Empire is a much maligned word, and with good reason - tis power has been much abused in the name of economic conquest. But like many words, it is one with two meanings - an ideal one, and its shadow.

As the shadow of our economic empire has spread accross the globe, the next place it threatens to touch is the Republic of Iran. And yet the very laws of empire say this is illegal. Let’s examine them more closely.

According to Cicero, and the higher laws of all our republics, it is illegal to attack a country unless they have attacked first. And then, it must first be declared on the public forum, and reparations asked for first.

Few of the presidential candidates were even aware of this fact. Remember Mitt Romney? When asked if he knew this, he said he’d have to “Ask his lawyer.”

Likewise, Ron Paul knew he’d have to ask the constitution and consult the senate, but th laws of the Republic are higher than this. Neither one got to the true meaning of the question, which is that it would be illegal to attack Iran since they are not developing nuclear power for military use.

Now all the republics know this, and would be familiar with Cicero’s work (although it was obscured until the 19th century, due to the incident of Augustine having written his City of God over it). Since it it such a good model, we know that any candidate that actually does try to attack Iran on these grounds will be committing war crimes.

On the other hand, Cicero says that Rome got far by going to war for the protection of our allies. And so we come to the true use of empire. First, let me tell you what it’s not: it’s not for financial gain (although it will sustain a temporary economic boom).

According to the following article, written by J. S. Richardson, on the meaning of empire, the word has become twisted over the years.

Originally, the word was the power to use physical force, and it was one of the two powers taken away from the king when the republic was established. Why then were these two powers given to the executive branch in our republic?

The other power, the power of iudicium, or the power of judgment, the executive himself gave to the supreme court at an earlier part in American history. This just goes to show: our consitution is not perfect, and so far doesn’t even really aim at the ideal

Likewise, it is not for the people, nor was it really by the people. By and large, we have a lot of work to do on our consitution. Money, black gold, has replaced the place of the people in the state, and now we have a state of affairs.

Thus we need a statesman to safeguard the executive branch for a politician.

The shadow of empire has spread across the land. We have not conformed to the platonic, or ciceronian in this case, ideal - most people weren’t even aware there was one for empire - and so have found its shadow.

Empire can sustain a temporary economic boost (we saw the in the United States, with World War II), but it is not meant for this: when a country tries to sustain this boost, the metaphor becomes overextended as well.

Going to war to protect our allies seemed to be the first precedent the Bush administration gave for going into the Republic of Iraq , but going in has to be soley for this reason, and never for extending our WEALTH.

According to journalist Joe Lauria, “but to continue the profits of the war industry, to continue that wealth and that power, the phoney power of the Soviet Union was given out through the media basically at that time, and continued throughout the 70’s.”

Lauria, who authored of Gravel’s A Political Oddessey about his experiences in the Senate, said “The militarists controlled the country, despite the warnings of Eisenhower at that time, which proves that the president is subject to oligarchic interests, and he can only do so much, even though he spoke out early in his administration, Eisenhower, against militarism.”

Eventually, the military takes over the government of the host country. “In 1973, there was a unique event. The United States lost a war. THe militarists were on the defensive. Tehre was a national self examination. There were hosue and senate comitties looking into what hte us had done wit h that power and wealth.

Had it used it for progress at home and abroad? Or to simply mulitiply that power and wealth for its own purpose, simply to become richer and powerful.

…The dommestic problems that this created, by spending too much on war industrioes, both at home and abroad.

Such economic booms are bought with blood money, and those that live by the sword die by it. Absorbing the war industry of the nazi’s also led this country to absorb its darkness, and has left it in the bloody PR tangled of the present day, where people all over the world have recently become disillusioned with the United States, upon seeing a demonstration of how it uses that power to sustain the oil industry.

Therefore,we have found a clear line demarcating the wrong way to use empire - and on the flips side, also the right way

Although this would work just as well if instead of Rome we put [insert name of republic here], but note Cicero says “No new Rome.” Cicero’s Republic is always the first source on policy for all republics.

This excerpt from Cicero’s speech against agrarian law, which Cicero deems  the most important  of his speeches, carried such weight because Roman agrarian legislation was the reason for the fall of the republic.

He gave this speech upon the first day of his ascension to consulship, when the republic was at it’s height. He overturned the law, and defeated the legislation. Pompey would later overturn the republic to gain it in the Lex Julia.

VIII. In fact, if we look round to survey everything which is pleasant and acceptable to the people, we shall find that nothing is so popular as peace, and concord, and ease. You have given up to me a city made anxious with suspicion, in suspense from fear, harassed to death by your proposed laws, and assemblies, and seditions. You have inflamed the hopes of the wicked; you have filled the virtuous with alarms; you have banished good faith from the forum, and dignity from the republic.

[24] Amid all this commotion and agitation of minds and circumstances, when the voice and authority of the consul has suddenly, from amid such great darkness, dawned on the Roman people; when it has shown that nothing need be feared; that no regular army, no band of extempore ruffians, no colony, no sale of the revenues, no new of command, no reign of decemvirs, no new Rome or opposition seat of empire, will be allowed to exist while we are consuls; that the greatest tranquillity of peace and ease will be secured; then, no doubt, we shall have much reason to ear that this beautiful agrarian law of yours will appear popular.

[25] But when I have displayed the wickedness of your counsels, the dishonesty of your law, and the treachery which is planned by those popular tribunes of the people against the Roman people; then, I suppose, I shall have reason to fear that I shall not be allowed to appear in the assembly, for the purpose of opposing you; especially when I have determined and resolved so to conduct myself in my consulship, (and the duties of the consulship cannot be discharged with dignity and freedom, in any other manner,) as neither to desire any province, nor honour, nor dignity nor advantage nor anything whatever which can have any hindrance thrown in its way by any tribune of the people.

[26] The consul states, in full senate, on the calends of January, that if the present condition of the republic continues, and if no new event arises, on account of which he cannot with honour avoid it, he will not go to any province. By that means I shall be able, O conscript fathers, so to behave myself in this magistracy, as to be able to restrain any tribune of the people who is hostile to the republic,–to despise any one who is hostile to myself.

-Cicero, On the Agrarian Law