Hard time understanding the difference between Red and Blue politics

[Apparition of Jack]

Leo gives the Roman Empire as an example of Red, whilst then giving Medieval Europe as an example of Blue. Now, I'm sure Christianity changed society a bit, but from I gathered there was just as much civil war, backstabbing, usurping, etc. going on in Medieval Europe as there was in the Roman Empire. 

Also, wouldn't the Roman empire have exhibited stage blue characteristics? I imagine a lot of the citizens would've believed that Rome was "the best" that needed to be defended "at all costs", and that the order, hierarchy, traditions etc of Rome were beneficial and had to be upheld (in the face of opportunism and macchiaveliansim.) Sure, theologically Rome was more lax than the dogmatic stage Blue Medieval Church, but they still had the Cult of the Emperor and exalted Rome's culture above conquered cultures. 

 

Could someone break down the differences to me? 

[Apparition of Jack]

That makes sense. I forgot about the role of the Pope and the quasi-universal power he held over the lords of Europe, which didn't have analogue for the lords of Rome. 

[Inliytened1]

@Apparition of Jack Rome was at Blue - it was Republic..which the US democracy took parts of when it was created.

There was room for someone to become rich through land owning for example and then the richer aristocrats played a bigger role in becoming representatives in the Republic.  You elected your representatives.

Medieval Europe fell back to a monarch system in which all of society was collective and not individual - which  was still Blue -  Such as China today which is communist stage Blue.

Red was more tribal but tribal with individualism.

Edited August 7, 2019 by Inliytened1

[Yog]

Rome is not the best example for red, a lot of blue in it. It went trough a lot of development.

The Huns, Mongols, Goths, Scythians, Alans, Vandals, Vikings,Moors,Kazaks,Saxons,Gauls,Iberian tribes. Usually with khans, yarls and such at their head. A warlord with the spiritual leader/advisor at his side. The one that was cool in purple.

They are more clear examples.

[Inliytened1]

@Yog agreed Rome was not stage Red. Stage red was tribal and prior to any real governmental system.

Edited August 7, 2019 by Inliytened1

[Yog]

Its not the best (clearest) example of nor red, nor blue.
There is still a lot of red in its roots, and emerging to blue as time goes on.
Its an interesting mix for sure.

You may observe the redness in the roman Contubernium, its a basic unit of 8 people, each legionere is self-sufficient, has all the skills, all the equipment, to survive alone , there is also an animalistic warrior bound between the 8 people, they may act on their own, without the commanders orders, and will often turn the tides of battle because of that opportunism, brother protects brother, one does a shield bash, the next one a diagonal sword stab, its a brotherhood. This is the same military redness that WW2 Germany adopted. Its the wolf-pack mindset. Honor is also a really important thing, witch is a late red healthy development and it leaks into early blue.

That makes the roman army a interlinked brotherhood type of redness united under the single minded blue flag, witch does its thing for blue reasons like: the glory of Rome, for the emperor, for the greater good, for the republic, to purge the unclean, for the civilized world ...ect.

Its an interesting mix.

Where as the "pure" red Huns will kill, plunder, pillage, ransom not to do it for some "higher cause",  .... more because they could. Like a teen breaking the glass, because he could. To put it in simplistic terms.

Edited August 7, 2019 by Yog

[Spiral]

A lot of the cohorts in Roman armies become loyal the their “general”. United in brotherhood rather then Rome itself.

[Inliytened1]

18 minutes ago, Yog said:

Its not the best (clearest) example of nor red, nor blue.
There is still a lot of red in its roots, and emerging to blue as time goes on.
Its an interesting mix for sure.

You may observe the redness in the roman Contubernium, its a basic unit of 8 people, each legionere is self-sufficient, has all the skills, all the equipment, to survive alone , there is also an animalistic warrior bound between the 8 people, they may act on their own, without the commanders orders, and will often turn the tides of battle because of that opportunism, brother protects brother, one does a shield bash, the next one a diagonal sword stab, its a brotherhood. This is the same military redness that WW2 Germany adopted. Its the wolf-pack mindset. Honor is also a really important thing, witch is a late red healthy development and it leaks into early blue.

That makes the roman army a interlinked brotherhood type of redness united under the single minded blue flag, witch does its thing for blue reasons like: the glory of Rome, for the emperor, for the greater good, for the republic, to purge the unclean, for the civilized world ...ect.

Its an interesting mix.

Where as the "pure" red Huns will kill, plunder, pillage, ransom not to do it for some "higher cause",  .... more because they could. Like a teen breaking the glass, because he could. To put it in simplistic terms.

Well if you think about it..all war is barbaric.  In war there is no individualism.   It is win or die.   There is no in between.  Thats why turquoise has no place for war other than being attacked or self defense.  A military would be for defense only.

A turquoise society would still maintain a military but only to use if absolutely required.

I don't think we should put a society into a stage based on it's military.

Edited August 7, 2019 by Inliytened1

[Leo Gura]

Red is going to be dictatorial.

See Russia or North Korea or Iraq for more modern examples of Red.

Saddam Hussein is a great example.

[Yog]

Those were just some small scale dynamics examples my friend @Inliytened1

No need to force the all present, 2200 years lasting Rome into them buckets. It had its colorful periods, My point is.
You can talk about the tyrants, or you can talk about the law they wrote. Do as you wish. It was vast in both time and space.

Edited August 7, 2019 by Yog

[Inliytened1]

3 minutes ago, Yog said:

Those were just some small scale dynamics examples my friend @Inliytened1

No need to force the all present, 2200 years lasting Rome into them buckets. It had its colorful periods, My point is.
You can talk about the tyrants, or you can talk about the law they wrote. Do as you wish. It was vast in both time and space.

Indeed.  Leo is showing you here that there is modern Red and primitive Red.  Just like Rome has shades of both.

It's just a model, and while quite accurate, is still a model.

 

[Truthority]

same shit different underwear

i prefer Neon Politics

PSYCHEDELIC POLITICIAN

vote for me with your vibes