The epilogue explores how the same zero-sum mercantilist policies waged by the Latin city-states against the ecumenical Eastern Roman Empire in the 12–15th centuries were those that the Protestant nation-states waged against the ecumenical Western Roman Empire in the 16–19th centuries, and are those that the Revisionist civilization-states are waging against the ecumenical American empire today. In the end, like the Eastern and Western Roman emperors before them, American presidents are being reduced (by mercantilist policies) to the status and power of and by the very civilization-states over which they fancy themselves to rule. Influenced, but nevertheless skeptical of the debates between the neoliberal followers of Francis Fukuyama vs. Samuel Huntington, the defining feature of the zero-sum conflicts between the Civilization states in the twenty-first century is how they manage their images—either as benignly powerful security guarantors or Robin Hood-like challengers of the global status quo. Thus, the predictably convergent cycles of history churn away in rotations of various models of zero-sum political economies—or what has been called an “Infinite Dictatorship,” in which one regime after another reimposes the same policies to enrich themselves and impoverish others. This occurs all while presenting their flawed forms of political economies as “win–win” or at least a divergence from the traditional zero-sum logic of haves and have-nots alike imprisoned within the same sovereign social pyramids. Thus the ubiquity of zero-sum thinking, as well as tribalism, becomes tantalizingly inescapable. The question then is not zero-sum versus non-zero-sum, but who wins and/or loses what and in which way. Thus, new, cooperative models arise which promise divergent possibilities of infinite growth, even as believers and critics converge in their views of the planet’s finitude.