That's because slavery gets shiat done. You crucify a hundred people in the streets department and put them on display and the streets wouldn't break up like that.
This image was posted long ago. But pretty much to sum all the arguments from last time. Modern roads take tons and tons of cars. From semi to massive transports like bridge parts and other heavy loads. Roman roads aren't used because the roads will crack and they were made for things like horses and carriages. They last for a long time because they aren't used like modern roads.
Also cars leak corrosive chemicals like like oil.
(TL:DR)
Roman roads don't take as much stress and weight as modern roads do. If we did use them, they wouldn't look so pretty after the first day.
Now putting it that way it sounds better having others do the work for you. Maybe we should bring back cheap labor. It's not like it already exi- wait a minute.
but the revolting ones would make very bad slaves. They'd probably die during the capture process and most likely take some of your people with them. Plus when the masses revolt over something like this even a lot of people that are indifferent about it will be up in arms because people like to be mad and many people want a civil war in a lot of places
my theory means that the romans had a much easier time enslaving people when the masses didnt give nearly as much of a shit and didnt have guns nor the ability to make binary explosives in their garage and were on a moderately lower technological level and fairly lower tactical level
Pretty sure the masses cared. They were being enslaved. Nobody had guns during the "Roman Empire." The Chinese(aka Mongolians) were making explosives along time before the Romans. And anybody with a forge could build a shield and a sword. So they were not technologically greater than any other group. They just went out, conquered others and enslaved them. I'm sorry if history disturbs you this much.
"anyone with a forge could build a shield and sword" not one worth shit. Making weapons is an art different from making other tools. look up the process of making a sword vs the process of making farm tools. It's a lot more difficult and requires specific practice and mastery.
"So they were not technologically greater than any other group"
They were technologically more advanced than the people they conquered and enslaved. Their weapon's were objectively better than most of their enemies. Also the chinese and the mongolians were two very distinct groups. Genghis khan was comparable to rome in tactical superiority over his enemies. A few good examples of how he was far tactically superior to those he fought was 1 his tactics with horse archers and feinted retreats to bait out a garrison from their defenses 2 he employment of modified terrain tactics such as using hides and furs on ice to allow for his archers (who were objectively more skilled and had objectively better bows) to cont.
have traction on the ice while attacking enemies had to get close to have a chance of defeating the far superior archers and were unable to close distance without slipping.
3 His use of sickness as a weapon in spreading disease via rotting plagued corpse bits as ammunition for siege equipment.
Rome had similar advantages in technology and tactics as well as far better trained soldiers.
also on the explosives side of things. The explosives used by the Chinese were far from extremely useful in combat compare to the exponentially more devastating binary explosives of today which my point in bringing up was not actually for use in combat but the fact it could be easily used by a revolting mass to destroy the infrastructure of the people attempting to enslave them as well as the fact that such information is widely available to everyone in today's times
The top picture is from Pompei, which hasn't had anything but very light foot traffic on it for thousands of years, and that only for the last 40 years or so. The other supports vehicle traffic every day. This is a bad comparison.
Also cars leak corrosive chemicals like like oil.
(TL:DR)
Roman roads don't take as much stress and weight as modern roads do. If we did use them, they wouldn't look so pretty after the first day.
¯\_(´ー｀) _/¯
"So they were not technologically greater than any other group"
They were technologically more advanced than the people they conquered and enslaved. Their weapon's were objectively better than most of their enemies. Also the chinese and the mongolians were two very distinct groups. Genghis khan was comparable to rome in tactical superiority over his enemies. A few good examples of how he was far tactically superior to those he fought was 1 his tactics with horse archers and feinted retreats to bait out a garrison from their defenses 2 he employment of modified terrain tactics such as using hides and furs on ice to allow for his archers (who were objectively more skilled and had objectively better bows) to cont.
3 His use of sickness as a weapon in spreading disease via rotting plagued corpse bits as ammunition for siege equipment.
Rome had similar advantages in technology and tactics as well as far better trained soldiers.
also on the explosives side of things. The explosives used by the Chinese were far from extremely useful in combat compare to the exponentially more devastating binary explosives of today which my point in bringing up was not actually for use in combat but the fact it could be easily used by a revolting mass to destroy the infrastructure of the people attempting to enslave them as well as the fact that such information is widely available to everyone in today's times