Reading Response 2

Reading Response #2

            As I read through the reading for the week, I was looking for something that would create a question. Instead I found one at the bottom of page 122. Strayer there asked the question, “are the Americans the new Romans?” Now this is a subject that can be debated by historians, politicians or anyone under the sun. In my opinion, I believe we are in some ways the new romans.

            The first time I came across this idea was a few semesters ago in my Managing Cultural Diversity class. We had an assignment to compare how we lived here in America with that of somewhere else in the world. During that research I began to come across the fact that many foreign countries refer to the United States as the “American Empire”. Some newspapers just referred to us as the empire. I was very taken back by what I was reading. I had always felt that the word empire was synonymous with evil or people trying to take over the world. I didn’t know what to make of it, are we an empire? A people that were hell bent on taking over the world and molding it in the way that we see fit. 

            I began to look at what we as a country have done since the 1700’s. I would say that in some ways, the United States has become very similar to the Roman Empire. With that being said, let me make it perfectly clear I am not saying the United States is an evil power trying to take over the world. I am strictly saying that there are some traits that we as superpowers share.

            The easiest comparison to make is that both the Romans and Americans see the importance of having a strong military force. During the glory days of the Roman Empire, they had a military force that was unrivaled in its time. There were a few nations that had fierce warriors of their own, but the shear mite and presence of the Roman army could not be matched. This is very similar for the U.S. Following the Allied victory of World War Two; the United States had become the most powerful military in the world. This importance of a strong military was now being seen in the further development of nuclear capabilities. This importance was shown to the world as the U.S. and Soviet Union compete of nuclear dominance during the Cold War.

            Another similarity is the conquering of lands. Or in the United States case the colonization of island nations. During the reign of the Romans their rule stretch all areas the encompassed the Mediterranean Sea. This was something that was shared by the Americans we too have colonized neighboring areas throughout the Pacific Ocean and Caribbean.

            One thing that I found in the reading that would not be something I figured was that Romans allowed conquered areas to maintain there own religions, and culture. These newly acquired areas could keep the history that was theirs in a sign that the Romans were gracious. Of course, in time these ways of thinking would inevitably be considered Roman ideas. This idea of being a melting pot is what the United States is all about. People are allowed to practice all customs that are particular to whatever culture they are apart of.

            In conclusion, I do not think we as Americans share the conquering mentality held by the Romans. However, as studying history it always shows one thing, history does repeat itself, and that these example help to show that we very well might be the new Romans. 

Reading Response 1

Reading Responses #1

For these responses, I used the books questions to help guide me.    

            After reading through Chapter 2, I came across the question of, do I agree with the statement about the agriculture revolution providing evidence for progress in human affairs. I would have to say yes, I do agree with that statement. Prior to the agriculture revolution early peoples did have a way of life that was getting them by. Hunter gathers were able to provide for their small groups and live for a period of time. However, with this particular way of life, hunter gathers did not to keep moving with the migration of their food and with the flow of the seasons.  The development of being able to grow food in particular areas was the change that started nomadic groups to become stationary. With people now beginning to not have to travel over vast areas for food, these groups could now have more children, which in turn would help develop into small villages. As we read in chapter 3, with the settlements caused by the agriculture revolution we begin to see the beginning of civilization. Which in my opinion, without the agriculture revolution would have never happened. We may still be roaming the vast regions of each continent in search of our next meal.

            Looking back at chapter 1 I couldn’t help but think about the fourth question at the end of the chapter.  How might the attitudes of toward the modern world influence our assessment of the Paleolithic societies? As noted from our first class when it comes to this period in our history, it just isn’t something that is paid much attention. Or it isn’t something that is spent being taught in school. Now I am speaking from my own experience when I write about this, but prior to reading this chapter much of what I knew came from seeing National Geographic movies. Those movies usually talk about their cave drawings and how primitive they were. Considering where we are today, anything less than what we have in way of technology is totally seen as inferior. Since there is no written record of this time, we do not know how advanced these peoples actually were. We can only assume. So yes, where we are in the modern world and are view of things will greatly influence our assessment of they way things were during the Paleolithic time. I think in order to get a true feeling of what it may be like a person would have to leave the comforts of today and put themselves in what we believe to be the Paleolithic mans way of life and live it for ourselves. I think the findings from such an experiment would be quite interesting.