https://www.governing.com/context/America-Rome-and-the-Slow-Erosion-of-Republics.html

"Watts: The Founding Fathers had a very specific reason for being attracted to Rome. Not only was Rome's Republic remarkably successful, but it was remarkably well-suited to the kind of project that the founders were imagining in the United States. That's because Rome's was a republic that, as it expanded, incorporated representative democracy.

The Roman example is baked into our political DNA. It is essential to understand the challenges Rome faced as it expanded and incorporated new people, but it is just as essential to understand the challenges that Rome did not face up to that proved fatal to that republic. Some of the pathologies that Rome was not able to deal with are pathologies that we may be susceptible to.

The republic falls in the first century BCE (Before the Common Era), but the path was actually charted nearly a hundred years before. The real issues that led to this should resonate for us now. It started because there was a revolution in the way the Roman economy worked in the mid-second century that created massively wealthy people. They were entitled by law to this wealth, but it did not feel fair. They were doing this when most Romans were not getting the full advantages of this economic revolution. This was a political problem that could have been solved through law and through electoral politics, but the republic could not come up with consensus-based policies to address this wealth inequality fast enough to eliminate anger and resentment. And it was in the 130s BCE that politicians began to demagogue on this issue."




This gentleman's answer got me thinking...I'll have to delve deeper into it.

If you read Plutarch's Fall of the Roman Republic, you will learn why the Republic collapsed.

Quote from: tac on December 18, 2020, 06:48:21 AM
If you read Plutarch's Fall of the Roman Republic, you will learn why the Republic collapsed.

He would rather throw cr-p against the wall.

Quote from: tac on December 18, 2020, 06:48:21 AM
If you read Plutarch's Fall of the Roman Republic, you will learn why the Republic collapsed.

Thanks for the recommendation. I just purchased the ebook 

Gee, who uses "BCE (Before the Common Era)"? You all know the answer. 

Quote from: Solar on December 18, 2020, 07:22:57 AM
Gee, who uses "BCE (Before the Common Era)"? You all know the answer. 

Jehovah's Witnesses for one, and anyone who wishes to diminish Christ.

Quote from: Solar on December 18, 2020, 07:22:57 AM
Gee, who uses "BCE (Before the Common Era)"? You all know the answer. 

Stupid uneducated fucking liberals...

While many ranking historians have opinions, Gibbon argued that the Law of Parsimony
(Ockham's Razor) which asserts that in complex issues, the simplest answer is correct.
Gibbon stated that Imperial Rome declined and fell because it abandoned/lost sight of
the civic values and virtues that were at the core of its legacy/heritage.
We would be wise to come to terms w/this reality as 'strum und drang' rages across
our civic/political environment.

Quote from: Walter Josh on January 26, 2021, 11:50:06 AM
While many ranking historians have opinions, Gibbon argued that the Law of Parsimony
(Ockham's Razor) which asserts that in complex issues, the simplest answer is correct.
Gibbon stated that Imperial Rome declined and fell because it abandoned/lost sight of
the civic values and virtues that were at the core of its legacy/heritage.
We would be wise to come to terms w/this reality as 'strum und drang' rages across
our civic/political environment.

Damn! That cuts to the chase. 

Quote from: tac on December 18, 2020, 06:48:21 AM
If you read Plutarch's Fall of the Roman Republic, you will learn why the Republic collapsed.

And what was the main reason?

Quote from: ModelCitizen on December 18, 2020, 06:37:22 AM
https://www.governing.com/context/America-Rome-and-the-Slow-Erosion-of-Republics.html

"Watts: The Founding Fathers had a very specific reason for being attracted to Rome. Not only was Rome's Republic remarkably successful, but it was remarkably well-suited to the kind of project that the founders were imagining in the United States. That's because Rome's was a republic that, as it expanded, incorporated representative democracy.

The Roman example is baked into our political DNA. It is essential to understand the challenges Rome faced as it expanded and incorporated new people, but it is just as essential to understand the challenges that Rome did not face up to that proved fatal to that republic. Some of the pathologies that Rome was not able to deal with are pathologies that we may be susceptible to.

The republic falls in the first century BCE (Before the Common Era), but the path was actually charted nearly a hundred years before. The real issues that led to this should resonate for us now. It started because there was a revolution in the way the Roman economy worked in the mid-second century that created massively wealthy people. They were entitled by law to this wealth, but it did not feel fair. They were doing this when most Romans were not getting the full advantages of this economic revolution. This was a political problem that could have been solved through law and through electoral politics, but the republic could not come up with consensus-based policies to address this wealth inequality fast enough to eliminate anger and resentment. And it was in the 130s BCE that politicians began to demagogue on this issue."




This gentleman's answer got me thinking...I'll have to delve deeper into it.

Basically it fell for the very same reasons and in the same ways ours is failing right now today. Sloth and greed mainly.

Read  the book and draw your own conclusions.

IT was inevitable.

Only citizens of Rome and then only the richer ones could serve in the senate.

So inevitably they became more insular over time.

And inevitably you will get those like Sulla and so forth and from that point on the Republic is doomed.

When you have such a small governing body (oligarchs as well) what happens is inevitable.

You can throw economics and all that jazz right out the window.

They would be responsible in the end for the Fall of the Roman Empire but not the end of the Republic. 

It fell because it  couldnt defend  its  borders.

Quote from: ldub23 on May 21, 2021, 08:48:50 AMIt fell because it  couldnt defend  its  borders.