posted
They fail for a number of reasons unique to each empire. There is no general reason that applies to all of them. The question you asked is very good but possibly it would be better to look at each empire and examine the reason for its decline. It may be that some would have reasons in common with others and such an examination would reveal that.
Posts: 904 | From: Texana | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
There is one thing that all civilizations have in common; the status quo. Humans tend to hate change or fear it. This becomes more acute in government where many grow rich inventing more layers of red tape and increasing laws and taxes upon existing structures. Fundamental or structural change becomes impossible.
All societies fill niches not unlike animals fill niches in the food chain. So long as the food supply or markets exist, so long as the Earth yields harvests and the geography isn't overrun with foreign soldiers, pestilence, or plague the society will flourish and grow. But just as an animals niche can evaporate or be usurped in the wild so can a civilization's place come under pressure. They will not adapt because they fear change more than they fear the weather or an invading army.
They fall because they can't change.
Ironically it can be the tiny unnoticed changes which destroy them as well. New procedures and new products are always being introduced. Little thought it put into such things in the rush to grow commerce or get wealthy. Citizens see their neighbors use such things and soon adopt it for themselves so it can become standard in short order.
It has been claimed that Rome's primary downfall was the introduction of lead cookware near its end. While lead is highly toxic and injurious to adults it is simply catastrophic for children and their developement. It can take 20 points off the IQ with no other signs of poisoning. Even small amount will affect children permanently and large amounts are fatal for all.
Posts: 393 | From: NW Indiana, US of A | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
According to the KKK its interbreeding better known as interracial marriage. They tend to use parts from the bible to ratify their claims....there is a part in it that says stick with your own.
Anyway I think they are describing the reactive after conquest. When White or Black invade the Opposite colour skin and settle they intermix and hence form a new ethnicity unrelated to either conquerers or the conquored.
That aside the other and more realistic reason is because the empires are often established under very special people their replacements are not always able to achieve what they achieved. Even ALexander the Great was doing well only when he was fighting and opening up the silk road. After that it suffocated and the process of decay started.
The same can be said for Egypt and the Nubian and most local empires. Te Kush which expanded to Indonesia also renewed great wealth for teh African people. However, the seuz canal built during Persian and later sever times by Greeks was one of teh major things that kept Egypt perpetual in its wealth. The trade from Europe via Egypt, Ethiopia and finally India was a great and profitable path. So as with any empire if their army or political power can not maintain wealth and massive revenue then the empire can be considered dead.
Posts: 104 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic