A Zen philosopher might argue that there is neither good nor evil, merely choices and their consequences. A Stoic would be more focused by saying that it is the morals of an individual that will make a good or evil choice, with Good and Evil being relative to the amount of good or evil inflicted upon another.
I have always believed that there are choices. I have always believed that we are the ultimate masters of our destiny. We always have a choice, even if that choice is to remove ourselves from the game of life by jumping off a cliff. Many Stoics chose to end their lives on their own terms rather than face their situation (Cicero comes to mind). I think it is cowardly, but to a Stoic, it is all about choice. Unless one is no longer in charge of their mental faculties, one must always be held accountable for their own choices. As you might guess, you would not want me to be a sitting judge in my county, or anywhere.
If you were to read the complete works of Gibbon's "Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire", you may get the feeling that nations have a life cycle just like any of God's creations. After reading the work, you would feel, from 1,500 years after the fall of the Western Empire and over 500 years since the fall of the Eastern half of the Empire, that its fall was inevitable. I strongly disagree with this. The evidence stares us in the face.
It all comes down to choices; choices equal options in this work. In 100 BC (I also don't go into that CE or Common Era crapola) The Roman Empire was actually the Roman Republic. It had survived huge challenges to its existence, first by freeing themselves from the Etruscans, then barely holding off the Celts and Gauls of Europe. Then, after some time to mature, it fought off another rising power, the Carthaginians (truly, a world war in its day). The Republic was full of energetic and intelligent individuals. The government evolved to meet the needs of is people. It changed the way its military was raised and borrowed from those they defeated. The Republic matured, as it must, as it's land area grew and the number of people (not citizens) it was responsible for grew as well. Consuls, proconsuls and the like evolved. Dictators were created in special emergencies, given the full power of the Senate to bring the emergency to a swift conclusion. Those individuals served their people, not the State, and they layed down that power and returned to their farms as common citizens (just like George Washington at the end of the revolutionary war).
As is always the case, powerful families and dynasties had formed in Rome during the preceding 400 years. Those families could trace there ancestry back to the very founding and independence of the city from the Etruscans. Power became more important to them than the people they were supposed to represent. The Republic was at risk of becoming an Oligarchy, ruled by the Senate.
The Republic was saved, for a time, by individuals such as Marius, who reformed and modernized the Roman military, giving it it's classical apperance and organization; and by Sulla and the Graccus brothers. Some call the latter three Tyrants, and they truly were, but they also strenthend the customs of the Tribunes, who had the power to veto the Senate if the will of the people demanded it (think Initiatives and Referendum process in the U.S.--look it up if you need to).
Eventually, the ruling families learned how to "game" the system and began to push rising members of their family through the political machine. Ticket punching became the road to power and influence in the late Roman Republic. Every son of potential had to serve as a Tribune or Legate, they all had to serve in various public service roles (think self-funded NGO's) and then finally the military. Glory on the battlefield translated into influence in Rome (and votes). Pompeii the Great or Magnus rose to power and influence a half-generation before Caesar. He was a Populist in every way. He had the ear and love of the people, dirt in and on the Senate, and a military career second to none, up to that time (he brought most of Spain into the Republic). Caesar was from a lesser family, a family that fell from power and influence. He was a singular genius on the battlefield and a genius at "spin". He carefully crafted his actions to give the best possible light on himself with the full intent of being the sole master of Rome (only he could do it right, you see). Pompeii met an awful end in Egypt, Antony as well. Caesar as we all know fell under the knives of angry Senators. His illegitimate son, Brutus, met his end in Greece, by his own hand.
Caesar's adopted son, Octavius, saw the anger of the people at his death and felt that he could take over the levers power himself (long story). He knew that the Republic was dead. He saw that it would simply spawn more individuals like himself. The rule of law was broken and the Constitution of Rome was meaningless, except as a custom. The first thing he did was forbade anyone from pronouncing him "Dictator". He was the First Citizen or the First Consul. He was elected to the position essentially for life and started a new dynasty that did its best to serve for the interests of its people.
We all know how that went, though. The mechanism for good governance was there, but if you have bad people at the helm, then all you will do is get bad stuff done very fast and efficiently (helllooooo B.H. Obama).
At various times in the Republic, things could have changed. Most people don't know but there were two major political parties at the time of Caesar. The Populists and the Optimates. Essentially, those that claimed to represent the people and those that favored a conservative, traditional method of governing (you know, the one that worked well for over 400 years). As we know, the Populists won because they were able to use class warfare and envy as weapons against the more conservative elements of the government (sound familiar?).
The saying, "If you rob Peter to pay Paul then Paul will vote for you every time" comes to mind. The common citizen liked the idea that they could be on the public dole at the expense of the rich. Cicero even had a great speech about how they must kick everyone off the government rolls, stop sending money to other countries, and reform the government (45 BC, I think). He ended up getting the choice, kill yourself of face Caesar.
The people chose the Populists over the Optimates. They gave them the Empire. The Empire was, up until that time, the greatest civilizing force in the world. It brought roads and advanced building practices from England to Iraq and spurred medical science and civil engineering to levels that were not seen again until over 1,000 years after its fall. However, a lot of things lead to its fall. It became so big that governing it was cumbersome. Tax collection was irregular and many public projects were funded by the local politicians themselves. Diocletian split the Empire up and created several types of co-emperors to diffuse power and reduce the likelihood of civil war. Ultimately, it bred war. The money was debased over and over and the Empire was brought to the brink several times.
Each time the Empire was saved by an individual of historical talent. Marcus Aureleus, Diocletian, Constantine, Hadrian and others. They made the right choices. By the time of Constantine, however, the wear and tear on the Empire was evident. The talent for statue making was poor by this time. Statues of Constantine look more like cartoons then the traditional Greek inspired statues. Learning and education were becoming concentrated around proto-universities; farming had lumped together into the Latifundia system (economies of scale at work there). It had become too expensive to run a farm on your own any longer due to progressive taxation and regulation (think the huge Agri firms of today). Those displaced farmers fled to the cities where they bred discontent. Choices upon choices.
The birth rate fell and the plague began to make itself felt. The Eastern Empire, formalized under Constantine, and administered from Constantinople, drifted away from Rome (the capital being moved from Rome to Ravenna) and began to rely on barbarian conscripts to round out the military. The economy slumped, birth rates dropped, the money was devalued again, and the barter system began to come back. Barbarians, schooled in the military arts by the Empire itself began to wield influence over the tottering houses of the Senate and weak Emperors. Breads and Circuses could only distract the people for so long.
The Empire in the West ended when a barbarian commander in the Roman military chose to do away with the charade that had gone on for too long.
Choices. The West chose to allow the Republic to fail. They chose to allow populists run their lives, just as those populists decided to take power and rule as Emperors. The people decided that it was better to have the State control everything from the price of bread to the admission cost at the Coliseum. The Romans even had their equivalent of the State newspaper, mail system, and Pentagon; along with the bloated expenses to keep them going. They chose to ignore their immigration laws and allow barbarians to settle within the frontiers, BEHIND the defensive fortifications. First as a source of recruiting material and then given responsibility to man those fortifications. When the mass invasions came, there was precious little to stop or slow the likes of Attila the Hun.
One poor choice after another, generally made to try to fix the last poor choice. When the end came, it came not with Apocalypse, but with a whimper.
The East held out for another 1,000 years. It made different choices during the 400's A.D. It survived where the other did not. That begs the previous analysis, does it not?
Nations do not rise and fall with the predictability of a living being. They fall because they rot from within and get kicked over from without.
America has made a lot of poor choices for the last 100 years. Problems on top of problems. Populists coming to power and then collecting the spoils for their coat tails and benefactors. Reagan was our Constantine. He held off the coming night and showed us the path back to where our Founding Fathers wanted us to be. However, with Bush 41, Clinton, and then Bush 43, we got Progressive presidents who made one poor choice after another and has let us to the point where our options are growing slim. Death by inflation or death by depression...
I will continue this in Part 2.
--Zavost
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment