We don't have to assume anything: http://www.correlatesofwar.org/Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Printable View
We don't have to assume anything: http://www.correlatesofwar.org/Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Don't worry, they make up for it with kidnapped boys and guns :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Btw, does anyone know what the consequences were of abolitionism? In terms of economic consequences for the various nations, and wrt the balance of power in the world?
Hard to imagine, it would depend on the ability of the EU to survive a collapse of the eurozone. I think most likely the EU will not survive such a collapse. Things will get ugly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
Sorry, I meant the abolition of slavery >_<
Not large, as best I can recall. The slave trade was already losing steam as a result of changing attitudes and technologies. By the time the Royal Navy started actively interdicting it most of the major powers weren't much involved in it anymore and those that were stopped within a few years in the hail of treaties and acknowledgement of Britain's supreme naval power that came after the Napoleonic wars. I expect it might have had some significant effects confined to Africa but my African history is pretty spotty, particularly for the Atlantic side of the continent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
I don't think slave based labour has ever proven sustainable in economic terms. It also tends to be a significant brake on innovation.
Looks like Spain has just elected in a government that is promising a program of reforms and austerity.
"I don't think slave based labour has ever proven sustainable in economic terms. It also tends to be a significant brake on innovation. "
Rome made out quite well at least for a while perhaps despite slavery, but nevertheless innovation wise it was way ahead of all the other nation/tribes, at least for a while.
Thanks for the reply P-Fuzz :up: but now I'm not sure what to make of Loki's assertion that they ended it while slavery was still profitable. I suppose there IS some way you can both be right :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzadelic
The poor free Romans were basically all on wellfare. I'd have to push myself harder than I care to to come up with any innovation that was not just a military improvement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian
Seriously? :rolleyes:
Profit margins were getting lower but were still there. However when you tack on the risk of the Royal Navy stopping you, seizing your ship and cargo with no compensation and possibly doing something unpleasant to your person in an exercise of summary justice, the profit margin might not be worth the risk compared to other, less controversial cargoes. The political will to act against the slave trade might not have arisen if the margins had still been at their prior higher levels though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Aimless
I don't think the Roman's actually invented any of those things, though.
They certainly innovated on them all though. Pre-Roman roads may have existed but were nothing like Roman roads. Same with the aqueducts, sanitation, etc, etc, etc
To say that the greatest ancient empire never innovated anything is just such bovine manure - but fits with Hazir's hatred of the British. I guess he just hates success.
Interesting how you make a comment on the lack of economic merit of slavery about Britain.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
I didn't.
I know they're mostly played by British actors in film, but I don't think the Romans were really British. And yeah, the romans innovated - and invented - plenty I was just being nitpicky.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Actually you did. You also missed the fact that I excluded the military from that statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
just to put it to rest:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_technology
Never would have thought anyone would actualy try to claim Romans didn't innovate or I would have posted it originaly.
LOL, don't think I was clear. I meant Hazir hates the British, he seems to have no regard for the Romans. Its tall poppy syndrome. I suppose the Greeks never did anything for philosophy either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steely Glint
As for the military, while Roman Roads were a military product, other innovations mentioned such as aqueducts, sanitation etc were not. To say that Romans didn't innovate (even excluding the military) is just a joke.
I think the Romans could have done a lot better than forcing pretty much all their free citizens on wellfare yes. You think that having everybody who has a vote in elections should be on the dole? I am quite surprised. I may also point out that the Roman empire lasted between 500 and 1500 years, depending on where you start to count and where you stop to count. I am under-impressed indeed with the innovations they have produced in all that time. Even the Brits managed to innovate more in a much shorter time.
Obviously someone fails at reading relatively short well compiled text. It took centuries to just rediscover some of the innovations Rome enjoyed some lasting as long as 19th century! It sure takes a lot impress Hazir:) Or is it similar to Drago and you cant grasp the concept of innovation if you have not recently bought a flat screen TV produced in the Roman Empire.
Could it have done better if it did things differently, sure maybe, we will never know, but the fact is it did better then anyone else during its time and many centuries after.
Nothing in that article contains anything even remotely new for me. It is far less than you could have expected from an empire that was around for at least 500 years (if you see Roman empire as the empire run from Rome, which is rather more limited than experts would). They built aqueducts and plumbing when Caesar ran the show, having them still around 500 years later is not proof of an innovative society.Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian
It's not the fact that roman structures still stand today, it's the fact that technologies invented by Rome remained unmatched many centuries after it seized to exist, some of which remained so until 19th century that should impress you.
Let me try this with small words; if you stay the same for 500 years, you are not very innovative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Asmodian
Also you don't seem to understand the difference between invention and innovation. It should make one despair to see an empire so brimming with potential not using any of it.
Hazir says
and what we all see is "since it doesn't advance to cause of contemporary total European integration, it's worthless"Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
You've got any idea how stupid this kind of comment makes you look? It is no coincidence that you and Steely landed in my ignore list at about the same time. Randblade at least believes in what he writes, you're just acting like a jackass.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
My point was and remains, that slavery does not benefit a society and that it actually holds back innovation. Good to know that you're one of those people who thinks slavery is a good thing. Also, you realise that as european integration was concerned the Roman Empire was a roaring success? So much so that all strive for integration in Europe ever since inevitably at some point gets labelled Roman Empire mark X ?
Your "point" is meaningless. What started this thread really going? Your constant pissing match with Rand. What started this latest tangent? Your constant pissing match with Rand. What do we all see every time you're that dismissive or contemptuous of something? Your constant pissing match with Rand. It always ends up tying back to that somehow as we press you for details and explanations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
If I call you a despicable cunt again, will you put me back on it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir