In Which Gardening Will Not Redeem Diocletian

Good morning, my friend! I am fighting against the desire to sleep, as I do want to write a post today. My eyes are so heavy, my muscles are all failing, it is like I am going to explode in exhaustion. And yet, maybe it isn't sleep, it could be anemia in any case, I hope you are in a healthier position than me, today? Of course, do let me know. And also, let me know how is the weather? Here it is one day of mild winter, which is so much appreciated. Fun how just being some centimeters in a different direction, concerning the planets, can make a difference! Here, it means the difference between a scorching day, and a more mild one. There could be influence of the ocean currents as well, but anyway, I would love to jump to today's theme, that motivated me to write. If you allow me, let is jump to it!

As I mentioned anemia, let us turn to gardening, or more specifically, to cabbages and lettuces. I saw a post today that pointed that Emperor Diocletian abdicated the throne to go take care of cabbages and lettuces, in the gardens of his palace-fortress in Spalatum of the Dalmatia region, today Split, Croatia. When a delegation "begged" (according to such post) that Diocletian would return to the throne, he replied pointing to his garden "oh if only you could see how pretty are the cabbages that I grow". Charming. Worthy of a musical. And it strikes my cottagecore side heavily. Alas, I know best.

Gardening will not redeem Diocletian for me. He was the worst emperor Rome was ever disgraced with, alongside the painful Honorius. I stand firm on this position, because of what he did to such empire. Rome was in the crisis of the 3rd century at that point, when he came to the throne. Chronic political instability has brought Rome to its knees. And so, his merit, according to the defenders, was that he managed to keep such empire alive. And that he made "reforms", that they are vague about, conveniently. Though it is true Rome survived the 3rd century, it was not in one piece, but more close to barely, and I go further "did it survive?".

The price for "stability" was absurdly high and morally bankrupt. Diocletian made the steps to finally destroy what was left of Rome's economy, by doing agressive price control, growing taxation burden taking away the savings of the remaining middle income folk of the empire, and, by tying farmers to their land, and urban professionals to their professions, essentially sowing the seeds of feudalism. You could say classical antiquity died with Diocletian. He demolished the last semblances of imperial checks and balances, causing the Senate, what still existed of it, to become even further superfluous and anachronic. SPQR turned into what would become the famous Byzantine Autocracy, another row of seeds sowed by Diocletian.

In one way, however, antiquity was still around, and that was in the persecution of christians. Under Diocletian, this minority, growing but still merely tolerated, was brutally harassed so badly, it almost ceased to exist. In memory, Nero is the emperor one usually associates with christian persecution. That does not really hold water if you ask me, because Nero was too close to the death and Ressurection of Jesus, I doubt Christians were even present in Rome substancially for he to systematically oppress them directly, rather than just pointing the finger and letting the bullies do the rest. No, what we associate with christian persecution, could as well be much more tied to Diocletian. One could say he was mainly responsible for the radicalization of the population in many sides, that would later turn to destroy the pagans instead.

Diocletian also did not abdicate out of benevolence or in a sense of "my work here is done". The empire was a mess still, and his tethrarchy system would collapse as fast as he close the doors of his palace fortress behind him. He abdicated due to the fact he sensed danger, and he was also sick and could no longer hold office. The sickness part is justifiable, but ironic, that one of the biggest tyrants of old Rome managed to quietly fade away, while much more capable men of the empire, such as Claudius, Maxentius, Maiorianus and Philip the Arab, died violently instead. Cruel irony. 

One can say Rome survived, but at what cost? Should it have survived under these terms? Would not be best for the empire to fragment into competing kingdoms like happened after Alexander Makedonicus's death? We cannot say how things would go, but if we had to pick a villain, if any, one that demolished what was left of classical civilization, or started its brutal demise and fading, that would be Diocletian, I rest my case.

The desire some today have cultivated, to see some western places harden into "righteous" autocracies, the christian king charging into a crusade, somehow, is at least easy to debunk. It happened before, as Diocletian. He was pagan, of course, but the desire for a more autocratic regime some have, may cause them not to condemn authoritarianism, but lament it is not on their side. I do not point to any group in specific, here, and I want another caveat to be put out:  no, do not come here thinking I am attacking Mr. Trump. If I wrote this thinking of him, it would be a very bad strawman caricature of this man, not him in actuality, as he is his own man, he has been under attack by that group too, and I do respect this president as I think he is doing a lot of good. That said, I wonder how big is this group of performative "machos", the catholicore bros as I call them, the jacobins, the wokes, both on the left and in this alternative fringe of the right. I suspect it is far less of a menace than one would suggest. But still worth pointing and to urge the less grievous of them to reconsider. Neither am I saying this is the only menace to what we have left of liberty and what little little bit we have of some free market. We know the others: the socialists - social democrats, communists, post modern marxists, gender theorists, globalist degrowers - we already know. The more emotionally unreasonable islamic radicals we also know, and all those collectivists feed off one another. But I, a classical conservatarian, have other ideas to consider evil as well, and unfortunately they are not as easy to classify. But fortunately, we can point where they end: Diocletian. I rest my case.

Thank you for being here, as I had this urge to rage against that meme I saw, that stupid meme, and the stupid people reacting to it as to see morality on Diocletian and his lettuces. At least now I am not as sleepy! And in any case, now that I wrote what I wanted, I can nap. Thank you once again, I wish you the best! I should return here to write some more thoughts, ideas, personal concerns, warnings, what have you, real soon, it is a new beautiful week. See you at some point in it, hopefully by the next weekend. Ciao!