Скачать с ютуб Did Rome Fall Because of The Gays? в хорошем качестве

Did Rome Fall Because of The Gays?

Analyze the data AND THEN make statements about history based on that data. Anything else is political propaganda. Here are the links to the video about Rome vs Greece    • How Did The Romans Defeat The Greeks?   And the recent video about Transgender Vikings    • Transgender Viking Warriors? DELUSIONAL   Please check out my Patreon to support the correct and data based speech about history!   / themetatron     / puremetatron   The causes of the fall of the Roman Empire are multiple, difficult to summarize and schematize, and to this day, they are not agreed upon by all scholars of the subject. However, one can try to construct a general discourse by analyzing various internal and external contributing factors, starting from the first attempts at analysis carried out by historiography. The first to address the issue in depth was the English scholar Edward Gibbon, according to whom the original cause of the fall of the empire was to be found in a generalized social crisis, which was reflected in several factors, all related to the protection of the state by its citizens. According to Gibbon, ease and wealth would have progressively distanced Roman citizens from military practice, who would have gradually delegated the defense of the empire to militias formed by barbarians. These militias, grown disproportionately in number and influence, amid power struggles and a lack of foresight and planning capacity, would have led the empire to collapse. Another fundamental reason for the decline of civic sense identified by Gibbon is the affirmation of Christianity: the intrinsic pacifism of the new religion and the certainty of a better life after death would have further dampened both the martial drive of the Romans and the willingness to sacrifice themselves on the battlefield for the stability of the empire. Gibbon's vision, while certainly offering some interesting points of reasoning and having undeniably set a precedent for Roman historiography, is now dated and suffers from a series of ideological elements typical of his time: to the aversion to religion, characteristic of the Enlightenment environment, Gibbon adds archetypal categories that we now know to be the result of clichés and commonplaces, such as the soft and decadent imperial Roman, now rendered effeminate and unwarlike by too much luxury and ease, in contrast to the virile but impulsive and warmongering barbarian. The agricultural and industrial technology of the time was not as advanced as that of Europe in the Late Middle Ages, making the process of resource production much more burdensome and inefficient. Excessive taxation and the fiscal burden borne by the productive classes, combined with the reduction of the agricultural population due to the excessive fiscal burden, contributed to the economic decline of the Empire. The presence of a large "unproductive" portion of the population, namely that assigned to the bureaucratic and military apparatus, further aggravated the fiscal burden and reduced the available agricultural workforce. The size of the empire, on the other hand, made an articulated bureaucratic apparatus a necessary element for its management, and the pressure of the barbarians at its borders made a large army equally necessary. The term "Barbaricum" refers to the set of territories north of the Danube and east of the Rhine, inhabited mostly by Germanic but also Indo-Iranian peoples, such as the Sarmatians. We are used to imagining the Barbaricum as something wild, uncultivated, and above all antithetical and opposed to Roman civilization. In reality, the Barbaricum was a sort of "poor periphery", albeit external to the Roman Empire, which was constantly influenced from a technological, but also cultural and ideological point of view by the Roman world. This is a fundamental fact to keep in mind, because the Barbarians objectively never wanted to destroy Rome. The idea of the barbarian rising among the ruins and moving to demolish the foundations of the empire is the result of a romantic imagery, but has very little to do with historical reality. The Barbarians wanted to enter into the Roman systemThis will be a constant in the relations between Rome and the Barbarians, and this is because Rome was something that was not necessarily perceived in a hostile way, not a hated model, but rather an envied one, a model to strive for, not something to destroy. Of course, we remember figures like Arminius, Vercingetorix, and Queen Boudica, who opposed Romanization. #ancientrome #lgbtq #debunking