Discuss
>>520690
>reform unjust and corrupt political system
>by installing unjust and corrupt political system
Wow
>>520697
But that was Octavian not Julius
How is Julius demonised?
>>520700
Because he cared about class and status, and used force to get his way
Leftcucks think this is a bad thing
>>520707
But he isn't demonised. He is usually portrayed in a good/neutral light
>>520715
True
I dunno bro ask the fag that made the image
>>520690
Sulla did it better and lived.
>>520833
Sulla fucked traps though
>>520833
>Sulla did it better
Sulla was an optimate. He worked against all the populist reforms that Marius implemented and even tried to have Caesar killed along with other popularii
>>520707
>Leftcucks think this is a bad thing
So many of Caesar's reforms are relatively sympathetic to leftist sentiments that I have a hard time believing this is something you've actually observed (I understand that there are such major difficulties in applying the whole left-right dichotomy to so alien a system as pre-Imperial Rome that the preceding is in some ways nonsensical, but it's possible to draw relative inferences if you're not too pedantic about it).
I don't even know what you mean by "caring about class and status". He was always a populare. If Rome had a left wing, the populares were certainly part of it.
>>520699
Augustus is so overrated it's not even funny. Things went so much to shit so quickly after he died it's unreal.
>>523052
Who were the populares, what were their history? I have never heard of them.
Pericles > Fabius
>>523083
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populares
>>520690
Lucullus went insane if I recall, and is largely forgotten.
>>523052
>Things went so much to shit so quickly after he died it's unreal.
Well the prodigal son Germanicus did die and he had to go with coke light so....
>>523131
Eh? Augustus predeceased Germanicus by 5 years, dude. Tiberius was being groomed as early as 6 BCE.
>>523155
Sorry dude, the romans had a crappy name system
Especially for their women
>>520690
Caesar is demonised in history?
Is this American history you're talking about?
Nobody here ever considers Caesar a bad guy.
>>523180
Well Americans were big on the whole new republican Rome shit and communists always reviled Caesar and celebrated Brutus and co.
So ironically both americans and communists demonize Caesar.
>>523180
It has to be. That said when we studied the Caesars there was never anything straight up villainising him.
Hell the text sort of defended his playing the lute/lute or whatever it was while Rome burned. Caesar was an artist.
>>520690
>only Roman the average person can name
>one of the Nine Worthies in medieval Europe
>demonised
>>523221
>Hell the text sort of defended his playing the lute/lute or whatever it was while Rome burned. Caesar was an artist.
What in the fuck. Was this in a textbook?Its also Nero, but even then it's not true.
>>520700
He's called a geezer, and accused of murdering his wife with a lemon squeezer
>>520690
Totalitarianism is never good.
>>520862
Didn't he have Caesar brought before him and was so impressed by him that he let him live?
>>523397
>Didn't he have Caesar brought before him and was so impressed by him that he let him live?
The only thing that impressed him was how dangerous he thought Caesar was. He wanted to kill Caesar and was persuaded not to against his better judgement. He's said to have qualified his mercy by telling his petitioners "In this Caesar I see many a Marius" ie, on your heads be it.
>>520690
I've rarely seen Julius in the context of evil/foolish. He is usually depicted in the scene of a great conqueror and ruler. A lot like Alexander the Great.
>>523438
If there was some sense in which he could be said to be foolish, it's that he went overboard in his mercifulness. He was an absolute genius to perceive the game-theoretical advantages of non-lethal conflict resolution (as in, not necessarily killing your enemy simply because you've defeated him) but he could have been more judicious in applying that thinking, I believe.
Ironically, the harshest critics of his tactics in that sense would be the purely hard-nosed realpolitik practitioners. See in particular Augustus, who was more scorched-earth, presumably at least in part as a reaction to how Caesar ended up.
Apart from that and a couple of PR mis-steps wrt triumphs, there's not much you can fault about Caesar's game.
>good/bad dichotomy
NOT HISTORY
>>520847
Are you saying you wouldn't?
Long live Timothy Leary and RAW
>>523954
Lmao
The Gracchi did nothing wrong.
you could sort of do a weird parody of Julius ceasar but set somewhere in 19th century Latin America.
it's mostly there in terms of "dictator killed for trying to pass land reform legislation that would've benefited the masses at the expense of the aristocrats."+"the country went to shit afterwards."
