If you think of Jesus everyday, you think of Rome everyday too.
If you think of Jesus everyday, you think of Rome everyday too.
I tend to notice things: I see patterns and history repeating itself. While I can't quantify your question, it's fairly frequently because the parallels are striking.
I tend to notice things: I see patterns and history repeating itself. While I can't quantify your question, it's fairly frequently because the parallels are striking.
Same. The cycle is predictable unfortunately…. I also roll into what should I be doing for my family near term and long term to help protect against what might come to be.
Parallels are striking indeed. The government pandering to the lowest common denominator to get more power and money. Copy paste of Rome.
Same. The cycle is predictable unfortunately…. I also roll into what should I be doing for my family near term and long term to help protect against what might come to be.
Parallels are striking indeed. The government pandering to the lowest common denominator to get more power and money. Copy paste of Rome.
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2017/02/24/aristotle-on-immigration-diversity-and-democracy/
Aristotle is greatly concerned with the preservation of civil peace in the city-state. One of the most common causes of “faction” and civil war, he says, was the unhappy consequences of unassimilated immigration and the consequent diversity. Aristotle’s prose is perfectly clear:
>Heterogeneity of stocks may lead to faction – at any rate until they have had time to assimilate. A city cannot be constituted from any chance collection of people, or in any chance period of time. Most of the cities which have admitted settlers, either at the time of their foundation or later, have been troubled by faction. For example, the Achaeans joined with settlers from Troezen in founding Sybaris, but expelled them when their own numbers increased; and this involved their city in a curse. At Thurii the Sybarites quarreled with the other settlers who had joined them in its colonization; they demanded special privileges, on the ground that they were the owners of the territory, and were driven out of the colony. At Byzantium the later settlers were detected in a conspiracy against the original colonists, and were expelled by force; and a similar expulsion befell the exiles from Chios who were admitted to Antissa by the original colonists. At Zancle, on the other hand, the original colonists were themselves expelled by the Samians whom they admitted. At Apollonia, on the Black Sea, factional conflict was caused by the introduction of new settlers; at Syracuse the conferring of civic rights on aliens and mercenaries, at the end of the period of the tyrants, led to sedition and civil war; and at Amphipolis the original citizens, after admitting Chalcidian colonists, were nearly all expelled by the colonists they had admitted. (1303A13)
Thus, immigration of different peoples was a common source of conflict, often leading to civil war and concluding with the ethnic cleansing of either the native peoples or the invaders.
Aristotle’s ideal of citizenship, entailing civic duties and group solidarity, necessarily requires a strong common identity and a sharp differentiation between citizens and foreigners. Conversely, foreign mercenaries had no solidarity with the people, and were thus frequently used by tyrants to enforce their unjust rule:
>The guard of a [legitimate] king is composed of citizens: that of a tyrant is composed of foreigners. (1310B31)
>It is a habit of tyrants never to like anyone who has a spirit of dignity and independence. The tyrant claims a monopoly of such qualities for himself; he feels that anybody who asserts a rival dignity, or acts with independence, is threatening his own superiority and the despotic power of his tyranny; he hates him accordingly as a subverter of his own authority. It is also a habit of tyrants to prefer the company of aliens to that of citizens at table and in society; citizens, they feel, are enemies, but aliens will offer no opposition.” (1313B29)
This passage brings to mind the Bolshevik tyranny in the early decades of the Soviet Union, when the government, and especially the secret police, was dominated by people from non-Russian ethnic groups. As Aristotle notes, under such a system any assertion of independence was ruthlessly crushed.
Aristotle also clearly expresses a related idea, that ethnic homogeneity enables the group solidarity that is needed to throw off tyrannical rule, while a diverse population with a no common identity is easier to rule. Aristotle, in order to enable leisure in the premodern era, argues for having a population of ethnically diverse slaves (something I, for reasons of civil peace and genetic integrity, would not endorse and especially not in the age of automation):
>The class which farms it should, ideally, if we can choose at will, be slaves – but slaves not drawn from a single stock, or from stocks of a spirited temperament. This will at once secure the advantage of a good supply of labor and eliminate any danger of revolutionary designs. (1330A23)
Thus, a mass of mongrels without identity is easier to rule than a self-conscious people, a truth which the hostile elites who rule the West seem to instinctively understand.
Aristotle observes that foreigners were also a favorite political weapon not only of tyrants but also of egalitarian extremists. He writes: “At Amphipolis someone by the name of Cleotimus introduced Chalcidian settlers, and incited them after their settlement to make an attack on the rich” (1305B39). Aristotle says that naturalization of foreigners played a key role in founding the more extreme form of democracy found in Athens. He writes of Cleisthenes, who was said to have founded the democracy of that city: “after the expulsion of the tyrants he enrolled in the tribes a number of resident aliens, both foreigners and slaves” (1275B34).[1] Aristotle says elsewhere that democrats consolidate their regime by efforts to mix the citizenry (breaking down old identities) and stoking individualism:
>Other measures which are also useful in constructing this last and most extreme type of democracy are measures like those introduced by Cleisthenes at Athens, when he sought to advance the cause of democracy, or those which were taken by the founders of popular government at Cyrene. A number of new tribes and clans should be instituted by the side of the old; private cults should be reduced in number and conducted at common centers; and every contrivance should be employed to make all the citizens mix, as much as they possibly can, and to break down their old loyalties. All the measures adopted by tyrants may equally be regarded as congenial to democracy. We may cite as examples the license allowed to slaves (which, up to a point, may be advantageous as well as congenial), the license permitted to women and children, and the policy of conniving at the practice of “living as you like.” There is much to assist a constitution of this sort, for most people find more pleasure in living without discipline than they find in a life of temperance. (1319B19)
...
https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2017/02/24/aristotle-on-immigration-diversity-and-democracy/
Aristotle is greatly concerned with the preservation of civil peace in the city-state. One of the most common causes of “faction” and civil war, he says, was the unhappy consequences of unassimilated immigration and the consequent diversity. Aristotle’s prose is perfectly clear:
>>Heterogeneity of stocks may lead to faction – at any rate until they have had time to assimilate. A city cannot be constituted from any chance collection of people, or in any chance period of time. Most of the cities which have admitted settlers, either at the time of their foundation or later, have been troubled by faction. For example, the Achaeans joined with settlers from Troezen in founding Sybaris, but expelled them when their own numbers increased; and this involved their city in a curse. At Thurii the Sybarites quarreled with the other settlers who had joined them in its colonization; they demanded special privileges, on the ground that they were the owners of the territory, and were driven out of the colony. At Byzantium the later settlers were detected in a conspiracy against the original colonists, and were expelled by force; and a similar expulsion befell the exiles from Chios who were admitted to Antissa by the original colonists. At Zancle, on the other hand, the original colonists were themselves expelled by the Samians whom they admitted. At Apollonia, on the Black Sea, factional conflict was caused by the introduction of new settlers; at Syracuse the conferring of civic rights on aliens and mercenaries, at the end of the period of the tyrants, led to sedition and civil war; and at Amphipolis the original citizens, after admitting Chalcidian colonists, were nearly all expelled by the colonists they had admitted. (1303A13)
**Thus, immigration of different peoples was a common source of conflict, often leading to civil war and concluding with the ethnic cleansing of either the native peoples or the invaders.**
Aristotle’s ideal of citizenship, entailing civic duties and group solidarity, necessarily requires a strong common identity and a sharp differentiation between citizens and foreigners. Conversely, **foreign mercenaries** had no solidarity with the people, and were thus frequently used by tyrants to enforce their unjust rule:
>>The guard of a [legitimate] king is composed of citizens: that of a tyrant is composed of foreigners. (1310B31)
>>It is a habit of tyrants never to like anyone who has a spirit of dignity and independence. The tyrant claims a monopoly of such qualities for himself; he feels that anybody who asserts a rival dignity, or acts with independence, is threatening his own superiority and the despotic power of his tyranny; he hates him accordingly as a subverter of his own authority. It is also a habit of tyrants to prefer the company of aliens to that of citizens at table and in society; citizens, they feel, are enemies, but aliens will offer no opposition.” (1313B29)
This passage brings to mind the Bolshevik tyranny in the early decades of the Soviet Union, when the government, and especially the secret police, was dominated by people from non-Russian ethnic groups. As Aristotle notes, under such a system any assertion of independence was ruthlessly crushed.
**Aristotle also clearly expresses a related idea, that ethnic homogeneity enables the group solidarity that is needed to throw off tyrannical rule**, while a diverse population with a no common identity is easier to rule. Aristotle, in order to enable leisure in the premodern era, argues for having a population of ethnically diverse slaves (something I, for reasons of civil peace and genetic integrity, would not endorse and especially not in the age of automation):
>>The class which farms it should, ideally, if we can choose at will, be slaves – but slaves not drawn from a single stock, or from stocks of a spirited temperament. This will at once secure the advantage of a good supply of labor and eliminate any danger of revolutionary designs. (1330A23)
**Thus, a mass of mongrels without identity is easier to rule than a self-conscious people, a truth which the hostile elites who rule the West seem to instinctively understand.**
**Aristotle observes that foreigners were also a favorite political weapon not only of tyrants but also of egalitarian extremists.** He writes: “At Amphipolis someone by the name of Cleotimus introduced Chalcidian settlers, and incited them after their settlement to make an attack on the rich” (1305B39). Aristotle says that naturalization of foreigners played a key role in founding the more extreme form of democracy found in Athens. He writes of Cleisthenes, who was said to have founded the democracy of that city: “after the expulsion of the tyrants he enrolled in the tribes a number of resident aliens, both foreigners and slaves” (1275B34).[1] Aristotle says elsewhere that democrats consolidate their regime by efforts to mix the citizenry (breaking down old identities) and stoking individualism:
>>Other measures which are also useful in constructing this last and most extreme type of democracy are measures like those introduced by Cleisthenes at Athens, when he sought to advance the cause of democracy, or those which were taken by the founders of popular government at Cyrene. A number of new tribes and clans should be instituted by the side of the old; private cults should be reduced in number and conducted at common centers; and every contrivance should be employed to make all the citizens mix, as much as they possibly can, and to break down their old loyalties. All the measures adopted by tyrants may equally be regarded as congenial to democracy. We may cite as examples the license allowed to slaves (which, up to a point, may be advantageous as well as congenial), the license permitted to women and children, and the policy of conniving at the practice of “living as you like.” There is much to assist a constitution of this sort, for most people find more pleasure in living without discipline than they find in a life of temperance. (1319B19)
...
I wish I could vote this up more; it’s truly worth a post and discussion all on its own.
I need to study more Aristotle…truly, thank you.
He writes: “At Amphipolis someone by the name of Cleotimus introduced Chalcidian settlers, and incited them after their settlement to make an attack on the rich
Sounds a lot like occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter. …fucking jews
I wish I could vote this up more; it’s truly worth a post and discussion all on its own.
I need to study more Aristotle…truly, thank you.
> He writes: “At Amphipolis someone by the name of Cleotimus introduced Chalcidian settlers, and incited them after their settlement to make an attack on the rich
Sounds a lot like occupy Wall Street and Black Lives Matter. …fucking jews
I love Aristotle, and have read this exact passage many times. Fuck immigrants and immigration, a handful of exceptions is fine, as they are smart enough and driven enough to assimilate. But when you bring in large numbers of any non compatible demographics, you are bound to get the bad with the good and the average too. When it comes to third worlders they will always be a net drag to our advanced, peaceful, law abiding and productive societies.
I love Aristotle, and have read this exact passage many times. Fuck immigrants and immigration, a handful of exceptions is fine, as they are smart enough and driven enough to assimilate. But when you bring in large numbers of any non compatible demographics, you are bound to get the bad with the good and the average too. When it comes to third worlders they will always be a net drag to our advanced, peaceful, law abiding and productive societies.
Great post thanks!
Great post thanks!
Lots of wives are asking husbands, and are surprised at how frequently they do.
Rant:
Yes, it's trending on the internet, but click-bait is not reality.
I think the whole thing is blown out of proportion driven by click-bait culture. It's an irrational trend. Now people go around and try to be cool, surprising and interesting and say that they think of the Roman Empire 10 times a day, and no one wants to be worse so the next guy says 20 times a day.
I think seriously about the Roman Empire, I don't know, max once a week. It is way rarer than many other more important and interesting subjects. I'm not saying that the Roman Empire is unintersting but most people are not Rome aficionados.
Reminds me of many similar occurrences like this one:
> Lots of wives are asking husbands, and are surprised at how frequently they do.
Rant:
Yes, it's trending on the internet, but click-bait is not reality.
I think the whole thing is blown out of proportion driven by click-bait culture. It's an irrational trend. Now people go around and try to be cool, surprising and interesting and say that they think of the Roman Empire 10 times a day, and no one wants to be worse so the next guy says 20 times a day.
I think seriously about the Roman Empire, I don't know, max once a week. It is way rarer than many other more important and interesting subjects. I'm not saying that the Roman Empire is unintersting but most people are not Rome aficionados.
Reminds me of many similar occurrences like this one:
[remember this?](https://pic8.co/sh/LAmVpz.png)
Fair. To be honest, I had no idea it was a thing; it caught me off guard and I was surprised to hear another thought about it at all.
Maybe I thought too much into it when I did hear it was a thing. My cogitation is little more than reference - see something shitty from politics, think about Rome. See something shitty and woke, think about Weimar Republic. I felt that others thinking about Rome was evidence that there are more who think along those lines as those here, that people are fed up with how things are going and see that it’s not right…. Maybe not though.
Regardless, I would say it’s different than fidget spinners. Those and the retarded popits started (I think) with kids, and the soyfags from Reddit jumped on board. This isn’t a Reddit thing too, is it?
Fair. To be honest, I had no idea it was a thing; it caught me off guard and I was surprised to hear another thought about it at all.
Maybe I thought too much into it when I did hear it was a thing. My cogitation is little more than reference - see something shitty from politics, think about Rome. See something shitty and woke, think about Weimar Republic. I felt that others thinking about Rome was evidence that there are more who think along those lines as those here, that people are fed up with how things are going and see that it’s not right…. Maybe not though.
Regardless, I would say it’s different than fidget spinners. Those and the retarded popits started (I think) with kids, and the soyfags from Reddit jumped on board. This isn’t a Reddit thing too, is it?
I completely missed the popits craze so I don't know what that is. Interesting curve though:
I completely missed the *popits* craze so I don't know what that is. Interesting curve though:
https://pic8.co/sh/5c5rN6.png
perhaps thats some of it, but I've lived with a group of men who talk about it in depth at least once a week, often times more. They've been doing this for alot of years. Its possible men often think about Rome, then the jews noticed and started writing about women who think about men who think about Rome in order to make thinking about Rome seem like a stupid click-bait subject.
perhaps thats some of it, but I've lived with a group of men who talk about it in depth at least once a week, often times more. They've been doing this for alot of years. Its possible men often think about Rome, then the jews noticed and started writing about women who think about men who think about Rome in order to make thinking about Rome seem like a stupid click-bait subject.
but I've lived with a group of men who talk about it in depth at least once a week, often times more.
I don't doubt it, and good for them.
I doubt the idea that most men think daily about the Romans. I mean men are a pretty wide bunch of people. How often do niggers, spics, arabs, leftards and retards think about the Romans? Probably not too often.
I just don't like trends. I'm a geezer I guess. A few years ago it was "all men love thigh gaps. you must have a thigh gap" (at in Sweden that was a trendy subject).
> but I've lived with a group of men who talk about it in depth at least once a week, often times more.
I don't doubt it, and good for them.
I doubt the idea that *most* men think daily about the Romans. I mean men are a pretty wide bunch of people. How often do niggers, spics, arabs, leftards and retards think about the Romans? Probably not too often.
I just don't like *trends*. I'm a geezer I guess. A few years ago it was "all men love *thigh gaps*. you must have a thigh gap" (at in Sweden that was a trendy subject).
Maybe (and this might just be wishful thinking) it’s that most aryans think about Rome because they feel what their ancestors built is crumbling in much the same way. I took it as a sign that others may be waking up.
Maybe (and this might just be wishful thinking) it’s that most aryans think about Rome because they feel what their ancestors built is crumbling in much the same way. I took it as a sign that others may be waking up.
I only think about it when the "All roads lead to Rome" comes up in a discussion.
I only think about it when the "All roads lead to Rome" comes up in a discussion.
I always just try and figure out where we are on the time line to the burning.
I always just try and figure out where we are on the time line to the burning.
Every time I see some shit bag panhandling. I remember Rome would frequently round up bums and prisoners and send them to the arena
Every time I see some shit bag panhandling.
I remember Rome would frequently round up bums and prisoners and send them to the arena
That’s something I would wholeheartedly endorse. I bet that cleans up the streets in Seattle real quick.
That’s something I would wholeheartedly endorse. I bet that cleans up the streets in Seattle real quick.
I have a roomate whos male who always always talks about Rome, Caesar, their technology, siege warfare and the battles they fought. So as far as this household goes, theres three guys who think and discuss Roman stuff on almost a daily basis.
He also talks about how Caesar had a son named Caesarian and how its technically possible that he had a son who could, in theory, be Jesus. But thats just a fun theory we play around.
I have a roomate whos male who always always talks about Rome, Caesar, their technology, siege warfare and the battles they fought. So as far as this household goes, theres three guys who think and discuss Roman stuff on almost a daily basis.
He also talks about how Caesar had a son named Caesarian and how its technically possible that he had a son who could, in theory, be Jesus. But thats just a fun theory we play around.
Quite often actually considering it’s a focal point of a lot of ancient tech and conspiracy type stuff.
Quite often actually considering it’s a focal point of a lot of ancient tech and conspiracy type stuff.
My wife asked me that and I didn’t know it was a meme. I was shopping for a book on Rome so it seemed natural, I told her probably like once a week, not that often.
I didn’t realize it was common I just thought I’m weird.
My wife asked me that and I didn’t know it was a meme. I was shopping for a book on Rome so it seemed natural, I told her probably like once a week, not that often.
I didn’t realize it was common I just thought I’m weird.
Same here. I had no idea others saw the parallel…
Same here. I had no idea others saw the parallel…
Are you guys not listening to sick Roman marches and remixes at least once a day?
Are you guys *not* listening to sick Roman marches and remixes at least once a day?
I focus more on German marches.
I focus more on German marches.
I think about the decline and fall of Rome at least once per day.
I think about the decline and fall of Rome at least once per day.
That’s exactly where I think about it. So many parallels to the greatest civilization in history to our own.
That’s exactly where I think about it. So many parallels to the greatest civilization in history to our own.
(post is archived)