It's because sometimes doing nothing let's some problems fizzle out and doing something can seriously screw things up. It's just hard to tell when doing nothing is the right option lol

@@stickemuppunkitsthefunlovi4733 that's very forgiving. The fabric of the society was based on patronage and had the mos maiorum to maintain the fabric, and this generation of aristocracy threw it out the window. Saying "it's hard to know what to do" doesn't absolve them of critically undermining the system of patronage that created and sustained them.

@@theletterw3875 The fabric of society was build around the notion, that you as a citizen had your privileges in exchange for self-funded military service. Citizens were owners of public corporation. By this time, that ship had sailed long time ago.

@@OkurkaBinLadin that is an ideal. The reality was enacted by patronage. An example of the difference is that Pompey's veterans could expect resettlement for all the reasons you listed, but they had to look to Pompey to actually advance their interests as their patron. This patronage was throughout Roman society, there wasn't a place that this system didn't touch.

Just voted in local government elections, knowing full-well that nothing will change.

As a liar, I think Cicero is a bitch for always chafing at Caesar and the Catalan conspiracy

Indeed I also GREATLY prefer discussing history(various periods of Western History) with my family rather than politics. Because even though we all agree on modern politics....that shit is awfully depressing to discuss with the current state of affairs of an unelected cheating baboon currently in office on behalf of a corrupt cabal of conspirators called the demonrat party, a bunch of communist scum who are loyal to China not their own nation and people. Their personal GDP is all these people care about; that, and hatred and jealousy of their own people and country. But anyway. my family has always been big Caesar fans; and likewise, big Augustus fans as well. And so am I. As a result I dont like Cicero at all; he talked the talk but never walked the walk, and he met his end after trying to use and then ultimately betray and have killed(or exiled in poverty AT BEST) Octavian the future Augustus Caesar. Cicero seemed to think he could remain a neutral party - heavily in service and favor of the optimates, but also wanting the actual peoples support the populares, but not running for any significant office himself or taking any real risks(he made his name in the courts after all) himself; like when he vocally supported the Assassins of Julius Caesar(who he SHOULD have been condemning since even Cicero himself was on pretty good terms with Caesar NOT TO MENTION the fact that Caesar is the only reason he was still alive and had spared his life) and even saying "I wish I was part of this". His own flippant attitude and desire to use the Caesars while also wanting to be part of the optimates, ended in his own death at Mark Anthony's hands. I can't even say it was undeserved either; he had slandered Mark Anthony in ways that you simply cant imagine NOT getting a violent reaction from a guy like him over. Like when he went on and on about how Anthony was basically controlled by his overbearing wife(though it was true to some extent, the things Cicero says shouldnt have been said); and Octavian, though always wanting to keep Cicero alive, seemed both unable and unwilling to stand up to Mark Anthony and Lepidus on this issue, and allowed them to kill him via the proscription lists. After all Cicero had already betrayed Octavian quite badly, and he KNEW, from letters and informants, what CIcero and the senate ultimately had planned for himself; a fate not unlike what they did to his uncle Julius Caesar. Cicero was a great author and an effective lawyer. How he reacted to Clodius' bullying and threats was downright cowardly though. And he never wouldve had to deal with that in the first place if he had stuck to his word and NOT started viciously slandering Caesar and Pompey and Crassus. Cicero was on fairly good terms with Caesar but Pompey didnt really like him, and neither did Crassus. He occasionally talked shit about Caesar too, but nothing like Cato for example. Cato is the man most responsible for the downfall of the Roman Republic with how bloodthirsty he was for Caesars death, and the deaths of all his supporters and all populares leaders; Pompey followed suit after he formally joined the Optimate side(Pompey was originally a populare of course; while Crassus was alive anyway, while there was still a First Triumvirate) because he was fearful above all that he was seen as lesser than Julius Caesar as a General, and he would rather fight him to the death than be seen as a lesser General. Which was REALLY dumb of him as a reason to betray an old friend and ally, and the man whose daughter he had married and loved a great deal, Julia. Pompey was basically manipulated by smarter people than him into taking the side of the optimates...little did he know that Cato would DEFINITELY have come after himself the SECOND Caesar had been killed if he had won the civil war; Cato, after all, was a jealous little man, that wanted to bring Romes greatest generals down, ruin them in the court system, and have them exiled to some distant province without money AT BEST, and imprisoned for life(which would mean they would die in jail in a couple years at best considering how awful Roman Jails were and how neglected the prisoners were - many starved to death straight up), or even outright killed by optimate assassins. The Senate has a LOOOOOOONG history of murdering Populare leaders. Caesar was FAR from the first, the Gracchi brothers come to mind as well as many others; they would murder and throw them in the Tiber. Octavian learned from these mistakes so I cant blame him for being extremely cautious towards the senate, and not relaxing his guard against them EVER, and not visibly relaxing his guard against the Senators until after he destroyed Mark Anthony and after most of the Republican senators were already dead and replaced by Men who werent connected to the old Republican order; like all the Gallic chiefs, and Spanish chiefs and so on, that were on Augustus' side and who he put in the Senate; that Caesar had originally started putting in the Senate.

I'm a lawyer and yes, in our profession, people like Cicero are for some reason held up. Cicero was a good lawyer, but he really didn't understand the profound trouble the Republic was in due to wealth inequality and desperation of the free workers. Just like most lawyers today. They are generally terrible at connecting social phenomena with actual causes.

@@chucknorris202 TL:Dr both parties in the states are fked and they both work for elites only. Wake up

@@LTrotsky21stCentury ok trotsky

I'm more inclined to think he was making panegyrics of the Claudius Claudianus's kind 4 centuries before he was making his gruesome panegyrics about the heroic first consulships of Honorius (child emperor).

🤣 this is good.

You kids..... Do you even know who Marcus Tullius even was?

@@waynemarvin5661 Yeah, he's that dude that got his hands and head nailed to a soapbox in the forum because his shitposts were too real. Metal.

@@waynemarvin5661 He was a slave-owning slumlord who had a completely delusional view of how politics in his era actually operated hence why he lost. You might as well romanticize Robert E Lee while you're at it.

did he say that?

@@jessefisher1809 yes

Despite his unorthodox methods, Caesar had an inherently conservative spirit. His tight adherence to the mos maiorum's age requirements for advancing along the cursus honorum shows this. Even in his dictatorship he wished to co-opt and convince members of the great aristocratic families to join him. Augustus was the true progressive, through intelligence and decades of work transforming Roman society and politics into something completely new, creating brand new patricians with no concern for the ancient mos maiorum's rules.

Him and Caesar would have been interesting allies. Honestly I feel like Sertorius being defeated single handedly prevented Rome breaking apart into a bunch of warring states. If he had been able to break away, we would have seen Caesar, Pompey and others do the same.

​@geordiejones5618 it ended up happening a few years later anyways under third triumvirate. And multiple times during The Empire.

Can you blame him? Caesar was awesome in all ways, Cato was a bitter little man that instigated others into starting a war that truly ended the Roman republic, and he shouldve damn well known better too. He just hated Caesar too much for things like logic to matter....it was a VERY personal affair for Cato. He had always hated Caesar, esp since Caesar had a sexual relationship with Cato's sister that esp pissed him off.

(((cato)))

😂 caught that

Sertorius is a very interesting figure. Would love to see a vid focused on him and the Sertorian Wars.

He won't do it until he makes more in depth videos on emperors

“Isn’t it a bit late in the year to be building a tower like this old man?” Crassus to a Syrian noble “I’m not the one invading Parthia!” Syrian noble to Crassus. - the foolish invasion of the east and subsequent disaster at Carrare tells us all we need to know about the generalship of Crassus.

@@dgetzin Carrhae saw the Romans sabotaged so badly it was essentially an ambush. Guides were corrupt and deliberately kited them around the desert, depleting their resources and strength. They were informed the Persians were weak and unaware when in fact they’d set up reload stations on the outskirts of the battlefield and disguised their cataphracts for max impact. Crassus held his army together waiting for them to run out of arrows, a sound strategy and based on his intel it was correct as the Romans held firm, but they were skirmished till nightfall (again, because this was essentially an ambush). Caesar would have lived but even he would have had has ass absolutely kicked here. The Romans were regularly winning battles when fewer in number and Crassus’ mistake was the Armenian political situation and not accounting for the potential betrayals that eventuated. You don’t think it’s interesting how the Romans bury the reputation of people who lose after a defeat, even those they worshiped prior? We’re lucky our sources survive or people like you would have thought Antony was a terrible soldier based on Augustus’ damnation of him, because that’s what they did. Please give actual evidence that isn’t posthumous damning?

I judge Crassus' eastern campaign to symptomatic of poor generalship because he chose an open route rather than skirting the mountains to the north, which gave the Parthians more chances to take advantage of their mobility. Further, Crassus had not commanded troops in nearly 20 years and was stepping into a major command that required someone who possessed more skill, a deeper bond with his men, and more physical vigor than what Crassus could muster at that point in his life.

@@ThersitestheHistorian appreciate you arguing your position. In summarising Crassus’ final campaign, I think your assessment is fair, while there’s reason to believe his son pushed for some of the misfortune, Crassus was in charge. The fact the average person in the street believes Scrooge McDuck decides to be a general and die one day is the average person’s idea of him, ignoring his prior achievements does mean he’s been simplified and slandered to an unrealistic degree.

@@rockstar450 Lacking foresight and being bad at reconissance isn't exactly what makes a great general.

The best part about that title is that it was given to him ironically by the Senate as an insult. He just spun it as an actual Title. Haha. Now 2000+ years later, he still holds that title.

He did attempt to recruit Cicero. Cicero was not quite a big enough deal in terms of his wealth and military chops to make it a Tetrarchy, but he would have added a good deal of debating and legal prowess to the group.

Jup, agreed. The Senate of the late Republic was *absolute Dogshit* at anything other then enriching themselves at the expense of the State.

Yeah, but if you and I were born into the optimate elite, we would fight to the death to preserve it I bet.

gridlocked senate reminds me a lot of todays politics

Pretty much the entire world is the late Roman Republic right now.

Why am I not surprised to hear this from a christian libertarian?

Luckily, rich guys trying to make themselves a political career they don't need in order to feed their own ego is not something that happens in current America. Oh wait

He didn’t fail, as you say. If he had failed to make his mark on history we wouldn’t be discussing him right now.

@@annascott3542 Well, considering that we remember how he basically killed himself and his entire legions by being a terrible general against the Parts, idk if it's the way he would like to be part of history.

@@jmiquelmb Crassus’ “bad” generalship really lacks substance the more you look into it. Played a key role in the civil war, defeated Spartacus after several failed but losing meant to protect the legions you had to bury the reputation of the general. Look harder into it, the idea a rich guy bought an army and marched to Pathia is ridiculous. Carrhae saw the Romans sabotaged so badly it was essentially an ambush. Guides were corrupt and deliberately kited them around the desert, depleting their resources and strength. They were informed the Persians were weak and unaware when in fact they’d set up reload stations on the outskirts of the battlefield and disguised their cataphracts for max impact. Crassus held his army together waiting for them to run out of arrows, a sound strategy and based on his intel it was correct as the Romans held firm, but they were skirmished till nightfall (again, because this was essentially an ambush). Caesar would have lived but even he would have had has ass absolutely kicked here. The Romans were regularly winning battles when fewer in number and Crassus’ mistake was the Armenian political situation and not accounting for the potential betrayals that eventuated. You don’t think it’s interesting how the Romans bury the reputation of people who lose after a defeat, even those they worshiped prior? We’re lucky our sources survive or people like you would have thought Antony was a terrible soldier based on Augustus’ damnation of him, because that’s what they did. Please give actual evidence that isn’t posthumous damning?

@@jmiquelmb the fact you only know about his defeat shows how casual your knowledge is. Rome began before the first triumvirate mate...

Indeed

I don't think that is likely, although it is possible since it would make him relevant again and end his unproductive rivalry with Pompey. Crassus is more likely to to be the architect than Pompey, however, since Crassus in general seems to have had a better grasp on politics and political strategy.

Don’t most people credit Caesar with the triumvirate? He basically convinced heavier hitters than he that he was a bridge and the secret ingredient to get everyone what they wanted while at the time having the least sway.

@@christopherbataluk643 I'd suggest checking out his videos on Crassus and the triumvirate, he makes a better argument than I could

He just needs work on his Latin pronounce.

He was elected Pontifex Maximus in 63 BCE.

other direction - optimates usually are right wingers. Conservatives see no need to change as they are benefiting.

I think he had both businesses, among other stuff. But I definitely heart about his private firefighters force

So what ? Should the privately owned fire brigade work for free, comrade?

@@augustopinochet1670 Should Crassus burn down parts of Rome, impoverishing citizens and decimating neighborhoods, for free comrade? No, that "service" costs money.

So it's been told. ... probably some truth to it.

(((crassus)))

??????????????????

See oben Dictionary Popeye =POMPEIUS Gadälayne CATILINA Scisse CAESAR Sissirow CICERO Keydow. CATO Merican Academics are able to pronounce the name of the Director of the WHO Gebrejehsus but NOT the name of CAESAR ! That's why they will kill Culture ! ' Cause Culture is too difficult to know all those names like Gädeläinae

How so?

The optimates were the republicans of the time Remember American politics were founded upon the Roman Republic Since the founding fathers were huge fan of Rome and the used its system as a mold