6 ms·

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

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 extrémeme censorship and surveillance? At what point do people say to hell with it and bring back kingship?

rootusrootus 3y ago
> 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.
- lokar 3y ago
  Judges are: “the president is not a king, and you are not the president “
  - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
    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 3y ago
      But that they thought it worth pointing out is telling
- __MatrixMan__ 3y ago
  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.
bigstrat2003 3y ago
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).
- digging 3y ago
  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.
- lainga 3y ago
  "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 3y ago
waihtis 3y ago
We’re super close to it given how many states have abandoned and spat on the contributing class in favour of egalitarianism.
- hef19898 3y ago
  In a Monarchy, or Oligarchy, not everyone who thinks they can make into the ruling class will manage to do so.
  - waihtis 3y ago
    thats exactly how it should be. only a small percent of people have any business in being rulers of people.
    - hef19898 3y ago
      Whixh is exactly how it should not be... But let me guess, you think you might be one of those "special" few?
      - waihtis 3y ago
        While being a King would be a lucrative profession, I have very few qualities that would be mandatory for success in that position. I would still 100% support a more lean, highly qualified leadership versus a large pool of untalented career-driven nitwits which is what most western governments have to offer.
jiofj 3y ago
> At what point do people say to hell with it and bring back kingship? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin
- golem14 3y ago
  I propose to instead use the system proposed by G.K. Chesterton in "The Napoleon of Notting Hill".
rawgabbit 3y ago
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 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 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 3y ago
  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 3y ago

> 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.

lokar 3y ago
Judges are: “the president is not a king, and you are not the president “
- AnimalMuppet 3y ago
  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 3y ago
    But that they thought it worth pointing out is telling
__MatrixMan__ 3y ago
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.

bigstrat2003 3y ago

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).

digging 3y ago
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.
lainga 3y ago
"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 3y ago

waihtis 3y ago

We’re super close to it given how many states have abandoned and spat on the contributing class in favour of egalitarianism.

hef19898 3y ago
In a Monarchy, or Oligarchy, not everyone who thinks they can make into the ruling class will manage to do so.
- waihtis 3y ago
  thats exactly how it should be. only a small percent of people have any business in being rulers of people.
  - hef19898 3y ago
    Whixh is exactly how it should not be... But let me guess, you think you might be one of those "special" few?
    - waihtis 3y ago
      While being a King would be a lucrative profession, I have very few qualities that would be mandatory for success in that position. I would still 100% support a more lean, highly qualified leadership versus a large pool of untalented career-driven nitwits which is what most western governments have to offer.

jiofj 3y ago

> At what point do people say to hell with it and bring back kingship? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin

golem14 3y ago
I propose to instead use the system proposed by G.K. Chesterton in "The Napoleon of Notting Hill".

rawgabbit 3y ago

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 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 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 3y ago
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.