Caesarism
June 2024
Counter to the American mind, autocratic power is not tyrannical by necessity. Autocracy can take several forms, some more intimately connected to the masses than others. Julius Caesar, one of the most monumental figures in history, is usually thought of as power hungry by Americans. Meanwhile, Americans only sow their own Caesar. Julius Caesar was a result of sociological forces beyond the short view of history the average person takes. The republic was dead, a carcass rotting. Americans look at a future prospect of a Caesar with contempt, just as the Romans had contempt for power after overthrowing their kings. Yet Americans will hail the coming Caesar, just as the Romans hailed Caesar.
To heavily gloss over the history of the Roman Republic, the government had over-promised the masses and the slow centralization of power over the previous few hundred years created a large enough divide among the masses and the government that there was no fulfilling those promises. Two implicit factions had emerged, the Populares (those whose policies favored the commoner) and the Optimates (those whose policies favored the rich). At some point, the will of the populists, channeling the discontented people’s will, overcame the will for stability and an unstoppable momentum was catalyzed toward the Optimates’ end. Between the filibustering and deadlocked senates, what little could be done seemed only to slowly fatten themselves over the past few hundred years. The famous Gracchi brothers, who tried to pass reforms in favor of the masses, were murdered. Each side in the growing divide increasingly bent the laws against their opponents, corrupting themselves and the land with each further step. Cato the Younger bent laws on many occasions to hurt Julius Caesar. When the final straw was laid, Julius Caesar famously crossed the Rubicon River with his army, marking his final ascent and a civil war. He went on to pass many popular reforms that the senate never could, including land reform, for which the Gracchi brothers were murdered.
A Caesar is a forcible stripping of Optimate power, a correction of a righteous course slowly diverged. However, let us not be too forgiving to the Caesar. Yes, he arises at the breaking point of corrupted power, but his doing so is (or can be) self-centered. Though, by the nature of the situation of his rise, his power is in a symbiotic relationship with the masses. It is as the shark and the cleaner wrasse, living in a mutualistic relationship. The Caesar capitalizes on the loss of confidence in the Optimate powers that be, which is only done in displaying that he is not one of them. This benefits the masses, who then reinforce the Caesar. I think the criticism of a Caesar should not fall on what he does, but his motives. Yet, even that may be excused assuming all is executed properly. The man who gives money to the homeless to fuel his pride receives what he wants out of the relationship just as much as the homeless man.
A Caesar is simultaneously a savior and a harbinger of doom. The most difficult task before him is not undoing elitist wrongs, even as an elite himself, but to recreate the lasting stability that he destroyed. This feat is twofold: (1) To create a concurrent stability and (2) to create a stability after he leaves power. The former was short lived, or perhaps even superficial, as Julius Caesar was assassinated only a year after the end of the civil war. The latter was also not achieved, probably due to his power being cut short. Julius Caesar’s assassination unwittingly did not rescue the republic, but only caused another civil war, which was won by his nephew Augustus Caesar. All of this instability, though, I would not place on the Caesar. He is merely a fulfillment of culminating forces.
Granted the origins of the US, the American mind is understandably heavily averse to anything remotely resembling a concentration of power. Yet, the American “experiment” is only unwittingly steering itself straight into the arms of Caesarism. It is only the inevitability of baseless democratic principles. Even the Greeks and Romans, who Americans will hail, would not have agreed with American republicanism. Democratic ideals and libertarianism do not necessarily go hand-in-hand.
It is idiots who will look to Trump as a Caesar, both out of fear and out of admiration. He may be boastful, yet anyone who thinks he will cross the American Rubicon has become an unwitting glutton for anything spoonfed to him. Even if he did cross the Rubicon, the current government — Cato and his allies — retains too much legitimacy to afford him that power. The US is inching toward its Caesar, but the time is not yet.