Fears of immigration in ancient Rome and today

https://eidolon.pub/barbarians-inside-the-gate-part-i-c175057b340f

by diodorus • 11 years ago

47 39 11 years ago

wtbob• 11 years ago

Of course, one should bear in mind what eventually happened to Rome…

cynicalkane2• 11 years ago

Since the late 300s there was a repeating pattern where German tribes would want to become part of Rome (initially, fleeing the Huns), and the Romans would respond with acts of astonishing racism.

The first revolt of 376 began when the Romans reneged on land grants to the Goths (who were refugees from the Huns) and allowed them to starve. The proximal cause of its fall were anti-German riots in the Roman capital, where the wives and children of the German troops were massacred; leading the Gothic leader Alaric's troops to openly revolt where they were previously loyal to Rome.

So the fall of Rome has a lesson about the treatment and acceptance of foreigners, but maybe not the one you had in mind.

MrBuddyCasino• 11 years ago

Another way to look at it: anti-german riots errupted because politicians ignored the public's disdain for immigration, causing the goths to rebel.

I still have the 90's headlines of burning refugee homes in my mind. After the german unification, the east was economically devastated. People had lost their jobs and their national identity, and things were bleak for years to come. So they turned to right-wing ideas, being Nazi was cool for a while. Plus, they had no every day experience with strangers - the iron curtain made sure of that.

Now you could say that these people were a bunch of facist idiots, and some of them certainly were.

But you could also say that it was very irresponsible of politicians to build refugee homes in these areas into this political climate. The reality is that humans are less willing to share if they feel threatened already and are in bad situation themselves.

mc323• 11 years ago

But didn't pluralistic and non pluralistic empires come and go back then? Did pluralism or non pluralism actually make a difference in the decline of empires?

If anything the Chinese who were ruthless in rule were able to keep things going the longest.

acqq• 11 years ago

"Maybe" also it doesn't mean anything:

From the absence of X during the fall of an empire it doesn't follow that the presence of X will protect from the fall of another empire.

The set of such X where X is not in the set of the policies of the fallen empire is infinite.

a_bonobo• 11 years ago

Always a relevant link when this argument comes up:

210 Reasons for the decline of the Roman Empire

http://www.utexas.edu/courses/rome/210reasons.html

simplicio• 11 years ago

"Eventually" in this case being more than half a millennium after the events in the article.

carlob• 11 years ago

Have you even read the article?

rawTruthHurts• 11 years ago

It became Byzantium?

Fears of immigration in ancient Rome and today

Related Stories