Controversial Opinion: Romans (Europeans) Were Gods https://propertarianism.com/2020/06/11/controversial-opinion-romans-europeans-were-gods/
Source date (UTC): 2020-06-11 14:51:03 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271092588909658115
Controversial Opinion: Romans (Europeans) Were Gods The roman emperors were promoted as gods since gods were all group’s (peoples) proxies for the group, and devotion to the gods was a devotion to the anthropomorphization of the people: it was the expression of loyalty. The roman demand was for loyalty to the empire, and the roman way of life, that so man wished to join – just as people wish to join the european way of life yet again today. But at some point lesser peoples want the benefits of roman-european way of life without the demand for loyalty in exchange. This is for very simple reasons: they and their traditional methods are unable to compete for income, sexual, social, and political status – so they refuse loyalty and undermine that civilization despite wanting its benefits. Truth is – comparatively? The Romans were gods.
Controversial Opinion: Romans (Europeans) Were Gods The roman emperors were promoted as gods since gods were all group’s (peoples) proxies for the group, and devotion to the gods was a devotion to the anthropomorphization of the people: it was the expression of loyalty. The roman demand was for loyalty to the empire, and the roman way of life, that so man wished to join – just as people wish to join the european way of life yet again today. But at some point lesser peoples want the benefits of roman-european way of life without the demand for loyalty in exchange. This is for very simple reasons: they and their traditional methods are unable to compete for income, sexual, social, and political status – so they refuse loyalty and undermine that civilization despite wanting its benefits. Truth is – comparatively? The Romans were gods.
2) There isn’t much evidence that europeans weren’t equally as outbred beforehand. Just the opposite. Archaeological records show lots of people movement across Europe for the purpose of marriage or work well back into prehistory.
3) Manorialism > Nuclear Family more influential
Reply addressees: @Biorealism @MaxOfTheTubes
2) There isn’t much evidence that europeans weren’t equally as outbred beforehand. Just the opposite. Archaeological records show lots of people movement across Europe for the purpose of marriage or work well back into prehistory.
3) Manorialism > Nuclear Family more influential
Source date (UTC): 2020-06-11 13:20:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271069801683857413
Reply addressees: @Biorealism @MaxOfTheTubes
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271066302900318208
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@Biorealism @MaxOfTheTubes 1) the ban on cousin marriage permitted the church to accumulate property. Since first sons inherited in order to keep property consolidated in the family, the nobility paid for churches, sent second sons to the church, and transferred property to the church, and then lent out
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1271066302900318208
1) the ban on cousin marriage permitted the church to accumulate property. Since first sons inherited in order to keep property consolidated in the family, the nobility paid for churches, sent second sons to the church, and transferred property to the church, and then lent out
Reply addressees: @Biorealism @MaxOfTheTubes
1) the ban on cousin marriage permitted the church to accumulate property. Since first sons inherited in order to keep property consolidated in the family, the nobility paid for churches, sent second sons to the church, and transferred property to the church, and then lent out
Source date (UTC): 2020-06-11 13:06:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271066302900318208
Reply addressees: @Biorealism @MaxOfTheTubes
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1270948103290359808
(I posted it to troll. Although via timelines, say wiki or Murray, or Mokyr, then it’s close enough. Sure, innovation requires commerce, contract, literacy, math, competition, and is partly to blame. But from Christian Destruction to Aristotelian return? Utter Darkness)
Reply addressees: @CrownedCaribou @AshaLogos
(I posted it to troll. Although via timelines, say wiki or Murray, or Mokyr, then it’s close enough. Sure, innovation requires commerce, contract, literacy, math, competition, and is partly to blame. But from Christian Destruction to Aristotelian return? Utter Darkness)
Source date (UTC): 2020-06-10 23:03:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1270854088679403520
Reply addressees: @CrownedCaribou @AshaLogos
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1270812714743394304
Well, I don’t want to go thru that site and try to figure out what claim you’re making but we do know the IE expansion and the Alexandrian Expansion, and we know (rather recently) that the alexandrian and roman expansion was broader than we thought. AFAIK we know the lost IE’s.
Source date (UTC): 2020-06-10 22:33:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1270846595953811456
Reply addressees: @UBKFrantisek @JohnMarkSays
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1270844310133583873