Historical uses of Rome as a guide

[caesar novus]

It used to be common to relate Roman history to pivotal issues of the day. I ran across a couple examples I will share. First is a speech from U.S. ambassador to Germany 1933 on Economic Nationalism http://docs.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/psf/box32/t299b09.html

 

Half-educated statesmen today swing violently away from the ideal purpose of the first Gracchus and think they find salvation for their troubled fellows in the arbitrary modes of the man who fell an easy victim to the cheap devices of the lewd Cleopatra.

And it goes on and on about how the example of Rome disproves the viability of national socialism. I looked it up since the new book "In the Garden of Beasts" mostly ridicules that ambassador except for the good reception of that speech, even by the targets of it in the audience. He was said to be an ineffective academic type who was sabotaged by his (married) daughter sleeping with many German adversaries... therefore his German confidants didn't dare give him valuable information which might be leaked back by his daughter.

 

Another example is Machiavelli's "Discourses Upon The First Ten (Books) of Titus Livy" http://www.constitution.org/mac/disclivy_.htm . Did you know that Niccolo's work http://www.constitution.org/mac/niccolo.htm is generally a love poem to ancient Rome and it's happy republican ways? Did you know Niccolo is not "Machiavellian" in the sense that he never intended "The Prince" to be published or applied to any but very rare and dysfunctional situations that were facing the Medici's or certain failing Italian city states? Well, that's what I gather from the course http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/courses/Course_Detail.aspx?cid=4311 (now under $30).

 

Once we recover the context of the writing of The Prince, and analyze it along with the Discourses on the First Ten Books of Livy, it will be clear how The Prince can be read as a book designed to guide leaders in the creation

Edited January 28, 2013 by caesar novus

[DecimusCaesar]

I remember an United States Senator a few years back used the story of Emperor Valens and the defeat of the Roman army at Adrianople as an example of the dangers of uncontrolled borders. The decline and fall of Rome has long been used as a guide, by people on all sides of the political spectrum as to the dangers of everything from corrupt politicians to disease.

 

People in the past were also much more familiar with characters from Greek and Roman history and mythology. When studiyng the Second World War in school I was amazed at the amount of sources, such as political cartoons, that referenced Classical history or Mythology. Everything from Gladiators to Roman gods were displayed. These days pop culture such as Star Wars and the Wizard of Oz have come to replace them. If a modern day politican was to referrence the Gracchi brothers, most people wouldn't get the referrence.

Edited January 28, 2013 by DecimusCaesar

[Virgil61]

The demise of Latin and to a lesser extent Greek as the languages of the 'learned' has of course brought the demise of the study of the classical era. I think everyone understands that but it's a pity that one of the last things to hang on to is this America as Rome stuff.

 

Prof recounts careful analyses by Niccolo on how the Romans had the best answers to things we typically fail at. And supposedly he was indirectly influential to the republics formed by England and US... not for just mob rule democracies, but with special branches of gov't with checks and balances. He never said the ends justify the means, but could indulge a tiny bit of tough love at times.

 

In the U.S. the Electoral College has been held up as a protection from 'mob democracy' (to me that's code for protection of the interests of a certain group) device. That is actually false. Madison and most of the Northern colonies pushed for direct voting of the president and could only get the Slave colonies to go along by the implementation of the Electoral College which took advantage of the 3/5 slave rule to 'bump' up their portion of the electoral voters. Madison records it in his Notes on the Constitutional Congress.

 

Madison (& Hamilton) later had to publicly justify the EC--they did in the Federalist Papers--which is where the argument for mob rule thing came about. Such is how myths get made.

[caesar novus]

Hmmm, an electoral college isnt needed to implement a little math weighting... and indirect (overridable) voting was in play already for electing congress by state reps back then. But anyway what irks me most about the system is how states are allowed to erase the votes of their minority and vote for president as a block (winner takes all). Its hard to argue with legally tho, because the federal gov't was created to be at the service to the states as entities.

 

However US state independence can be a protection against mob rule, at least letting you switch to a mob that you hate less. The supreme court is increasingly failing to protect state rights, most recently for the unaffordable healthcare act. Niccolo by the way advocated a ruthless court to keep the politically powerful in line, although maybe from a french rather than roman example.

 

I would say europe and increasingly the us is falling under mob rule, where you basically vote yourself possessions of your harder working or wiser spending neighbor. The leaders knowingly support failing tax policy, and push it thru demogogery. The tax attack on high incomes brings hardly any revenue at all compared to expenditures, even if it didnt kill their risk-taking creation of new economic activity (and its potential tax revenue). This is proven by the small diversity not yet stamped out, where us states that have or plan smaller or zero income tax are booming, while the ones increasing it are in fiscal death spirals.

 

Machiavelli advocated a mix of democracy and elites and a figurehead ruler like republican rome or UK monarchy. Actually, the Wiemar republic was originally supposed to be that kind of british model, with maybe a respected but weak Hindenburg at top and some elites like a house of lords all sharing power with the everyman... which might have been more resistant to a populist brownshirt infiltration because they could only legally replace the commoner elements of govt.

 

Another example of mob rule is when leaders knowingly kowtow to and push populist green measures that actually sabotage green-ness. Block and harass the changeover to abundant and clean natural gas... let it just flare off wastefully and promote impractical expensive subsidized alternatives. Pretend you do green work by banning pipelines, and force more dangerous, spillable, expensive transport by road or rail. Just a few years ago, the people in power would temper populism with sane judgement from knowing more facts about the issue than joe sixpack.

 

Niccolo looked to periods of Rome and elsewhere to systematically solve or at least refine such problems of a republic. Maybe i havent done it justice, but readers here should find his Livy discourses easy to scan over. I like the way he breaks down issues into multiple possible approaches, and says for instance approach c has often been disasterous (like hiring mercenaries) which Rome avoided.

Edited January 29, 2013 by caesar novus

[Virgil61]

Hmmm, an electoral college isnt needed to implement a little math weighting... and indirect (overridable) voting was in play already for electing congress by state reps back then. But anyway what irks me most about the system is how states are allowed to erase the votes of their minority and vote for president as a block (winner takes all). Its hard to argue with legally tho, because the federal gov't was created to be at the service to the states as entities.

 

Maybe it isn't needed but it's the method they chose to pick a president;

 

http://constitution....fc/dfc_0719.htm

 

Madison speaking of himself in his notes in the third person;

 

...He was disposed for these reasons to refer the appointment to some other source. The people at large was in his opinion the fittest in itself. It would be as likely as any that could be devised to produce an Executive Magistrate of distinguished Character. The people generally could only know & vote for some Citizen whose merits had rendered him an object of general attention & esteem. There was one difficulty however of a serious nature attending an immediate choice by the people. The right of suffrage was much more diffusive in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of the Negroes. The substitution of electors obviated this difficulty and seemed on the whole to be liable to fewest objections.

However US state independence can be a protection against mob rule, at least letting you switch to a mob that you hate less. The supreme court is increasingly failing to protect state rights, most recently for the unaffordable healthcare act...

 

States Rights wounded and maimed on the altar of the Civil War with Civil Rights the final coup de gr

Edited January 30, 2013 by Virgil61

[GhostOfClayton]

I feel I must back Virgil61's comments, particularly on tax. Whilst there is some inconclusive evidence that lowering rates of tax can offer a short- or even medium-term boost to a state's/country's overall economic growth, there is no evidence that this growth is sustainable in the longer term. Quite the reverse. It's like a bucket with small hole in it. You can keep pouring water in, and for a while the bucket will be full, but it will always steadily dribble away through the hole. The only way to keep it topped up, is to keep adding water, which is fine if your resources are infinite. Nothing is.

 

The long term solution to the bucket problem is to fix the hole, and ensure the bucket stays in good order. To translate the metaphor back to the real world, a strong social, economic and logistical infrastructure is the only way to underpin sustainable economic growth in the long term. Unfortunately, the quickest way to achieve this is to pay for it through taxation. Efficiency savings sound wonderful, but can only ever trim round the edges if done properly (ie for sound, rather than politcal reasons). Plus which, there inevitably comes a point where the costs of implementing the measures (having already implemented the cheaper ones) outweigh the actual savings.

 

In short, no-one thinks that tax is a good thing, but while it remains the only way to fund a strong social infrastructure, it's the lesser of two evils.

 

Has this thread wandered off-topic?

Edited January 30, 2013 by GhostOfClayton

[Virgil61]

In short, no-one thinks that tax is a good thing, but while it remains the only way to fund a strong social infrastructure, it's the lesser of two evils.

 

Has this thread wandered off-topic?

 

It probably has, maybe a mod should move part of it?

 

Anyway I'd add to your statement that austerity hasn't done much for EU nations that have tried it during this post financial bust period.

 

Too further supply some data these figures [i apologize to the non-Yanks for using only US figures] show that in the postwar era whether we taxed the wealthiest at 90% or 70% [most of the 1950s], 50%, 40% or less GNP has grown, coincidentally some of the greatest growth rates were during periods where the top earners had the heaviest tax burden.

 

Historic top marginal tax rates (U.S.): LINK

 

Historic growth rate (U.S.): LINK

 

The problem I have with much of the current economic thought [like that influenced by the Austrian School] is that it's less about actual data, macroeconomics or economics [as a science] but instead a morality play.

[caesar novus]

What an admirable sight is afforded, by contrast, by the rough soldier Gaius Marcius in his camp before Rome, when he renounced vengeance and victory because he could not endure to see a mothers tears!...

 

 

Above is from white rose leaflets in 1942.. http://www.holocaustresearchproject.org/revolt/wrleaflets.html contains maybe the most high minded and passionate critique ever of totalitarianism. The first 4 leaflets are by a German and a Russian medical student roped into army service on the Russian front. I guess the Russian guy had fled Stalin into Germany only to be drafted there, but anyway these are even more articulate about freedom than US founders documents. The leaflets 5 and 6 are kind of dumbed down as more folks became involved, discovered, and ultimately beheaded (an air raid happened to kill the hanging judge and allowed one condemned rose person to escape).

 

Edited May 31, 2013 by caesar novus