The Power of Ideology

Alex Roberto Hybel

• Editorial: Routledge
• Año: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781134012497
• Edición: 1
• Categoría: Politics & International Relations
• Categoría: Politics

Since the Roman Empire, leaders have used ideology to organize the masses and instil amongst them a common consciousness, and equally to conquer, assimilate, or repel alternative ideologies. Ideology has been used to help create, safeguard, expand, or tear down political communities, states, empires, and regional or world systems. This book explores the multiple effects that competing ideologies have had on the world system for the past 1, 700 years: the author examines the nature and content of Christianity, Islam, Confucianism, Protestantism, secularism, balance-of-power doctrine, nationalism, imperialism, anti-imperialist nationalism, liberalism, communism, fascism, Nazism, ethno-nationalism, and transnational radical Islamism; alongside the effects their originators sought to craft and the consequences they generated.

This book argues that for centuries world actors have aspired to propagate through the world arena a structure of meaning that reflected their own system of beliefs, values and ideas: this would effectively promote and protect their material interests, and - believing their system to be superior to all others – they felt morally obliged to spread it. Radical transnational Islamism, Hybel argues, is driven by the same set of goals. This book will be of interest to students and scholars of international politics, international relations theory, history and political philosophy.

1	Political ideology in late antiquity and the Middle Ages

He who fights so the word of God may prevail is on the path of God.¹

Introduction

Probably no leader in antiquity captured the relationship between ideology and foreign policy more eloquently than Pericles in the funeral oration he delivered at the burial of the first Athenian soldiers killed in the war between Athens and Sparta. According to Pericles, the Athenian soldiers who died perished to defend a political ideal, a democratic way of life. My interest, however, is not motivated by the desire to locate the period when a set of political leaders first used ideology as a foreign policy instrument. As already noted, one of my intellectual aims is to bring to light the sources of the ideological structures that define, and contradictions that affect, today’s world system. My objectives in this chapter are to explain: i) the transformation of religion into political ideology; ii) the way leaders first used religious-based ideologies either to help prevent the demise of an empire or create a new one; and iii) how a political ideology helped prevent the leaders of an empire from expanding its power far beyond their regional base.

Christianity as a political force

Distinct political communities populated the globe during the first millennium CE. The largest ones, structured in the form of empires, extended from Rome through Persia and the Kushan Empire to China.² Two of them, the Roman and Sassanid Empires, interacted within the context of a regional system of their own creation. By the middle of the seventh century the system’s structure had been altered by the rise of Islam.

Wealth during Antiquity and the Middle Ages was relatively static. Agriculture and the exploitation of peasant slaves were the means empires commonly relied on to expand their material goods. In turn, both elements depended on the amount of territory and the number of trade routes empires controlled.³ The relationships were relatively simple—the greater the size of an empire’s territory and the more major trade routes it controlled, the greater its taxable income and power.⁴ It was no coincidence that the Roman and Sassanid Empires emerged at the crossroads of trade and commerce in the eastern Mediterranean.

By the third century, pressures from inside and outside the Roman Empire had transformed it, in the words of one of its own historians, from a “kingdom of gold into one of iron and rust.”⁵ During that period, Rome was compelled to maintain a large military presence along the frontiers of the Rhine and Danube regions to prevent invasions from “barbarians,” and along its eastern flank to offset attempts by the Parthian Empire to widen its power. Rome’s problems took a turn for the worse around the middle of the century, when the Persian Sassanids launched raids that reached deep into Roman provinces.⁶ It was also around this time that the Goths, along with the Franks and the Alemanni, overran the empire’s northern and western borders.⁷

The unrelenting military challenges undermined the empire’s economy and destabilized its social order. They affected the economic system in two distinct ways. As the wars on the different fronts gained momentum, so did inflation. With inflation came the need to raise the soldiers’ pay. Faced with an enlarged imperial budget, the emperors were forced to set up new taxes. The wars, moreover, had a direct effect on the empire’s agricultural system. In dire need of soldiers, the empire had no choice but to recruit workers from large farms. With a sizeable portion of the labor force reduced, the number of independent family farms declined and agricultural output plummeted.⁸ The burdens generated by the external threats destabilized the social order in two other ways. At the top of the power pyramid, assassination often became the instrument of choice for the removal of emperors.⁹ Commoners, in turn, took to piracy and theft. No less challenging was the drive to create a social structure that impaired the ability by members of one class to ascend to the next one.

Diocletian became the empire’s new leader in 284. Convinced that no single individual could “simultaneously direct wars, fight all the battles, govern the Empire, and watch out for usurpers,” he created a tetrarchy.¹⁰ He relinquished part of his authority to a joint Augustus, appointed two subordinate Caesars, and divided the empire into four prefectures and twelve dioceses.¹¹ The tetrarchy did not generate internal harmony. Subsequent to the retirement of Diocletian and his co-emperors, two major struggles erupted in the Roman Empire. The East and the West battled each other to decide which one would govern the entire empire, while two leaders in the West fought one another for the right to rule the region. By 312 Constantine had became the sole emperor in the West. He and Licinius, who had assumed control of the East the year before, temporarily put their differences aside and agreed to acknowledge each other’s authority. Their fragile accord, however, was soon fractured by a rapidly emerging religion—Christianity.

Christianity materialized in Palestine. The first Jews to become Christians claimed that Jesus of Nazareth was the “messiah,” was divine, and had been prophesied in scripture.¹² Through Christianity they sought to extend authoritative answers to the religious yearnings of the time, describe ways of attaining unending life in the company of the divine, and offer a societal structure that would help its members achieve salvation. In a short time the new belief spread throughout the Jewish communities of Syria and Asia Minor and to other parts of the Roman Empire. The poor and uneducated in the cities became Christianity’s first members. Their interest in creating a sense of community soon resonated with the viewpoints and wants of a wide range of people. A few members of the aristocracy became attracted to the idea that by becoming a Christian, a person was stepping up from a bewildered and immature stage of moral and intellectual development into the heart of Greek–Roman civilization. Women, in particular, treasured the notion that in Christ there was neither male nor female and that men cared for their wives as Christ cherished the church.¹³

As their numbers increased, so did their need for creating an organized religious structure. Members of congregations in different cities rapidly began to elect their own overseers—episkopoi (bishops)—to lead them in worship and manage their funds. In due course the elected bishops broadened their own authorities. They established a nearly monarchical organization and asserted that they inherited their powers directly from those extended by Jesus to his original disciples. With their new status, the bishops sought to prevent doctrinal and sectarian divisions, keep internal discipline, and limit encroachment by the civilian government. They further enhanced their influence via the formation of councils. The councils were established for the purpose of bringing together bishops from different cities and regions in order to address problems and determine orthodox opinion.¹⁴

By the time Constantine had become emperor, Christianity was no longer a sect disconnected from the Roman world. Christianity’s strength, nonetheless, varied significantly from one part of the empire to another. It was a struggling religion in North Africa and Western Europe, while in the eastern section of the empire it had gained considerable strength, and its leaders and members were beginning to think about the idea of establishing one Great Church with a single rule of faith.¹⁵

The fate of Christianity took a major turn in 312, when Constantine, who had worshiped Sol Invictus (the Syrian sun god that had been brought to Rome some sixty-five years earlier), attributed his military and political success to the Christian god, and became its avid promoter.¹⁶ Hopeful that by decriminalizing Christianity he would be able to purge some of the ills afflicting the empire and generate greater internal unity, Constantine, and his counterpart in the eastern section, Licinius, formulated the Edict of Milan.

I, Constantine Augustus, and I, Licinius Augustus, met happily in Milan, and in the course of our discussions in all matters relating to public well-being and security, we thought it right that our very first ordinances would benefit the majority of our people, should concern the respect due to the divinity, that is to say that Christians should be given full liberty to follow the religion of their choice … [W]e should embark upon this policy of not refusing to anyone the opportunity of devoting himself either to the cult of Christians or to whatever religion he feels is most suited to him … ¹⁷

Immediately thereafter, Constantine began to sponsor the building of churches, gave the bishop of Rome property to construct a new cathedral, and exempted the clergy from taxation, military service, and forced labor.

Relations between Constantine and Licinius remained stable for several years. Both emperors reached an “entente cordiale,” with each addressing matters within his own sphere of influence and consulting the other when the problem affected both parties.¹⁸ During this period, however, Licinius began to have second thoughts about their accord. Fearful that the Edict of Milan and Constantine’s policies were undermining his own power and authority in the East, Licinius expelled Christians and executed several bishops. Constantine retaliated, and by 324 his forces had defeated Licinius’s army and had gained control of the densely Christianized territories of Asia Minor.¹⁹

To contend that Constantine used Christianity to try to generate unity within the empire is not to argue that Christians were united, that he moved forcefully and rapidly to propagate Christianity throughout the domain, and that he succeeded in bringing together the realm. By the time Constantine defeated Licinius, Christians were already deeply divided on a number of issues. One of the most important ones was theological. Arius, a priest in Alexandria, engendered a major dispute when he claimed that though Jesus, as the son of God, was superior to other humans, his divinity did not equal God’s. According to Socrates Scholasticus, Arius presented the following argument: “If the Father begot the Son, he [who] was begotten had a beginning of existence: hence it is clear that there was when the Son was not.”²⁰ Jesus, explained Arius, derived his divinity through the full obedience of his Father’s will. Alexander, Arius’s bishop in Alexandria, immediately ordered his subordinate to stop voicing such an opinion. Arius rebuffed the demand and soon gained the backing of other bishops. Dissatisfied with the dispute, Constantine called for the convocation of the Church’s first ecumenical council. At a gathering in Nicaea in 325, he asked the bishops to determine whether Jesus was one with God. Though unable to fully comprehend their rationale for concluding that the two were one, Constantine welcomed the accord.

Despite the agreement and his continuing belief that he could use Christianity as a means to unify the empire, Constantine recognized that it would be unwise to try to accelerate the conversion process.²¹ Of special concern to Constantine and the Christian bishops was the role of the aristocracy. Both understood that the legitimization of Christianity depended heavily on whether the aristocracy adopted it as its religion. Aristocrats, who viewed serving in public office as their right and responsibility, had had a similar attitude toward priesthood and the performance of pagan rites. “The incentives for aristocrats to hold public priesthoods [had been] similar to those for holding public office; both sorts of position allowed aristocrats to play an important role in the state and thereby to gain the public approval they coveted.”²² This meant that Constantine, his successors, and the bishops had to convert pagan aristocrats with a great deal of patience, and convince them that affiliation with the Christian church would secure and augment their status.²³

By the same token, as Christians endeavored to convert pagan aristocrats, they had no choice but to moderate certain original Christian values. Conscious that the adage “it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to go to heaven” would not sit well with most aristocrats, bishops fashioned an immunity clause. Men of great wealth, they averred, could avoid condemnation so long as they put some of their own material resources to good Christian use.²⁴ Likewise, nobility, a concept greatly valued by aristocrats and associated with family pedigree, significant achievements, and cultural superiority, stood in stark contrast with the Christian version. But rather than rebuking the aristocrats’ conceptualization, Christians broadened the formulation of nobility and identified piety as its most important value.²⁵

The next major move to establish Christianity as the empire’s sole religion started in the 380s, when Theodosius, who ruled the eastern part of the empire, made Easter and Christmas legal holidays; declared the doctrine of the Trinity the empire’s official religion; banned non-religious public and private activities on Sundays; ordered that all heretics be considered demented and insane and the places they met not be recognized as churches; and instructed that Jews be prohibited from proselytizing Christians, marrying them, being in the army, and holding state office.²⁶ These steps eventually began to yield some of the goals sought by the rulers of the Roman Empire. By the middle of the fifth century, non-Christians had been outlawed and Christianity had become a critical instrument of the imperial goal: “one God, one empire, one religion.”

Reliance on Christianity as a political tool did not avert the empire’s demise. As the reach of Christianity expanded, albeit not as a unified ideology, the entity within which the development occurred experienced severe losses. Subjected to challenges emanating from the west, the north, and the east, the empire’s ability to protect itself had diminished steadily since the first century. For a while, only outlying provinces fell to barbarian invaders. In the fifth century, however, Rome itself became the target of repeated attacks, and by the start of the sixth century the Roman Empire was no longer Roman. The Ostrogoths dominated Italy, the Franks held sway over northern Gaul, the Burgundies ruled Provence, the Visigoths reigned over southern Gaul and Spain, the Vandals ran northern Africa and the western Mediterranean, and the Angles and Saxons presided over England.

With the downfall of its western part, the Roman Empire became the Byzantine Empire. With its power center located in Constantinople, the leaders of the abridged empire faced two challenges. In the West, the belief that they had to reunite the empire remained alive. Around the middle of the sixth century, Justinian launched a series of expeditions designed to regain control over parts of the western section. His success was brief. In the East, leaders of the Byzantine Empire had no choice but to cope with the threat of an old rival—the Sassanid Empire.

Around 250 BCE, on the high plateau of Iran, the nomadic Parthians, under their chieftain Arsaces, launched a successful revolt against Greek rule and established an independent dynasty. Eventually the Parthians managed both to consolidate their control over the region and to transform the dynasty into an empire that, in time, became a dangerous rival to Rome. The fate of the Parthian Empire took a radical turn in 226 CE, when Ardashir deposed its overlord. Ardashir, who had succeeded his father Papak, who in turn was a son of a Persian priest named Sassan, inaugurated the Sassanid Empire. He replaced the Parthians’ feudal system with a highly centralized administration, and reintroduced Zoroastrianism in order to establish a religious kingship and regulate social and political life. Ardashir’s son, Shapur, assumed power in 244 and by 259 had defeated the Roman armies thrice. He solidified the religious nature of the Sassanid Empire by holding spiritual, along with political and social, leadership and by granting the aristocracy the highest ranks in the priesthood.²⁷

Zoroastrianism is attributed to the prophet Zoroaster. Sedentary communities in northern Iran may have been among the first to practice Zoroastrianism during the fifth and sixth centuries. It was not a monotheistic religion. Ahuramazdah (sovereign knowledge) was considered the leading god. Six assistant deities, who represented the personal aspects of Ahuramazdah, surrounded him. Ahuramazdah and his six attending gods were believed to be in a permanent state of war with evil spirits led by Ahriman. Humans took sides in the struggle; the side they chose was determined by the kind of person they were.

As the power of the Sassanid Empire rose, so did the intensity of its rivalry w...

Índice

• Front Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction
• 1 Political ideology in late antiquity and the Middle Ages
• 2 Beginnings and restructuring
• 3 The strengthening of an empire, the materialization of a new one, and the emergence of novel ideologies: 1750–1871
• 4 A world system destabilized by five ideologies: 1871–1914
• 5 A world still burdened by multiple conflicting ideologies: 1919–1990
• 6 The resurgence of forgotten ideologies
• 7 The dialectical nature of political ideologies in the world system
• Notes
• Bibliography
• Index