Appearances Can Be Deceiving
To the right you can see just another bronze bust of just another old dead white guy. No big deal, right? Museums the world over have millions of ‘em.
This isn’t just any old dead white guy immortalized in bronze. This is Cato the Younger or, as his contemporaries knew him, Marcus Porcius Cato Uticensis, a Stoic, scion of the late Roman Republic, a famously incorruptible statesman, advocate for liberty (or at least what passed for it in those days) and the latest in our examples of Toxic Masculinity.
His Maculate Origin
Born in 95BC in the city of Rome, Cato quickly grew into a stubborn, willful child. The Greek-became-Roman-citizen Lucius Mestrius Plutarchus (Plutarch) chronicled several events from the young Cato’s life, including his refusal to support the Marsi in the Social War – in spite of having been dangled out a window by his ankles, said dangle having been carried out by the leader of the Marsi, one Quintus Poppaedius Silo. This was Cato’s first public display of ballsiness and, while it is not our place to question Plutarch’s chronicling of these events, it’s important to note that Cato would have been around four years old at this time.
During the dictatorship of Lucius Cornelius Sulla, the dictator often sought out the then-fourteen-year-old Cato and his brother Caepio for conversation, despite Cato’s outspoken opposition to the dictator. Cato’s tutor Sarpedon cautioned Cato about his opposition, noting that Sulla had taken a free hand in executing Roman nobles that opposed him; Cato replied by asking for a sword, after which Sarpedon somehow managed to curtail the boy’s public excursions.
Cato had quite a few notable relations. Among them: His half-sister, Servilia Major, was the long-standing mistress of Julius Caesar and the mother of Marcus Junius Brutus. At age 21 he married a woman about whom little is known but her name, Atilia; with her he had two children, his son Marcus Porcius Cato and his daughter Porcia, who would later marry the same Marcus Junius Brutus. This connection would have significant meaning in the civil war that was to come.
His Adventurous Career
On reaching majority and receiving his inheritance, Cato left the house of the uncle where he had spent his childhood. While his inherited wealth would have allowed him a life of luxury, Plutarch tells us that the young Cato eschewed unnecessary comforts and instead dove deep into Stoic philosophy, living modestly, eating no more than necessary, drinking only (apparently a great deal of) cheap wine, wearing plain, undyed robes and even doing without shoes. He cultivated physical endurance, exposing himself to all conditions of heat, cold and damp to better enable himself to withstand discomfort.
Cato was 23 when the Third Punic War began in 72 BC. (Honestly, I always thought I would have taken Spartacus’s side on that one, but still…) He quickly volunteered to join his brother Caepio in the field. The brothers didn’t have much impact in that war, but five years later, in 67 BC, Cato was given command of a legion in Macedon. There he impressed his troops by sharing their food, drink and living conditions. Cato, true to his Stoic philosophy, chose to forgo the luxuries afforded other commanders and slept among his men. He led their marches from the front, and only left his legion when he received word of his brother, wounded and dying in Thrace.
The death of his brother hit Cato hard. After burying his sibling, Cato embarked on an extensive walkabout of Rome’s eastern provinces and did not return to Rome until 65 BC.
On his return to Rome, Cato was elected quaestor, a position that put the Stoic in the position of being able to audit and, to some extent control, the state Treasury. His strict rectitude and incorruptibility made him somewhat unpopular in this position, as he quickly moved to prosecute several nobles – including some of former dictator Sulla’s inner circle – for illegal appropriation of funds and for filing fraudulent documents. Cato made himself plenty of enemies in this role, about which he appeared to not give even one single ounce of crap.
In 63 BC, Cato was elected Tribune of Plebs, in which role he assisted the sitting Consul, Marcus Tullius Cicero (a good choice for another Profile in Toxic Masculinity) in squashing the Cataline Rebellion. Once the rebellion was put down, Cato, in a display of his usual inflexibility, wanted the conspirators executed, but a Roman general named Gaius Julius Caesar insisted instead on exiling the malefactors, spreading them among several far-flung Roman settlements for “safekeeping.”
The animosity between Cato and Caesar appears to date from this point.
Around this time Caesar, General Gnaeus Pompey Magnus and Marcus Licinius Crassus formed a triumvirate, and began slowly consolidating power between the three of them. Cato opposed the triumvirate at every turn. In 61 BC, Pompey returned from a campaign in Asia and demanded both a Triumph and that the Senate postpone elections to allow him to run for Consul; Cato opposed the measure, convincing the Senate to allow Pompey only one of the two options. Pompey chose the Consul’s chair over the Triumph, but faced with the same demand from Caesar, Cato was forced to resort to a filibuster. Unlike today’s proceedings in our own Senate, Cato actually had to hold the floor and speak, which he did so until sunset brought an end to the proceedings.
In time Caesar became Consul, and immediately proposed to award his veteran troops with rich farmlands in Campania. As this province and its agriculture provided almost a fourth of the Republic’s tax revenue, Cato again took to the rostrum to oppose the measure – upon which Caesar had the Consul’s Lictors forcibly remove Cato from the Senate, an insult which Cato was not to forget. Still not giving even one tiny little crap, Cato resolved to oppose Caesar’s ambitions at every turn.
But the Triumvirate was on shaky ground at this point. Caesar’s ambitions were about to bring him into conflict with his fellow triumvirs. It turns out that Cato’s inflexibility and zeal in prosecuting Sullan nobles had brought him in conflict with a famous general, the aforementioned Gnaeus Pompey Magnus, who had been known as The Teenage Butcher for his zeal in persecuting Sulla’s enemies. It is ironic, then, that this very general would come to be an ally of Cato’s in the coming unpleasantness.
The solidity of Cato’s big brass pair was about to be tested.
His One-Man War
Matters came to a head in 49 BC. Cato was then in the Senate, a key member of a group of republican Senators known as the Optimates. In that fateful year, Caesar was winding up his campaigns in Gaul, having defeated and taken prisoner the Celtic king/warlord Vercingetorix. Before the Senate, Cato insisted that Caesar’s term as proconsul had ended, and with it his proconsular immunity; he demanded Caesar return to Rome as an ordinary citizen, there to face charges.
Cato’s now-ally, Pompey, was willing to let Caesar accept continuation of his immunity along with giving up all but one of his legions and accepting governorship of one province, but Cato refused the compromise, and managed to ram through a resolution recalling Caesar.
The conqueror of Gaul didn’t take this well. He crossed the Rubicon with one legion and marched on Rome. Marcus Anneus Lucanus chronicled that moment:
Caesar crossed the flood and reached the opposite bank. From Hisparie’s Forbidden Fields he took his standards said, “Here I abandoned peace and desecrated law; fortune it is you I follow. Farewell to treaties. From now on war is our judge!”
Caesar had indeed decided to follow Fortune, and Fortune had evidently taken him as a pet, for with one legion he drove Pompey and the Optimates out of Rome and into Greece, where at Pharsalus the outnumbered Caesar seized victory from the jaws of defeat and sent Pompey and the remnants of the Optimates fleeing. Pompey went to Egypt, where he met execution at the hand of Ptolemey’s minions seeking to curry favor with Rome. Cato and Quintus Metellus Scipio fled to Utica in north Africa, determined to fight to the end for the Republic.
Caesar followed.
The final battle was fought at Thapsus, where Caesar was again victorious, and against the normal custom, Caesar ordered the execution of all of Scipio’s men. Cato was not present at the battle, having remained within Utica. At this point even the adamant Stoic had to concede defeat.
His Defiant Ending
Cato, sadly, wasn’t to enjoy any happy golden years.
Refusing a pardon from Caesar, Cato took up a sword and plunged it into his stomach. Plutarch wrote:
Cato did not immediately die of the wound; but struggling, fell off the bed, and throwing down a little mathematical table that stood by, made such a noise that the servants, hearing it, cried out. And immediately his son and all his friends came into the chamber, where, seeing him lie weltering in his own blood, great part of his bowels out of his body, but himself still alive and able to look at them, they all stood in horror. The physician went to him, and would have put in his bowels, which were not pierced, and sewed up the wound; but Cato, recovering himself, and understanding the intention, thrust away the physician, plucked out his own bowels, and tearing open the wound, immediately expired.
Thus, perished the man who has been described as “The Last Citizen of Rome.” He opposed Caesar with all of his breath, standing for the founding principles of the Republic. Personally, he was reputed to be a prickly, difficult man, and very likely a high-functioning alcoholic (hardly a novelty in those times.) But he was a man of principle and, unlike most pols today, was willing to stick to his principles even unto death.
Caesar, now, his story has been told, by Plutarch, Lucanus, Livy, Shakespeare and many more. He won his war, was assassinated by a man who had been one of his closest friends, but his adopted son Octavian seized control and became, effectively, Rome’s first Emperor.
You could very well argue that when Cato died, the Republic died with him.
And where is our Cato today?
And where is our Cato today?
A wishy-washy think tank?
Well, at least we have our Spartacus.
I am Spartacus!
Great Article Animal!! There is a certain institution out there that’s horribly unworthy of his name. Also highly recommend this to any Glibs who want a very readable biography:
https://www.amazon.com/Romes-Last-Citizen-Legacy-Mortal/dp/0312681232
I’ve a copy of that book. It’s well worth the read.
I was moved when it described Cato’s very unstoic reaction to his brothers death. It’s funny how something that happened 2000+ years ago can still resonate on an emotional level.
Also of interest; Julius Caesar tried hard to erase Cato’s legacy after his death, even having a pathography written about him and parading banners of him disemboweling himself in the streets. Caesar’s narrative didn’t survive; Cato’s legacy remained a thorn in his side until his assassination.
Given standard Roman attire, That could be a quite literal descriptor.
Romans wore loincloths.
Even Biggus Dickus?
The Punic wars were against Carthage. Sparticus was involved in the Third Servile War,.
Bah. Dumb typo on my part.
Scipio Africanus?
Thanks for taking your spare time to write all this cool stuff Animal.
I can’t not write. It’s like some kind of weird compulsion. Fortunately I found myself a captive audience in the Glibs, so that once a week I can inflict my ramblings on you all.
And we are all the richer for it.
+1 I studied Cato in school, but it’s been a long time since I’ve gone through my Roman history.
To the right you can see just another bronze bust of just another old dead white guy. – are Italians really white though?
Some.
Sicilians are not.
According to my very racist grandfather this is true. Northern Italians check out. Spanish (from Spain) too, but not the Mexicans obviously. I mean, come on. Ricardo Montalban and, like, some Greek people will do in a pinch if you can’t find real white people.
Not according to my Northern Italian people. Let’s just say the welcome here in the early 20th Century was less than enthusiastic.
Well, you were just dirty foreigners then.
And the Irish really wanted to maintain that bottom wrung of the social ladder.
I don’t think there was much distinction between Irish, Scots and EyeTies.
They all had that white privilege?
Sure there was. There was “You can’t understand them when they’re drunk” “you can’t understand them when they’re sober either” and “stop waving your arms around when talking to me”
nope but they sure liked to hate each other. My grandfather would often make snide remarks about ‘Dagos’ even though his best friends last name was Mamoni.
My Scottish great-grandfather used to say, “If you ever meet a good Welshman shoot him before he turns bad.”
To be fair, a welshman in scotland is bound to be up to no good.
nope but they sure liked to hate each other.
And yet the Irish and Italians intermarried constantly, as both my family and my wife’s family would demontrate.
Yeah, my wife’s dad’s family is very, very Italian. Sicilian, I believe, but from Texas/Louisiana. Her mom’s side is Irish and German.
Well, I think he meant Northern Italian in the sense of eastern French or southern Austrian.
Oh, the Holy Roman Empire provinces.
Yeah, come to think of it, that lines up. The Nordics get in, too, of course, as do the English, Scottish, and Welsh. The Irish are ok, but only if they’re the funny kind.
However, I’m guessing your ancestors felt the same way about Sicilians and Calabrians as my great-grandfather, who hailed from the province of Parma. Dad’s nonno was not a fan of the southerners, and I’ve been told he would get very angry when they’d be called “Italians”. “They aren’t Italian, they’re criminals!”
I’ve gotten a copy of his naturalization application, and I thought it was interesting that he listed his nationality as Northern Italian just in case some testadura bureaucrat was under the misconception that Giovanni Cavalli was one of those southern criminals.
In your Dad’s nonno’s defense, my southern Italian nonno also thought all southern Italians were criminals.
Tying it back to this article’s era, the Romans feel the same way about northerners (and definitely Sicilians).
And that non-Roman Italy would be anything north of the Rubicon.
Present times; yes. According to my Scot-Irish forebears; definitely not.
Pre- or Post- mid seventh century?
Sicilians are just baptized Arabs.
In the mid-90s I was in a bar in Bratislava that was run by Sicilians. At the time I didn’t know. I was talking to one of them and I asked him where he was from. He told me Sicily. I foolishly said, “Huh, I assumed you were from the Middle East.” He said, “Yeah, we get that a lot.” I was asked to leave about 30 minutes later.
This sort of thing is admirable though, being rich back one must of been tempted to retire to a country villa with some 20 of the finest female slaves and some good wine instead of all this politics business.
Like today, Roman politics can erase your wealth in the blink of an eye if you’re not engaged.
So people did that in their city homes.
I consider Cato and Patrick Henry my ideal political figures. Cato died for his principles, Patrick Henry retired from public life and lived his days out on his plantation, uninterested in furthering his political career.
Patrick Henry a slave owner is you ideal political figure? NOT WOKE
Yep. Like many men of that era he inherited his slaves with land purchases. It’s well documented that he had no desire to own slaves but thought of them as his wards once they had come into his possession, knowing freedom at that time was tantamount to an eviction and putting them out into the world without skills or means to sustain themselves. He also thought the best way to deal with the Indian question was interbreeding; familial ties would end all rivalry and claim to the land.
Two very enlightened opinions that would send SJW’s into fits of rage.
freedom at that time was tantamount to an eviction and putting them out into the world without skills or means to sustain themselves
Couldn’t he have kept them on as employees? Or was there not enough income to stay solvent if he paid even modest sums to farm workers?
I’m no historian but the second sentence seems to be exactly describing what Jefferson was alluding to when he said:
“As it is, we have the wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go. Justice is on one scale, and self-preservation in the other”?
Eh. That’s a bit paternalistic, don’t you think? I’m sure his slaves would have leaped at the chance to try to pull themselves up by their bootstraps. I mean would you choose to be a well-fed slave or a hungry freeman?
I can’t assume, given the number of people these days who seem to be pining for a ‘well-fed slave’ role. I didn’t know the people involved.
Once you get a taste of honest-to-goodness, no bullshit slavery, you realize your foolishness quickly.
Slavery wasn’t that bad because they got to work outside and sing and dance a lot.
HM, I suppose the more appropriate question would be whether there would be any who had similar problems to prison inmates who are unable to adjust to life on the outside.
I’m sure there were. In both cases, I’d rather let them make their own choices. (Actually, I’d prefer ex-cons not to engage in recidivism just to get back in prison, but if that’s what they want, hopefully they do it non-violently).
Maybe, but I remain unconvinced by the assertion.
I think a great many people would voluntarily choose being chattel slaves over the harsh life of the alternatives available to the slaves at that time.
Hell I think a lot of people would have voluntarily chosen chattel slavery over the harsh life in the early industrial age factories
@Ras
Again, instead of talking about hypothetical people, what would your choice be? If freedom, why? And if you made that choice why do you believe that it is exceptional?
Yes, my choice would be freedom.
As for why I consider my choice to be exceptional, it is because I have actually interacted with other humans and I have had many advocate for exactly that.
Yes, if you ask people to choose between 18th century chattel slavery and the life of a free person today of course they would take the latter. Now ask them to choose between chattel slavery and the life of a hunter gatherer or subsistence farmer, not the idealized and romanticized vision of it people often have, but the nitty gritty reality of it and yes, in my opinion a great many people, not all, maybe not even a majority but at the minimum a significant percentage will choose to be slaves.
I also have some pretty solid evidence to back up my opinion.
You realize that slavery is always a choice right? You could if someone were attempting to hold you in slavery resist at every turn and seek to escape to your freedom. What percentage of slaves actually did that? 10%, maybe 20%?
See if I were transported back to 1750 in the body of a black man with the same mind I have today there is no way they could keep me as a slave. They could kill me for sure but there is nothing they could do to get me to acquiesce to a state of enslavement. I would gain my freedom one way or another or I would die trying. That also was an exceptional choice among the actual slaves.
Paternalistic? Absolutely. Enlightened for his time? I’d say so.
I’d say your enlightenment bar is set a bit low. Henry was a contemporary of Benjamin Rush, Thomas Paine, John Jay, Ben Franklin, and every Quaker alive at that time.
To be more specific, enlightened for a Virginian of the 18th century. Much like Jefferson he certainly had his blind spots.
This letter captures his feelings on slavery. While I’m not defending the institution I think we often overlook many of the cultural complexities surrounding it when we view it through modern sensibilities and the benefit of 200 years of hindsight.
https://www.patrickhenrylibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora:1351
Well, even in Ol’ Virginny you had dudes like this.
But, I think it’s ok to say that Henry, Jefferson, and Washington, while realizing the hypocrisy of slavery weren’t ready to give up their livelihoods over it. Manumitting their slaves wouldn’t just mean the slaves had to find work (and many slaves were skilled in a trade, be it cooking, tailoring, or even husbandry/agriculture), but they would have to reinvent themselves as well. Saying they reluctantly kept their slaves for the slaves’ own protection is a bit of a pious fraud, in my opinion. Their motivations were purely economic, and while not admirable, it doesn’t diminish the role they had to play in the founding of a republic that would eventually live up to its promise.
I agree with that almost entirely. I guess the point that I’m driving at is the paternalism, while indefensible from our standpoint, was very much a part of their psyche. I think they thought they were making the best of a bad situation.
I agree. That’s why I’m using his 18th Century contemporaries as a comparison. There were plenty of Americans, even before the Rev. War, who were advocating full on abolition. To say that Henry et al. were merely ‘men of their time’ is not really true when you have people like Ben Rush and Thomas Paine, as well as a multitude of anti-slavery and manumission societies that were founded prior to American Independence. Hell, Aaron Burr unsuccessfully submitted bills to end slavery and to establish women’s suffrage in the 1780’s.
In the link you provided, Henry makes my point:
In other words, ‘Yes, slavery is terrible, but I gotta eat.’ The basic human ability for cognitive dissonance is not complex. We can acknowledge the accomplishments of Henry, Jefferson, Washington, etc. without having to make excuses for their ‘blind spots’. Indeed, to truly honor them, we should present them as they were, warts and all. Because while their motivations weren’t necessarily all that complex, taking the entirety of their lives in sum, they were complex humans, just like us. Which makes them even greater.
But if they were making the best of a bad situation, why did some free their slaves only in their wills after their death?
I think I lean towards HM’s position as opposed (maybe somewhat) in principal, but not willing to give up the fruits of that hideous institution.
Possible parallel:
If global warming really is the greatest challenge of our time, as slavery was the greatest challenge of their time, the planters didn’t want to give up the benefits of slavery, and we don’t want to give up the benefits of fossil fuels.
I don’t see a parallel.
One was a known real issue (walk outside, see the slaves working in your fields, there it is) where the people squishily advocating action on it faced the changes themselves. The other is an article of faith where the people pushing for dramatic changes are confident of avoiding the suffering they’re intending to inflict on everyone else.
Possible parallel but not really as slaves were a very clear thing and global warming is not. Also the slavery solution was abolish. The GW solution is not clear. It is not just vacations but potentially millions dead to give up fossil fuels
@HM: Well said.
I think that while it’s certainly possible that there were some slaves in certain situations who felt like their situations could certainly be much worse if freed, time and again you see examples of slaves who lay their lives on the line to free themselves and others. Frederick Douglass and particularly Harriet Tubman spring to mind.
With that said, while some of Henry’s contemporaries were abolitionists, I’d assume that most of his peers were not. Slavery in the English-speaking world was on the wane, true, but it was still very much a going concern in the Spanish and Portuguese colonies. Abolitionism was starting to pick up steam in the American South, but it was still the norm among the people Henry would’ve considered his peers. That’s not a defense of Henry, his peers, or slavery, of course, but simply to say that it was the kind of position on a moral issue that would not have been considered beyond the pale by the people who he would likely look to for affirmation and probably would’ve read as “progressive” without being dangerous or radical by the other fellows at the club, so to speak.
“taking the entirety of their lives in sum, they were complex humans, just like us.”
In sum, I’m not complex.
I’ve seen some sources say that at the time in Virginia it was illegal to free your slaves, hence why people would do it on their deathbed as to avoid the boot of the state. Not a defense, just an explanation I’ve seen.
Even if true, it just leads to the question of why Jefferson and Henry, being political titans, didn’t try to change the law.
My guess is for the same reasons Rand Paul hasn’t tried to get the NFA repealed of the Department of Education dissolved. It was a political non-starter at that time.
I’ve seen some sources say that at the time in Virginia it was illegal to free your slaves, hence why people would do it on their deathbed as to avoid the boot of the state
I’m skeptical, because if it was illegal to free slaves in Virginia, any attempt to do so (whether while alive or in your will) would be void ab initio.
*high-fives self for more Latin in comment thread about Cato*
I don’t know about Virginia but I’ve heard that in Georgia a slave owner could just free his or her own slave. That would require a bill passed in the legislature. Naturally, it was not easy to accomplish. That would explain how some African-Americans were technically slave owners of their relatives whom they had purchased earlier but could not set free legally.
What I’m saying is freeing a slave was not always a simple process that could easily done by a slave owner.
a slave owner could NOT just free
Cato, recovering himself, and understanding the intention, thrust away the physician, plucked out his own bowels, and tearing open the wound, immediately expired.
The man had guts, no question.
Ugh. I can’t stomach another pun thread.
You just need more pluck.
Probably should move this to an appendix.
Or a gall bladder or a spleen.
Intestinal fortitude, even.
You guys are going to drag it all out, aren’t you?
It’s more fun when you have a little skin in the game.
It’s bloody suicidal to carry on like this in the face of a Swiss narrowed gaze
It’s not as cutting as you let on.
Got to admit this is amusing, but pointless.
Careful, Swiss is going to start venting his spleen.
“Pompey went to Egypt, where he met execution at the hand of Ptolemey’s minions seeking to curry favor with Rome. ”
I was watching a show on Cleopatra this weekend and they had this bit of the story. IIRC, Ptolemey was her younger brother, and didn’t want to share power, so he exiled her from Alexandria. Then Pompey arrived (while feeling from Caesar), and Ptolemey thought it would be a good idea to execute him. He presented Caesar with Pompey’s head, which Caeser did NOT like, and so Caeser’s men killed Ptolemey. Which created the opportunity for Cleopatra to seize power.
Which Ptolemey, because last I knew the last Ptolemey drowned in the Nile with no proof he was pushed or held under.
Ptolemey 34 out of 37?
This is why I’m not fond of that Dynasty. They had only four names, and only married inside the family. Makes it difficult to keep track.
They had only four names
Ptolemy, Biggus, Incontinentia, and Wodewick.
I know that law firm…
Looks like Ptolomey VIII. Seems like every male ruler in Egypt at the time was related and named Ptolomey.
Every Ptolemey was related. And their family tree didn’t branch.
I’m Larry, this is my brother Ptolemey, and this is my other brother Ptolemey.
And your Father-Uncle Ptolemey, and your grandfather-brother-in-law Ptolemey…
weird local to me fact: William Sanderson and Fred Thompson both have JD from Memphis State.
The HBO series “Rome” had an episode on this event.
BTW. Rome is one of the best series I have ever seen. It’s great.
Sticking to the time period, Robert Harris’ Cicero series is also very good.
What bothered me about that is they made Cato out to be a doddering old man. He was several years younger than Caesar and in his 40’s when he died.
True. For whatever reason, HBO gave painted CATO in a bad light.
What they did with Mark Antony I thought was great.
I think you could make one heck of a good movie or miniseries based on the book I linked to above. No way that’s getting made now though, no way it wouldn’t be seen as a challenge to left-wing populism without some serious revisionism.
James Purefoy was great in the role, giving Antony this sort of layer of whimsical irreverence over top of real menace.
dat dick tho
“And I have an angry mob, who will ROAST AND EAT YOUR MEN OF QUALITY IN THE ASHES OF THE SENATE HOUSE!”
The man is great.
And where is our Cato today?
Manservant to Inspector Clouseau?
I thought he went to work for the Green Hornet.
That dude trying to save books from being burned in Animal Farm?
I think it’s the one about genetically engineered pigs in Brazil.
No, that’s The
BoysXe/Xer from Brazil.Facts: The character’s name in the Green Hornet was Kato, not Cato, and the actor who portrayed Kato (Bruce Lee) got his ass kicked when he ran his mouth to an AMERICAN war hero.
That was a daydream, as much as your fantasy that Bailey Jay and Mia Isabella are superior to Venus Lux.
No one of Bailey Jay’s ilk is superior to her. Don’t be ridiculous.
Her face is weird.
You’re probably more of a Buck Angel guy anyway. To each their own.
Facts: Kato was played by Tokutaro Hayashi, and it’s impossible to differentiate Kato from Cato on the Radio.
It’s pronounced KELL-LEE, but spelled like Kelly… Married with Children
It’s pronounced Throatwobbler Mangrove.
Great article, Animal. I didn’t know anything about the man so this was quite interesting.
There is a lot of bluster about dying for one’s principles – it’s shocking when it actually happens.
The thing about dying for principles is it rarely changes anything. I prefer to make other people die for their principles.
-roughly Patton
That’s exactly it. Although Patton may be wrong in the sense that 2,000 years later Cato’s stoic philosophies are alive and well.
Because it is mostly bluster. There are two kinds that actually do it: 1) The ones that suck it up and go into battle to fight for a principle knowing they likely wont survive and 2) The nuts that commit suicide. The two are not quite the same kinds of people.
Speaking of Toxic Masculinity, Thomas Massie got a little glib yesterday:
Thomas Massie
@RepThomasMassie
Homicides per 100,000 went down AFTER the ban ended in 2004. Also, the number of AR-15s sold went up during the ban. That’s when I bought my first one (1996, before the boating accident of course).
Nice. Another man of principles.
You’re celebrating that one of our elected representatives is openly flaunting our nation’s laws?
Laws are laws – if Massie doesn’t like the laws he can work to change the laws. I hope the ATF reads this tweet and storms his homes.
I would hope that our representatives would flaunt our laws; they write them, they should be proud of them.
Provided its done in proper civil fashion (that is, openly and with a willingness to take the consequences), I don’t have a problem with them flouting our laws, either.
No one likes a perfect Peter, Mr. Dean.
No one likes a perfect Peter
Anyone else want to take this one?
But then how could Crusty fix a man who’s already perfect?
Anyone else want to take this one?
Winston’s Mom?
The correlation between gun owners and boating accidents is surprisingly high.
Someone should look into that.
Agreed.
This is an interesting period in Roman history. I think you can make the argument that once the Social War happens there’s sort of no going back for the Republic. You’ve got the Marian Reforms kind of setting the stage for legions to be loyal to a particular general and able to stay in the field as a professional army, and then the Social War kicks off this period of civil unrest and political violence that doesn’t really end until Augustus.
I would argue that the Republic died generations earlier when the rule against multiple consulships was abandoned. By Cato’s time, it was a ripe corpse being squabbled over by vultures. But I never cared for the pathological aggression of the Republic anyhow – they destroyed themselves, and good riddance.
That’s a reasonable statement. It was a shell of a republic by that point.
You know what other republic . . . .
The Gorbachev-era USSR?
Yep – Where were are now. Assholes with giant egos fighting for power with no respect for the Constitution or rule of law. It’s just a struggle for personal power by sociopaths who appeal to the idiot masses with handouts while fighting with each other.
John Adams were recoil in horror.
But I think ALL the originals would be disgusted with the modern DNC.
would recoil
Cato? Hm. It seems like the Kochs have infiltrated the Glibertarians with their dirty Nazi money.
Cato took up a sword and plunged it into his stomach
If only they took commonsense measures against
suicidesword violence.What? Without guns to cause violence, the world is a peaceful, non-violent paradise!
Thanks Animal. Cato has been and shall remain a point of personal reference for me. Much like Stoicism, it’s easy to admire and hard to replicate such dedicated principles.
In hindsight Cato should have made the deal with Caesar. Whether or not that would be delaying the inevitable I can’t say.
Makes you wonder about our whole a sitting President can’t be indicted. If your choice is between stepping down and being indicted or overthrowing the Republic, a new Caesar may decide to overthrow the Republic.
The Optimates (“The Best” or perhaps “The Elite”) were opposed by the Populares (Populists), of which both Marius and Julius Caesar allied themselves with.
We all know what happened after the Populares won.
They Made Rome Great Again?
Rome was never great.
*begins lecture on “Roman Exceptionalism*
Yeah, what have the Romans ever done for us?
How so they weren’t?
The first edition of Tiger Beat?
I find it funny that Caesar had a Optimates pedigree yet early-on realized his ticket to power was with the Populares. There is nothing new under the sun. On the whole are the populist masses blind to naked ambition or do they just not care?
Bread and circuses, dude, bread and circuses. Free shit never gets old.
On the whole are the populist masses blind to naked ambition or do they just not care?
There’s nobody on offer without naked ambition, so they pick the one who says he will put his boot on the other guy’s neck?
+1 Why an out-group is always a political necessity
Yes. In this case it was all about seizing the wealth of the patricians and redistributing it to the masses.
Shit sounds familiar….
Everything old is new again…
I’ve been saving my JNCO jeans for a reason.
Yes. Shocking that the elites who pretended to be on the side of the plebians were the ones who created a permanent dictatorship. That *never* happens.
By the time Octavian came along, the old system was long gone – the hugely destructive cycle of civil wars was no longer an aberration, it was the *new* system. I think at that point the alternatives were someone strong enough to win decisively and create a lasting dictatorship, or the whole thing falling apart completely. (There are strong parallels to the Third Century Crisis.)
Nation was ungovernable, they gave us order, yada yada yada.
A rationalisation can also be the truth. The Republic was killed long before Octavian made it official… and frankly, the Late Republic with its delightful combination of aggressive Forever War and slave labour on an industrial scale was even less of a libertarian paradise than the Principate.
Isn’t this what Trump is doing? Mind you, the entire Democrat party apparatus pretends to be on the side of the plebs too.
If one must analogise directly, I would think of Trump as the Gracchi. Which is not a happy analogy for Trump, unfortunately. Or for us.
Trump takes a dump on the Buckingham Palace lawn:
Queen Elizabeth Reportedly Said Donald Trump “Ruined” Her Property
I didn’t actually read the article, but I’m pretty sure that’s what must have happened.
I wish we had a monarch who cared about lawns like that.
This is the kind of shit that I actually like about Trump. Fuck royalty.
“No matter how silly the idea of having a queen might be to us….”
Grass is such a nuisance.
I would tell her to replace it with cement.
Uh-huh.
First, lets get some confirmation that the Queen either scheduled the meeting to include the gardens, or broke with her schedule (unlikely) to drag the Australian PM out to the gardens to bitch about Trump.
And the patent absurdity of bitching about manners to an Aussie.
Anytime I hear sources say and Trumps involved I automatically assume it’s him leaking the story or someone leaking the story on his orders.
Maybe he can give her the audio version of Art of the Deal on an iPod to make up for it.
Re the discussion upthread on choosing slavery or freedom. Years ago I read “The Arms of Krupp” by Wm Manchester. The one thing that stuck with me was the description of the slave labor used by Krupp during WWII. It was not uncommon for people to escape and then return. The fear of the unnkown was stronger than the certainty of the known horrors.
I know it’s different in magnitude, but plenty of us stay in full time jobs that make us miserable because we prefer the security.
Well, when I have to practically commit a felony to be fired…
*waves at Kevin*
hey now that’s me!
Back at TOS, I would occasionally ask someone if they would rather be the canary in the gilded cage or the sparrow outside the window in the dead of winter.
Every now and then, someone would admit to wanting to be the canary.
I think part of it is whether you have the ability to survive outside of the security. If the sparrow was well prepared for the winter that’s one thing. If the sparrow is looking at certain death that’s another.
Everyone and everything dies.
Death is always certain.
Ceteris parabus, later is better than sooner.
*pats self on back for using Latin in comment thread about Cato*
Semper ubi sub ubi.
*assumes a haughty position*
*sneers at Scruffy’s juvenile Dog Latin joke and refusal to go commando*
Scruffy:
Illegitimi non carborundum.
You would think that I would have heard that phrase before, what with 5 years of Latin.
Filing that one for later. Thanks.
parabis ?
never took Latin; ain’t Catholic
I think there are mostly canaries out there. But I don’t know if it’s a cultural thing or it’s a genetic thing. I’m guessing genetic.
Cultural / experience thing. Boot camp and Infantry school is designed to turn people from canaries into sparrow hawks.
It’s straightforward. Internal locus of control versus external locus of control.
There are a lot of people that just want someone else to do the hard work for them.
I never knew the houseguest of Orenthal Jones was such a fascinating fellow.
That was *Kato* Kaelin, not Cato Kaelin.
So Bruce Lee stayed at OJ’s house?
No, but Burt Kwouk did
Yes, and he wrote about it in his autobiography – Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others – How I Parlayed My Problematic Racist Surname And Spastic Dancing Into Hollywood Gold.
Cato the Younger was a bad mofo.
Wasn’t there a commentator under one of the Catos at TOS?
Tulpa as I recall
We are all Tulpa.
Profiles in toxic mousculinity- Last night a saw a mouse , he just walk right across the kitchen floor like he owned the place, so this morning I load up four good old Victor traps and position them in strategic locations, Just got home and checked and the little fucker has cleaned every last molecule of peanut butter off all four traps and didn’t spring a single one.
Sounds like it’s time to set up the hair trigger shotgun traps.
Given the never-ending avalanche of mice and packrats from the mountains into our neighborhood, I have gone with electric traps for strategic locations, like under the grill. One mouse got popped so hard it knocked him clean out of the trap.
Did you use the sensitive or firm setting on the traps?
You need an owl. Owls are nature’s mousetraps.
My cat brought me a mouse the other night, but, true to form, the mouse was alive. So I watched a senile, deaf, geriatric cat chase a mouse around the room that he apparently couldn’t see or smell very well. The mouse got away when the cat got tired and climbed into the box the mouse was hiding in to take a nap. So far, in my life, I have never seen either of my cats kill anything, and I’ve only seen them catch something maybe five times in twenty years. The obese pit bull? He’s up to somewhere around six mice and five rabbits in ten years. His sister caught a mourning dove on the wing, too, which is nothing to sneeze at.
My cat brings home a dead rodent, rabbit, or bird almost every day. I long for a normal indoor cat now.
The golden years of our companion animals is heartachey, but that’s an adorable anecdote nonetheless. My mom had a wee Rat Terrier who loved killing any mole or snake he found in his yard. Gopher Turtles were his nemesis though; he would run tight circles around the impervious shell, impotently barking until he convinced himself it was just a rock. He would walk away, the turtle would pop out, travel another few feet, and pop back in as Chester came tearing ass around the corner firmly convinced that THIS TIME he was gonna eat that sweet, sweet turtle meat. Those poor turtles would keep him busy all day.
So far, in my life, I have never seen either of my cats kill anything, and I’ve only seen them catch something maybe five times in twenty years.
Sounds like they’ve been well fed. My cats often bring me dead critters, but I find them in the yard chewing on the last bits of rodents and reptiles almost daily. I feed them less than what satiates them but enough to keep them alive and healthy.
The obese pit bull? He’s up to somewhere around six mice and five rabbits in ten years. His sister caught a mourning dove on the wing, too, which is nothing to sneeze at.
No cats? A former Dean Beast managed to rack up two cats, including one that she ran down on a dead straight-away.
The Big Dumb One has a handful of snakes, no telling how many lizards, and a trophy Gila Monster to his credit. Amazingly, the Little Fat One, who is as grouchy and hair-triggered as the day is long, has never killed anything to my knowledge. I think she figures she’s got the Big Dumb One for the wetwork.
The mourning dove is quite the achievement. The local quail taunt and laugh at the Dean Beasts.
None of the neighborhood cats have ever been stupid enough to come into the yard while they’ve been outside, so no cats on the kill board. They grew up with cats that kicked their ass every day though, so I’m not sure if they’d do much more than bark indignantly. The bird dog (she’s gotten two, now that I think of it) is a bunch of stuff, but definitely pit and some kind of sight hound. She’s sturdy but she’s also very leggy, so at walking speeds she’s a clumsy galoot but she’s got crazy speed and shockingly fast reflexes. In another life she’d have been a hell of a courser.
When my family were between dogs, we had some killdeer start nesting our yard. Then some cats started hunting them, which was the motivation for our mom to let us get another dog. It (a border collie) caught the killdeer.
My brother had a borzoi who loved his family (including me when I came to visit) but racked up some horrifying kills including a deer and a pair of labradors that were part of a five-dog pack trying to claim the neighborhood.
I get good results with the Tom Cat spin traps. They can’t get the PB without going inside the trap.
My old man had great success with these
https://www.intruderinc.com/products/the-better-mousetrap
Of course these were dumb country mice, not the Cosmo drinking city variety.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-plunges-tied-with-warren-and-sanders-in-new-national-poll
Biden plunges, tied with Warren and Sanders in new national poll
A new national poll suggests a three-way tie between Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and former Vice President Joe Biden in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination.
The Dems are fucked.
Their voters can’t decide who is worse.
I mean, there’s plenty of time for something crazy to happen, but I would bet money that Trump is a two-term president.
Minus a recession – what are the number of modern presidents who lost after only serving one term?
Presidents that served one full term and lost in an election for second term:
John Adams
John Quincy Adams
Martin Van Buren
Benjamin Harrison
William Howard Taft
Herbert Hoover
Jimmy Carter
George H. W. Bush
hence my “minus a recession”, because that’s what takes a president out even though sheer stupidity – Hello, W! – should be a better reason.
I posted the other day that Trump would win if he didn’t do something stupid (i.e., trade wars) and push the country into a recession.
I heard that H.W. accomplish all his goals during his first term and didn’t want to win again.
Bush I was basically Reagan’s 3rd term. But he might have pulled it out if Perot hadn’t run.
Nah, if they were stuck with Biden I was more sure Trump would win, Warren might pull it off, as disgusting as that is. Bernie will never be the nominee.
a three-way…between Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and former Vice President
Ewwwww.
So Warren is going to end up being the nominee before one vote is counted … I mean cast.
Super Delegates!
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before:
A fake indian, a commie and a dementia patient walk into a bar…
This should keep me up at night, but I’m dead inside.
Bah, that was supposed to be a reply to Lackadaisical
Would also work for Rebel’s comment. *shudders*
When the Soviet Union Paid Pepsi in Warships
Scrap? That’s not how you evil company!
Scrap is what is on the official ledgers. The ships are docked in a hollowed out volcano.
Sitting next to John Leonard’s AV-8 Harrier.
Chapeau Animal.
Animal, I’d give good odds that a fair amount of the Glibertariat are Stoics. How ’bout it, folks? I’d like to know.
Excellent read, thanks!
Once again I late log in to type….it amazes me the shit I don’t know and learned here in the depths of snark, sexism, overtly snarked racism and mostly bad music links . Thanks for the great read Animal.