Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate

acoup.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 126 posts

Re: How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate

#31

Post by lokar »

rootusrootus wrote: post #20
ulizzle wrote: post #17

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 democrac…

> 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.

Judges are: “the president is not a king, and you are not the president “

Re: How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate

#32

Post by swasheck »

jackconsidine wrote: post #2

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

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.

Re: How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate

#33

Post by the_af »

gmaster1440 wrote: post #12
CydeWeys wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

People who want an AI summary can get it for themselves, I think there's no need to "spam" that service here, unasked for.

Re: How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate

#34

Post by 1980phipsi »

arrosenberg wrote: post #19
riazrizvi wrote: post #9

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 r…

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.

Slavery certainly had an impact on that as well.

Re: How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate

#35

Post by edgarvaldes »

snowpid wrote: post #4

This is the reason I think about the Roman Empire at least once a week!

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.

Re: How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate

#36

Post by snowpid »

throwawaycities wrote: post #16
snowpid wrote: post #4

This is the reason I think about the Roman Empire at least once a week!

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.

I havent read the article. Im still stuck at work. also there was a senate during imperial time.

Re: How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate

#37

Post by jiofj »

ulizzle wrote: post #17

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 democrac…

> At what point do people say to hell with it and bring back kingship?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Yarvin

Re: How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate

#38

Post by AnimalMuppet »

lokar wrote: post #31
rootusrootus wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Judges are: “the president is not a king, and you are not the president “

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).

Re: How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate

#39

Post by lokar »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #38
lokar wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Judges are: “the president is not a king, and you are not the president “

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).

But that they thought it worth pointing out is telling

Re: How to Roman Republic, Part IV: The Senate

#40

Post by hef19898 »

waihtis wrote: post #24
ulizzle wrote: post #17

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 democrac…

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

In a Monarchy, or Oligarchy, not everyone who thinks they can make into the ruling class will manage to do so.
Post reply on HN