i actually like the roman analogy, but this is a bad interpretation of it. rather, rome is london - and the british empire was the roman empire. the revolution is the partition into "east" and "west" - not a revolution at all, in fact, but a civil war within the british empire that resulted in partition and eventual usurpation. if america is rome, it is byzantine rome; washington is more comparable to constantinople.

now, here's the funny twist: byzantine rome is known to history as the collapse of greek culture into christian ignorance. the same people that invented philosophy and science were reduced to arguing over icons and launching holy wars against the persians, and then the muslims. revolutions were based on minor and irrelevant details in jewish scripture. and, in the end, they stood down and let the city fall - because they truly believed it would put the apocalypse in motion, and they preferred that outcome over the horrible conditions that puritanism places on existence.

america is indeed the new rome. but it's the new new rome. the rome that lost itself to fundamentalist christianity....