Excerpt from an interview of a roman historian by some guys who's page I wandered onto... here's the link...
Great Interview of the Week: Beware of charismatic populists leading private armies | chrisdellavedova.com
No point to make... just found it interesting.
-Hedons
CDV:Now is the time when we get to the wildly speculative part of the interview - my favorite part. In one of your podcasts, you called Cincinnatus the Roman George Washington. Which historical Roman leader is the most similar to the following contemporary politicians and why:
a. Bill Clinton: A far more shallow version of Cicero - great orator and master politician.
b. Hilary Clinton: Aggripina - the patron saint of ruthless female politicians.
c. John McCain: Pompey - the aging ex-military hero in way over his head.
d. Barack Obama: Vespasian - a conciliatory pragmatist who stabilized the Empire after a period of intense partisan strife.
e. George W Bush (say Nero, c’mon say Nero!): Sorry, I gotta go with Commodus - the failed brat son of a relatively benign Emperor. The beginning of the end…
CDV: I recently read this slightly strange article in the Globalist by Michael Lind comparing the U.S with the Roman Empire. If you were forced to compare the modern U.S. with ancient Rome, where would we be in the timeline of the Empire?
MD: I usually only get into this kind of stuff after three beers, but here we go: It seems pretty clear we’re post-Carthage but pre-Caesar. Unfortunately we have already made the critical transition from a conscription army to a professional (and increasingly private) army, so that puts us closer to Caesar than we may be willing to admit.
Plus, we are witnessing a consolidation of power in the hands of an increasingly myopic super-elite in Washington that parallels the stranglehold on power wealthy patrician Senators had achieved near the end of the Republic (which left the door wide open for a populist demagogue to step in and declare war on the corrupt oligarchs). I’m not sure if the Bush/Clinton thing is exactly Marius and Sulla, but it’s pretty dang close, which means young Caesar is running around somewhere…
CDV: Which historical Roman leader would be the best President of the U.S. in 2008?
MD: I think we need a Hadrian. He recognized the implicit danger of Imperial overreach, swallowed Roman pride and pulled back from the territory Trajan had so recently conquered. He took a beating for it, but it ensured the survival of the Empire. As a bonus - the territory he recognized as being too costly to incorporate into the Empire was Mesopotamia. The more things change…
CDV: Which American politician (living or dead) would have made the best Roman Emperor?
MD: Well, George Washington obviously would have done just fine, but he explicitly rejected the idea. I think either of the Roosevelts would have done a good job. Both had the requisite mix of vision, arrogance and political savvy to pull it off. Other than that it’s slim pickings (good Emperors are hard to come by…just ask the Romans).
CDV: What lesson that the Romans learned during their fall should we be bearing in mind today?
MD: Beware of charismatic populists leading private armies. Remember kids: today’s private contractors are tomorrow’s Legion XIII.