Metus Hostilis

The Roman historian Sallust understood the decline of the Republic to begin in 146 BC, when the city of Carthage was destroyed.

The line Carthago delenda est, a rallying cry of Cato the Elder against their North African city-state rival, is well known today. More obscure is an argument made at the time (at least per Sallust) against destroying Carthage: that the city provided a sense of metus hostilis (fear of the enemy) which kept Romans from turning on each other. Carthage was Rome's enemy for a total of 118 years, during most of which there was an uneasy peace. Sallust contrasted the civil wars and political usurpers of his own time with the relative sense of unity and patriotism which prevailed in that century.

So what do you think? Is this concept applicable to our time and place?

It is possibly the reason why wars are started and funded today, but that's a symptom, not the cause of internal decay. The destruction of the government by detached oligarchs is the true decline for both Rome and the USA.

Wagging the dog with wars can only distract for so long under the "bread and circus" period of decline.

Any society with premise which requires distraction is likely a failed society anyway.

Any society with premise

P1. If I dont distract population from a problem, then society will fall apart.

Naturally, one must wonder why is it so?

What "problem" exists which needs distracting from?

Population works too much?

Population is poor?

Population doesnt see their desires being fulfilled?

The existence of some people who are too rich, while some who are too poor?

Or is it just the natural competition for power which starts as soon as external enemy no longer exists?

Whatever it is, even with distractions, there is obviously a limit to how much people can sacrifice themselves for the government, and different countries have different limits.