Is it possible the United States of America could fall as a country? My classmates and history teacher were discussing/arguing about this. If it is possible list reasons why and support it.
I think Canada would have the highest chance of a successful invasion: Their military tactics have not been seen in many years; they are very patriotic; they have a very close proximity to the US.
I think Canada would have the highest chance of a successful invasion: Their military tactics have not been seen in many years; they are very patriotic; they have a very close proximity to the US.
India won't become a super-power anytime soon. The reason is quite simple: It still uses the caste system. Almost a billion Indians live below the poverty level.
India has a billion people. You're saying that almost all of them live below poverty level? Also, the caste system is used in poor areas as it is, which are unimportant on the entire scale seeing as areas where there is economic development, most people aren't that traditional anymore. India's got a monstrous large population and is set to grow economically in a big burst pretty much. Though I, too, doubt they will be a superpower, it is sufficed to say that if something 'ww3' like ever comes into play, India will have strong influence on the subject.
I think Canada would have the highest chance of a successful invasion: Their military tactics have not been seen in many years; they are very patriotic; they have a very close proximity to the US.
Canada is smart and technologically powerful, not in any way powerful. I'm pretty sure if you turned all of NYC into mad zombies with guns Canada would have trouble fighting against a raving mob of 20 Million monsters.
Personally I don't think the USA can fall as abruptly as other empires in the past have, such as Rome. Rome was a nation flooded with apathy and an all powerful rich class and a bunch of poor people. Also, lets not forget something like a third of their populace was a bunch of slaves. Not too patriotic. Also, it had a bunch of uprisings and stuff like that. Simply put, nations are better than empires. So it's not a good comparison. The only real nation that's ever had a demise was the Soviet Union. But they were crazy communists that excluded the entire world , so we can ignore that. I don't think the USA will ever fall, or die, or whatever, at least not for a really long amount of time. it's backed by a large population of educated people [even if they're not as educated as other nations]. If anything, I don't think the USA can die or fall off the map. Even under economic stress, it's not like our economy is totally worthless. I just see other nations catching up, putting more competition on the American economy.
You're saying that almost all of them live below poverty level?
77% of Indians live on less than 0.50 $ per day.
Also, the caste system is used in poor areas as it is, which are unimportant on the entire scale seeing as areas where there is economic development, most people aren't that traditional anymore.
You are supposing that regions with economic development are not poor. This is incorrect, high initial inequality makes poverty less responsive to growth. Growth tends to be distribution-neutral on average, the higher the initial inequality, the less the poor will share in the gains from growth.[Poverty Lines in Theory and Practice] As a matter of fact -ceteris paribus- India's areas with big economic growth have more poor than the national average. Anyway, even in the richest regions of India, 40% of the population is in Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
The United States would fall if the United Nations decides to drop the U.S. Dollar as the reserve currency. The U.S.'s economy is already not doing well, one of the only things holding it together is the fact that the United States is the only country that can legally print more money. Though I doubt this will happen BECAUSE the U.S. is the only country that prints money, and my cousin who works for the U.N. has confirmed that this will never happen anytime soon.
Bluedevil, lots of countries print their own money. Any country can, it just affects their inflation.
You are supposing that regions with economic development are not poor.
That isn't what I meant. There are a bunch of beggars out there. I'm not saying India's close to getting rich, but they have a young and large working population, and I feel that as time goes on, their poor will find jobs with more meaning.
Even then, India has the world's 10th largest GDP, and fourth largest in PPP. The only thing holding it back is it's per capita GDP, but I feel with all that money being produced by it's masses, that India would have a lot of influence if there were a major outbreak in an area close to it, such as the middle east or China. That's all I meant.
I don't really see the USA being occupied or conquered as such, although possible, it seems far more likely that it will simply fade into obscurity, Japan, China and India are the economical powerhouses of the future, and there is no place in the world for the international policeman that America used to be, soon America will be just another country.
I don't think you can really describe any modern nation as an empire anymore, there are just too many powerful or at least moderately strong nations to allow any one nation to grow to such heights anymore.
The reason many ancient and some modern empires fell is because they amassed so much territory that it was impossible to control it all, currently I don't think there is any nation that is that large.
Most failures of empires weren't territorial based at all. It's not about ineffectively controlling land, it's about how you control people. The reason there are no empires, is because empires were unfair and multicultural. Example: If you're in an empire, then you're either the ruling race or that race which has been controlled. You're allegiance to it? None.
Nations are utterly different. Though some are multicultural, they offer representation in one's government and equality, they eliminate a ruling class, nor do they anymore rely on slave labor to control their economy.
EX: Rome, upon it's fall, was 1/3 slave population, and was taking rice tributes from conquered lands. Lots of rice, most of it being stored and not enough of it going to slaves lead to poor farmers, so economic collapse, civil unrest, and bang. There are a bunch of factors.
The thing is, modern countries are pretty much... new. All of them. We won't have any lasting empire to look at and see if it will do better than we will. It's a new concept and a nation state is based on a unification of people, not a control of them. People can define themselves by their country [within an empire, you can't]. Lastly, there aren't any modern nations that have fallen [besides the USSR], so it's impossible to really judge their longevity.
So... possibly, yes, I think we'll just have to wait and see.
most of it being stored and not enough of it going to slaves lead to poor farmers
Explain this logic.
Additionally slaves had little cause to revolt in Rome due to the fact that not only were revolts dealt with harshly, but any slave had they opportunity to buy their freedom, once this occurred their children were guaranteed full citizenship. Harshly is to the point where for a crime that one slave committed, every slave in the household would've been executed.
The reason I referenced the Roman Empire was because in it's later years, the territory it controlled was so vast that they were unable to suitably respond to uprisings and attacks by the German barbarians on their western front. So while I agree with you that there are other factors, do not underestimate the role territory plays. The fall of an empire is a snowball effect, virtually everything matters.
lol red dawn^^ great movie but is that scenario not a bit late?? If the Us fail it will likely be because of something called "imperial overstretch" to much of the country's resources go to the military and wars on foreign soil
