George Washington

Putin didn't seize power and Augustus wasn't perfidious

>The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.

>For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.

>Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.

>Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.

>The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible.

What did he mean by this?

He did and he was. Even their rhetoric is similar, and the way they act, like when Putin stepped down for four years because the constitution said so, it was very similar to Augustus's charade with "temporary" authority.

With that you could literally compare anyone with Augustus.

Augustus was autistic

Putin's power base isn't the army, he's very popular in Russia.
And Augustus did nothing wrong

Um... no I can't. Let's take George Washington, he's nothing like that description.

Augustus was popular too, but still they both need army.

>And Augustus did nothing wrong
Then you also must think the same of Putin. As you can see, I didn't say anything about right and wrong, you judge according to your views.

Modern Russia is a much less militarized society than Ancient Rome. The Russian army doesn't go on yearly campaigns and Putin's legitimacy is based on his nationalization of the oil and gas industries and his assertion of independence from Western groups.

This.

If he was the Augustus of our time he'd have continued to wield influence and set America on the path of empire. If we're talking historical parallels to Rome America hasn't had its Augustus yet. The only real comparison you can make were "both were famous figures that became national myths!" and even then Cincinnatus is more appropriate.

You could make a shitty argument for Trump being Julius Caesar in terms of him fitting the populist strongman angle but he's too stupid and incompetent to actually fit the bill. Still, let's see a world where Trump gets murdered in Congress and then Jared Kushner goes head to head with Bannon for supreme control of America.

More like Washington was purposely made out to be a modern Cincinatus.

>Augustus wasn't perfidious

is this nigga serious?

I love Augustus but his entire road to power was full of treachery, murder and slander. He became a bit better once he was secure in his authority but even then he was a pragmatic dude.

The army was part of Augustus' authority but so was him positioning himself as a defender of Roman values against the degenerate east.

But it was the base of his power. Putin never fought a civil war to establish his hold on power.
>inb4 the Chechen war

For Steve Bannon is an honorable man

Obviously you're going to find some differences, there are no perfectly identical historical parallels. The point I think the user was making was that if you're looking for a modern Augustus parallel he fits the bill best.

It's still a terrible comparison
He's basically just saying "both are autocrats"

I'm not versed enough on Putin to make it my hill to die on, but these are what he said

>a perfidious man with military background seizing power in a republic while maintaining a semblance of respect for the democratic principles, and relying on the gullible people
>Even their rhetoric is similar, and the way they act, like when Putin stepped down for four years because the constitution said so, it was very similar to Augustus's charade with "temporary" authority.

These fit with Augustus at least. Do they fit with Putin?

Well, from the Anglo-American/ "Western" standpoint, Putin couldn't be an Augustus, because he is perceived as purely an autocrat, without the charade of being an enlightened one.

He didn't seize power and most Russians don't believe he's a fully democratic president

>Cincinatus

Never heard of him. Who was he?

The original "offered absolute power and laid it down to go back to his farm".

No. He was Cincinnatus

fpbp

That could easily describe Washington.

Him not seizing power is LITERALLY his thing.

Well, everything but that.

>seizing power
>washington

Could you elaborate your view? U.S. up to 1918 is one of my weaker areas of study.

youtube.com/watch?v=vkwZDRB3tZo

I'm immediately concerned about anything that opens with "The Truth About"

This.

FDR was Augustus.

papa goerge wasnt a terrible military leader, he was just mediocre