Was the assassination of Caesar a mistake?

Was the assassination of Caesar a mistake?

Yes. The Republic was done for either way. At least under Caesar the transition would have been more peaceful.

Yea, they utterly failed to read the political climate. Which is a good indication of just how far up their own asses they really were.

Yo nigga I just got out of prison.

Care to explain more?

It really doesn't matter because Rome is fucking overrated. Had he lived longer, the whole thing would've just lasted in a different fashion but probably just as long.

Yes, if you read about why Brutus and co thought they could get away with it, the whole thing reads like an episode of It's Always Sunny

>Rome is fucking overrated
user, I...

Is there a link to a source of this?

>le epic 49th post about Rome today
Yes, you're all so different and interesting, talking about a dead thing.
Even dinosaur fans gets bored. Rome fans are just sad.

But I fail to see your reasoning? Rome is talked about a lot because it is liked and popular. If that's your reason for hating Rome, that's really fucking sad.

Rome is talked about a lot on Veeky Forums. That's not really a relevant population nor is it necessarily a mentally healthy one.
I don't hate Rome. I just think it's fucking overrated.

Public Order in Ancient Rome.

See if you can find it online, the book is absolutely not worth buying. Four citations per sentence gets really fucking old, especially when it is just a hundred and 112 pages long without the epilogue, bibliographic essay, bibliography, and index.

That said, the mere three or four paragraphs Nippel devotes to it is pretty insightful and funny when juxtaposed to the dryness of the writing. It honestly does come off as a "Why are the plebs so angry? Don't they know how smart we are?" And then they killed the Republic.

Caesar up to that point was the closest anyone had come to a genuinely influential Platonic philosopher king, so yes.

kys you contrarian faggot

Agreed, Probably a salty Carthaginian or a homosexual Greek.

Yes, but it worked out for the best in the end.

Augustus needed a turn, after all.

The Senate was becoming increasingly disconnected from the plebs and hounded down the Populares, like Caesar, who were attaining power by pandering to the people.

While it may have been selfish, they did actually bring up valid complaints for reform, but the Senate wasn't having it.

Fast forward, Caesar wins the civil war. His political rivals completely fail to grasp just how popular Caesar is and assassinate him. They think that the plebs will hail them as heroes for killing the tyrant and then things will go back to the way they were.

Instead the plebs were in shock and after Caesar's funeral that shock turned to full on fucking outrage.

>LARPing over a dead nation

this is how pathetic you are, right in line with the prussiaboos (OMG YES I COMPARED U WITH GERMANIC LE SAVAGES. DEAL WITH IT PUNK)

Was the assassination of X Roman populist a mistake?

Dude. You're not impressing anyone by acting like a complete fedora tipper in regards to an empire that was highly influential in western history.

I personally dislike Rome because they destroyed a bunch of cultures that I'd have loved to see develop (Gaul developing city states, and Carthage continuing as a major power on the Mediterranean would have been interesting to see), but I don't fucking try to pretend as though they (Rome) were anything but hugely significant in our history.

Not him either.

the Carthaginians were child sacrificers and gauls thought the height of sophistication was dipping their hair into lye to make it spiky

none of these ancient societies were worth shit, and neither was Rome.

Yeah man, think about it. If dem Romans hadn't killed those Gauls we would be punk rocking in space right now.

>Builds the foundation of modern day western poetry, architecture, law, military and religion
>Wasn't worth shit
I recommend you either see a doctor or read a history book.

>Yea, they utterly failed to read the political climate

It quite literally is the best possible example of this there has ever been in history.

A bunch of wealthy unelected noblemen who had hoarded their fortunes for centuries cut down the one man who had been lavishing cash and public works spending on the poor. It's not surprising that they quickly gave their support to Mark Antony.

It doesn't get better later on. iirc Flavius Aetius, the Roman commander who defeated Attila, was killed by nobles along with another compentent leader for petty squabbles.

He was straight up murdered by the emperor and some bros in full view of court.

Maybe but the real issue is they left way too many figures for the Cesar faction to coalesce around leaving Anthony is just irresponsible.

Would Caesar have crowned himself King had he survived? Would he have attempted to created a dynasty like Augustus? Or would the dysfunctional Republic that had existed since Sulla's march on Rome have continued to exist?

One of my favorite historical what-ifs.

>Even dinosaur fans gets bored
no we do not

That became the standard for Rome's most capable.

>Win battles
>Gain popularity
>Emperor or nobles feel threatened
>Murder you
>Rinse and repeat until Rome is basically defenseless and run by incompetents

He was already taking the steps to centralize power like Augustus did so it's most likely he would do something similar.

Don't forget Germanicus. The Roman Alexander. Killed by Tiberius I believe because of his popularity.

Fall out of line and they'll beat you into the ground, the ultimate reason for all political systems' fall since the ancient times