/lit/ - Literature

>>18760079
>THOSE ARE SUPERFLUOUS PARALLELISMS; ANY TWO THINGS CAN BE COMPARED VIA ACCIDENTAL TRAITS, OR CONDITIONS, BUT THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY INDICATE HOMOLOGOUS, NOR ANALOGOUS, RELATION, MUCH LESS A SIMILARITY.
Nothing in history is accidental. The condition of one generation always conditions the next. This is true across centuries, even millennia. Contingency arises from ignorance. Your alternative analysis of America and Rome is political only. Have you take into account their art? What do you know of their economics? Their spiritual and ethical attitudes? Not merely the content of these things, but form also? For content is merely visible. Form is that which cannot be seen but is everywhere evident to he who knows what he's looking for. America and Rome are indeed homologous, as the Trojan War was to the Crusades, the Peloponnesian War to the Thirty Years War, the Punic Wars to the World Wars. On this I suggest you read Spengler.
Anyway, your dichotomy is completely arbitrary and false. You think Americans massacre and enslave people more than the Romans did? You think the Romans didn't have a basically capitalist economy?

>>18739638
But it does