pro bono publico

Okay, Tom's recent post has gotten me thinking about public morality in Ancient Rome and today.

Here are some thoughts.

Ancient Rome was a dirty, smelly place full of hardship, suffering, and daily terror for most of its residents. If you were able to go back through a time machine to see it, you wouldn't recognize it from the capital of any third world country, if you saw the whole of it.

Young Roman men would have considered easy access to prostitution a right, not a privilege. Rich bands of youth roamed the streets at night killing street people and vagrants for pleasure with impunity. Bands of criminals roamed the streets at night looking to kidnap people and hold them for ransom, or sell them into slavery.

Most female slaves were subjected to sexual slavery in a completely abject way, with no ability to escape. Most male slaves were expected to work 14-16 hour days. The lucky ones worked in the fields. The unlucky ones took minerals from deep inside the ground.

The vast majority of citizens had very little protection from the vagaries of the rota fortunae which could carry any individual, from a senator to the lowest plebeian into complete destitution.

The Roman reliance on slave labor put a drag on industrial development, and therefore Rome lagged far behind Asia in technological development.

On the other hand...

Roman law created the idea of "rights" and "due process," which exactly 1786 years after the dedication of the Ara Pacis, blossomed into the Declaration of Independence.

The Greco-Roman tradition of rational inquiry helped Europeans use technology mostly developed in Ancient China to enslave the world...oh, wait, this probably should have been included in the last list.

They had some really great naked statues. I mean, really great.

They had indoor plumbing...and domes. Did I mention the domes?

They created the idea of a multi-racial state which afforded its residents certain rights of citizenship. Okay, this one is pretty cool.

You could probably add to either list. Here's what floors me about today's world. Romans expected their leaders to provide for them. The emperors maintained their power by offering free grain and entertainment to the peoples. People of Senatorial rank were expected to provide for the public edification of their city or province. In other words, although it was a vastly unbalanced system, the rich were expected to look out for the poor. Let's look at an historical document, written by a group of folks who had a good reason not to be happy with the Roman state.

Romans 13
Submission to the Authorities
1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. 7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.

Let's get back to that crucial verse number 4, "For he is God's servant to do you good." Not, "For he is God's servant to take a vacation at his ranch while people are dying." And it adds this, "If you owe taxes, pay taxes." The most offensive thing that I have seen in the last few days was a headline at FOXNews.com. It read something like, "Are taxpayers going to have to pay for Hurricane Katrina?" The answer is, "Damn right, they are." We all are taxpayers. If you don't pay taxes, and it is not because you make less than $10,000 a year, then put yourself on the list of bad people, right next to catamites and idolaters.

The response to this Hurricane should have been our government's finest hour. After hours and hours of hearings, billions of dollars given for disaster management and planning, and committee after committee, why can't we get our act together four years after 9/11. I don't care who is responsible—whether we should blame Bush or his buddie, "Brownie," or Roy Nagin, or any other such person. I think that all of these people should be honorable like Richard Clarke, and take responsibility for the absolute bungling of this tragedy.


Yet, we do still have a hierarchy in our democratic society. George Bush is the President—the last time I checked we have no other. He ran away from the action during Vietnam, he ran away from Washington on 9/11, and he ran away from Katrina when it hit. Maybe the buck should finally stop. Maybe if he takes some responsibility for this mess, everyone else can step up like the grownups they should be and take responsibility too.

ADDENDUM
A kind and judicious commentator just reminded me of something else that makes me want to scream, kick, and pull hair. So, I'm afraid I'll dignify his actually thoughtful comment with an overly emotional response. I couldn't give a flying wombat's ass what the Founding Fathers' position on disaster relief would have been. The Founding Fathers had as much contempt for the constitution as any activist judge. Thomas Jefferson was opposed to the very idea of the constitution, and only muted his criticism of it in deference to Madison. The constitution itself was barely ratified. Nor was it created in any sort of transparent or democratic way. The Louisiana Purchase was completely unconstitutional, as were the Alien and Sedition Acts. The removal of the Cherokee Indians known as the "Trail of Tears," went way beyond constitutional limits. There was also the suspension of habeas corpus during the Civil War, etc...

We no longer live in an era where Philadelphia was a bustling burg of 40,000, which made it the metropolis of North America. Now that is just a neighborhood in New Orleans and there were more than half that many casualties already counted in the aftermath of this storm. If one does not want tax dollars being spent, then I would encourage one to move to Somalia or some other failed state. Then, you'll never have to pay taxes again, if you can kill enough people.

A democracy is a delicate balance between tradition and innovation. However, this balance must be struck on the basis of thoughtful and compassionate policies. We cannot allow ourselves to make decisions solely based on the misunderstood opinions of men who lived in a world without real cities, motorized transport, telecommunication, or heavy industry. If one wants to live in that world, I would suggest moving to Lancaster, PA. I hear that it is beautiful this time of year.