Did feminism destroy the roman empire or is it a bullshit conspiracy theory?

Did feminism destroy the roman empire or is it a bullshit conspiracy theory?

Yes. The question is why do men allow feminism to triumph.

No, it was immigration and soft and degenerate men.

Feminism is always just a symptom, not a cause.

Feminism didnt even have a chance to blow up all the way.

It seems that feminism always rises during the decline. Has happened during several empires now.

Hmm, interesting. Can you explain in further detail?

Only acceptable answers. Only MGTOWs and Robots think DA EBIL WIMMINZ ever gain power unless weak men let them.

Feminism is men's fault and only men's fault.
>Joos lol
Jewish men. Same difference.

Roman men started giving political rights to immigrants because of economic reasons. That was the first problem. Second they started giving women more and more rights. Also "equality" became fashionable, just like women fucking foreign men. A bit familiar, isnt it?

Eventually Rome turned into a degenerate shithole, and then the barbarians came.

Funny because the reason Germans often revolted against the time is because Rome treated them like second class citizens, even those who were Roman citizen.

>Roman men started giving political rights to immigrants because of economic reasons.

Rofl, we would never be stupid enough to do this again. Amirite?

Ask /his/ for real non-meme discussion.

But essentially, Romans had no idea what inflation was so couldn't stop their currency from getting less and less valuable (except for solid gold coins that only the super-rich could afford, super-rich who became feudal lords), and they had to keep recruiting Germans into the army to fill out the ranks. They didn't Romanize sufficiently and eventually took over control for a weak Western emperor. Basically post-Valentinian you had puppet emperors hiding in Ravena while their German generals ran things.

Without any actually Romans in the army (Italians, Gauls, Celtiberians, Illyrians) the army was completely subverted by foreigners who ended up just saying 'fuck it' and taking direct control without a care for the state collapsing around them.

In the East, Zeno managed to outmaneuver his German general by getting Isaurians to deal with him, Isaurians mostly loyal to him. Importantly, Isaurians came from inside the empire, rather than from outside of it.

That doesn't change that the best first step for saving the West would be to disenfranchise women.

Another interesting thing the Romans did was outlaw all forms of abortion in an attempt to raise birth rates and arrest the decline.

>That doesn't change that the best first step for saving the West would be to disenfranchise women.
...why are you arguing against a point I never made?

You seem like an except.

Redpill me more...

So basically foreigners replaced the roman military and attacked the romans?

These two assclowns couldn't be more wrong. Disregard them.

Women are born civilization destroyers.

...wot.

Because the problem of western politics is men focusing on what other men are doing (muslims, terrorists, trolls, cucks, the CCP, gangsters, etc etc) while meanwhile all democracies are falling to pieces because women in all their irrationality are the controlling electorate.

If there's anything we need to get whipped up about, it's women ruining and paralyzing our ability to act. We don't need to froth at the mouth about the liberals that let them do so because we are just as guilty of the misdeed as they are.

>If there's anything we need to get whipped up about, it's women ruining and paralyzing our ability to act. We don't need to froth at the mouth about the liberals that let them do so because we are just as guilty of the misdeed as they are.
That is EXACTLY what I'm saying?

I'm saying that we need to see it as a problem. Not a problem women brought. Not a problem liberals brought.

A problem men brought, and men need to excise.

Feminism is a sign of a beta culture nothing more

There is literally no practical difference between what we are saying. I would just prefer to focus on the degeneracy of women than on the weakness of the men who indulge them. I guess the difference in our tactics is that I am trying to inspire contempt for women, while you are trying to shame feminist men. No idea which tactic is more effective because this sort of rhetoric is too redpilled for Sup Forums even.

It was incompetent bureaucracy and inflation. Such is the fate of a government that is not held accountable.

Rome was dead when Caesar crossed the Rubicon.

>Rome was dead when Caesar crossed the Rubicon.

Even though they conquered evermore lands after the civil war.

Reminder that women are instinctively averse to combat because they are breeders.

This is why China and Islam are pushing us out of their corners of the world.

Because they are patriarchal societies.

As long as we have women in power, all our attempts at military victories will be sabotaged or wasted due to women's unwillingness to engage in protracted warfare.

It is literally impossible to beat Islam as long as women are in power.

I don't even blame women. It's in their nature to be caring, use resources, strive for fairness, allow for some freeloading, etc. This is great when paired with a man heading the family.

What humanity can't seem to grasp is that these traits are actually terrible for government and civilization.

Women are designed to care for children. Give them control of the government and everyone starts acting like a child.

Feminism is a part of it. The major factor was that degeneracy took over.
For example:
Roman men's lifestyles made them feminine.
Middle class+ people could live in "luxury" back then, which made them lazy.
There were several stories that soldiers ordered their slaves to take up their swords and go out to battle in their place. This was recorded all over the Roman empire, people got too comfy.
Roman upper class men became gay IN MASS. Which made the women more "manly" and started to demand more rights and of course.. the men didn't have a problem with it because they thought it would take the load of them (politically).
The mighty Roman legions didn't get enough pure hearted soldiers from Rome, so they relied on barbarians in the north and random fucks in other places. Which made the overall moral of the mighty legions crash to the ground.
Money became a problem aswell for the empire.

This is just a tiny amount of problems they had.
BUT, then again. This is how an empire goes down, it has always been this way for large, rich empires.

Also.. degenerate, weak minded men will always exist and they will find their girls and get a son or daughter. They will spread and make sure more degeneracy spreads across the rich nation because no one is there to stop it from happening. We have been warned about this for centuries from famous people like most recently Hitler (obviously) and Winston Churchill.
I promise you that if Churchill knew about the future he fought for in WW2, he would side with Hitler within a second.

Powers used for good can be used also for ill.

Caesar and Augustus? Oh, excellent. But not every emperor is Caesar or Augustus. You give unlimited power to good men, and things are good...

But when that power falls into the hands of incompetent or evil men... everything falls apart.

Rampant feminism destroys everything. I was in an argument last night and one of the women says "Why is it always the white men that disagree with you?"

Which immediately discredits my argument..