+1 for that. I believe that new forms of wealth creation are beyond the ken of the controllers. You got a reply from jhagen about how the mass media are controlled by those in power. To some extent that is true, as it must be. However, millions of people - left, right, or center - look to other sources of information. Millions more simply ignore the noise.

That is all that that is: noise. New technologies are deeply endemic in our culture today. It may be centuries before they all gel and stultify into some kind of socio-political stasis. I mean, that would have to include the miners in the asteroid belt, and I do not see that happening soon.

I do not agree, though I note the Plusses from others who do. Atlas Shrugged was never intended as a predictive or prescriptive story. If anything, its widespread popularity actually prevents the end it warns against.

It is too easy to read the headlines and accept them as social reality. I recommend that you visit the Ayn Rand Institute's Essay Contest pages. They have been running these for 20 year or more. Many of those who enter come from Catholic schools. Think about that.

The undercurrent of change is only not yet perceived.

As the writers and editors of The Invention of Enterprise point out, in Rome, being a merchant as not held in high regard. A successful businessman turned his works over to his freedmen and slaves while he retired to the country to live on a farm like a nobilis.

I agree with your premise, of course. In fact, I believe that this is the fatal flaw on the theory presented. We can create not only new wealth, but new forms of wealth creation if we are free to do so.

Here's something interesting I read a while back about changing the past.
Quantum Physics suggests that if the outcome of some past action or even your actions in the present, is unknown...it can be changed. As soon as the outcome IS known...it's history and cannot be changed.
EXP's were done in some universities where some students studied before an exam and others only studied after...both groups were not told the outcome. After the second group studied after the results were tallied and the group that studied after got the highest marks as a whole.
I think it's too late to study after because we've seen the outcome of past falls.
What we might try is that which has never been tried then study after the fact to see if we changed the past...which of course was once out present.

So...I told the truth, predicted the outcome ..but nobody listened. There were those just as intelligent as me, with as much knowledge, and foresight, but when it came to outlining consequences -- nobody listened. I saw a once mighty republic rotting on the inside and when I showed the danger to its structure - nobody listened. I saw evil men with evil agendas gain power and when I pointed them out, nobody listened. Why didn't they hear me? What does it take to unblind the blind? Aren't these wise men who have attained great stature? If I'm right why won't they see what I see? There must be only one reason that I can discern. I must be insane.
Either that, or the world is.

Thanks for such a thoughtful and insightful essay, especially with the humorous refrences to Druids imaginary and recent.. Even the word exploitation is overcharged. I get that we rarely see the negative feedack or make the fundamental adjustments. What makes me lose sleep is how utterly impotent elected representatives are collectively, who are pettily distracted from any and all well intended sincere 'druid's'..

The mongols had many nasty ways to produce the death of an individual. Like pouring molten silver into someone's ears, forcing someone to swallow small pebbles until his entire esophagus was full, or even what they did to the Caliph of Baghdad - rolled him up in carpets and had elephants stomp him out!

And we argue about the death penalty!

An interesting thought - a very good point. We have the printing press, the postal service, tv, radio, many thousands of schools, AND the internet. Systems even better than Spargue de Camp could mention. But since so much of each of them are controlled by people who don't like America, having this amazing ability to communicate and transmit information clearly isn't enough.

Something the ancient Romans were into.
Romans hated druid priests for stirirng up Gauls, Brit tribes and so forth.
I believe that is what Merlin was, though he lived after the fall of Rome or so his legend goes.

Isn't it neat to be able to carry hundreds of books around with you in one hand? I am having trouble charging my Kindle right now. :>(

Jan

It appears that we must put reality aside for the mystics.

Congrads on your solar array. I am still working on getting mine.

Jan

The most interesting answer to this question was made (in 1939) by Sprague de Camp in his SF novel Lest Darkness Fall. Time travel: A mousy archaeologist is transported back to Visgothic Rome. He decides to try to prevent the Middle Ages. He does this by inventing the printing press, semaphore, corporations...(and making sure that certain battles are won/lost). Since de Camp was, himself, an archaeologist, the details are accurate (to 1939).

Bottom line is that improved communication and better transmission of information are essential for holding an empire of that size together.

As I have said before, I think that political models may be overturned by new technology, even as fracking has overturned the concept of the amount of petroleum products that are left.

Jan

With old dino's insight for saying about the same Merlin kinda thing for this day and time, I would just be ignored save for this board,
Lust for power and ill-gotten gains has Roman kinda put the USA on its death bed.