America in Decline: Late Republic or Late Empire?

That’s the title of a wide ranging article that my Dutch friend sent me a few days ago. You can read it all at Revolver:

America in Decline: Late Republic or Late Empire?

This is the consideration that’s at the core of the article:

When millions believe that the ruling government is illegitimate, you have the first step towards regime change or revolution. And things have only gotten worse since the election: the January 6th fiasco and its invocation as a way to kickstart a “Domestic War on Terror” (despite, or maybe because of, possible FBI involvement); the continuation of COVID-19 tyranny and the push for vaccine passports that would create a Chinese-style social credit system; rising inflation at the pump and the supermarket; and the malignant growth of Critical Race Theory and “woke” politics within the central government. The border crisis in the Southwest walks together with a declining white population while the latter is loudly celebrated. Afghanistan can now be added to this list of disasters and failures.

…

Given this reality, it is no wonder so many are talking about America’s imminent collapse. There are those who celebrate it and wish to push it over the cliff. …

Others, such as the Claremont Institute’s Michael Anton and prolific political philosopher Curtis Yarvin, aka Mencius Moldbug, openly talk about what comes next after the end of the American Republic. Collapse is a given; the only question remains is whether the United States is in its late republic phase or late imperial phase.

After his lengthy lead in, the author offers a comparison of the American situation with that of ancient Rome. The parallels are obvious enough, to those with a knowledge of history. American, like Rome, arose as a Republic defended by civic virtue and citizen soldiers. One thinks immediately of Washington’s Farewell Address. Also like Rome, having attained world dominant power, America has been almost imperceptibly transformed into an Empire with a professional military. Republican trappings and external forms have been retained (as they were in Rome), but the reality is of raw Deep State power wielded by the IC and the Defense Establishment—the military tech establishment—and Realpolitik ueber alles. All driven by the greed and corruption of the elite. The comparison is a natural one.

I urge you to read the entire article and ponder the parallels. In the meantime, here is an extended excerpt from the portion that deals with the transition of Rome from a republic to an empire:

The terms “late republic” and “late empire” come from Roman history. Roman history was near and dear to the Founding Fathers, and much of America’s political culture seeks, or rather used to seek, a return to Roman traditions. As such, one can learn a lot about America’s past and its possible future by studying Rome.

…

The Roman Republic was designed to be a “republic of virtue,” wherein mos maiorum, or ancestral Latin customs passed down through history, united society. The early republic produced fine specimens of Roman civic virtue. Chief among them was the farmer Cincinnatus, who put down his plow and picked up his sword to lead Rome’s city militia against an invading tribe. The story of Cincinnatus inspired the citizen-soldier idea that animated American armed forces until the twentieth century.

However, despite Rome’s cultivation of civic virtue, its politics began fracturing just as Rome reached new heights of power.

Rome’s dominant position on the Italian peninsula and its military victories against Carthage and Macedonia expanded the size, strength, and wealth of the Republic. The city-state grew into an empire that included citizens who had never been to Rome. Many, especially the majority plebeians, felt that Rome’s institutions needed to change for it to be governed equally. The Council of the Plebs and various tribal assemblies were created to give the plebeians a greater voice in politics. It was still not enough, so, in the second century BC, Tiberius Gracchus and his brother Gaius Gracchus became radical populist agitators. They sought the redistribution of land and an increase in the grain dole. For these suggestions, conservatives in the Senate (optimates) created street gangs and urban riots, one of which killed Tiberius Gracchus and his supporters.

The execution of the Gracchi did little to solve Rome’s woes. Military reforms instituted under Gaius Marius, who was a popular consul and general of the Roman army, forever ended the citizen militia of Cincinnatus. Rome’s military thus became a professional force with divisions, better equipment, and standard pay. As a result, Marius’s men became loyal to him rather than the Senate. This unsettling trend was further increased by Marius’ status among the populares, a political faction of Romans who supported radical populist reforms. As recounted in the brilliant book Party Politics in the Age of Caesar by scholar Lily Ross Taylor, Rome lacked political parties in the modern sense. Rather, wealthy and well-connected men became patrons for others, who in turn made and executed decisions for their supporters. To squash Marius and his supporters, the Senate turn to another brilliant general, Sulla.

In 82 BC, following his victory at the Battle of the Colline Gate, Sulla used his dictatorial powers to murder, rob, and exile Marian supporters. One of the victims of Sulla’s proscription was a young Gaius Julius Caesar. Decades later, as a consul and general, Caesar would lead his loyal legions into Gaul and Britain, and then back into Italy and across the Rubicon to start another civil war. Caesar triumphed. His next moves spelled the end of the Roman Republic, as he, a member of the populares, became dictator for life on the strength of his appeal to Rome’s masses. For this sin, members of the Senate murdered him.

Ironically, the Senate would turn to Caesar’s adopted nephew, Octavian, to put down another aspiring dictator named Marc Antony. Like his uncle, Octavian proved to be an excellent military commander. He was an even shrewder politician, for Octavian declared his triumph over Marcus Antonius and his Egyptian allies as a victory for the Senate. This magnanimity convinced the Senate to heap titles upon Octavian, who in turn renamed himself Augustus. In saving the Senate, Augustus weakened it and created the Roman Empire.

The Roman Empire was cheered by the majority of Romans, most of whom had no clue that the Republic was dead. The Roman Empire brought peace for centuries.

Obviously, what the author wants us to consider is simply this: Is there any going back? Are we still in the Republican period of the American Order, one which could somehow be revived through a recovery of civic virtue? Or have we lost our unifying mos majorum that unified us as a nation in the past? Have we passed irrevocably to the Imperial period from which there is no turning back short of massive upheaval.