Two nights ago I read Meditations by Marcus Aurelius, a nearly two thousand year old text. It was challenging, and made me quite uncomfortable. Its reflections forced me to reflect upon myself, and see my own flaws that needed remedy. As such, I rather enjoyed it.
But what I found very interesting was the consciousness of Marcus himself, the philosopher emperor. He was in many ways expressing the perfect consciousness of authority, speaking of how the needs of the state was his own needs, and how fulfilment came from his duty to such a state.
Obviously he was not a perfect man in reality, but philosophy is frequently an expression of motive, and even ideal. I am examining the texts, not the man.
So if you want to tell me that the Roman Empire was an empire, if you want to tell me they had war, and slavery, and patriarchy, then fine, do so. I agree with you. But I don’t see where else we would find writing that reflects upon these things.
Because Marcus Aurelius understood his authority, and his role in wielding it. Instead of being a libertarian, and pretending he was no different from the ordinary citizen, or indeed, the indentured slave, was not a false consciousness he embodied. He understood precisely who he was.
He saw how the greatest service he could do to the people was to turn his authority into a personal burden, to, in essence, let the state oppress him. To let the state embody him with obligation, duty and humility to the people.
He talks about how all people are innocent, how wrongness comes from ignorance rather than evil. How you do not combat flaws and mistakes with punishment and retribution, but rather with wisdom. How you do not punish someone into becoming a better person, but educate them.
He talks about how the nature of anger, vindictiveness, punishment and retribution are equally flawed. How, upon being tested by the ignorance of others, he must show enough virtue for two.
That to show such care and compassion when exposed to the weakness of others, to nurture a wounded spirit, is to nurture one’s own.
I believe this is what every great revolutionary has learned in some way or another. The intellectual Marxist, who takes on the role of a hypocrite, treating knowledge as a currency which permits them wealth in the company of peers, who uses their knowledge for personal gain such as reputation, credibility and influence.
Who is more concerned with party prestige and book deals than the material needs of the proletariat; Who acts opportunistically by preaching false promises of utopianism, idealism, reform and reaction, ironically enough partake this wounded spirit which will, should they be revealed by power, have them become the very totalitarian character they are so quick to ascribe to others.
Rather, it is only through careful discipline and self-awareness, through the imposition of duty, discipline and personal attainment, through rigid boundaries and the careful machination of philosophy that figures of authority can make itself equal to the people. By levelling the playing field through self-imposed burdens and limitations.
And this should be the spirit of the state. An exemplary spirit, that does not exist as laws and bylaws, but as people. As careful adherents who become a reflection of the needs of the people. Who, in their upright stature, imposes not fear, but inspiration.
Who in their leadership never applies the double standards of idealism, who never denies themselves their own nature, who gladly forfeits themselves to the people, and in doing so, become true servants to the public.
The vanguard must produce this spirit through their own accomplishments, to understand that it’s their job to drink the same poison that Socrates did. That the state must be in a constant state of agitation and vigilance with itself, that each day is a tribunal of such a spirit. That only the most disciplined, caring and virtuous leaders may wake up in the morning and not feel the fear of scrutiny and surveillance.
Let every delegate, every official, every policeman, every soldier, every commander feel the weight of liability, so that the people may rest easy.
When Robert Conquest spreads hysteria about purges, then I believe he is showing the wounded spirit of liberal philosophy, the acute self-serving nature of people who desire power for their own gain. Who wants their power to furnish their office with blooming roses rather than gleaming bayonets.
Who wants the police and the legislature to be their personal lapdogs, in carrying out the whims of desire and ideals, who, instead of ruling their passions, let their passions rule them.
For every law and regulation the people are expected to adhere to, there should be three more written for the statesman.
For every benefit or easement given to authority, there should be three more given to the mandate of such an authority.
For every sacrifice expected from a citizen, a tenfold should be volunteered by the official.
This will create an atmosphere that regiments the servants of the state to pursue virtue, to assure that they are honest, devoted and generous in their dedication to the needs of the people.
This will also create an atmosphere in which the corrupt, the self-serving and the undisciplined will fear the pursuit of power, knowing that it will not reward them with wealth or personal power, but rather criminal prosecution.
And then, over time, as society prospers and the spirit of the state is nurtured, these many virtues will be codified by law, statute, decree and verdict. It will become as clear as crystal, and permit people to find safety in knowing precisely what to do as to serve the people, and become honoured in doing so.
This I believe is the most vital principle of a republic, to understand that the greatest crimes do not come from those who violate the law, but rather its own authors.
