New here?
Create an account to submit posts, participate in discussions and chat with people.
Sign up
97
posted 3 days ago by LordGrimTheInvincibl on scored.co (+0 / -0 / +97Score on mirror )
You are viewing a single comment's thread. View all
Supermatmike on scored.co
3 days ago 6 points (+0 / -0 / +6Score on mirror ) 1 child
Republican models of government are actually quite a good idea, given that there is not universal suffrage. Take Rome for instance, only patricians and those who served in the legions could vote, the common plebian did not have franchise. Likewise upon the founding of the United States only land owners could vote. Once the political franchise started to be expanded (both in Rome and the USA) you start to see the gradual destruction of both nations.
MI7BZ3EW on scored.co
3 days ago 2 points (+0 / -0 / +2Score on mirror )
Roman elections were a lot more complicated than that, but you are right: ultimately only the nobility had any say in how things were actually done. However, they had a stopgap that said that if the nobility can't come to a consensus the plebians would get a say, and since no nobility would ever let that happen, they got their stuff together quick.

The plebians did have a congress of sort, what I think the Founding Fathers wanted the House of Representatives to be. That body had almost no power and could only whine and complain when things got bad.

The English figured out you bring the peasant leaders in and have them figure out how to tax themselves. It makes things a lot less messy. Things got out of hand, though, when the peasants (really, the new middle class) decided that kings aren't allowed to do certain things rather than levy taxes like they were told.
Toast message