History Western Civilization, Rome and Cyclical History

[Lord Sovereign]

If the peoples involved aren't such violent anarchic dicks (beause let's face it, they were),

As much as I hate to channel Evola here, to them a very young Christendom looked preposterously weak and foolish enough to build some of its wealthiest places either by the sea or somewhere easily accessible. To a Europe before Roman pacification, the Norse aren’t exactly out of the ordinary (everyone constantly raided each other). This is what made them strike such fear in a world that had forgotten the raid and blood sacrifice to cold Gods: for the last time, the barbarians came crashing down on the civilised world.

(Apologies for the tangent. I’m about as fascinated by the Northmen as I am by Rome)

But further to your point, it really is remarkable what an impact a bunch of drunken hooligans from the arse end of Scandinavia, in flat bottomed boats, had on the course of history (those motherfuckers sailed across the Atlantic). And to my mind the Viking spirit persisted even long after their age had come to an end: note how it was Germanic peoples, the English and the Dutch in particular, who sailed off to explore and conquer the world.

To my mind, Charlemagne forged the West. But it was Thor who hammered it into a shape we recognise.

 

[Aldarion]

No, no it's not, and you dismiss the details because they show how wrong your supposition actually is.

Then prove it.

No, this is you wanting to push your own reactionary view of society and the world as the 'norm' things are viewed from, when they simply aren't.

And you notice I never said anything about 'constant progress' either.

There are options besides the two nuttiest ends of the political horseshoe and their views of the world.

No, it is not. You just don't want to see what is really going on and are holding tight to your rose-tinted glasses.

Rome also no longer exists as a empire, France does, and actually has enough connections to US culture to be a useful for comparison.

France also exists in the world of modern weapons, social paradigms, and knowledge, where as Rome very much didn't.

And France has had a 'cycle of history' of Republic/Empire that is rather well fucking documented, and that US existed in/worked with (Louisiana Purchase says hi), yet you all want to compare the US to Rome, ignoring over a 1000 years of time and cultural changes.

Rome no longer exists because it got subjected to mass immigration. Mass immigration to France only started after Second World War.

Give it a century or two more, and France will no longer exist either.

Modern weapons and social paradigms change nothing. They only mean that when history inevitably repeats, it will hurt all that more. As for knowledge, it is merely a raw resource that is meaningless if you cannot utilize it - in short, knowledge isn't enough, you need wisdom as well. And modern people are bloody insane compared to medieval people; instead of pursuing wisdom, we have replaced it with "intellectualism".

1000 years of time and cultural changes is irrelevant compared to human base nature. Also, even with all of these "cultural changes", modern societies are closer to that of Rome than they are to, say, China. Hell, modern Western society is more similar to ancient Rome than it is to medieval Franks!

 

[Skallagrim]

As much as I hate to channel Evola here

As one generally should hate it.

to them a very young Christendom looked preposterously weak and foolish enough to build some of its wealthiest places either by the sea or somewhere easily accessible. To a Europe before Roman pacification, the Norse aren’t exactly out of the ordinary (everyone constantly raided each other). This is what made them strike such fear in a world that had forgotten the raid and blood sacrifice to cold Gods: for the last time, the barbarians came crashing down on the civilised world.

Yet, indeed, you are correct. The Romans themselves, in their interactions with the Germanic peoples, noted their great vitality (and capacity for bold action), which they found admirable. Which is one reason why Germans made up the bulk of the foederati. They were considered the best to fill such a role.

But further to your point, it really is remarkable what an impact a bunch of drunken hooligans from the arse end of Scandinavia, in flat bottomed boats, had on the course of history (those motherfuckers sailed across the Atlantic). And to my mind the Viking spirit persisted even long after their age had come to an end: note how it was Germanic peoples, the English and the Dutch in particular, who sailed off to explore and conquer the world.

To my mind, Charlemagne forged the West. But it was Thor who hammered it into a shape we recognise.

In essence, the West is what is built when two influences meet. That Southern legacy of Rome, and the Northern influence of those peoples who lived beyond Rome. Charlemagne himself is a product of this mixture. And Christianity, although first scoffed at by many a German (especially those who always lived beyond Rome's reach), proved to be the cement of the civilisational unification.

 

[Lord Sovereign]

Yet, indeed, you are correct. The Romans themselves, in their interactions with the Germanic peoples, noted their great vitality (and capacity for bold action), which they found admirable. Which is one reason why Germans made up the bulk of the foederati. They were considered the best to fill such a role.

If I recall correctly the Germans proved very reliable and loyal troops as well because in their eyes you didn’t stab your ring giver (whom you’d sworn an oath to) in the back. I mean, it’s night and day between the Praetorians and the Varangians. And the times when the Foederati did turn on the Romans was usually when Imperial power had either imploded, or a deal had not been upheld.

In essence, the West is what is built when two influences meet. That Southern legacy of Rome, and the Northern influence of those peoples who lived beyond Rome. Charlemagne himself is a product of this mixture. And Christianity, although first scoffed at by many a German (especially those who always lived beyond Rome's reach), proved to be the cement of the civilisational unification.

Rome gave the West form, and the Germanics gave it fire, essentially?

And it is remarkable just how effective Christianity is at embracing basically any culture it comes across. As you’ve said, the savage Northmen who initially scoffed at Christ ultimately “let him in” so to speak. I do suppose the entry conditions for the Kingdom of Heaven are a bit easier to fulfil than Valhalla, mind you.

 

[Bacle]

Then prove it.

I've provided repeated points showing what changes to society and humanity as a whole have happened since Rome.

No, it is not. You just don't want to see what is really going on and are holding tight to your rose-tinted glasses.

I see what is going on with a reactionary who thinks the US is just like any Old World Euro power, and hates to think maybe the US is not doom to the same bullshit Rome dealt with.

Rome no longer exists because it got subjected to mass immigration. Mass immigration to France only started after Second World War.

No, Rome doesn't exist anymore because it stretched itself too thin trying to take Germania, fight the Persians, bribe the Goths, and bribe the Huns, and ended up leaving it's core exposed to literal invasions (sacking/looting Rome didn't happen because of 'mass migration' into the city/empire, it was a loot raid and prestige move).

As well, climatic conditions at different points in the empire were rather varied, and volcano's in the tropics and Iceland have repeatedly laid civilization low. Colder winters lead to less crops harvest, and also make flees more ravenous. That's why Justinian was unable to retake Rome, when the plague that bears his name broke out.

Give it a century or two more, and France will no longer exist either.

No, see the thing is France is sort of like the US in that is does it's best to assimilate new comers into the society so they become 'French' themselves a couple generations.

And with the new laws for deporting people for supporting groups like Hamas and co, getting rid of those who won't assimilate just got even easier for France.

Modern weapons and social paradigms change nothing. They only mean that when history inevitably repeats, it will hurt all that more. As for knowledge, it is merely a raw resource that is meaningless if you cannot utilize it - in short, knowledge isn't enough, you need wisdom as well. And modern people are bloody insane compared to medieval people; instead of pursuing wisdom, we have replaced it with "intellectualism".

Yes, we are 'insane' compared to the people who burned witches, did the Inquisition, and who could barely read or write.

Please, make me laugh harder.

1000 years of time and cultural changes is irrelevant compared to human base nature. Also, even with all of these "cultural changes", modern societies are closer to that of Rome than they are to, say, China. Hell, modern Western society is more similar to ancient Rome than it is to medieval Franks!

See, you don't want to deal with the changes of the past 1000 years, and have a hard on for pre-Enlightenment times/thinking from what you've said.

Which means you perspective is...worthless to anything but Roman fanboy LARPing; reactionaries only ever make things worse.

 

[Aldarion]

I've provided repeated points showing what changes to society and humanity as a whole have happened since Rome.

Yes, they have.

It is also irrelevant. Prove that these changes have affected fundamentals of human nature and historical trends.

I see what is going on with a reactionary who thinks the US is just like any Old World Euro power, and hates to think maybe the US is not doom to the same bullshit Rome dealt with.

United States are "just like any Old World Euro power". Your American exceptionalism is dumb as rock. You know what is the only thing truly exceptional about the US?

Your geography. But it is not going to save you from historical processes unless you utilize it properly. And you are rather intent on not doing that.

No, Rome doesn't exist anymore because it stretched itself too thin trying to take Germania, fight the Persians, bribe the Goths, and bribe the Huns, and ended up leaving it's core exposed to literal invasions (sacking/looting Rome didn't happen because of 'mass migration' into the city/empire, it was a loot raid and prestige move).

As well, climatic conditions at different points in the empire were rather varied, and volcano's in the tropics and Iceland have repeatedly laid civilization low. Colder winters lead to less crops harvest, and also make flees more ravenous. That's why Justinian was unable to retake Rome, when the plague that bears his name broke out.

Rome could have easily recovered from all of that if it didn't screw up its demography.

Trying to take Germania? They stopped trying after 16 AD. Centuries before Rome even began to decline at all.
Fighting the Persians? Sure, it was an expenditure of resources. Borne by the Eastern portion of the Empire. You know, the same portion of the Empire that would proceed to outlive West by a thousand years?
Bribing the Goths? Not exactly expensive.
Bribing the Huns? By the time Huns had arrived, Western Empire was already in the gutter.

Reason why "core" of Rome got exposed was because Roman armies weren't loyal to Rome anymore. And yes, cause of that was immigration. Or rather, the fact that Rome allowed entire barbarian tribes and ethnicities into the Empire, and in such numbers that they could not be absorbed. And then Rome relied on barbarians to provide troops... which barbarians used to start carving out their own kingdoms.

You are correct about Justinian, but that is literally the only thing you are correct about.

No, see the thing is France is sort of like the US in that is does it's best to assimilate new comers into the society so they become 'French' themselves a couple generations.

And with the new laws for deporting people for supporting groups like Hamas and co, getting rid of those who won't assimilate just got even easier for France.

Yes, I see how well it is working out for them.</sarcasm>

It tries, yes. But it also fails. Fact is, you can only really assimilate people into the society if they are either a) similar enough to begin with or b) arrive in extremely small numbers.

And by extremely small, I mean extremely small. As in, 1% of domestic population per generation. Germanic tribes of few tens of thousands ended up ruling areas of millions of inhabitants when they didn't assimilate.

So how is it working out for France? Let's see:

Notice something? More diversity = greater threat of terrorism.

And France is among the worst offenders.

Yes, we are 'insane' compared to the people who burned witches, did the Inquisition, and who could barely read or write.

Please, make me laugh harder.

Yes, you are.

And the only thing you can laugh at is yourself, because you have no clue what you are talking about. I had more knowledge of history than you when I was ten years old.

I mean, literally everything you have said here is wrong.

1) Burning witches? That wasn't a thing during the Middle Ages. Do you know when people began to burn witches? During Renaissance. Specifically, after Martin Luther (not the King, FYI) screwed everything up and weakened moral authority of the Church. And even then, 90% of witch burnings happened in Protestant countries. Catholic Church was in fact adamant that witches didn't exist.

2) Inquisition? First, most of the bad stuff with Inquisition happened... during the Renaissance. Second, Papal Inquisition never did most of the stuff ascribed to Inquisition in the first place, so I'll just ignore it. As for the Spanish Inquisition? It was a necessary evil at worst, and that is assuming it was even evil. You see, when Spain began to liberate the Muslim-occupied territories, Muslims began to mount literal terrorist campaigns. So Spain demanded conversion to Christianity (which they may have demanded anyway, but hey). Which Muslims would do... except, it was faked. "Newly born Christian" would pretend to go to Church, and then he would go and give information to Caliphate spies, or murder people, and generally be an arsehole. Inquisition was the only way to root them out. If you want to give Spain shit for Inquisition, you should first go and convince your government to shut down CIA.

3) "Barely read and write" is a dumbass myth. Even peasants in Middle Ages were largely literate. And more importantly - politically literate. In fact, average medieval serf likely knew more about his rulers and had more interest in politics than average "voter" in a modern Western "democracy". Peasants organized literal uprisings when their rights were threatened. Meanwhile, most people in democracies don't even know what their rights are.

See, you don't want to deal with the changes of the past 1000 years, and have a hard on for pre-Enlightenment times/thinking from what you've said.

Which means you perspective is...worthless to anything but Roman fanboy LARPing; reactionaries only ever make things worse.

I have a hard on for pre-Enlightenment times because I have seen what Enlightenment has brought us.

You meanwhile insist on burying your head in the sand and thinking that people of modernity (or maybe just Americans?) have, somehow, magically, for no discernible reason, left behind the processes of history and limits of reality, and have in fact ascended to Godhood and thus have no reason to learn anything from dumb mortals who had lived before them.

 

[Bacle]

Yes, they have.

It is also irrelevant. Prove that these changes have affected fundamentals of human nature and historical trends.

United States are "just like any Old World Euro power". Your American exceptionalism is dumb as rock. You know what is the only thing truly exceptional about the US?

Your geography. But it is not going to save you from historical processes unless you utilize it properly. And you are rather intent on not doing that.

Rome could have easily recovered from all of that if it didn't screw up its demography.

Trying to take Germania? They stopped trying after 16 AD. Centuries before Rome even began to decline at all.
Fighting the Persians? Sure, it was an expenditure of resources. Borne by the Eastern portion of the Empire. You know, the same portion of the Empire that would proceed to outlive West by a thousand years?
Bribing the Goths? Not exactly expensive.
Bribing the Huns? By the time Huns had arrived, Western Empire was already in the gutter.

Reason why "core" of Rome got exposed was because Roman armies weren't loyal to Rome anymore. And yes, cause of that was immigration. Or rather, the fact that Rome allowed entire barbarian tribes and ethnicities into the Empire, and in such numbers that they could not be absorbed. And then Rome relied on barbarians to provide troops... which barbarians used to start carving out their own kingdoms.

You are correct about Justinian, but that is literally the only thing you are correct about.

Yes, I see how well it is working out for them.</sarcasm>

It tries, yes. But it also fails. Fact is, you can only really assimilate people into the society if they are either a) similar enough to begin with or b) arrive in extremely small numbers.

And by extremely small, I mean extremely small. As in, 1% of domestic population per generation. Germanic tribes of few tens of thousands ended up ruling areas of millions of inhabitants when they didn't assimilate.

So how is it working out for France? Let's see:

Notice something? More diversity = greater threat of terrorism.

And France is among the worst offenders.

Yes, you are.

And the only thing you can laugh at is yourself, because you have no clue what you are talking about. I had more knowledge of history than you when I was ten years old.

I mean, literally everything you have said here is wrong.

1) Burning witches? That wasn't a thing during the Middle Ages. Do you know when people began to burn witches? During Renaissance. Specifically, after Martin Luther (not the King, FYI) screwed everything up and weakened moral authority of the Church. And even then, 90% of witch burnings happened in Protestant countries. Catholic Church was in fact adamant that witches didn't exist.

2) Inquisition? First, most of the bad stuff with Inquisition happened... during the Renaissance. Second, Papal Inquisition never did most of the stuff ascribed to Inquisition in the first place, so I'll just ignore it. As for the Spanish Inquisition? It was a necessary evil at worst, and that is assuming it was even evil. You see, when Spain began to liberate the Muslim-occupied territories, Muslims began to mount literal terrorist campaigns. So Spain demanded conversion to Christianity (which they may have demanded anyway, but hey). Which Muslims would do... except, it was faked. "Newly born Christian" would pretend to go to Church, and then he would go and give information to Caliphate spies, or murder people, and generally be an arsehole. Inquisition was the only way to root them out. If you want to give Spain shit for Inquisition, you should first go and convince your government to shut down CIA.

3) "Barely read and write" is a dumbass myth. Even peasants in Middle Ages were largely literate. And more importantly - politically literate. In fact, average medieval serf likely knew more about his rulers and had more interest in politics than average "voter" in a modern Western "democracy". Peasants organized literal uprisings when their rights were threatened. Meanwhile, most people in democracies don't even know what their rights are.

I have a hard on for pre-Enlightenment times because I have seen what Enlightenment has brought us.

You meanwhile insist on burying your head in the sand and thinking that people of modernity (or maybe just Americans?) have, somehow, magically, for no discernible reason, left behind the processes of history and limits of reality, and have in fact ascended to Godhood and thus have no reason to learn anything from dumb mortals who had lived before them.

I never said that the US ascended to godhood, only that we are not Rome and that comparisons between the two are largely a farce.

Also, we have something more than geography on our side; it's called the US Constitution, US Congress, and US Supreme Court, something neither Rome or any European empire had.

The US is exceptional, deal with it.

 

[Lord Sovereign]

Also, we have something more than geography on our side; it's called the US Constitution, US Congress, and US Supreme Court, something neither Rome or any European empire had.

My guy, what do you think the twelve tables were? Or the Comitia Centuriata? Or the Plebian Tribune?

Many societies down the centuries have had very sophisticated political systems with many a thought through safeguard against tyranny. America is not unique in that regard.

The United States is a mighty Republic with much to be proud of, indeed having the empire of the world at its feet, but this is some hubris right here.

 

[Bacle]

My guy, what do you think the twelve tables were? Or the Comitia Centuriata? Or the Plebian Tribune?

Ineffective in the long run, given I don't think I'd ever heard of them before now.

Many societies down the centuries have had very sophisticated political systems with many a thought through safeguard against tyranny. America is not unique in that regard.

The United States is a mighty Republic with much to be proud of, indeed having the empire of the world at its feet, but this is some hubris right here.

The US Constitution has been abused and stained by corrupt hands, but SCOTUS is still legit and may give us a chance to reclaim what was lost.

Also, none of those documents had nuclear backing, 24/7/365 orbital surveillance of the world, a info network like the internet that allows near instantaneous communications across the world by random joes and janes on the street, effective security against hostile military invasions via geographic barriers, and who knows what else available to the government the document was a part of.

What you call hubris, I call just being real about the position the US is in and how vastly different it is from the ideas of small-minded European Roman fanboys and reactionary imaginings.

We aren't Rome, we are America; we're better.

 

[Skallagrim]

It is as if you are talking to a rock and expect your words to make it sapient, @Aldarion & @Lord Sovereign.

The fact is, this fellow just has a raging hate-boner for certain subjects, is completely incapable of reason or honest discussion when it comes to those subjects, and in fact goes out of his way to seek out discussions on those subjects specifically to shit them up.

Imagine it like that: suppose @Bacle hates... not macro-history, but baseball with a burning passion. He's the kind of guy who would then head over into a thread specifically meant to discuss the baseball season, only to post again and again about how much baseball sucks and how everyone who likes baseball is an idiot who must stop liking it at once.

That's the kind of person you're trying to talk to. Someone who may in most other cases be perfectly normal, but who happens to be so autistically obsessive about his pet grudges that he turns (apparentlly without even really realising it) into a very nasty troll whenever it comes to his obsessions and grudges.

Best is to not to engage with his insane troll logic when he's in his moods. It just feeds his brand of crazy. Let him simmer down. Maybe, at some point, he'll look at what he's doing and grasp: "hey, I'm being a huge dick for no reason" -- and go do something productive instead.

One can hope.

 

[Bacle]

It is as if you are talking to a rock and expect your words to make it sapient, @Aldarion & @Lord Sovereign.

The fact is, this fellow just has a raging hate-boner for certain subjects, is completely incapable of reason or honest discussion when it comes to those subjects, and in fact goes out of his way to seek out discussions on those subjects specifically to shit them up.

Imagine it like that: suppose @Bacle hates... not macro-history, but baseball with a burning passion. He's the kind of guy who would then head over into a thread specifically meant to discuss the baseball season, only to post again and again about how much baseball sucks and how everyone who likes baseball is an idiot who must stop liking it at once.

That's the kind of person you're trying to talk to. Someone who may in most other cases be perfectly normal, but who happens to be so autistically obsessive about his pet grudges that he turns (apparentlly without even really realising it) into a very nasty troll whenever it comes to his obsessions and grudges.

Best is to not to engage with his insane troll logic when he's in his moods. It just feeds his brand of crazy. Let him simmer down. Maybe, at some point, he'll look at what he's doing and grasp: "hey, I'm being a huge dick for no reason" -- and go do something productive instead.

One can hope.

'Hating baseball' doesn't lead to political delusions and mistaken ideas about the modern world, that have real world consequences.

Mistakenly and stubbornly insisting the US and Rome are good comparisons, particularly by small-minded European's, who hate admitting the US is exceptional and yet would mostly be speaking German without our nation's help, does cause problems because foolish people in the US actually take this shit seriously and try to find their Caesar every election year.

Not enough people are calling out how foolish the Rome comparisons are, at least on this site. Though I guess I shouldn't be surprised right-wing Euro's want the US to be Rome in their minds, so the US isn't 'exceptional' yet can protect them from Moscow and Beijing.

 

[Cherico]

'Hating baseball' doesn't lead to political delusions and mistaken ideas about the modern world, that have real world consequences.

Mistakenly and stubbornly insisting the US and Rome are good comparisons, particularly by small-minded European's, who hate admitting the US is exceptional and yet would mostly be speaking German without our nation's help, does cause problems because foolish people in the US actually take this shit seriously and try to find their Caesar every election year.

Not enough people are calling out how foolish the Rome comparisons are, at least on this site. Though I guess I shouldn't be surprised right-wing Euro's want the US to be Rome in their minds, so the US isn't 'exceptional' yet can protect them from Moscow and Beijing.

Russia hollowed out its culture with 70 plus years of communism, their educational system got wreaked during the 90s, their birth rate collapsed and the only section with healthy demographies are the restive seperatist minority groups. They also pretty much wreaked a lot of their country with further corruption and have become reliant on an ever shrinking stocks of weapons from the soviet era that is being burned up in Ukraine.

The US is fully capable of protecting Europe from Russia.

As for China, their boxed in Navally by the first island chain, which is a collection of hostile island arcapelagos. So projecting power to eruope is actually pretty difficult for them.

Honestly the US can protect europe from both the problem is protecting europe from itself.

 

[Bacle]

Russia hollowed out its culture with 70 plus years of communism, their educational system got wreaked during the 90s, their birth rate collapsed and the only section with healthy demographies are the restive seperatist minority groups. They also pretty much wreaked a lot of their country with further corruption and have become reliant on an ever shrinking stocks of weapons from the soviet era that is being burned up in Ukraine.

The US is fully capable of protecting Europe from Russia.

As for China, their boxed in Navally by the first island chain, which is a collection of hostile island arcapelagos. So projecting power to eruope is actually pretty difficult for them.

Honestly the US can protect europe from both the problem is protecting europe from itself.

Protecting Europe from itself, or trying to, does unfortunately seem to be a recurring theme in US history.

 

[Aldarion]

I never said that the US ascended to godhood, only that we are not Rome and that comparisons between the two are largely a farce.

Also, we have something more than geography on our side; it's called the US Constitution, US Congress, and US Supreme Court, something neither Rome or any European empire had.

The US is exceptional, deal with it.

Yeah, that is bullshit.

Rome had literally all of that, and it all went down the gutters. And just like you now, Romans also believed it would all last forever.

And frankly, Austria-Hungary was superior to the modern-day US when it came to rule of law. Stop living in 1790s and look at what is happening around you.

No country is exceptional because all countries are made by humans. Neither the Constitution, Congress nor Supreme Court will save you from history. FFS, they aren't even managing to save you from Communist takeover!

 

[ATP]

I never said that the US ascended to godhood, only that we are not Rome and that comparisons between the two are largely a farce.

Also, we have something more than geography on our side; it's called the US Constitution, US Congress, and US Supreme Court, something neither Rome or any European empire had.

The US is exceptional, deal with it.

No.
Polish Commonwealth after 1569 was made with Roman republic as model - but,with counters to prevent it from turning into Empire.It worked,our Kings always were weak.
It worked so well,that our neighbours destroyed our state.

So,when americans made their Republic they made Rome as model,but with counters to prevent it from turning into Empire,AND being too weak to survive,like Poland.

They failed - USA turned into Empire after 1945,and now is falling as country,with immigrants from South America as germans in Rome,and BLM and Antifa goons as degenerated roman citizens.

You are not exceptional,it is play "Third fall of Roman Republic" /after Rome and Poland/

 

[Bacle]

Yeah, that is bullshit.

Rome had literally all of that, and it all went down the gutters. And just like you now, Romans also believed it would all last forever.

And frankly, Austria-Hungary was superior to the modern-day US when it came to rule of law. Stop living in 1790s and look at what is happening around you.

No country is exceptional because all countries are made by humans. Neither the Constitution, Congress nor Supreme Court will save you from history. FFS, they aren't even managing to save you from Communist takeover!

No.
Polish Commonwealth after 1569 was made with Roman republic as model - but,with counters to prevent it from turning into Empire.It worked,our Kings always were weak.
It worked so well,that our neighbours destroyed our state.

So,when americans made their Republic they made Rome as model,but with counters to prevent it from turning into Empire,AND being too weak to survive,like Poland.

They failed - USA turned into Empire after 1945,and now is falling as country,with immigrants from South America as germans in Rome,and BLM and Antifa goons as degenerated roman citizens.

You are not exceptional,it is play "Third fall of Roman Republic" /after Rome and Poland/

I'm sorry, who's flag is on the Moon, who had the first A-Bomb, who has the first National Park system in the world, and who saved your Euro ass's from speaking German as the state language?

The US is better than Rome, and better than small-minded Euro's imaginings.

 

[Aldarion]

I'm sorry, who's flag is on the Moon, who had the first A-Bomb, who has the first National Park system in the world, and who saved your Euro ass's from speaking German as the state language?

The US is better than Rome, and better than small-minded Euro's imaginings.

1) Thanks to the Nazis.
2) And that was consequence of US being a) isolated from the war and b) benefitting from all the scientists that Nazis had chased away. You really have a lot to thank Hitler for.
3) India protected certain areas by royal decree 2 000 years ago. European monarchs did the same. US merely came up with the term "national park", but that is like giving somebody credit for coming up with "gobbleyhegweythrook". Now gimme a medal!
4) Nazi Germany will have fallen apart anyway. All socialist countries do, eventually.

In short: get your head out of your ass and learn some stuff before trying to showboat. And doubly so before claiming you are better than the people without whom your own civilization will have never existed to begin with!

 

[Bacle]

1) Thanks to the Nazis.
2) And that was consequence of US being a) isolated from the war and b) benefitting from all the scientists that Nazis had chased away. You really have a lot to thank Hitler for.
3) India protected certain areas by royal decree 2 000 years ago. European monarchs did the same. US merely came up with the term "national park", but that is like giving somebody credit for coming up with "gobbleyhegweythrook". Now gimme a medal!
4) Nazi Germany will have fallen apart anyway. All socialist countries do, eventually.

In short: get your head out of your ass and learn some stuff before trying to showboat. And doubly so before claiming you are better than the people without whom your own civilization will have never existed to begin with!

1) Von Braun stole Goddard's designs, so more like the Nazi's stole US designs, then we took them back.

2) Eh, a lot of those scientists were already in the US, and the Manhattan Project was up and running without them. Remember, Einstein was not actually part of the Manhattan Project, and Neils Bohr didn't pulled out of Europe with Allied help till well after the fighting started and the Project was underway.

3) There is a difference between royal hunting preserves, and national parks for a whole nations populace to enjoy. That you don't understand the difference just shows how small-minded your thinking is, and how desperate you are to pretend the US isn't something new and exceptional.

4) That is not assured, particularity if Hitler found a competent successor, and if there was no active military pressure against him/Germany, like the Allies or Soviets. No, Europe doesn't all speak German because the US had to come over and sort your continents shit out once again.

But please, show more and more how you are just another butthurt Euro upset by the US's exceptional place in the world, and the increasing irrelevance of the historical 'cycles' that some fools in postage stamp sized countries in Europe cling to.

You're leaders even made the EU, because of how envious they were of the US' system and cohesion, and because it gives the Germans and French a way to rule over the rest of you without needing to actively conquer you.

 

[Aldarion]

1) Von Braun stole Goddard's designs, so more like the Nazi's stole US designs, then we took them back.

Liquid propelled rocket was developed in USSR and Germany at the same time as Goddard. And there is no evidence Von Braun stole Goddard's designs, btw. Goddard only believed so due to some similarities. There is however evidence he had read works on liquid-propelled rockets by Konstantin Tsiolkovsky.

Also, German V-2 was far more advanced than anything Goddard had built or even contemplated. If I steal your design for Ford Model T and develop a Volkswagen Beetle from it, can you really say I am still using your design?

2) Eh, a lot of those scientists were already in the US, and the Manhattan Project was up and running without them. Remember, Einstein was not actually part of the Manhattan Project, and Neils Bohr didn't pulled out of Europe with Allied help till well after the fighting started and the Project was underway.

Well yeah, but Einstein is what made the project largely possible in the first place.

3) There is a difference between royal hunting preserves, and national parks for a whole nations populace to enjoy. That you don't understand the difference just shows how small-minded your thinking is, and how desperate you are to pretend the US isn't something new and exceptional.

I'd rather be small-minded than delusional.

Even if we exclude the so-called "royal hunting preserves", you still have Bogd Khan Uul National Park in Mongolia. It was established in 1778, and is thus a full century older than the Yellowstone National Park (established in 1872). It is about as old as United States themselves!

4) That is not assured, particularity if Hitler found a competent successor, and if there was no active military pressure against him/Germany, like the Allies or Soviets. No, Europe doesn't all speak German because the US had to come over and sort your continents shit out once again.

It actually is. Socialist countries fall apart because of socialism.

But please, show more and more how you are just another butthurt Euro upset by the US's exceptional place in the world, and the increasing irrelevance of the historical 'cycles' that some fools in postage stamp sized countries in Europe cling to.

You know, I actually disliked when people in Europe joke about "stupid, ignorant Americans who have no knowledge of history and believe that Mongolia is a lake in Kazahstan". But you fit said stereotype to a T.

You're leaders even made the EU, because of how envious they were of the US' system and cohesion, and because it gives the Germans and French a way to rule over the rest of you without needing to actively conquer you.

Oh, so US are just a stereotypical empire and not anything exceptional.

Glad you are finally starting to see things.

 

[Bacle]

Liquid propelled rocket was developed in USSR and Germany at the same time as Goddard. And there is no evidence Von Braun stole Goddard's designs, btw. Goddard only believed so due to some similarities. There is however evidence he had read works on liquid-propelled rockets by Konstantin Tsiolkovsky.

Also, German V-2 was far more advanced than anything Goddard had built or even contemplated. If I steal your design for Ford Model T and develop a Volkswagen Beetle from it, can you really say I am still using your design?

Goddard's suspicion about Von Braun stealing his work is public record.

Well yeah, but Einstein is what made the project largely possible in the first place.

But he was not a part of it, and most of the talent for the project already was in the US when it began.

I'd rather be small-minded than delusional.

Even if we exclude the so-called "royal hunting preserves", you still have Bogd Khan Uul National Park in Mongolia. It was established in 1778, and is thus a full century older than the Yellowstone National Park (established in 1872). It is about as old as United States themselves!

First I'd ever heard of the place.

Looking into it, you are being misleading about it's nature:

"Environmental protection on Bogd Khan Mountain dates back at least to the thirteenth century when the Tooril Khan ruler of the Keraites, forbade logging and hunting there, claiming that Bogd Khan was a holy mountain"

"In 1778 the Mongolian governor of what is now Ulan-Bator, petitioned the Qianlong Emperor requesting approval to hold twice yearly ceremonies dedicated to Mount Bogd Khan Uul. Permission was granted eight days later for ceremonies to be held twice annually"

"In 1783, the local government of the Qing dynasty declared the Bogd Khan a protected site, to be preserved for its beauty"

It's a holy site, which was maintained for local religious purposes/beliefs, and preserved because of it's importance to locals and the Qing. That's like trying to claim that Mount Olympus is the 'first national park' because of how the Greeks treated it.

Though not surprised the Mongolians and CCP want to play it off as the 'first national park', to try to one up the US.

It is now a biosphere reserve, which is not the same as a national park either, as reserves have far fewer visitor amenities and are generally there to protect wildlife/flora with minimal human interaction, instead of allow the public to enjoy nature by visiting it in depth.

It actually is. Socialist countries fall apart because of socialism.

I do not think that the 'fall apart' phase would have happened before the whole of Europe was already German controlled for a while. You remember how many collaborators the Nazi's had in their conquered lands, and how many places joined 'non-violently'.

Britain may have survived unconquered, but without the US and Soviets keeping the pressure up on German, Europe would have been Hitler's plaything till the syphilis got him, and if someone competent took over after that, it would only get worse.

You know, I actually disliked when people in Europe joke about "stupid, ignorant Americans who have no knowledge of history and believe that Mongolia is a lake in Kazahstan". But you fit said stereotype to a T.

I know more than most Americans, and the fact I can dissect the reasons behind why the US and Rome comparison's are a farce is because I actually do have a greater knowledge of history and world affairs than most of the US population.

Which should scare you, because you are not wrong about others in the US; some in the US even think Alaska is an island because of how it's shown on maps. And I am not shitting you about that.

Oh, so US are just a stereotypical empire and not anything exceptional.

Glad you are finally starting to see things.

No, because the EU is a super-state farce that is trying to usurp control from national level govs, and force European nations into a super-state for the benefit of Berlin and Paris.

The EU is trying to become the US, not because the US is an empire, but because the US's economic might drawf's all European nations, even combined, and the European merchants feel they need the EU to compete with the US at all.

Paris and Berlin realized they could never match DC on their own, and realized working together against the US economically, via the formation of the EU, was their only hope of rebuilding from WW2 towards something like what they had before, but now with a formal way to control other European nations via pen, instead of sword.