Rome collapsed because of multi-culturalism

Rome collapsed because of multi-culturalism.

Prove me wrong
>Protip: You can't

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=OvFcURVQCi0
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elagabalus
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coitus_interruptus
youtu.be/qh7rdCYCQ_U
gatesofvienna.net/2016/11/the-barbarians-who-sacked-rome-came-into-the-empire-as-refugees/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

I have stared at your image. It did not collapse and I see no cultures.

Why are you doing this?

>Rome collapsed because of multi-culturalism.

nah it collapsed because they ruined their currency

they basically forced culture on everyone

Rome is weird and unique because its the only empire in history that existed long enough and implemented the proper policies to make civic nationalism work.

I can't.

In fact Julius Caesar promove a law in wich all immigrants should GTFO of Rome except for professional Greeks (They were the only good Doctors back in the time).

So Immigration WAS a problem, a real problem BUT the Roman Empire fall for many reasons, not just one and the immigrants who were creating chaos in Rome wasn't non-whites in any case though. the first problems were Germanic tribes.
We could also say that the decadence of the Emperor itself was also a major problem.

So yes, multi-cultarism play a role in the fall, but it wasn't the only reason.

Here you go idiot

Rome collapsed because they were subhuman shitskins who fucked little boys. Fuck australia and fuck rome

>forced culture on everyone
You mean like we are doing now with immigration? Like some sort of....multiculturalism?

>rome collapsed

lol no

Nah it collapsed due to socialism. Rome was full of useless plebs that did nothing but where given free grain at huge cost to the state and provinces.

Why are countrylets so salty all the time?

The Byzantines lasted another 1,000 years.

Same shit with Austria-Hungarian Empire, Yugoslavia and USSR. Multiracial state = failure

no, because the immigrants don't take on our culture and no one forces it on them

they show up, collect their bread and circus and tell everyone else to accommodate them or face violence

>because the immigrants don't take on our culture and no one forces it on them
Multiculturalism is still multiculturalism whether its forced or not.

>Byzantines
>Roman
Yeah and Australia/America are still British

they called themeselves romans and we should too

No, you cunt. It was Caracalla's edict of AD212 that granted Roman citizenship to all free men in the Empire that started the collapse. Things went downhill quickly from there.

thus is life in Australia's shadow.

Did Kangaroos teach you history?
It was over-extension and cocky commanders who ruined the empire, multiculturalism was only a consequence of this.

Caracalla's edict therefore granted equal status to people of widely divergent culturtets and loyalties. THAT was the problem, rather than the existence of different cultures within the Empire. Should have let them stay 2nd rank.

>It was over-extension and cocky commanders who ruined the empire, multiculturalism was only a consequence of this.

Then why did those borders work years earlier? Mass migration, currency debasement and a continuing movement of relevance in trade to the east is what did it.

>>Byzantines
>>Roman

What is the East and West Roman Empire? Pretty sure the West fell apart, while the East remained. Only reason it is called "Byzantine" is to differentiate it from The Holy Roman Empire that the "Germanians" founded after Charlemagne died and Francia was split in 100.

Yeah and even though I respect the Byzantium they're not the Roman Empire, even if they wanted to believe it.

You can't keep calling yourself the Roman Empire without even having Rome and getting fucked by the Ottomans.

Dont expand past the Rhine.

oh sh*t i thought this stun-barbaric northman was arminius for a moment

>You can't keep calling yourself the Roman Empire without even having Rome and getting fucked by the Ottomans.

Wasn't the Capital was moved to Constantinople under Constantine to help centralize command before the Empire split in two.

Daily reminder that Rome never collapsed, its just changed its name to Finland

...

How many Romans actually moved to Byzantium and colonised the Eastern empire? I thought it was mostly natives of Eastern Europe who more or less had Roman culture thrusted upon them. I think comparing the relationships between Rome/Byzantium and Britain/Australia/America are fairly valid as in they are colonised states with similar cultures yet clearly not identical.
Especially since the Byzantine empire would have changed quite significantly in the 1000 years since the fall of Rome.

Friendly reminder that
>Finland = Winland

Indeed but that doesn't change the fact that Rome was under control of a different power completely different than the Byzantium.

Are you Roman or Mongolian. Pick one and only one

Is really incredible that men like Augustus can create an Empire so relevant and powerfull than not various cultures but also different religions try to restore.

Christians or Muslims, European West or East or Middle-Eastern, all of them admire the Romans.

Truly amazing.

I will never feel tired of reading I Augustus

youtube.com/watch?v=OvFcURVQCi0

kinda more a symptiom.
first sign was when they gave women too many rights and and their feritlity rate went down...the end is when they are deafeated by the barbabrians since foreingers have no need to fight for the land they live on

>Empire level Ebin x---dddd

Roman empire didn't had multiculturalism, they had slaves and bred among each other. And no, Roman Empire didn't collapse because different races. If anything Christianity and broken African trade routes harmed them more, not to mention constant slaughter among elites.

No we don't force shit, that's why we have multiculturalism

If you want an example of a culture being forced on its subjects, look at post-Revolution France up until WW2, and even before that with the sun king and real consolidation of the French monarchy. And it worked amazingly.

All things have a lifespan. Mass immigration of foreign slaves is a last gasp attempt to prolong a bloated and corrupted system. It never works. The main problem is always the lower orders getting a slice of the action. It's alright to have a ruling class of greedy pigs, but once those practices filter down, you get too many freeloading parasites. Like Buy-to-Let landlords, crony capitalists, and over-paid bureaucrats in vanity jobs today. Rome got sucked dry by Middle Class people trying to be like their betters. You can't have too many people having a disdain for real work.

Rome collapsed because of degeneracy. By the end of 1st century AD population stagnated and even starting shrinking, with dieout being especially pronounced in the former Roman core of the empire and among the elites. Christians and Jews who rejected the culture of orgies and infanticide on religious basis became the only groups with positive demographics. And by the time Christianity went from an underground anti-government cult to the official religion it was already too late to do anything about decay. Moreover, the culture of degeneracy, hedonism, and 1-2, if any, children per family, made most of the population mentally unsuitable for military service. Armies had to be recruited from frontier populations that were poorly Romanised and therefore still retained some fighting spirit, and eventually from barbarians beyond the border. This resulted in the army becoming largely alien to the main body of the Empire's population, and often behaving like they were conquerors in a subjugated country, including instigating civil wars so that a particular group of legions could put their own warlord on the throne and enjoy the lion's share of spoils.

...

Rome literally collapsed because of women

It's scary how similar this is to the modern west

>tfw no swiss gf

No, these are the reasons of its collapse:

> 1) Crop yield started falling due climate change, cooling down the average temperature making the mediterranean 'dryer' and west-europe colder. Resulting in less crops and less revenue.

> 2) Expansion halted thus the loss in crop yield and revenue couldn't be compensated by revenue gained from expansion.

> 3) Integrated Germans (read: non-roman citizens) into their army, having no loyalty to Rome only to their commander and money. Disintegrating the integrity of the army.

> 4) Refugees coming in from all directions fleeing from the huns or fleeing from failing economies due the climate change. West-Rome let them all in but instead of working the land and be Romans they started taking over.

> 5) Government corruption, the "emperors" had no real loyalty to Rome because they weren't Romans anymore. Thus policies shifted away from Rome's interest to the interest of others.

And your roaches decided to kick it when it was down.

Fuck you.

Constantinople was the 'New Rome'. I guess until Justinian they were fairly content with not having the decrepit ruins of the original. As much as people like to praise him for his renevatio imperii, Justinian destroyed the empire in the process.

Sounds a lot like the EU.

Just replace crops with wages.

The burden of proof is on you.

>Rome collapsed because of degeneracy
They go from a harcore warrior empire (the Roman army had similar training to Sparta, which they greatly admired) to having a fucking tranny emperor en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elagabalus

and we think modern times are bad...

Naw people are just a lot dumber/easier to manipulate + an exceptionally intelligent upper class

It collapsed because the ayys willed it

U mad?

Almost all of those are related to immigration and multiculturalism/openness

Rome also let in the jews.

You wrong, even if the lower classes were benefiting from corruption it only increases the amount spend within the economy and because the lower classes are usually bad with money that cash still filters upwards.

Rome always has been multicultural but the concept of being Roman was something very special. Just because you adopted their culture didn't mean you would be Roman. Name changing was mandatory for instance. People who became Roman succumbed tot the believe that its Laws were holy. This worked for centuries. Yet Rome met his fate when 4-5 factors all came on them in one short period of time.

Compare it with earthquakes. 5 small eartquakes in a period of years isn't a big deal but when those hit at the same time you'll get fucked

What does a culture of "1-2 if any children " mean in a negative sense? Are you saying large family's are preferable?

The original name of Consantinople was New Rome, everyone from east to west was calling them Romans, the fact that they lose half of their empire doesn't make them less Romans.

Rome collapsed because of Christianity

>Started shrinking in 117 AD
>Constantine converted in 312 AD

Yeah mate, totally the Christians fault.

There's a lot of comparisons between Rome's decline and the Modern world:
>Most of the wealth and upper classes moving to the East
(Europeans moving to America, brain drain)
>Easier to become a citizen, Less focus on heritage and more a sense of "Anyone inside the borders is a Roman now"
>Gradual devaluation of the currency by adding impurities (less gold & silver)
>Reduced interest in defending the borders
>Increased corruption in government officials who see the situation as fucked, and rather look to stealing money for themselves and their families, and then jumping ship to Constantinople (America)
>More & more hope placed in in single ruler (Emperor), rather than the Republic (senate) to fix everything
>"Roma Invicta" / "Make Europe Great Again"
And obviously
>Unshaved barbarian hordes pouring in NOT to loot and destroy like most people seem to think, but because they want to live the same luxury life that the romans enjoy.
Only difference is in 400 AD the barbarians wanted to enjoy baths, dinner parties and heated houses, today they want smartphones and welfare.

Christianity (salvation religion) is rather a symptom than the cause of a disease, as the emperors were populists and therefore made it the state religion because it was already extremely popular with the plebeian masses. Rome had a long tradition of pragmatism, and adopting different customs and different foreign gods that they came across. Their "own" gods were stolen from the greeks. The rulers clearly saw the potential of exploiting a religion that the masses loved in christianity. And look at the East, it stayed strong and Christian for another 1000 years. To say that "Christianity came and made the West collapse!" is highly ignorant.

You need at least 2.1 children per couple on average to sustain a population in modern times. Back then it would need to be much higher due to worse hygiene and disease.

If you can sustain your population you end up with more old people than young people. Young people are the foundation of a society so you need them to be the largest group

An interesting fact is that in the Roman empire they knew several methods for preventing pregnancy, and preferred small families. But these techniques were lost with the collapse.

So cultural marxism?

Interesting and thanks for clearing that up. Obviously China one child policy was abhorrent but is 2.1 per family still the best number in modern times? It seems like over population is gonna be an issue within our life times but then again I have no clue.

Rome throughout its history thrived as it expanded to include new, conquered peoples. As it conquered it expanded citizenship to the elites of the conquered and educated their heirs in Roman schools to foster allegiance starting from the top. Lower classes had to earn citizenship through military service, but this was beneficial since it fostered a want to serve Rome. After Rome conquered, it largely left the new territories to govern themselves. The new territories provided troops and some taxes, in exchange for all the benefits of being in a vast, interconnected empire.
What changed was the expansion of citizenship to all freed men by Caracalla in 212. This meant that one didn't have to serve Rome in order to receive the benefits of being Roman, so even those apathetic towards Rome still gained the once "elite" status of citizenship. The allure of citizenship and serving Rome to gain it was lost.
After Constantine, some emperors, especially Julian, dedicated much of their efforts towards persecuting Christians in hopes to restore and unify Rome under the traditional Roman Pagan religion, but in doing so caused Christians to resent the Empire. Not a smart move since Christianity was becoming insanely popular by this time. Near the end of the Western Roman Empire, the Huns had pushed many of the Gothic Tribes into Roman territories. Rome initially welcomed them, even granting citizenship to many of the Tribe's elites. However, a culture of elitism had developed itself in Rome. Romans never fully accepted the Goths as they had to conquered peoples in the past. Goths were regularly persecuted for their "uncivilized" trouser-wearing cultures, and were regularly disrespected even when they achieved high military standing. Eventually many of the Goths had had enough, leading to the sacking(s) of Rome, and ultimately the the downfall of the Western Roman Empire.

You can't have an empire without multi-culturalism.

>preferred small families

[citation needed]

>muh lost secrets of the Roman ubermenschen

It was butt sex.
They did it in the butt.

>Societies in the ancient civilizations of Greece and Rome preferred small families and are known to have practiced a variety of birth control methods.[5]:12,16–17 There are references that have led historians to believe withdrawal was sometimes used as birth control.[6] However, these societies viewed birth control as a woman's responsibility, and the only well-documented contraception methods were female-controlled devices (both possibly effective, such as pessaries, and ineffective, such as amulets).[5]:17,23

>After the decline of the Roman Empire in the 5th century AD, contraceptive practices fell out of use in Europe; the use of contraceptive pessaries, for example, is not documented again until the 15th century. If withdrawal was used during the Roman Empire, knowledge of the practice may have been lost during its decline.[5]:33,42

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coitus_interruptus

Was Jesus the first fag/nigger/kike/feminist enabler known to history?

The kikes loath him to this day though

This is true.

Most important documentary I've ever seen:

youtu.be/qh7rdCYCQ_U

youtu.be/qh7rdCYCQ_U


youtu.be/qh7rdCYCQ_U

>Jews hate the Jew that convinced the gentile to worship a Jew as their God

How do you manage to type with all of that cognitive dissonance?

Have you done any research on religion? Or do you just like to shitpost

The fool and the wiseman do not see the same shitpost.

>currency debasement
This Ron Paul meme needs to die. The currency debasement was a consequence of a collapsing economy, not its cause. Plagues and civil wars ruined the empire, currency debasement was just an (unsuccessful) technique to try and keep the state together after the economic base had narrowed so much, much like the edict on prices, taxes in kind, limitanii, estates, etc.

You could argue that they should have shrunk the state along with the economy, but with barbarians at the gate who hadn't been affected by plague and civil war, that just wasn't an option.

The empire did the best they could in difficult times, it just wasn't enough.

Did a pizza teach you history?

It was settlement of barbarians within the borders of the empire, as well as recruiting them into the army and teaching them the military strategies of the legions that destroyed it. Your cooky commanders were indeed barbarian leaders, more loyal to their own greed than to Rome.

gatesofvienna.net/2016/11/the-barbarians-who-sacked-rome-came-into-the-empire-as-refugees/

They collapsed because of decadence, buggering little boys and keeping them as pets, child trafficking, slavery and identity politics. oh shit.

I can because you are an uncultured idiot.

Rome was never multiculturalist in a modern way. It was always, though, extremely pluralistic, but with a clear hierarchy of cultures and values.
So it was always about a plurality of cultures, people and religions, but it was geared towards assimilation not towards a 'fragmentation' of identities.

And rome collapsed because between the second and the third century AD it debased its own currency immensely (due to overblown spending, civil wars, etc...), thus bringing a total halt in trade and revenues. It was a complete and slow economic and political collapse.

>Western Roman Empire = Holy Roman Empire

Did you skip a history lesson or two?