They were protecting their power because Ceasar was consolidating power, not just for subjugation.
I fail to see the difference. Caesar’s consolidation of power only concerned them because he was a lifelong populare. When the ultraconservative Sulla took the dictatorship, they fell over themselves to lick his feet, and when the opportunistic Pompey had all-but-subsumed the power of the state under his umbrella, they chose him to be their champion.
He was committing genocide.
This is an extremely dubious assertion I don’t want to get into right now, but I promise you that the conservatives who assassinated him didn’t give a single good goddamn about it. Every goddamn time this argument comes up it’s from someone who watches Dan Carlin. The argument is not taken seriously elsewhere outside of French academia, and there only for nationalist reasons.
He used war and the destruction of foreign lands to upold flagrant triumphants.
That is by no means unique to Caesar or even objectionable contemporarily. The destruction of foreign lands was what triumphs were all about, and triumphs happened, meaningfully, only under the Republic.
The real question is, why do we still simp for the Romans?
Because most of Western culture has roots in either Rome, Greece, or Germanic peoples (or Christianity, but Christianity sucks)?
… that consolidation of power wasn’t a problem until someone with The Wrong Views™ came into power suggests very much that the issue was not consolidation of power, but the ideology of the wealthy being threatened. You know, the same reason that they murdered democratically elected populist after populist.
I fail to see the difference. Caesar’s consolidation of power only concerned them because he was a lifelong populare. When the ultraconservative Sulla took the dictatorship, they fell over themselves to lick his feet, and when the opportunistic Pompey had all-but-subsumed the power of the state under his umbrella, they chose him to be their champion.
This is an extremely dubious assertion I don’t want to get into right now, but I promise you that the conservatives who assassinated him didn’t give a single good goddamn about it. Every goddamn time this argument comes up it’s from someone who watches Dan Carlin. The argument is not taken seriously elsewhere outside of French academia, and there only for nationalist reasons.
That is by no means unique to Caesar or even objectionable contemporarily. The destruction of foreign lands was what triumphs were all about, and triumphs happened, meaningfully, only under the Republic.
Because most of Western culture has roots in either Rome, Greece, or Germanic peoples (or Christianity, but Christianity sucks)?
I vote we bring back the old ways. The Romaboo ways. Let’s make a statue of Obama as a Graeco-Roman god, purely for the lulz
Macron,president of the French republic is referred to, not ironically, as Jupiter. Only thing missing is the bronze statue.
MACRONIVS OPTIMVS MAXIMVS
Too bad he isn’t nearly cool enough to merit such a comparison. In fact, I think we should go for a bit of damnatio memoriae when we get the chance.
One is for me, the other for thee. It’s the same in definition but different in results. I think you’re being overly pedantic.
… that consolidation of power wasn’t a problem until someone with The Wrong Views™ came into power suggests very much that the issue was not consolidation of power, but the ideology of the wealthy being threatened. You know, the same reason that they murdered democratically elected populist after populist.