Presumably, there are very few major countries in the world that can be called "tolerant." Most of them began with military repression and required sustained use of force for years to come in order to smooth the transition. But there is a limit here, and if it continues to be suppressed endlessly, it is easy to attract dissatisfaction and give rise to anti-government movements. Therefore, the common practice is to control the strength within the limit range, "at this level, you can do whatever you want", and then guide it to establish a certain degree of autonomy. None of the countries that maintained harsh punishment from beginning to end were able to maintain long-term peace and stability, and the typical example of this was the ancient Assyrian Empire.
The Kingdom of Assyria arose in North America in the 2,000th century BC, and then expanded its territory by force and grew into the Assyrian Empire. Incidentally, what we now call the Assyrian Empire generally refers to the period of about 120 years from the reign of the neo-Assyrian kingdom of Tiglat-Palasar III to the reign of Assyrian Banebbah. The Assyrian Empire was a veritable "repressive empire."
The Assyrian Empire imposed heavy taxes and imposed repressive policies on its provinces, the most distressing of which was the forced captivity and arrest of men. Although forced arrest was a common policy in the countries of the East at that time, no country could be as organized as Assyria, and its scale was rare in the world. The overwhelmed state citizens immediately expressed their dissatisfaction and rose up. The ensuing rebellion weakened little by little the assyrian empire, and the Assyrian empire finally collapsed in 612 BC when a coalition of the Medes and Chaldeans occupied the capital Nineveh.
It is not possible to maintain the stability of the empire for a long time simply by coercive methods; and it is easy to fall into a situation that is difficult to control if it is too tolerant. In the face of different values, where is the scope and scale of tolerance? The balance between retraction and retraction is really difficult to control. In this sense, Rome's ease with "tolerance" is exquisite, as exemplified by not imposing latin on the provinces.
The imposition that the common people "must speak Latin" will only bring dissatisfaction, and after allowing them to live in a free environment for a period of time, they will naturally appreciate the benefits of speaking Latin for life, and then spontaneously begin to learn and use Latin. This coincides with the current situation of English learning: if people are forced to speak English, there will inevitably be people who stubbornly think that "Japanese people know Japanese enough?" And once you understand that "if you know English better" at work or overseas travel, you don't have to be forced by anyone to pay for it.
The one who could put this subtle "tolerance" to the fullest was Julius Caesar.
The term "Clementia Caesaris" was widely used in Rome, which literally translates to "Caesar's love." Although Caesar was judged to be a tolerant figure, this did not obscure the cruelty he had committed. Caesar's tolerance was reserved only for the citizens of Rome and those who obeyed and showed weakness, while he had always ruthlessly crushed those who dared to rebel. In the face of the Tit-for-tat Gauls, Caesar did not hesitate to carry out military repression and cruel punishment, and then when the Gauls showed timidity and deep obedience, Caesar's attitude quickly turned from cloudy to sunny, showing his tolerant side.
Caesar showed only the great patience and tolerance of the Roman citizens, as evidenced by his attitude towards Marco Julius Brutus[65]. As a political enemy, no matter how much Brutus provoked and challenged Caesar's authority, Caesar repeatedly tolerated his improper behavior because he was also a Roman. Not only that, but he also arranged a new job for Brutus, which can be described as benevolent. It can be seen that Caesar's tolerant treatment and use of the way is absolutely seriously considered. That's why Caesar shouted out the words "Brutus, how are you?" when he was stabbed? (Et tu, Brute?) must also contain complex emotions. The author believes that this may also be deeply rooted in Caesar's incomprehension and resentment of "I have tolerated your indulgence, but why have you done this?".