Haha yeah, rome, the famously peaceful and stable state that was dominated by a cruel slave owning elite. That is where we should be taking our lessons from.
this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2026
107 points (80.2% liked)
Showerthoughts
39660 readers
1011 users here now
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.
Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:
- Both “200” and “160” are 2 minutes in microwave math
- When you’re a kid, you don’t realize you’re also watching your mom and dad grow up.
- More dreams have been destroyed by alarm clocks than anything else
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
- Posts must be original/unique
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS
If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.
Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Well Americans aren't taking lessons from the rest of the democratised world right now so I thought they might relate better with a culture more akin to their own.
It would seem we are
We are though, the people in power idolize the Romans to a disturbing degree.
Even saluting them in their own roman way.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Same in the "wild West", it didn't take long before they banned guns in town.
The civilised world has kept that knowledge since.
They didn't ban weapons. They banned generals leading independent armies.
Roman military was, at that time at least, privatised. The generals were the elites and the rich who would often pay for their own armies. When Caesar for example wanted to go campaigning in Gaul, he'd pay for a lot of the cost or of his own pocket. This resulted in armies that were generally more loyal to their general than to Rome.
That could naturally be a problem, so to prevent a general from getting ideas, the law mandated that they would have to disband their armies before crossing into Italy proper (or at least leaving their army encamped outside the territory)
That point was traditionally just before the army would cross the Rubicon river, hence the phrase "crossing the Rubicon" denoting a kind of "red line" or "point of no return".
When Caesar made the decision to March on Rome and incite a civil war, his army "crossed the Rubicon".
I stand corrected. Learn something new every day. Thanks.
edit: I don't know why you are getting downvotes. You corrected me with a proper source. and I stood corrected. That's the proper civilized way of doing things.
I'm stun locked this has never worked for me before, sorry for being a bit of a sassy bitch
That was sassy? I thought it was hilarious.
I thought you had actually taken the time to look at my comment history, discovered that I majored in Near Eastern Classical Archaeology and was making a riff on that. I thought it was great!
Hahaha I had no idea lol, my meme truly transcended my original vision
Now kiss ;)
(But seriously, it’s nice to see people being awesome online.)
Haven't brushed my teeth yet today. I'm gonna have to decline.
But it was possible to sneak in daggers (the proverbial weapon for political violence; see sicarius). Since Julius Caesar's assassination occurred outside this boundary, the senatorial conspirators could not be charged with sacrilege for carrying weapons inside the sacred city.
Seems banning weapons didn't work back then. Gee, it surely wouldn't happen today either. And only some people were charged with the crime while politicians could escape charges of literal murder.
If anything you've shown that we've done this before and restricting weapons only allows certain people to have weapons. No thanks, I'll hold onto my rights before ICE tries to take them.
That is part of why US military members are always being moved around and transferred to different units. The US does not want independent militaries all over the place.
Depending on the time we are speaking of there were bans against citizens openly carrying swords or daggers within the boundaries of Rome. Though there were some exceptions to the law when it came to certain bodyguards or elites. A lot of people carried clubs or makeshift blunt force weapons as personal protection.
If you really pissed off the citizens the traditional weapon of choice were tiles thrown from the tops of roofs.
If you could reason with gun-brains, they would cease to exist.
Very strange how giving people a deadly weapon makes them unreasonable. Must be government overreach or something idk
Admittedly, if I had slaves, I think I'd be pretty worried about weapons just lying around...
Well we all know that exploited workers having weapons is a clear and simple path to liberation...
"Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary."
-Karl Marx
All means that have been used for gun control and disarmament in the USA has been steeped in racism. Most neo-liberal anti-gun people don't seem to acknowledge this fact like with the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act. Nor how the police are almost guaranteed to kill a black person when they're armed in some capacity even if they are complying. Not like the origins of the police were systematic racism as well as classism. Nope, not at all.
load more comments
(7 replies)
Nearly every liberation to happen in the past 200 years have used guns. It's kind of a thing. Why do you think every dictatorship starts removing guns from people? Look up German gun laws from 1938 sometime.
load more comments
(7 replies)
We didn't allow guns in the towns and cities of the "old west." You had to check your gun with the sheriff at the edge of town
What?
How did they not have weapons in cities? If you can have a cleaver or boning knife then a gladius or dagger isn't much different?
You sure youre not talking about armies within the city limits?
Yeah check the wiki for Pomerium.
Obviously almost anything can be used as an improvised weapon but they will never be as effective as weapons designed with the specific purpose of killing people. There is a huge difference between a cleaver and a gladius that's why the Romans didn't arm their soldiers with kitchenware.
This reads as someone who say an AI overview over the subject and didn't bother to read actual articles stating this was armies, not civilians.
load more comments
(5 replies)
You mean letting the poor carry....the nobles still could and had bodyguards that carried as well.
Anti-2a people lick the same boot as the maga chodes...
That's the neo-liberal for you. When progress is on the rise, they coddle up with fascism to keep it down. Madani is a perfect example. The Democrat establishment did all it legally could to stop him winning, they'd rather have had the right win than someone actually on the left promising meaningful change. Very telling.
load more comments
(4 replies)
From my cold dead hands
That is currently, literally, what is happening to Americans.
view more: next ›