Fall of the Roman Empire mirroring the West

[RIPWarrior]

racism is down to a sliver of what it used to be,

Thanks for the laugh!

 

[IDL]

No, its been the West. Namely France and Britain initially and more recently the US has taken the front seat. Sure corporate interests have aligned with this globalist agenda but its been pushed forth by the political class of these nations as well.

But why sacrifice the most stable region that also happens to be the seat of power for the multinational corporations and globalists?

What difference does it make if it has been the West historically, as in the few in power care only about a section of the world rather than the whole of it? They don't view the world in terms of nation-states vs. nation-states and they don't care about Western peoples outside their little club.

I see the American empire as a continuation of the British empire. Center of power changed (or spread) but the system is a continuation.

The world empire is a continuation of the American empire. It's the largest project going.

I'm sure the US and places in the West will continue to be power centers, but the regions will come under a global power not a regional one, and the subordinated power centers will be distributed.

 

[FrankensteinMMA]

You can really only compare the Roman empire or any empire with the West today to a very limited degree because of the advancement in communication.
I can basically communicate with everyone in the western world instantly, how long did it took the empire to deliver a message to the front for example.

Because of the communication we have access to today most issues the Romans had dont apply to us.

not only that but we arnt always spending rescources on continuous warfare.

theres too many differences back then that created situations that dont translate today.

for example it was easier to counterfiet money back then...which caused the empire nearly going bankrupt...this turned the tides of roman history...

you dont get situations like that today.

romans also had slavery...we dont. the economy was way different.

just more fake intelectuals cherry picking little articles and youtube videos to match their bullshit.

like the earth being flat and dinosaurs being fake.

"everything is true on dee internetz...one dayd i sawt a alternative history...because its alternative it must be dee troof.."

"dee leftits r behind evrrything that i domt agree wit...heil seig hitlor!...twump da mighty 2016.."

 

[FrankensteinMMA]

Pretty soon we will run out of sky.

im gonna pour some kool aid in the sky when it runs out...

let it rain oh lawd...cherry sweetness..

 

[Blackened]

Stopped at "leftist propaganda."

Yeah, it's the "leftist" narratives that have completely white washed the formation of our countries on the extermination of indigenous peoples. It's "leftists" that are actively trying to remove fact checkers from history books (Texas), postively frame American slavery (Texas), and remove anything that seems anti-patriotic as well (Kansas). It's "leftists" that have sought to suffocate earnest accounts of deeds done by Columbus and Cortes.

This guy is a fucking moron.

So if it doesn't suit your narrative you disregard it.

I encourage watching the video, he does have a graduate degree in history, he is qualified to teach. Learn something.

 

[Islam Imamate]

What difference does it make if it has been the West historically, as in the few in power care only about a section of the world rather than the whole of it? They don't view the world in terms of nation-states vs. nation-states and they don't care about Western peoples outside their little club.

It makes a difference because you're talking about the dismantling of the West as a step towards globalization when in fact that would only accomplish the opposite.

The people in power did in fact care about nation states. Imperialists like Roosevelt and Churchill felt their nation was the one fit to rule the world and all the wretched and savage peoples that lived outside their nations.

I see the American empire as a continuation of the British empire. Center of power changed (or spread) but the system is a continuation.

The world empire is a continuation of the American empire. It's the largest project going.

Its not a direct continuation though I agree the US basically inherited a roughly similar position that the British occupied.

I'm sure the US and places in the West will continue to be power centers, but the regions will come under a global power not a regional one, and the subordinated power centers will be distributed.

If the West will continue to be the center of power what good will dismantling it do? Think a bout, if you wanted to construct a global order from the current state of affair the best way to do it would be to expand on the systems pioneered and controlled by the West.

 

[IDL]

It makes a difference because you're talking about the dismantling of the West as a step towards globalization when in fact that would only accomplish the opposite.

The people in power did in fact care about nation states. Imperialists like Roosevelt and Churchill felt their nation was the one fit to rule the world and all the wretched and savage peoples that lived outside their nations.

Its not a direct continuation though I agree the US basically inherited a roughly similar position that the British occupied.

If the West will continue to be the center of power what good will dismantling it do? Think a bout, if you wanted to construct a global order from the current state of affair the best way to do it would be to expand on the systems pioneered and controlled by the West.

I don't see people like Roosevelt or Churchill as part of the club, so to speak. The higher powers are the private international powers that control the money systems and lending, among other things.

Dismantling, at least in part, helps the few dominate the many and create a new equilibrium. Undermining the nation-states and peoples especially in Europe is pretty overt at this time. As if they have been rendered obsolete in the new model. I suppose the problem with strong nation-states is that they are capable of collective resistance to globalist interests. Undermining and subordinating them is the game. This requires weakening.

I'm not suggesting the West is to become some third world place though. I don't see the point in that at all. But, considering the forces behind these things they will go to extreme lengths to secure objectives (same ideological forces behind Chinese and Russian revolution for example). Ends justifies the means.

 

[$uicideboy$]

Can you post a transcript or at least cliffs? I'm not watching a video that appears to be as shit as this one is.

Also, just posting a video is lazy. Don't you have any thoughts on the subject?

>calls other lazy
>wont watch video thread is about

lel

 

[Islam Imamate]

I don't see people like Roosevelt or Churchill as part of the club, so to speak. The higher powers are the private international powers that control the money systems and lending, among other things.

You don't see a former President of the US and Prime Minister the UK as part of the club?

Dismantling, at least in part, helps the few dominate the many and create a new equilibrium. Undermining the nation-states and peoples especially in Europe is pretty overt at this time. As if they have been rendered obsolete in the new model. I suppose the problem with strong nation-states is that they are capable of collective resistance to globalist interests. Undermining and subordinating them is the game. This requires weakening.

I'm not suggesting the West is to become some third world place though. I don't see the point in that at all. But, considering the forces behind these things they will go to extreme lengths to secure objectives (same ideological forces behind Chinese and Russian revolution for example). Ends justifies the means.

Still doesn't make sense. All this uncertainty and anxiety about the refugees and immigrants has only hindered the globalist project by reducing faith in transnational institutions like the EU which are a step towards globalization.

 

[spin]

So we should look to the Romans for morality?

In that case........Yes.

 

[IDL]

You don't see a former President of the US and Prime Minister the UK as part of the club?

Still doesn't make sense. All this uncertainty and anxiety about the refugees and immigrants has only hindered the globalist project by reducing faith in transnational institutions like the EU which are a step towards globalization.

They are influential people, but more public front men. Sort of like a CEO of a corporation. They can be swapped in and out meanwhile the company is really controlled by private investors.

IMO the globalists are pushing too hard in Europe and should let off the gas a little because you are right there is some resistance building. They aren't letting off the gas though.

Keep in mind though that fear and anxiety can be extremely useful things.

in terms of nation-states, consider the following sentiment (fluffed for publication) and there are many more statements such as this.

"Nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single global authority... All countries are basically social arrangements... No matter how permanent or even sacred they may seem at any one time, in fact they are all artificial and temporary... Perhaps national sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all... But it has taken the events in our own wondrous and terrible century to clinch the case for world government."

Spoiler

Strobe Talbott, Rhodes Scholar, roommate of Bill Clinton at Oxford University, CFR Director and Trilateralist (and appointed Deputy Secretary of State by President Clinton)

Published in TIME magazine July 20, 1992

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strobe_Talbott
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/a ... 15,00.html

The world system (world empire) is what we are being transitioned to.

 

[Siderealmotion]

Trying to wrap my brain around the argument that the Roman Empire abandoned morality towards the end, when said argument is being presented by people who would love the influence Christianity had on the late empire and would abhor the type of morality and behavior that characterized Roman civilization for most of its existence.

 

[5H3RD0G]

The current trajectory of every government on our tiny planet mirrors past failures, obviously they are not very sharp in avoiding such losses due to lack of historical appreciation and lack of superior strategy.

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

US- Roman Empire got so big eventually it started to Balkanize as it became to big for one centralized government to control and split up into a bunch of different competing parts, some of which became overran and conquered or changed composition over time.

Europe- Towards the end refugees fleeing war and invaders(Germanic tribes in the wake of the Huns) descended into the Empire in hordes, and these same refugees later, after would sack Rome and conquer and occupy large parts of the Empire.

 

[Raiman]

One may forget that a huge reason Rome fell was the incorporation of immigrants into the Roman army and the appropriation of their culture. This led to many peoples across the Danube to see an opportunity to flood the provinces and eventually take them over slowly.

Scipio cried after the last sack and razing of Carthage because "... As Carthage now falls, so too must Rome."

Complacency was a problem. They were too far gone before they knew it was dangerous because their enemies had already infiltrated their society.

 

[SensaiRambo]

All nations die out the same way, when they can't win its wars,pay its debts, or protect its borders...
http://buchanan.org/blog/pjb-the-partys-over-1164

 

[Deleted member 196663]

Long ass video, but very interesting from an economical and historical standpoint. There really are so many similarities to our current situation once you analyse things carefully. I think the clearest one is over-reliance on central planning and abandonment of morality/self-discipline.

Two and a half hours?? Who the fuck does this guy think he is? I listened to the first 2 minutes. Basically he thinks he can save "Rome" with a youtube video. That's enough for me.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

We've also abandoned morally repugnant ideas.

lol.

 

[dissolved]

Now, like at every point in time, we need to fight for truth.

 

[jk7707]

Didn't watch the video, but I'm gonna assume that it is saying that the fall of the Roman Empire has something to do with "the gays". Youtube historians are so entertaining.