Cæsarism and Civilisation

Here we stand in 2017. Cultural Marxism has permeated nearly every significant media outlet and educational institute in existence. We have corporatist elements infesting our politics, the interests of which outweigh all prior existing interests meaning a kleptocratic oligarchy has formed that think only in terms of personal material wealth and this has led to the abolition of ethnic identity, traditional social norms and traditional goals and incentives for societies and individuals.

At such a time it may be prudent to ask, “what hope is there for the west? Can we reverse the tide of decay? And is there any point in trying?” to answer such a question we must first ask “what is the decline of civilizations? What causes it? What are the signs to look out for? ” I find it useful to take an anthropological method, by examining the declines and transitions of previous civilizations we can gain insight into our own.

The Latinum city state of Rome was a Republic ruled via the Mediterranean method of organisation; amici di amici or friends of friends, similar in nature of the method the mafia used to control Sicily. After the demise of their royal dynasty in 495bc they implemented a constitution and an imperfect aristocratic republic was born as was so common in the Mediterranean world. This created a system of keynesian expansion. The aristocracy or Patrician class held the central administration of the state, they felt that they collectively owned it and held an affinity for their ownership class; this meant that whilst they would inevitably be corrupt they would prevent others from entering the sphere of corruption as they wanted these positions for themselves, intimately linked to the concept of amici di amici is the concept of patronage and this system is very good at keeping out hostile external interests, making up for their lack of biologically based kinship identity.

This system was offset by giving the middle and lower classes the ability of vote for their own magistrates and run their municipalities local and urban administration. Due to these elements of governance the expansionist element of the society was inevitable as the Senate would always benefit from an expansion of the territories and found it favorable to accept local tribal chiefs or nobles into the senatorial and patrician classes in exchange for the absorption of that state into the empire. However with victory comes the spoils, and just as the plebeians, the mob of Rome demanded ever more free bread and games we too have eroded one of the foundations, one of the pillars of society by distorting the material incentive for working and altering the basis upon which we organised the society. Similarly this lead to gluttony and avarice in ancient Rome, the attempt to satisfy one’s existential needs with more material want eventually leads to the purposeful abdication of morality.

Such as in ancient Rome today we have seen the abdication of the responsibility of marriage, of chastity and of traditional virtues of all kinds. The germane point is that Rome was able to reverse their fortune as under Julius Cæsar’s principate he made it illegal for any slave to do the work a free man can do; recognizing that labor slavery merely created small short term gains for the owners and wage depression and outsourcing of jobs from local municipalities, under his son Augustus Cæsar’s appointment of Consul he instituted reforms of the aristocracy and enshrined the rights of senators by giving them formal status (ordo senatorius) with a higher wealth threshold (250,000 denarii, or the pay of 1,100 legionaries) and superior rank and privileges to ordinary equites and also instituted laws that once more made it illegal for a wife to be “infidelis” / not faithful and sent his own daughter away for such a crime. Augustus installed reforms, in both the modern and original meaning of the word meaning to restore a facet that previously existed.

Rome did not manage to continue such reforms throughout the empire’s history and Theodosius I let the Goths into the empire and to fight in the military, the very source of Rome’s great power and wealth, this decision would be their undoing. Anyone who’s been to a multicultural urban area recently will recognize the modern analogy but in ancient Rome towards the end of the Empire Roman children were reported to be hanging out with barbarian children, using barbarian words, going on raids with the barbarians and worst of all wearing trousers, whereas today in London native Britons are using slang that’s a mixture of Jamaican and Urdu (Pakistani), joining their gangs, and wearing flat peak hats and tracksuits, and the trousers? they wear them below their arses. It’s clear to see that the civilizational trials we have are not different from those faced by our ancestors, and are if anything more pressing given the degree of difference between the belligerent alien populations living together.

In a time of great turmoil where trust in institutions that have let the masses down is very low people usually turn to a man instead of an idea or concept, a Cæsar whom will use the plebiscite masses to obtain power and correct the perceived wrongs of the system.

The only question here is weather we can appoint a Cæsar or Cæsars throughout the west who can not only amass enough power unto himself that he is able to stem external vested interests but also that he is also able to correct the faults of the system, as the left have readily identified some of these problems and might appoint a Cæsar of their own; we can see across the west and across political spectra alike faith in democracy has all but failed. Ideally I would like to see a Cæsar who holds principles for limited government and the need for aristocracy, but also one whom holds the Arthurian concept of the native people, the king and the kingdom all being one and the same thing, a Cæsar who understands the nature of his people and is not afraid to act virtuously knowing that if he does he will have only the additional admiration of his subjects.

Which way the west will go is hard to determine but the example of history is clear to see, it took us until the renaissance to regain the majesty of the roman empire and regain our understanding of the world; the west easily may not survive it’s current turmoils but only time will tell.

– Ælle Sussex, Editor-in-Chief

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.