The Fall of the Republic?

I have been a fan of Jerry Pournelle since I first read "The Mercenary" in 10th grade (1979). That was at a time when I was still only vaguely aware that stories rather than textbooks could teach you something, if that makes sense, but there was just something about that book that told me he had something important to say. After a couple more of his books (The Mote in God's Eye and Lucifer's Hammer) as well as some story collections he put together I started to get his message, or at least what I took / take as his message - Systems Fail. When you think about it that statement is true, all systems will eventually fail and all you can really do is hope the critical ones are adequately backed up and can remain functioning.

Today Dr. Pournelle points out what could be an imminent system failure and I am not sure that there is a redundant sytem or recovery plan for this one:

And meanwhile the Democrats seem to be drifting toward the concept of prosecution of former office holders by criminalizing policy differences. That's a certain formula for civil war; perhaps not immediate, but inevitable. The absolute minimum requirement for democratic government is that the loser be willing to lose the election: that losing an election is not the loss of everything that matters. As soon as that assurance is gone, playing by the rules makes no sense at all. (Pinochet learned that lesson. Fortunately for Chile, he was old and was allowed to die in peace; the inevitable -- liberals can always find a good reason not to keep their word -- persecutions after he turned over power on the assurance that he would be allowed to retire in peace were not so severe that his adherents didn't take to their weapons.)

There have been - I don't know - thousands(?) of comparisons of the present day United States to the late Roman Republic since George Bush took office. Just today when I was at Borders I know I saw three books prominently displayed making that claim and I bought a fourth "The Martian General's Daughter" that uses that line of thought as the basis for the story, but as Mark Lardas points out at Instapundit if the shift from Republic to Imperium occurs soon it won't be because of the actions of George W. Bush:

The best example of what happens when you criminalize political opposition is the Roman Civil War.

Gauis Julius Caesar was a republican to the core. He believed in the Roman Republic, and its unwritten constitution. When his political opponents, the Optimates, made it clear that they were going to prosecute him and either exile or execute him, the moment Caesar set down his military command they made war inevitable. Especially since it was clear that they were not interested in following the law, except at their convenience.

Caesar was not given a choice between going to war and destroying the republic or preserving it by going quietly to his doom. He could see that the republic was doomed no matter what his choice was. He could either start a civil war or let Rome slide into a tyranny run by the Optimates. Given that choice, let the dice fly and hope you can put the pieces back together after you win. At least, you can die trying.

The Democrats remind me of the Optimates in many ways. William Clinton seems like a 21st century version of Pompey Magnus. That Bush has not played Caesar is a tribute to two things: George W.'s fundamental decency, and the fact that the United States is yet not in as bad a shape politically as the late Roman Republic.

I don't think the United States is that far gone yet. For one thing we have a written constitution not a series of traditions that govern our state but every time a Ginsburg or Breyer ignores something explicitly written in the Constitution yet finds rights thru inference that hold weakens. And let's be honest if we aren't careful Republicans / conservatives could easily engage in the same behavior, it is just that so far they have been a bit more respectful of the structure of the state, but that could easily change.