Was Salahuddin right when he said this...

[shunyata]

Pretty much, corruption at high levels of goverment and the instabilty this created was a massive part of the decline of the Roman Empire.

Another big factor though was actually conservatism, the Romans under Augustus were massively more advanced than the nations they were taking on in norther europe, 400 years latter the gap in terms of weaponry and tactics had narrowed considerably.

If were talking about the Islamic world as well I would argue a big factor in its decline in power was actually when it became more conservative whilst Christian Europe shifted in the opposite direction.

Yeah there's a radical difference between the governments of states in the academic golden age in the Middle East while Europe was trapped in the dark ages, vs modern regimes that claim to be Islamic but want to suppress education, trade, and freedom.

Whether that's post revolution Iran or ISIL in Syria, the control and violence ends up suppressing the economic and academic gains a region could be enjoying and not promoting them.

 

[moreorless87]

I would lean to be more conservative than liberal. And this seems like some pretty strange claims, do you have anything to back it up? And the definition of conservative has changed over time, just like liberalism, how can you draw that parallel here? Seems like you are just trying to shit on modern conservatism, which doesn’t bother me, because it is shit, to reinforce your view. I’m open to you changing my mind though.

That Christian Europe became less conservative and the Islamic world more conservative relative to each other over the last millennium doesn't really seem a very contentious claim to me.

 

[Kaybee]

the senate was no longer acting in the interests of the empire, but was acting more and more frequently out of self interest and greed and could be lobbied by the highest bidder at many points.

Sounds familiar lol

 

[shunyata]

That Christian Europe became less conservative and the Islamic world more conservative relative to each other over the last millennium doesn't really seem a very contentious claim to me.

The shift in the Islamic world has mostly been in the last 150 years, and the British are at least partly to blame.

The Ottomans shouldn't have attacked Russia (an allied nation with Britain at the time) in 1914, that ended up dooming them at the end of WW1 and then Britain was given mandates to rule over Iraq and Palestine.

 

[Kdup]

That Christian Europe became less conservative and the Islamic world more conservative relative to each other over the last millennium doesn't really seem a very contentious claim to me.

That’s a tactic trump used quite often. Everyone knows it, therefore must be true.

 

[moreorless87]

The shift in the Islamic world has mostly been in the last 150 years, and the British are at least partly to blame.

The Ottomans shouldn't have attacked Russia in 1914, that ended up dooming them at the end of WW1 and then Britain was given mandates to rule over Iraq and Palestine.

The kind of modern Islamic conservatism we see today has its roots in that period but I would say as far back as the Mongol invasions you see a shift in that direction, not continuous of course although the Ottomans were themselves invaders who defeated the traditional centers of Islamic power that had been weakened.

Decreased control of the church on society across western Europe in the last 500 years seems pretty hard to argue against, the rise of secular science in the modern era playing a massive part in European world dominance.

 

[MicroBrew]

I don't think it destroys the nation but rather the family values especially with the rise of Onlyfans and stuff. Yay or nay? @Oceanmachine

Easier to destroy a nation from within with cultural genocide, like religious conversion.

 

[Gutter Chris]

I don't think it destroys the nation but rather the family values especially with the rise of Onlyfans and stuff. Yay or nay? @Oceanmachine

Nay dude . Fuck this guy. Does it look like religious sand countries are a better place to live than anywhere in the west...

The worst thing you can do to the youth is turn them into wage/debt slaves and not invest in them


Oh noes not nudity ! Gimme a fuckin break.

 

[shunyata]

The kind of modern Islamic conservatism we see today has its roots in that period but I would say as far back as the Mongol invasions you see a shift in that direction, not continuous of course although the Ottomans were themselves invaders who defeated the traditional centers if Islamic power that had been weakened.

Decreased control of the church on society across western Europe in the last 500 years seems pretty hard to argue against, the rise of secular science in the modern era playing a massive part in European world dominance.

For sure, and it's that same violent conservatism that's at the core of many historical atrocities.

The Hamidian massacres of the 1890s killed far more people than the Spanish Inquisition 400 years earlier, but both came from an authoritarian monarch violently enforcing one faith upon a broad area.


For anyone who's getting triggered by the use of the word conservatism, historically conservative parties are those that defended consolidation of power vs liberalist parties that sought to transfer more power from heads of state to the people. The term "right wing" refers to the lords who sit on the right hand of the king (representing their support of him) in French legislative bodies, with royalist nobles who generally supported conservatism and especially authoritarian conservatism being referred to as the "right wing" in legislative assemblies.

 

[Bacco]

Moral decay is an interesting way to put it.

My understanding was that centuries of corruption in the legislative branch of their government meant that the senate was no longer acting in the interests of the empire, but was acting more and more frequently out of self interest and greed and could be lobbied by the highest bidder at many points. Government became less effective as the senate served the wealthy more and more instead of what would help the empire as a whole. The senate became more and more plutocratic which in turn caused military and economic instability.

It was the greed, corruption, and loss of principles of the senators that did all the real damage, had nothing to do with the morals of the average citizen.

Yeah greed of powerful ones reaching the max not giving fucks about the empire health is something that heavy parallel modern west

But morals of citiziens played huge part too, even if we can say rotten leadership had no doubt a role in that too
One step was change of religion (not far from today ideologies in terms of influence) from old gods to softer Mithraism and Christianity

And more than that long period of peace on top and wealth combined with a lost of patriotic sense and identity, that leaded romans (as italics) to essentially gradually quit be part of legions, wich became every day more barbaric and unreliable (wich has been one of last nail in Rome's coffin)

Essentially romans as society were became bunch of selfish rich spoiled cunts with no survival or homeland sense... wich sound pretty 2021

We may add other stuff to that link with the fall and offer some more parallels but big chunk is there

There was a great italian doc about this change in mindset on all levels that gradually made crumble the very basic structure of Rome's strenght, buy no idea if i can find it on yt, and sure af no english version


Cliffs: long peace make people think they need no more fangs and claws, then they die

 

[BearGrounds]

Moral decay is an interesting way to put it.

My understanding was that centuries of corruption in the legislative branch of their government meant that the senate was no longer acting in the interests of the empire, but was acting more and more frequently out of self interest and greed and could be lobbied by the highest bidder at many points. Government became less effective as the senate served the wealthy more and more instead of what would help the empire as a whole. The senate became more and more plutocratic which in turn caused military and economic instability.

It was the greed, corruption, and loss of principles of the senators that did all the real damage, had nothing to do with the morals of the average citizen.

How do you achieve such things without a demoralized and distracted populace?

 

[ralphc1]

I agree that it won’t destroy it alone, but rather part this and some other things will destroy a Nation. Like...

Take away Boarders, Language, Culture

If you don't rent a room to someone it will destroy a nation?

 

[CutStryker]

Boarding is a perfectly reasonable means of housing, what's your problem?

Boarding? What the hell are you talking about.

I said Boarders, like Boarders to determine where a Nation starts and ends.

 

[USA!USA!]

How did banning those things help all the extremists living in the mountains of the middle east.. not too well.

 

[CutStryker]

If you don't rent a room to someone it will destroy a nation?

Another slow learner?!

I said Boarders, like Boarders to determine where a Nation starts and ends

 

[Medulla Omoplata]

Boarding? What the hell are you talking about.

I said Boarders, like Boarders to determine where a Nation starts and ends.

I don't think people who haven't yet secured permanent housing are the best people to be guiding our nations to be honest

 

[SL1200]

Not word by word but the general concept have a core of truth



Modern softness is one of current biggest threats of the west, social stability in the US and survival in Europe

I would say that the rest of the world not keeping up is a bigger threat...

 

[ralphc1]

Another slow learner?!

I said Boarders, like Boarders to determine where a Nation starts and ends

 

[kimocomplex]

 

[ralphc1]

Not word by word but the general concept have a core of truth

I mean moral decay is what slowly destroyed Roman Empire, hilarious amount of parallels can be done

Modern softness is one of current biggest threats of the west, social stability in the US and survival in Europe

Somehow west mistake some decades of local peace with "the world is no more a jungle" and thought Mr. Nice Guy may stay king forever without need a sword

On other hand money is other big enemy
Specially today money recognize no nation (except Israel maybe lol), no interest about average citizien and his society.
Money want absolute globalism no matter what collateral damage can do

Combine the two and

Rome expanded too far and became impossible to manage. They hired mercenaries with no loyalty to Rome for their armies who eventually became part of the armies that overthrew Rome.

The decline of Rome dovetailed with the spread of Christianity, and some have argued that the rise of a new faith helped contribute to the empire's fall. The Edict of Milan legalized Christianity in 313, and it later became the state religion in 380.

https://www.history.com/news/8-reasons-why-rome-fell