Armchair Intellectual 's avatar
Armchair Intellectual 9 months ago
Pax Romana should not be romanticized as it is, IMO. Firstly the governance of individual towns was so decentralized it could be considered near anarchic. That's not to say Rome wouldn't of loved to crush all under its boot, but it was limited by technology. Secondly, the vice and moral decay of Rome, and the short sighted plans of it's politicians are well documented. These laid the ground work for it's decay and demise. Third, it's growth and wealth was based on the sword and blood. Hardly fertile ground for a virtuous governance. A good counter factual would be if a empire decided to grow itself through tade and not conquest. How much capital was wasted in military efforts that could of been better spent elsewhere. An old example is the small cities of the medieval peninsula of now Italy.
↑ Parent

Replies (3)

Armchair Intellectual 's avatar
Armchair Intellectual 9 months ago
I'm pretty sure I've never claimed there would ever be a stateless utopia. That's the fever dreams I early communists. Human existence is always different grades of hell. But if you want examples of active anarchy. Our conversation here is one. Neither of us is forced to engage. Most interactions in our life are voluntary and anarchic. And this is good, since neither of us are forced to converse, that limits the verbal abuse and incentives using reason. I would believe power should only given to people through voluntary means. IE I trust my surgeon, and so I accept his orders within grounds of his expertise. Any power taken through violence or threat of violence is not moral, no matter the pageantry it's is wrapped up in. I understand my view will not be accepted yet, but I'm willing to meet half way by supporting massive secession of polities.
↑