No Spoilers Perhaps odd historical question about Italians

[plataoplombo]

That's an argument i would like do gigantic post about, but kinda busy day at work, so will just drop some random points


Tricky part is give a single answer to a question that cover 2000 years with different situations, so essentially are bunch of answers

Beside the fact on reality it's not like modern italian "lost" these values... more like ancient romans themselves lost these values
You can bet your own ass early romans would have been horrofied (and for good reason history will proof) by the way late romans allowed the barbarization of the army (from northern people while at it), but wealth, entitlement and comforts are hell of a drug

But skipping after Rome's fall wich would take a thread itself

Most interesting point imho it's probably jump to medieval/Renaissance times and notice how Rome's inheritance generated both the fortune and the curse of italy
Rome gave us lot of "big" cities... these cities created LOT of wealth, but at same time gave italians a culture of consider their city the main centre of power
Watch this shit lol
View attachment 1032237

Back in these days if you could magically turn that shit into one single country ruled by one single strong hand, you would have got an immense force under basically any measurable value of that time
I'm not even debate what could have achieved, but just to drop something Venice alone at some point was like
View attachment 1032238

But tricky part is WE would think something like this with the concept of "Italy" in mind, italians back then did not
It's false there was'nt the concept of "italians" or better italic people in ancient world, in fact at some point of Rome's expansion it was used to declare who could join roman legions, but there was'nt the concept that they should unify and have one King/Emperor (after Rome days)

Actually most of times italians were at war... with italians, usually the ones of closest big city that today we would reach in 30min of car lol

There's popular historical fact of Holy Roman Emperor Barbarossa coming down from Germany to destroy Milan and exile it's people, then milanese people rebuilding the city and with other local minor cities winning as underdogs the second war, kicking the emperor back home (Rocky1 and Rocky2 basically)

This is true and all, but key funny part is italian cities close to Milan were the ones who asked the german emperor to come and destroy Milan (fighting at his side), actually were very same cities who got the duty of actually destroy the city

Then (and here come best part lol) same italian cities realized they did'nt liked Milan (biggest bully of the neighborhood) but liked even less the Emperor
So they went like
"yo Milan whatsupp"
"Eh exiled, life sucks"
"about that sorry for calling germany emperor to destroy your city, HE's an asshole"
"..."
"what if i help you build back the city and then we ally (will not backstab you i promise) if emperor come back?"
"ok, totally reasonable plan"

And for some reason it even worked lol
Ironically cities even after making war and winning against the Emperor did'nt even splitted from HRE, just obtained an agreement where basically they had full autonomy and on return would swear refreshed loyalty to the Emperor (basically same kind of shit declining Rome had with local rulers in "roman" areas could no longer truly control)

This had simple reason, wich is greed
Local italian rulers would have lost everything (or a lot anyway) with a single big kingdom, so it's born a culture of divide the power as much as possible with lasted for centuries

Modern days would take another post again, but just to add some things that may not be much known
Italy went decadent at some point
When unification happened all the wealth and potential of previous centuries was gone
New commercial routes in the oceans made Mediterranean sea ever less relevant, and we were very late on industrialization process when became main factor for euro countries/war potential
To give perspective not only Italy was considered the lowest of euro big powers, but second worse Austria would still be able to produce 3 tons of steel for each 1 we did

For reasons of military fails beside weak industry and cheap equipment you can point that at high levels (the organization structure of power, officials etc) we had the absolute worst war culture and mindset.
Since unification whole late 800 up to 900, almost zero meritocracy, war was handled by bunch of rich cunts usually with aristocratic blood that had no skills, super antiquated "tactics" and who saw war as some sort of game to gain personal political prestige.
So you would have shit like WW1 where some young rich cunt with zero experience would order thousands and thousands of italian soldier to "chaarge!" up an useless hill where far inferior number of austrians had lot machine guns and turrets, with the result at the end of the day if the rich cunt was lucky he had more italian soldiers to sacrify than austrians had bullets and he could triumphally write a letter to his superiors to saying "i conquered the hill! (15k men died)"... and would get congratulations, if not promoted lol

WW2 for 99 reasons was that and much more

Most sad part is that under the meme style perspective that history ever take in common culture, italian soldiers are the ones that took most shame for all these fails, when on reality if was'nt for their effort Italy military fails would have been even bigger and faster

This is true. Wish I could find and embed some YouTube videos where they interviewed Italian ww2 soldiers from different regiments. Some crazy shit they had to face against overwhelming odds. Poor funding, poor equipment, poor leadership at the higher levels. The individual soldiers themselves were not the issue, actually they performed really well considering their circumstances.

 

[wwkirk]

That's an argument i would like do gigantic post about, but kinda busy day at work, so will just drop some random points


Tricky part is give a single answer to a question that cover 2000 years with different situations, so essentially are bunch of answers

Beside the fact on reality it's not like modern italian "lost" these values... more like ancient romans themselves lost these values
You can bet your own ass early romans would have been horrofied (and for good reason history will proof) by the way late romans allowed the barbarization of the army (from northern people while at it), but wealth, entitlement and comforts are hell of a drug

But skipping after Rome's fall wich would take a thread itself

Most interesting point imho it's probably jump to medieval/Renaissance times and notice how Rome's inheritance generated both the fortune and the curse of italy
Rome gave us lot of "big" cities... these cities created LOT of wealth, but at same time gave italians a culture of consider their city the main centre of power
Watch this shit lol
View attachment 1032237

Back in these days if you could magically turn that shit into one single country ruled by one single strong hand, you would have got an immense force under basically any measurable value of that time
I'm not even debate what could have achieved, but just to drop something Venice alone at some point was like
View attachment 1032238

But tricky part is WE would think something like this with the concept of "Italy" in mind, italians back then did not
It's false there was'nt the concept of "italians" or better italic people in ancient world, in fact at some point of Rome's expansion it was used to declare who could join roman legions, but there was'nt the concept that they should unify and have one King/Emperor (after Rome days)

Actually most of times italians were at war... with italians, usually the ones of closest big city that today we would reach in 30min of car lol

There's popular historical fact of Holy Roman Emperor Barbarossa coming down from Germany to destroy Milan and exile it's people, then milanese people rebuilding the city and with other local minor cities winning as underdogs the second war, kicking the emperor back home (Rocky1 and Rocky2 basically)

This is true and all, but key funny part is italian cities close to Milan were the ones who asked the german emperor to come and destroy Milan (fighting at his side), actually were very same cities who got the duty of actually destroy the city

Then (and here come best part lol) same italian cities realized they did'nt liked Milan (biggest bully of the neighborhood) but liked even less the Emperor
So they went like
"yo Milan whatsupp"
"Eh exiled, life sucks"
"about that sorry for calling germany emperor to destroy your city, HE's an asshole"
"..."
"what if i help you build back the city and then we ally (will not backstab you i promise) if emperor come back?"
"ok, totally reasonable plan"

And for some reason it even worked lol
Ironically cities even after making war and winning against the Emperor did'nt even splitted from HRE, just obtained an agreement where basically they had full autonomy and on return would swear refreshed loyalty to the Emperor (basically same kind of shit declining Rome had with local rulers in "roman" areas could no longer truly control)

This had simple reason, wich is greed
Local italian rulers would have lost everything (or a lot anyway) with a single big kingdom, so it's born a culture of divide the power as much as possible with lasted for centuries

Modern days would take another post again, but just to add some things that may not be much known
Italy went decadent at some point
When unification happened all the wealth and potential of previous centuries was gone
New commercial routes in the oceans made Mediterranean sea ever less relevant, and we were very late on industrialization process when became main factor for euro countries/war potential
To give perspective not only Italy was considered the lowest of euro big powers, but second worse Austria would still be able to produce 3 tons of steel for each 1 we did

For reasons of military fails beside weak industry and cheap equipment you can point that at high levels (the organization structure of power, officials etc) we had the absolute worst war culture and mindset.
Since unification whole late 800 up to 900, almost zero meritocracy, war was handled by bunch of rich cunts usually with aristocratic blood that had no skills, super antiquated "tactics" and who saw war as some sort of game to gain personal political prestige.
So you would have shit like WW1 where some young rich cunt with zero experience would order thousands and thousands of italian soldier to "chaarge!" up an useless hill where far inferior number of austrians had lot machine guns and turrets, with the result at the end of the day if the rich cunt was lucky he had more italian soldiers to sacrify than austrians had bullets and he could triumphally write a letter to his superiors to saying "i conquered the hill! (15k men died)"... and would get congratulations, if not promoted lol

WW2 for 99 reasons was that and much more

Most sad part is that under the meme style perspective that history ever take in common culture, italian soldiers are the ones that took most shame for all these fails, when on reality if was'nt for their effort Italy military fails would have been even bigger and faster

Top notch reply. I see why it was solicited.

 

[PBAC]

Short answer is that there was cultural rotation. Roman culture was largely defined my their mythos and emperor. In spirit these concepts moved east and as the western empire changed and fell so did the cultural values.

 

[StonedLemur]

That's an argument i would like do gigantic post about, but kinda busy day at work, so will just drop some random points


Tricky part is give a single answer to a question that cover 2000 years with different situations, so essentially are bunch of answers

Beside the fact on reality it's not like modern italian "lost" these values... more like ancient romans themselves lost these values
You can bet your own ass early romans would have been horrofied (and for good reason history will proof) by the way late romans allowed the barbarization of the army (from northern people while at it), but wealth, entitlement and comforts are hell of a drug

But skipping after Rome's fall wich would take a thread itself

Most interesting point imho it's probably jump to medieval/Renaissance times and notice how Rome's inheritance generated both the fortune and the curse of italy
Rome gave us lot of "big" cities... these cities created LOT of wealth, but at same time gave italians a culture of consider their city the main centre of power
Watch this shit lol
View attachment 1032237

Back in these days if you could magically turn that shit into one single country ruled by one single strong hand, you would have got an immense force under basically any measurable value of that time
I'm not even debate what could have achieved, but just to drop something Venice alone at some point was like
View attachment 1032238

But tricky part is WE would think something like this with the concept of "Italy" in mind, italians back then did not
It's false there was'nt the concept of "italians" or better italic people in ancient world, in fact at some point of Rome's expansion it was used to declare who could join roman legions, but there was'nt the concept that they should unify and have one King/Emperor (after Rome days)

Actually most of times italians were at war... with italians, usually the ones of closest big city that today we would reach in 30min of car lol

There's popular historical fact of Holy Roman Emperor Barbarossa coming down from Germany to destroy Milan and exile it's people, then milanese people rebuilding the city and with other local minor cities winning as underdogs the second war, kicking the emperor back home (Rocky1 and Rocky2 basically)

This is true and all, but key funny part is italian cities close to Milan were the ones who asked the german emperor to come and destroy Milan (fighting at his side), actually were very same cities who got the duty of actually destroy the city

Then (and here come best part lol) same italian cities realized they did'nt liked Milan (biggest bully of the neighborhood) but liked even less the Emperor
So they went like
"yo Milan whatsupp"
"Eh exiled, life sucks"
"about that sorry for calling germany emperor to destroy your city, HE's an asshole"
"..."
"what if i help you build back the city and then we ally (will not backstab you i promise) if emperor come back?"
"ok, totally reasonable plan"

And for some reason it even worked lol
Ironically cities even after making war and winning against the Emperor did'nt even splitted from HRE, just obtained an agreement where basically they had full autonomy and on return would swear refreshed loyalty to the Emperor (basically same kind of shit declining Rome had with local rulers in "roman" areas could no longer truly control)

This had simple reason, wich is greed
Local italian rulers would have lost everything (or a lot anyway) with a single big kingdom, so it's born a culture of divide the power as much as possible with lasted for centuries

Modern days would take another post again, but just to add some things that may not be much known
Italy went decadent at some point
When unification happened all the wealth and potential of previous centuries was gone
New commercial routes in the oceans made Mediterranean sea ever less relevant, and we were very late on industrialization process when became main factor for euro countries/war potential
To give perspective not only Italy was considered the lowest of euro big powers, but second worse Austria would still be able to produce 3 tons of steel for each 1 we did

For reasons of military fails beside weak industry and cheap equipment you can point that at high levels (the organization structure of power, officials etc) we had the absolute worst war culture and mindset.
Since unification whole late 800 up to 900, almost zero meritocracy, war was handled by bunch of rich cunts usually with aristocratic blood that had no skills, super antiquated "tactics" and who saw war as some sort of game to gain personal political prestige.
So you would have shit like WW1 where some young rich cunt with zero experience would order thousands and thousands of italian soldier to "chaarge!" up an useless hill where far inferior number of austrians had lot machine guns and turrets, with the result at the end of the day if the rich cunt was lucky he had more italian soldiers to sacrify than austrians had bullets and he could triumphally write a letter to his superiors to saying "i conquered the hill! (15k men died)"... and would get congratulations, if not promoted lol

WW2 for 99 reasons was that and much more

Most sad part is that under the meme style perspective that history ever take in common culture, italian soldiers are the ones that took most shame for all these fails, when on reality if was'nt for their effort Italy military fails would have been even bigger and faster

I knew you would sir lol.
Thanks for that and im looking forward to the thread

 

[StonedLemur]

Top notch reply. I see why it was solicited.

I know who knows

 

[Arashikage4Life]

 

[Bobby00]

Once they started churning out good food the decline began. They needed to decide between world dominance or great food and they chose right. No conquering superpower has good food. Example the english they ruled the whole world at one point but did anyone ever enjoy english food? No they got beans with ketchup and toast.

 

[Bacco]

Once they started churning out good food the decline began. They needed to decide between world dominance or great food and they chose right. No conquering superpower has good food. Example the english they ruled the whole world at one point but did anyone ever enjoy english food? No they got beans with ketchup and toast.

It's also strategic choice (timestamped)

 

[Quadtavius Tuck]

Once they started churning out good food the decline began. They needed to decide between world dominance or great food and they chose right. No conquering superpower has good food. Example the english they ruled the whole world at one point but did anyone ever enjoy english food? No they got beans with ketchup and toast.

Puddings and English breakfast rule the waves

 

[Bobby00]

It's also strategic choice (timestamped)

I actually like German baked goods but its not enough.

 

[avenue94]

I'm not relating groups merely because of an ethnic connection. I'm asking about the very same people at a different period of time asking how or why they changed. - But if they are in truth NOT the very same people, I concede my question may be moot.

Fair enough. My comment was more tongue in cheek that being born in a particular spot in the world isn't determinative to the extent people think.

As what for changed. The modern Italian state is a rather late invention (19th century), as opposed to a state like the UK, which looks fairly similar to its modern version much earlier. Germany formed roughly around the same time as Italy, but was much larger and better advantaged geographically, and thus able to better tap into the industrial revolution and later advances.

That would be my very broad explanation.

 

[jx820]

Are they truly ethnically identical as I have imagined?

Ethnicity and behavior are not necessarily linked the way you imagine.

But moreover modern itallians are not ethnically identical to ancient romans.

• Italy is a peninsula encircled by port cities on the mediteranian where there have been 2000 years of traders "coming" and going since the days of Cesar.
• Even back in ancient rome Hanibal marched an army of 40,000 men comprised of Carthaginians, Celts, and Gauls right into the roman empire and presumably that many men probably left a lot of DNA behind.
• 80 years ago 2 million foreign soldiers congregated on Italy all at once for WII.
• And Italy consistently accepts over 100,000 imigrants per year.

 

[wwkirk]

Short answer is that there was cultural rotation. Roman culture was largely defined my their mythos and emperor. In spirit these concepts moved east and as the western empire changed and fell so did the cultural values.

Thought provoking response.
I'm learning that barbarians became increasingly Romanized. Maybe some of them "inherited" the Roman ethos.

 

[Quadtavius Tuck]

The average southern Italian is indistinguishable from a North African or West Asian

The average Northern Italian is indistinguishable from a Germanoid

The ancient true Romans were a completely different race (Black)

 

[chrisdiaz]

As a greaseball I take offense to this thread.

 

[jeff7b9]

Who invited the moolie?!

Ayyyye, fughettaboutit!

Hopefully I don't get dubs for asking, but what is the back story to that particular ethnic slur?

If someone knows and can enlighten me, maybe use spoiler tags or PM me.

I have no malice towards anyone, I'm just curious as to the meaning and linguistic root of that word. It doesn't seem readily apparent to me, like most racial slurs tend to.

 

[chrisdiaz]

Funny I always heard it as Bafangu but I looked it up to say it correctly in this thread.

Va Fangool

 

[Streeter]

Mongolians, Greeks, Persians Egyptians read this an say ........ Hold our beers

 

[KnightTemplar]

I sooo want to post the Walken/Hopper video, but I know I'd get Dubs for it.

 

[zapataxiv]

I hear you. But I'm going to have to double down..sorta.
In contrast to the Italians and, as you note, the huge time gap separating them from the Romans, we have the much closer in time case of the Japanese.

To me, its quite stark to look at how the Japanese appear nowadays (I admit, I've never been over there) and how they were from the time of the Russo-Japanese War up to the Big One. Those pre-war Japs were unbelievably HARD. I mean, Alpha-Nation Hard! But now, it's almost like they are the reverse of what they were.

You might blow that off as an unremarkable inter-generational transformation, but to me it's a stunning change in national character which ought to be explicable.

Admittedly, the Japanese transformation may be stranger since it happened more rapidly. But Italy and the Roman Empire have been more of a focus of attention for me recently. And despite the temporal distance, a valid explanation of the historical change should possible, and for some at least, interesting.

idk bro that seems a little off
prewar post restoration Japon was a fucked up place ideolgically and they basically radicalized the nation to the point where they were just as bad or worse than the nazis ther accomplisments were achieved through some pretty terrible measures

post ww2 we took over their culture and basically prohibited them from having an army or an identity of masculinity tied to a national or ethnic pride.
they shifted to working and that blind drive for success has led to this culture of burn out. you see it in Korea to. people with so much internal pressure to succeed in a competition with everyone around them that the only way they can let loose is to dress up like a cat and have someone fart in their mouth.