China is one of the oldest civilizations in the world. And interestingly, the Chinese Han Empire and the Roman Empire existed at the same time, reaching their peak at roughly the same time around 2,000 years ago. However, China is still in existence today.
The entire Roman Empire is gone.
What's the difference? “China is often considered one of the most politically, culturally, and linguistically monolithic countries in the world,” writes LitCharts.com. In other words, through famine, plague, bad government, and other disasters, Chinese people, language, and culture have always endured.
In contrast, Rome was not only made up of a variety of peoples who were conquered in a relatively short space of time, but it also placed little emphasis on the principle of e pluribus unum. In fact, as Matt O'Brien, research director at the Immigration Reform Law Institute, writes:
A common historical myth is that Rome fell in 476 AD after the Gothic king Odoacer sacked the capital and forced Romulus Augustus to abdicate.
The historical reality is rather different: for almost a century Germanic tribes moved unhindered into Roman territory, fleeing war, famine, tribal politics and everything else, and the empire fell not by traditional invasion but by unchecked mass migration.
So, here's the question: Is America today like China?
Or is it closer to mid-5th century Rome?
Ghosts of Imperial Past
If you don't know the answer, check out this article from the website History's Histories, which explains that the “Roman Peace” was followed by a long period of “turmoil and violence” and political strife:
Food shortages caused prices to rise, and people spent more money on necessities, so they often couldn't pay their taxes. The government tried to revive the economy by simply minting more new coins. However, with too much new coin on the market, the value of money decreased. As a result, prices continued to rise, and it became more expensive to buy goods. This is called inflation.
Sound familiar? Note that our legalized counterfeiting practice, the federal government, has increased the money supply by 40 percent since 2020. Not surprisingly, the resulting inflation has become a major election issue.
But economic problems alone were not enough to bring an end to the great Roman Empire. History's Histories also states:
As Rome struggled, Germanic tribes began to attack the empire. Since the time of Julius Caesar, Germanic tribes had gathered on the northern border of the empire. Some tribes adopted Roman customs, settling down to a peaceful agricultural life, speaking Latin, and becoming Christians. Other tribes remained nomadic. Between 376 and 476 (AD), a huge number of Germanic peoples flowed into Roman territory. As a result, Germanic tribes, including Ostrogoths, Visigoths, Franks, Angles, Saxons, Burgundians, Alemanni, and Vandals, competed for land, recognition, and Roman favor. Gradually, the Germanic tribes overwhelmed the Roman social structure, eventually forcing the last Roman emperor off the throne.
It's worth noting that the main reason these Germanic peoples came to Rome was because they were fleeing the brutal Mongol invaders, the Huns. They were refugees – real refugees (as opposed to people seeking help from a so-called meddling state).
Demographics are destiny
One chapter in this story is especially pertinent: According to the Greek historian Procopius, political power struggles led Boniface, a 5th-century Roman governor of North Africa, to seek allies among the Vandals and invite them to North Africa. What was the outcome?
Shortly thereafter, the Vandals conquered North Africa.
Is this even remotely similar to how major American political parties inject large numbers of foreigners into our country in order to gain power? (These foreigners help the party gain more seats during redistricting season. The party also believes that immigrants will be its future supporters.)
For your information, a Yale/MIT study found that there were 22 million undocumented immigrants in the United States as of 2018. This number is likely still significantly higher.
Speaking of demographics, even in early Rome, there weren't enough Romans. In fact, low birth rates were such a serious problem that Emperor Augustus instituted “family values” policies, fined single men without children, and lectured the nobility about not having many children. But to no avail.
This might sound familiar too: The current US fertility rate is 1.786 children per woman, well below replacement level (2.1). European Americans have a fertility rate of just 1.6.
Regarding migration rates
The aforementioned Matt O'Brien makes a few more parallels between Rome and the land we (some of us) know and love:
Rome at this time (late in the Empire) was ruled by a disgruntled elite. They decided that rather than sending out a legion or two to kick the butt of some thugs and take credit for it, it would be easier and cheaper to just invite them in and give them citizenship. In exchange for citizenship and farmland, entire clans of Angles, Burgundians, Franks, Ostrogoths, Vandals, and Visigoths agreed to serve in the Roman army. The fact that this overturned centuries of Roman law and practice regarding citizenship didn't cause the upper echelons of Roman society to be upset. They figured that now that the barbarians were citizens, they would behave like Romans.
That was an overly optimistic idea on the part of the Romans. Assimilation tends to happen when people enter a new culture in small numbers and experience social pressure to blend in with their new community. Assimilation removes barriers to economic success, such as not being able to speak the local lingua franca, so they can thrive in their new homeland.
O'Brien points out that Rome's immigration rate exceeded its assimilation rate (note: another prerequisite for assimilation is that newcomers are able to assimilate), and he concludes that “in the end, unchecked mass immigration, mass amnesties, and a monetary system for citizenship did not save Rome, but destroyed it.”
It may be jarring to ask again, “Does this sound familiar?” (and I don't mean to be jarring), but to many of you it may not sound familiar at all, because, to borrow the words of philosopher Georg Hegel, “we learn from history what we do not learn from history.” It may simply be repetition.
