Meh. Looking at this retrospectively, this is where we can trace back where the problem of international jewry has its origin.
Before, most jews lived in this one confined area, Titus had the opportunity to actually solve the problem of the jew once and for all but had some sympathy for them because he had some kike whore he was into and had accepted the kike lord Josephus as his friend and advisor.
Because of Titus unwillingness to actually finish the job and vanguish these pest for real. As a result, the jew scattered all around the world, infiltrating many nations and their leaderships all over the world so in later centuries they were able to form an international intelligence network so that they could wreak havoc all around the world.
That was Caracalla the Arab emperor of Rome I believe that made it so that everyone could vote and be a citizen and ended slavery in Rome. Plus multiculturalism preceded the Romans in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia. Where the Whites in those lands became overrun by immigration and diversity.
They scattered to Rome and with the Judeo-Christian cults the Semites spent the next 400+ years dissolving Roman language, art, culture and history until there was no true Roman left.
No. Rome should never have become involved in wars outside their own lands. They caused multiculturalism to blight europe in ways that had never before been possible.
Palestine geopolitically speaking was very useful for securing trade from the east also for defending against the Persians who could’ve monopolized all trade from China and India
The Roman economy was geared towards overseas military campaigns. The Ides of March was the middle of the war month designed for new campaigns, specifically for settlement of old soldiers after serving time in the armed forces.
By the late republic? Yes. They had fallen into a cycle of invading new lands to launch the careers of politicians, glutting themselves on the spoils and allowing plutocrats to amass power on the back of slave labour.
In the long run the result was that those plutocrats didn't know when to stop and turned their entire society into a giant slave plantation. By the end of the empire there were very few romans who could consider themselves free in any meaningful sense, they were welcoming the barbarians in.
The lesson I draw from all of this is that we're not supposed to own other humans or rule over foreign nations. If you're going to invade somewhere do it properly, clear the land and settle your own people. If you can't do that then you have no business going there.
It was always an agrarian and slave-based economy. Conquer new lands, grow grains there for bread, turn everyone into slaves, make them work their sentence off in the military for future conquests.
The late Republic was full of corruption as you mention which an entirely new problem, but the model was always unsustainable.
It was an economists wet dream, perpetual growth in a world with finite resources.
It was always an agrarian and slave-based economy. Conquer new lands, grow grains there for bread, turn everyone into slaves, make them work their sentence off in the military for future conquests.
Always? No. The early republic was based more on the model of the farmer-soldier. The permanent urban population were a tiny minority and the city itself was more like a stockade where they kept their gold and emergency supplies. The model you're describing is more accurate to the late republic/early empire, by which point the urban population had eclipsed the rural one politically.
The late Republic was full of corruption as you mention which an entirely new problem, but the model was always unsustainable.
Well, the two are directly linked. Dependent people vote for more dependency. As roman politics became more dominated by the needs of the urban poor and administered by slavemasters who just kept expanding their power.
It was an economists wet dream, perpetual growth in a world with finite resources.
Keynesists' maybe, it's an austrian nightmare. Their economy was essentially venezuela: They kept printing more money to pay the army and fund gibs for their political base, but it was never enough. By the end they were collecting taxes in the form of goods because no one had gold to pay them and imperial currency was worthless.
[ + ] didyouknow
[ - ] didyouknow 5 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 10:47:10 ago (+5/-0)
Before, most jews lived in this one confined area, Titus had the opportunity to actually solve the problem of the jew once and for all but had some sympathy for them because he had some kike whore he was into and had accepted the kike lord Josephus as his friend and advisor.
Because of Titus unwillingness to actually finish the job and vanguish these pest for real. As a result, the jew scattered all around the world, infiltrating many nations and their leaderships all over the world so in later centuries they were able to form an international intelligence network so that they could wreak havoc all around the world.
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 5 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 12:04:25 ago (+5/-0)
[ + ] Ironcrusader88
[ - ] Ironcrusader88 3 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 13:13:51 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] fightknightHERO
[ - ] fightknightHERO 2 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 14:18:37 ago (+2/-0)
(((foreign))) pussy
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 0 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 22:35:48 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] youregay
[ - ] youregay 2 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 11:49:42 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] account deleted by user
[ - ] account deleted by user [op] 1 point 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 13:31:58 ago (+2/-1)
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 1 point 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 12:02:48 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Ironcrusader88
[ - ] Ironcrusader88 1 point 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 13:36:52 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 0 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 13:42:27 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Belrick
[ - ] Belrick 0 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 14:40:30 ago (+0/-0)
When you have hostile tribes raiding your populace you must leave your borders to defeat them.
Why did usa lose in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Korea?
Because the barbarians were on the other side of imaginary borders usa was unwillingly to cross.
Making the enemies safe to plot and recoup and build and train armies
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 1 point 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 14:58:31 ago (+1/-0)
Oh please. The problem with Rome wasn't them crossing borders, it was trying to subjugate the entire world. It's not like they weren't also raiders.
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 0 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 22:38:24 ago (+0/-0)
The Ides of March was the middle of the war month designed for new campaigns, specifically for settlement of old soldiers after serving time in the armed forces.
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 0 points 3.4 yearsJan 28, 2022 02:15:59 ago (+0/-0)
In the long run the result was that those plutocrats didn't know when to stop and turned their entire society into a giant slave plantation. By the end of the empire there were very few romans who could consider themselves free in any meaningful sense, they were welcoming the barbarians in.
The lesson I draw from all of this is that we're not supposed to own other humans or rule over foreign nations. If you're going to invade somewhere do it properly, clear the land and settle your own people. If you can't do that then you have no business going there.
[ + ] UncleDoug
[ - ] UncleDoug 0 points 3.4 yearsJan 28, 2022 02:27:56 ago (+0/-0)
The late Republic was full of corruption as you mention which an entirely new problem, but the model was always unsustainable.
It was an economists wet dream, perpetual growth in a world with finite resources.
[ + ] Broc_Liath
[ - ] Broc_Liath 0 points 3.4 yearsJan 28, 2022 02:44:29 ago (+0/-0)
Always? No. The early republic was based more on the model of the farmer-soldier. The permanent urban population were a tiny minority and the city itself was more like a stockade where they kept their gold and emergency supplies. The model you're describing is more accurate to the late republic/early empire, by which point the urban population had eclipsed the rural one politically.
Well, the two are directly linked. Dependent people vote for more dependency. As roman politics became more dominated by the needs of the urban poor and administered by slavemasters who just kept expanding their power.
Keynesists' maybe, it's an austrian nightmare. Their economy was essentially venezuela: They kept printing more money to pay the army and fund gibs for their political base, but it was never enough. By the end they were collecting taxes in the form of goods because no one had gold to pay them and imperial currency was worthless.
[ + ] globaltrekker
[ - ] globaltrekker -1 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 17:38:16 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] carnold03
[ - ] carnold03 -1 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 13:06:36 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] Lordbananafist
[ - ] Lordbananafist -1 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 10:48:43 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] SirNiggsalot
[ - ] SirNiggsalot -1 points 3.4 yearsJan 27, 2022 10:20:49 ago (+0/-1)