There Once Was A Dream That Was Rome

Molly Swiger

“There was once a dream that was Rome, you could only whisper it. Anything more than a whisper and it would vanish.”

—Marcus Aurelius, The Gladiator

The Roman Empire is an important model that is still studied, generations after its ending. With a unique story of conquest, Romans dreamt that “one could not only conquer, but in doing so create a Pax Romana, a vast area of peace, prosperity and unity of ideas, was a genuine inspiration” (Wallace-Hadrill).

The imperial system of control was very strong and effective. Julius Cesar and Augustus represented order and unity, in contrast with the difficulties presented by pluralism. In addition, the bureaucracy introduced by emperors such as Claudius provided a long-term structure for continuity. The Union of modern Europe can largely be attributed to the foundation laid by the Roman Empire.

As a military leader, however, the Roman Empire serves as a cautionary tale for centralized control and suppression of local identities and peoples. Slavery was one of the key features attributed to Roman success. There was no regard for human rights: “From the crucifixion of rebel slaves in their thousands to the use of theatrical enactments of gruesome deaths in the arena as a form of entertainment, we see a world in which brutality was not only normal, but a necessary part of the system” (Wallace-Hadrill). Slavery was a direct result of the Roman conquests. Obviously, slavery has been outlawed from our system but military conquest walks a thin line. There is a constant discussion on the proper procedures to follow when dealing with an occupied area and its inhabitants. In the fleet, we can look to history and not follow in the footsteps of brutal leaders from the past. Promoting a healthy command climate and following orders set by the chain of command is crucial.

On the other hand, the diversity and vastness of geographical and cultural landscapes controlled by the Roman Empire was astonishing. This extensive culture combination was evident in the necessity for two official languages—Latin and Greek—as well as local tongues. The planning of cities and conscious encouragement of biodiversity led to great economic prosperity. The United States and her military can learn from this encouragement of diversity and take important lessons relating to cultural relativism. In the fleet, we will face many different ethnic and culture groups. Dealing with them tactfully and realizing that we are all human will improve our diplomatic standing.

Overall, the Roman Empire provides invaluable lessons in military and political leadership. Regardless of its blatant failings, the Roman Empire occupied one of the largest and masses in history for so long. It is no wonder why we are still talking about its vastness, power, and diversity 2,000 years later.

WC: 460

Work Cited:

Gladiator. Directed by Ridley Scott, performances by Russell Crowe, Joaquin Phoenix, Connie Nielsen, and Oliver Reed, Universal Pictures, 2000.

Wallace-Hadrill, Professor Andrew. “History – Ancient History in Depth: Roman Empire: The Paradox of Power.” BBC, BBC, 17 Feb. 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/romans/empire_01.shtml.

Not a Crusade but a …

Molly Swiger

Tim Cook is fighting for Americans to increase the privacy used in technology. BBC News labeled his urging as a “privacy crusade.” It is not unusual that the technology industry is being accused of tampering with user security, but it is peculiar that the accusation is coming from Apple’s Chief Executive Officer. In medieval times, the crusades were a series of expeditions made by Europeans to recover the Holy Land from Muslims. It was a religious war, backed by a strong tension between Christians and non-Christians. Rory Cellan-Jones, the author of “Tech Tent: Tim Cook’s Privacy Crusade,” incorrectly categorizes Cook’s lobbying as a crusade. Instead, he should have used words such as campaign, promote, or work. The modern definition and usage of crusade differs from the actual Crusades.

Tim Cook explains the surveillance tactics being employed by companies online. User data is being stored and then traded and used against them “with military efficiency.” Companies take advantage of the lax security in order to increase their profits. Tim Cook favors Europe’s new privacy law: the GDPR. He believes that the United States should create something similar. Cook also acknowledges that some users will not be in favor of new regulations, as there is a trade-off between free service and advertisements. If users are going to see ads they might as well be relevant, right? However, Cook argues that Apple will not be able to reach its full potential without complete user trust. He is not the only big name in favor of the GDPR either. Mark Zuckerberg also believes GDPR-style regulation is not only necessary, but inevitable.

In contrast, the medieval Crusades included eight major military expeditions between 1096 and 1291. Both Christians and Muslims were jockeying for control of holy sites. The battles were extremely violent, bloody, and ruthless. They ultimately ended in the defeat of the Europeans but the reach of Christianity was extended far into the West, increasing the wealth and power of the Pope and Roman Catholic Church. Trade and transportation, and subsequently demand for supplies, also increased. Culturally, there are still remnants of hatred toward Christians for their actions during the Crusades.

Obviously, Cook’s urging for increased security carries a magnitude nowhere near that of the cause of the Crusades. Specifically, as there is no violence or religion involved in his technological campaign, it is not proper to refer to it as a crusade. One may argue that the cultural significance of changing privacy laws is enough for it is be labeled as a crusade. However, the privacy debate is focused more on the individual’s safety, rather than a difference between American and European culture. The GDPR is simply a model that Cook and Zuckerberg believe will benefit user safety. Tim Cook may strongly believe in privacy reform, but his struggle will never reach the ruthlessness or violence that occurred during the religious conflicts and therefore cannot be named a crusade.

Word Count: 486

Work Cited:

Cellan-Jones, Rory. “Tech Tent: Tim Cook’s Privacy Crusade.” BBC News, BBC, 26 Oct. 2018, http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-45993776.

“Crusades.” History.com, A&E Television Networks, 7 June 2010, http://www.history.com/topics/middle-ages/crusades.

“Tim Cook.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 30 Oct. 2018, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Cook.

Master Sun

Molly Swiger

Sun Tzu’s Art of War has been regarded as one of the most influential military strategy texts in East Asian warfare since it was published in 5^th century BCE. In Chinese culture, the sun is the epitome of ‘yang’ and represents heat vitality, Spring and East. It is important to note that Tzu was known as Master Sun: he represents goodness in Chinese culture and following his teachings will ensure success in battle. Sun Tzu’s over-arching philosophy focuses on victory through planning, with the strength of an army originating in its unity. Similarly, the Naval Academy aims to focus on the mental aspects of war and to “imbue them with the highest ideals of duty, honor, and loyalty.” While both philosophies are effective, the Naval Academy does not teach about military strategy, instead placing a greater focus on wholeness of the individual. Tzu emphasizes both the importance of strategy and character. Therefore, Tzu has a better philosophy.

The first chapter of The Art of War explains the making of plans. Tzu emphasizes the severity of war: “War is a grave affair of state; it is a place of life and death.” Without proper planning, a commander will not be prosperous. Understanding the fundamentals of war is a necessary step. Tzu states these essentials as: The Way, Heaven, Earth, Command, and Discipline. Because of how momentous war is, due consideration must be given to strategy. Plainly, Tzu declares “victory belongs to the side that scores most in the temple calculations before battle.” The Naval Academy puts Midshipmen through classes like Ethics, Leadership, Law, and History in order to foster this understanding of the gravity of war and the consequences of the decisions of officers. The mission statement is not singly focused; officers must be well versed in all aspects of war.

The third chapter of The Art of War describes the origins of strength. In battle, unity is congruent with strength. A focused, unified force will be stronger than a large, distracted army. This unity is developed through strategy. A commander who plans will conserve his troops and resources. In addition, he has to know his people and those who he is fighting against. Midshipmen, too, are taught to stress honor and loyalty. This loyalty refers to loyalty within a command and loyalty to the Constitution.

The seventh chapter of The Art of War discusses the risks of direct combat and exposes the greatest difference between Tzu’s principles and those taught at the Academy. Tzu discusses the drawbacks of pursuing an enemy in different terrain and the stresses it places on soldiers. He draws on the principles taught in previous chapters, as strategy is integral to find the balance of when to go and when to stay. Furthermore, war will favor a focused army because “the brave will not advance alone, nor will the fearful retreat alone.” It is the refusal of an army to lose its spirit that will lead to victory. Tzu argues a skillful warrior will possess mastery of spirit, mind, strength, and change. The Academy does not have classes that teach about military strategy or war planning. Thus, officers have to go to extra schooling to receive this knowledge.

Master Sun’s military strategy maintains a profound influence on both Eastern and Western philosophy with implications beyond the scope of war. Tzu describes what is required to be successful in battle and as a leader.

Word Count: 571

Work Cited:

“Nature Symbolism in Chinese Art.” Chinese Symbolism of Nature Elements, http://www.chinasage.info/symbols/nature.htm#XLXLSymSun.

“Plebe Summer Home.” The U.S. Naval Academy, http://www.usna.edu/PlebeSummer/index.php.

Sun-tzu, The Art of War. Trans. John Minford. London: Penguin, 2009.

With a Capital ‘G’

It is close-minded to view the world from only your perspective. Of course, this is much easier to say than actually practice, but to evaluate the world from only a monotheist perspective is to ignore the religions of all other cultures. Trying to understand the Roman religion from today’s Judeo-Christian model can be like trying to listen a new language. It sounds like a bunch of mumbles. Now, reverse the roles. You are a Roman before the third century and you believe that Jupiter is the head god. Pleasing him and the other gods is the only way to have a successful society. Any person who followed another belief systems was shunned and many were punished.

So, of course, the introduction of monotheism was met with extreme dissent by the majority of Romans. Imagine your belief system, the commonly practiced belief system, is one day challenged. The monotheists do not recognize your gods and they refuse to pay respect to them. Naturally, you are going to be scared and insulted. You will fear the recoil of your gods and feel as if your faith is threatened.

The Romans were extremely superstitious. Their faith was based off a system of loyalty toward minor and major gods. Good and bad luck was given to the Romans by these gods based off their actions; as long as the gods were happy, the Romans would prosper. It was common practice to host festivals in honor of the gods. The Romans also built temples to worship and pay sacrifices and respects. The monotheists’ refusal to participate in these sacrifices was a direct disregard of the loyalty toward Rome and her gods. The Romans responded largely with religious persecution. For example, Christians who refused to participate in the festivals or give animal sacrifice to the Roman gods were thrown into cages with lions, dressed in animal skins.

Personal faith is an extremely sensitive subject, but one that so many are so passionate about. Holy wars are so common an occurrence in today’s society. Moreover, it is easy to see the violent nature of religious persecution that has been present for generations. Humans value knowledge and it is in their instincts to associate with religion. Anyone who challenges that will appear to us as a violation of our human nature and we will name them as evil and wrong. However, different viewpoints are not necessarily bad and if we can accept and understand this then we can move toward increased tolerance as a whole.

WC: 421

The Minds of the Masses

The most significant similarity between the American and Athenian system is the behavior of political parties in politics. Political parties are comprised of three defining characteristics: competing groups with a small number of prominent leaders and a substantial number of followers, a group that shows loyalty and stability, and groups that compete for a majority vote that would allow them to impose their will. Athens was controlled by the desire of the masses. Whatever party gained the most support of the masses would capture the majority vote. A good example of the existence of political parties in Athens occurred during the reconciliation agreement of 403. Following the defeat of Sparta and the fall of the Thirty Tyrants, radical democrats, largely supported by farmers, poorer members of society, and those who fought directly under Thrasybulus, and the oligarchs, mainly followed by wealthy, educated aristocrats, were contesting over the granting of amnesty towards the Tyrant’s supporters. While both parties had large followings, the oligarchs were ultimately successful in their mission and the agreement was passed. It is clear that the two major parties in today’s politics leave little to no room for smaller parties to gain support. Unlike our current political system, the Athenian Democracy was direct, such that there were no representatives. This encouraged voter participation and encouraged political candidates to be better politicians. Today, this type of voting is mirrored in the popular vote for presidential elections. The candidate with the majority of votes is awarded the popular vote.

Because Athenian political institutions followed the democratic principle, people did not just vote in accordance with their leaders. Presently, this phenomenon can be seen as party lines are becoming blurred and citizens are, more frequently, voting for candidates outside of their previously stated party. In Athens, a good politician, otherwise known as a rhetor, would require political skill, rhetorical gifts, charisma, and a solid reputation. The 1960 Nixon- JFK presidential debate is a clear example of how important these skills still are in politics; a candidate needs to be well rounded and well versed in public interactions and political knowledge. JFK won the debate because he was so much more personable and relaxed on camera when compared to Nixon. The influence of voters encourages all political parties to maintain positive leadership and present promising candidates.

In summation, political parties have always played a large role in politics. Maintain a loyal follower-ship is an integral part of securing a political victory. Political parties compete for the attention and favor of voters in order to come out on top.

Work Cited

Hansen, Mogens Herman. “Political Parties in Democratic Athens?” 2014. PDF File.

WC: 442

A Modern-Day Tyrant

Contrary to the use of the term in present day, Greek tyrants were monarchs who enjoyed an oppressive, one-man rule. The tyrant usually rose to power because of his military ability and support from the lower class but the term simply referenced someone who obtained executive power through unconventional means. Early tyrants arose from the underclasses who were pitted against the aristocrats and hereditary succession. For example, populist coups commonly produced tyrants who observed approval during the initial part of their regime. One of the most fondly remembered Athenian tyrants was Peisistratos. He constructed grand new buildings, improved agriculture, specifically olives, and focused on public works and urban centers. It was Peisistrato’s successors, namely his sons, and the simultaneous growth of Athenian democracy that produced the negative connotation of the title “tyrant” that is used today.

Greg Bailey, in his article, “Our Very Own George III,” likens President Trump to the tyrannical King George III. Throughout the article he includes a multitude of reasons the founding fathers used to support their case for independence from tyrannical British rule. Bailey then explains the similarities between the actions of President Trump and King George III. Among the list of “a long train of abuses and usurpations,” Bailey highlights Trump’s controversial political decisions. Quoting the Declaration of Independence, Bailey argues that President Trump and King George III are one in the same: “A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, [who] is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”

Bailey’s employment of the word “tyrant” is very similar to the Greek use of the term. The pre-democratic definition focuses on an unconventional rise to power. President Trump is not a career politician. His transformation from businessman to politico was anything but conventional. Ancient tyrants also maintained the absolute power of a single ruler. While the American political system does employ a structure of checks and balances, the President has final say over a majority of issues, especially if his political party aligns with the majority in Congress. President Trump’s rise in popularity can, too, be compared to that of a Greek tyrant. While he did not gain political favor from the underclass, he did present a specific vision of America that embodied the politics of hope. He focused on strengthening the country from within, thus attracting the support of those who felt as if they didn’t have a political voice. Overall, Bailey’s definition of “tyrant” aligns with that of the ancient term. Aptly, the characterization is utilized to describe one who has used unconventional means to achieve great power.

Work Cited

Bailey, Greg. “Our Very Own George III.” History News Network, 2 Sept. 2018,

historynewsnetwork.org/article/169820.

WC: 455