Despite all the claims to the contrary, Rome was never a Republic. Its unelected Senate was an oligarchy composed of aristocrats who modestly referred to themselves as patricians or optimates (the best men). These best men realized they could become even richer by exploiting the lands around Rome, known as the ager publicus. These lands had been farmed by the populares or plebeians (commoners) and kept the city fed. But these plebs, in addition to feeding Rome, also fed the legions that were in a constant state of warfare. While the were off being patriots, the optimates would buy up their land and begin farming them with slaves that plebs captured during Rome's wars. Displaced, these plebs were forced to live in urban centers and pay high rents to the very same optimates who had displaced them. They were victims of agrarian displacement, something that has been pretty much replicated in this country as giant corporations have bought up small farms. Today's slaves are machinery and migrant workers.
Caesar was born a patrician but his family had fallen on hard times. He grew up in the very same tenements in which the plebs were crowded. This no doubt gave him an understanding of their plight. He tended to side with them. We all know Caesar as perhaps the most brilliant military commander the world has ever seen, but he was also a reformer. Here are some of the tings he did when he was able.
- He founded new settlements for veterans as well as 80,000 proletariat. The best lands around Rome went to 20,000 poor families with three or more children.
- Like FDR's New Deal, Caesar sent many proletarians on repair projects of cities in the colonies or for public works in Rome.
- Like today's living wage laws, he required large landowners to employ free men instead of slaves for 1/3 of their workforce. This reduced unemployment and crime while trimming the profit margins of the optimates.
- Caesar remitted a year of rent for those in low or moderate income dwellings.
- He imposed taxes on luxury imports to encourage domestic production while forcing optimates to pay for their luxuries.
- He eliminated tax farming and capped taxes in the provinces.
- He abolished fines on debtors unable to make payments and reduced and, in some cases, eliminated interest.
He was reversing the concentration of wealth in the hands of the few at the expense of the many. Naturally, the optimates killed him.
34 comments:
This is a fine history lesson, but what is your suggestion for a solution to today's problem?
A little heady for some of your audience.
love this!
Same shit, just another millennium
"he required large landowners to employ free men instead of slaves for 1/3 of its workforce."
Good Lord. The west's first project labor agreement
No big inflatable rat on the Forum...
A better comparison is Hadrian. We're broke, overextended in expensive foreign military messes, and attempting to build a wall. Romans knew the empire was over long before it ended. We know, too, don't we? Some of us do.
I'm not sure of the point you're trying to make.
Are you suggesting some or all of Caesar's policies should be adopted today in the US? If so, which ones?
Are you suggesting that our current President should ignore other branches of government (as Caesar did) to unilaterally impose what he wants to do?
My Roman history is a bit rusty, but didn't Rome fall after Caesar's death?
Yeah, I will gladly vote for Affordable Housing and Julius Caesar.
Caesar sounds more like an old school Democrat like we had in the nineties.
The main point I make (I am not trying, I make it) is that we lack bold leadership. It is very rare.
Ancient Rome is not 2022 US, but you can see the similarities. Both civilizations see wealth concentrated in the hands of a few. Both suffer from a shrinking middle class. Both see agrarian displacement. One thing we need to do, and this is actually a matter of national security, is reverse agrarian displacement. Corporations are creatures of statute and we should limit the ability of corporations to own land. We should eliminate large land purchases by developers who encourage people to buy homes at outrageous prices.
I accidentally deleted a comment pointing out that Caesar ignored the Roman senate. He did. That body was never democratically elected. He was ignoring an oligarchy. I do believe he was on a path to implementing a form of democracy when he was killed bc he was doing it in Athens. But that would have to wait until his return from Parthia.
I'll write his name in on my ballot. I'm paying two-thirds of my labor force. The unpaid slave is me.
Trump was more bold than you know or will ever admit. And I couldn't and can't stand the creep. However, his will go down as one of the more consequential presidencies in history. Taxes, regulation, energy, immigration, SCOTUS x 3, smashing ISIS, numerous peace agreements in the Middle East in a pivot from a bizarre Iran-centric policy: he got a lot done in just four short years - for better or worse. And he started ZERO wars. He still owns most political discussion and he's been gone almost two years. 49-state Reagan didn't get that.
But, we have a constitution, all we need to do is follow it, not ignore the people or the senate, but the people and the senate have to do their job, according to the constitution.
I'll disagree on the corporate ownership of farms, BO. Unless you are talking about land developers like Jandl. Over 90% of farmland is family owned and just over 60% is owner operated. Farms are just like politics; the middle is getting squeezed. We're surrounded by agrotourism on one side and large family run operations. Nothing wrong with either one, some like my family don't like to be bothered by people and the second are willing to accept more debt than most.
I'm not sure what affordable housing is supposed to look like, but you can pick up a row home in Allentown for under 100k. God forbid you have to put some work into your first home. My parents bought their house in 68 and lived in the kitchen huddled around a wood burning stove. fixed it up one room at a time. My father is not a carpenter but with time and a steady hand it's amazing what you can accomplish.
When I hear the words “bold leadership,”. I immediately think of Donald Trump. Seriously!
Trump worked against China, not with China. Trump refused to depend on Mideast oil and essentially made America energy independent. Trump worked hard (until stopped) to fully secure our border with Mexico and told Mexico to solve its own problems. Trump began the process of exposing the corruption within our Congress. Trump called out the news media for biased, sometimes untruthful reporting. Trump addressed the threats from North Korea directly and in person. He worked to reduce the size of government. ALL bold steps.
I could go on, but neither you, nor most of your readers, would agree these actions showed strong, independent leadership. In any event, the career politicians (and their puppet masters) working on Washington DID NOT WANT bold, decisive leadership. Trump was, and still is, a threat to “too big” bureaucracy.
. . . and here we are.
I read a study in the Economist during my *ahem* sabbatical pointing out that the wealth disparity in the US today is far greater than during Caesar's Rome.
Just look to the cities in our country the people in power are doing a great job with affordable housing.
Under this administration, any American who wants affordable housing should claim to be an asylum seeking illegal immigrant from Honduras.
"Under this administration, any American who wants affordable housing should claim to be an asylum seeking illegal immigrant from Honduras."
Versus lying to them for a free plane trip to Martha's Vinyard under a Republican administration?
"When I hear the words “bold leadership,”. I immediately think of Donald Trump. Seriously!"
Trump and Caesar have one thing in common - vanity. Caesar was bold, but Trump is a boor. There is a difference. Caesar had a great deal of military experience. Trump has none. Caesar treated his political enemies well and won many of them over. Trump just continues to deride them. Caesar was all for bestowing Roman citizenship and even Senate seats to many of the Gauls he had just conquered. He encouraged foreigners with advanced skills like medicine to move to Rome. Trump wanted to build a wall, and could not even manage that. Caesar stood by his allies while Trump derided and abandoned them. Trump is a con artist. Caesar was the real deal.
Caesar was a bit of a con himself...he was in massive debt but continued to live extravagantly. T&C are two sides of the same coin. Sociopathic narcissists who are "daring" enough to crush boundaries in their quests for world domination. This is the end of the republic.
It's certainly true that as he climbed the political ladder, Caesar incurred huge debts. As I pointed out in my story, he was a patrician who had no wealth. He spent lavishly and well beyond his means, but that was calculated so that he could advance. He was never a con man. There was no Caeser U or Caesar Steaks. He had a sponsor - Crassus - who was willing to lend him huge sums of money. His financial worries ended when he became procounsel in Spain. His wealth expanded even more when he went to Gaul. You can scour history and it would be hard to find anyone like him. He could argue better than Cicero. He could lead troops better than Alexander. He administered better than his nephew, Augustus. His engineering feats, like a bridge into Germany that he built and removed in a matter of days, or double walls in his siege of Vercingetorix at Alesia, is unmatched (except by other Romans). As I said, he was the real deal.
"Sociopathic narcissists who are "daring" enough to crush boundaries in their quests for world domination"
I see nothing remotely sociopathic or narcissistic about Caesar. You are fairly ignorant and should read Plutarch. I do see vanity, little more than the vanity seen in many men who are balding at middle age. Caesar was actually very much an empath. He could feel the suffering of others and worked to make their lives better. There was one instance in which he and a small band of troops were on their way somewhere in the middle of a raging storm. (Caesar traveled very fast and always had two scribes beside him to take dictation as he rode). They came upon a hut that had barely enough room for a few of them. Caesar said, "Honors belong to the strongest, but necessities belong to the weakest." He had the weakest members of his group sleep inside while he slept on the porch. This is a man who suffered from bouts of epilepsy and who was somewhat fragile, but was selfless. Also, I can think of several occasions in which Caesar, the commander of an army, threw himself into the front lines and fought with ordinary legionaries. His actions inspired his men and scared the elite, who actually tried to remove him when he was in Gaul.
Plutarch's Parallel Lives should be required reading in every high school.
Different eras, hundreds of years apart, present far different circumstances for rulers to deal with in achieving what they believe best for their nation’s citizens. Citizens facing challenges unlike any of those who came a generation or more before them. The comparison of Caesar with Trump is, at best, entertaining and thought provoking. Your admiration for the life of Caesar is fine with me, but has little bearing on the life my generation has been born into.
Your continued obsession with demeaning Trump however, sometimes convoluted in its accuracy and logic, reveals much about a troubled, somewhat blinded character. Something I keep in mind while listening and then, evaluating your daily messages. Regardless, I’ll keep reading. There’s value here.
"Your continued obsession with demeaning Trump however, sometimes convoluted in its accuracy and logic, reveals much about a troubled, somewhat blinded character"
He certainly is. Thanks for agreeing. Incidentally, my story was about Caesar and the need for bold leadership. It is you MAGAs who tried to make the comparison to your cult leader. So it is actually you folks who are obsessed.
Sociopathic was perhaps a bit too far, but Caesar was absolutely a narcissist. He’s often held as a prime example of a leader who possesses the “Dark Triad” of personality traits: Machiavellianism, psychopathy, narcissism. To call him an empath is almost laughable. He was power-hungry and used any means necessary, especially lies, propaganda and violence, to further his ambitions. Just because his ambitions are seen as more "for the people" (and actually also align with my extremely leftist/progressive worldview) doesn't make his tactics any less authoritarian.
I've already provided several examples demonstrating that Caesar was, in fact, an empatH. You actually contradict yourself.
You accuse Caesar of Machiavellianism. In The Prince, Machiavelli cautions that you must destroy a political enemy. Better to be feared than loved, he reasoned. But Caesar was the opposite. He actually forgave and gave positions of power to his political enemies. That is the exact opposite of Machivellianism.
You accuse Caesar if psychopathy, a condition characterized by lack of empathy, deficient emotional responses and poor behavioral controls. Caesar was the exact opposite. This is the man who burst into tears when presented with the head of Pompey, his mortal enemy. This is the man who insisted that Pompey's statues remain in Rome. This is a man who was abstemious, ate very little and was highly disciplined in his personal behavior, except when it came to women.
Was he power hungry? Yes, we call this ambition, not narcissism. Dis he use "any means necessary"? No. He was ruthless, to be sure, but there were always limits to what he would and would not do. His Commentaries make that clear. In brilliant prose that even today is compelling reading, he provides numerous insights into the characters of others, as well as himself.
It appears to me that what really bothers you is that you view him as a progressive. he was not. He was a reformer who solved problems.
You mention lies without example. You talk about propaganda, but his Commentaries are largely accurate. Unlike Trump, he realized that lies would catch up to him.
The only Roman emperor who wrote as well as Caesar was Marcus Aurelius.
Was Caesar authoritarian? Obviously. He was, after all, named dictator perpetuo. But would he have remained such had he lived? I do not that before he crossed the Rubicon to march on Rome, he bent over backwards in an effort to work out a return on amicable terms that would have allowed him to live. Also, as I mentioned, shortly before his death, he had established the basis for a return to democracy in Athens. I think it's entirely possible that he would have surrendered his dictatorship, as Sulla did, once his reforms were enacted. Sulla, unlike Caesar, was an optimate who also was a brilliant commander. He never lost. He marched on Rome before Caesar ever did and posted a proscription list that resulted in the murder of thousands. Sulla was a backer of the oligarchs while Caesar was a supporter of the populare. When Sulla took over, Caesar was about 17 and was among those on a proscription list. Sulla told Caesar he'd remove his name if he divorced his wife. Caesar flatly refused in a face-to-face meeting. Sulla let him go but then reversed himself and reinstated Caesar as a proscribed citizen. Sulla said that he say many Marius' in Caesar (Marius was Caesar's uncle-in-law and was Sulla's nemesis). In reality, Sulla saw himself.
"what really bothers you is that you view him as a progressive"
lol weirdo literally nothing about Julius Caesar bothers me except that that you insist on misunderstanding his personality and misrepresenting his motives
Your take is pandentic
Nothing pedantic about Rejecting wholesale misrepresentations and backing it up with actual fact as i’ve Done. You simply have no idea what you’re talking about and it must bother you to be contradicted with substance by someone who does.
You are no Farticus!
The problem is government. HUD’s average 4 bedroom apartment in the Lehigh Valley is $1,622 a month. The tenant pays 30% the government picks up the rest. My childhood home in Bethlehem was a half a double that my dad a custodian could afford. Many of the homes in that neighborhood have since been converted to HUD. Without these government handouts house prices would be affordable to the masses. The government is setting the rent rates not the market. Change the zoning laws and the way rentals are subsidized.
8:06
No you are wrong on your thoughts.
Look at it this way, if the rich pay their fare share of taxes than there would be more money to increase incomes for the massage that receive those benefits. They most likely need good childcare so that they can earn a living at a full time job and not worry about their children. We need to make the rich accountable for paying their fair share of taxes.
Post a Comment