Entropy Of The State

No title can do justice to this

Freeman notes that the problem of dealing with actions of non-national entities is quite ancient, and refers to the burning of Ostia, destruction of a fleet, and kidnapping of two senators and their staffs by a league of Pirates in 68 BCE. He quotes a recent book by Robert Harris, which explores how Pompey took advantage of the understandable horror at what had happened. Here I offer part of the paragraph where he quotes Harris and offers some additional words

Rome panicked. Mr. Harris comments that: "What Rome was facing was a threat very different from that posed by a conventional enemy. These pirates were a new type of ruthless foe, with no government to represent them and no treaties to bind them. Their bases were not confined to a single state. They had no unified system of command. They were a worldwide pestilence, a parasite which needed to be stamped out, otherwise Rome – despite her overwhelming military superiority – would never again know security or peace." In response to these imagined menaces, Pompey (self-styled "the Great") persuaded a compliant Senate to set aside nearly 700 years of Roman constitutional law, abridge the ancient rights and liberties of Roman citizens, and appoint him supreme commander of the armed forces. With due allowance for a bit of pointed reinterpretation, if not revisionism by Mr. Harris, most historians regard this incident and its aftermath as the beginning of the end of the Roman republic.

Any sentient being capable of reading will of course see the immediate parallel with our own time, which is of course why Freeman uses the historical example.

History offers an interesting perspective on modern times. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.