My memory of Carlin's episode on that one is that it's broadly accurate as per the historical consensus, but as a note one should beware of taking Carlin too seriously more generally. Good for the basic shape of things, maybe good for tone, but probably not good for the why things actually happened most of the time. Too deep in the dad-history bucket.
(But that's not to diminish that Julius Caesar was a bad dude.)
> The correlation seems less about the fall to ruin, but that that somewhere like the US would fall into a dictatorship and has many ingredients as Julius Caesar served to claim emperor
And it's not like it's something completely out of the question - there was literally a coup attempt to circumvent election results (which are already gerrymandered to hell) a year ago.
Rome was bloodily founded, with the forced subjugation of other nations and peoples across what is now Italy.
The correlation seems less about the fall to ruin, but that that somewhere like the US would fall into a dictatorship and has many ingredients as Julius Caesar served to claim emperor. I would also add a hefty amount of backwards looking rhetoric also to the mix - things were better, more moral in the past; or we must address sins of the past. Putin has been using similar rhetoric to Caesar swapping the Ukraine for the Celts.
I recommend Dan Carlin’s Hardcore History on the Celtic Holocaust that poses that the whole expansion and annihilation of the Celts was a money making scheme by Julius Caesar to grasp power.