When he was celebrating in dramatic poetry the great Greek victory over Xerxes, Aeschylus understood the meaning of Salamis as the victory of free men over what the Greeks saw as the lashed and herded slaves and mercenaries serving in the war of a despot. The Persians soars high above petty localism and patriotic bluster, though, not least because we see not the battle but the Persians themselves in their opulent court, hearing piece by piece the terrible news, until Xerxes himself comes on stage to mourn his loss. We actually sympathize with them, and we should, because we and they face the same fate as human beings; and if we Greeks allow our victory to blind us to our frailty, we too will know the despair of Xerxes.
The Persians were barbarians, the Greeks thought, not because they were weak (they were mighty) or stupid (they were clever) or rustic (they built lavish cities). They were barbarians because they were not free. Or, to put it more precisely, they had become accustomed to living under despotism; they lacked the will to rise up against their overlords and govern themselves, city by city, by the use of their own minds and strong arms. The barbarian may arouse pity, if he can no longer conceive of what it would be to stand tall and speak candidly; by this definition, the lowlier of the Calormenes in Lewis' Chronicles are pitiable barbarians. Or he may arouse a kind of half-comic aversion, as do the Cyclopses in the Odyssey, who gather in no assemblies, pass no laws, unite for no large-scale industry or agriculture, and do not give homage to the politically organized gods of Olympus, but mind their own petty business, each of them ignoring his neighbors -- as the bleeding oaf Polyphemus finds to his discomfiture. Or the barbarian may be one of the privileged few who cause others to truckle to his will, like the semisavage tyrants of Sicity (Agathocles, Hiero, Dionysus).
Whatever the case, the barbarian is missing something central to being human: living as a free man with duties and responsibilities in a community, taking part in spirited debate, and not having to duck and scrape when some big shot from a distant Persepolis descends with the imperial decree. The free man is both a dutiful son of his country and a father for it; the city commands his allegiance, but it is also in part his creation, his patrimony, which he will pass along to his descendants in turn. The Greeks claim that when this political liberty -- it is not the radical individualism of a Cyclops in his cave -- is lacking, that itself is barbaric, regardless of whether the people possess sweet and gentle manners. My family and I are preparing to go north for the summer, where the people of Canada have had the liberties of their small communities snatched from them by a bad constitution and a tyrannical court. They are, as one defender of liberty has put it, a Nation of Bastards, wards of the state. This novel kind of barbarism does overgo the barbarism of Persia, though, because the ancient Persians were willing enough to grant their outlands a measure of home rule; witness Cyrus's humane returning of the Jews to their homeland. Chief Justice McLachlin of Canada will not allow such local variations for a Calgary or a Thunder Bay. When it comes to detaching Canadians from the very culture that gave rise to Canada in the first place, only a mockery of debate is allowed. And only the shreds and patches of political opposition, too. Approach the presence, Clayton, Terence, Angus. Bow with awful reverence prone, flat as the Canadian shield. I'm not gloating over you, my friends of the permafrost. We in America will soon be leaving our nose-prints in the dirt, too.
This is going to take a while and cover rough territory...bear with me...
Lesbianism in my neck of the woods is often associated with gang activity. If I see two women necking they are most likely wearing gang tattoos and be outfitted in the baggy pants that Tony referenced earlier. They are, in every possible way, a dark parody of everything bad about masculinity.
Last Thursday I was in an area of the local mall designed to allow children play while their mothers go shop in the nearby Sephora (a make-up shop) which was exactly what was happening with my family. My two children where watching the interactive fountain display (I was not in the mood to let them get wet much to my daughters frustration). A gaggle of gang-clad Lesbians complete with children from what I am 90% sure were arrested boyfriends had gathered at the opposite end of the pool to leer at the passing upper-class housewives on their way to the make-up store.
I growled, only to myself. I excused my behavior on the grounds that I had a one year old on my shoulders and a four year old trying to sneak out of dad's sight so that she could get wet. Then my wife came out and they leered at my wife. The evening, which was supposed to be a family outing, had been ruined. She had no clue why I was had turned red. I then explained what happened.
My wife, good soul that she is, pointed out that she could have kicked all their posteriors (in slightly more salty language) and that I shouldn't let them ruin my evening. She also pointed out that since they were barbarians they were destined to lose in the end.
What she didn't understand was that there were, counting them as a group, two barbarians that evening. The other one was me. As Tony rightfully points out a barbarian has lost his ability to, "stand tall and speak candidly." I should have pointed out to them, politely and reasonably, that they had become less than female, far from male, and nothing more than a sick joke.
Truth was, kids or not, political correctness, the Darkest Demon of Despotism, had arrested me.
Posted by: Nick | June 01, 2008 at 06:22 PM
Nick - pick your fights, man. The feeling that you CANNOT confront is unmanning; but that, on any one occasion, you DO NOT confront is another matter altogether. You are controlled just as certainly if you are obligated to fight back, as if you are unable to. Discretion really is the greater part of effective valor.
Though it galls, of course you wouldn't initiate any unnecessary interaction with gang-types, with your family present! That's not knuckling under to despotism; that's simple tactics. Surely even Leonidas would understand.
Posted by: Joe Long | June 02, 2008 at 08:13 AM
Nick,
I agree with Joe. You need not nor should not confront such people whenever you see them. Do so when you must or, at least, you ought. I don't believe you did anything to feel guilty about in the circumstances you described. If I had to confront someone who gave my wife and I odd looks when they see us with our children or who obviously dislike and disrespect Christians, I would have time for little else.
Posted by: GL | June 02, 2008 at 08:51 AM
>>>She also pointed out that since they were barbarians they were destined to lose in the end.<<<
History differs. In the end, the barbarians always win. History is one long rear-guard action against barbarism, in which there can be limited counteroffensives and occasional rollbacks, but the darkness is always looming. It is much as Elrond tells Frodo: "I have seen three ages in the West of the world, and many defeats, and many fruitless victories".
Our job, while we live, is to do what we can to hold back the darkness, to preserve what can be preserved, in the ultimate hope that all will be redeemed when Christ comes again in glory. Yet history also tells us that much that was great, wonderful and beautiful will pass away before that time comes.
Posted by: Stuart Koehl | June 02, 2008 at 08:52 AM
I wanted to add one other thought for you to ponder: Under what circumstances did our Lord, as recorded in the Gospels, confront those who opposed Him and His intended order? That should give you some idea of when we should do so. Another thought to ponder: Did Paul stay around Mars Hill trying for months to persuade the pagans of the truth of Christianity or did he move on to more fertile fields? Don't cast your pearls before swine.
Posted by: GL | June 02, 2008 at 09:02 AM
"But you and all the kind of Christ
Are ignorant and brave,
And you have wars you hardly win
And souls you hardly save.
"I tell you naught for your comfort,
Yea, naught for your desire,
Save that the sky grows darker yet
And the sea rises higher."
Mary, to King Alfred, in Chesterton's "Ballad of the White Horse". Truly a fine book on barbarian relations; one which clearly shows what a menace they are, without losing sight of their essentially tragic nature.
"Their souls were drifting as the sea,
And all good towns and lands
They only saw with heavy eyes,
And broke with heavy hands,
Their gods were sadder than the sea,
Gods of a wandering will,
Who cried for blood like beasts at night,
Sadly, from hill to hill."
Posted by: Joe Long | June 02, 2008 at 09:29 AM
There really was not much in the way of danger involved. Gang bangers or not they were girls and half my size. Worse, due to their attempts to look manly or hyper-feminine they were either sticks or overweight and the guard station was less than fifty yards away and to the best of my knowledge unarmed. I grew up with these folks as one of the few white kids in a largely minority school. This is not to brag, as the average man would dispatch me with ease, they just weren't real threats.
As to the comment about Jesus, you are correct not to throw pearls(1) before swine or staying on Mars Hill. However, I think there is a difference between trying to teach and letting your position be known, which Jesus did do frequently. One is refusing to submit and the other is stupid. For example, the Temple incident wasn't so much a teaching moment as a stand on an issue.
(1) I program in Perl sometimes. The spell check caught me with "perls before swine" and I had a bugger of a time figuring out what I did wrong. This is only amusing if you're a software developer. The rest can move on.
Posted by: Nick | June 02, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Nick,
I have programmed in Perl in the past, though not much in the last couple of years.
I guess this means that you associate with daemons. ;-)
Posted by: GL | June 02, 2008 at 01:11 PM
Actually I've always been a bit giggly about how programmers have a rather supernatural vocabulary with daemons, ghosts, spawners, and the like. I imagine it has to do with the AD&D Monster Manuals.
Posted by: Nick | June 02, 2008 at 09:06 PM