Re: Et tu, Brute?
This question is WAY too complicated to be answered in the form of a poll, and not only because the qualitative factors are not clearly defined, but...
brutus: supposedly a roman comitted to the 'democratic' process that was taken for a ride by the power hungry cassius and company, duped into the belief that their actions was something other than a power grab by the rich elite.
Ceaser: roman leader that hads REFUSED an offering of a crown/dictatorship- thus the idea that he was killed to preserve democracy is a BS cover for the disposessed powerful aristocrats like the conspiritors that were being marginalized by J's growing influence...
Agustus (octavian): brilliant statesman and general, far, far better for rome than democracy, ceaser, brutus, M antony cassius, or any other potential leader. garuenteed rome's dominance for centuries. had degenerate children/descendants- too bad.
rome: never really a democracy anyway.
Hadrian, Trajen, constantine, etc: good emperors, garunteed that the latin/western tradition would dominate european power structures for centuries
Nero, calugia, tiberius, etc: bad emperors
and so on...
|