"[Rome] is the classic example of that kind of insincerity in both foreign and domestic affairs which permeates not only avowed motives but also probably the conscious motives of the actors themselves—of that policy which pretends to aspire to peace but unerringly generates war,
the policy of continual preparation for war, the policy of meddlesome interventionism. There was no corner of the known world where some interest was not alleged to be in danger or under actual attack. If the interests were not Roman. they were those of Roman allies;
and if Rome had no allies, then allies would be invented. The fight was always invested with an aura of legality. Rome was always being attacked by evil-minded neighbors, always fighting for a breathing space…
Thus [for Rome] there is but one way to an understanding [imperialism]: scrutiny of domestic interests, the question of who stood to gain” (p. 177-8).
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
