Podcasts about Germanicus

THEATER, BATTLESHIPS, AND THE ILLUSION OF AMERICAN POWER Colleagues Gaius and Germanicus, Friends of History Debating Society, Londinium, 91 AD. Gaius and Germanicus discuss the theatrical nature of American imperial power under Donald Trump, positing that the administration utilizes military displays—such as missile strikes on empty targets in Nigeria or Venezuela—as symbolic rituals to assert authority without risking the failure associated with actual combat. Germanicus argues that Trump possesses the insight that "theater is the best way to assert American authority," drawing a parallel to Reagan's "Star Wars" initiative, which defeated the Soviets through the illusion of technological superiority rather than its reality. They debate the strategic utility of battleships; while Trump envisions massive vessels for their psychological hold on the "collective imagination," Germanicus predicts the construction of guided missile cruisers that merely project that image of invincibility. The conversation shifts to the Russo-Ukrainian conflict, where Germanicus characterizes the Kyiv government as a "gangster racket" protracting the war for financial gain while Russia solidifies its military reputation. They conclude that the US is transitioning into a phase of empire relying on "demonstration and display" to maintain global dominance, warning that an actual military defeat could be a fatal blow to the system. NUMBER 1 1942 BB58 USS MARYLSND IN ACTION.

THE WAR OF THE WORLDS, OPEN BORDERS, AND ELITE DETACHMENT Colleagues Gaius and Germanicus, Friends of History Debating Society, Londinium, 91 AD. The discussion turns to domestic turmoil, using H.G. Wells' The War of the Worlds as a metaphor for the modern refugee crisis and the rejection of border enforcement by Western elites. Gaius argues that the recent election results served as a mandate to halt undocumented migration, questioning the logic of those who vilify ICE while romanticizing open borders as if invaders were victims. Germanicusidentifies this opposition as stemming from the "Equites" or ruling class, who profess a "universalism" that views all people as identical labor units while hypocritically insulating themselves in gated communities. He describes this elite mindset as a "fictive reality" akin to Marie Antoinette's detachment, where actual consequences are ignored in favor of a self-destructive, anti-nationalist "religion." The speakers contrast this elite "bubble," characterized by cognitive dissonance regarding the sources of their own wealth, with the harsh reality of global migration. They conclude that the ruling class's refusal to acknowledge cultural borders threatens the nation's cohesion, comparing the situation to the Martians in Wells' novel overwhelming the established order. NUMBER 2 1906 WAR OF THE WORLDS

FERGUSON'S ANALYSIS, THE EMPEROR SYSTEM, AND AUGUSTAN AUTHORITY Colleagues Gaius and Germanicus, Friends of History Debating Society, Londinium, 91 AD. The speakers critique historian Niall Ferguson's recent characterization of Donald Trump as a composite of Andrew Jackson, William McKinley, P.T. Barnum, and Richard Nixon. Germanicus dismisses Ferguson's analysis as a cynical attempt to force a conventional republican narrative onto what is actually a systemic shift toward an "emperor system." He argues that the Americanpublic has embraced this imperial transition due to the "ruin" and dysfunction of the traditional republic caused by a corrupt elite. While Ferguson attempts to minimize Trump's significance by linking him to past politicians like the "salesman" Barnum or the "aristocratic" Jackson, Germanicus asserts that the "gold leaf" aesthetic of the Trump era correctly signals a return to Augustan authority. The conversation concludes by contrasting the necessary "dignitas" of future American emperors with the degradation of the office under Bill Clinton, whom Germanicus describes as ethically "worse than Tiberius" due to his association with the Epstein scandal. They finish by reflecting on the resilience of the Byzantine emperors, such as Basil II, who successfully maintained imperial continuity for centuries through strong leadership. NUMBER 3

THE ACTOR-EMPEROR AND THE SHIFT FROM DIGNITAS TO INTIMACY Colleagues Gaius and Germanicus, Friends of History Debating Society, Londinium, 91 AD. In this session, set against the backdrop of a cold winter in Londinium, Gaius and Germanicus explore the evolution of the imperial persona, drawing sharp parallels between the Roman Emperor Nero and modern American figures Bill Clinton and Donald Trump. Germanicus argues that the essential skill of the modern "emperor" is the capacity to create an intimate emotional connection with the populace, a transformation that began with Teddy Roosevelt's dramatic speeches but was fully realized by Franklin D. Roosevelt's "fireside chats." While Roman emperors like Augustus relied on dignitas, stoicism, and an aura of divinity, the American tradition demands that the leader embody the "passions and authenticity of the people." Donald Trump is identified as the culmination of this trend, possessing an "intense capacity to connect emotionally," which allows him to survive overwhelming opposition, unlike Clinton, whose "genius is fled" in his later years. NUMBER 1 1888

THE GILDED AGE, GROVER CLEVELAND, AND THE ASSERTION OF SOVEREIGNTY Colleagues Gaiusand Germanicus, Friends of History Debating Society, Londinium, 91 AD. The second segment pivots to a historical comparison involving Grover Cleveland, the only American president prior to Trump to serve non-consecutive terms, using his presidency to illustrate parallels between the "Gilded Age" and the 2020s. The primary focus is the Venezuelan Crisis of 1895, where Cleveland asserted that the United States was "practically sovereign on this continent" and its "fiat is law," forcing the British Empire to submit to American arbitration rather than fight. Germanicus draws a direct line to the present, noting that just as the 19th-century crisis was driven by gold mines near the Orinoco River, modern conflicts are driven by oil, while the US now contends with encroachments from China and Russia. The speakers suggest that the partisan press of the Gilded Age was even more vicious than today's media, and that the railroad bubbles of that era mirror current AI and tech bubbles. NUMBER 2 1885

THE REIGN OF THE EMPEROR AND THE PROBLEM OF SUCCESSION Colleagues Gaius and Germanicus, Friends of History Debating Society, Londinium, 91 AD. In the final segment, Gaius and Germanicus analyze the New York Times characterizing the Trump presidency as a "reign," a term Gaius embraces as historically accurate for the current state of the American executive. Germanicus argues that the American presidency has evolved into a system indistinguishable from the Roman imperial court, complete with "imperial mausoleums" (presidential libraries) and vast building programs intended to project power, similar to Hadrian rebuilding Athens or FDR building the Pentagon. The conversation turns to the 2028 election, with Germanicus comparing Joe Biden and potential successor Gavin Newsomto Roman emperors who inherited the throne, such as Titus or Commodus, viewing them as weak because their elevation was orchestrated by elites rather than won through personal struggle. In contrast, figures like Julius Caesar, Augustus, and Trump are described as possessing a "will to power" that imbues them with natural authority that "selected" leaders lack. NUMBER 3 1793 VIRGIL READING AENEID TO AUGUSTUS

War-War: NATO Provocations and American Detachment from Europe — Gaius & Germanicus — Gaius reports on escalating aggressive rhetoric from NATO and fortification initiatives throughout the Baltic region, questioning whether these military deployments constitute "false flag" provocations deliberately designed to entrap the United Statesin direct warfare with Russia. Germanicus contends that European elites are systematically manufacturing an external Russian crisis to maintain institutional power and governmental legitimacy against ascending populist movements and deep-seated fear of abandonment by the new American "Emperor." Germanicus draws a historical parallel to the permanent schism of the Roman Empire in 395 AD, characterizing the United States as the prosperous, militarily secure Eastern Empire (Byzantine Constantinople) and contemporary Europe as the economically weak, militarily collapsing Western Empire facing irreversible institutional decay. Germanicus argues that just as Constantinople eventually ceased attempting to save the disintegrating Western Empire from Vandal invasions and territorial collapse, the United States is strategically detaching from European geopolitical failures, recognizing that continued military commitment represents strategic wastage of American resources without corresponding security benefit. Germanicus emphasizes that European strategic incompetence and political cowardice render European salvation impossible through Americanmilitary intervention, making strategic withdrawal the rational American policy response. 1944 GOLD BEACH H-HOUR

Migration: Assimilation Crisis and the Collapse of Western Civilization — Gaius & Germanicus — Gaius and Germanicus analyze the destabilizing strain generated by mass migration flows from the economically depressed Global South to the wealthy industrialized North, documenting escalating violence in Australia, social unrest throughout Europe, and institutional strain within the United States. Gaius highlights the new American "Emperor Trump's" political mandate to enforce border security and immigration restrictions, contrasting this with the "woke elite's" previous advocacy for polyglot multicultural societies without national identity boundaries or assimilationist expectations. Germanicus argues that successful historical migration requires genuine desire for cultural assimilation into host societies, citing the Roman-era Franks and Visigoths who adopted Roman culture, language, and institutional frameworks, thereby integrating into Roman civilization. Germanicus contrasts these assimilationist populations with groups like the Vandals and contemporary observant Sunni Muslim communities, who systematically resist cultural integration and instead establish cohesive, ethnically and religiously homogeneous societies paralleling their original homelands. Germanicus warns that Europe is reaching a "boiling point" due to systemic resistance to assimilation, surging crime rates, and political backlash against uncontrolled immigration, comparing this civilizational instability to the circumstances precipitating the destruction of the Western Roman Empire by non-assimilating tribal invasions that progressively fragmented Roman institutional coherence and territorial control. 1775 BOUDICA RALLIES

Ceremony: The Emperor as Collective Focal Point and Sacred Kingship — Gaius & Germanicus — In the "freezing darkness of Londinium," Gaius and Germanicus reflect philosophically on the spectacle of the new American"Emperor" (Donald Trump) attending the Army-Navy football game, with Gaius describing the theatrical pageantry of Trump's entrance flanked by enormous military officers and the overwhelming orchestrated cheers from assembled military cadets. Gaius argues that for a transcendent moment, the United States embodied the full confidence, unified purpose, and absolute power characteristic of the Roman Empire at its zenith. Germanicus analyzes this ceremonial moment through historical lens, positing that the Emperor functions as a "collective focal point" for national identity and institutional legitimacy, embodying "sacred kingship" roles that unify the entire nation in ways that republican governance structures fundamentally cannot achieve. Germanicus compares this modern ceremonial spectacle to Roman imperial tradition wherein the Emperor's physical presence at the Coliseum or the Hippodrome served vital ritualistic functions transcending mere entertainment, instead melding the Emperor, the Senate, and the populace into a singular apotheosis of unified national identity and sacred authority. Germanicus suggests that this ceremonial gathering simultaneously demonstrated American military strength while affirming the psychological necessity of embodied leadership and collective ritual in maintaining national cohesion and ideological purpose.

The Three Archetypes of American Global Strategy — Gaius & Germanicus — Gaius and Germanicus analyze the prospective American National Security Strategy for 2025–2026, framing it as a deliberate return to the "Trump corollary" of the Monroe Doctrine emphasizing hemispheric supremacy and regional sphere-of-influence arrangements. Germanicus categorizes American foreign policy history into three religious-like ideological visions: Washington'sisolationist "beacon on the hill," the Monroe-Adams "realm of liberty" (defensive empire protecting American interests), and the Jacksonian "Prometheus unbound" (universalist ideological expansion spreading democratic values). Germanicus argues the incoming administration systematically rejects the "Wilson to Biden" lineage of global interventionism and messianic crusading in favor of Theodore Roosevelt-style "flexible realism" emphasizing power, national interest, and transactional diplomacy. Gaius details this shifted strategy as consolidating American dominance in the Western Hemisphere and Pacific region while according Russia respect and a recognized sphere of influence in Eurasia, explicitly rejecting Cold War confrontationalism. Gaius documents that Kremlin leadership has explicitly welcomed this "flexible realism," viewing it as a geopolitical departure from perpetual adversarial Cold War mindset. Germanicus contrasts this transactional approach with the "Manichaean" moral crusades characterizing recent American foreign policy, suggesting the American public now explicitly favors strategy avoiding military entanglement while prioritizing domestic prosperity and economic reconstruction, mirroring isolationist sentiments following World War I. 1911 USS MAINE IN HAVANA HARBOR

he Caudine Forks and the Dangers of Half-Measures — Gaius & Germanicus — Germanicus and Gaius center their discussion on the instructive Roman historical lesson of the Caudine Forks: a victor must either completely annihilate the enemy or embrace them as genuine allies; choosing the treacherous middle path of ritual humiliation and subordination ensures future vengeance and perpetual instability. Germanicus applies this ancient strategic principle to contemporary geopolitics, arguing that the United States consistently fails this historical test by demanding submission—symbolized by forcing nations beneath the ritualistic "yoke"—without achieving total conquest that transforms hostile nations into obedient subordinate "bricks" within a durable imperial structure. Gaius and Germanicus cite the Treaty of Versailles and the post-Cold War treatment of Russia as prime historical examples where deliberate humiliation without comprehensive conquest bred lasting resentment rather than durable peace, establishing the foundation for subsequent conflicts and nationalist backlash. Germanicus characterizes this approach as reflecting American "narcissism," the desire for dominance without willingness to wage total war, thereby explaining systemic American failures in Iraq, Afghanistan, and contemporary tensions with Iran. Germanicus and Gaius warn against applying this "halfway yoke" framework to emerging challenges with Venezuela or Russia, instead counseling that it is strategically safer to permit regimes to decay internally through entropy rather than provoke nationalist backlash through external military or political pressure. Gaius concludes by characterizing current European leaders as "aggressive dependents" psychologically clinging to the Ukraine conflict to artificially preserve their own fragile domestic political authority and suppress internal dissent regarding failing governance.

The Courtiers' Pivot and the Failing Imperial Narrative — Gaius & Germanicus — Gaius and Germanicus, in their metaphorical 91 AD Londinium dialogue, critique the Western foreign policy establishment, dismissively labeled "courtiers," regarding their systematic narrative repositioning on the Ukraine war as military circumstances deteriorate catastrophically. Germanicus argues that these elite advisors prioritize preservation of institutional status and access to executive power over accountability and honest assessment; as the military situation turns decisively against Ukraine, these courtiers seamlessly pivot from predicting Ukrainian victory to blaming European allies for failing to "step up" with additional military commitment. Germanicus draws historical parallels to the fall of the Soviet Union, noting that elites systematically rewrite their past positions retrospectively to claim they foresaw inevitable geopolitical collapses, a psychological mechanism enabling survival without disgrace or professional consequences. Gaius and Germanicuscontrast successful empires possessing unified narratives aligned with coherent strategy against the current Americanapproach, characterized as "predatory opportunism" driven by electoral manipulation requirements. Germanicuscontends that strategic failures in Ukraine—where population and material resources mathematically determine victory—expose the U.S. as a "weak and venal empire" relying upon a "pastiche" of propagandistic lies rather than the solid convergence of vision that characterized American dominance during World War II. 1918 UKRAINE

1/3. The Peace Debate — In a Londinium wine bar during a storm in 91 AD, Gaius and Germanicus philosophize about service and contemporary geopolitics, centering on the modern concept of "peace," particularly regarding Ukrainedespite ongoing conflicts in Venezuela and Hezbollah rearmament. Germanicus asserts that "peace" functions as a euphemism for defeat, deployed by the side facing inevitable submission to avoid public humiliation. Germanicus argues that Russia's protracted attrition strategy is culminating, evidenced by recent media reports of meteoric desertions and massive irrecoverable casualties exceeding 40,000 Ukrainian soldiers monthly, suggesting Ukraine approaches structural collapse. Gaius emphasizes that Europe lacks deployable military capacity and sustained fighting capability, necessitating a negotiated peace settlement to avoid the humiliation of military defeat. Germanicus notes that neoconservatives remain unusually silent, lacking control of the current administration, establishment Democraticinfluence, and weakened by collateral damage from Israel's Gaza campaign to their "endless war" doctrine. Gaiuscontends that the United States' only viable leverage for Russia involves promises of economic investment, reestablishing European energy linkages, and modernizing resource extraction through joint ventures. Germanicusidentifies three conditions for a viable treaty: Ukrainian neutrality, Russian reintegration, and attractive arrangements regarding Donbass, coupled with Ukraine affirming non-discrimination toward Russian-speaking populations. 1968

2/3. The Civic Communion Debate — Gaius observes that despite ceremonial declarations of national strength, the United States remains profoundly fragmented domestically. Germanicus presents French philosophical recommendations for "Civic Communion," emphasizing shared, major institutions—Religion, Military, Education, Healthcare—where citizens belong to each other transcending immutable background characteristics. Germanicushighlights that the US prioritizes enshrining individual rights and liberty but neglects fraternity, the concept providing implicit kinship and reciprocal obligation among citizens. Gaius articulates French exceptionalism, which embraces those joining the French civilizational sphere; the French concept of laïcité requires that kinship to France supersede sectarian and identitarian attachments. Germanicus emphasizes that the US has failed to cultivate the idea of constituting a "people" and lacks emotional bonds necessary for sustained national unity. Gaius notes this fragmentation was temporarily healed during the World Wars but is now fully developed, resembling divisions of the 1840s-1850s. Germanicus describes contemporary American society as characterized by "bile and rancor," where citizens are rewarded for denouncing American institutions, rendering reestablishment of "imagined kinship" extraordinarily difficult and requiring fundamental reconceptualization of national identity and shared purpose. 1908 FRENCH GRAND PRIX

3/3. The Regicide Debate — Gaius and Germanicus examine the history and implications of killing monarchs and emperors, particularly regarding modern political leadership. Germanicus uses the execution of Charles I in 1649following the English Civil War as the seminal regicide precedent; Charles I was executed publicly after refusing to defend himself in court. Gaius explains that regicide recurs throughout imperial history because the sacred monarch's authority embodies the totality of society itself; metaphorically, the monarch's body represents the body of all citizens collectively. Germanicus distinguishes between legitimate regicide—eliminating a king who betrayed his societal mission (like Caligula)—and capricious execution like Charles I's, Louis XVI's, or Nicholas II's, which constitutes ritual delegitimation. Gaius notes that Charles I's execution ultimately delegitimized the regicides themselves, causing the nation to reject them and resulting in Cromwell's short-lived Protectorship. Germanicus warns that contemporary opposition entertaining regicidal ideas against "Emperor Trump" appears unaware they are entering this long historical tradition of regicide, which invariably triggers general conflict among factions, since millions of faithful supporters embrace the emperor. Gaius emphasizes that while individual men may be killed, opposition attempting to slay the high office itself confronts an institution that is undying, all-powerful, and ultimately indestructible, creating structural conditions for catastrophic escalation and societal fragmentation reminiscent of cracked mirrors that cannot be adequately mended without the binding emotional adhesive of fraternity and shared national purpose. 1649

HEADLINE: GAIUS & GERMANICUS IN LONDINIUM 91 AD: Discussing the Pragmatic 28-Point Plan for Ukraine. Broadcasting live from Londinium, where the Thames is too rough for boatmen due to the grim weather, Gaius and Germanicus analyze the 28-point plan aimed at ending the Ukrainian disruption. This plan, a multiple of Wilson's 14 points, is driven by an emperor in Washington, and the Kremlin is currently prevailing. The core provision involves the ceding of territory, specifically Donbas, to Russia, followed by Russian-won elections. Unlike the disastrous Versailles Treaty that led to future conflict, the 28 points are deemed pragmatic, solving the issue of ardent Russian nationalists within Ukraine's borders. The plan also prevents Ukraine from joining NATO and offers Russia reintegration into the world order, potentially rejoining the G8. The speakers agree the solution is positive, allowing Ukraine to survive as a sovereign nation while losing only territories that did not want to be a part of it. 1037

HEADLINE: GAIUS & GERMANICUS IN LONDINIUM 91 AD: The "When Russia Wins" War Game and NATO's Empty Shell. Gaius and Germanicus continue their discussion, reflecting on how Woodrow Wilson's 14 points led to catastrophe. They then play the "paranoid NATO dream" war game, "When Russia Wins." The scenario posits that in 2028, after the 28-point plan is implemented, Russian forces occupy Narva, Estonia, but remain static. NATO fails to invoke Article 5 due to a lack of consensus, especially after Washington washes its hands of the conflict, effectively ending the alliance. Germanicus argues NATO is an "empty shell," designed only for nuclear confrontation, not hybrid warfare or lesser contingencies. While Ukraine has made peace with not joining NATO, Russia accepts Ukraine pursuing EU membership for its necessary economic connection. Russia's goal in the Baltics is primarily the protection of ethnic Russians and access to the Baltic Sea. 1940

HEADLINE: GAIUS & GERMANICUS IN LONDINIUM 91 AD: Reclaiming James I as the True Founding Father. Preparing to see a mock battle staged by centurions in Londinium, Gaius and Germanicus discuss the unappreciated legacy of James I (James VI of Scotland), asserting he is the true founding father of the United States. James I, an intellectual king who took the throne in 1603, faced challenges from the powerful Spanish Empire over territorial claims in the New World. When the Spanish ambassador complained about incursions near Chesapeake Bay, James I gave an "opaquely professional" response, disclaiming crown involvement and calling it "private business." This non-committal stance prevented war and allowed colonization to proceed. By 1618, he solidified this by granting a charter to the struggling Virginia colony. His light management established self-governance, setting the course for both modern Britain and the United States. 1901 OLD HOUSE Retry

Londinium 91 AD: The Debate Over Venezuela. Gaius and Germanicus of the Friends Mystery Debating Society discuss at a cold wine bar by the choppy Thames the potential decision by emperor Trump to invade Venezuela, noting the presence of a sizable, powerful military force gathered deliberately off its shores. Germanicus argues that American engagement in the Caribbean is a deep-rooted tradition dating back to the Monroe Doctrine, with the current military buildup serving as a symbolic initiative signaling to powers like China and Russia that the U.S. is reasserting influence in its accepted sphere. However, he cautions there are huge risks because the U.S. military's connection to strategic realities has declined massively, with capabilities depleted partly due to the war in Ukraine. U.S. history of warfare since Korea is marked by poor net assessment, where planners privilege desires over reality. Maduro has reportedly offered tribute of 300 million barrels of oil, suggesting the conflict is currently an aggressively conducted negotiation dependent heavily on Venezuelan armed forces loyalty. The emperor faces pressure to achieve a consolation prize if he chooses not to invade to avoid looking weak, leaving the outcome undecided. 80 BCE. SULLA

Londinium 91 AD: Corruption and the Imperial Slip. Gaius and Germanicus shift attention to Washington, observing that wealth has grown more powerful than government in the U.S., similar to Rome's path into empire. Evidence includes Washington insiders like Rudy Giuliani and Hunter Biden allegedly operating on payrolls of corrupt foreign interests such as the Democratic Republic of Congo. Republicans typically avoid registering foreign work under the Foreign Agents Registration Act by using cutouts or undocumented money, while Democrats use think tanks during interregnums, making the process so transparent it suggests everybody's in on the game. Insiders are even willing to work for adversaries like sanctioned Russian arms makers or the Taliban under the justification of private diplomacy. Germanicusanalyzes this decline through three vantages: the Gilded Age, where corporations owned government but lacked today's foreign entanglement; foreign penetration, where adversaries and allies like Israel, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia have enormous leverage; and irreconcilable ideological conflict, where corruption fuels severe ideological struggle tearing away the rule of law. They conclude that the transition into an emperor system is subtle and happens without notice, weakening the system when corruption damages trust. SULLA

Londinium 91 AD: The Aging Emperor's Urgency. Gaius and Germanicus discuss the physical and mental state of emperor Trump, noting his senior age and frantic, restless pace as potentially signs of an aging brain or alternatively adrenaline and confidence. Germanicus believes the emperor is acutely self-aware of his limited time, driven by tremendous brutal urgency to secure a lasting legacy including fiscal stability, border control, and eliminating principles like DEI. However, the stress of this frantic pace combined with age could cloud his judgment, making him more impulsive or desperate. The emperor's focus on revenge cycles, such as indicting former directors, is typical of historical emperors against their enemies. Germanicus worries this could lead to physical decline and reckless action. A critical marker of a republic's collapse into an emperor system is when the incoming president pursues and imprisons his predecessor, an easy push into civil war seen in places like Brazil. They conclude the transition is quietly happening, with the question of whether the U.S. will experience violence remaining unknown. 81 BCE SULLA Retry

The Decline of Democracy: Autocracy and Oligarchy on the Rise. Gaius and Germanicus discuss Michael McFaul's hypothesis that democracy is in recession and autocracy is ascendant. Germanicus concurs, blaming "Blue" (Democrats) for pursuing steps that strip the nation of its Republican character, including efforts to control media and censor, which he terms "creeping authoritarianism." He cites examples like a two-tier justice system and the pursuit of "thought crimes" (e.g., silent praying outside an abortion clinic) in the US and UK. Germanicus believes the US is heading toward a "brutal oligarchy" controlled by a ruling class, rather than a classic autocracy. Gaius asks if autocratic models, such as Chinese capitalism, are appealing to allies. Germanicus confirms that certain nations (like the expanding BRICS) view China and Russia as providing a better model for societal progress, especially given the US's poor global reputation since 2001. Furthermore, neoliberalism benefits only the very wealthy, creating devastating wealth inequality akin to the ancien régime before the French Revolution. Projecting 100 years ahead, Germanicus believes the US will likely be an "oligarchic autocracy" and an empire competing as a trans-Pacific/transatlantic block against a Eurasian block. They agree that modern technology, capable of tracking thoughts and speech, is an "enormously powerful instrument" supporting this autocratic trend. Germanicus notes that moralizing about dictators and "saving democracy" will persist, but merely as a means to keep the population passive and quiet, labeling modern censorship as highly Orwellian. They conclude they are living through a transformation from kingship to democracy, now moving toward autocracy. 80 BCE. SULLA 

Russian Aggression, NATO Tensions, and the Specter of 1914. Gaius and Germanicus, hosting the Friends of History Debating Society in Londinium, discuss the future of the Roman Empire's inheritor, the United States, and its empire in the 21st century. The conversation, held by the turbulent Thames, focuses on the extreme challenges facing US institutions, both outside and inside its borders. The primary external challenge discussed is Russian aggression against Ukraine and the heightened tensions along the NATO frontier. Gaius is reliably told that any provocation, such as blockading the Russian shadow fleet or shooting down a Russian warplane, could lead to Mr. Putin's removal by his right-wing compatriots who believe he has supervised a bad war. Germanicus notes that while no one plans provocations, accidents happen, and hotheads exist in NATO alongside appeasers. Putin is seen as driven by his right-wing elements, demanding recognition and respect for Russia, with conditions comparing the situation to 1914, not 1939. Germanicus counters that Putin is a "Kaiser" (Caesar), comparable to the emperor in Washington, D.C., and must secure a "big victory." Putin's attack on the Ukrainian electrical grid is viewed as smart, bringing Ukraine to the brink without destroying the whole grid, thereby deterring Western media backlash and demonstrating Russia's capacity against NATO. Gaius observes that Washington (specifically the neocons) thinks it must win. The comparison to 1914 suggests that a quick collapse of the Ukrainian war effort could spark a dangerous "July crisis" if the West loses its head. Germanicus, however, sees domestic US political turmoil and European weakness making a major war "almost impossible," suggesting Democrats might prefer Russia to win to politically damage Mr. Trump. 1923 PETROGRAD

Domestic Crisis: US Political Conflict Compared to Charles I and the Long Parliament. Gaius and Germanicus, speaking in Londinium, explore a significant domestic threat to the American Empire by drawing an analogy to 1641-1642 England, prior to the regicide of Charles I. They argue that the current US "emperor" is ignoring the repudiation registered by a recent vote, similar to Charles I ignoring the Long Parliament. Gaius fears that relentless impeachment awaits if Democrats dominate Congress. A scenario is hypothesized where a "blue governor" defies a presidential order (e.g., regarding ICE business), is detained, inciting Democratic rage and an overwhelming electoral victory. This state defiance is compared to historical examples like South Carolina against Andrew Jackson. Germanicus notes that escalating defiance by governors like Pritzker or Newsom is currently rhetorical, but an actual confrontation requiring federal force (Marshals, National Guard) would be necessary to truly break the Constitution. Such a confrontation could resemble an insurrection, potentially turning Americans against the president if handled poorly, or against the governor if he seems to be unraveling the Republic. Misperception is identified as a dangerous factor, referencing the panic in London when Charles I sought to arrest six traitors. Gaius insists that things get out of control without an "evil mastermind" and that any political trigger after the 2026 election could lead to impeachment. They agree that participants often fail to see the escalation toward crisis, much like in 1642 or 1914. Germanicus concludes that since Mr. Trump is unlikely to compromise, this lack of restraint could push things "over the edge." 1649

1. LONDINIUM 91 CE. Seven Warnings, Part I. Gaius and Germanicus, joined by retired centurions, convened at the Friends of History Debating Society to discuss Germanicus's list of seven maxims detailing how empires, specifically the US, engage in self-harm or self-destruction. Gaius offered the example of the emperor deciding Nigeria needs attention due to the killing of Christians, asserting America has no interest whatsoever in this venture. He contrasted this unnecessary entanglement with Rome's historical method of handling threats in its self-interest. Rome, when it decided to win, completely wiped out resisting enemies, as demonstrated by the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE and the earlier obliteration of Sepphoris, the capital of Galilee, around 4 BCE. The Romans even renamed Judea to Palestine to deny the populace their historical identity. Germanicus then presented the first four maxims routinely ignored by US war fighters: (1) Never let a foreign power define your interests and objectives—this warning cited historical entanglement examples, including the British in two World Wars and modern manipulation by Ukraine, NATO countries, and Israel; (2) Never let initial success fool you into thinking you're winning—Germanicus noted that this "victory disease" affected the Japanese after Pearl Harbor and the US during the invasion of Iraq and the initial stages of the Ukraine war; (3) The failure chosen now is always better than the failure forced upon you later—this maxim addresses the destructive "stay the course" mentality, exemplified by the Vietnam War, driven by courtiers worried about reputation rather than effectiveness; (4) Judgment of the enemy should not be confirmed by internal biases—this bias leads to disastrous strategy, such as the initial belief that the Japanese could not fly effectively due to poor eyesight, viewing Pearl Harbor as a "freak." NERO

2. LONDINIUM 91 CE. Seven Warnings, Part II. The conversation continued with Germanicus detailing the remaining maxims, noting that the United States seems to follow this list of strategic errors as if it were a program. (5) Never think "it will never happen to us"—this belief stems from American exceptionalism, the idea that the US is superior because "democracy makes us smarter." The shameful US withdrawal from Afghanistan was cited as a major instance of this failure, especially when contrasted with the Soviet withdrawal, which was conducted with dignity and left a regime that lasted three more years. The US, believing itself to be the "gods of war" after World War II, relied on the myth of technological superiority, a mindset preserved even in the proxy war in Ukraine where elites underestimated Russia based on GDP. The danger of biased judgment (Maxim 4) was re-emphasized through the Korean War, where the US despised the Chinese, who ultimately defeated the US in a strategic campaign. The Chinese military adapted to American fire with unconventional tactics, overwhelming US lines, a capability the US disallowed because it viewed the enemy as a "lesser force." This mindset gives a gift to the enemy, allowing them to rely on US unpreparedness (e.g., letting Russians build vast fortifications in Ukraine). (6) Never follow a strategic course of action that makes your enemy stronger—this requires understanding the enemy's source of strength (like the morale and spirit of the Taliban), which the US often fails to attack. The speakers applied this warning to potential US intervention in Venezuela, which is being encouraged by the opposition. The strategy of using overwhelming air power and insufficient ground forces—bombing them into submission—will fail and only make the enemy stronger. Insufficient tactics like leadership decapitation, even if inspired by Israeli actions, will not succeed if the enemy army chooses to resist. The centurions noted that the Romans consistently avoided one mistake: forgiving the enemy.

3. LONDINIUM 91 CE. Hollywood and Rome. Gaius and Germanicus concluded their meeting by critiquing Hollywood's portrayal of Roman decline, focusing on Gladiator 2. Gaius admitted he could not finish the film due to its historically inaccurate conclusion. The film's ultimate payoff—the removal of bad emperors and the return to the Republic—is viewed as fundamentally wrong. Gaius argued that empires do not revert to republics, as the republic was "aged out" and the empire was necessary, suggesting that Hollywood confuses the word "republic" with "democracy." Germanicus elaborated on this distortion, noting that societies frequently look back and shape the past into a "golden age" from which they have fallen. The founders of the American republic were informed by Rome and Greece, viewing Rome as a morality play detailing triumph, tragedy, and the ultimate loss of virtue. This tradition of distortion was reinforced by Gibbon's Decline and Fall, which packaged the later empire as corrupted by "barbarism and religion" to suit the ideals of the Enlightenment. This historical lens persists, leading to a simplistic modern conventional wisdom, especially prevalent in Hollywood media, that "republic is good, empire is bad." Hollywood fails to recognize that the imperial institution maintained many of the Republic's institutions and sensibilities. Furthermore, the media elite confuses the Roman imperial office with a "mafia don" or "banana republic dictatorship." The speakers concluded that while they see the world "as it is," American aspirations (like those reflected in Hollywood) see the world "as they want it to be." AGRIPPINA MINOR Retry

LONDINIUM 91 A.D.: Roman Siege Tactics and Russian Attrition: A Study in Political Vengeance and War Strategy Gaius (John Batchelor) and Germanicus (Michael Vlahos) Gaius and Germanicus open by discussing fresh swan meat in Londinium before moving to the main topic of political vengeance, noting that Romans recognize it while American editorialists are discovering it afresh due to Emperor Trump. They review the war in Ukraine, where Russians are employing a strategy of attrition to achieve the collapse of the Ukrainian army. Germanicus explains that Ukraine's strategy of refusing to retreat has led to disproportionate losses and the encirclement of up to 10,000 soldiers in "cauldrons" near Pokrovsk and Kupyansk. Gaius relates this situation to successful Roman siege tactics used at Carthage and Jerusalem. Historically, the reward for Roman soldiers breaking a siege was to ransack the city, causing the prices of gold and slaves to plummet. Germanicus asserts, however, that the Russians are taking pains to signal that leveling cities is not their way, emphasizing mercy due to the kinship between the two related peoples. The hosts also mention the delay of a summit involving Vladimir Putin and Mr. Trump's proposed Greco-Roman style building at the White House. 80 BCE SULLA SACKS ROME

LONDINIUM 91 A.D.: The Emperor's Legacy: Debating Trump's Greco-Roman White House Addition Gaius (John Batchelor) and Germanicus (Michael Vlahos) Gaius and Germanicus discuss the proposed 90,000 square foot Greco-Roman casino-style building intended for the White House, which the Washington Post endorsed, calling the current need to erect tents on the South Lawn an embarrassment. Gaius notes that changes to the White House traditionally draw large protests, citing Jefferson and Jackie Kennedy. He compares Mr. Trump, who has no claim to royalty, to the Flavians (Vespasian and Titus), who were business-class provincials yet built the Colosseum, the symbol of Rome. Germanicus explains that it is the prerogative of the emperor to leave a physical legacy, a tradition dating back to Augustus, who transformed Rome from a city of brick to one of marble. He argues that official architecture in Washington, D.C., follows this majestic imperial Greco-Roman tradition, cemented by Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Gaius reveals that the current White House is actually a complete 1950s reproduction, rebuilt under Truman after structural deficiencies were discovered. Finally, they discuss Mr. Trump's desire for a moon landing before leaving office, viewing it as part of his mission to restore American greatness and secure a significant legacy. 1902 ROME

LONDINIUM 91 AD. Political Revenge: Comparing Modern American Vendettas to Roman Gore Gaius (John Batchelor) and Germanicus (Michael Vlahos) The conversation focuses on the nature of political revenge, prompted by the revival of Seneca's bloody revenge play Octavia. Gaius expresses astonishment that editorialists appear surprised by Mr. Trump seeking vengeance against those who attempted to jail him, noting that revenge is inherent to the Roman and American empires. Germanicus states he is only surprised that the opposing party refuses to confess to similar actions, citing historical Democratic precedents such as the Palmer raids under Wilson and successful efforts against Richard Nixon. He calls the opposition's outrage a "forked tongue expression," noting the unjustified high-security incarceration of individuals for minor offenses following the 2020 events. Gaius observes that the opposition employs false piety and melodrama—such as claiming democracy faces an existential crisis—in place of historical understanding. Germanicus argues that political bitterness and high levels of lying stem from the opposition's belief that they represent light and truth, leading to the "othering" of the enemy. This dehumanization means that lying becomes perceived as an act of virtue. The hosts conclude that while Roman political revenge sometimes involved preemptively wiping out one's own family, the current American conflict represents a comparatively mild cupcake tyranny. 1883 CATO SUICIDE

LONDINIUM 91 AD. Carthage, Gaza, and the Risk of Unhealable Imperial Wounds. Gaius and Germanicus open by reviewing recent international news, including a major ceasefire signing hosted by Mr. Trump and proposals for US-Russia talks in Budapest, moderated by Mr. Orbán. The conversation pivots to the analogy between the Roman destruction and subsequent revival of Carthage and the modern conflict in Gaza. Despite being destroyed in 146 BCE, Carthage became prosperous and essential to the Western Roman Empire's bread basket centuries later. Gaza, however, is a "wholly symbolic artifact of contention." Germanicus observes that Israel's dependence on the US to preserve its vision, which currently requires the emptying and incorporation of Gaza, tests the West's moral standards regarding the conduct of war. The hosts discuss whether reconciliation can occur over historical time. However, if Israel forces an expulsion of the people of Gaza—mirroring what the Romans did to Israel—the resulting transgression will be so great that the wound will become "codified in the very identity of the people who were wronged" and never heal. This unforgiven wrong risks the long-term disappearance of the US and Israel, much like how the memory of the Roman presence in North Africa was "expunged and wiped away." 1569 LONDINIUM

The Oligarchic Motives Behind the "No Kings" Protest. Gaius and Germanicus, speaking from Londinium, discuss the contemporary "No Kings" protest occurring across the American Empire, noting the young people involved are protesting the outcome and subsequent actions taken following the 2024 democratic vote. While Gaius sees the protest as amateurish, Germanicus finds it rooted in deep ignorance. Germanicus emphasizes that kingship is profoundly alien to both the Roman experience (which was founded on the overthrow of kings) and the American experience, pointing out that even a Roman emperor would never call himself a king. The true American Revolution was a rebellion against Parliament, not King George III. The element that is truly sinister, however, is not the youthful protestors but the oligarchy that created the enterprise. This elite class, which feels entitled to rule and controls the ruling institutions, is threatened by the rise of "big men" (like Crassus or Pompey) supported by populism. The "No Kings" metaphor is an absurd and ahistorical tactic used by the threatened oligarchy to quash this popular movement. The hosts then turn to debating the necessity of moving the American Empire's capital, as DC's usefulness is outworn. 1582 OTHO

DC's Decline and the Search for a New Imperial Capital. Gaius and Germanicus debate where the new capital of the American Empire should be located, noting that Washington, D.C., is losing its usefulness. This parallels the Roman abandonment of Rome when it became indefensible and the imperial economy shifted east, leading Constantine to establish Constantinople. DC is troubled by a bypassed population and a shrinking federal workforce, partly due to the consolidation of AI data centers in Virginia. A shift in the capital would symbolize a dramatic transformation of American identity. Germanicus suggests Miami as a potential new capital because it already serves as the entrepôt for Latin America, fitting a potential "America First" hemispheric identity. This focus aligns with the large Hispanic influx and the migration of Northerners into strong Southern states like Florida and Texas. Just as DC was originally situated midway between the North and South colonies, the new capital must be centered where North and South meet to cement a new identity. The hosts anticipate a future hemispheric alliance where America becomes a fortress and a startup for a billion people in the 22nd century. 1712 CAESAR Retry

      Roman Revisionism and the Crisis of the American Republic Gaius and Germanicus discuss the 21st-century revisionism of Rome, which they find entertaining, noting that it presents figures like Domitian as successful and Nero as misunderstood. They counter the revisionist view that the Roman Republic was vital by asserting that Rome was perpetually embroiled in civil war until the ultimate resolution by an emperor. This leads to the central question of whether the American Republic is in a late stage heading toward an emperor. They debate whether political strife signals societal vitality or decadence, noting that while conflict in U.S. history was sometimes resolved by figures like Franklin Delano Roosevelt or McKinley, the late Roman Republic required the intervention of "big men" like the triumvirates (Pompey and Caesar). The speakers suggest the current American political structure and unsustainable economic inequality may require a major adjustment, echoing the Roman path. They conclude by heading off to make a sacrifice to the great god Augustus. 1876 NERO AND TORCHES FOR CHRISTIANS

The American Empire, Israeli Ethos, and the Carthaginian Peace Gaius (John Batchelor) and Germanicus (Michael Vlahos) discuss the enduring influence of the Roman Empire on the American Empire. Their immediate topic is the situation in Gaza, which Gaius defines as a "Carthaginian peace"—total destruction of the enemy, mirroring Rome's leveling of Carthage in 146 B.C.E. Germanicus posits that this outcome results from the convergence of Israeli and U.S. sensibilities. Israel is driven by the axiom Carthago delenda est (Cato the Elder's decree that Carthage must be destroyed), viewing a successful Palestinian state as intolerable. The U.S. is similarly steeped in the ruthless Roman way of war, pursuing victory to complete destruction, a tradition reflected in conflicts like World War II and the destruction of Mosul against the Islamic State. The Israeli ethos, rooted in narratives of destruction visited upon them by figures like Titus and Hadrian, now embraces the spirit of destruction itself. The American imperial ruthlessness, exemplified by historical figures like Robert McNamara, stems from a fierce Calvinist wrath that aligns well with the Zionist narrative. Although the result appears visually and structurally to be a Carthaginian peace, the survival of some Gazans is attributed to a countervailing American vision of the U.S. as a "redeemer nation." The speakers plan to next discuss revenge lawfare, which Cicero practiced. 1907 CARTHAGE

3. Rituals of Command and the Cicero Revelation Londinium Chronicles Gaius & Germanicus Debate The emperor asserted command authority over the legions in a ritual event at Quantico, Virginia, with his viceroy addressing the leadership of the legions. This ceremony was designed to overturn the previous instances of "command disobedience" experienced by Trump during his first term (such as General Milley's reported actions). The message delivered was a direct command: "New mission. Fortress America. If you are uncomfortable with that, leave."Domestically, this ongoing power transition draws parallels with the murder of Caesar, which marked the end of the Roman Republic and the path toward the principate. A newly shared detail from the documents of Marcus Tullius Cicero reveals that Brutus allegedly raised his dagger while striking Caesar and shouted "Cicero." This detail suggests Cicero, the master storyteller and champion of the senatorial class, provided the intellectual legitimacy and imprimatur for the assassination, affirming that the murder was committed in the name of the Senate's vision of republicanism. 1802

LONDINIUM CHRONICLES: GAIUS & GERMANICUS PHILOSOPHIZE Summary of Audio Part 2 Gaius and Germanicus discuss the emperor's ceremonial gathering of the legion leadership at Quantico, where the new mission of "Fortress America" was announced, an event they view as a necessary ritual to overturn previous command disobedience and re-establish the emperor's authority. They connect the current US political crisis to the end of the Roman Republic, observing that the constitutional system cannot sustain the ongoing conflict between the immensely rich oligarchic Senate faction (represented by "blue" elites) and the popular movement championed by the powerful leader, similar to the clash between senators and populares. This power struggle is visible in the Governor of California's challenge to the president's authority to use the National Guard against perceived "insurrections," which they believe is an unavoidable dynamic leading towards the establishment of a principate system.

LONDINIUM CHRONICLES: GAIUS & GERMANICUS PHILOSOPHIZE Summary of Audio Part 1 Gaius and Germanicus, reflecting on 21st-century events from Londinium, compare the American "princeps" (emperor) issuing ultimatums against "gangsters" in places like Gaza and Caracas to the Roman precedent of figures like Pompey suppressing the Cilician pirates, noting that emperors do not negotiate. Germanicus suggests the current US administration's approach of reducing direct administrative control over allies while maintaining titular supremacy is reminiscent of how the Roman Emperor in Constantinople dealt with emerging barbarian kingdoms by bestowing Roman titles like Consul and Patrician. They debate whether Europe's recent emergency meeting in Copenhagen regarding a "drone wall" signifies European independence or a success of the US princeps' policy of creative retrenchment, criticizing the arbitrary basis of 20th-century alliances like NATO and the discredited domino theory.

Londinium Chronicles Part 2 Sept 28.mp3 HEADLINE: The Verres Moment: Indictment, Corruption, and the Threatened Legitimacy of the American Vote SPEAKERS: Gaius and Germanicus 200 WORD SUMMARY: Gaiusand Germanicus draw parallels between the collapse of the Roman Republic—where the people lost confidence in the Senate—and modern America. They recount the trial of Verres, the notoriously corrupt governor of Sicily in 70 B.C.E., whom Cicero prosecuted to expose corruption not just of Verres, but of the entire Roman establishment. Cicerofamously appealed to common sense and immediately brought in witnesses to demonstrate the blatant nature of the corruption. Gaius asks if the indictment of former FBI Director Comey represents a modern "Verres moment," a necessary "hinge moment" to expose deep corruption in the US political system. Germanicus confirms the goal is to expose the systemic failure that is strangling representative government. Gaius views Trump as a "tribune of the people" seeking payback against a corrupt system that undermined the vote's credibility in 2016, 2020, and 2024. Gaius expects more indictments, noting that, like Cicero, the current political appeal is to sentiment rather than solely evidence. Germanicus worries that the escalation of political combat into "lawfare" could lead to a complete breakdown of constitutional order and legitimate transfers of power, citing the Spanish Civil War. The underlying cause is the extreme inequality of wealth and income, where a tiny minority holds immense political status while the majority is reduced to "plebeians." 1902

Londinium Chronicles Part 3 Audio Sept 28.mp3 HEADLINE: How to Move the Billionaires: War, Leveling, and the Failure of Reform SPEAKERS: Germanicus and Gaius 200 WORD SUMMARY: The speakers address the internal crisis within "Fortress America": the modern-day Palatine Hill, represented by the billionaires who are untouchable and above the law. Gaius cites economist Thomas Piketty, highlighting the "gigantic" wealth amassed by the super-rich. Germanicus asserts that the only guaranteed pathway to practical leveling—bringing the super-rich back down—is through war, whether external conflict or civil war. He explains that upheaval is necessary because the rate of return on investments consistently outpaces inflation, creating extraordinary wealth imbalance. World War II and the Great Depression were instruments of leveling in the US, creating the middle class and a more cohesive society. Today, US society is highly bifurcated, with the top 7-8% of the population holding 60% of the nation's wealth. Germanicus suggests that the populares committed to radical change are not the conventional "socialist" progressives (who are "parasites" of the state), but groups motivated by non-material goals. Both speakers emphatically agree that the problem of wealth inequality and the power of the Palatine will not be solved by reforms, calling reform a "misdirection." They conclude that maintaining the "status quo" means they are deeply "in trouble." 1790 SULLA'S PROSCRIPTIONS

Londinium Chronicles Part 1 Sept 28.mp3 HEADLINE: Reorganizing the Legions: Fortress America, the Corrupt Senate, and the Stranglehold of the Military-Industrial Complex SPEAKERS: Gaius Londinium and Germanicus 200 WORD SUMMARY: The Friends of History Debating Society opens by discussing the panicking temperament of European leadership due to Russian provocations (drones, jamming) and Washington's silence on requests for Tomahawks for Kyiv. They contrast the effective Roman legions—combat units and engineers—with the modern USmilitary, which has "too many generals and too few war fighters." Major changes are anticipated, including a speech by Secretary of Defense Hegseth promoting the theme of "Fortress America" and reorganizing the military to match the needs of an empire. Germanicus argues that the US military needs an overhaul akin to Rome's transition from the Republic, having squandered its post-Cold War strength and now facing powerful rivals like Russia and China, who have adopted new technologies. He notes that the US military is hampered by reliance on 1945 weapon systems (like the heavy bomber). Germanicus believes the military is unwilling to change because the military-industrial complex (MIC), dominated by five defense firms, maintains a powerful stranglehold over procurement and general officers. This results in massive inefficiencies, such as the F-35 program, a trillion-dollar effort with only 10% combat availability. Gaius insists the core problem is the corrupt Senate (Congress), which enables these wasteful contracts and sets priorities like focusing on DEI and climate change over war fighters. 1770 PANTHEON

#LONDINIUM90AD: MICHAEL VLAHOS. FRIENDS OF HISTORY DEBATING SOCIETY. @MICHALIS_VLAHOS HEADLINE: From Dalmatia to Poland: Frontier Tensions, Roman Legacy, and the Danger of Miscalculation The discussion opens with Gaius (John Batchelor) in Londinium speaking to Germanicus (Michael Vlahos), who is in Dalmatia (the Dalmatian coast, modern Croatia), a frontier area of the former Roman Empire. Germanicus observes that this region, Ragusa, maintained its Roman continuity through the Middle Ages and was critical as it connected Italy and the Western Empire to Greece and the Eastern Empire. They reflect on Roman figures such as Augustus and Drusus(Nero Claudius Drusus Germanicus), who fought in Germania. Drusus's son, Claudius, became a highly effective emperor who brought the empire to its maximal state, establishing Londinium. The conversation shifts to modern frontier tensions: the Russian probing of the Polish border using drones and warplanes, leading to NATO intervention and British assistance. Drawing on films like The Bedford Incident, they worry about accidental catastrophe due to miscalculation. Germanicus warns that tiny NATO states like the Baltics, driven by paranoia and insecurity, are acting "spasmodically and irresponsibly" and that the United Kingdom is acting like a "rogue state" aggressively pushing for conflict, creating a dangerous situation that could plunge Russia and the West into general war. 41 AD. CLAUDIUS BEGS

#LONDINIUM90AD: MICHAEL VLAHOS. FRIENDS OF HISTORY DEBATING SOCIETY. @MICHALIS_VLAHOS HEADLINE: The Struggle for America: Ruling Elite vs. Populism and the Threat of Revolution The speakers analyze domestic American conflict, using David Brooks's framework of the credentialed elite versus the non-credentialed public. Germanicus argues that the conflict is fundamentally between an entrenched ruling elite, solidified since the Cold War, and the populace, similar to the Roman optimates. This elite maintains power by accumulating wealth across generations while regular people suffer. The elite appropriates an ideology—which Germanicus calls the "church of woke"—to suppress the people, mirroring how the Roman aristocracy co-opted Christianity in late antiquity. The growing wealth inequality and mass migration policies exacerbate this conflict, providing a vehicle for populist leaders like Mr. Trump. The situation is coming to a head, with every election becoming an "existential choice" between the ruling class and the people. Germanicus suggests the resolution will be a revolution: either a restoration (represented incoherently by Mr. Trump) or the elites cementing complete control. He also notes that American global engagement, while enriching the elite, makes them vulnerable; should world situations "go south," the resulting turmoil could overthrow the domestically weakened ruling class. 1917 YALE AND READINESS.

#LONDINIUM90AD: MICHAEL VLAHOS. FRIENDS OF HISTORY DEBATING SOCIETY. @MICHALIS_VLAHOS HEADLINE: The American Empire Inheritance: Emperor Trump at Windsor Castle The conversation draws parallels between the Roman Empire and the current American Empire, emphasizing that the US inherited its imperial role. A state dinner at Windsor Castle, steeped in centuries of British tradition, was cited as a visual representation of this transition, featuring King Charles III hosting Emperor Trump. The setting—lined with gold, silver, and portraits of those who delivered the British Empire—symbolized the transfer of legacy to America. Germanicus notes that the American Empire's reach is solid, mirroring Rome's authority over an oecumene (the known world) and its ability to have supplicant kings, such as Herod the Great serving Augustus. The speakers argue that many Americans, unlike the "prissy elite," recognize the imperial reality. They criticize maintaining the "fig leaf" of the nation founded by George Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin, stating that until the US recognizes itself as an empire, it cannot act strategically to defend or move it forward. Mr. Trump is seen as refreshing because he does not hide this reality, thereby forcing this necessary recognition. 1876 NERO

The Friends of History Debating Society: Setting, Immediate Events, and Media Critique The Friends of History Debating Society convenes with Gaius (also known as John Batchelor) hosting from Londinium, specifically a wine bar he favors. Michael Vlahos participates from the "Edge of the Empire." In his persona as Germanicus, Michael Vlahos is on a mission in Dalmatia, a "slightly untamed" region that serves as "connecting tissue" between the Roman Empire's eastern and western halves, visiting fortified places like Ragusa and planning a trip to Spalato. As Dramaticus, Michael Vlahos is "traveling on the road" and is reminded by Gaius to "walk with Centurions" for protection from potentially "obsequious and violent" locals. The society's purpose is to review weekly events through a "Roman eye," with participants seeing themselves as "Roman citizens" attempting to understand and potentially "help" the 21st century, while also observing. Gaius reports on a recent visit by Michael Vlahos (in his Dramaticus persona) to the "Imperial Court," or President Trump's White House, during the sad news of Mr. Kirk'sdeath. Despite this somber event, the overall atmosphere in the Oval Office was described as "busy, positive, energetic, attractive, and working perfectly," reminiscent of Augustus's imperial court. Gaius notes that the mainstream media, committed to "hurting Trump," unanimously portrays him as a "demon," "evil force," or "another Hitler," with his followers characterized as "Nazis" or "white supremacists." This rhetoric, according to Michael Vlahos, contributed to events like Mr. Kirk's assassination. Both Gaius and Michael Vlahos find this equating of speech with violence "immature and ignorant," revealing a lack of historical understanding among those in the "blue" faction.             

#Londinium90AD: Gaius & Germanicus debate the question: Do empires need allies? Michael Vlahos. Friends of History Debating Society. @Michalis_Vlahos. Headline: Ancient Rome's Imperial Dilemma: Alliance Strategy in 90 AD In 90 AD Londinium, two Roman figures engage in a critical debate about imperial strategy. Gaius and Germanicusexamine whether the Roman Empire requires alliances to maintain its vast territories and growing influence. Michael Vlahos of the Friends of History Debating Society moderates this historical discussion, exploring how Rome'sapproach to partnerships with client states, tribal confederations, and regional powers shaped its longevity. The debate addresses fundamental questions about imperial overextension, the costs of military occupation versus diplomatic cooperation, and whether sustainable empire-building requires collaborative governance structures. This ancient discussion resonates with modern debates about great power competition, alliance systems, and the balance between unilateral strength and multilateral cooperation in maintaining global influence and regional stability. 1712 CAESAR

#LONDINIUM90AD: Gaius & Germanicus debate the cycle of Optimates and Populares. Michael Vlahos. Friends of History Debating Society. @Michalis_Vlahos Headline: Roman Political Factions: The Eternal Cycle of Elite vs. Popular Power In 90 AD Londinium, Gaius and Germanicus examine the recurring political struggle between the Optimates(aristocratic party) and Populares (popular party) that defined late Republican Rome. Michael Vlahos of the Friends of History Debating Society moderates this discussion of Rome's fundamental political divide. The Optimates, representing senatorial privilege and traditional governance, consistently clashed with the Populares, who appealed directly to citizens and plebeian assemblies. This cycle saw figures like Sulla and Cato defending aristocratic interests against populist leaders like Marius, Pompey, and Caesar. The debate explores how this factional warfare ultimately destroyed the Roman Republic, leading to imperial autocracy. The discussion examines whether such political polarization represents an inevitable cycle in republican governments, questioning if elite-populist tensions doom democratic institutions to cyclical breakdown and authoritarian resolution. 1783 ABDICATION OF SULLA

#Londinium90AD: Gaius and Germanicus debate why the Optimates assert that "our democracy" is at risk? Gaius asks, what do they mean by "our democracy?" Michael Vlahos. Friends of History Debating Society. @Michalis_Vlahos. Headline: Roman Elite's Democracy Claims: Defining "Our Democracy" in Imperial Context In 90 AD Londinium, Gaius and Germanicus examine the Optimates' claims about democratic threats. Gaiuschallenges the aristocratic party's definition of "our democracy," questioning whether they truly defend popular governance or merely their own privileged position within the Roman Republic's institutions. Michael Vlahos of the Friends of History Debating Society moderates this discussion about how political elites historically invoke democratic rhetoric to legitimize their power. The Optimates traditionally controlled the Senate and claimed to protect Romantraditions against populist demagogues, yet their "democracy" often excluded common citizens from meaningful participation. This debate explores the tension between elite-controlled republican institutions and genuine popular sovereignty, examining whether appeals to "save democracy" represent authentic concern for citizen governance or strategic rhetoric deployed by threatened establishment powers seeking to maintain their influence against rising populist challenges. 1593 ROMAN WOMEN

3.  #LONDINIUM90AD LIVE AT 6 PM ET SUNDAY: 8/31:  GAIUS & GERMANICUS DEBATE:  Women with Money, Billionaire Politicians, and the New Roman Republic.  This segment explores the historical and contemporary intertwining of money, power, and politics, comparing wealthy individuals in ancient Rome with those in 21st-century America. Gaius introduces Claudia of Matelis, a powerful Roman woman from the 1st century BCE who, despite formal restrictions like needing an advisor and being barred from court, inherited immense wealth and lived an independent life, exercising "great political power". Gaius observes that "politics and money in Rome were the same thing," a truth he believes also applies to America. Germanicus elaborates that in traditional societies, women historically played powerful, behind-the-scenes political roles, often linked to class and wealth, citing figures such as Livia in Rome or Madame de Pompadour. In the modern U.S., he notes a significant "galloping ahead" of women's wealth and influence, projecting that women will control 75% of discretionary spending by 2028, and already hold over 66% of consumer wealth and 51% of all stocks. The discussion then shifts to the emergence of billionaire politicians. While historical figures like JP Morgan, Carnegie, and John D. Rockefeller possessed immense wealth, they were not directly engaged in politics. Today, however, there is a rise of billionaires, including women such as Steve Jobs' wife (who owns The Atlantic and engages in "charitable or political charitable giving"), directly influencing politics. This trend, they suggest, could lead to "family dynasties," exemplified by the Pritzker family. The speakers connect this phenomenon to Roman history, particularly after Constantine's conversion to Christianity, where "unbelievably rich senators" and their widows became crucial political players and funders of networks like monasteries and churches. They mention a period in the 5th-century Western Empire where three senators each held more wealth than the imperial state itself. They further link the increasing disproportion of wealth and income in the United States to levels comparable to pre-French Revolution France. In Rome, such inequality led to the "revolution" that ended the Republic and ushered in "billionaire politicians" like Crassus, Caesar (who gained massive wealth despite being in debt), and Augustus (whose wealth "soared" with power). The segment concludes with the assertion that America is becoming "more and more like Rome every single day" and is heading towards a future potentially dominated by "billionaire presidents," with Mr. Trump making claims in this vein. Germanicus predicts that these billionaires will become the "new dukes and counts" of American politics, potentially creating a political system characterized by a struggle between the emperor/state and these extraordinarily powerful figures. 79 AD WOMEN OF ROME #LONDINIUM90AD LIVE AT 6 PM ET EVERY SUNDAY: GAIUS & GERMANICUS DEBATE. FRIENDS OF HISTORY DEBATING SOCIETY. @MICHALIS_VLAHOS. PRODUCED BY CHRIS NOEL.

2.  #LONDINIUM90AD LIVE AT 6 PM ET SUNDAY: 8/31:  GAIUS & GERMANICUS DEBATE: The Federal Reserve: America's Vestal Virgins and the Emperor's Reach.    Gaius and Germanicus use the Roman Vestal Virgins as a metaphor for the American Federal Reserve, focusing on themes of trust, independence, and accountability to the "emperor" (the President). In Rome, Vestal Virgins were "contract keepers," embodying "trust" and "nonpartisanship," essential for the "Roman worthiness" of the state. They safeguarded the "eternal flame of Vesta, the goddess of the hearth," which symbolized the protection of Rome's identity and integrity. Initially, Vestal Virgins were independent of the Senate, with the Pontifex Maximus holding ultimate authority over them; upon becoming emperor, Augustus assumed this role, blurring the lines between religion and politics. The speakers portray the Federal Reserve as America's "Vestal Virgins," with the "almighty dollar" and the monetary system serving as the nation's "hearth". Gaius explains that the Federal Reserve was established in 1907 to address market failures, such as the one bailed out by JP Morgan. It only gained its "so-called independent" status through legislation in 1951, having been seen as a clear "function of the government" before then. Despite this perceived independence, they argue that the Federal Reserve is "not outside of the emperor and the emperor's reach". A recent "melodrama" involving a Federal Reserve board member (Cook) accused of misleading on mortgage applications, and the President's swift public response ("you're fired"), underscores the tension between the Fed's asserted independence and presidential authority. Germanicus clarifies that while the Fed's "independence" implies its decisions shouldn't be controlled "capriciously by the emperor," it remains "part of the state" and "under the purview of the emperor". Like the six Vestal Virgins, there are seven governors on the Federal Reserve, nominated for terms. The legitimacy and authority of such institutions, much like the Vestal Virgins, require a "superordinate authority" to ensure accountability. Germanicus critically views Jerome Powell's (the Federal Reserve chairman) consistent defiance of the President's desire for lower interest rates as "unwise" and possibly "personal," which he believes eroding public trust. He questions why Powell has not publicly addressed concerns about his leadership or a board member's alleged misconduct. The Federal Reserve Board, they point out, is not part of the "original constitutional system" laid out in America's founding documents, meaning its "independence" granted by 1951 legislation is not constitutionally embedded. The Federal Reserve, therefore, like the Vestal Virgins, remains "under the purview of the emperor". 1712 CAESAR #LONDINIUM90AD LIVE AT 6 PM ET EVERY SUNDAY: GAIUS & GERMANICUS DEBATE. FRIENDS OF HISTORY DEBATING SOCIETY. @MICHALIS_VLAHOS. PRODUCED BY CHRIS NOEL.