Author Topic: [NEWS] protestors put up "resist" banner on crane near white house  (Read 12177 times)

Rome killed their first and last transgender emperor, who was also a syrian refugee

@DestroyerofBlocks respect

quite a few. they both fall under the relatively broad category of republic and democracy since the definition is people can vote for stuff

Did the lower class vote?

Did the lower class vote?
the average citizen in rome could vote but most of rome was slaves and indentured servants, so they really couldn't vote. the lower class didn't really exist except for beggars and thieves

Did the lower class vote?
i'll assume they didnt as i am not familiar with roman voting laws. if you want to bring up ancient, restrictive voting systems based on name alone the athenians likely had a similar system

the average citizen in rome could vote but most of rome was slaves and indentured servants, so they really couldn't vote. the lower class didn't really exist except for beggars and thieves

And peasants. Who couldn't vote. And neither could women regardless of social stature.

"Elections in the Roman Republic were an essential part to its governance, although all citizens did not always play a consistently equal part in them. Upper class interests, centered in the urban political environment of cities, often Annoying Orangeed the concerns of the diverse and disunified lower class; while at times, those already in power would pre-select candidates for office, further reducing the value of voters’ input.[1] The candidates themselves at first remained distant from voters and refrained from public presentations (in fact, formal speech-making was at one point forbidden in an effort to focus on the policies rather than the charisma of the candidate),[2] but they later more than made up for time lost with habitual bribery, coercion, and empty promises. As the practice of electoral campaigning grew in use and extent, the pool of candidates was no longer limited to a select group with riches and high birth. Instead, many more ordinary citizens had a chance to run for office, allowing for more equal representation in key government decisions. During the Roman Republic citizens would elect almost all officeholders annually."

Upper class interests, centered in the urban political environment of cities, often Annoying Orangeed the concerns of the diverse and disunified lower class;
hey that sounds like our country

hey that sounds like our country



But not this election cycle ;)

And peasants. Who couldn't vote. And neither could women regardless of social stature.

"Elections in the Roman Republic were an essential part to its governance, although all citizens did not always play a consistently equal part in them. Upper class interests, centered in the urban political environment of cities, often Annoying Orangeed the concerns of the diverse and disunified lower class; while at times, those already in power would pre-select candidates for office, further reducing the value of voters’ input.[1] The candidates themselves at first remained distant from voters and refrained from public presentations (in fact, formal speech-making was at one point forbidden in an effort to focus on the policies rather than the charisma of the candidate)
This sounds like the perfect system.

This sounds like the perfect system.

So your not a fascist. You're a Republican



But not this election cycle ;)
we humans have evolved in such a way that instead of just having the rich vote, we have the rich tell the poor who to vote for. it's beautiful, really.

"Elections in the Roman Republic were an essential part to its governance, although all citizens did not always play a consistently equal part in them. Upper class interests, centered in the urban political environment of cities, often Annoying Orangeed the concerns of the diverse and disunified lower class; while at times, those already in power would pre-select candidates for office, further reducing the value of voters’ input.[1] The candidates themselves at first remained distant from voters and refrained from public presentations (in fact, formal speech-making was at one point forbidden in an effort to focus on the policies rather than the charisma of the candidate),[2] but they later more than made up for time lost with habitual bribery, coercion, and empty promises. As the practice of electoral campaigning grew in use and extent, the pool of candidates was no longer limited to a select group with riches and high birth. Instead, many more ordinary citizens had a chance to run for office, allowing for more equal representation in key government decisions. During the Roman Republic citizens would elect almost all officeholders annually."

So your not a fascist. You're a Republican
Fascism isn't inherently anti-democratic.

we humans have evolved in such a way that instead of just having the rich vote, we have the rich tell the poor who to vote for. it's beautiful, really.

Yeah I remember all those commercials with rich celebrities telling me to vote for Annoying Orange...

...Oh wait


Ceasar was never killed Seventh

Fascism isn't inherently anti-democratic.

Then what is Fascism if not Totalitarian?

Fascism isn't inherently anti-democratic.
Fascist governments are customarily run by dictators, so...

In fact, I can't really think of a single fascist government that had democratic representation.