Jump to content

Did Congress Question Clinton


Jason

Recommended Posts

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='461012' date='Mar 22 2007, 11:00 PM']That's a pretty jaded view of humanity, Actium. And, to a certain extent, it is a fair assessment.

Except...

The polarities of dictatorship v. democracy do not express the real tension in history. You've left out perhaps the most important factor, which is the oligarchy--those powerful families which have run the show more than either dictators or democracies throughout history. Until you incorporate their place in proper historical context, your theory will be less accurate with regard to human history as well as human practice.

For all the supposed stability brought by Augustus, et al... it's easy to forget, or ignore, that the Roman Empire (especially in the West) was mostly barren of scientific and economic advancement. Or that between the years 27 bc and 395 ad (when the Empire split), there were 79 Emperors (by my hasty count.) That's an average reign of a little over 5 years per Emperor, not very distinct from our Presidential cycle, and the transition of power, in many cases, was a lot less "peaceful." What was vital in the West was brought, for the most part, by the introduction and spread of Christianity. And this may explain why, in the East, the Empire lasted until the mid 15th c., as Constantinople was pretty much Christian from the get go. That's what Mattingly thinks, though I am not as charitable as he. Certainly Gibbon's hatred of Christianity, which he blames for the downfall of the Western Empire, begs a series of questions to which we find unpleasant answers, not the least of which is: "If not Christianity and its accompanying cultural matrix, then what?" And here, imo, is one of the keys to understanding history over the long span--across various forms of state and governance. It's no accident that powerful families have been both the movers and shakers of history, as well as the proponents of "renaissance" behavior and backward cultishness. Mostly the latter.

One could argue that such choices are merely based upon the acquisition of power, and I'd be inclined to agree with you, provided you expanded your conception of what the term power consists.

So...

The real nub here is one's view on what it means to be human. Not only to those who have the "practical" means to affect history--whether they were born into such means or seized them forcefully, but possibly also to those who possess that innate feature which distinguishes humans from the beasts--i.e. reason.

And...

The greatest irony of them all is this: if the universe were constructed in such a way that is implied by the "might makes right" crowd, then the fact of the matter is that the human race would not exist--at least not with the charactestistic of reason.[/quote]


An oligarchy could be explained as part of the transitional phase between the two polarities. Or perhaps it would be fair to say that they are always there, and it is to them that either the dictator or the people must deal. Or liquidate. Your point is interesting--are they the holders of power, from which the mantle must be wrested? And in democracy, they succeed in tacking it back, only to have the dictator take it from the oligarchy? Or sometimes they take it from the dictator, and the dictator takes back the signet ring, or to the people, etc. Yes, I like that--they are both transitional and a constant. [eta is this clear? it was when I wrote it but I'm not so sure now--I think you know what my clumsy words mean]

The problem of succession is always the problem with empires. It's one that has never been very well solved. I have been working on ideas for my own successors--(forgive my megalomania)--but it necessitates a slavish devotion to me even after I die, which of course cannot be achieved even with divinity, let alone a human. Augustus' principate, a pragmatic solution, was a splendid way for power to be wielded and was much more stable than the dominate. It provides a good starting point, but as Augustus (or rather history) found there is no clear way to ensure that your successors will be worthy of the system's architect.

As for what power is, that is of course a rubric of physical forces (to command), charisma/reason (to convince), culture (this should be further defined, but I'm not up to that, used to win over through nonviolent means), and legitimacy (a practical consideration of convincing people you are in the right, basically a subset of charisma/reason). Others have defined it better than me and these terms are good enough for me at the moment.

You might paint me in the naked might makes right crowd, but I recognize that reason is a component of might--power as above is not physical alone.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='461014' date='Mar 23 2007, 12:05 AM']Be careful, Bung. While Lawman would have not problem with a "Death's Head" uniform of the day, you don't want to be put in the position of being an honorable Wehrmacht soldier acting on behalf of the evil SS crowd.[/quote]

[img]http://bp0.blogger.com/_EoaekWnLvZc/Rf2f7mQTk_I/AAAAAAAAAL0/jaL7gPt1Tw4/s320/20070317_MarchOnPentagon_%20052-edited.jpg[/img]

Now Homer, return your head into the sand once you pull it out of your ass.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the democrats believe every day is April 15.
Ronald Reagan

[img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/24.gif[/img]

[i]Damn, he was funny. I mean unlike his predecessor's he seemed to enjot being president.

Bill Clinton having sex with other woman than his wife doesn't count.[/i]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BlackJesus
[quote name='Lawman' post='461075' date='Mar 23 2007, 05:28 AM']Government's first duty is to [s]protect the people[/s] [b]enrich corporate sponsors and fund the military industrial complex[/b], not run their lives.
Ronald Reagan[/quote]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BlackJesus

[quote name='Lawman' post='461072' date='Mar 23 2007, 04:57 AM']Now Homer, return your head into the sand once you pull it out of your ass.[/quote]


[b][img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//23.gif[/img] [size=3]lets see ...[/size]


[color="#0000FF"][size=3]Homer[/size] = eloquent, thoughtful, educated, well read, intelligent, fair minded, wise, objective, & honorable.[/color]


[color="#FF0000"][size=3]Lawman[/size] = bigoted, deranged, islamophobe dittohead, Rush Limpdick koolaid drinker, possessing a powerful kind of stupid and a CARM website to copy and paste from[/color]




:whistle: [/b]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote name='Homer_Rice' post='461727' date='Mar 24 2007, 07:20 AM']Ah, but your soul is stained forever.[/quote]

[i]Come to think of it you may be right, I got a call with a request from detainee [/i]#2541;

[i]he wanted to know if I could stop at Mcdonalds and pick him up a #1 Supersized.[/i]

[img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//19.gif[/img] [i]food[/i].

:ninja:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...