I’ve had a love of history generally, and I know a bit more than most about the Roman empire, and that’s kind of a red flag i guess, but I genuinely think they’re one of the worst things to ever happen to the world, much as i find the endless stream of civil wars and coups to be very fun to read, the brutality of their empire wouldn’t be surpassed until England somehow went from a backwater to a globe spanning empire and to be quite honest i’m not a fan of them except as a gateway to knowing what some of my ancestors got up to.

Weird Ass Rome Guys are why the American feds are the way they are, it’s obvious there is something deeply wrong with how Rome gets portrayed in popular media and stuff that makes this a seemingly wide-spread phenomenon, but honestly what’s with the glorification of Rome? is it downstream of American Nationalism? No, that can’t be, because Rome Guys go back so far we have popes making fake roman states and tsars and sultans trying to prove their dick is the most Roman. It’s hard to miss a lot of Rome Guys are pretty regressive people. Like, you don’t ever think something like “Augustus was a role model” unless you’ve got some twisted bullshit shit going on in your heart.

It makes me uncomfortable to engage with the history sometimes, because Rome Guys are always listening and ready to project their noble fantasy of them and the idiot narratives of Rome’s decline as a sickness caused by foreign invaders sure does sound like deeply right wing revisionist history to me, but I’ve never really thought through the how and why of these guys, i wanted to solicit Hexbear’s thoughts.

  • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.netEnglish
    9·
    3 months ago

    The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living. And just as they seem to be occupied with revolutionizing themselves and things, creating something that did not exist before, precisely in such epochs of revolutionary crisis they anxiously conjure up the spirits of the past to their service, borrowing from them names, battle slogans, and costumes in order to present this new scene in world history in time-honored disguise and borrowed language. Thus Luther put on the mask of the Apostle Paul, the Revolution of 1789-1814 draped itself alternately in the guise of the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire, and the Revolution of 1848 knew nothing better to do than to parody, now 1789, now the revolutionary tradition of 1793-95

    because he’s talking about Napoleon III he doesn’t extend the context far back enough, but this is exactly what the Dutch Republic & Yankkke Republic were smoking.

    you gotta understand that a national “democratic” rule hadn’t been seen in europe since the roman republic, it’s very explicable why they’d choose it for their model (Athens was out for being too populist by 18th century standards, lol)

    and finally, Romanism isn’t actually married to Rome. again, Marx hits it out the ballspark by identifying this is a mostly aesthetic relationship looking for symbols: the fasces for instance, the phrygian cap, not looking for actual policy suggestions from history: “In England, at this day, if elections were open to all classes of people, the property of the landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would soon take place. If these observations be just, our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation.”–James Madison, refering to Lex Agraria of the Gracchi as something to be avoided