He rebuts the current predominant Whig interpretation that Rome never fell....and this is part of his explanation, to some extent, of why.
He notes that the decline was not merely to a place in ancient Mediterranean and near eastern civilization antedating the rise of Rome, but a reversion to the level of the iron age, even before that.
I am just going to cite this passage in the context of other things I have said about specialization and its problems, and globalization and its problems, today. These are not unrelated.
They are also related to problems caused by the idea, a dogma here, that one can rely on the market as one's fundamental political economic and social planning mechanism.
I have discussed it in the context of globalization of production, consumption, and distribution, on the one hand, and of the related problem of the ramifying specialization of everything everywhere, on the other.
This is an aspect of the problem of specialization, and of what one might call the cults of change, progress, and technology.
The Danger of Specialization, p 136.
"ironically...the Roman experience had been highly damaging."
"ironically...the Roman experience had been highly damaging."
No comments:
Post a Comment