How Imperial Socialism Shattered the Roman Empire and Led to Feudalism

How Imperial Socialism Shattered the Roman Empire and Led to Feudalism

>fee.org/articles/will-durant-on-diocletians-socialism/

Fucking commies.

Ruining the Romans.

Even in the antiquity you guys are fucking up everything.

Attached: colosseum-75003_960_720-RxrX6xSXArIYdXaoh94ROAI-1200x800@GP-Web.jpg (1024x683, 224.52K)

pls don't ban, Im just shitposting and sharing something I've found.

I have a feeling this article is going to make me really angry.

Attached: you know how feudalism started.png (1286x934, 162.33K)

economics according to libertarians:
capitalism is when people trade stuff. capitalism has existed for all of human history.

socialism is when the government does stuff. over 100 trillion have starved due to socialism.

Attached: intense losing.gif (425x240, 175.68K)

The funny thing is that the reason why Rome had to put into place a welfare system in the first place is due to massive slave plantations (latifundia) running the small land owning Roman farmers out of their livelihoods.
These displaced masses became the worlds first urban poor as they flocked into the cities in search of work; As there was always never enough work, Rome had to implement free games and grain in order to stop them from rioting.
Whenever the Populares attempted to break-up the latifundia and distribute the land back to the people, the Optimates (who by-and-large owned the latifundia) would oppose them; Culminating in the Optimates assassinating Caesar on the floor of the senate itself just as he was about to do so.
Mass unemployment and its associated economic and social problems continued to plague Rome for centuries until with the collapse of the empire came feudalism; A system that the latifundia had provided the foundation for.

Frankly I think the Roman welfare system and the reason why it was needed in the first place should serve as a reminder of the dangers of wealth/land concentration, the fusion of capitalist interests with politics and an unregulated economy.
It should also serve as a warning of what will happen should the interests of capital trump the interests of the people and the nation at large.
The only reason why any capitalist would ever bring up such a thorough repudiation of their ideology is due to simple historical ignorance.

Attached: 1523767510049.png (921x886, 256.75K)

Attached: parenti on caesar.png (900x506, 231.09K)

Libertarians are largely historically illiterate.

Was Caesar nazbol?

Good find, it's full of full neat tidbits. You can imagine how the system of in kind collection of taxes in a region for the empire could mutate smoothly to serve a feudal class once there was no more empire to send it to above the local level. More descriptive than I expected, the ideology does not get in the way.

You are the biggest idiot on this board.

Attached: omedetou.png (471x236, 76.25K)

GANG GANG GANG GANG

bro capitalism is just human nature

AYO I GUESS FEUDALISM WAS COMMUNISM AFTER ALL
ANARCHO MONARCHIST GANG ASSEMBLE
GANG GANG GANG

THE ROMAN EMPIRE WAS AND IS ACTUALLY EXISTING NAZBOL

Attached: aywer.jpg (1301x800, 27.8K)

Is it seriously "when the state does stuff it's socialism" the article?

pretty much, it's a real hoot
or blood-vessel popper

ONWARD BARBARIANS

BARBARIANS OF THE WORLD UNITE!

All Hail Emperor Karlus the Marxus!

Karolus Marximus Economicus

VISIGOTHS DID NOTHING WRONG
AVE ALARIC

No. The word socialism (or capitalism, or free trade) does not appear except in the title. He does mention that supposedly people fled high taxes, which is rather inaccurate: the wealthy retreated to tax exempt estates, and craftsmen fled the cities, but people did not flee the empire. It would be more accurate to say they fled the reach of the bureaucracy. There were no tax refugees pouring north across the Danube.

The parts of the article describing the Diocletian reforms are generally accurate. It is just presented as lolbertarian clickbait.