Rule and Repetition

Biden and Blue MAGA

Most readers have no doubt has heard Marx’s old saw about history repeating itself “the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.” But perhaps not everyone is familiar with the part of Hegel’s Lectures on the Philosophy of History he is paraphrasing. It’s a section that has to do with the fall of the Roman Republic and the rise of the Empire:

[Caesar’s] position was indeed hostile to the republic, but, properly speaking, only to its shadow; for all that remained of that republic was entirely powerless. Pompey, and all those who were on the side of the senate, exalted their dignitas auctoritas – their individual rule – as the power of the republic; and the mediocrity which needed protection took refuge under this title. Caesar put an end to the empty formalism of this title, made himself master, and held together the Roman world by force, in opposition to isolated factions. Spite of this we see the noblest men of Rome supposing Caesar’s rule to be a merely adventitious thing, and the entire position of affairs to be dependent on his individuality. So thought Cicero, so Brutus and Cassius. They believed that if this one individual were out of the way, the Republic would be ipso facto restored. Possessed by this remarkable hallucination, Brutus, a man of highly noble character, and Cassius, endowed with greater practical energy than Cicero, assassinated the man whose virtues they appreciated. But it became immediately manifest that only a single will could guide the Roman State, and now the Romans were compelled to adopt that opinion; since in all periods of the world a political revolution is sanctioned in men’s opinions, when it repeats itself. Thus Napoleon was twice defeated, and the Bourbons twice expelled. By repetition that which at first appeared merely a matter of chance and contingency becomes a real and ratified existence.

In other words, assassinating Julius Caesar could never work: the world itself was changed; this one particular individual could be done away with, but his type of rule was here to stay. Like many others, I’ve spent most of the past decade complaining about the tyrannical behavior of Trump and how he augured some new form of political regime. The behavior of Biden and the people supporting him now threaten to make a total mockery of these warnings and reduce them to mere partisan hackishness unless we apply them disinterestedly and to all. Consider: A man manifestly unfit for office, driven by personal vanity and pride, encased in a camarilla of hackish cronies and depraved family members, who has cowed one of America’ great political parties into doing his personal bidding above their duty or even to preserve the party’s self-interest. A man who thinks he is indispensable. A man whose supporters, in order to shield his political and moral weaknesses, attack the press, intellectuals, and shadowy “elites,” and who fantasize openly about plots and treasons against this supposedly sacrosanct person. Imagine a political force that wants you to ignore your lying eyes and believe what they tell you. Who and what does that sound like?

The Hegelian repetition has occurred. “Trumpism” isn’t confined to the person of Donald John any more than Caesarism was confined to the person of Gaius Julius. It’s the way things are now. Cynics who would gladly see democracy dead and buried like to say, “politicians, they’re all the same.” They now have a point.

I still believe Trump is the worse of the two options, the harder edge of this politics of despair that we must do our best to mitigate. But for the first time in my life, ensconced in a safe blue state, I’m strongly considering a protest vote. But even if they could, perhaps removing Biden wouldn’t work either, just as assassinating Caesear didn’t. This is not an adventitious thing. It’s systemic. The revolution has already taken place.