenever it comes, or is orchestrated.
This is similar to the situation that developed in Rome where constant wars, border protection, and significant overspending, lightened imperial coffers, while oppressive taxes and inflation widened the gap between the rich and poor. At its zenith, the Roman Empire stretched from the Atlantic Ocean all the way to the Euphrates. Such grandeur probably contributed to its downfall. With such a vast territory to govern, the empire struggled to marshal enough troops and resources to defend its frontiers from local rebellions and outside attacks. By the second century the Emperor Hadrian was forced to build his famous wall in Britain just to keep the enemy at bay. As more funds were funnelled into the military, upkeep of the empire stalled, technological advancement slowed, and Rome’s civil infrastructure fell into disrepair.
Conclusions
In 2008 David Walker, comptroller general of the US, asserted that America was afflicted by precisely the same predicaments that were responsible for the collapse of the Roman empire: declining moral values and political civility at home, a brash and overstretched military in foreign lands, and fiscal imprudence in Washington. Today we would have to add political corruption, geopolitical angst, and even cultural overreach. The world is fed up with America and its bullying behaviour.
Climate change is likely to impact the US far more than presently anticipated. With so much carbon dioxide locked into the atmosphere, and methane erupting through the permafrost, benign environmental conditions are a thing of the past. People everywhere are also likely to become more disobedient if trust in political institutions frays much further and the economy experiences another global slump, which is just a matter of time.
Social cohesion is a huge problem, and although some confidence seems to be returning of late, America’s sense of identity is still fragile. In the years following the Second World War the US became an extraordinary cauldron of artistic and intellectual endeavour. That vitality has gone. Only a growing cultural malaise remains.
And then there is leadership – or rather the lack of it. Constantly surprised by complexity and unable to resolve the many issues facing the country, US politicians are far too complacent and condescending. Nowhere is this smugness more evident than in the constant barbs thrown at Russia and Iran, and increasingly, China and North Korea.
Such overt threats are particularly foolish given US military mediocrity. That is right. Most of the world assumes the US has total military supremacy over every other country. But that is simply not the case. While they US possesses the biggest arsenal by far, Russia is superior in terms of quality, training and deployment of its armed forces, while China is superior in terms of its strategic war-gaming capacity. Besides, are we really expected to believe that the only restraint keeping the US from using their overwhelming military advantage is that the leaders in Washington do not condone the unconstrained use of force? Is their a ghost in the shadows reminding them of their humiliation in Vietnam, their need to fight proxy wars in the Middle East, or the fact that they start conflicts without a clue as to how they can conclude hostilities?
The truth is American armed forces were never the invincible military power the propaganda machine, including Hollywood, would have us believe. And while the US undoubtedly has an advantage in the sheer numbers of weapons, advanced technologies, and reach, all that power is nullified if the enemy refuses to play the American style of war.
Washington’s excessive confidence in US invulnerability, and the brazenness that ensues, is delusional. It is the reason many other nations around the world react so negatively towards the US and why it is losing friends. The recent political upheaval and divisions afflicting the US seem to be getting worse by the day and invites the question whether America, like its ancient predecessor, is headed for a fall.
Yet it would be premature to assume the US will share Rome’s fate. America is still a fairly adolescent, if insecure, nation. Obviously a comparison between the United States and the Roman Empire is attractive for philosophers like myself. After all, these two states were the most powerful empires of their time, while the US modelled many of its institutions, and much of its thinking, after Rome.
Although our attention is currently focused on political strife, significant shifts in America’s identity and power will most likely come from entirely different sources. The future world of total computerization, life-extending medical advances, deep space exploration, and the inevitable impacts of climate breakdown, will transform the US in ways the Roman Empire never experienced, much of it for the better. The Romans deployed advanced technologies of the day, but their lives were not overturned because up to 80 per cent of jobs were suddenly taken by robots - something likely to happen in the US over the next decade.
How technological and economic changes and geopolitical tensions will impact Russia, China, America, and other political entities around the world will not be clear until towards the end of this decade of disruption.
The latest futures thinking, emerging just this week from the US National Intelligence Council, points to increasing political volatility, growing polarization and populism within politics, and community mistrust in leaders and official institutions - aggravated still further by demands on governments at a time when they are increasingly constrained in what they can actually (or are competent) to do. Should these factors accelerate and converge, which seems feasible, it will lead to further waves of activism and social unrest, democratic brittleness, and an inevitable escalation of geopolitical competition.
The intensity of competition for global influence is likely to reach its highest level since the Cold War between now and 2030, amid the continuing weakening of the old order, and as institutions like the United Nations struggle. Nor is this likely to remain a discrete polarized issue between China and the US after 2030. Non-governmental organizations, including religious groups and technology superstar firms, could well develop the capacity to host decentralized networks that compete with, or even bypass, the state.
Jihadist terrorism is likely to persist. But a greater threat comes from extreme right- and left-wing terrorists, using artificial intelligence and augmented reality to sponsor issues such as racism, environmentalism and anti-government extremism, in ways that could erupt across Europe, Latin America and North America.
Another relevant topic, still barely considered, is the continuing impact and fallout from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on the global economy as well as the overall 'confidence' of humanity. The cultural shock has been deep and there is no doubt we are scarred. Ripples from what is now acknowledged to be the most significant, singular global disruption since World War II, which has fuelled divisions, accelerated existing trends, and shaken long-held assumptions about resilience and adaptiveness, including how well governments can cope with disorder on this scale, are all likely to endure.
Looking beyond 2030 it is a long shot, but nevertheless feasible, that market economies as currently constructed fail to recover from the Covid pandemic, becoming domestically deeply divided and unanchored, drifting in an international system that is directionless, chaotic, and wide open to lawlessness. But even then the volatile conditions could lead to a new global coalition, capable of navigating humanity through its most wicked problems.
Just reflecting on such a scenario gives me a sense of hope. A dystopian future might still be avoided by individual, groups and states that see key drivers of contemporary change, like the climate crisis, as more than just a disruptive killer. Those who harness shifts in new energy and means of production first and fastest, for the public good rather than pure individual greed, could deflect the trajectory of human civilization. It lifts the soul, for example, to imagine that a renaissance of democracies might evolve from the current chaos should brutal crackdowns from within authoritarian societies continue to stifle innovation and freedom of expression, thus strengthening the appeal of democratic ideals.
On the other hand, perhaps the battle waged against globalism by President Trump and his ideologues, which had a strong anti-intellectual and anti-technology component, will prove to have been a last-ditch effort to fight back against a war that is already lost. Only time will tell.