Preamble to Social Mayhem
by
Tim Case
by Tim Case
DIGG THIS
"The
human race divides politically into those who want people to be
controlled and those who have no such desire."
~ Robert A.
Heinlein (1907–1988)
"The
common man, finding himself in a world so excellent, technically
and socially, believes it has been produced by nature, and never
thinks of the personal efforts of highly endowed individuals which
the creation of this new world presupposed. Still less will he admit
the notion that all these facilities still require the support of
certain difficult human virtues, the least failure of which would
cause the rapid disappearance of the whole magnificent edifice."
~José
Ortega y Gasset (1883–1955)
The glory years
of Pax Romana can rightly be set as that period in Roman history
from the beginning of Augustus’ reign in 27 BC to the end of stoic
Emperor Marcus Aurelius’ reign in 180 AD.
The Christian
apologist Tertullian (200 AD) gives us an excellent example for
how Rome was viewed during this period: "Surely a glance at the
world shows that it is daily being more cultivated and better peopled
than before. All places are now accessible, well known, open to
commerce. Delightful farms have now blotted out every trace of the
dreadful wastes; cultivated fields have supplanted woods; flocks
and herds have driven out wild beasts; sandy spots are sown; rocks
and stones have been cleared away; bogs have been drained. Large
towns now occupy lands hardly tenanted before by cottages. Islands
are no longer dreaded [as the abode of pirates]; houses, people,
civil rule, civilization are everywhere."
However, even
as the ancient world basked in the glory of the Roman civilization
its very foundation was decaying. The causes for this decay and
the eventual collapse of the Roman Empire have long been debated
by historians and are generally attributed to one or more of the
following:
- Lack
of Public Health which led to relatively short lives among
the wealthy and debased living conditions among the lower classes
and the poor.
- A marked
decline in the morals and ethics among all Roman social classes
as witnessed by the gladiatorial games, rampant prostitution,
gluttony of the ruling class and alcoholism among all classes.
Certainly the wealth of the empire contributed to various forms
of social and individual debauchery. As one author put it: "The
Roman Empire couldn’t stand prosperity."
- Excessive
government with its accompanying political corruption which
can be demonstrated through the Roman state’s use of the frumentarii
or the Roman secret service. It was the frumentarii that Emperor
Hadrian engaged, to collect the corn throughout Roman’s provinces.
This brought them in contact with local politics, and as spies
for the emperor they gathered a wealth of intelligence concerning
the people and their thinking throughout the empire. This in turn
earned those who spied for the emperor, the hatred of the people.
The people feared and hated the frumentarii so much that when
in the third century (217 AD) Macrinus appointed a former head
of the frumentarii and prefect of the Praetorian Guard to the
senate, he alienated a large portion of the Roman establishment
against him, in effect signing his own death warrant which was
summarily executed the next year. This is not to excuse the gangster
rulers of the latter part of the 3rd century nor the
totalitarian, socialist state created by Diocletian, Constantine,
and their successors which not only aided but exacerbated the
destruction of the Roman society.
- Excessive
military spending with corresponding government projects and social
programs which led, in due course, to inflation and then hyperinflation.
- Inflation,
price controls, and the state’s attempt to completely regulate
the Roman economy destroyed manufacturing along with the empire’s
agricultural base. This swelled the unemployment rolls and
sent large numbers of people to cities looking for either work
or to get on the public dole. Such was the desperation of the
empire that in 274 AD Emperor Aurelian extended the relief rolls
by making government subsidy a right of heredity. He also replaced
bread for the traditional wheat and added free pork, olive oil
and salt to the rations, making the Roman state’s war on wealth
even more pronounced.
- Inferior
Technology is not often thought of as a reason for the decline
and eventual collapse of the Roman Empire. However, behind all
the architectural grandeur that was Rome there was deadly lack
of simple technology needed to advance, protect and sustain the
Roman civilization. From the early part of the second century
there were no technical improvements in industry. Roman tools
were poor at best: men working in quarries, mines and construction
were required to use brute force to make up for inadequate tools.
The Romans never devised a practical harness or horseshoes which
would have made their draught animals more productive. The Roman
horse collar applied too much pressure to the animal’s windpipe,
causing choking, and greatly reducing the animal’s ability to
haul or do any heavy work. The Roman military’s inability to develop
heavy cavalry to protect the empire was due to their failure to
develop the simple stirrup, a failure that would haunt them in
later years.
- Civil
war accompanied by external invasions.
Each of these
points can be expanded or elaborated on to show their relationship
to the ultimate collapse of the Roman Empire. Certainly no serious
student of history would dare ignore any of these lines of reasoning
in studying the fall of the Roman Empire. However, there is one
further item that is rarely addressed but which should be of equal
importance to understanding why great empires, like Rome, ultimately
fail.
Whether we
are talking about an autocracy, oligarchy, or democracy we are in
the final analysis dealing with a coercive force which will become
violent to attain its ends. As the state increases its power base
and the demands upon its citizens, it will seek to have a domineering
effect upon the human spirit. The result is the destruction of self-reliance,
self-determination and self-confidence of free citizens and replacing
them with a dutiful, subservient drone totally reliant on the state.
The pressure
the state exerts on it subjects was not lost on Tacitus who bemoaned
the servile mood of the Roman Senate under Tiberius in contrast
to the character of the Senate during the building of the Empire.
Even Tiberius is reported to have said in disgust of the Roman senators:
"O men, ready for slavery!"
Three of the
great writers of antiquity Livy, Pliny the elder, and Tacitus
all recognized that the Roman society was becoming enslaved.
Livy felt it was because of the wealth and Pliny concurred that
the lack of intellectual interests was the result of the worship
of wealth.
Tacitus, however,
stated that "genius died by the same blow that ended public
liberty" laying the blame directly at the feet of the rising
tyranny of the Roman state.
However, it
is the unknown philosopher of Longinus’ On
The Sublime who pinpoints the cause when he says: "we
of to-day, seem to have learnt in our childhood the lessons of a
benignant despotism, to have been cradled in her habits and customs
from the time when our minds were still tender, and never to have
tasted the fairest and most fruitful fountain of eloquence, I mean
liberty. Hence we develop nothing but a fine genius for flattery.
This is the reason why, though all other faculties are consistent
with the servile condition, no slave ever became an orator; because
in him there is a dumb spirit which will not be kept down: his soul
is chained: he is like one who has learnt to be ever expecting a
blow. For, as Homer says – ‘the day of slavery takes half our manly
worth away.’"
In Catiline's
War Gaius Sallustius Crispus opens his dissertation with
this statement: "Every man who is anxious to surpass the lower
animals should strive with all his power not to pass his life in
obscurity like the brute beasts, which nature has made the groveling
slaves of their bellies. Now our whole ability resides jointly in
our mind and body. In the case of the mind it is its power of guidance,
in the case of the body its obedient service that we rather use,
sharing the former faculty with the gods, the latter with the brute
creation…"
We may say
then, without too much contradiction, that the real war between
a free people and the state resides over who will control the mind:
the individual or the state.
If it is the
individual, society will continue to grow and flourish, while if
the state wins control, the society rapidly decays, allowing the
points often citied for the fall of the Roman Empire to occur.
What is reflected
by these ancient authors is not merely loss of liberty but a mood
of apathy. This lethargy was prevalent throughout the empire and
it was strictly due to the severe paternalism of the Roman state;
the result being the people had lost their will to succeed.
Curiosity was
discouraged; the history of the Roman Republic which had been the
foundation for the Empire was bastardized, forgotten or ignored.
The accepted leaders of Roman cities were persecuted to the point
they lost all their initiative and public spirit; their every thought
being subject to the whims of Rome. For the general public the results
were to suppress the entrepreneurial spirit, while in its place
every effort was made, by the Roman citizen, to secure for himself
and his family a docile and inactive life on a safe, if modest,
income.
In short, almost
every intellectual endeavor was discouraged, suppressed, or redirected,
reducing the population to "groveling slaves of their bellies"
and to the Roman Empire.
While history
will judge when the American spirit of self-reliance, self-determination
and self-confidence was destroyed we have an indication that its
destruction is well advanced.
Recently I
was sent an email asking me to take a civics
quiz that was designed and issued by the Intercollegiate
Studies Institute of Wilmington, Delaware.
While most
LRC readers will find the quiz easy if not simplistic I was stunned
to see the results when the quiz was issued to a random sample of
Americans. Testing their "knowledge of America’s founding principles
and texts, core history, and enduring institutions" showed
that of the 2,508 respondents only 21 could pass it with a score
90% or better; 66 with 80 to 89.9%; 185 with 70 to 79.9% and 445
with a "D" score of 60 to 69.9%. This left an unimaginable
number (1,791) who were not able to pass this basic quiz. What is
worse is that the mean score of all who took the test is 49%.
Now if that
wasn’t bad enough the ISI broke the score down and found that elected
officials taking the test scored 5% BELOW the mean with an average
of 44%.
The politicians’
weakest points were the questions dealing with U.S.-Soviet Tension
in 1962, the Declaration of Independence, Sputnik and not
surprisingly the definition of Free Enterprise. This from
those who believe they are supernaturally endowed to be the sole
lord and arbiters of our private actions and property when they
should be the brunt of our jokes and exiled from our midst.
I have often
lamented that politicians
always emanate from the dregs of society; the historical proofs
now have modern confirmation.
It is always
dangerous to lay current events at the door of history and say because
it happened before under these circumstances it will happen here
and now. But given the recent presidential campaign and the promise
of "change" trumpeted by the president-elect I suspect
that we are doomed to witness the destructive exploits of another
Diocletian rather than the calming influence of an Augustus.
Given also
that the society that elected the president-in-waiting is dominated
by blind nationalism, trendy savior-worship, an unending ignorance
of history, economics and philosophy and devoid of a critical thought
process, I fear history will say of this moment, "the civilization
of the modern world suffered final collapse."
The American
author and revolutionary Thomas Gordon wrote: "…[I]t is that
we everywhere find tyranny and imposture, ignorance and slavery,
joined together…" one then wonders how long America can last.
December
30, 2008
Tim
Case [send him mail]
is a 30-year student of the ancient histories who agrees with the
first-century stoic Epictetus on this one point: “Only the educated
are free.”
Copyright
© 2008 LewRockwell.com
Tim
Case Archives
|