The End of the Republic?

[Scaramouche]

A very good read, especially if you love Roman history. In this piece he explores the downfall of the Republic vis a vis the rise in Roman imperialism and military adventurism. Ah, the lessons of history...

http://hnn.us/articles/1685.html

The End of the Republic?
By Chalmers Johnson

The collapse of the Roman republic in 27 BC has significance today for the United States, which took many of its key political principles from its ancient predecessor. Separation of powers, checks and balances, government in accordance with constitutional law, a toleration of slavery, fixed terms in office, all these ideas were influenced by Roman precedents. John Adams and his son John Quincy Adams often read the great Roman political philosopher Cicero and spoke of him as an inspiration to them. Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay, authors of the Federalist Papers, writing in favor of ratification of the Constitution signed their articles with the name Publius Valerius Publicola, the first consul of the Roman republic.

The Roman republic, however, failed to adjust to the unintended consequences of its imperialism, leading to a drastic alteration in its form of government. The militarism that inescapably accompanied Rome's imperial projects slowly undermined its constitution as well as the very considerable political and human rights its citizens enjoyed. The American republic, of course, has not yet collapsed; it is just under considerable strain as the imperial presidency -- and its supporting military legions -- undermine Congress and the courts. However, the Roman outcome -- turning over power to an autocracy backed by military force and welcomed by ordinary citizens because it seemed to bring stability -- suggests what might happen in the years after Bush and his neoconservatives are thrown out of office.

<snip>
Service in the armed forces of the United States has not been a universal male obligation of citizenship since 1973. Our military today is a professional corps of men and women who join up for their own reasons, commonly to advance themselves in the face of one or another cul de sac of American society. They normally do not expect to be shot at, but they do expect all the benefits of state employment -- steady pay, good housing, free medical benefits, relief from racial discrimination, world travel, and gratitude from the rest of society for their military "service." They are well aware that the alternatives civilian life in America offers today include difficult job searches, no job security, regular pilfering of retirement funds by company executives and their accountants, "privatized" medical care, bad public elementary education systems, and insanely expensive higher education. They are ripe, it seems to me, not for the political rhetoric of patrician politicians who have followed the Andover, Yale, Harvard Business School route to riches and power but for a Julius Caesar, Napoleon Bonaparte, or Juan Perón -- a revolutionary, military populist with no interest in republican niceties so long as he is made emperor.

Given the course of the postwar situations in Afghanistan and Iraq, it may not be too hard to defeat George Bush in the election of 2004. But whoever replaces him will have to deal with the Pentagon, the military-industrial complex, our empire of bases, and a fifty-year-old tradition of not telling the public what our military establishment costs and the devastation it can inflict. History teaches us that the capacity for things to get worse is limitless. Roman history suggests that the short, happy life of the American republic is in serious trouble -- and that conversion to a military empire is, to say the least, not the best answer.

[Homer12]

1. The parrells are amazing

...Details on how Rome became an empire are different, but the similarties of the corruption of the senate, the war-mahcine poltics, econimcs, etc... are all the same.

Good article.

There's a book called, the "Sword in the Senate" The Rise of the roman military and the fall of the republic. It covers this in detail.

[enkidu2]

2. yes

i have been thinking about this connection for a while, dreading it really, catullus' poem with the line (when thinking about caesar and worrying about it) "turn your head to the wall, Catullus, and die," somehow fits in the bleakest moments. and for the bushies, truman's line which i will macerate: "there is nothing new only the history we did not bother to learn."

[Scaramouche]

3. Who wrote "Sword in the Senate"?

I tried to google it but came up empty.

Thanks in advance!

[indepat]

4. If this or any Republic is worth saving, the people will rise up, be heard

and do what is necessary to save it. But should the people be in a stupor, be timid and afraid to speak up and be heard, not give a diddledy-damn, or just have more important things to do than save their Republic, the only reasonable conclusion would be that it is just not that important. Time will soon tell.

[Resistance Is Futile]

5. Doesn't this remind anyone else of Shrub?

a revolutionary, military populist with no interest in republican niceties so long as he is made emperor.