No Room for Class
Consciousness in an Utopia
Marcus Tullius Cicero is the man who lived in the period of
the fall of the Roman Republic, the most active period of the Roman history,
(106-43 BC). He was one of the important figures in his time as an orator,
lawyer and statesman. His main contribution to the Roman world is to create a
Latin philosophical vocabulary and terms, which are still used. His way of
using the language was at the top level; his various speeches in the senate and
the court showed that he was extremely impressive and successful orator. I
always think that I had better fall into a cesspit than defend myself against
Cicero in the court if I were a Roman citizen.
Besides his superior skill as an orator and lawyer, his
political career was a remarkable one that Cicero placed politics above all his
activities. At that time prominent offices were under the control of wealthy
and aristocratic families. Although Cicero’s family was neither aristocratic
nor wealthy, he was elected to each principal offices (quaestor, aedile,
praetor) at his early age, and he finally became consul for the year 63 BC. He
even received the honorary title, the Father of the Country (Pater Patriae). After Julius Caesar’s assasination, Cicero
became popular during the period of instability. However, he failed to escape
from being murdered as the enemy of the state because of his opposition to Mark
Antony. At this point I do not want to go into historical details.
Cicero was obviously a patriotic republican. But how come he
became the enemy of the state once he was the Father of the Country? What did
he overlook? It is likely to find the answer to these questions if we trace his
state model in his On the Republic (De Re
Publica). Firstly, Cicero bases the degeneration of the Roman Republic on lack
of some noble values, and believes that the Roman Republic would overcome the
difficulties if the Roman elites, particularly in the senate improved their
character and put their individual virtue and social stability before their
fame, wealth and so on. Secondly, he asserts that his model, the republic, was
the superior to any other goverment because it brought monarchy, aristocracy
and democracy together. But Cicero’s state model was in fact based on a system
ruled by the aristocratic class, even if his idea of concordia ordinum was a coalition of the senate and equites.
This kind of system, concordia
ordinum, is too unrealistic an even utopic , expecting a group of
aristocratic families to protect the public interest! It is a Ciceronian utopia,
which shows us Cicero had no class consciousness. I have used the term ‘utopia’
in particular, where individual and social identities, consequently class
consciousness, are reduced to the lowest level possible. If a group of elite
people had the power in a society, no matter it is a democracy, monarchy or
aristocracy, they would by no means make concessions to the majority. They will
never give up their gracious living. The idea of reconciliation between the
classes, whose interests are completely opposite to each other, is just a vain
attempt and wishful thinking.
I want to draw your attentions to similarities to present days:
the bottom line is the most important thing for the head or owner of a private
company. Neither they care what their workers have been experiencing or
suffering, nor they try to improve workers’ standard of living, but they definitely care just the bottom
line! Labour class is merely a tool to yield the profit to them. I think that
Cicero, the Father of the Roman Country, had a lot of painful experiences to
teach us already. Having class consciousness must be the primary mission for
the labour class.
Best wishes,
Nilufer Akcay
Dublin June 7, 2012
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder