Aurielius Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 Semantics is the linguistic definition of a concept, since we use English semantics is the practical tool at hand.The term empire derives from the Latin imperium. Politically, an empire is a geographically extensive group of states and peoples united and ruled either by a monarch,emperor or an oligarchy. A Hegemony is the dominance or leadership of one social group or nation over others. I believe that the latter more aptly describes the United States. Your examples of our overseas bases in the Pacific is the resultant consequence of being the dominant pan Pacific naval power, though I am not excusing criminal off base actions of military personnel which is another matter all together. We are the dominant naval power of the world, that requires naval bases and countries such as Japan realize that fact and permit their existence in the interests of their own security. The Military Industrial Complex does have weight but not the driving force of our economy, our world dominance is technological, financial and cultural.The multinational corporations of which we have a disproportional share are the driving force of the world economies, otherwise the recent Wall Street financial meltdown would not have such extensive fallout worldwide. I have no problem with our dominance in economic, cultural and military fields and would like it to continue, but that is simply because I enjoy the benefits that are attendant. If there has to be dominant military power, then for parochial reasons I prefer ours over another country's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverDNA Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 In building an empire one must face and answer this questions: To what purpose is the military in an empire? To what purpose is the executive in an empire? To what purpose is the legislative in an empire? To what purpose is the judiciary in an empire? To what purpose is the economic value of an empire?To what purpose is the journalism in an empire?How would the people react to this government?It is not important to answer these questions from top to bottom, but to answer them all to an satisfactory end. The line of questions is not as important as the answers they lead to and the new questions the answers open up. (If you want a visual model think of an huge palace with many locked rooms. If you find the key to one room and enter it you have to search the room for a key to the next room. (the more rooms (answers) you get in to, the more keys (questions) you have. And may the best win this race into the Imperial palace.) :whistling: If you can bring all those questions under a hat, without any flaws, that by any scientific way can be brought down, then I would congratulate you, because you found out the ultimate formula to world peace. I wish you to have fun in the maze of building an world empire. :biggrin: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpellAndShield Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 Semantics is the linguistic definition of a concept, since we use English semantics is the practical tool at hand.The term empire derives from the Latin imperium. Politically, an empire is a geographically extensive group of states and peoples united and ruled either by a monarch,emperor or an oligarchy. A Hegemony is the dominance or leadership of one social group or nation over others. I believe that the latter more aptly describes the United States. Your examples of our overseas bases in the Pacific is the resultant consequence of being the dominant pan Pacific naval power, though I am not excusing criminal off base actions of military personnel which is another matter all together. We are the dominant naval power of the world, that requires naval bases and countries such as Japan realize that fact and permit their existence in the interests of their own security. The Military Industrial Complex does have weight but not the driving force of our economy, our world dominance is technological, financial and cultural.The multinational corporations of which we have a disproportional share are the driving force of the world economies, otherwise the recent Wall Street financial meltdown would not have such extensive fallout worldwide. I have no problem with our dominance in economic, cultural and military fields and would like it to continue, but that is simply because I enjoy the benefits that are attendant. If there has to be dominant military power, then for parochial reasons I prefer ours over another country's. How very pragmatic of you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surenas Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 Just a side note. Don't mismatch the ability to deploy troopers, to launch air strikes immediately and everywhere on this planet with a military dominance of an empire, or perhaps even with a guaranteed national security or individual safety at the home front - Rome sweet Rome is history since long. It is, however, just one parameter among others in warfare, the not that modern hegemonic opening draw of a campaign for resources or political dominance, based as usual upon an overwhelming firepower, but nowadays (and not only because of the beloved installation of puppet regimes) with a fatal final outcome on the field as the rule - for the former Sovjet Union as well as the USA; China might follow later in history. Unfortunately, embedded war reporting in good German Wochenschau fashion doesn't really turn marking time into victory, it just fools the people at home with censored images... for a time and a half.Actually, the empire doesn't strike back, for there's none that has survived history. And the fancied hegemony of former rebels... huuh... that won't even last long enough to make the Methuselah in us nervous, as the fate of the Sovjets proves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurielius Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 In building an empire one must face and answer this questions: To what purpose is the military in an empire? To what purpose is the executive in an empire? To what purpose is the legislative in an empire? To what purpose is the judiciary in an empire? To what purpose is the economic value of an empire?To what purpose is the journalism in an empire?How would the people react to this government?It is not important to answer these questions from top to bottom, but to answer them all to an satisfactory end. If you can bring all those questions under a hat, without any flaws, that by any scientific way can be brought down, then I would congratulate you, because you found out the ultimate formula to world peace.Before weighing in with any form of response, is this proposed empire benign or just efficient? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpellAndShield Posted June 13, 2010 Share Posted June 13, 2010 In building an empire one must face and answer this questions: To what purpose is the military in an empire? To what purpose is the executive in an empire? To what purpose is the legislative in an empire? To what purpose is the judiciary in an empire? To what purpose is the economic value of an empire?To what purpose is the journalism in an empire?How would the people react to this government?It is not important to answer these questions from top to bottom, but to answer them all to an satisfactory end. If you can bring all those questions under a hat, without any flaws, that by any scientific way can be brought down, then I would congratulate you, because you found out the ultimate formula to world peace.Before weighing in with any form of response, is this proposed empire benign or just efficient? Benign empire=oxymoron I might argue that an efficient one is as well, but I won't push my luck. :tongue: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverDNA Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 An inefficient empire wouldn't survive long and drive to anarchy and corruptness every day. (The decline of the roman empire is an good example I think.) Think it through an empire that last only 5 to 20 years isn't a good one, or what do you think? So an efficient one would last longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurielius Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 OK then how about an efficient, internally socially equitable empire as the starting point? Sooner or later I knew that I'd run afoul of posters as grammatically picky as I am. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverDNA Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 OK then how about an efficient, internally socially equitable empire as the starting point? Sooner or later I knew that I'd run afoul of posters as grammatically picky as I am. lolI'm looking forward to exploit your imagination .... of an empire. (I might have nebula guess of what you might come up, but I can't tell for sure, so I'm tight nailed as the extension of my back.) :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurielius Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 All right, as a staring point the Legislative Arm would need to be Bicameral with split areas of legislative superzenity. Simplest corollary would be US Congress but with addition of the ability of the lower house to override the upper with 3/4 majority if their legislation is vetoed. The lower house should have proportional representation from each region of the empire. Each region should have two senators and one pro consul per region,the pro consul is suggested by the region but appointed by the Emperor (within the suggested candidate pool). OK, I've started......time to modify with other suggestions. I'm not megalomaniacal enough to have entire plan just floating in the back of my mind. Edit; 20:49 EST Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts