Replies

In a controlling society like Roman society was - a police state, albeit "fun" police state (bread and circuses?) - it didn't matter what the views of the "common man" were.

Rome was not really a "police state." Certainly, it wasn't a representative democracy. However, the government did not really intrude into the daily lives of citizens to a great degree, probably less than in America today. Furthermore, the views of the common man were important to the authorities, especally in Rome itself, where fear of the Mob tempered the decisions of the Emperor himself.

Those who were in control were hedons - lovers of themselves and pleasures - this lead by and large to the decline of the Empire as a whole.

Again, this view of the ruling classes in Rome is based on the decadent excess of a very few. Scandalous behavior by a few at the top of a society is not an accurate gauge of the morals of a society. If you only judged the morality of American society by looking at rich NY socialites, corrupt DC politicians and libertine Hollywood celebrities, you'd conclude that America was rapidly sliding into moral collapse, too.

And, if anything, the two main causes of Roman decline were Christianity and lead pipes.

Rome was not really a "police state." Certainly, it wasn't a representative democracy. However, the government did not really intrude into the daily lives of citizens to a great degree, probably less than in America today. Furthermore, the views of the common man were important to the authorities, especally in Rome itself, where fear of the Mob tempered the decisions of the Emperor himself.

Of course it was a police state - rebellion and anti-Roman sentiment was "put down" very ruthlessly and efficiently (How would you expect a military state to be?). It wasn't worth it to fight against the powers that be. The "mob" was given food and entertainment - panem et circences - why would anyone rebel when pleasures were everywhere and rebellion only ended badly. Emperors had a vested interesting in keeping the people "entertained" outside of this, the ruling class didn't care about the "common man".

Again, this view of the ruling classes in Rome is based on the decadent excess of a very few. Scandalous behavior by a few at the top of a society is not an accurate gauge of the morals of a society. If you only judged the morality of American society by looking at rich NY socialites, corrupt DC politicians and libertine Hollywood celebrities, you'd conclude that America was rapidly sliding into moral collapse, too.

Once again - the decadence of those in power is the ONLY important factor. It doesn't matter how "moral" I am in my beliefs, it has no bearing on the powers that be because they can tell me to take a flying leap. America is sliding into moral collapse, and redefining marrige will be another nail in the coffin.

If you only judged the morality of American society by looking at rich NY socialites, corrupt DC politicians and libertine Hollywood celebrities, you'd conclude that America was rapidly sliding into moral collapse, too.

Oh, we're not? That's news to me.

And, if anything, the two main causes of Roman decline were Christianity and lead pipes.

Ah, the trendy interpretation among the anti-christian set. Read your history. If anything, Christianity gave the already tottering Empire of the third century another two hundred years or so in the West and over 1,000 more in the East.