The start of the fall

I've been listening to the Ancient Roman History podcast. This is a podcast with an accompanying blog, see http://thehistoryofrome.blogspot.com/2008/04/28-taking-stock-history-of-rome.html for the episode that I'm referring to.

This episode is called Taking Stock. The point that it refers to the point in history where Rome finally conquers all major rivals in the Mediterranean basis and begins their reign of uncontested dominance. At this point, economic and political forces set a course of action into motion that eventually transformed the democratic and stable Republic into the era of the Emperors.

There was an interesting progression where the wealth from conquering all the other nations became concentrated in the hands of a few. These few didn't care much for the state or the rules that governed society. Through a complex system of patronage, they purchased the loyalty of enough people to sway elections and get their own way in things. They brought back hundreds of thousands of slaves from the conquered lands and the poor Romans found themselves out of work, replaced by the free labor of slaves. Eventually, they had to find a patronage with a wealthy Roman or join the military in order to survive. Small farms disappeared as poor farmers sold their land and wealthy Romans gobbled up large territories. Eventually, this would lead to the downfall of the Republic and usher in the era or the Roman Emperors. Some would argue that this eventually led to the downfall of Rome itself, but that was 500 years later, so it's hard to point to a specific point in their history and say "this is when it all began".

I found it to be reminiscent of the course of events in U.S. history that we are seeing unfolding right now. Politicians and the wealthy cooperating to divide up their majority share of the wealth and power, and eroding the purity of the democratic idealism that the state was founded on.

I wrote the following comment in their blog:

"After listening to this episode, I thought about how the parallels to modern day America were so clear. I see that has been commented on here. After 9/11, when we perceived a strong external threat, we had a strong degree of unity. The speed with which this unity dissipated and the breadth of the divide that emerged has been stunning, to say the least. I considered it a product of political and economic/capitalistic pressures, and Rome's transition away from the Republic follows a similar course. You mention that individual rich Romans felt that they did not need the state any more, and it reminds me of current stories of astronomical CEO compensation and record profits by Exxon in an era of economic recession. I think the lesson to be learned here is when a small number of people get greedy for wealth and power, it starts a process. They start changing the rules to protect or enhance their ability to increase their already overwhelming advantage in wealth or power. At least when you study Roman history, you don't have to listen to people on the top of the heap whining about taxes and regulations when in reality, the world is their oyster."

We often hear the tired old saying that "those that ignore history are doomed to repeat it". In this case, I think people can be perfectly aware of history and still repeat it, thinking that this time it doesn't apply.

You've probably heard the stories about experiments done on rats involving drugs or the pleasure centers of their brains. The point of these stories is that when an animal is given unlimited access with no limits to the things that give it pleasure, they inevitably pleasure themselves to death. While this is demonstrated as physical pleasures, I believe there is a corollary in the area of wealth and power. Both of these states provide the opportunity to accelerate the acquisition of more wealth or power (or both). It's like some kind of tipping point, where once you get so rich or powerful, there are few limits to the amount of wealth or power you can accumulate. The question is, if wealth and power are somehow part of a finite supply, then the additions to wealth and power have to come at the expense of someone on the other end of the spectrum. This is how a system becomes top heavy and unstable. To exercise power, you have to have strong people below you. To enjoy wealth, you have to have a reasonably secure populace to provide a stable society for you. When wealth and power concentrate too much in the hands of fewer and fewer people, the system has to eventually collapse.