Where is Cicero?

Last night I read one of Cicero's speeches.

For those unfamiliar: Marcus Tullius Cicero was a Roman statesman, a prolific writer, a true Republic-an (i.e. man of the Republic), and, without any doubt, the foundational rhetorician underneath all of Western thought, argument, and discourse. He was later loved and received by such great minds as St. Augustine and Francesco Petrarch.

In the speech, Cicero is stating the case against Verres, a corrupt governor of Sicily. Verres was an inexcusable man - he stole money from the coffers of the state, he imprisoned and executed peasants at random, his actions resulted in the decimation of the Sicilian navy. And, yet, he was also a very wealthy person. At the time of his trial, it was well known how easily a jury could be bought and bribed. However, unfortunate for him, the jury so-selected at the time of Cicero's charge against him was one unfavorable to bribes. His strategy - and the strategy of his consul Hortensius - was simple: Let Cicero make his remarks now (in late summer), and we will give the full time to respond. That will put us into the upcoming series of festivals, the trials will be placed on hold, and, come January, we will have a new jury, one more pliable by money.

Cicero, of course, sees through this mockery of justice, and he makes his own plans in order to counter his opponent.

What struck me as absolutely incredible, however, is the way in which Cicero frames his argument. He tells the jurors that their ability to administer justice has lost its value in the eyes of the Romans people. If they fail to indict such a damnable person as Verres then they will prove the uselessness of the Roman courts, discredit the value of Roman justice, and tell the whole world that Rome is such a place that money can buy one's innocence, rather than the exercise of true, just, wise judgment.

But if they successfully indict Verres, then they will declare the opposite claim to the Roman people: we will not accept bribes, nor will we accept money, in order to influence our beliefs of what is just, what is right, and what is acceptable in Rome.

What struck me in this speech - something that always strikes me with Cicero - is how truly a "man of Rome" Cicero is. In a later speech against Marc Antony - a speech that would cost him his life - Cicero declares that a person who assaults him is also a person who assaults Rome. How many men could say this with regards to their country? Or, more importantly than the "nation," with regards to the relationship they hold with the ideals embodied by their country? For, truly, Cicero is not nearly as much a "true Roman" (although he is) as he is a "true Republic-an," a true believer in the ways of administering secular justice. He is aware of man's fallible, weak, and evil nature, but he is convinced that men still have the ability to judge amidst themselves well.

Maybe Cicero is a little idealistic. Maybe he has read Plato too much. But it strikes me that in the sort of season of American history wherein we find ourselves that we have a great many Verres-es about. Verres exists on the Right, in the forms of, say, individuals whose financial contributions secure votes; Verres exists on the Left, in the forms of, say, individuals whose received financial contributions secure foreign policy. But where is our Cicero? What has become of him?

Truly, I am concerned that the bifurcation of our society into camps - Left, Right, Libertarian, Socialist - prevents the true administration of Justice, in the commonly-held, commonly-understood, secular manner. The political "tribes" (or totems) have their own epistemologies, entire ready-made worldviews that are accessible not via reasoning, nor debate, nor discourse, but via microwave, through fast-food, as it were. Most political commentators - professional and Facebook - are not true debaters or discussants. Most are tribalists, fed the same way we feed our children at McDonald's: crap that doesn't cost much, doesn't provide much nutrition, and gives you a little toy to make you feel special.

A true Cicero of today would eschew the paltry boundaries of tribalism within the American political discourse and would resolutely stand firm upon the foundational claims made by the American political experiment - something liberty and justice for all, or the inalienable rights to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. A true Cicero of today would not be a pundit of the sides, but would point out the evils of corruption regardless of its colors.

Truthfully, I am tired of Veres, in his various forms, buying off jurors and stealing from Sicily. Would that we would see new modern Ciceros arise to combat these foes, whose aim is their own bellies and whose fruit will be our destruction if we do not respond to them.