World Affairs Board - View Single Post

Praxus · 08-25-2004, 16:35 PM

We seem to be getting off topic significantly here. So I will put forth my points in a clear concise way about Cicero being a greater champion of liberty then Caeser.

1.) Given there were slave revolts in the ancient world, but no one viewed slavery as wrong, not even the slaves. The slaves simply wished the roles to be reversed or for them to simply not be slaves. There was no abolitionist movement or principled stand against the institution of slavery. So comparing Caeser and Cicero on this issue is completly rediculus as neither believed it to be wrong.

2.) I am not putting an argument in defense of the decaying republic at the time of Cicero(which as you rightly stated was corrupt and no longer a republic) but of true republican principles.

3.) Anything positive that Julius Caeser had done was built on quicksand. The destruction of the last vestages of Republicanism doomed Rome to inevitable death.

4.) Cicero's work shows Ciceros philosophical dedication to the system of rights and the Republican form of Government. It may not have been rights for everyone, but a system of rights and "natural law" none the less. The same can not be said about Caeser.

All of this being said, it is very complicated to make a proper moral evaluation of historical figures as there is many things we do not know and there are so many factors to take into account.

So for now we can agree to disagree.

08-25-2004, 16:35 PM	#47 (permalink)
Praxus *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 08-26-03 Posts: 3,237	We seem to be getting off topic significantly here. So I will put forth my points in a clear concise way about Cicero being a greater champion of liberty then Caeser. 1.) Given there were slave revolts in the ancient world, but no one viewed slavery as wrong, not even the slaves. The slaves simply wished the roles to be reversed or for them to simply not be slaves. There was no abolitionist movement or principled stand against the institution of slavery. So comparing Caeser and Cicero on this issue is completly rediculus as neither believed it to be wrong. 2.) I am not putting an argument in defense of the decaying republic at the time of Cicero(which as you rightly stated was corrupt and no longer a republic) but of true republican principles. 3.) Anything positive that Julius Caeser had done was built on quicksand. The destruction of the last vestages of Republicanism doomed Rome to inevitable death. 4.) Cicero's work shows Ciceros philosophical dedication to the system of rights and the Republican form of Government. It may not have been rights for everyone, but a system of rights and "natural law" none the less. The same can not be said about Caeser. All of this being said, it is very complicated to make a proper moral evaluation of historical figures as there is many things we do not know and there are so many factors to take into account. So for now we can agree to disagree. Last edited by Praxus : 08-25-2004 at 16:38 PM.