Edward Feser@FeserEdward
Thucydides: “Civil war ran through the cities… And they reversed the usual way of using words to evaluate what they did. Ill-considered boldness was counted as loyal manliness; prudent hesitation was held to be cowardice in disguise, and moderation merely the cloak of an unmanly nature. A mind that could grasp the good of the whole was considered wholly lazy. Sudden fury was accepted as part of manly valor… A man who expressed anger was always to be trusted, while one who opposed him was under suspicion... In brief, a man was praised if he could commit some evil action before anyone else did, or if he could urge on another person who had never meant to do such a thing.
Family ties were not so close as those of the political parties, because party members would readily dare to do anything on the slightest pretext… To take revenge was of higher value than never to have received injury...
Those who led their parties in the cities promoted their policies under decent-sounding names: “equality for the mass of citizens” on one side, and “moderate aristocracy” on the other. And although they pretended to serve the public in their speeches, they actually treated it as the prize for their competition; and striving by whatever means to win, both sides ventured the most horrible outrages and exacted even greater revenge, without any regard for justice or the public good… The citizens who remained in the middle were destroyed by both parties, partly because they would not side with them, and partly for envy that they might escape in this way.
Thus was every kind of wickedness afoot throughout all Greece by the occasion of civil wars... People were sharply divided into opposing camps, and, without trust, their minds were in strong opposition. No speech was so powerful, no oath so terrible, as to overcome this mutual hostility... For the most part, those of weaker intelligence had the greatest success, since a sense of their own inferiority and the subtlety of their opponents put them into great fear that they would be overcome in debate or by schemes due to their enemies’ intelligence…
Those who attacked… primarily out of zeal for equality… were the most carried away by their undisciplined passion to commit savage and pitiless attacks…. Human nature, having become accustomed to violate justice and laws, now came to dominate law altogether, and showed itself with delight to be the slave of passion, the victor over justice, and the enemy of anyone superior. Without the destructive voice of envy, you see, people would not value revenge over reverence, or profits over justice. When they want revenge on others, people are determined first to destroy without a trace the laws that commonly govern such matters, though it is only because of these that anyone in trouble can hope to be saved” (The History of the Peloponnesian War, Book 3, Paul Woodruff translation)
