Originally Posted by Mython /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Oh, so you believe the historians (with their own agendas) who claim the Roman empire declined, do you? Do you believe everything you were taught in your school curriculum?
Wow I did not realize that splitting with Constantinople, moving to Ravenna, Ravenna getting sacked, the rise of Germanic kingdoms and eventually the Holy "Roman" Empire were a total spin and not a misunderstanding.
No, it is not Rome anymore. Why do you think they were looking for "True Romans" to fight Attila, and then he got whacked and everything continued downhill from there? Rome ceased being Rome due to the nearly hundred year peace before Marcus Aurelius, when they became more like Carthage as Italians and Greeks were content to just pay off Germans and other Auxiliaries to do the fighting for them (and then were a bunch of weaklings running like headless chickens when discontented Germans roll up with empty sacks and looking to empty their two smaller sacks too), when virtu was replaced by piety.
I'm not saying all those centuries there wasn't any power much less influence given how Spain and Portugal got to operate by having one guy draw a freaking line somewhere through Brazil or, heck, how they marshaled people to march to the desert ostensibly for Constantinople (and then they sacked it at some point), but just because the center of its power is a tiny principality geographically located near the old Rome does not mean it's still the old Empire.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mython /img/forum/go_quote.gif
granddesignexposed.com/rulersof/evil2.html
The problem isn't just what they teach in schools, which while lower levels tend to change rather slowly (although it can be ordered top-down by the Education Dept), in colleges there is more academic freedom for fresh perspectives.
At the same time, it isn't just school spouting a spin, sometimes it can be an effective spin masquerading as a "bulletproof idea," like one by Allan Moore. Why? Well I can't continue discussing it because even when I discuss mythology and history I get a slap on the wrist here (I won't be surprised if this gets deleted along with yours), but suffice to say that people bought into Agent Smith's spin on the matter. Note that even without Agent Smith's spin on what the 5th of November really was about, people should have questioned why he had to torture Queen Amidala to prove his own point, but you know, sheeple.
The face of resistance on the internet. And no, that's not what Fawkes was about, if you actually used at the very least Wikipedia and read more about him than some catchy spin by Alan Moore.
Users who are viewing this thread
