WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

1.4K

Apparently that question is …viral? Lots of wives are asking husbands, and are surprised at how frequently they do.

I suppose I think about it daily.… What caused the fall, what cancers were brought into Rome that aided from the inside out? How does it relate to our current day?

I didn’t realize others thought about it as well. Hanging out with the neighbors, his wife asked, and was surprised that I had answered. I think about it as did my buddy. I didn’t realize he thought about it. So question here… Do you guys think about Rome?

Apparently that question is …viral? Lots of wives are asking husbands, and are surprised at how frequently they do. I suppose I think about it daily.… What caused the fall, what cancers were brought into Rome that aided from the inside out? How does it relate to our current day? I didn’t realize others thought about it as well. Hanging out with the neighbors, his wife asked, and was surprised that I had answered. I think about it as did my buddy. I didn’t realize he thought about it. So question here… Do you guys think about Rome?

(post is archived)

[–] 3 pts

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.

[–] 5 pts

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)

...

[–] 2 pts (edited )

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

[–] 1 pt

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.

[–] 1 pt

"advanced, peaceful, law abiding and productive societies"

That's what we are no longer allowed to have, we've been deemed not worthy of it by our dear leaders, obviously...