[HN Gopher] How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate
___________________________________________________________________
How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate
Author : Tomte
Score : 162 points
Date : 2023-09-22 16:38 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (acoup.blog)
(TXT) w3m dump (acoup.blog)
| snowpid wrote:
| This is the reason I think about the Roman Empire at least once a
| week!
| martinclayton wrote:
| Our release tool is called "Roderick", as-in the Monty Python
| "Life of Brian" sketch. TBH I don't think about the Roman
| Empire much apart from that, I mean, what did they ever do for
| us?
| OldHunter69X wrote:
| Only a Barbarian would think of Rome any less than that
| frequency.
| throwawaycities wrote:
| That is one of the great ironies of the meme...
|
| Most people self-identifying that they think about the Roman
| Empire don't seem to know the difference between the Roman
| Republic & Roman Empire (much less the period of Kings)...it's
| all just the Roman Empire.
| snowpid wrote:
| I havent read the article. Im still stuck at work. also there
| was a senate during imperial time.
| thom wrote:
| Well, the Roman Republic had an empire so you can see where
| it gets confusing.
| namaria wrote:
| If you want to get technical, the Roman Republic controlled
| provinces and ally states. Emperor was the title of a
| victorious general, and a notion of a "Roman Empire" is an
| artifact of modern scholarship.
| edgarvaldes wrote:
| It's all about the Roman Empire and World War II. The other
| day, while I was taking my son to school, we were talking about
| the Maginot Line. He knows that story better than I do, even
| though my son is only 8 years old. But he likes history and
| yes, he has a nice illustrated book about Rome.
| Ian_Macharia wrote:
| "I'm thinking about it right now!"
| morelisp wrote:
| Why would I stop thinking about something that never ended?
| belval wrote:
| This has the be the funniest trend to come out of Tiktok. My SO
| point blank asked me how many times I thought about the roman
| empire and I replied "I don't know, once or twice a week".
|
| Little does she know we get a post from acoup every week!
|
| Reference (for those out of the loop):
| https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/09/18/how-ofte...
| genewitch wrote:
| thanks for the reference. I mean i could have websearched
| around for a while, but i've been asking everyone that
| comments in my friends group, about this topic, and i'm
| getting "it was a trend" but not where or why it started.
|
| when 1/8th of the planet knows about a trend and i'm out of
| the loop...
| jjulius wrote:
| I was completely out of the loop as well, until my wife
| shot me a completely out of the blue text this morning
| asking me if I thought I could help land a plane in an
| emergency, and how often I thought about the Roman Empire.
| After I begged for context, she told me about the trend,
| and then about three minutes later I happened upon this
| thread and this comment chain was at the top lol.
| swasheck wrote:
| my wife asked me and i said once per week. then she and my
| daughter cackled and asked me to repeat my answer and i knew
| i was about to become part of a trend so i refused. but isn't
| it fascinating how truly interested in the roman republic and
| emopire we are? people are coming up with theories about why
| this is the case but i'm not sure any of them resonate with
| me. i was always more of a greece person until i visited
| italy 7 years ago and i was thoroughly smitten.
| seanw444 wrote:
| My answer to my girlfriend was that I think about ancient
| Greece more often. Rome less. Greece was ahead of its time
| in philosophy and science. So many household names. Rome
| has a lot of political analogs to today though, which is
| what I find interesting about it.
| Keyframe wrote:
| Difference being Rome was an entity with government,
| military, etc. with which we can draw a lot of parallels
| to today, whereas Greece was more of a loose
| interconnection of cities that shape shifted over time.
| Both extremely interesting, of course.
| jmkr wrote:
| I've never been asked this question, but I think I'd
| respond similarly. In fact, when I think of Rome, I think
| of Greece. They are nearly inseparable for me, but that's
| probably because my understanding of history is the
| history of western philosophy. You start with the
| Socratics, then read about the neo-platonist in Rome.
| lo_zamoyski wrote:
| > Greece was ahead of its time in philosophy and science
|
| And some would say that, philosophically, while we have
| the _potential_ benefit of hindsight and therefore the
| opportunity to exceed the Greeks (you just need to crack
| open the right books), our typical modern, academic
| philosophy, is in many ways, inferior to it.
| jmkr wrote:
| This is a strange comment because not only is academic
| philosophy built from the Greek tradition, but it is
| formalized. Maybe one can say it stagnated for centuries
| but I find it difficult to say that the work in the 20th
| century is inferior.
|
| I wouldn't say that about comparing Hilbert to
| Pythagoras, and this is not putting down history of
| knowledge.
| Jensson wrote:
| Just the awareness of the scientific method makes us far
| superior to the ancient Greeks. Many still doesn't follow
| it, but basically no Greek followed it and it really
| shows in their works.
|
| For problems where the scientific method doesn't help
| however we probably aren't that much better than the
| ancient Greeks, maybe we are even inferior there.
| henrikschroder wrote:
| > but isn't it fascinating how truly interested in the
| roman republic and emopire we are?
|
| If you're in the US, how can you not be? It's everywhere!
| The fledgling US was desperately in need of authority and
| gravitas, so they essentially cosplayed as the inheritors
| of the ideals of Rome, and put that shit everywhere.
|
| Why does Washington DC look the way it does? Why are there
| pillars and obelisks and domes and white marble everywhere?
| Why is there Latin on the money? Why does every US
| courthouse look like a Roman temple, and why is there a
| Roman goddess on it?
|
| The trend is popular because it's laughing at men for being
| "nerdy", but I think it's sad how ignorant a lot of people
| in the US are for _not_ knowing about or recognizing the
| absolutely enormous amounts of references to Rome that
| exists in modern US.
| mattmanser wrote:
| It is not a US thing.
|
| Europeans also have Latin on our money too. Our alphabet
| is the Latin alphabet.
|
| They were still teaching primarily IN Latin at
| universities around the war of independence. Yes, you
| read that right, you spoke and read Latin as your primary
| learning language. The American universities copied the
| practice from their home countries.
|
| Until the 1960s in the UK you had to know Latin to learn
| Medicine or Law. It was still taught in many schools, and
| I think has been having a resurgence.
|
| I was taught Latin at school.
|
| The Americans didn't cunningly adopt it to lend
| themselves legitimacy. It's as simple as the European
| settlers brought it with them. It was the culture of
| European intellectuals.
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| What is sort of curious to think about is that all these
| monuments really shouldn't be white. They should be
| painted many colors especially the friezes. There were
| never temples with big empty rooms with a white marble
| statue either. Done in proper roman tradition the Lincoln
| memorial would be this imposing giant, fully painted,
| with a pile of gold and other offerings right there in
| the room along with regular insence burning fronted by
| local patrons.
|
| Of course by the time europeans got into the rennaisance
| all these temples had been pilfered and regular
| repainting had ceased for centuries. So because of this
| huge misunderstanding, neoclassical architecture is
| always boring and beige despite us knowing better today.
| lo_zamoyski wrote:
| > Why does Washington DC look the way it does? Why are
| there pillars and obelisks and domes and white marble
| everywhere? Why is there Latin on the money? Why does
| every US courthouse look like a Roman temple, and why is
| there a Roman goddess on it?
|
| This is all true for much or most of Europe, the West,
| and Western-affiliated countries. (Also, the marble in
| Rome, and Greece from whom the Romans took much of these
| styles) was generally painted, so not quite the austere
| white of DC.)
| verve_rat wrote:
| But everyone tries to wear the clothes of Rome. The
| Russians, the Ottomans, unified Germany all played Roman
| dress up.
|
| Edit: also Catholicism.
| Detrytus wrote:
| For Catholicism it wasn't a "dress up" - it was the
| official religion of Rome in the last couple centuries,
| and the Catholic Church was the only main institution of
| (Western) Roman Empire surviving its fall.
| Jensson wrote:
| Why do people think that is funny?
|
| Edit: Why downvote a genuine question? How else would I learn
| why people find that funny?
| bcherry wrote:
| For me, it's because it's true. I really do think about the
| roman empire all the time! and my wife couldn't believe it.
|
| Most "trends" from TikTok are made up, stupid, fake, or
| highly exaggerated. This one is funny because it's actually
| kinda true for a LOT of people, and has nothing to do with
| TikTok.
| Jensson wrote:
| Is it really that strange that people think about the
| Roman empire when things related to it are all around us?
| Even the white house is built to look Roman. Not to
| mention all the documentaries and games that touches on
| Roman stuff.
|
| If you ask men how often they think about different
| manufacturing processes you will probably get similar
| numbers, or even higher, for the same reason.
| [deleted]
| wizerdrobe wrote:
| I find it interesting but for the diversity of "why"
|
| I have an Italian American friend who weirdly into the
| Roman Empire, kind of in a weeb kind of way but he's a
| tatted up (Roman Republic full back piece!) Army veteran
| who would Kimura my ass if I he sees this.
|
| I have a friend just nerdy as shit and into history. He
| constantly talks about this podcast or that.
|
| I have an ex-roommate / philosophy major, so it comes up
| a good bit.
|
| I have a friend into Stoicism. Oddly not a philosophy
| major.
|
| I have a friend rich in small arms, ammunition, and those
| rice ration buckets because we're destined for a failure
| of the Republic as they had.
|
| I have a friend with the same belief, except he just
| wants to fiddle so I'm pretty sure I won't bother raiding
| his house if either of them are correct.
| acatnamedjoe wrote:
| I don't think it's funny because it's "strange". It's
| funny because it reminds people that they can have very
| different inner worlds to people they share their life
| with.
| Jensson wrote:
| But people already know that? Everyone knows men and
| women think about very different things.
|
| But I guess it is similar to the old meme where a woman
| worries why the guy is so distant that day and if he
| doesn't like her any longer, and the guy is just thinking
| hard about why his motorcycle isn't starting.
|
| But that explains it: it is funny the first time you see
| it, but these differences aren't funny when you already
| are aware of them. Everything is a first to people. So I
| don't find it funny since I have seen similar things many
| times before and have grown tired of it, while others
| here finds it funny since it is new to them.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| I think people find it humorous because it's an unexpected
| instance of sexual dimorphism. Like a "Men are from Mars
| [not Ares]" kind of thing.
| Jensson wrote:
| Since when is making fun of sexual dimorphism a thing? I
| thought we stopped doing that.
|
| Like, would it be funny if men asked women how often they
| think about celebrity relationships and drama? People
| just think about different things.
| lotsoweiners wrote:
| Maybe nerds on the internet stopped doing that but plenty
| of my coworkers and people I meet in everyday life aren't
| competing for "woke" points.
| edgarvaldes wrote:
| The other day I was in a party with my wife and my
| friends. In some moment, we (all men) were in a corner
| talking about comics, movies, sports. My wife was sitting
| nearby, and she could hear us for 30 minutes straight
| talking about the same topics. At the end of the party,
| she asked me how were my friends' kids, jobs and family.
| I had no clue. She laughed at me and said "Typical men.
| We women always ask for the family, the school, the kids,
| the life of her friends, you boys talk for hours and know
| nothing new about your friends".
|
| Is it typical? I don't know.
| coffeefirst wrote:
| One girl learning her dad and boyfriend are both history
| geeks who think about the Roman Empire all the time is not
| funny.
|
| Hundreds of thousands of women realizing that unbeknownst
| to them ALL the men in their lives secretly think about the
| Roman Empire _all the time_ is hilarious.
|
| Of course, the more specific this phenomenon is, the
| funnier it is: all men think about history isn't fun. All
| men are thinking about the Roman Empire is pretty funny.
| All men are thinking about Pliny the Elder and none of the
| women in their lives had any idea much funnier.
|
| This is classic benign violation https://en.wikipedia.org/w
| iki/Theories_of_humor#Benign_viola... The reason I think
| its a hit because it scales and its totally
| silly/fun/harmless, relatable beyond expectations, and a
| welcome distraction to the usual hellscape that is the
| internet in 2023.
|
| ---
|
| So the next question is why is it _happening_ , and I have
| two theories for this:
|
| 1. History is stranger than fiction. There's a lot of
| history geeks out there _and there always have been_. See
| stereotype about dads reading WWII books.
|
| 2. The Roman Empire is a gateway drug to history for a lot
| of people. And why not? It's a fascinating period full of
| whacky characters, and there's been so many
| movies/shows/plays/games about it that you _probably_
| already know enough to dive in and generally know to expect
| some togas and a dude shouting "I'm Spartacus."
| Jensson wrote:
| Thanks, that explains it even better! Basically many
| women all over the world realized this 'weird' thing now
| together and that shared experience creates something
| magical.
| nullindividual wrote:
| One might think that an individual who thinks about an
| empire that has been "dead" for nearly 1500 years is a bit
| strange. Why would anyone care about a dead empire, after
| all? The reason why it's funny is because of how common
| people say they do think about the Roman empire (which for
| me is also quite often). It's subverting expectations-- you
| think no one thinks about the Empire-- in reality, all of
| your family and neighbors do think about the Empire on a
| regular basis.
| Jensson wrote:
| > Why would anyone care about a dead empire, after all?
|
| Because it isn't dead culturally.
|
| When you see a medieval castle you think about medieval
| things, when you see Roman architecture you think of
| Roman things, and since you see Roman architecture all
| the time in the news, like every time they show the white
| house etc, it makes sense your brain thinks about the
| Romans now and then.
| verve_rat wrote:
| See also: the Pope and the Catholic Church.
| TeMPOraL wrote:
| Maybe with all that sudden interest, we'll get some progress
| on the "Rome Sweet Rome" movie. For context, and going by my
| memory, circa 12 years ago somebody on Reddit asked who would
| win, a bunch of Marines or the army of the Roman Empire; in
| response, one redditor wrote a short story about Marines
| being thrown back through time into the Roman era - it became
| viral (for ~2011 levels of "viral"), and the author ended up
| making a movie deal with some producers. I've been waiting
| for over a decade now for said movie to happen...
| jffry wrote:
| It was indeed August 2011:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome,_Sweet_Rome
|
| If it's been in development hell that long, I don't know
| how likely it is that it'll ever see the light of day.
| jackconsidine wrote:
| Whoa! I picked up The Fall of the Roman Republic by Plutarch this
| week and have been glued. Will definitely be reading this whole
| series
| swasheck wrote:
| the fall of the roman empire is such a fascinating, and
| surprisingly divisive, topic. enjoy the read and then pick up
| other works and it will feel like hearing the same story
| through a brand new lens. this may be part of the enduring
| curiosity with the roman republic and subsequent empire - it's
| so complicated and nuanced that you cannot simply distill it
| down to a single factor.
| Symmetry wrote:
| It's amazing this showed up on Hacker News before it showed up in
| my RSS reader.
| monocasa wrote:
| Makes you wonder how prevalent RSS->HN submission scripted
| automation is, or if it's just the thundering herd of users.
| bee_rider wrote:
| This guy has absolutely nailed the nerdy-but-accessible vibe,
| no surprise his posts are recurring first-pagers.
| belval wrote:
| I wish we had a Bret Devereaux for more topics, but then I
| might never get things done.
| ethbr1 wrote:
| It seems like there's a ridiculous amount of time to sink
| into a single blog post.
|
| So you're probably looking at mostly historians to be able
| to do something like what Devereaux puts out. The closest I
| could think of would be: Derek Lowe
| Neil deGrasse Tyson (when not playing for camera)
| Adam Savage Nigel Braun (NileRed) Salman Khan
| Dianna Cowern (Physics Girl) Grant Sanderson
| (3Blue1Brown)
| riazrizvi wrote:
| Point to Charlie Munger, whom I was critical of a few days ago,
| how is so much written on how the Roman Republic worked, without
| talking about the most basic of incentive structures that drove
| its citizens to work like no others in the first place - The Law
| of Twelve Tables? It gave every citizen property rights that were
| protected by the State. The system was _the_ get rich game for
| the common man (after Alexander replaced ancient Greece's
| Solonian Constitution with his Royal authority). Roman soldiers
| were citizens looking to make money, it was a so called army of
| merchants. Joining the empire was an attractive proposition
| because people saw an opportunity to break out of their own
| opportunity-poor regimes, so the model spread like wildfire,
| though obviously resisted by hereditary rulers who stood to lose
| their cozy positions.
| arrosenberg wrote:
| And look! The problems started when the wealthy Senators
| started hoarding land in the aftermath of the Punic and Greek
| conquests. The Gracchi - land reform issues! Marius - land
| reform issues! Caesar - land reform issues!
|
| It's as if history rhymes.
| riazrizvi wrote:
| Rhymes indeed. Caesar rode a popular wave of resentment to a
| system that was increasingly gamed by the powerful few, and
| it ultimately lead to power being captured by an even more
| concentrated body, the office of an emperor, Augustus,
| Caesar's heir.
|
| Isn't this the exact thing we see in the USA where the
| economically disadvantaged seek solutions from the right
| whose policies aim to further concentrate wealth and
| opportunity?
| 1980phipsi wrote:
| Slavery certainly had an impact on that as well.
| [deleted]
| gmaster1440 wrote:
| [flagged]
| CydeWeys wrote:
| HN really needs to add "No AI generated comments" to the site
| rules. I'm not interested in reading AI summaries in comments
| here; I come for actual discussion by real people.
| gmaster1440 wrote:
| I don't see how a short AI summary dissuades actual
| discussion by real people. If anything, it can lower the
| barrier to entry and encourage more people to comment and
| participate, especially for longform pieces.
| pvg wrote:
| It's just noise, you can read the moderation side of it
| here:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36252547
| the_af wrote:
| People who want an AI summary can get it for themselves, I
| think there's no need to "spam" that service here, unasked
| for.
| ulizzle wrote:
| I think I'm almost out of this illness. Still sweating the fever
| but no migraines
|
| Ive been reading a lot because that's about the only thing I can
| do so I read the original Gallic wars from Julius Cesar and its
| funny because he's painted like a bad guy today for becoming a
| dictator but the Senate was at that point so corrupt and
| inefficient and everyone hated it so he wasn't the only one
| trying to get rid of democracy. Julius Caesar had actually been
| involved in four attempted coups before he got it done. And he
| was popular with the public even after his death so that makes
| sense
|
| I'm sure a lot of here think of the Roman Empire almost
| obsessively. How bad is this turn toward extrememe censorship and
| surveillance? At what point do people say to hell with it and
| bring back kingship?
| rawgabbit wrote:
| My understanding was that Caesar represented the populares who
| championed the poor like the Gracchi brothers. By Caesar's
| time, the poor believed not only the Senate was beyond repair
| but were the primary reason for their poverty. Several
| attempted land reforms were blocked by the Senate who lived off
| their latifundium. https://www.britannica.com/topic/latifundium
|
| The populares welcomed Caesar and Augustus because they saw no
| other alternative. Sulla had effectively ended the office of
| the tribunes who represented the poor. From the essay below, _A
| tribune couldn't even guarantee his personal safety: the murder
| of the Gracchi brothers is the best example. This office itself
| was an outcome of the political compromise in the early
| Republic. Its seemingly supreme and sacrosanct power was based
| on the compromise, or to say, tolerance of the Senate. When the
| symbiotic relationship between the nobles and the commoners on
| the political stage of the early Republic collapsed after
| drastic economic changes, the compromise of the Senate
| automatically vanished, so it was only a matter of time to
| weaken the power of the tribunate. Thus, the Roman commoners
| must find new strength for their political struggles._
| https://www.atlantis-press.com/article/125967046.pdf
|
| In other words, the people will rise up if they believe the
| political class no longer represents them and are actually
| opposed to them. I see a parallel between the enslaved
| Carthaginians working the latifundium and all the immigrants
| our politicians want to bring in to "fix our economy." I
| believe this is playing with fire.
| kmeisthax wrote:
| The question is not whether or not to bring in more
| immigrants. The agricultural industry already does so in
| large numbers, legality be damned, and the parallels to the
| latifundium are way stronger than, say, Facebook/Meta wanting
| to hire more people from India.
|
| Ironically if we radically legalized immigration it'd make it
| _harder_ for Big Ag to exploit migrant workers, since they 'd
| have access to legal immigration and the protections therein.
| But that's assuming Big Ag doesn't do to that program what
| they did to the Bracero program back in the 70s.
| rootusrootus wrote:
| > At what point do people say to hell with it and bring back
| kingship?
|
| That seems to be well in progress, though I don't think anyone
| is actually using the term 'king' yet.
| __MatrixMan__ wrote:
| I had a ton of time to kill in an airport recently, so for a
| little while I hung out at the end of the TSA line to let the
| confused passerby know that yes... this is the end of the
| line for peasants. Nobility goes over there. I think I did a
| much better job than the existing signage--branding sort of
| confuses the matter.
|
| Had a lot of fun conversations with other peasants about
| whether this is the kind of privilege that the french
| revolution was fought over. The nobility didn't have as much
| time to stand around and water the seeds of revolution.
| Seemed fitting.
| lokar wrote:
| Judges are: "the president is not a king, and you are not the
| president "
| AnimalMuppet wrote:
| Yes, they're using it _in the negative_.
|
| But Yarvin and the "Dark Enlightenment" people seem to be
| using it seriously (so far as I understand them).
| lokar wrote:
| But that they thought it worth pointing out is telling
| bigstrat2003 wrote:
| I recently read _Rubicon_ by Tom Holland, and honestly I came
| away from that book feeling like it 's Sulla, not Caesar, who
| truly deserves the blame for the downfall of the Republic. Like
| yeah, Caesar crossed the Rubicon, but that seal was broken
| decades earlier by Sulla. If Caesar hadn't done it, someone
| else would have because it was clear that there would be no
| real consequences as long as you could win the war. And then
| Sulla painted the town red with blood to get rid of his
| enemies. All the reforms in the world can't undo that kind of
| damage to the social fabric, or so I would think. I am
| admittedly not the most knowledgeable about this topic, but it
| really does seem like Sulla should get the blame that Caesar
| does.
|
| Also, one thing that struck me about the Republic is that it
| worked right up until people stopped upholding the social norms
| that made it work. And while one might say the lesson is "make
| your system of government work without social norms", I wonder
| if such a thing is possible. Looking at the US government it
| seems damaged (not broken yet, at least) precisely because we
| have stopped upholding the social norms that made it work. This
| being despite the fact that the US constitution seems to be
| more robust than what the Romans had! It really makes me wonder
| if any form of government, no matter what, absolutely relies on
| social norms to work well (and breaks down when those norms
| do).
| lainga wrote:
| "Time was when men could (so to speak) of a given man, by
| nourishing and decorating him with fit appliances, to the due
| pitch, _make_ themselves a King, almost as the Bees do ...
| How such Ideals do realise themselves; and grow, wondrously,
| from amid the incongruous ever-fluctuating chaos of the
| Actual ... How they grow; and, after long stormy growth,
| bloom out mature, supreme; then quickly (for the blossom is
| brief) fall into decay; sorrowfully dwindle; and crumble
| down, or rush down, noisily or noiselessly disappearing. "
|
| (Carlyle's history of the French Revolution)
| Eumenes wrote:
| The entire civil war and times surrounding Marius and Sulla
| would make an amazing movie. Its a real shocker that
| Hollywood hasn't picked it up yet. Not that I trust Hollywood
| to make anything good anymore. I think Caesar gets alot of
| attention due to the way he was murdered. And it was the
| "end" of the Republic. You also have Marc Antony and
| Cleopatra in there, which is a good story.
| Exoristos wrote:
| People, historically, have often had successful lives with
| social norms but no government (as we think of it), but never
| with a government and no social norms.
| henrikschroder wrote:
| > Rubicon by Tom Holland
|
| I'm currently listening my way through The Rest Is History,
| the podcast he does with Dominic Sandbrook. Very entertaning,
| highly recommended!
| 12907835202 wrote:
| Worth starting from ep.1 or just diving in where it's at
| now?
| url00 wrote:
| This is very poignant. I have come to similar conclusions
| w.r.t societal systems only last as long as the social norms
| continue - the actual legal framework and structure is
| secondary to the larger cultural imperatives that brought it
| about in the first place.
|
| And as you say, history directly plays into the shift of
| possible actions by social elites/leaders. Once change
| starts, change itself can become as social norm and seen as
| acceptable by society at large (at least to a point in a
| given time period).
| digging wrote:
| Sulla often gets the opposite treatment because he retired
| from dictatorship, but it's important to keep in mind exactly
| the problems you raise. Mass murder causes stress to a
| society, regardless of intent.
| seanw444 wrote:
| This is the conclusion I've come to. Societal decay causes
| nations with even the most solid foundations to topple.
| There's really no way around it.
|
| A phrase to summarize the phenomenon is: "Politics is
| downstream from culture."
|
| We focus too much on slapping bandaids on society through
| increasing bloat of government and adding more laws to the
| pile, when the real root of the problem is our culture is
| falling apart. No amount of laws is going to fix that.
|
| I parallel it to medications. You get one illness, so you get
| prescribed a medication. But then that medication causes an
| unusual reaction with your body, so you're given another
| medication to fix that one. But that medication has adverse
| effects when taken in conjunction with the first one, so now
| you need to take another medication to fix that... and it
| continues until you have a daily ritual of popping 20 pills
| to solve a trivial health condition.
|
| The US is taking way too many medications, and not going on
| the proper diet to solve its health issues. That can be said
| both literally, and in the metaphorical sense.
| araes wrote:
| You use the phrase Societal Decay. I think you can say it
| has many similarities to a corpse. Not to be gross, just
| you get a lot of the same terms.
|
| The country freezes in rigor mortis, and can no longer take
| actions.
|
| Politics or governance often feels like its experience
| brain death.
|
| You get bloat and deflating effects, bubbles that inflate
| and pop.
|
| You get a lot of social events that humans would describe
| as "putrid".
|
| You get flight or escape of those that can leave for a new
| host, others flee to the remaining healthy areas.
|
| You have external "parasites" / enemies removing portions
| of the empire/nation.
|
| The process usually results with breakup and collapse in
| prior body segments.
| Jensson wrote:
| Heart disease fits the best. Your heart is dying, it
| can't pump blood properly. To compensate it tries to grow
| larger, it swells and you get a giant heart. At some
| point it collapses since the problem was that the heart
| was leaky or the arteries got clogged or the muscles has
| some issue etc, growing larger can compensate in the
| short term but eventually you die anyway.
|
| So it is similar to how a government that tries to grab
| more power and become larger is a red flag for corruption
| or inefficiency. The problem isn't that it tries to grow,
| the problem is that it is corrupt and inefficient in the
| first place, the country is then dying no matter what.
|
| Countries can be replaced however, and small governments
| are easier to replace than large ones, so ideally should
| fix the government before it grows too large and powerful
| to easily be replaced.
| waihtis wrote:
| We're super close to it given how many states have abandoned
| and spat on the contributing class in favour of egalitarianism.
| hef19898 wrote:
| In a Monarchy, or Oligarchy, not everyone who thinks they can
| make into the ruling class will manage to do so.
| jiofj wrote:
| > At what point do people say to hell with it and bring back
| kingship?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin
| golem14 wrote:
| I propose to instead use the system proposed by G.K.
| Chesterton in "The Napoleon of Notting Hill".
| swasheck wrote:
| bret devereaux is a great follow on twitter, uh ... X, as well.
| his thoughts on the ukraine/russia conflict are very interesting
| to me
| ethbr1 wrote:
| His modern stuff is more... eh.
|
| E.g. I thought there were a lot of flaws in his early-war "NATO
| can't supply X, because Russia will threaten nukes" positions,
| as he completed ignored the obvious opposite "Russia can't
| escalate, because NATO will threaten nukes"
|
| 110% love his Roman-period deep dives though.
|
| There's probably a smarter quip than me out there to the effect
| of "Great people share their brilliance on many matters, while
| the greatest speak on but a few."
| bobthepanda wrote:
| To be fair, it took a while for people to figure out how much
| MAD was still in play, since before the invasion most
| punditry thought Russia was bluffing and would never try to
| invade Kyiv with tanks, so what else had they gotten wrong?
| ethbr1 wrote:
| If a shoe fits on one foot, it fits on the other too. Aka
| the "M".
|
| The "Russia is a madman, but we're not" is... difficult to
| square logically and historically.
|
| Beneath all the political and PR charades, during the Cold
| War the Soviet Union was generally as terrified of the West
| pre-emptively nuking them as vice versus.
| pphysch wrote:
| I was curious, so I looked. He's out there boosting Timothy
| Snyder. Oof. I'll pass.
| lying4fun wrote:
| I'm not familiar with Timothy's persona/work, why did that
| repel you?
| _whiteCaps_ wrote:
| Can you explain further? I see on his Wikipedia page:
|
| "Since Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine, and the bombing of
| its energy infrastructure, Snyder has spoken and written
| widely on the history of Ukraine and its worldwide importance
| for democracy, on the disastrous geopolitical effects of the
| invasion, and on the need for other nations and individuals
| to stand for the protection of territory belonging to that
| state."
|
| which seems reasonable to me.
| philipov wrote:
| I hope he does a series like this on civic governance in Han
| China next!
| DylanSp wrote:
| As great as that would be, it's well out of Devereaux's area of
| specialization; I don't think he'd feel like he could do that
| topic justice. If you look up his older series on farming, he
| notes in the introduction and in his addendum on rice farming
| that he's not as familiar with Chinese history.
| red_admiral wrote:
| He does guest posts though, so maybe there's a chance?
| fladrif wrote:
| Unfortunately he as a historian specializes in the
| Mediterranean, specifically Rome.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-09-22 23:01 UTC)