The real nature of empires

By Rod Kapunan

Numerous books have been written about the rise and fall of empires.  Historians and political scientists are almost unanimous in saying that empires come and go.    Others give their emergence a historical setting, or in relation to the prevailing mode of production, as the Marxists would often say.

However, no one has profoundly analyzed why empires ultimately collapse.   Such is logical because to answer that, one must ultimately come out with a logical answer why empires, in the first place, emerge.  Even if historians, political pundits and ideologues are unanimous in their prognosis, no one has firmly come out to conclude that empires, for all of their glorious contributions to humanity, have always been a self-defeating proposition, it being the translation of power into its utmost nakedness called “subjugation and oppression.”

As one borne out of oppression, maintaining it is almost ten times costlier than building it.   In the end, the empire serves as its own death trap.   Aside from the waste of material and financial resources, it has to be enforced by oppression.  If empires resort to exploiting the wealth and resources of their subjugated states, in the end the enterprise becomes less profitable  compared to the cost of keeping it.

But oppressors never learn.  They say the emergence of Pax Americana as the greatest empire mankind ever witnessed is about to put an end to that cycle of rise and fall. The US today possesses the greatest number of nuclear arsenal of about 5,113 nuclear warheads, enough to erase human civilization three times from the face of the earth, and backed up by technological superiority to ensure maximum devastation.   Next is Russia having 1,449 warheads, while the rest possessed by the members of the nuclear club ranging from 180 to 350 nuclear warheads.

The US has 1,458,697 active members of the armed forces, second only to China, the largest standing army in the world.   Although having about 2,285,000 men in uniform, military analysts concede it remains far below the capability of the US army in terms of firepower, mobility and logistical support.  For 2011, the US appropriated $549.3 billion for defense representing 4.9 percent of its GDP, while China spent only about $114.2 billion for 2013 or about 1.46 percent of its GDP.   The US has military bases in 150 countries maintained by about 200,000 troops.  The biggest is in Afghanistan with 68,000 combat troops, followed by Japan with 58,692, Germany 45,596, South Korea 28,500, Italy 10,916, and United Kingdom 9,310.

It is estimated that the cost for maintaining troops overseas is three to five times higher than it would take just to keep them at home.  That budget even soars to 20 times higher if deployed in war zones as in Afghanistan.  This not to mention the auxiliary fighting machines deployed in support of their effort for world domination.  As one US Navy poster would put it, “The Navy put ‘em across.”   For that, the US navy has about 288 ships to respond to every type of naval operations: 10 aircraft carriers with 3,700 aircraft, 9 amphibious assault ships, 8 amphibious transport docks, 12 dock landing ships, 22 cruisers, 62 destroyers, 20 frigates, 71 submarines, and 3 littoral combat ships.

The air force has about 5,484 aircraft ranging from their top of the line stealth fighters, strategic bombers, fighter interceptors, reconnaissance-spy planes, troop transport, helicopters of various types, 450 ICBMs and 63 satellites to apply its so-called “global precision attack” that begins in their maintenance of air superiority.

Despite that awesome array of armaments to subjugate states in the name of democracy and freedom, the grandeur of an empire is definitely rotting from the inside.   For one, Standard & Poor reduced US credit worthiness from AAA to AA+, something that shocked most Americans.   In gross per capita income, the US now ranks no. 9 as listed by the CIA Factbook.  In September 2011, 46.2 million Americans were living in poverty with 16.3 percent without any health care benefit, and 22 percent in child poverty with 39 among blacks and 35 percent among Hispanics.

In 2013, the US recorded the biggest trade deficit reaching a staggering amount of $44.448 billion. Despite that, one weird French economic-philosopher, Frederic Bastiat, expressed that trade deficit actually is a manifestation of profit, rather than loss. It is to him an indicator of a successful economy, than a failing one.  Expectedly that theory was echoed by another weird American economist, Milton Friedman.  As an advocate of the “monetarist policy”, he contended that some of the “concerns of trade deficits are unfair as it is an attempt to push macroeconomic policies favorable to exporting industries.”

To fill in the ever widening trade deficit that has crossed to one of imbalanced budget, it has resorted to unregulated foreign borrowings.  As of March 2013, debt held by the American public was approximately $11.856 trillion or about 75 percent of GDP.  Intra-governmental holdings stood at $4.854 trillion, giving a combined total public debt of $16.710 trillion.  As of July 2012, approximately 48 percent of the debt is owned by foreign investors, the largest of which are China and Japan at just over $1.1 trillion each.

Many blame Friedman for the continued printing of the US dollar without being backed up by any gold reserve but just relying on the myth of the US GDP.  That resulted in the Americans spending more for goods twice less their value because of inflation with an added insult of having to pay more taxes to maintain an oppressive empire.  This observation of an empire as a losing proposition is not much difficult to understand.

The irony is, while the US has been boot-stomping countries seeking economic and political independence, it remains blinded that sooner than expected, it will be fighting against its own people who bears the brunt of maintaining an empire that becomes more oppressive as it slowly crumbles to its final downfall.  War being its principal business, the empire has resulted in the deterioration of their people’s standard of living; shrinking of their purchasing power; decay of public services; soaring of unemployment; and the abrogation of welfare, health, and educational benefits altogether.

rpkapunan@gmail.com

http://manilastandardtoday.com/2013/03/16/the-real-nature-of-empires/