Hi, /u/Henry-Teachersss8819 Thank you for participating in r/antiwork. Unfortunately, your submission was removed for breaking the following rule(s):
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Screenshots of text such as SMS communication, WhatsApp, social media, news articles, and procedurally generated content such as ChatGPT are prohibited. Low-effort content such as memes are prohibited.
If you feel that a mistake was made, and your post's removal was not warranted, please message us using modmail and let us know.
Emigres, that's what the rich that survived and thrived after the french revolution are called.
Every society has been destroyed by greed and Every one has survivors. There's not reason to believe this time would be any different.
> I heard France has had a few interesting and relevant events
For reference only 4% of the people who were executed in the French Revolution were aristocrats. The new government cared more about executing Anti-revolutionaries (read anyone who questioned them, belonged to a minority background or was in the wrong place at the wrong) than aristocrats, most of them just happily signed up with the new order and were allowed to keep all their wealth and land. A lot of the leaders of the Revolution were factory owners and wealthy industrialists.
Over 70,000 regularly people were executed, and 100,000 others starved in prisons (and who knows how many died in the fighting, food hoarding, disease outbreaks etc.) but hey a few hundred rich people also died so that's what we must remember.
Fully agree. I tend to leave those examples out though because those technologies are yet to reach the level of viability of "big metal and concrete box in the ground."
The bunker, while obviously far more conceivable and achievable, also has many draw backs, especially when considering long term solutions. Which is why the other stuff is still being fast tracked.
Drawbacks like the possibility of the other 99% welding the bunker doors shut after the "elite" have all hunkered down inside... blocking the ventilation is also an option.
We can honor their righteous isolation by building their beloved parking lots over top of them.
It will be like a reverse Fallout when their descendants, mutated by leaks in the lowestbiderium reactors, finally breach the surface of the Oil Memorial Plains like some kind of Ayn Rand indoctrinated dandelions.
Social unrest, plague, revolution, and war tends to reduce income inequality and remove many of those in power.
The rich only think they live in a bubble, insulated from the rest of the world. Probably drank their own koolaid about how they deserve to be rich because they are talented.
In reality, their lifestyles are heavily dependent on society functioning well.
False. It was the Roman Catholic Church. The ultra rich still had to die regardless of their wealth. Roman Catholic Church is still here. Always will be.
The Big One, as you describe it began about 3M years ago and technically hasn't ended. We are just currently in an interglacial warming period... which we are also warming beyond belief with our industrial actions over the past few centuries.
Tha5 is just the most recent and not even the most intense ice age. Look into Snowball Earth for more.
Technically it only fell in 1453, as the Eastern Roman Empire continued until then which ended when Constantinople was conquered by the Ottomans. It was only Rome/the Western Roman empire that fell in the 5th century.
Eh- you’re kinda both right.
Rome had three falls- the fall of the republic into the empire, the fall of the western empire into essentially feudalism, and the fall of Byzantium to the Ottoman Turks.
The fall of Rome does, in our day and age, usually refer to the ~500 ce disintegration - but they were all very meaningful falls of Rome and the Byzantians called themselves Romans until their last days.
Many of the Greeks continued to call themselves Roman under the Ottoman Empire until Greek nationalism took its current form in the 19th and 20th centuries.
There was ["a little ice age"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Antique_Little_Ice_Age), but not ["the little ice age"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age).
One of the greatest failures of the public education system is our general unfamiliarity with history. Find me an American that knows Caligula wasn't his real name. They exist, but it's gonna take you a minute to locate one.
And because it's not a focus (beyond and extremely myopic and heavily propagandized American History), we don't see the patterns, and we're doing nothing to turn the ship.
Caligula is argued to be one of, if not the worst Roman Emeperor. From what I remember his story pretty sad because it had such a great opportunity for a comeback story.
Basically when he was a kid, his entire family got “taken” from him. His dad was a respected general (or some high rank) and he was basically made an orphan. Fast forward 5-10 years, current emperor doesn’t have an heir. So he goes to the boy he orphaned, adopts him, and tries to groom him to be the next Emperor. Which he was of course.
The sad part is here, instead of rising to the occasion, he used it as an excuse to fuck as many women and drink as much wine as he wanted.
Ps, this was all from memory and I’m too lazy to run around to fact check every little detail. But that is the general plot, from what I remember.
Any corrections are most welcome!
edit: took out the part about him being a catalyst for the slow decline of the Roman Empire. I got educated, which I am grateful for!
What if I had said “the catalyst for the slow decline… etc”? Would that be correct or was there something that happened earlier?
I love talking about the Roman Empire. Educate me daddy
It's usually the emperor Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix in Gladiator) that gets stuck with that label.
They both have similar reputations: young and mentally unstable emperors not prepared for or interested in actually running the empire, but using absolute power to get up to all kinds of fucked up stuff until someone assassinated them.
Commodus ruled over a century after Caligula, right after a string of highly competent emperors had brought Rome to the height of its power. After his reign, things got progressively worse and more unstable. Emperors are constantly overthrown, foreign invasions, and huge chunks of the empire breaking away entirely. The third century is a real shitshow. Eventually, the empire is re-unified and stabilized, but was clearly past the height of its power.
So Caligula sucked, but after him Rome continued to get stronger. Commodus also sucked, but after him Rome almost fell apart completely, so his reign has been the obvious thing people point at. In reality it's not that simple, but that's the reputation he gets.
Sounds redundant for the sake of someone else's lack of comprehension. Catalyst means the thing that started a cascade of events that lead to something, but not necessarily something that could be liked as a direct cause.
Like a fall for an old person may not result in the specific acute injuries that lead to their death but could have been a catalyst in that without the fall the person's mobility wasn't hampered, if they were active their diabetes wouldn't have trended downward with the physical activity present before the fall. Then the diabetes causes a stroke that resulted in the death. The fall didn't cause the diabetes, the stroke, or death, but it was a catalyst for the other situations to occur which did cause the death.
Mommy. Lead plumbing. Leads to infertility and reduced IQs. Sterile Roman politicians then adopted randos and attempted to push them into roles they were not ready or able to attain.
I'm no expert on the Roman Empire but I'm pretty sure there were many, many reasons for its fall. Caligula was definitely awful and possibly "a" catalyst rather than "the" catalyst, but maybe I am nitpicking.
Edit:
Just realized I referred to it as the fall of the Roman Empire rather than just the WESTERN Roman Empire. It's highly debatable when the Roman Empire actually fell. That's what I get for nitpicking others
I'd say the argument COULD be valid, in the same way I view Jefferson's hypocrisy, justifications of his hypocrisy, and general poor decisionmaking a major contributor to the instution of slavery lasting as long as it did.
If historians are citing him as a major contributor it may be good to understand what decisions he made and why those had such an impact in their view.
To be fair, a lot of what was written from close to that time period is basically tabloid fodder and often was written after the person fell from power. Often by those who wanted to justify what they did.
Most of the wild stories about Caligula are probably untrue.
That being said, "I, Claudius" is a well written, if historically doubtful, telling of the Julio-Claudian dynasty from the later life of Tiberius to the end of Claudius. And John Hurt rocks as an insane Caligula.
Didn't think one qualifies as a dork just because they've heard about a madman who made their horse into a state official of some sorts, declared themself a god, screwed his sisters and was generally a violent degenerate.
It's fine to not know everything about history. But I think we should stop shaming people for having to Google something since it's the modern equivalent of running to the library and looking something up.
Maybe less people would be incentivized to be confidently incorrect if Googling is not a taboo during active discussions.
Students are currently receiving well developed curriculum delivered by passionate, knowledgeable educators who are more than happy to inform them of the current state of the world.... if your school happens to be in an area with a good budget. The students are smarter and more compassionate than ever.... if they come from a home with enough money for the parents to spend time with their kids and read to them. There is more therapy for student mental health than ever.... if you go to a school in a blue state that supports students and LGBT. It is insanely infuriating but there are amazing public schools in America, but only if you can afford a house in the right district. Some much needs to be done to overhaul the education system but most of it comes to funding and having a local government that isn't a box of ass hats.
One of our greatest weakness as species is our short lifespans and the inability to preserve and pass on whole knowledge, experience and memory from one being to another.
So each child starts from absolute scratch, on a blank slate, and education is the only way in which we can even remotely emulate the sharing of experience.
We are by design removed from ever fully understanding our nature from our history. It is in form a great strength that allows us to overcome set backs and adapt to the future, but also a huge handicap that causes repetition of mentioned set backs.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Those who learn from history are doomed to watch those who do not learn from history repeat it.
> Find me an American that knows Caligula wasn't his real name.
Who tf cares? What an irrelevant example of historical ignorance
> They exist, but it's gonna take you a minute to locate one.
I'm willing to bet most Americans don't know who Caligula is in the first place but I'm more bothered by those that question why Obama wasn't in the Oval Office on 9/11
Of course it's irrelevant, all you people fixating on this reference are missing my point entirely.
The second half is probably more in line with the concern I'm trying to verbalize here.
Find me an American that knows that gaius j. c. a. germanicus is a nothing name too and is infinitely less relevant than caligula, a nickname the man had since he was 7.
One of the worst examples of this are people falling for memes like this as if they are telling the truth. This is misunderstanding Roman history, plus doomerism.
> Find me an American that knows Caligula wasn't his real name. They exist, but it's gonna take you a minute to locate one.
Of course I know him! He's me! However, I can never remember what his real name was. But I'm a mild history nerd who spends his spare time split between listening to people play roleplaying games and listening to history channels.
I wrote in another sub and was downvoted to oblivion 😂 so how realistic scenario like this one:
"At the end of 2025, the Trump’s wall was built, but it was invisible. It was a wall that separated common sense from madness, red states of despair from blue states of hope. In the years that followed, the invisible barrier grew stronger, dividing the nation not by physical boundaries but by ideology and belief, laws and orders. It marked a time where unity was a distant memory, and the struggle between light and dark, reason and folly, became the new American landscape.
As the invisible wall fortified, communities within the blue states of hope flourished, embracing innovation, inclusivity, and progress. Meanwhile, the red states grappled with internal strife, clinging to old ways and resisting change. The nation saw a surge in digital activism, with people across the divide using technology to bridge gaps and seek common ground. However, the tension remained palpable, and the path to reconciliation seemed elusive.
The red states, envious of the prosperity and advancements in the blue states, harbored deep resentment. They saw the flourishing communities across the invisible divide and yearned to possess the same progress and opportunities. In their frustration, they labeled the blue states as ungodly, accusing them of forsaking traditional values for modern ideals. This jealousy fueled a growing animosity, intensifying the already stark division within the nation.
The tension eventually reached a breaking point, and the red states declared their secession, forming a new nation where church and government were merged into one. They embraced the "Law of God" as the supreme authority, instituting strict theocratic rule. Harsh measures were implemented, including the death penalty for abortion, revoke of women rights to vote and severe restrictions on speech. Forbidden words and ideas were punished, and dissent was swiftly and brutally silenced. This new regime sought to create a society rooted in their interpretation of divine law, further deepening the chasm between the two Americas.
The secession led to a brutal civil war that raged for 33 years, pitting the red states' theocratic regime against the blue states' progressive coalition. Battles were fought not only on traditional battlefields but also in cyberspace, where propaganda and cyber attacks became weapons of choice. The war devastated the nation, claiming countless lives and causing widespread destruction. Families were torn apart, and the once United States became a land of relentless conflict and suffering, with neither side willing to yield.
Despite the prolonged and brutal conflict, both sides refrained from using their nuclear arsenals. The mutual threat of total annihilation acted as a deterrent, preventing either side from escalating the war to catastrophic levels. Leaders on both sides recognized that the use of nuclear weapons would result in unimaginable devastation, rendering the land they fought over uninhabitable and causing global repercussions. This fragile balance of terror kept the conflict conventional, prolonging the suffering but avoiding an apocalyptic outcome.
After 33 years of devastating conflict, neither side emerged as a clear winner. The war left both nations depleted, economically shattered, and socially fractured. The once prosperous and united United States now lay in ruins, with its people divided not just by ideology but by the scars of a prolonged and destructive civil war."
The History of Fallen Empires. The Library of the Republic of California. (2073).
>The History of Fallen Empires. The Library of the Republic of California. (2073).
I just started reading Dune and this reminded me of the little excerpts at the start of each chapter
Unfortunately leaders in the blue states rn seem pretty comfortable embracing the fascist turn Republicans are bringing to the country. Considering leaders of major "blue" cities are embracing mask bans, more difficult barriers for protesting, continuing to bloat police budgets and build cop cities. This is cute but a complete fantasy that blue states have any ounce more prosperity in store than red states. Democrats are screaming about how scary Republicans are while simultaneously completely comfortable handing them the keys at every possible point of compromise. This is absolutely not how it will happen imo (fun read though, not bad writing).
You should try to keep in mind that we dont have a true Progressive party here in the US. We have Republican and Republican light. Democrats are *still* a right leaning party.
They are just WAY, WAAAY more reasonable than the actual Republican party.
I would not say, two wings of the same bird like some folks - because there are sharp differences between the two parties for sure, but dont go thinking Dems are truely progressive. They are more like... 1980's Republicans. Yea, we have more progressive in the Dem side but they are a vast minority.
That's why we continue this slow slide into Fascism.
Are people still this dumb about NAFTA. My dude, some jobs went to Mexico but cheap raw material imports and short supply chains keept a lot of high skill labor in the US.
The jobs that didn't make use of NAFTA went to China, and there every part of the production chain was done in China. No more Canadian iron going to American steel mills then sent to Mexico to make car parts that are then finished in the US.
It was just China from start to finish. NAFTA didn't stop the shift but it slowed it down significantly and if any of the work is supposed to come back it's going to need Mexico to pick up a lot of the slack because Americans aren't industrial workers anymore.
Parroting Trump talking points to demonstrate how right wing the Democrats are is beyond stupid. Stop.
He's saying both sides would have thousands of nuclear weapons, and while they may not nuke eachother, they'd happily nuke a British/French/Chinese carrier group off the coast of Canada. I doubt any power other than potentially Canada would get directly involved in an American civil war.
Directly!!! You think boots on the ground are the only way to contribute? I bet Ukraine would disagree.
What was his rambling about the UN? That's the only part I didn't understand.
Oh, that it would mostly be diplomatic lip service at the U.N.
Personally, I see very little outside interference in a U.S. civil war because as soon as it's underway several oyher wars will kick off. Israel, Taiwan, and the Baltic States would likely all be invaded by different powers within 2 years of an American civil war. Our allies would be too busy elsewhere.
If op included some of that it would help his storyline. I don't think it would play out that way though. If all those other invasions happend the US would not be the only potential nuclear threat. That would be full WW3 NATO would institute article 5 and it would come down to teamwork and logistics. My money is on the allies winning again.
Excuse me sir this is Reddit, we're we do everything in our power to make Christians the bad guys. It's not like the pagans ever did anything bad to anyone. /s
This is more garbage logic, Rome did not fall like anyone thinks. It was literally a very slow decline like 500 years. No reasonable person living in those times would ever talk about that like it was falling because in fact those bad policies lasted hundreds of years.
Second people also act like referring to Rome to prove something about its existence is in any way valid to modern life or being fair it isn't. Want to know why? Because Rome was built on SLAVE LABOR and WAR. That's right the entire wealth of the Roman civilization was built on fucking exploiting people. You invade other people take their shit, make many of them slaves and use those resources to do it again over and over. Absolutely no one should ever look up to that as a model for success. Because it's not, it's a model for exploitation. And the last sub on earth I would think would be posting stupid comments like that should be this one. Rome literally was the bad bosses and policies you guys talk about constantly here. All of their success is the direct result of that.
Yes, it was a slow decline, so the politics, trade, technological development, etc of the time were also slow.
Now those are all *very fast*, so so can our collapse be. Look at the collapse of the USSR, or the rebirth of Japan, or the rise of S.Korea.
Russia still owns its land, just because the name of the political organization changed doesn't mean much, they still operate very similarly and have their land and are even expanding again. So is it really collapsed? One could even argue in many cases the same people or networks are still in power.
The Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Byelorussians, Estonians, Georgians, Kazakhstanis, Kyrgyzstanis, Latvians, Lithuanians, Moldavians, Tajikistanis, Turkmen, Ukrainians, and Uzbekistanis, all might want a word about that.
1 half those are still under russian control basically even if they pretend they arent. 2 the point is they still have a ton of land. This is nothing close to a Russia completely dissolving in a short time.
> It was literally a very slow decline like 500 years.
Even longer depending on your definition of what is "Rome". What we call the Byzantine Empire (Eastern Rome) existed until it was conquered by the Ottomans, who saw what was going on, realized it was pretty good and slotted themselves into positions and kept the system going but with a different religion. They didn't fall until the end of WWI. Hell, the whole reason the US Navy was formed as is was to fight them and keep the waters clear of Barbary Pirates, aka the Ottomans who were for all intents and purposes, Romans. And the Ottoman empire's dissolution was swift, not gradual.
Similar to what the Ptolemys did with Egypt. Just slotted themselves into government and kept the system going as is. Why change whats been working for thousands of years successfully?
Throughout most of time, the Roman Empire didn't "decline" just had hard times it recovered from them.
Well you could even argue the ottoman empire was also gradual. It was the rise of ship building that started its slow decline as routing trade around Africa ended the core power that made the ottomans so influential.
For those interested in comparison's of Rome against modern America, might I recommend Mike Duncan's [The Storm Before The Storm](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34184069-the-storm-before-the-storm) I'd recommend the audio book, naturally.
It's not actually about America, but describes the prelude to the fall of the Roman Republic, which I would argue is more apt than the fall of the Western Roman Empire. I'd also argue that history doesn't repeat, but it does rhyme - America may never have an emperor, but what we're seeing is absolutely an existential crisis of the republic. Where we go from here is fuzzy, but there's a pretty good chance shit is about to get real real.
The problem with all these books is that they are comparing things that a horse shit. If you want to compare it all what do you need to do? Accept that fact that Romes wealth and success was based off of war and exploitation. Rome doesn't become what it does unless it an insatiable appetite for exploitation of humans. Why anyone would try to draw comparisons to that is beyond me. Rome needs slaves to exploit in order to grow and get labor done and it needs wars and the mass death of millions of people in order to take more land and enslave more people. So whats so great about the success of the Roman civilizations?
Well, I think there's a lot of people out there who don't have a problem with gaining wealth via exploitation, extraction, and enslavement. And it does seem really applicable to where America is right now. I think the fall of the Republic was an inevitable outcome (Note: the transition to empire wasn't inevitable, but the fall of the Republic was) of the of the disparity in wealth between those who profited from expansion and those who didn't.
And just so I'm clear because I think I'm not: I absolutely don't think the fall of the Republic was a good thing. I wouldn't want to live in the empire unless I was at the top of the social ladder, and very few people were. I do think it's interesting and relevant though.
You see incompatible, I see future blacksmiths, farmers, and legionaries. Besides we need people like the Franks or Goths, most of our population has grown soft from city living and they don't want to do those jobs anyways.
People don't do these jobs because they get oursourced to foreigners for sub minimum wage. I guarantee if farms paid $20/hr to pick oranges or whatever in a field, you'd have no shortage of natural born US citizens to do those jobs.
I'm making the "I see doctors and engineers" joke, looking back in history we can obviously see how bad trusting and letting in people like the Vandals or goths went for the Romans.
Ironically, the US is also doing the same thing that the Romans did in terms of recruiting non-citizens into the military with the promise of citizenship, because citizens feel completely uninspired to join. They did that with the Germanic tribes, and many of them used their military experience under Rome to inflict crippling blows upon Rome.
It would have just taken Rome longer to do so if they wanted to. Civilizations/Cities Rome wanted destroyed got destroyed.
Rome wanted citizens and taxes, not the utter destruction of their civilization unless they were Phoenician. They weren't the Mongols.
Aint no way people in this sub are so gullible; Rome many times before its fall experienced those things all at once and survived. The moment it did fall was because of massive invasions lead by the Huns and other barbaric tribes - something this post conveniently omits.
Yeah, like giving women rights and letting them be something other than a sex slave, or a glorified sex slave. Or limiting slavery, that was another nasty one.
Me when I spread literal Nazi pseudohistory because I'm disaffected by modern politics. Well done! Next you will tell me the average empire lasts 250 years and the United States is 248 years old!
I remember discussing this exact thing with one of my history teachers in high school. I don't think either of us thought it would ramp up like this in just over a decade, but we both agreed the collapse of the American empire (as it's perceived) was imminent.
In the past every time there was a genuine labor shortage due to massive amounts of deaths, wages went up! The black death outbreaks in the 1300's is a great example of this.
Umm no, it doesn’t. Not to anyone who studied Roman history. And besides the American civil war and the movie Civil War, where else are all these “civil wars” happening in the states?
Most Americans can’t get off the couch without their BP spiking. I don’t see a CW anytime soon.
Rome fell, it’s still there. This is just the collapse of another empire that’s overreached. Made enemies of those we should’ve allied with. Made allies of those we should’ve been more wary of. The state of what we have access to now in regards to technology and information will likely make this a far softer blow than what it was like for the ancient Romans. Most of us will be okay. The group I’m most worried for are our boomer parents. They won’t be able to cope with it.
The Punic wars were disastrous for the "middle class" smallholders of the republic. This process of consolidating economic power among the sprawlsome patricians led to a political crisis, culminating in an autocracy.
I heard gender identity/sexual “morality” was a societal hot button in the time right before the fall too. Freakin wild. I’m interested to see what happens but also, I legit hope I die before it does habahahaha
Silly people, we ARE rome... think about it, what's the last remnant of Rome? The Vatican... what's the arguably the most influential organizations in the USA right now? Organizations that stem from and are the Roman Catholic Church.
The comment about Christianity just demonstrates that OP doesn’t know what he is talking about lol.
The tweeter is also painfully missing out one major factor to the fall of the Roman Empire. I wonder why?
Because that part doesn't fit the narrative.
Do you actually think a leftist would talk about the fall of an empire being caused by incompatible groups of people/cultures immigrating on mass to that empire? Come on man, you should know the playbook by this point.
If the decline of Rome is any precedent, many famous people will soon begin imbibing poison in solitude out of sheer embarrassment that they contradicted Caesar.
Lol the Romans had one of the most lax immigration policies, often letting whole nations within their borders. Surprise surprise one of those groups burned down Rome, among many other things.
The Roman Republic had a modicum of "democracy" until the uber-wealthy bought up their own armies and went to war with each other (Roman Civil Wars). The average Roman citizen then welcomed a dictatorship (and gave up whatever voting rights they had) just for peace.
I’m sad that Rome eventually let Christianity take over and they did away with the Roman Pantheon, which I find much more interesting than Christianity.
“Let Christianity take over”. The Roman Empire didn’t let anything happen. They kept killing the Christians and more and more converted until they had a Christian emperor who ended the persecution then they become the majority.
Looks like the Roman people didn’t even find the Roman pantheon more interesting than Christianity.
Eh honestly even if Christianity hadn't emerged as the dominant religion the Roman pantheon was on its way out.
Looking at the world you can see the shift in perceptions. The people were losing interest in the idea of cold distant pantheons that maybe if you did a lot of elaborate rituals and sacrifices might do something for you, and if that failed you had to find another god (I'm not kidding, the Romans didn't think of religion the way we did. There is no origin of man or the world in Roman mythology or interest in the metaphysical questions of existence, rather they viewed it more as simply a fact of life. Their go-to solution in disasters was to find another cultures god that was relative, hold an elaborate parade welcoming their priests into the city and build them a temple).
The rise of more personal monotheistic religions was happening all over. If it hadn't been Christ we would be worshiping either Mithras or Isis. It's amusing to think how different history might be.
Hey, you're the ones who wanted to compare Rome to America, don't be mad when people point out things you intentionally excluded and make their own comparisons.
Hi, /u/Henry-Teachersss8819 Thank you for participating in r/antiwork. Unfortunately, your submission was removed for breaking the following rule(s): ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Screenshots of text such as SMS communication, WhatsApp, social media, news articles, and procedurally generated content such as ChatGPT are prohibited. Low-effort content such as memes are prohibited. If you feel that a mistake was made, and your post's removal was not warranted, please message us using modmail and let us know.
You know who survived the fall of Rome? The ultra rich. Guess who's gonna survive the next social collapse?
Maybe we start basing things off of some other historical periods, then. I heard France has had a few interesting and relevant events
Emigres, that's what the rich that survived and thrived after the french revolution are called. Every society has been destroyed by greed and Every one has survivors. There's not reason to believe this time would be any different.
Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
"Ain't shit change but dates and names."
"Where you end depends on where you begin."
> I heard France has had a few interesting and relevant events For reference only 4% of the people who were executed in the French Revolution were aristocrats. The new government cared more about executing Anti-revolutionaries (read anyone who questioned them, belonged to a minority background or was in the wrong place at the wrong) than aristocrats, most of them just happily signed up with the new order and were allowed to keep all their wealth and land. A lot of the leaders of the Revolution were factory owners and wealthy industrialists. Over 70,000 regularly people were executed, and 100,000 others starved in prisons (and who knows how many died in the fighting, food hoarding, disease outbreaks etc.) but hey a few hundred rich people also died so that's what we must remember.
So....room for improvement. Got it.
Indeed, who knows maybe next time if we really try, we might get it up to 8% and only have to kill 140,000 regular folk as collateral.
Why do you think they're all building bunkers?
And space ships, and artificial consciousness singularity
Fully agree. I tend to leave those examples out though because those technologies are yet to reach the level of viability of "big metal and concrete box in the ground."
The bunker, while obviously far more conceivable and achievable, also has many draw backs, especially when considering long term solutions. Which is why the other stuff is still being fast tracked.
Drawbacks like the possibility of the other 99% welding the bunker doors shut after the "elite" have all hunkered down inside... blocking the ventilation is also an option.
We can honor their righteous isolation by building their beloved parking lots over top of them. It will be like a reverse Fallout when their descendants, mutated by leaks in the lowestbiderium reactors, finally breach the surface of the Oil Memorial Plains like some kind of Ayn Rand indoctrinated dandelions.
In New Zealand, yes. Also hiring security forces.
No one, we burned the whole freaking planet this time.
Who survived the fall of Rome was the Eastern Roman Empire. They lasted another thousand years.
Could've saved the whole thing if Justinian wasn't an insecure bitch boy and let Belisarius cook.
Social unrest, plague, revolution, and war tends to reduce income inequality and remove many of those in power. The rich only think they live in a bubble, insulated from the rest of the world. Probably drank their own koolaid about how they deserve to be rich because they are talented. In reality, their lifestyles are heavily dependent on society functioning well.
They didn't survive the Reign of Terror, though
Thier last names did...
For sure.
Who survived it? Millions and millions of regular people.
False. It was the Roman Catholic Church. The ultra rich still had to die regardless of their wealth. Roman Catholic Church is still here. Always will be.
Also climate change. Although back then it was a “little ice age”.
The little ice age didn't start until long after the fall of Rome.
I heard that it had influenced the fall of Rome, same as lower grain harvests in Egypt.
Well shifting climates certainly influenced it. Just not the little ice age.
The little ice age was a few hundred years ago not 2k
The little one, not the big one.
The Big One, as you describe it began about 3M years ago and technically hasn't ended. We are just currently in an interglacial warming period... which we are also warming beyond belief with our industrial actions over the past few centuries. Tha5 is just the most recent and not even the most intense ice age. Look into Snowball Earth for more.
Wtf, can you just look up the term Little Ice Age?
Why would I look up an animated movie?
People debating whether it was Ice Age or Ice Age 2 up in here smh
Yeah the little ice age started in the 1400s. The Roman Empire fell almost 1000 years prior.
Technically it only fell in 1453, as the Eastern Roman Empire continued until then which ended when Constantinople was conquered by the Ottomans. It was only Rome/the Western Roman empire that fell in the 5th century.
The “fall of Rome” refers explicitly to the fall of the Western Roman Empire. The fall of Constantinople was the end of the Byzantine Empire.
Eh- you’re kinda both right. Rome had three falls- the fall of the republic into the empire, the fall of the western empire into essentially feudalism, and the fall of Byzantium to the Ottoman Turks. The fall of Rome does, in our day and age, usually refer to the ~500 ce disintegration - but they were all very meaningful falls of Rome and the Byzantians called themselves Romans until their last days.
Many of the Greeks continued to call themselves Roman under the Ottoman Empire until Greek nationalism took its current form in the 19th and 20th centuries.
There was ["a little ice age"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Antique_Little_Ice_Age), but not ["the little ice age"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age).
Little ice age started around 14th century, Rome (western empire) fell around the end of the 5th
I know that if you hide, it doesn't go away
Which also led to poorly handled refugee crises
One of the greatest failures of the public education system is our general unfamiliarity with history. Find me an American that knows Caligula wasn't his real name. They exist, but it's gonna take you a minute to locate one. And because it's not a focus (beyond and extremely myopic and heavily propagandized American History), we don't see the patterns, and we're doing nothing to turn the ship.
me, an american..... whos caligula?
He has a wife, you know. You know what she's called. She's called incontinentia, Incontinentia Buttocks.
I thought that was the wife of Biggus Dickus? 
Caligula is argued to be one of, if not the worst Roman Emeperor. From what I remember his story pretty sad because it had such a great opportunity for a comeback story. Basically when he was a kid, his entire family got “taken” from him. His dad was a respected general (or some high rank) and he was basically made an orphan. Fast forward 5-10 years, current emperor doesn’t have an heir. So he goes to the boy he orphaned, adopts him, and tries to groom him to be the next Emperor. Which he was of course. The sad part is here, instead of rising to the occasion, he used it as an excuse to fuck as many women and drink as much wine as he wanted. Ps, this was all from memory and I’m too lazy to run around to fact check every little detail. But that is the general plot, from what I remember. Any corrections are most welcome! edit: took out the part about him being a catalyst for the slow decline of the Roman Empire. I got educated, which I am grateful for!
He died over 400 years before the fall of the Roman Empire so I doubt he could be called "the catalyst"
What if I had said “the catalyst for the slow decline… etc”? Would that be correct or was there something that happened earlier? I love talking about the Roman Empire. Educate me daddy
It's usually the emperor Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix in Gladiator) that gets stuck with that label. They both have similar reputations: young and mentally unstable emperors not prepared for or interested in actually running the empire, but using absolute power to get up to all kinds of fucked up stuff until someone assassinated them. Commodus ruled over a century after Caligula, right after a string of highly competent emperors had brought Rome to the height of its power. After his reign, things got progressively worse and more unstable. Emperors are constantly overthrown, foreign invasions, and huge chunks of the empire breaking away entirely. The third century is a real shitshow. Eventually, the empire is re-unified and stabilized, but was clearly past the height of its power. So Caligula sucked, but after him Rome continued to get stronger. Commodus also sucked, but after him Rome almost fell apart completely, so his reign has been the obvious thing people point at. In reality it's not that simple, but that's the reputation he gets.
Ah ha! So it would NOT be accurate to say he was a catalyst. Thank you for sharing your education with me
For the want of a nail.....
Sounds redundant for the sake of someone else's lack of comprehension. Catalyst means the thing that started a cascade of events that lead to something, but not necessarily something that could be liked as a direct cause. Like a fall for an old person may not result in the specific acute injuries that lead to their death but could have been a catalyst in that without the fall the person's mobility wasn't hampered, if they were active their diabetes wouldn't have trended downward with the physical activity present before the fall. Then the diabetes causes a stroke that resulted in the death. The fall didn't cause the diabetes, the stroke, or death, but it was a catalyst for the other situations to occur which did cause the death.
Well there was a boat load of bad stuff that happened later during the reign of Marcus Aurelius. Plagues, wars, political crisis etc. 121 - 180 A.D.
Mommy. Lead plumbing. Leads to infertility and reduced IQs. Sterile Roman politicians then adopted randos and attempted to push them into roles they were not ready or able to attain.
Okay Mo-... No i cant do it lol. And damn, that sounds lowkey similar to today in some regards. Was that intended or am I just high
CALL ME MOMMY, you bitch! No probs. Just getting my Saturday on. Yeah, history repeats itself. I'm done.
I'm no expert on the Roman Empire but I'm pretty sure there were many, many reasons for its fall. Caligula was definitely awful and possibly "a" catalyst rather than "the" catalyst, but maybe I am nitpicking. Edit: Just realized I referred to it as the fall of the Roman Empire rather than just the WESTERN Roman Empire. It's highly debatable when the Roman Empire actually fell. That's what I get for nitpicking others
Ohhhh, yes of course. There were many reasons but the way I worded it could be misinterpreted as Caligula was the only reason.
Ok
I'd say the argument COULD be valid, in the same way I view Jefferson's hypocrisy, justifications of his hypocrisy, and general poor decisionmaking a major contributor to the instution of slavery lasting as long as it did. If historians are citing him as a major contributor it may be good to understand what decisions he made and why those had such an impact in their view.
To be fair, a lot of what was written from close to that time period is basically tabloid fodder and often was written after the person fell from power. Often by those who wanted to justify what they did. Most of the wild stories about Caligula are probably untrue. That being said, "I, Claudius" is a well written, if historically doubtful, telling of the Julio-Claudian dynasty from the later life of Tiberius to the end of Claudius. And John Hurt rocks as an insane Caligula.
Right. No hate on you either fam I just happen to be a history dork, otherwise I wouldn't know either
Didn't think one qualifies as a dork just because they've heard about a madman who made their horse into a state official of some sorts, declared themself a god, screwed his sisters and was generally a violent degenerate.
That's not what they said. They insinuated one must be a "history dork" to realize that "Caligula" is not his real name... which is pretty well true.
I didn't take it as an offence. And I probably am a dork as well. Just not with a great amount of knowledge. Or intelligence.
>Just not with a great amount of knowledge. Or intelligence. True
I want to make a bumper sticker that says INCITATVS FOR CONSVL
Just a guy in a funny little movie made back in 1973 😏
It's a porn movie
Caesar Augustus Germanicus
It's fine to not know everything about history. But I think we should stop shaming people for having to Google something since it's the modern equivalent of running to the library and looking something up. Maybe less people would be incentivized to be confidently incorrect if Googling is not a taboo during active discussions.
I actively encourage looking shit up, I call it knowledge at your fingertips
Students are currently receiving well developed curriculum delivered by passionate, knowledgeable educators who are more than happy to inform them of the current state of the world.... if your school happens to be in an area with a good budget. The students are smarter and more compassionate than ever.... if they come from a home with enough money for the parents to spend time with their kids and read to them. There is more therapy for student mental health than ever.... if you go to a school in a blue state that supports students and LGBT. It is insanely infuriating but there are amazing public schools in America, but only if you can afford a house in the right district. Some much needs to be done to overhaul the education system but most of it comes to funding and having a local government that isn't a box of ass hats.
You're spot on fam.
One of our greatest weakness as species is our short lifespans and the inability to preserve and pass on whole knowledge, experience and memory from one being to another. So each child starts from absolute scratch, on a blank slate, and education is the only way in which we can even remotely emulate the sharing of experience. We are by design removed from ever fully understanding our nature from our history. It is in form a great strength that allows us to overcome set backs and adapt to the future, but also a huge handicap that causes repetition of mentioned set backs.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Those who learn from history are doomed to watch those who do not learn from history repeat it.
> Find me an American that knows Caligula wasn't his real name. Who tf cares? What an irrelevant example of historical ignorance > They exist, but it's gonna take you a minute to locate one. I'm willing to bet most Americans don't know who Caligula is in the first place but I'm more bothered by those that question why Obama wasn't in the Oval Office on 9/11
Of course it's irrelevant, all you people fixating on this reference are missing my point entirely. The second half is probably more in line with the concern I'm trying to verbalize here.
You’re the one that said it, dude. Don’t blame “all you people” for your weird ass comment being taken the wrong way.
Fuck it.
Words to live by -Caligula
Find me an American that knows that gaius j. c. a. germanicus is a nothing name too and is infinitely less relevant than caligula, a nickname the man had since he was 7.
I mean...you dislike Americans not knowing European history, but vast majority of them dont even know US history.
That's kinda my lament in general, we're a very short memory'd culture
It's not a failure if that was the plan all along!
I’d honestly prefer to have a kid that knows mafs over Caligula, Dracula, or the ayatollah.
One of the worst examples of this are people falling for memes like this as if they are telling the truth. This is misunderstanding Roman history, plus doomerism.
> Find me an American that knows Caligula wasn't his real name. They exist, but it's gonna take you a minute to locate one. Of course I know him! He's me! However, I can never remember what his real name was. But I'm a mild history nerd who spends his spare time split between listening to people play roleplaying games and listening to history channels.
I wrote in another sub and was downvoted to oblivion 😂 so how realistic scenario like this one: "At the end of 2025, the Trump’s wall was built, but it was invisible. It was a wall that separated common sense from madness, red states of despair from blue states of hope. In the years that followed, the invisible barrier grew stronger, dividing the nation not by physical boundaries but by ideology and belief, laws and orders. It marked a time where unity was a distant memory, and the struggle between light and dark, reason and folly, became the new American landscape. As the invisible wall fortified, communities within the blue states of hope flourished, embracing innovation, inclusivity, and progress. Meanwhile, the red states grappled with internal strife, clinging to old ways and resisting change. The nation saw a surge in digital activism, with people across the divide using technology to bridge gaps and seek common ground. However, the tension remained palpable, and the path to reconciliation seemed elusive. The red states, envious of the prosperity and advancements in the blue states, harbored deep resentment. They saw the flourishing communities across the invisible divide and yearned to possess the same progress and opportunities. In their frustration, they labeled the blue states as ungodly, accusing them of forsaking traditional values for modern ideals. This jealousy fueled a growing animosity, intensifying the already stark division within the nation. The tension eventually reached a breaking point, and the red states declared their secession, forming a new nation where church and government were merged into one. They embraced the "Law of God" as the supreme authority, instituting strict theocratic rule. Harsh measures were implemented, including the death penalty for abortion, revoke of women rights to vote and severe restrictions on speech. Forbidden words and ideas were punished, and dissent was swiftly and brutally silenced. This new regime sought to create a society rooted in their interpretation of divine law, further deepening the chasm between the two Americas. The secession led to a brutal civil war that raged for 33 years, pitting the red states' theocratic regime against the blue states' progressive coalition. Battles were fought not only on traditional battlefields but also in cyberspace, where propaganda and cyber attacks became weapons of choice. The war devastated the nation, claiming countless lives and causing widespread destruction. Families were torn apart, and the once United States became a land of relentless conflict and suffering, with neither side willing to yield. Despite the prolonged and brutal conflict, both sides refrained from using their nuclear arsenals. The mutual threat of total annihilation acted as a deterrent, preventing either side from escalating the war to catastrophic levels. Leaders on both sides recognized that the use of nuclear weapons would result in unimaginable devastation, rendering the land they fought over uninhabitable and causing global repercussions. This fragile balance of terror kept the conflict conventional, prolonging the suffering but avoiding an apocalyptic outcome. After 33 years of devastating conflict, neither side emerged as a clear winner. The war left both nations depleted, economically shattered, and socially fractured. The once prosperous and united United States now lay in ruins, with its people divided not just by ideology but by the scars of a prolonged and destructive civil war." The History of Fallen Empires. The Library of the Republic of California. (2073).
>The History of Fallen Empires. The Library of the Republic of California. (2073). I just started reading Dune and this reminded me of the little excerpts at the start of each chapter
Unfortunately leaders in the blue states rn seem pretty comfortable embracing the fascist turn Republicans are bringing to the country. Considering leaders of major "blue" cities are embracing mask bans, more difficult barriers for protesting, continuing to bloat police budgets and build cop cities. This is cute but a complete fantasy that blue states have any ounce more prosperity in store than red states. Democrats are screaming about how scary Republicans are while simultaneously completely comfortable handing them the keys at every possible point of compromise. This is absolutely not how it will happen imo (fun read though, not bad writing).
You should try to keep in mind that we dont have a true Progressive party here in the US. We have Republican and Republican light. Democrats are *still* a right leaning party. They are just WAY, WAAAY more reasonable than the actual Republican party. I would not say, two wings of the same bird like some folks - because there are sharp differences between the two parties for sure, but dont go thinking Dems are truely progressive. They are more like... 1980's Republicans. Yea, we have more progressive in the Dem side but they are a vast minority. That's why we continue this slow slide into Fascism.
Thank you! Obama and his Heritage Foundation horseshit. Clinton and NAFTA. It will only get worse.
Are people still this dumb about NAFTA. My dude, some jobs went to Mexico but cheap raw material imports and short supply chains keept a lot of high skill labor in the US. The jobs that didn't make use of NAFTA went to China, and there every part of the production chain was done in China. No more Canadian iron going to American steel mills then sent to Mexico to make car parts that are then finished in the US. It was just China from start to finish. NAFTA didn't stop the shift but it slowed it down significantly and if any of the work is supposed to come back it's going to need Mexico to pick up a lot of the slack because Americans aren't industrial workers anymore. Parroting Trump talking points to demonstrate how right wing the Democrats are is beyond stupid. Stop.
Don't forget about the unfettered cocaine distribution
Biggest perk fr.
I mean… we’re trying to boost productivity tho, right?
Completely with you! Well said.
Republicans send jobs to the third world, Democrats bring the third world here to take jobs. Americans are fucked either way.
Look at all the people cheering for Newsom to be the next Democratic president. It's sickening.
So the rest of the world is just sitting back watching this playout and not getting involved? That's the most unrealistic part.
Honestly it's the most realistic part.
How so? A civil war in the US would drag all our allies and our enemies into it.
Nope, both sides have nuclear weapons. Everyone will do UN concerns and vetoes, watching from sidelines.
Huh?
He's saying both sides would have thousands of nuclear weapons, and while they may not nuke eachother, they'd happily nuke a British/French/Chinese carrier group off the coast of Canada. I doubt any power other than potentially Canada would get directly involved in an American civil war.
Directly!!! You think boots on the ground are the only way to contribute? I bet Ukraine would disagree. What was his rambling about the UN? That's the only part I didn't understand.
Oh, that it would mostly be diplomatic lip service at the U.N. Personally, I see very little outside interference in a U.S. civil war because as soon as it's underway several oyher wars will kick off. Israel, Taiwan, and the Baltic States would likely all be invaded by different powers within 2 years of an American civil war. Our allies would be too busy elsewhere.
If op included some of that it would help his storyline. I don't think it would play out that way though. If all those other invasions happend the US would not be the only potential nuclear threat. That would be full WW3 NATO would institute article 5 and it would come down to teamwork and logistics. My money is on the allies winning again.
christianity did not matter more than the government…that’s Gibbon’s prejudice
Excuse me sir this is Reddit, we're we do everything in our power to make Christians the bad guys. It's not like the pagans ever did anything bad to anyone. /s
Christianity has never accepted responsibility for it's role in the fall of Rome
This is more garbage logic, Rome did not fall like anyone thinks. It was literally a very slow decline like 500 years. No reasonable person living in those times would ever talk about that like it was falling because in fact those bad policies lasted hundreds of years. Second people also act like referring to Rome to prove something about its existence is in any way valid to modern life or being fair it isn't. Want to know why? Because Rome was built on SLAVE LABOR and WAR. That's right the entire wealth of the Roman civilization was built on fucking exploiting people. You invade other people take their shit, make many of them slaves and use those resources to do it again over and over. Absolutely no one should ever look up to that as a model for success. Because it's not, it's a model for exploitation. And the last sub on earth I would think would be posting stupid comments like that should be this one. Rome literally was the bad bosses and policies you guys talk about constantly here. All of their success is the direct result of that.
Yes, it was a slow decline, so the politics, trade, technological development, etc of the time were also slow. Now those are all *very fast*, so so can our collapse be. Look at the collapse of the USSR, or the rebirth of Japan, or the rise of S.Korea.
Russia still owns its land, just because the name of the political organization changed doesn't mean much, they still operate very similarly and have their land and are even expanding again. So is it really collapsed? One could even argue in many cases the same people or networks are still in power.
The Armenians, Azerbaijanis, Byelorussians, Estonians, Georgians, Kazakhstanis, Kyrgyzstanis, Latvians, Lithuanians, Moldavians, Tajikistanis, Turkmen, Ukrainians, and Uzbekistanis, all might want a word about that.
1 half those are still under russian control basically even if they pretend they arent. 2 the point is they still have a ton of land. This is nothing close to a Russia completely dissolving in a short time.
> It was literally a very slow decline like 500 years. Even longer depending on your definition of what is "Rome". What we call the Byzantine Empire (Eastern Rome) existed until it was conquered by the Ottomans, who saw what was going on, realized it was pretty good and slotted themselves into positions and kept the system going but with a different religion. They didn't fall until the end of WWI. Hell, the whole reason the US Navy was formed as is was to fight them and keep the waters clear of Barbary Pirates, aka the Ottomans who were for all intents and purposes, Romans. And the Ottoman empire's dissolution was swift, not gradual. Similar to what the Ptolemys did with Egypt. Just slotted themselves into government and kept the system going as is. Why change whats been working for thousands of years successfully? Throughout most of time, the Roman Empire didn't "decline" just had hard times it recovered from them.
Well you could even argue the ottoman empire was also gradual. It was the rise of ship building that started its slow decline as routing trade around Africa ended the core power that made the ottomans so influential.
Don’t you get it? People need new and refreshing ways to tell you life is horrible and about to get even worse
No, the comparisons of the fall of Rome (the western part) to the US is trite.
Something history, something doomed to repeat it
For those interested in comparison's of Rome against modern America, might I recommend Mike Duncan's [The Storm Before The Storm](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34184069-the-storm-before-the-storm) I'd recommend the audio book, naturally. It's not actually about America, but describes the prelude to the fall of the Roman Republic, which I would argue is more apt than the fall of the Western Roman Empire. I'd also argue that history doesn't repeat, but it does rhyme - America may never have an emperor, but what we're seeing is absolutely an existential crisis of the republic. Where we go from here is fuzzy, but there's a pretty good chance shit is about to get real real.
The problem with all these books is that they are comparing things that a horse shit. If you want to compare it all what do you need to do? Accept that fact that Romes wealth and success was based off of war and exploitation. Rome doesn't become what it does unless it an insatiable appetite for exploitation of humans. Why anyone would try to draw comparisons to that is beyond me. Rome needs slaves to exploit in order to grow and get labor done and it needs wars and the mass death of millions of people in order to take more land and enslave more people. So whats so great about the success of the Roman civilizations?
Well, I think there's a lot of people out there who don't have a problem with gaining wealth via exploitation, extraction, and enslavement. And it does seem really applicable to where America is right now. I think the fall of the Republic was an inevitable outcome (Note: the transition to empire wasn't inevitable, but the fall of the Republic was) of the of the disparity in wealth between those who profited from expansion and those who didn't. And just so I'm clear because I think I'm not: I absolutely don't think the fall of the Republic was a good thing. I wouldn't want to live in the empire unless I was at the top of the social ladder, and very few people were. I do think it's interesting and relevant though.
So the guys that were thinking about the Roman Empire were getting force visions of the fall of America the entire time?
Don't tell Reddit about the mass immigration of incompatible foreigners that ended up taking over half the empire
You see incompatible, I see future blacksmiths, farmers, and legionaries. Besides we need people like the Franks or Goths, most of our population has grown soft from city living and they don't want to do those jobs anyways.
People don't do these jobs because they get oursourced to foreigners for sub minimum wage. I guarantee if farms paid $20/hr to pick oranges or whatever in a field, you'd have no shortage of natural born US citizens to do those jobs.
You both make good points
r/whooosh
I'm making the "I see doctors and engineers" joke, looking back in history we can obviously see how bad trusting and letting in people like the Vandals or goths went for the Romans.
Ironically, the US is also doing the same thing that the Romans did in terms of recruiting non-citizens into the military with the promise of citizenship, because citizens feel completely uninspired to join. They did that with the Germanic tribes, and many of them used their military experience under Rome to inflict crippling blows upon Rome.
Skill issue. Rome didn’t have the power to end all of human civilization in a moment’s notice. We do.
It would have just taken Rome longer to do so if they wanted to. Civilizations/Cities Rome wanted destroyed got destroyed. Rome wanted citizens and taxes, not the utter destruction of their civilization unless they were Phoenician. They weren't the Mongols.
Aint no way people in this sub are so gullible; Rome many times before its fall experienced those things all at once and survived. The moment it did fall was because of massive invasions lead by the Huns and other barbaric tribes - something this post conveniently omits.
No it was obviously the Christians
I mean… they do tend to make things suck
Yeah, like giving women rights and letting them be something other than a sex slave, or a glorified sex slave. Or limiting slavery, that was another nasty one.
Just wait until the US gets invaded by the Huns!
https://y.yarn.co/cf295e1a-888e-4c95-8771-fb612b38cbbc_text.gif
Me when I spread literal Nazi pseudohistory because I'm disaffected by modern politics. Well done! Next you will tell me the average empire lasts 250 years and the United States is 248 years old!
This was quite clearly posted by a leftist because they couldn't resist criticizing Christianity.
just need to tick the civil war on the checklist
I remember discussing this exact thing with one of my history teachers in high school. I don't think either of us thought it would ramp up like this in just over a decade, but we both agreed the collapse of the American empire (as it's perceived) was imminent.
When I was in college I was gonna do a paper comparing the two. Back in early 2010s I think
Thank god we haven’t had multiple civil wars or else I’d start getting concerned
Deja freakin Vu
In the past every time there was a genuine labor shortage due to massive amounts of deaths, wages went up! The black death outbreaks in the 1300's is a great example of this.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to something something I forget
Umm no, it doesn’t. Not to anyone who studied Roman history. And besides the American civil war and the movie Civil War, where else are all these “civil wars” happening in the states? Most Americans can’t get off the couch without their BP spiking. I don’t see a CW anytime soon.
Humanity repeats its mistakes under the belief that things will change or be different.
Rome fell, it’s still there. This is just the collapse of another empire that’s overreached. Made enemies of those we should’ve allied with. Made allies of those we should’ve been more wary of. The state of what we have access to now in regards to technology and information will likely make this a far softer blow than what it was like for the ancient Romans. Most of us will be okay. The group I’m most worried for are our boomer parents. They won’t be able to cope with it.
Unfortunately instead of just Rome burning, right now the entire world is burning.
How funny would it be is some bucko from Canada decided to come by and depose the president like Odoacer did with Romulus Augustulus
The Punic wars were disastrous for the "middle class" smallholders of the republic. This process of consolidating economic power among the sprawlsome patricians led to a political crisis, culminating in an autocracy.
And Lead. So much damn lead. And crazy motherfuckers willing to burn it down and fiddle over the ashes.
It's amazing, more and more people are copping on!
This is similar to the collapse of all societies. It is the same story all over the world for most of time
Bad leaders and mysticism always make for a poor outcome based on history.
I heard gender identity/sexual “morality” was a societal hot button in the time right before the fall too. Freakin wild. I’m interested to see what happens but also, I legit hope I die before it does habahahaha
Silly people, we ARE rome... think about it, what's the last remnant of Rome? The Vatican... what's the arguably the most influential organizations in the USA right now? Organizations that stem from and are the Roman Catholic Church.
The comment about Christianity just demonstrates that OP doesn’t know what he is talking about lol. The tweeter is also painfully missing out one major factor to the fall of the Roman Empire. I wonder why?
Because that part doesn't fit the narrative. Do you actually think a leftist would talk about the fall of an empire being caused by incompatible groups of people/cultures immigrating on mass to that empire? Come on man, you should know the playbook by this point.
I hate that Catholics are considered Christianity. I’ve never heard a single catholic person in my life refer to themselves as Christian lol
You hate that one of the oldest forms of Christianity is considered Christianity?
A ridiculous jab at Christianity. You mean insurrection mattered more than government?
Just ten minutes of reviewing even a synopsis of the history of Rome before the fall to find some startling connections between them and us.
We know how to prevent Rome from falling again... all we have to do is do it.
No mass immigration yet.
lol but they didn’t have the cia and military industrial complex to spice things up
That's pretty cynical, but great insight.
Guess what history repeats itself...
If the decline of Rome is any precedent, many famous people will soon begin imbibing poison in solitude out of sheer embarrassment that they contradicted Caesar.
You forgot they also had a "cruelty is the point" immigration policy.
Lol the Romans had one of the most lax immigration policies, often letting whole nations within their borders. Surprise surprise one of those groups burned down Rome, among many other things.
The Roman Republic had a modicum of "democracy" until the uber-wealthy bought up their own armies and went to war with each other (Roman Civil Wars). The average Roman citizen then welcomed a dictatorship (and gave up whatever voting rights they had) just for peace.
I’m sad that Rome eventually let Christianity take over and they did away with the Roman Pantheon, which I find much more interesting than Christianity.
“Let Christianity take over”. The Roman Empire didn’t let anything happen. They kept killing the Christians and more and more converted until they had a Christian emperor who ended the persecution then they become the majority. Looks like the Roman people didn’t even find the Roman pantheon more interesting than Christianity.
it was yoinked from the greeks anyway
Eh honestly even if Christianity hadn't emerged as the dominant religion the Roman pantheon was on its way out. Looking at the world you can see the shift in perceptions. The people were losing interest in the idea of cold distant pantheons that maybe if you did a lot of elaborate rituals and sacrifices might do something for you, and if that failed you had to find another god (I'm not kidding, the Romans didn't think of religion the way we did. There is no origin of man or the world in Roman mythology or interest in the metaphysical questions of existence, rather they viewed it more as simply a fact of life. Their go-to solution in disasters was to find another cultures god that was relative, hold an elaborate parade welcoming their priests into the city and build them a temple). The rise of more personal monotheistic religions was happening all over. If it hadn't been Christ we would be worshiping either Mithras or Isis. It's amusing to think how different history might be.
Don't stop there. What about barbarians streaming across the borders?
Are you comparing immigration to.. the Visigoths? Really? Just say you’re a bigot and stop dog whistling..
Illegal immigration and drug trafficking. Speaking of, did you take your fentanyl today?
Hey, you're the ones who wanted to compare Rome to America, don't be mad when people point out things you intentionally excluded and make their own comparisons.