Julius Caesar

>MUH GORILLION GAULS

And the world was better for it

Funny considering how his legions were made up of gauls

Well maybe they deserved to be genocided

Nobody cares about genocide happening to white people, especially ancient white people. If you even bring it up, somebody will shame you for calling it genocide even though it clearly was the literal definition of genocide.

Nobody cares about ancient brown people genocide either, take Sardinians, 80,000 of them was slain by the Romans but nobody ever mentions it.

or the Armenians, genocided by the Young Turks.

Rome was the archetype of a patriarchal fascist nation with aggressive expansion politics.
>lots of people here admire fascism and glorify war
Caesar was the aggressive military and poltical leader that seized power, destroyed the Republic and became a totalitarian tyrant
>lots of people here admire the big man dictator type

Genociding end enslaving entire people is cool as long as it is Rome

You should be genocided for such a retarded post, honestly.

>rome
>fascist
Holy shit do you know what a fascist is?

Yes, you know why they borrowed even their name from the roman Fasces? Or the Roman salute?

t. Brown people lover

oh boy he killed enemies during a military campaign
what a monster

Why do some people on Veeky Forums seems to care a lot about gauls lately ? Is it just me ?

Technically, he was killing rebels against the Roman and ProRoman Gallic hegemony. They had the option of submitting to Roman power and enjoying the benefits, but they valued their freedom over security.
Granted, the Romans probably would've done the same.

The genocide of the Tencteri and Usipetes was considered a war crime even in his own time, read Cato for example. He massacred nearly half a million people just for fun.

Dont talk about my ancestor like that you son of a bitch

Because italy came up with this new system and thought it might bring back the glory of old rome
By your definition of fascist napoleon was also a fascist, and if you think that i don't know what to teel you

History is written by the victor - call of duty 4: modern warfare

>submitting to Roman power and enjoying the benefits
Like what? Getting enslaved?
If someone invades your country and demands submission you fight him because his the bad guy. Why would anyone want to become roman?

The Republic was already dead long before Caesar crossed the Rubicon, fuck off with your Optimate cock sucking.

>By your definition of fascist napoleon was also a fascist
No, surprisingly he wasn't, his political tendencies are far from totalitarian or right wing.
Rome on the other hand incorporated everything a fascist dreams of, including enslaving "sub"-humans

Agreed. He spat on a few Gaulish tribes and marched into Rome afterwards, so what?
Marching over primitive peoples doesn't make you a genius. He was an opportunist. Yet popular culture and the mythologized residue of the Roman propaganda machine paint him as being on par with Alexander or Hannibal. He is not. Augustus was 10x the leader and statesman Caesar ever was.

You're making the classic mistake of being a fucking mongoloid retard and looking at it without regard for the history of fascism. It's BASED on Caesar's politics but it is NOT Caesar, you might as well say Hitler was a Neo Nazi

>history having good guys and bad guys
This board is 18+ kiddo

>Gaul hos aint nothing but dank stank on my dick
What did he mean by this?

>killing
>bad

Hitler was a Nazi and Caesar the conqueror and Rome, the nation that enslaved most of Europe, and their society was the inspiration for Fascism. Like be the same kind of assholes, tight ass totalitarian society that serves the needs of those in power, constantly at war and trying to subjugate its neighbors by force.
>same shit is same

>enslave most of europe
If you call having to pay taxes enslavement of most of europe, i don't know what to say
>rome
>tight ass totalitarian
Ah so you know nothing about rome
>constantly at war
Most of the time it was rebels,other times they were actually trying to expand
It sure is a good thing that romes military was made out of volunteers
>napoleon was fascist
He spread enlightenment ideal all through out europe, destroyed the HRE,reorganized the german states, gave more overall freedom to the european people, and even started the proto EU

He wiped out about 1/5 of all Gauls, how is that not genocidal?

Read what I posted, I said NEO Nazi. Fascism is NEO Caesarian principles you dunce

>If you call having to pay taxes enslavement of most of europe, i don't know what to say
Rome wasn't a taxed base economy, but a slave based economy. Roman conquest ended with enslaving large parts of the population and abducting them to foreign lands.

>Ah so you know nothing about rome
sure has been fun if you where male, rich and belonged to patriciate, so for about 1-2% of total population. women, plebs and poor where second class citizens and slaves, which made the majority of population had no fun at all.

>Most of the time it was rebels,other times they were actually trying to expand
So they either fought people that rebelled against their tyranny or then tried to subjugate more people. what heros!

>It sure is a good thing that romes military was made out of volunteers
And I fought they payed them...

>He spread enlightenment ideal all through out europe,
>yes

>destroyed the HRE
no, that was dead long before

>reorganized the german states,
not really

>gave more overall freedom to the european people,
that wasn't exactly him, but the bourgeois movement following the french revolution

>and even started the proto EU
not really
And know what, none of this makes Napoleon proto fascist. In fact it makes him quite a bit lefty

As opposed to when poltards talk about racemixing?

The definition of Fascism might have came later, but Rome matches every single point of that definition, which makes it somewhat a fascist state.

Caesar was the real jesus

>Rome on the other hand incorporated everything a fascist dreams of, including enslaving "sub"-humans
Explains why they were so successful :^D

>Gauls dindu nuffin.

>judging ancient cultures with today ethical standards.

Nice objectivity Veeky Forums

Caeser's brutal actions in Gaul provoked criticism even from other Romans, so "it was okay for its day" doesn't actually apply in this instance.

we can classify what a civilization was like, mongols for example killed a whole lot of people, destroyed entire cultures and left pretty much nothing, thats why we don't see them as positive today.
Rome genocided and enslaved much of the European continent for centuries with brutal means. I see no reason why I should fanboy for them or try to justify their crimes.

Yeah except its economy, youth culture, and scientific fetishism

Who the fuck cares about gauls. The real reason to hate this fucker is the destruction of the library of Alexandria.

>Caeser's brutal actions in Gaul provoked criticism even from other Romans
Yeah, Romans who wanted him to be taken away from his Legions so that he wouldn't march into Rome at their head. They weren't complaining when Carthage was salted, Syracuse was stacked, Macedonian soldiers who'd already surrended were massacred, etc etc

>slave based economy
But thats wrong
Rome may have had slaves, but they sustained themselves off of the crops of those they conquered and allowed those they conquered to rule over their lands
They enslaved those who rebelled or fought against them
>wasn't fun for the majority of the population
So like every successful ancient civilization ever
>rebelles fought against tyranny
The romans were probably the most forgiving empire in history
They allowed those they conquered to rule over their lands and built infanstructure for them
>i thought they were paid
They were
They volunteer and got paid and were rewarded lands
Those who weren't roman citizens got rewarded citciteze
>the HRE was destroyed long agi
But it wasn't
The HRE was destroyed by napoleon in 1806
>reorganzied the german states
Pic related
>not really
He wanted to start an all european trade union that forces europe to use one ccurrenc and wanted to leave britian out

>The HRE was destroyed by napoleon in 1806
It existed only in name and had no political power for a long long time.

>>reorganzied the german states
non of that stuck, all got reversed in 1815 again and no one carred

>He wanted to start an all european trade union that forces europe to use one ccurrenc and wanted to leave britian out
Yeah, but he didnt.

For the rest of your post nice try, but roman economy was slave based, it wasn't free man working the fields, they troops were payed mercenaries and not volunteer heros and Rome wasn't very forgiving, they massacred everybody that resisted, they where Borg tier evil.

You got a pretty naive view on history.

The genocide he committed was two thousand years ago. Do you think people will give an ounce of a fuck about the Holocaust two thousand years from now on?

They shouldn't have revolted then

Some dude named Shakespeare made a play about him which became a cornerstone of literature.

Roman slaves were treated the best out of any other slave, they could file complaints about their masters, own land, and buy their own freedom and join the legions to become a citizen
It was still slavery but it was the best kind of slavery
It was mostly freemen working the fields, they worked the feild to give the for tax relife and all that, even if they were slaves it wasn't actually that bad
The roman legion were literally made up of volunteer forces. The only time rome resorted to using mercinaries was when rome was on its last legs
Yes they did massacre those who resisted, that was better than what most got in other empires
Also, since when was spreeding civilization and prosperity evil?

>non of that stuck, all got reversed in 1815 again and no one cared
It most certainly did not get reversed. The German states were reordered following the fall of napoleon. And the enlightenment ideals he spread and the breakup of the HRE ignited calls for a untied pan German state.

>For the rest of your post nice try, but roman economy was slave based.
As was nearly every pre modern economy. Pro tip the Romans survived the almost complete collapse of slavery in the empire just fine.

>it wasn't free man working the fields, they troops were payed mercenaries and not volunteer heros

Volunteer means they volunteered for service as opposed to being forced into it.

>and Rome wasn't very forgiving, they massacred everybody that resisted, they where Borg tier evil.

It really doesn't surprise me that someone who watches sci fi has such a childish and ignorant view of history, but I do find it sad.

Are you seriously dumb?
Pretty much everything you wrote is plain wrong
40% of the people in Rome where enslaved, brutal torture and exploitation was the norm. Slaves reached and average age of 18, which speaks for the conditions and the heavy work.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_ancient_Rome

Also, the Greeks must have been so happy that Rome invaded them, burned their cities, enslaved their population and finally gave them civilisation, right?

>It most certainly did not get reversed.
It did, see pic related. And here is something to read en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congress_of_Vienna
>As was nearly every pre modern economy.
The Gauls weren't, and neither where the Lusitans.

> Pro tip the Romans survived the almost complete collapse of slavery in the empire just fine.
Pro tip, please state exactly what event you mean, like source?

>Volunteer means they volunteered for service as opposed to being forced into it.
It was a career. reserved for the poor that otherwise would life their days out in a roman slum. Social mobility in roman society was low and the army one of the few ways out.

>It really doesn't surprise me that someone who watches sci fi has such a childish and ignorant view of history, but I do find it sad.
ad hominem and no idea where you see sci fie. You wouldn't know the difference between a consul and a tribune, but somehow you feel fit to debate about Rome.

Historia Civilis came out with a new video so all the Romeaboos have a new talking point.

The Gallic menace needed to be stopped at all costs

Before I respond further please actually read the Wikipedia page you posted and then once you've understood it come back and explain to me how the dissolution of the HRE from 360 member states lead by an emperor into a confederacy with 38 member states with votes skewed was a reversal into the previous system.

>Pro tip, please state exactly what event you mean, like source?
You think the widespread manumission of slave was an event? It was a long process stemming from many factors from the ceasing of new lands being conquered to the spread of Christianity. Most things in history are slow changes not grand events.

>It was a career. reserved for the poor that otherwise would life their days out in a roman slum.
While the vast majority of the roman army post Marian reforms were the poor they weren't city dwellers in large part. The vast majority of people lived on farms or in villages.

>Social mobility in roman society was low and the army one of the few ways out.
As it is in all premodern societies. And in most Modern ones. The very fact that the common man could rise in the legions and eventually retire to his own plot of land is a good thing.

>ad hominem and no idea where you see sci fie. You wouldn't know the difference between a consul and a tribune, but somehow you feel fit to debate about Rome.
You accuse me of Ad Hoimienem while asserting that the Romans are Borg tier evil.

post a single source you retard!

>sure has been fun if you where male, rich and belonged to patriciate, so for about 1-2% of total population. women, plebs and poor where second class citizens and slaves, which made the majority of population had no fun at all.

Caesar was a populist who worked to gain the favor of the poor who were disenfranchised, they were the ones who loved his conquests.

He conquered Gaul mostly to give land and loot to his low class soldiers and their families, the rich hated him for it.

>destroyed entire cultures and left pretty much nothing.

But romans didn't just kill gauls, they assimilated many things of their culture and even their gods.

>You accuse me of Ad Hoimienem while asserting that the Romans are Borg tier evil.
ad hominem means at the person, comparing romans and borgs is something different.

>but roman economy was slave based, it wasn't free man working the fields

oh shit, but my man?? wasn't this what that ol' fascist caesar was trying to do something about, with his land reforms?? wasn't this the exact problem plaguing the republic that the emperors after spent years trying to fix??
it was in the republic and empire best interests to have citizens and freemen in the fields, as slaves can't be soldiers.

sources are Commentarii de Bello Civili by your favorite populare.
The Complete Roman Army by my good friend Goldsworthy.
Ab Urbe Condita by some slave-owning fascist.
and you might as well also read some Polybius.

>pic related

>the widespread manumission of slave
source please

>Their crimes

yes man those evil romans genocided those peaceful lovely tribes, how racist they were they, just like the nazis, amirite?

>Rome genocided and enslaved much of the European continent for centuries with brutal means. I see no reason why I should fanboy for them or try to justify their crimes.

They actually colonized, traded and slowly incorporated them into an interconnected system of allied states, granting them a good deal of cultural and political freedom, only conquering when needing to.

Don't you know what the Socii war was about? People WANTED to be Roman, being Roman fucking rocked compared to being under tribal chief shitdick or delusional Greek tyrant #541.

Please read the wikipedia page you yourself posted. Thank you.

>romans where the good guys

So Julius Caesar was literally hitler then, DO IT AGAIN BRUTUS.

>spartacus was the good guys

>only conquering when needing to.
Name one province in the Roman empire that wasn't acquired by brutal conquest.

>History is about goodies and baddies.

name one Empire that didn't commit crimes

Phrygia, or Asia, you absolute moron.

>Slaves that fight for their freedom are bad.

>Name a beligerant province that wasn't acquired by war.

see

>Muh proto communist leader was murdered for those ancient fascists

They got their freedom then they turned around at the alps and came back to loot and pillage

America

kek, nice one
not an empire anyway

bait

Yes, it states that all decisions regarding the German states from Napoleon where canceled and a new order where created instead.
please quote otherwise. Thats why Alsace and Lorraine for example are German again.

He meant: "You faggots struggled so much to defeat Pontus yet I crushed it in on battle". Not really related to their gaulish exploits.

>implying sacking rome and killing merchants and citizens like niggers isn't gonna get you bitchslapped at some point.

There aren't any people on Sardinia at that time period, its way too remote. Where in the hell are you getting that from?

I'd like to nominate this post for stupidest post of 2017.

>muh one million
shouldn't have sacked Rome Asterix

He literally appointed gaulish senators. There was benefit to be gained by supporting him. Give to Caesar the smallest excuse and he will plunder, kill and enslave your whole people. Don't and he will treat you better than any roman has ever treated a barbarian.

>read his fiercest political enemies, for example

>Why would anyone want to become roman
lots of benefits of Roman citizenship b r o

>authority = fascism

Fucking leftypoltards

But he's right. The germanic nig Ariovistus started it all.

Doesn't count, they were Barbars. The ones that did survive became heavily Romanized, so he really did them a service. You're welcome sweaty :-)