6/12    My old HS history teacher used to tell us that the Roman Colliseums
        were built to detract citizens from real issues so that they will
        be content and not overthrow the emperor. Now that I'm grown up and
        know better, I think that is really stupid. I mean, we have football
        and basketball today but people are still pretty pissed about Bush
        and his policies. What do you guys think?
        \_ You are lacking one vital component in your reasoning, the
           shows at the Coliseum were free. Football and basketball are
           not free, and even TV broadcasts are increasingly not free
           (i.e. advent of PPV). Also, the shows at the coliseum were
           state sponsored, the NBA and NFL are privately sponsored.
           \_  The stadiums are usually locally sponsored.
        \_ you are a minority.  Majority of people still think Iraq has
           helped the September 11th attack, and invading Iraq has everything
           to do with WMD and terrorism.
               \- hello, roman entertainment for the masses was motivated
                  by expedient reasons and took the form of public games,
                  subsidies drama, mime [mime was big] etc. while officially
                  run by the aediles who were public officials, the $ was
                  augmented by wealthy individuals [as opposed to now, when
                  the public subsidizes the stadiums for the wealthy].
                  however after the fall of the republic, there was less
                  reason for individuals to pretend to be public spirited.
                                         \- actually looking at some material
                                            this appears more complicated.
                                            i wont bore the "senate and the
                                            people of soda" but i wanted to
                                            leave a note for full disclosure
                                            and can discuss via email if anyone
                                            is interested. --psb
                  it wouldnt get you elelcted consul and more power in the
                  senate was not worth much. so later on, some of the
                  events in the colosium did have a ticket system and women
                  had to sit in the nosebleed seats. so you cannot generize
                  between 2nd century b.c. and say the spectacles of the
                  Neronic age. also outside rome, differnet parts of the
                  empire were "into" different events ... like i think
                  gladitorial games were more popular in the west than the
                  eastern parts of the empire. it is sort of interesting that
                  individuals figures in costests did develop reputations and
                  the sort of had non-georgraphic teams and fans ... like
                  these celebrities would appear on "sports merchandise". --psb
        \_ Your history teacher was pretty much correct.
           \_ you have never heard the expression "bread and circuses"
              [panem et circenses]? this is a troll, clearly. --psb
              \_ And Mr. Latin phrase arrives on schedule.
                 \_ i resisted a discussion of the tribune of the people
                    and roman land reform law with you plebians. --psb
                    \_ your little roman era sports speech above was lengthy
                       but lacked any serious detail that might show you have
                       done more than watch a history channel episode.  would
                       you do a better job with roman land reform?
                       \- One is speaking to a History Channel Audience here.
                          It's reasonable to say something here is wrong.
                          To say it is incomplete is silly. The large topic
                          of the relations between the govt, the patrician
                          class, and the urban underclass, the rural population
                          etc is obviously something that changes over time
                          as rome grows from a "city on the tiber" to
                          "the ruler of the known world" and then changes
                          form into an empire from a republic and cant possible
                          addressed in depth here. if you want citations
                          they can be provided via email. if anything is
                          incomplete, it is your criticism which is largely
                          content-free. --psb
        \_ TROOOOOOLLLLL!!!!!
        \_ Yeah, I built a cathedral in all my major cities and I have the
           Colosseum, but my cities are still all in disorder.
           \_ Build the "war on terrorism" minor wonder. People will be
           \_ Build the "war on terror" minor wonder. People will be
              forced to support the government no matter what.
              \_ I changed the government type to "Shadow" and it all worked
                 itself out. If I get a riot, that population disappears.
                 \_ Iain Banks' thriller _Complicity_ features a Civ-like
                    game where you can "discover" the drug trade and get your
                    counsellors hooked so they stop bugging you for reforms.
                 \_ If you changed it to communist, it would have the same
                    effect.
                    \_ Kinda:  all of the dissidents would be rounded up and
                       then shipped out in equal numbers to all of your
                       cities.  It's kind of like congressional redistricting.
            \_ Stop using your Mech. Inf. to fight partisans and put them back
               in your cities where they can suppress unrest.