Reply #38: The Roman Republic is a poor comparison

[DivinBreuvage]

The people did not rise up and throw off their chains because the Caesars didn't put them in chains. They had been in chains under the Republic, which was a government of wealthy men for wealthy men despite some token concessions wrung from them by the masses in times of civil unrest. In fact Julius Caesar leveraged himself to power in part by taking the side of the people against the aristocrats. And though the title of Caesar remained with Rome until it fell, the lives of the men who held the title were frequently short and ended nastily.

I think you are right about the tendency of humans to strike out laterally, or at people below them, rather than at people at the top who may perhaps be more to blame for some of the problems they suffer. But there's a vital issue that never receives proper consideration from the "America is a nation of slaves" crowd: I'm not aware that the advent of the Caesars significantly worsened the standard of living of the Roman masses. But in America it's a question of increasing unemployment, lowered wages, inaccessible health care, bankruptcies, home foreclosures, and so on, for people who haven't had problems with those things before. THAT is the factor that convinces nations that the club at the top isn't getting the job done.

Françoise