Countries & Their Time Statements

carmen510

Deity
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
8,126
Location
NESing Forums
Sorry for the title, not sure how to really convey this idea:

Why is there a tendancy for nations that state they will last 'a thousand years' (Third Reich) or 'ten thousand years' (Shi Huangdi), etc. last only a few decades at most? Is it because the people who made such statements were the only people holding the nation together, or some other such factor?
 
I'm not sure there's empirical evidence to back your assumption up, but let's just pretend it's correct.

States that have leaders who make such statements are usually totalitarian(ish) states. History has proven that totalitarian(ish) states fail. There you got it.
 
I'm not sure there's empirical evidence to back your assumption up, but let's just pretend it's correct.

States that have leaders who make such statements are usually totalitarian(ish) states. History has proven that totalitarian(ish) states fail. There you got it.

What about... say... China? Wasn't it totalitarian for most of its existence?

I'm not taking any sides here BTW, just provoking discussion. :)
 
Don't forget Xim the Despot.
 
What about... say... China? Wasn't it totalitarian for most of its existence?

I'm not taking any sides here BTW, just provoking discussion. :)

I dont think the definition of a totalitarian state would include the old monarchies, it is more fitting to modern dictatorships.
 
When people say they'll last thousands of years, the world has to take on that challenge, and they usually succeed
 
I think it's more that new regimes tend to make ridiculous over-the-top claims, and new regimes also have a habit of falling. The French Revolutionaries made some ridiculous claims and decisions, but they also made some prophetic ones. The same is true of most revolutionary regimes, even those like the Nazis that gained power legally during a period of vacuum. It just happens that inertia (or overreaching) usually brings about the collapse of these new regimes before long, making their claims seem ridiculous.

On the other hand, the 'eternal city' of Rome is still doing alright. And I suspect you could probably find a few other claims of the sort that have endured, but they'd be few and far between.
 
No need to go so far back in time - I believe Bush strategist Karl Rove proclaimed that the Republican rule in the US (President, senate, congress) would last a century.... Fail. :rolleyes:
 
No need to go so far back in time - I believe Bush strategist Karl Rove proclaimed that the Republican rule in the US (President, senate, congress) would last a century.... Fail. :rolleyes:
I watched The Seige last night, maybe they really are planning on putting troops in the streets. After all, whitey's got to find someway to keep the brother down, and the election certainly didn't work.
 
What about... say... China? Wasn't it totalitarian for most of its existence?

I'm not taking any sides here BTW, just provoking discussion. :)

Dude, China failed like a gazzillion times. That's why they got all 'em dynasties.
 
I dont think the definition of a totalitarian state would include the old monarchies, it is more fitting to modern dictatorships.
What he said. The first time China tried anything close, the Qin dynasty, was the one where everything got epically ruined. Especially when people realized how much legalism sucks.

"What's the penalty for being late for work?"
"Death."
"What's the penalty for rebellion?"
"Death."
"Well, we're late for work!"
 
To be fair to the Russians, their Third Rome is still standing, and a fourth there has not been.
 
I suppose the longest-lasting dynasties in history are the Egyptian ones, though the Zhou didn't manage too badly, around 800 years or so.

It is worth noting that the present King of Jordan is of the same clan as Mohommad, the Hashimites, so you might include that as well.
Nah, the Indians have the longest lasting dynasties.They had individual kings that lived for thousands of years.

Seriously, weren't the Egyptian 'dynasties' really just several dynasties grouped together by historians? I'm sure a few pharaohs were overthrown and their usurpers still considered part of the same dynasty.
 
Usually because if someone says that an empire is going to last for a thousand years but it lasts for 500, it sounds more like rhetoric than anything else. If it lasts for 10 years, then everyone gets a good laugh and we all remember it. I think it's more a case of selection bias than anything else.
 
'ten thousand years' (Shi Huangdi)
In Chinese culture "ten thousand" is used to mean "countless" or "infinite" and the particular version of the world "year" (they have several) indicates a year of life, rather than a calendar year, so the expression "ten thousand years" essentially translates, in this context, as "long live the emperor", and is also used informally to mean "good health". It wasn't a literal declaration.

Wiki

I suppose the longest-lasting dynasties in history are the Egyptian ones...
They had 30 seperate dynasties over the course of 2700 years, which is only an average of 90 year each. Most only lasted a few decades, and the longest less than three centuries. Not all terrible, but hardly impressive compared to some.
 
I bet we're the only country that regularily reminds people how long we were subjugated rather than exclaiming how long we will be around for. 700 years of oppression!
 
Back
Top Bottom