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

41–50 of 126 posts

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

#41

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

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.

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.

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

#42

Post by Eumenes »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #21
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…

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…

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.

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

#43

Post by rawgabbit »

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…

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.

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

#44

Post by jjulius »

genewitch wrote: post #15
belval wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

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...

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.

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

#45

Post by url00 »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #21
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…

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…

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).

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

#46

Post by Jensson »

belval wrote: post #8
snowpid wrote: post #4

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

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...

Why do people think that is funny?

Edit: Why downvote a genuine question? How else would I learn why people find that funny?

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

#47

Post by Exoristos »

bigstrat2003 wrote: post #21
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…

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…

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.

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

#48

Post by seanw444 »

swasheck wrote: post #22
belval wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

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 visite…

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.

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

#49

Post by kmeisthax »

rawgabbit wrote: post #43
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…

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 th…

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.

Post reply on HN