Rules by which a great empire may be reduced to a small one (1773)

Franklin’s Satire and Elite Power

• Many see Franklin’s “Rules” as timeless: a checklist for how empires and large organizations self‑sabotage, revealing “elite blindness” and power’s tendency to repeat the same abuses.
• Some argue it’s less “blindness” than structural: ordinary people tolerate abuse for too long, teaching the powerful they face no consequences.
• One subthread links this to hate, ignorance, and lack of critical thinking; proposed remedies include aggressive wealth redistribution and even overthrowing corrupt regimes.
• Commenters note the piece reads like someone “done asking politely,” using sarcasm as a mirror more than persuasion.

Historical Context: Britain, George III, and Franklin

• Several comments stress that Parliament, not the king alone, drove policy by the 1770s.
• Others correct claims about George III’s mental illness, saying his serious episodes came later, after the American Revolution.
• The essay is likened to a dry run for the Declaration of Independence, listing similar grievances.
• Franklin’s long, ultimately failed lobbying mission in Britain is cited as background that shaped the tone of his satire.

Empires, Pax Americana, and Sovereignty

• Debate over whether Franklin’s points generalize like The Prince or The Art of War: historical analogies can suggest possibilities but don’t “prove” anything.
• One view: empires reliably follow a rise‑and‑decline arc; critics argue trajectories are more complex, with multiple rises and falls (China, Byzantium).
• There is sharp disagreement whether “Pax Americana” is an empire:
  • One side: it’s an empire without borders, enforced through military, economic dependence, and trade terms that heavily favor the US.
  • The other: it’s a web of treaties with still‑sovereign states; influence and tariffs don’t erase sovereignty, especially when Europe sometimes resists US demands.
• Ukraine, NATO burden‑sharing, US tariffs, LNG pricing, and a recent US‑EU trade deal are used as evidence on both sides, with no consensus on who really holds leverage.

Causes of Imperial Decline

• One camp sees hubris and detachment from reality as the core driver of imperial collapse, citing British overconfidence in the American war, entry into WWI, and Versailles.
• Others say this overstates “hubris”: military defeats, economics, succession crises, and even weather play equal or bigger roles; hubris may be a secondary factor that worsens responses rather than the root cause.

China, Unity, and Civil Conflict

• A long subthread questions the claim that “China always unites”:
  • Some emphasize repeated cycles of fragmentation and reunification under broadly shared culture and language.
  • Others argue Chinese “continuity” is overstated for modern nation‑building; dynasties and modern CCP rule differ as much as old European polities from today’s states.
• There is contentious back‑and‑forth over whether the Chinese Civil War is “technically” ongoing and how Taiwan’s modern politics relate to it, with strongly opposed interpretations and no resolution.

Language, Typography, and Orthography

• Several note the capitalized nouns and long “ſ” in the original printing; these are explained as period style and emphasis, not strict grammar.
• This leads to German comparisons: the origin of ß from “ſs”/“sz,” and the 1990s spelling reforms meant to simplify learning, which remain somewhat controversial.
• Some draw a humorous line from 18th‑century emphatic capitals to modern all‑caps political rhetoric.

Satire, Truth, and Causality in History

• One thread reflects on satire as polarizing more than persuasive—people often reject uncomfortable truths.
• Another disputes claims that the American Revolution or Civil War “really” began decades earlier, arguing that pushing causal origins back indefinitely becomes meaningless; others counter that long‑term buildup and grievances matter more than the official outbreak date.