This is coming from Stanford.

Honestly, I fail to see his point. Is this just some excuse to make money, with an edgy-title?

So apparently, it is good that Rome fell, because it created a power-vacuum in Europe of people that were trying to re-create it. He mentions all of the war and suffering leading up to WWII, and vaguely says it is fine, because it lead to the modern world. Okay! How does he know what the world would have been like if it didn't fall? Perhaps it would have been even more advanced, since we wouldn't have had the Dark ages. I recall reading that technological innovations of the Romans were not matched until Britain in the 19th century!