This will be inflammatory

doubleplay · September 29, 2006, 5:43pm

In fairness, I havent checked Olsen’s statistics:

About the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in
1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of
Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some
2,000 years prior:

“A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a
permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until
the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous
gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always
votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public
treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due
to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.”

The average age of the worlds greatest civilizations from the beginning
of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these
nations always progressed through the following sequence:

<li>From bondage to spiritual faith;</li>
<li>From spiritual faith to great courage;</li>
<li>From courage to liberty;</li>
<li>From liberty to abundance;</li>
<li>From abundance to complacency;</li>
<li>From complacency to apathy;</li>
<li>From apathy to dependence;</li>
<li>From dependence back into bondage …"</li>
</ol>

Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St. Paul,
Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2000
Presidential election:

Population of counties won by: Gore: 127 million; Bush: 143 million;

Square miles of land won by: Gore: 580,000; Bush:
2,427,000

States won by: Gore: 19 Bush: 29

Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Gore: 13.2 Bush:
&nb! sp;2.1
Professor Olson adds: “In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush won was
mostly the land owned by the tax-paying citizens of this great country.
Gore’s territory encompassed most of those citizens living in
government-owned tenements and living off government welfare…”

Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the “complacency
and apathy” phase of Professor Tyler’s definition of democracy, with some
40 percent of the nation’s population already having reached the
“governmental dependency” phase.

Pass this along to help everyone realize just how much is at stake,
knowing that apathy is the greatest danger to our freedom.

“All that is necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is that
good men do nothing”

----EDMUND BURKE

Tarhunt · September 29, 2006, 6:26pm

I wonder WHY people don’t go to snopes.com to check this stuff out before posting it.

<a href=“http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/tyler.asp[/url]”>http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/tyler.asp</a>

doubleplay · September 29, 2006, 8:03pm

Yikes, see I knew that was gonna come back and bite me. Although I agree with Tyler, Tytler, Whoever.

Dadguy · September 30, 2006, 12:39pm

Well, a lot of that is just wrong, In terms of Federal spending vs. taxes collected, the red states are way ahead of the blue states, if you consider welfare, defense spending (mililary bases), agricutural subsidies and good old-fashioned pork.

Allmusic · September 30, 2006, 1:32pm

Got that right Dad. Conservatives hate “entitlement spending”,but a far greater predominance of welfare spending occurs in the old, conservative red states. Yep, and lots of defense, farm and pork too.

fundingfather · September 30, 2006, 1:44pm

.
I think I need some cites to believe that one … unless you call Social Security and Medicare welfare.

However, if you want to even out the red state/blue state inequality, this article will be to your liking (of course the Dems will have to change their tune on tax policy to make it happen):

<a href=“http://www.taxfoundation.org/commentary/show/75.html[/url]”>http://www.taxfoundation.org/commentary/show/75.html</a>

Tarhunt · September 30, 2006, 2:47pm

Well, slice it any way you want, the fact is that most of the elements of the economic engines that drive this country are located in blue states. Our system is not set up to give a greater vote to those who produce the most value (with the exception of very rich political donors, of course), nor should it be. In fact, it’s designed to give a greater say/vote per citizen to those who live in the least populous states (the Senate and the Electoral College).

It’s not quite as bad as the old “tribes” system in the Roman Republic, but the effect is, oddly, the same: moving power from the urban to the rural.

As for “welfare,” it depends on how you define it. If you’re talking only about Aid to Families with Dependent Children and food stamps, then it’s a very small part of the federal budget. If you’re talking about all direct wealth transfer payments, then SS and Medicare qualify in a very big way.

Dadguy · September 30, 2006, 2:58pm

ff, I see your point, but there are a lot of other spending items which the red states come out “ahead”.

UCLAri · September 30, 2006, 3:22pm

I also heard that people who voted for Gore were vampires. But everyone who voted for Bush will find wealth, happiness, marry someone super hot and nice, and win a free car. A Tesla Roadster, even!

Now send this to everyone you know. Chain letters = high truths!

Oh, and SSI and medicare are technically welfare of sorts. Transfer of wealth is transfer of wealth. But hey, if corn farmers can get tons of it, why can’t old people who actually generated GDP get some of it?

I kid…I kid…sorta.

Dadguy · September 30, 2006, 6:52pm

Well, I checked out the population by age from the US Department of Health and Human Services and got linked over here.

<a href=“http://factfinder.census.gov%5B/url%5D”>http://factfinder.census.gov</a> - Table Compiled by the Administration on Aging

I looked at the percentage of the state population by age in 2000 to see the percentage of those at 65 or older. I calculated the average blue state % by averaging all the percentages for the blue states and did the same thing for red states.

Blue state % = 13.0% Red state % = 12.2%

Top ten % (in order) Fl PA WV IA ND RI ME SD AR CT
Bottom ten % (working from bottom) AK UT GA CO TX CA NV VA WA ID

The fact that the there about 5 or 6 blue states in the top make blue states a little over-represented given that there are more red states overall. The states on the bottom seem more in line with the overall distribtion.

I know that SS and Medicare invovles more than just the elderly, but I don’t see any reason that there would be a greater per-capita transfer from these programs in the red states versus the blue states.

poetsheart · October 1, 2006, 3:59am

What does party affiliation have to do with the OP’s assertions about the 8 steps to democratic failure? Red state, blue state—what the heck does it matter?

kassos · October 1, 2006, 4:14am

It doesn’t. Partisan hacks are just plain ■■■■■■■■.

Dadguy · October 1, 2006, 9:53am

Becasue the OP brought it up.

If voting ourselves “gifts from the public treasury” leads to the downfall of democracy, then it’s the red states that are leading the charge, rather than what the OP implied.

kluge · October 1, 2006, 12:02pm

This is from the same genre as the “study” which defined the “10 characteristics of a fascist political party” (which just happens to look a lot like the Republicans, by gosh!) <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=216002&page=2&highlight=fascist[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=216002&page=2&highlight=fascist</a>
— a politically slanted assemblage of loaded phrases festooned with bogus quasi-academic verbiage and propped up with fake credentials. Of interest only to the true believers and the credulous.

Tarhunt · October 1, 2006, 1:23pm

doubleplay said:

If the correspondent to snopes.com can be trusted, Tytler never said anything of the sort. In fact, I can’t imagine that anyone with even a nodding acquaintance with world history would say something like that.

What, exactly, to you agree with?

Here’s the quote:

</li>
</ol>

First off, what are the word’s “greatest civilizations,” and how could any civilization be considered among the “greatest” if it lasted less than 200 years??? As for 200 years itself, what about the Egyptians (3,000 years or more, depending on how you count it), Chinese, Punics, Hittites, Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Ottomans, etc.? All those civilizations lasted at least twice as long as 200 years and often much, much longer.

So, I would submit that the average “greatest civilization” must have lasted MUCH, MUCH longer than 200 years. BUT, 200 years does make for a convenient number if one is trying to get people to equate all this with the US, doesn’t it?

Now, let’s take the stages. The first is “from bondage to spiritual faith.”

How many great civilizations emerged from bondage? Egyptian? Nope. Greek? Nope. Roman? Maybe, if one considers the Etruscans. Chinese? Depends on the dynasty, but many would be a “no.” Punics? Not really. Byzantines? Nope.

OK, so how many started out their “great” periods with great spiritual faith? Egyptians? I’d say “yes” to that. Greek? Mmmm. That’s problematic. Depends on how you look at it. Chinese? Nope in most cases I think. Punics? Once again, depends on how you look at it. Byzantines and Ottomans? Yes.

But let’s take a look at some great civilizations that didn’t start out with great spiritual faith. The Brits have had three great phases. The early 100 Years War, in which they had great faith but so did their French adversaries (and the same faith, at that). The Elizabethan period, in which different factions may have had great faith but they were conflicting faiths, and so it tended to produce secular thought that flourished in the 17th century in the likes of those like Isaac Newton. The Empire period was notably non-religious and was rooted in the Elightenment. The Victorians, who actually had more faith than the Enlightenment set, actually preceded the Empire’s fall.

The United States is also a product of the Enlightenment. It was founded in what was probably the most secular period in this country’s history. By the tiome Thomas Jefferson died, he was aware of surge of the Great Awakening, in which religion in this country came to be more like what we read in Civil War-era letters.

Now, what about “courage to liberty.” What the heck is “liberty” in an historical context? Does that mean liberty from bondage. Well, I think I’ve already demonstrated that the whole “bondage” thing is inaccurate.

So what about the reasons for falls from Empire? Is it really complacency that comes from abundance? Does it really lead to apathy, dependence, and then ruin? I think it has certainly happened this way before, but the idea that it ALWAYS happens this way is absurd.

The Persian Empire didn’t fall because of this. It fell because of Alexander and a new way of warfare it was unprepared to meet. The Brits fell because they were badly overextended after being bled white in two world wars. The Spanish fell because they overextended and went heavily into debt while fighting ruinous wars and simultaneously depressing the value of gold and silver as they brought it in from the New World. They failed to invest in economic infrastructure. The Athenians fell because they overextended with failed military adventures in Egypt and against Syracuse, at the same time they were fighting the Spartans for supremacy in Greece!!!

I find the premise that all of the “greatest” civilizations fell from the same causes to be ridiculous, and it doesn’t surprise me that no one credible said anything of the sort. It takes an anonymous Internet poster to do something like this.

golani89 · October 1, 2006, 2:40pm

The greatest civilization ever is the Jewish people although they do not fit the conventional definition of civilization but more of nation. Jewish people have exsisted from time immorial they have given much to many cultures, and everyone has tried to destroy them, but has failed

UCLAri · October 1, 2006, 2:44pm

Kvell all you want at how great us Hebrews are, but the fact is that all civilizations are interdependent and benefit from one another.

The Jews have been affected just as much by the diaspora countries as they have affected them. In fact, looking at the difference between Ashkenazi and Sephardi, it’s easy to conclude that the countries affected the Jews far more than the other way around.

But that’s how culture works. It’s all give and take.

golani89 · October 1, 2006, 3:12pm

Well dont forget that Judaism gave the world monotheism, Christianity essentially evolved from Judaism, and just look at the individual accomplishments of Jews and the fact that their accomplishments are dispproportionate to their overall population. And then most importantly remember how at every point in history there is someone or some nation or whatnot that is tyrying to destroy the Jewish people and interestingly enough they have always failed

UCLAri · October 1, 2006, 3:31pm

But if we really wanna dig deeper, then we have to ask ourselves the actual origins of Jewish belief, and what contributed to that? There is no doubt that Jews benefitted greatly from the Hellenistic tradition, probably moreso than any other people. Look at the works of Maimonodes as an example.

I’m not trying to diminish what the Jews have accomplished worldwide, because it’s great. I just don’t think that trumpeting to excess is good, either.

Tarhunt · October 1, 2006, 3:49pm

golani89:

Sorry. Can’t buy it. The Jews are not the oldest people/nation or even close to it. The first mention of Israel (and whether Merneptah’s stele actually says “Israel” is in dispute) is Egyptian and dates from c. 1200-1150 BCE or so. That’s thousands of years after the earliest city states came into being.

The origin of montheism is also in dispute. If by “monotheistic,” it means the worship of one god among many, the Hebrews certainly have a claim. If it means the worship of one god because there is only one god, I’d be tempted to give that to the Rigvedas. Of course, no one knows the orgins of Zoroastrianism, so it could be older, and it would seem that the earliest known manifestation of what today might be called monotheism can be attributed to Akhenaton.

That Jewish monotheism has had an outsized impact on the modern world cannot be denied. But a great civilization? I don’t think that, in secular terms, the peoples of Judaea and Israel ever achieved that status.

This will be inflammatory

CONNECT WITH US