Kamala President Now: Super Parties For America In Name Of Old Rome – OpEd 

Kamala Harris as President now, for three months before the next elections, would allow us to make a phenomenal parallel with the longest ever democracy in the world, which was that of the Res Pubblica Populi Romani, that lasted from 509 BC to 27 BC, i.e. 482 years. This parallel could open up a unique possibility in the American electoral process, that could unify opposing factions of the political system by giving special meaning to the upcoming elections of the Republic of the USA. This hypothesis must be carefully considered by President Joe Biden — the only one capable of promoting it, as a special moment of the Republic.

It was the idea of Res Pubblica, considering power owned by all citizens (populi), that made Rome the largest Western empire ever. It was not the emperors who created the greatness of Rome, they reaped the benefits and ultimately determined its downfall. This incredible Roman institution, Res Pubblica, was brilliantly invented against all existing political systems. At the time, power everywhere belonged to those who had absolute power, satraps or kings, the former rulers where there is no democracy, the latter surviving as an unjustified remnant, albeit formal, of ancient times even where there is democracy. One example can be found in the Royal system of England, where a family now specializes in marketing their descendants, a form of parasitism hungrily celebrated by the media for genealized practice. The media are looking for Kings everywhere, kings of sport, music, chess, crime etc.

But how does the current US election relate to the ancient Roman system?  The Res Pubblica, this incredible political institution that produced the largest empire in the entire Western world (it would not be wrong to say of the whole world) was based on principles that have not been found anywhere on the planet and that it would be useful to remember in this electoral moment. In the Res Pubblica, power was attributed to 2 consuls, elected for only one year. Those who were elected had to share power with another person, who was also elected for a year. It is precisely the simultaneous presence of two consuls, both elected for a year, that is the phenomenal democratic engine that created the basis for the most extraordinary democracy of all time. For centuries, is a criterion of Balance of Power and interest that has worked for the benefit of all.

Subsequent political powers have lost the extraordinary conception of Balanced Power to grow and have exalted the principle of one person in charge — in my opinion this is a very serious political error, for which the irreducibility of differences has thus become the evil of Western democracies. The Trump versus Biden case proves this. In today’s American democratic competition, differences must be understood, not dramatized. Total opposition is a political process exacerbated by a philosophical crisis, that of dialectics, whose limits are not understood due  to an almost servile dependence on ancient concepts. Dialectics exaggerates differences and dramatizes them and does not lead, as simplistically hypothesized by Hegel, to a superior synthesis, but vice versa in politics it leads to a barbarization of differences.  It should be remembered that concepts are useful inventions, as long as they are not transformed into dictators. The same problem arises for logic, another concept that from a useful operational tool has been mythologized into a criterion for the conquest of metaphysical truth, a concept also in crisis because with the internet it has in fact been replaced by the VVW, Veritas Vera Web. 

But to return to the present electoral context, Trump versus Biden: The brilliant inventor of dialectics, Zeno of Elea, an extraordinary student of Parmenides (the man who had perfectly understood that the whole is one) having shown that there is no movement, if it were alive today that would show that the opposition of the two candidates does not enrich progress, but inserts it in the end into a blind alley, of mutual indecompensability. This is the current crisis situation, but all this to say that this biconsular mechanism could be recovered in a Kamala President NOW candidacy.

Now let’s try to imagine that the USA was regulated by a republican system like Rome. The American people today could vote two consuls in power, Trump and Biden, and instead of being divided, be unified. What could be better? Nothing. With the poorly documented view of today’s political comments, having two consuls like Trump and Biden in power seems to be an absolute impossibility. But this is not the case, we just have to avoid remaining slaves to concepts.   

But if the hypothesis of two consuls at the command of the American republic seems impossible (but we should remember the admonition against the impossible of the Latin saying, nihil difficile volenti, (Nothing (is) impossible to the one who wants it) there is another Roman institution that thanks to a Kamala President NOW could be used — that of the special subject, also elected to deal with certain emergencies. In Rome, the special subject elected to face exceptionality was called dictator. This is obviously not the case for Kamala, but the similarity holds up for another problem. . 

First, let me explain that I am not arguing for a dictator in the current understanding of that term, rather I am suggesting the naming of a person who could unite (just as in Rome there was an appointment of a person when there was an emergency situation). And so, to continue this parallel, one could ask whether America is not today in an unfortunate emergency situation. The answer can only be in the affirmative. There are problems in American society that have become gangrenous. Immigration, drugs, violence, East-West conflicts, etc.  It is evident that neither of the two “consuls” possesse the simultaneous solution to all these problems.  But an exceptional opportunity presents itself today with a possible appointment of Kamala as president.  In the short term, the time missing for the a new election of a President, Kamala could have as her objective the unified solution of emergencies.

By replacing a candidate, but inheriting his presidential functions, albeit for a short time, Kamala could present a government program that is the synthesis of opposing proposals. Instead of proposing a program opposite to that of Trump, it could present a program of unified interests and go to the elections with it. It is an exceptional opportunity for America. Inspired by the example of Rome, Kamala could open up a unique hypothesis in the development of the American republic.