So, Rome fell because the degenerate settled Romans got conquered by the stronger more virile barbarians, right? And this also happened in China (Twice), in England, it will happen in Europe/USA sooner or later, etc etc etc. Weak people get beaten up by strong people.
Most adherents of this belief tout it as an unchangeable fact of life, that all great nations are bound to be overtaken by smelly dumb barbarian scum because the great nations end up getting filled with spineless wimps.
But that's not what happened in 9th century England. Alfred the Great and friends, despite being "degenerate" settled farmers, drove off the "superior" Danish invaders.
Are there any other cases of this happening? When Civilization successfully fends off the Barbarians? I'm not counting the Qing getting overthrown as they'd long since conquered the Han and become fully Chinese when they got tossed out.
Rome fell because of Christianity. The Germanics just walked in almost unopposed since most Romans were pacifist due to their indoctrination into Judeo-Chrisitian teachings and they forgot the warrior ways of their pagan, non-Christian ancestors.
Jack Campbell
The Anglo-Saxons still ended up getting conquered by the Danes in the 11th century, and the Normans after that, for good this time.
Lucas Jenkins
The Cold War.
By all laws of history, the Soviet Union should have won.
Bentley Williams
>9th century England >a "great nation"
Gabriel Russell
Right, they got degenerate, blah blah blah. I'm not interested in what comes after, the barbarian conquest.
Well all civilizations fall sooner or later.
Who were the barbarians? The Mongols? I thought the Mongols succeeded? Or, I guess "overthrowing the barbarians" should also count.
Xavier Williams
Also Alfred didn't really drive the Danes off, they still colonized North England.
>So, Rome fell because the degenerate settled Romans got conquered by the stronger more virile barbarians, right? No, this is not what happens >Most adherents of this belief tout it as an unchangeable fact of life There are no adherents to this belief who are not 19th century anthropologists. Please read some more up to date literature.
Landon Kelly
OP's point
Your head
Parker Morales
The wild beast will always beat the established machine.
Nathan James
More like the established machine wins 99% of the time but it fails once and its gone
Mason Sanders
Because society is a house of glass. Hit it in just the right spot at just the right time and the whole thing shatters. Nature balances everything, and despite what we think, we cannot escape nature.
Aiden Green
The laws of history didn't account for brzezinski's afghanistan strategy. Poles finally got their revenge.
Luke Gutierrez
OP's point | | V An orangutan's shit-smeared bunghole | | | | V actual dialectic
Just admit it's trash. It's not difficult to be rigorous. Even a child can do it.
Blake Ross
Explain? America had greater resources and management.
Landon Sanchez
America was a sea-based, commercial power, promiscuous and degenerate and ridden by ethnic and political divisions, while the Soviet Union was a land empire, with strong morals and societal cohesion.
Previously, the "land powers" won such conflicts, like Sparta defeated Athens and Rome defeated Carthage.
Austin Sanchez
>LITERALLY EVERY WAR BRITAIN WON
Samuel Anderson
>LITERALLY EVERY WAR SPAIN WON
Jaxon Walker
>LITERALLY EVERY WAR PORTUGAL WON >LITERALLY ALL ITALIAN CITY-STATES
Alexander Scott
Uh, Russia was anything but socially cohesive. If you lived in Moscow, sure, if you lived in the East, Poland, Ukraine, the Balkans in general really there was anything but trust and cohesion.
Robert Cooper
>Poland and the Balkans >part of the USSR
Nathan Ross
You are talking about the Soviet Union like it was homogenous - it was actually less homogenous than the United States.
Connor Gonzalez
Not him but cohesion isn't necessarily ethnic based.
Lucas Williams
The purpose of the image was more to outline the disparate cultures and, to some extent, languages. My point was not to bring up ethnicity in of itself.
The USA just does not have that kind of ancient diversity in language, religion, etc.
As a nation of immigrants, the US is (or was, rather) united in the common need to assimilate, namely by learning English and then by choosing which Jesus to worship.
The USA does not have native populations with disparate traditions, languages, or religion. This is both because of the general lack of sophisticated ancient societies here and the general lack of smallpox and cholera free injuns.
Most of our people abandoned their homeland long ago.
Sebastian Mitchell
Rome was suffering from internal strife, a severe lack of manpower, and stupid decisions when facing Attila. When Attila's war was finished up, all the Goths had to do was surge south. It wasn't barbarians conquering civilization, it was a weakened kingdom getting pushed over.
Gavin Smith
>being a puppet state of the USSR >being completely controlled by the USSR as a result >not for all intents and purposes part of the USSR
Evan Scott
>strong morals and social cohesion
Yeah because Stalin, a Georgian, thought Russian human labor was the most effective means of industrialising his country.
Joshua Mitchell
I just want you to know, I came here to post this because it is my legitimate belief. I don't care if you're trolling, you made my night. Thank you.
Kayden Williams
Reconquest of Iberia
Nathaniel Ward
If that's the case then you are an absolute fucking sped. Sack of Rome (410) by the Visigoths, Arian Christian Sack of Rome (455), by the Vandals, Arian and Nicene Christian Sack of Rome (546), by the Ostrogoths, Arian Christian shoo shoo Gibbon goblin
Thomas Robinson
Just because it took longer for Christianity to ruin the Germans doesn't mean it didn't destroy rome.
Jaxon Gray
>Who were the barbarians? Germanics.
Lincoln Gray
The degeneracy of Rome started with bread and games for the people which originated in the 1st centuary. It just goes to show how fucking great Rome was that it kept going for 300 years after this took roots. Nowadays, sadly, we seem to relive history as if we were on speed.
Tyler Mitchell
Cimbri and Teutones invasion of the Roman Republic.
Brandon Cook
Saint Pope Leo was able to dissuade Attila the Hun from sacking Rome
Caleb Lopez
>the decline in the west was not due to a shift of the economic and subsequently political core to the east >it was not due to a domino effect of displaced peoples >it was Constantine legalising Christianity some 200 years earlier, never mind the people sacking Rome and settling in western territories also being Christian
