What do you think?
Rate this book
Collapse: United States History 2000 to 2050
Looking back from the 24th century, the (other) famous historian Edward Gibbon describes the last decades of America's "Great Republic".
On New Year's Day of 2000, The United States occupied a place in the world that had not been seen since the time of Rome. How could a nation that seemed so powerful, so confident, so secure have come to such grief so quickly?
It was only history repeating itself. Great nations do not simply die, they commit suicide and the United States was no exception. As one politician put it, "Rome was not destroyed in a day. It took centuries. America got the job done in about four decades."
On New Year's Day of 2000, The United States occupied a place in the world that had not been seen since the time of Rome. How could a nation that seemed so powerful, so confident, so secure have come to such grief so quickly?
It was only history repeating itself. Great nations do not simply die, they commit suicide and the United States was no exception. As one politician put it, "Rome was not destroyed in a day. It took centuries. America got the job done in about four decades."
174 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 9, 2013
10 people are currently reading
6 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
July 26, 2013
Future histories are present crises writ large. The premise is the old "I'm writing this history in the future (400 years in this case) to show how fucked up they were back then." So the book trying for a faux perspective on current events.
As a piece of literature the book is a mess. It is monomaniacal in it repetition of ideas. Its structure is unsound as it veers from politics to technological futurism.
The author suggests a perpetual political gridlock which he sees as constitutional and systemic in nature. Republicans and Democrats have both been taken over by "extremists" who will not compromise.The Senate has become the stumbling block for any major reforms and the Congressman and Senators are simply corrupt mouthpieces for interests willing to pay the price. There are some obvious problems in this analysis. But more about that latter.
So a corrupt deadlocked political system ends up trying to correct itself with a drastic reform of its constitution but of course that fails. This being America political instability begets assassination begets instability and so on until the only non corrupt force takes over ie the military. There are some obvious problems with this analysis as well.
On the surface this all makes sense. A society armed to the teeth that sees force as the answer to all of its problems could end up this way. In fact I agree that the end stage of a rapidly deteriorating unstable political situation can be military intervention/coup or fascism. America I suggest is actually trying a new formula since the ruling classes position is unassailable it is not willing to throw in its lot with a fascist grouping, it is transforming the republic from within to become a fairly authoritarian system. It is shutting down dissent and militarizing responses to internal and external threats.
The problem with America is not a wobbly 18th century constitution but some awful politics. There are intractable problems with the politics of late neoliberalism. There is less and less room for maneuver because the government/public sector has been declining. The private sector cannot solve America's prison system for instance. This requires political will and new ideas using the state apparatus. This is one problem but there are many more where private enterprise has not got the answer.
It becomes clear the author is a mixed up tea bagger with a dash of the Newt Gringrich's fixation that technology will solve it all in the end. A very unsatisfactory book.
As a piece of literature the book is a mess. It is monomaniacal in it repetition of ideas. Its structure is unsound as it veers from politics to technological futurism.
The author suggests a perpetual political gridlock which he sees as constitutional and systemic in nature. Republicans and Democrats have both been taken over by "extremists" who will not compromise.The Senate has become the stumbling block for any major reforms and the Congressman and Senators are simply corrupt mouthpieces for interests willing to pay the price. There are some obvious problems in this analysis. But more about that latter.
So a corrupt deadlocked political system ends up trying to correct itself with a drastic reform of its constitution but of course that fails. This being America political instability begets assassination begets instability and so on until the only non corrupt force takes over ie the military. There are some obvious problems with this analysis as well.
On the surface this all makes sense. A society armed to the teeth that sees force as the answer to all of its problems could end up this way. In fact I agree that the end stage of a rapidly deteriorating unstable political situation can be military intervention/coup or fascism. America I suggest is actually trying a new formula since the ruling classes position is unassailable it is not willing to throw in its lot with a fascist grouping, it is transforming the republic from within to become a fairly authoritarian system. It is shutting down dissent and militarizing responses to internal and external threats.
The problem with America is not a wobbly 18th century constitution but some awful politics. There are intractable problems with the politics of late neoliberalism. There is less and less room for maneuver because the government/public sector has been declining. The private sector cannot solve America's prison system for instance. This requires political will and new ideas using the state apparatus. This is one problem but there are many more where private enterprise has not got the answer.
It becomes clear the author is a mixed up tea bagger with a dash of the Newt Gringrich's fixation that technology will solve it all in the end. A very unsatisfactory book.
January 22, 2017
It was alright. The book is written as if it is a history book on US history from 2000 to 2050. The author clearly has a conservative bias as to what are the problems of a current and a near future America. The book was published in 2013 so there are already things that have turned out different, mainly the election of Trump, but who could have foreseen that. Overall it was a somewhat interesting read.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews