John Bagot Glubb

Post image for John Bagot Glubb

by Charles Martel on January 14, 2010

The best way to describe Sir John Glubb is “Lawrence of Arabia — but smarter.” We can learn a lot from this dead white male.

Sir John Bagot Glubb, decorated British Army Officer, became the commander of the Arab Legion in 1939 and transformed it into the most effective fighting force in the Arab world. If you have a few minutes, take a look at David Castlewitz’s fascinating article, Glubb Pasha and the Arab Legion.

A soldier for much of his life, John Glubb was also a historian who wrote a number of books on Middle East and Arab history, including The Life and Times of Muhammad. But it is his prescient book “The Fate of Empires,” that I will focus on here.

Glubb examined eleven empires over a timespan of almost 3,000 years, from Assyria to the British Empire, and found that each followed an astoundingly similar path of growth and decline.

He found that empires have a lifespan of about ten human generations, two hundred and fifty years, and that changing technology and methods of warfare do not affect this life expectancy.

Glubb also found that empires were remarkably consistent in their growth and decline, moving through six readily identifiable stages, which he called the Age(s) of Pioneers, Conquest, Commerce, Affluence, Intellect and Decadence.

About the USA, Glubb wrote: “The United States arose suddenly as a new nation, and its period of pioneering was spent in the conquest of a vast continent, not an ancient empire. Yet the subsequent life history of the United States has followed the standard pattern … the periods of the pioneers, of commerce, of affluence, of intellectualism and of decadence.”

Glubb has much to say on the first four stages of empire, but I’m going to focus on what Glubb writes on the Ages of Intellect and Decadence. Published in 1978, The Fate of Empires is highly relevant to our discussions at The Spearhead. I make no apologies as I quote at length from The Fate of Empires. If you get bored, skip ahead to the bolded text and just read that.

“In a wider national sphere, the survival of the nation depends basically on the loyalty and self-sacrifice of its citizens. The impression that the situation can be saved by mental cleverness, without unselfishness or human self-dedication, can only lead to collapse.”

“intellectualism leads to discussion, debate and argument, such as is typical of the Western nations today. Debates in elected assemblies or local committees, in articles in the Press, or in interviews on television – endless and incessant talking. Men are interminably different, and intellectual arguments rarely lead to agreement. Thus public affairs drift from bad to worse, amid an unceasing cacophony of argument. But this constant dedication to discussion seems to destroy the power of action. Amid a Babel of talk, the ship drifts onto the rocks.”

“True to the normal course followed by nations in decline, internal differences are not reconciled in an attempt to save the nation. On the contrary, internal rivalries become more acute, as the nation becomes weaker.”

“As the nation declines in power and wealth, a universal pessimism gradually pervades the people, and itself hastens the decline … Frivolity is the frequent companion of pessimism … The resemblance between declining nations in this respect is truly surprising … The Roman mob, as we have seen, demanded free meals and public games … Gladiatorial shows, chariot races and athletic events were their passion. In the Byzantine Empire, the rivalries of the Greens and the Blues in the hippodrome attained the importance of a major crisis … The heroes of declining nations are always the same – the athlete, the singer or the actor.”

“The works of the contemporary historians of Baghdad in the early tenth century are still available. They deeply deplored the degeneracy of the times in which they lived, particularly the indifference to religion, the increasing materialism and the laxity of sexual morals. They lamented also the corruption of the officials of the government and the fact that politicians always seemed to amass large fortunes while they were in office. The historians commented bitterly on the extraordinary influence acquired by popular singers over young people, resulting in a decline in sexual morality. The ‘pop’ singers of Baghdad accompanied their erotic songs on the lute, an instrument resembling the modern guitar. In the second half of the tenth century, as a result, much obscene sexual language came increasingly into use, such as would not have been tolerated in an earlier age.”

An increase in the influence of women in public life has often been associated with national decline. The later Romans complained that, although Rome ruled the world, women ruled Rome. In the tenth century, a similar tendency was observable in the Arab empire, the women demanding admission to the professions hitherto monopolized by men. “What,” wrote the contemporary historian, Ibn Bessam, “have the professions of clerk, tax collector or preacher to do with women? These occupations have always been limited to men alone.” Many women practiced law, while others obtained positions as university professors. There was an agitation for the appointment of female judges, which, however, does not appear to have succeeded. Soon after this period, government and public order collapsed, and foreign invaders overran the country. The resulting increase in confusion and violence made it unsafe for women to move unescorted in the streets, with the result that this feminist movement collapsed. The disorders following the military take-over in 861, and the loss of the empire, had played havoc with the economy. At such a moment, it might have been expected that everyone would redouble their efforts to save the country from bankruptcy, but nothing of the kind occurred. Instead at this moment of declining trade and financial stringency, the people of Baghdad introduced a five day week.”

“When I first read these contemporary descriptions of tenth-century Baghdad, I could scarcely believe my eyes……The resemblance of all the details was breathtaking – the break-up of the empire, the abandonment of sexual morality, the ‘pop’ singers with their guitars, the entry of women into the professions, the five day week. I would not venture to attempt an explanation! There are so many mysteries of human life that are beyond our comprehension.” [We have a better understanding of this now, thanks to the MRM - Charles Martel]

The people of the great nations of the past seem normally to have imagined that their pre-eminence would last forever. Rome appeared to its citizens to be destined for all time to be the mistress of the world. The Abbasid Khalifs of Baghdad declared that God had appointed them to rule mankind until the day of judgement. Seventy years ago, many people in Britain believed that the empire would endure for ever … That sentiments like these could be publicly expressed without evoking derision shows that, in all ages, the regular rise and fall of great nations has passed unperceived. The simplest statistics prove the steady rotation of one nation after another at regular intervals.”

“We have not drawn from history the obvious conclusion that material success is the result of courage, endurance and hard work – a conclusion nevertheless obvious from the history of the meteoric rise of our own ancestors. This self-assurance of its own superiority seems to go hand-in-hand with the luxury resulting from wealth, in undermining the character of the dominant race.”

“When the welfare state was first introduced in Britain, it was hailed as a new high-water mark in the history of human development. History, however, seems to suggest that the age of decline of a great nation is often a period which shows a tendency to philanthropy and to sympathy for other races … The rights of citizenship are generously bestowed on every race, even those formerly subject, and the equality of mankind is proclaimed. The Roman Empire passed through this phase, when equal citizenship was thrown open to all peoples, such provincials even becoming senators and emperors. The Arab Empire of Baghdad was equally, perhaps even more, generous. During the Age of Conquests, pure-bred Arabs had constituted a ruling class, but in the ninth century the empire was completely cosmopolitan. State assistance to the young and the poor was equally generous. University students received government grants to cover their expenses while they were receiving higher education. The State likewise offered free medical treatment to the poor. The first free public hospital was opened in Baghdad in the reign of Harun al-Rashid (786-809), and under his son, Mamun, free public hospitals sprang up all over the Arab world from Spain to what is now Pakistan. The impression that it will always be automatically rich causes the declining empire to spend lavishly on its own benevolence, until such time as the economy collapses, the universities are closed and the hospitals fall into ruin. It may perhaps be incorrect to picture the welfare state as the high-water mark of human attainment. It may prove to be merely one more regular milestone in the life-story of an ageing and decrepit empire.”

“Neither is decadence physical. The citizens of nations in decline are sometimes described as too physically emasculated to be able to bear hardship or make great efforts. This does not seem to be a true picture. Citizens of great nations in decadence are normally physically larger and stronger than those of their barbarian invaders … Decadence is a moral and spiritual disease, resulting from too long a period of wealth and power, producing cynicism, decline of religion, pessimism and frivolity. The citizens of such a nation will no longer make an effort to save themselves, because they are not convinced that anything in life is worth saving.

{ 41 comments… read them below or add one }

Firepower January 14, 2010 at 09:11

If American schools gave up just 5 minutes to study this guy out of the 2 hour daily lesson plan devoted to enshrining MLK , maybe we’ll have a chance.

But, they’d have to revamp the daily 90 minute lessons dedicated to Bill Clinton defending the honor of private behavior the Oval Office from evil persecutors.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4
Rollory January 14, 2010 at 11:58

Yes. This society is in the middle of a free fall collapse. It’s going to be a hard landing. “Concerned American” at westernrifleshooters.blogspot.com has had some things to say about the immediate practical steps one might take in dealing with this, as have many other bloggers – survivalblog is a good one too.

Rule 1: Survive the first die-off.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Firepower January 14, 2010 at 12:10

“Neither is decadence physical. The citizens of nations in decline are sometimes described as too physically emasculated to be able to bear hardship or make great efforts. “

This is indeed where America and the entire West is at today.

If we believe this above statement, it follows: do we ignore what comes next in the equation?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Justin January 14, 2010 at 13:09

“Decadence is a moral and spiritual disease, resulting from too long a period of wealth and power, producing cynicism, decline of religion, pessimism and frivolity. ”

Sounds kinda right-wing, doesn’t it? Almost so-con speak…

After reading this article, does anyone else suddenly feel the need to condemn, I don’t know, anything else posted on this site ,as being productive of cynicism, pessimism, irreligiousness, or frivolity?

Ahem, of course, we all know GAME, properly understood, is purely about male sexual empowerment… So, of course, I would not be so foolish as to condemn Game… Just, well, perhaps some of the attributes — cynicism, pessimism, irreligiousness, frivolity –that seem to define many articles and discussions on this site, for some unknown reason, not related to Game of course.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6
Rollory January 14, 2010 at 13:33

Roissyish Game is certainly worth condemning. The biological facts underlying it are worthy of study and understanding though – in fact, that understanding is critical for the future of a stable society.

Ends and means.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Jabherwochie January 14, 2010 at 13:37

“Sounds kinda right-wing, doesn’t it? Almost so-con speak…”

Personally, and I’d like to hear others opinions here, but for me its not so much that we don’t like so-con ideas about family, morals, and work ethic, its that we don’t like the dishonest justification for their beliefs, some divine understanding, sin, heaven and hell, all that silliness, when it is really just rational behavior to control our baser instincts and can be explained through human nature and evolution. Religion sought to cement productive behavior, no explain why that behavior is productive, hence I hate the “Because God said so.” bull shit. It also leaves no wiggle room for growth and evolution when factoring in current realities and understandings. Religions are far from perfect. Absolute adherence to imperfect systems of thought is dangerous. If you tell me the sky is blue because God has blue eyes, I’ll dismiss you and many of your other ideas, even if we agree the sky is blue. If you explain the light spectrum and refraction, then we can move forward with other things. If you take the God and “absolute certainty” out of so-con beliefs, I don’t really have a problem with them. I also don’t like the hypocricy of so many so-cons who follow Jesus, the absoute ultimate pacifist, and yet war-monger and generally act like pompous, self rightous jerks.

“After reading this article, does anyone else suddenly feel the need to condemn, I don’t know, anything else posted on this site ,as being productive of cynicism, pessimism, irreligiousness, or frivolity?”

No pessimism from me. I’m confident we will destroy the matriarchy, turn this boat around, and begin a new era of prosperity and enlightenment based on science and rational thought. I’m quite certain, and happy, that feminism will die.

The frivolty is only to help us keep our heads intact while we are in the trenches of this war. Soldiers need R&R.

I am not irreligious at all. My belief system is heartfelt and logical, and I hope to spread the word of the true nature of God.

“Ahem, of course, we all know GAME, properly understood, is purely about male sexual empowerment… So, of course, I would not be so foolish as to condemn Game… Just, well, perhaps some of the attributes — cynicism, pessimism, irreligiousness, frivolity –that seem to define many articles and discussions on this site, for some unknown reason, not related to Game of course.”

Game is a tool. It can be used for good and bad, but the knowledge of it can only be enlightening. The fact that it will help destroy the matriarchy is a plus.

There are all types of people here. So-cons are welcome, so are liberals. We are equal oppurtunity ball busters however, so no one is safe from a verbal smack down. We have Alpha rednecks, gay men, geeks, and Omegas. We agree to disagree on many things, just not the fact that feminism opened up a Pandora’s box. What we do about it, how, and when, well join the debate.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
Hawaiian Libertarian January 14, 2010 at 16:13

Charles, excellent piece, thanks for bringing this man I’ve previously never heard of to our attention.

As for Justin…

After reading this article, does anyone else suddenly feel the need to condemn, I don’t know, anything else posted on this site ,as being productive of cynicism, pessimism, irreligiousness, or frivolity?

No. But since you’ve got us all pegged, feel free to start your own online men’s magazine dedicated to everything that is not cynical, pessimistic, irreligious or frivolous. I’m sure you’ll get at least as much traffic as your blog…

Ahem, of course, we all know GAME, properly understood, is purely about male sexual empowerment…

You just don’t get it, and after so many people have tried to explain it to you, It’s quite obvious you never will.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Jack Donovan January 14, 2010 at 17:14

Excellent contribution. I love this kind of stuff.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Bhetti January 14, 2010 at 17:15

The Arab Nation moves like a ghost, unaware of its death, filled with the false pride of the living, transmitting the memes of entitlement to a population that has long lost its claims to glory…

Yet perhaps there is rebirth. Or perhaps there is another death, after brief wealth from the richness of oil.

Will the West not know it has been taken over by emptiness until a millenia later? Will we be talking about Radical American Terrorists a millenia from now, who kill innocents because that act of pointless evil is all they can think to against a corrupt, absolute Islamic order?

Fanciful. We won’t live to see it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel January 14, 2010 at 17:16

@Hawaiian Libertarian

Charles, excellent piece, thanks for bringing this man I’ve previously never heard of to our attention.

My pleasure. I was fascinated when I found Glubb’s work and discovered that feminism is nothing new. Feminism springs from the abundant wealth of a successful civilization and the hard-wired male impulse to please and accommodate women.

What’s more, though this may be a disappointment to some, Glubb’s work shows that feminism is not a cause of the decline of empire, it’s an effect.

It’s interesting too that the end of empire doesn’t mean an immediate plunge into anarchy, into the Dark Ages. For example, Glubb dates the end of the British Empire to 1950. Britain is obviously still on the map, its inhabitants still in place, but the empire is gone. The country (civilization/culture) will also be gone in any recognizable form by 2100, probably sooner, but that’s what happens as empire ends, the center is overrun by barbarians from the frontiers.

The Caliph January 14, 2010 at 17:41

Great Read.

SO…anytips on who the new empire will be? so i can move my family there and obtain citizenship with them during their pioneer stage, my money’s on China, who disagrees?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jack Donovan January 14, 2010 at 18:00

Mr. Martel –

Have you ever read Howard Bloom’s “The Lucifer Principle?”

That aside, I would add that while feminism may not be the cause of decline of an empire, a civilization/culture can hang on for a long time if it avoids embracing feminism. Perhaps the lax attitudes that accompany immense wealth and luxury and security tend to allow for feminism (though I suspect the current situation is still the most extreme/widespread/successful manifestation of feminism to date) but peoples and cultures have certainly managed to survive and keep their women in check for much longer than 2-300 years.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Welmer January 14, 2010 at 18:16

SO…anytips on who the new empire will be? so i can move my family there and obtain citizenship with them during their pioneer stage, my money’s on China, who disagrees?

-The Caliph

China? No way. They’re too busy being Chinese to go out and subjugate others. China has traditionally consolidated its empire by breeding with its neighbors. As soon as you have a critical mass of people who speak Chinese, eat with chopsticks, and can write Chinese characters, the place becomes Chinese. It isn’t a matter of sailing across rough seas to tame savages such as ourselves.

China’s a good place to be a man, but being Chinese is a hell of a stretch for an American — although it can be done.

Here’s an old Beijing neighbor of mine who went native:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLzAfwnu9SA&fmt=18

Jon’s done well for himself in China, but he’s left America behind. Most of us don’t realize how difficult that is to do. He also clowns a lot, as you can see in the video. That’s kind of demanded from foreign performers over there.

Jon was born in Seattle, like me. He’ll probably die in China, but who knows? Not a bad life, overall, but I couldn’t accept that. Maybe it would have been better if I could…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Charles Martel January 14, 2010 at 18:43

@JD

Mr. Martel –

Call me Chuck……or The Hammer if you prefer.

I haven’t read The Lucifer Principle, but just Googled it and it looks interesting.

I would add that while feminism may not be the cause of decline of an empire, a civilization/culture can hang on for a long time if it avoids embracing feminism. Perhaps the lax attitudes that accompany immense wealth and luxury and security tend to allow for feminism (though I suspect the current situation is still the most extreme/widespread/successful manifestation of feminism to date) but peoples and cultures have certainly managed to survive and keep their women in check for much longer than 2-300 years.

I totally agree with all that. I think the reason that some cultures have survived longer than 300 years is because the natural state of humankind is poverty, and in poverty staying alive is the priority. Moderately successful civilizations survive longer.

What is feminism after all, but the systematic attempt of one gender to maximize their share of the economic pie at the expense of the other? This is only possible when there is abundant wealth, and the USA and other Western countries have the most abundant wealth in all of human history. “The light that burns twice as bright burns for half as long – and you have burned so very, very brightly.”

Jack Donovan January 14, 2010 at 18:51

Agreed, Chuckie Da Hammer.

The Lucifer Principle was probably book that got me started thinking about “the barbarian problem.” I read it years ago. Not sure how it would hold up now, but it was mind blowing for me at the time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
zed January 14, 2010 at 20:08

SO…anytips on who the new empire will be?

This may be naive, but my bets are either on the worldwide Caliphate, or nothing at all.

There is a part of me which believes that Imperialism has hit the wall – that the conditions necessary for it no longer exist. Every successful empire in the past has had a military advantage – either better military technology, better tactics, or simply greater raw aggression.

It doesn’t take a lot to go into an area inhabited by essentially stone age people with significantly better weapons technology than they have and take their land away from them. However, as the Soviets learned in Afghanistan, reduce the disparity in the levels of weapons technology even a little bit and the entire game changes.

With nuclear proliferation, military conquest becomes almost a suicidal endeavor. I expect the next empire to be based on either economics or religion, with religion having a slightly greater chance because people seem better able to tolerate economic disparity if they share a common religion.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Niko January 14, 2010 at 20:57

The next empire won’t come from a race, religion or region, it will come from an energized people with common ideals within all nations much like socialism.

Global Liberalism will be the new religion and its only just the beginning.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3
ThousandMileMargin January 14, 2010 at 21:19

@Zed:

“There is a part of me which believes that Imperialism has hit the wall – that the conditions necessary for it no longer exist. Every successful empire in the past has had a military advantage … reduce the disparity in the levels of weapons technology even a little bit and the entire game changes.

With nuclear proliferation, military conquest becomes almost a suicidal endeavor. I expect the next empire to be based on either economics or religion….”

It’s worth remembering that the Byzantine empire lasted a thousand years after the fall of the western Roman Empire, despite all it’s flaws.

And the industrial revolution really was a game changer. Not to mention Hiroshima. Even if the USA declines as dramatically as the USSR, it need never fear foreign troops on its soil.

So we are talking about economic and social decline, not sack and conquest.

At this stage, any talk of the Arabs or the Chinese forming an empire is a fantasy. The Arab world has seen some great empires in the past, but none of the Arab countries show signs of putting together a prosperous, developed economy any time soon. Lebanon has been there, but is now crippled. Both Iran and Iraq could potentially get there in 50 years, but we are talking about getting up to European levels, not great power status.

China is way over-rated. They copied the export-led model pioneered by Japan and South Korea, which works fine as long as you can keep growing market share at the expense of a dumb fat and happy consumer nation like the USA. But that export growth now appears to have stalled – they can’t steal anymore market share from the USA or the EU without causing mass employment in those countries, so they will run into protection pressures.

People talk about “rebalancing” the Chinese economy to rely on domestic demand. Well, this requires a prosperous middle class, and a reasonably well paid working class. Both take at least a decade each to develop.

Japan’s export growth stalled out 20 years ago, and they are still struggling to conjure up any domestic growth to support it. In fact domestic wages in Japan have declined during the last 20 years.

Take away China’s export growth and they will be back to 3% growth, which is the rate of domestic growth. They will then have to spend the next 50 years gradually building a domestic market and a middle class, like India has been doing.

If they play they cards right they will have a healthy domestic economy in 30 years. But this requires a lot of reform. They will probably stall out at a higher level of development, like the Japanese did.

In other words, China has only been so successful because of the huge boost they have received from the USA. That cannot continue.

The result is that China will make slow work of bridging the gap over the next 30 years, and the USA, despite all its flaws, will still be ahead in 2050.

Empires are built on discipline and organisation. If you are looking for a replacement for the USA, you have to point to a place where you can get things done, where contracts and the rule of law are honoured, where the trains run on time etc.

Singapore fits the bill, but it is tiny. South America, Africa, China, Russia etc do not answer to this description. Brazil and India are making progress, but they still have decades of reform ahead of them.

I would say the the best bets are Brazil and India IF they can spend the next 50 years reforming their business culture to become as reliable as Singapore.

In theory, China could become like Singapore in 50 years – but I’d say they have 100 years of work on their culture required in order to stamp out corruption.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi January 14, 2010 at 21:19

””””’It doesn’t take a lot to go into an area inhabited by essentially stone age people with significantly better weapons technology than they have and take their land away from them. However, as the Soviets learned in Afghanistan, reduce the disparity in the levels of weapons technology even a little bit and the entire game changes. ””””’

But in thr future it will be possible to exterminate your enemies. If russia would have started at one side of afganistan and killed every man woman and child on their way to the other side they would have won and had some new land to occupy.

”””It isn’t a matter of sailing across rough seas to tame savages such as ourselves. ”””””

They don’t have to tame anyone. Just take land they certainly don’t need westerners for shit after the initial blitzkrieg. Just get rid of them. This is not olden times where slaves where beneficial. You don’t need slaves when you have automated factories but controlling an entire world of landmass probably would be nice.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Gunslingergregi January 14, 2010 at 21:23

If china would make a factory with 200,000 people producing unmanned vehicles all day 24 7 then yea who is gonna stop them from taking over the world. They produced a cell phone for everyone in the world I am pretty sure they could easily produce a bullet.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi January 14, 2010 at 21:27

””””’With nuclear proliferation, military conquest becomes almost a suicidal endeavor. I expect the next empire to be based on either economics or religion….””””

Sure now. The game changer is gonna come and also when conventional war on a massive scale is gonna happen is when the other side says ok yea go ahead and shoot your nukes as we are fucking you up. We can shoot them out of the air and you submarine launched shit is obsolete as well. Along with your bombers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Justin January 15, 2010 at 07:32

Hawaiian, you fashion yourself an internet tough guy? I’m normally paid to do it, but today I’m gonna give you a free lesson, boy:

Those who are intelligent and mature engage ideas. Those who are stupid and immature do personal attacks.

Now reread your response and engage in some self-analysis.

When you get back, your assignment is to write a short essay on the definition of hypergamy, and how you have been misusing the term.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Firepower January 15, 2010 at 09:01

Glubb

The impression that the situation can be saved by mental cleverness, without unselfishness or human self-dedication, can only lead to collapse.

As I’ve stated numerous times, internet posting leads only to… more internet posting. Not action.

Debates in elected assemblies or local committees, in articles in the Press, or in interviews on television .(and the internet) – endless and incessant talking…this constant dedication to discussion seems to destroy the power of action. Amid a Babel of talk, the ship drifts onto the rocks.

JBG FTW
Parentheses, mine.

Remember: Even though he spoke these (to us, now) obvious truths to Brits living at the present, Glubb’s wise warnings didn’t save the former Great Britain. A once truly great nation and empire. His words had no impact at all.

I propose that the final sign of imminent death is
The unconscionable ignoring of
wise men.

Good research Martel.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Bob January 15, 2010 at 10:01

@ Firepower –

Each of us only has so much to give beyond internet posting – I do agree, however, that posting by itself is worthless.

What each of us needs to do is pick some manageable, relevant cause, and fight for it. No one can even keep track of everything wrong with the world, much less change, by themselves. But there are millions of men, scattered throughout this country.

I, for one, am active with the primary schools in my local area. I do what I can to keep things in line there, coaching and teaching, and generally trying to be a good male role model for the kids who, largely, do not have fathers. I’ve been involved in several school board campaigns. And I encourage others to pick their own cause. If we’re all fighting for something, the world will improve.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Firepower January 15, 2010 at 11:15

Glubb:

History, however, seems to suggest that the age of decline of a great nation is often a period which shows a tendency to philanthropy and to sympathy for other races.

One Word:
Haiti

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
TAllagash January 15, 2010 at 12:22

this is a vastly different telling of empire/history than we learned growing up in school, even in the university/college. vastly different. normally, we’re told how despotic and draconian previous civilizations were, how women/children were ALWAYS oppressed and property…wow.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Welmer January 15, 2010 at 12:27

this is a vastly different telling of empire/history than we learned growing up in school, even in the university/college. vastly different. normally, we’re told how despotic and draconian previous civilizations were, how women/children were ALWAYS oppressed and property…wow.

TAllagash

Yup. It wasn’t like they told you. In many ancient and classical cultures women had it a lot better than you’d think. In fact, it was often libertine female behavior and abuse of power that eventually led to the restrictions one finds in recent history.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel January 15, 2010 at 13:04

@TAllegash

we’re told how despotic and draconian previous civilizations were, how women/children were ALWAYS oppressed and property

It’s a joke. Most human civilizations have treated their women exactly how we treat ours. We sacrifice for and protect our women, we labor and die for them. We shower them with special privileges and refuse to hold them accountable for their actions.

This is what true oppression looks like.

Hawaiian Libertarian January 15, 2010 at 13:04

Hawaiian, you fashion yourself an internet tough guy? I’m normally paid to do it, but today I’m gonna give you a free lesson, boy:

Those who are intelligent and mature engage ideas. Those who are stupid and immature do personal attacks.

Now reread your response and engage in some self-analysis.

Internet toughguy? LMAO whose the one trying to AMOG me with the “boy” talk?

Than you pretty much diss many of the authors on the site: “cynicism, pessimism, irreligiousness, frivolity –that seem to define many articles and discussions on this site”

I merely invited you to start your own online men’s magazine that doesn’t have all these things you criticize this site for.

Why don’t you go and look up the definition of “personal attack” and quit being an asshat. (Now THAT was a personal attack.)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Marius January 15, 2010 at 20:08

1776+250=2026

The Americans have 16 years left.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Red January 16, 2010 at 02:08

@Marius January 15, 2010 at 20:08

1776+250=2026

The Americans have 16 years left.

America Phase 1:
1776-1865 Expansion to a great power(89 years)
1865-1930 America grows rich on trade and industry(65 years)
1942-Present American Political/Military/Intellectual Empire(68 years)

America kind of did things in reverse or rather it’s a disjointed growing such as Rome had.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Earl Uhtred February 7, 2010 at 09:01

It’s interesting too that the end of empire doesn’t mean an immediate plunge into anarchy, into the Dark Ages.

Yes. Roman culture even survived the political collapse of the Western Empire. Classical civilisation in Italy ended not with the Germanic takeover of Italy in the 470s but with the Gothic War and Lombard invasion in the mid-sixth century.

America and Britain will probably be there on the map long after the hollowing-out is complete. These things rarely end with a bang, sadly.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Eurosabra February 10, 2010 at 12:50

I’m a little grumpy because the major project of the Arab Legion, 1948-67, was the removal of the Palestinian Jewish population of the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem, and massive destruction of the Quarter, ancient-to-medieval religious sites, and cemeteries. Only infrequently is a foreign trainer so decisive in allowing a military force to achieve its main objectives, and Glubb and the Legion did themselves proud, leading to a distortion of Israeli priorities in handling the city’s urban policy to this day. Had the Jordanians realized that the priorities of the indigenous Palestinian Jewish population of the Old City were different from those of the State of Israel in many respects, they might not have engaged in ethnic cleansing and created a situation in which the modern State of Israel is committed to the assertion of the property rights of the Council of the Sephardic Community to the detriment of some Palestinian refugees. I realize this is arcana, but it is important arcana, given the ultimately quixotic nature of the Jordanian intervention, which was primarily to secure the Old City for the Kingdom. The Old City and its prestige were secure, did it have to be emptied?

(For anyone who thinks I am being excessively disingenuous, be advised that I lived in West Jerusalem for several years and am thoroughly acquainted with the sins and excesses of the modern State of Israel.)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
Marc February 16, 2010 at 10:50

I’ve known/felt (for the longest time!) that women are the world’s biggest problem!

To save The World “We’ve Got To RETURN them to their RIGHFULL place, –helpers of men, NOT their bosses!”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Sean MacCloud February 16, 2010 at 17:41

@ Charles Martel

http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_japa.htm


I still don’t find that too oppressive. It is a female; it got fucked and fed, clothed, sheltered and protected for this “work”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Ragnar February 17, 2010 at 03:22

Marc February 16, 2010 at 10:50
I’ve known/felt (for the longest time!) that women are the world’s biggest problem!

To save The World “We’ve Got To RETURN them to their RIGHFULL place, –helpers of men, NOT their bosses!”

The way I have come to see Mankind is that it is Men Only and everything else is collateral.
Male societies regulates the interaction between men and nothing else!
When norms and ethics occur they are culture only and can be abandoned – maybe against peer pressure – without the interference of law.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
alpha August 18, 2010 at 10:42

Heaven help us. John could be describing 21st century earth !

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
acurneDar September 13, 2010 at 08:30

Goodday

I’m new here and just wanted to drop by with a little “hello” message (sorry if I have posted in the wrong section!)

My name is Courtney, mom to two lovely boys, and a parttime soccer coach!

I’m here to sniff around and gather some information, so please welcome me :O)

Have a nice day!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5
surfer November 26, 2010 at 18:19

FYI:
Someone made the entire book into PDF. It is available for download at http://www.megaupload.com/?d=H4P8FXYW

I downloaded the file and it is a great read. Uploaded the file also to easy-share:
http://www.easy-share.com/1913108092/The.Fate.of.Empires.by.Sir.John.Glubb.pdf

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Helen Backagain January 31, 2012 at 06:51

Asshats!!!
Rome and other empires were bled dry by endless wars and overexpansion beyond the power of the treasury.
Not by uppity women.
The seeds of Rome’s destruction were sown simultaneously with the Empire’s expansion. During Spartacus’s slave uprising, the Consuls handed over power to the military, who seized power and never gave it up. Rome was riven by a series of power struggles and murders at the top, with militaristic emperors igniting endless wars and looting expeditions to control grain (Egypt), gold (Greece and Mesopotamia) and slaves (Gaul, Spain, the rest of Italian territory). Eventually the administration could not supervise the vast provinces under them. There was no representation in the Senate from these far away provinces. Governors became selfish, lavish, sybaritic and corrupt. Rome itself was riven by class struggle and the need to keep slaves and slum dwellers down. The Lords and Common people continually engaged in altercations and fights. The Treasury paid a high price in supporting bread and circuses, necessitating more wars and looting expeditions, and fatal overexpansion.

While the Eastern emperor’s attentions and bulk of the empire’s resources were fixed on holding the Persians at bay, the Western empire was overrun by displaced hordes from the North. Last I looked, Attilla the Hun was NOT a woman. Nor was he helped by women who ‘did not know their proper place.’

The rightwing’s ability to re-write history and ignore inconvenient facts that don’t fit their self-serving and vainglorious theories is just astounding. Rome was split by communal and patriarchal forces which led to series of internal and external wars, drained resources, caused uprisings on the frontier by poorly paid troops, eventually bankrupting the rulers and causing the decline and fall of the Empire.

Only a bunch of insecure dickheads could feel so threatened by women being educated, women participating in civic life, women engaging in trade, art and commerce.
Your need to use force to elevate yourself by keeping other people down is exactly what destroys all empires.
Eventually, power defeats brute force.

.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 12
Clay March 27, 2014 at 15:38

The fact that men rule nations should not come as a surprise, and although it is difficult for women to hear about these things, there is truth in the fact that “men being in charge” is not only needful but also necessary.
Men are the producers of the nation. Biology bestowed upon men the ability to conquer, to build, to tear down, and to plan. I am not going to go into arguments about how much more a man can produce in a years time as compared to a woman, but in a man’s lifetime he will probably out produce a woman by 50-80%. If the woman is infertile and doesn’t marry she may be able to produce 80% of what a man can produce. While there are some women who are freaks of nature and can produce as much as a strong man, this is rare and should not be included in data for how much a nation produces.
Men have certain drives to produce stuff. One of these drives is the need for sex and female companionship and child bearing. Another need is male comradery, in which other males form bonds with producing males as they build families and develop lands. These drives for female companionship and respect are what drive men to work and also brings great prosperity to the nation that they live in, which produces a strong military and thriving cities. But take the incentive to produce away and the men will stop producing. The tax base will shrink.
Men also have another deep instinct in them that women do not have, and that is wanderlust. Today, the incentive in men to produce has vanished. As more and more women have sold themselves off to modern day breeding farms and their new husband the government, many men have given up on being producers. Many of them have embraced their wanderlust, for without the incentive of marriage, sex, kids, and family relations, the male has nothing to live for or strive for. He has found a new life in video games, hunting trips, surfing, and mountain climbing. Because American women are so loose he has learned that marriage isn’t worth the trouble because most women will sleep with their boss, or leave them and become part of a secret office harem of an alpha male. The incentive to work and produce is gone.
The tax base shrinks. The government prints more money to make up for the shortfall. Inflation rises. The economy falters. And the once great nation becomes just another fallen empire in a history book.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 7 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: