Yesterday, Trinette was by. She brought in my mail, including my ballot. which I filled out, and she took it with her to mail. Such a gem. She also said her son will be by this week to tackle my weeds (That is contingent on it not being too hot, and also on there not being lightning, of course.) He’s a gem also.
As scary as this is, I think I see one small good takeaway, and that is, thank goodness those extremists who make the local extremists look normal are no longer in California. The more of them move to Idaho, the better for California.
For once, the Washington Post has figured out that something important is important (gift link from Robert Hubbell). This would destroy our economy so fast that our heads would swim for the rest of our lives (which would not be that long actually.)
Yesterday, the radio opera was Gluck’s “Orfeo ed Euridice.” Composed in 1762, it was part of his “reform” project to simplify both operatic plots and operatic music. Allow me to suggest that the story is of universal appeal by pointing out that the most famous aria in it, “Che faro senza Euridice,” has the same content as irving Berlin’s “What’ll I Do,” both being in language appropriate to their time periods (for example, Orpheus didn’t have access to photographs.) I sang the aria (badly) when I was taking voice lessons – it’s in the mezzo-soprano range, but sung yesterday by a counter tenor – Anthony Roth Constanzo – of whom I’m a fan. As I guess is the Philadelphia Opera – they just named him their General Director) This is the last opera in the Met season, so next week I’ll be streaming a summer season opera broadcast from Chicago (performed and recorded in Vienna).
For pride month. I guess I don’t need to go over again how so-called Christians who think being anti-gay is Christian annoy me (not a strong enough word but I’m trying to be civil.) The image below is also from this article.
Sheesh. I remember when it was anthrax. I’m sure this is coming from the right … but there are too many suspects to nail it down. I hope we can get a clearer picture by November – maybe even put a stop to it.
I’d say the ability to distinguish between appearances (and emotions) on the one hand and actual, truthful facts on the other belongs to the faculty of wisdom. So I’m once again asking Athena to help us.
The minor discernment here goes back 500 years to Niccolo Machiavelli, who is remembered as being a gaslighter. He was no such thing. He was as straightforward as he could possibly be in his knowledge and opinions (and yes, some of his work was opinion.) Yes, he did advise leaders that there were times they would need to lie. But he also put conditions on those times. He also warned competent leaders – and especially citizens of republics – to look out for gaslighters, as you will see in the article below. I know, after all these years, it’s likely impossible to fully rehabilitate his reputation. But there’s no harm in trying.
=============================================================
500 years ago, Machiavelli warned the public not to get complacent in the face of self-interested charismatic figures
That sort of activity has been called “Machiavellian,” after Renaissance writer Niccolò Machiavelli, who lived from 1469 to 1527. He wrote a notorious little treatise called “The Prince,” in which he advises sole rulers – his phrase for authoritarians or dictators – as well as those who aspire to sole rule to use force and fraud to gain and maintain power.
But scholars of Machiavelli like me know there is much more to his analysis. His 16th-century writings discuss not only princely rule but also republican governments, in which citizens select leaders directly or indirectly for specified terms. He instructs republican citizens and leaders, including those of the United States, to recognize how vulnerable the governments they cherish are and to be vigilant against the threats of tyranny. Machiavelli’s advice is as relevant now as it was then.
Machiavelli knew from experience and his extensive reading that there was a long history of nations with republican governments falling victim to ambitious individuals who sought to subvert their nations’ practices and institutions so they could rule alone and unchecked, with all others serving at their behest and on their authority.
For example, he was from the city-state of Florence in what is now Italy. Florence had had a republican tradition for centuries, but about 30 years before Machiavelli’s birth, banker and politician Cosimo de’ Medici had subverted that system. Cosimo had used his family’s wealth to propel himself to political power by exerting influence over officeholders so that he was the ultimate decision-maker.
Cosimo’s descendants inherited his political power. They briefly lost their grip on power just long enough for Machiavelli to participate for about a decade as an official and diplomat in a restored republic. Machiavelli was in office when the republic collapsed with the return of the Medici family to power.
Removed from office, Machiavelli wrote “The Prince.” He prefaced it with a dedicatory letter to the young member of the Medici whom the family had designated as the new ruler of Florence. Commentators have long disagreed about what Machiavelli sought by so obviously pandering to an autocratic ruler.
The ‘Discourses,’ Machiavelli’s republican writing
That puzzle is all the more perplexing because elsewhere Machiavelli expresses his commitment to republican government. He wrote another book, less well known and much less pithy than “The Prince,” entitled “Discourses on Livy.” In the “Discourses,” Machiavelli uses the work of the ancient Roman historian Livy to examine how the Roman republic was overthrown by a single leader.
At its founding, Rome was a kingship, but when subsequent kings became tyrannical, the Roman people overthrew the monarchy and established a republic, which had a remarkable history and lasted almost 500 years.
The Roman republic collapsed in 44 BCE when Julius Caesar declared himself dictator for life. Machiavelli wrote that Julius Caesar was the first tyrant in Rome, with the result that Rome was never again free.
The key lesson of Machiavelli’s examination of Roman history in the “Discourses” is this: A republic is fragile. It requires constant vigilance on the part of both the citizens and their leaders.
That vigilance is difficult to maintain, however, because over generations, citizens and leaders alike become complacent to a key internal threat that haunts this form of government. Specifically, they fail to grasp early enough the anti-republican designs of exceptionally ambitious citizens among them who harbor the desire to rule alone.
Machiavelli provides instructive examples of how Rome failed to protect its republican practices and laws against such a threat. When the republic was young, Rome allowed candidates to nominate themselves for high offices. This practice worked well because only worthy candidates put themselves forward. Later, however, the practice of self-nomination allowed into office those who wanted to promote their own popularity rather than respond to the needs of their country.
Machiavelli said that leaders and citizens devoted to the republic should have closed off this easy route to power to such candidates. But Rome failed to act. Because of its complacency, Caesar was able to build on the popularity that his predecessors had amassed and to transform Rome into a tyranny.
Actors recreate the assassination of Julius Caesar, which came too late to save the Roman republic from collapse into authoritarian rule. Andreas Solaro/AFP via Getty Images
The point of no return
If republican citizens and leaders fail to be vigilant, they will eventually be confronted with a leader who has accumulated an extremely powerful and threatening following. At that point, Machiavelli says, it will be too late to save the republic.
Machiavelli uses the examples of Caesar’s assassination in Rome and Cosimo’s exile from Florence to underscore this lesson. In each case, the supporters of their respective republic, finally perceiving the danger of tyranny, initiated an attack on the people’s idol. In each case, that effort led not to a restoration of republican freedom but rather to its elimination.
In Rome, Augustus used the public’s sympathy and devotion for the martyred Caesar to seal the republic’s demise. In Florence, Cosimo himself was welcomed back from exile to become Florence’s leading man.
The fate of the American republic
For Americans, the question is whether, as a result of public complacency, the republic will be lost. Will the American republic fall to the same perils that Machiavelli identified in ancient Rome and Renaissance Florence?
Perhaps an opportunity exists to breathe new life into the nation’s republican practices and institutions. Perhaps there is still time to reject through elections those who seek office only to enhance their own power.
Or perhaps it is so late that even that approach will not work. Then, Americans would be left to mourn the demise of their republic and to affirm Machiavelli’s counsel that republics fail through complacency. Such an outcome for one of history’s most exemplary republics would stand as a wretched testament to Machiavelli’s political insight.
Athena, I don’t suppose that, affter all these years, Niccolo cares any more that his name is used as a synonym for deliberate deception. And it is true that that was one tool in his leadership toolbox. But just because it is, let’s say, a hammer there, that does not mean that everything has to be treated as a nail. There are plenty of other tools there. Our current issue feels to me more like a stripped screw than a nail – and it usually takes an electric drill with a special bit to remove one of those.
Yesterday, Robert Reich’s second “DEBUNK” article posted here. As last week, there’s both a video and a transcript. Good thing, since nothing much happened here. I took in a grocery order is all.
This is a good news story about a rescue in Florida. I am 100% behind the Mom who is pushing for lifesaving rings to be readily available, but also feel I need to point out that in this case a ring would not have worked, though in many, maybe most, cases a ring would have been the best choice.
I have hardly mentioned Hunter Biden at all, because the GOP efforts to turn him into a monster have been so cringworthy. But this is a very interesting speculation. I hope The Beast is reading the room correctly.
Yesterday, When I received an email from Thrater of War announcing that they are doing a performance in Times Square, i must admit my jaw dropped. It’s to be on the Red Steps, which didn’t exist the last ttime I was in NUC around 1970, so I looked it up, and yeah, I guess that’s a venue. But even in the evening I would expect there to be a whole lot of people in and around Times Square who are not there to see a performance. The play is Ibsen’s “An Enemy of the People” (which is analogous to the ttrue story of CoViD and Dr. Fauci), and the cast will include Bill Murray. It will be Zoomed (and no, you don’t need to download Zoom to watch. You would if you wanted to comment. I don’t have Zoom, nor do I have awebcam nor a working microphone and I receive their transmissions just fine.) I will tryto watch it – it’s next Wednesday, so if next Thursday’s Open Thread is a bit skimpy, you will know why. Also yesterday, I came across a new nickname “Rip van Stinkle.” (It couldn’t have been thought of before the trial.)
Well, clearly they don’t wait until someone’s on the Supreme Court without starting to buy them up. I know, that comes as no surprise.
Also clearly we can look forward to another Senator who pulls no punches. (But I will still miss Katie and Barbara.)
Yesterday, Wonkette’s newsletter provided a gift link to a New York Times opinion piece, written by Michelle Goldberg (not by some right-wing lackey), whichdoesn’t contain anything we hadn’t figured out, but says it well and clearly. And the gift link makes it easier to share if you’d like to (don’t cut it – the stuff after the question mark is needed to validate that it’s a gift.) Also, Andy Borowitz “interviews” the new President of Mexico, who has thoughts on the U.S.
Well, this is interesting. It’s hard to be sure what it means at this point, other that Republicans are so good at creating “plausible deniability” that they have gotten bad at using it, trying to make it work all the time. Denying everything is admitting everything.
Well, this is really interesting. Like puppetmaster, like puppet, I guess. Now, before anyone says “Money is the root of all evil,” let me point out it is not money, but the love of money, which is the root of all evil (or as Chaucer quoted in the Canterbury Tales, “Radix malorum est cupiditas.”)
Yesterday, there was a lot of speculation regarding what will happen now that Trump** has been convicted. One topic which is everywhere: “Is Trump** going to incite violence if he is sentenced to any prison time?” To me the answer is “Yes, of course he is. He will incite violence if he is just sentenced to House Arrest. He will incite violence if he is just sentenced to probation, once he finds out how restrictive that is. Why should any of this determine how we administer justice? Besides, if he is given no sentence at all, he will incite more violence, since he can get away with it. Just prepare for violence and sentence him the way he should be sentenced.” Both my short takes agree with me, I think, though they’re coming from different places. I’m not sure how they would prepare. My suggestions would be along the lines of whatever you do, do not buy a gun. You wouldn’t have time to get proficient. If you already have one (as a surprising number of liberals and lefties do, for different reasons) and are proficient, start learning how to be proficient at knowing when you use it. That’s much harder and takes longer, but there’s time for some baby steps (and if it’s “been a minute” since you used the weapon, some practice with it wouldn’t hurt.) For those of us who wouldn’t dream of using a gun, I’d suggest thinking hurricane or pandemic. Stock up on necessities so that you won’t have to leave your home. Of course all of this depends on where you live also. I live just outside the city limits of a red city in a blue state, and everyone knows how red it is. If I lived in Denver I’d be more concerned. If I lived in Washington DC I’d be very concerned. Also yesterday, Informed DElivery advised me my ballot was delivered. Not bad.
Robert Hubbell throws a bucket of common sense cold water over whoever needs it the most. But I don’t think it will hurt any of us.
