HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_032203.jpg

33

something which, in turn, is owed to its imperial superstructure. And
as that superstructure became too unwieldy, an emperor like the gruff
soldier Diocletian could allow for the division of the empire itself
into several administrative parts, thus furthering its life span.
America, for its part, is unique in its division of federal, state and
local power over a vast continental landscape, allowing for the full
expression of its boisterous democracy. Say what you will about the
deficiencies of the United States and particularly those of Rome, but
they both indicate a very difficult truth central to the outcome of the
Arab Spring: it is not about the expressions of freedom in Tahrir
Square so much as it is about the building of legitimate institutions to
replace illegitimate ones. And because institutions are hierarchical—
and social media like Twitterand Facebookdismantle existing
hierarchies—revolutions enabled by new technology do not
necessarily lead to the building of governing organizations. Criticism
is not enough, someone must wield power; hopefully in a way less
coercive than before.
Meanwhile, the Arab Spring has raised the pressure on autocrats the
world over to truly be good—or at least better. Though, even if they
are, they can never ultimately get it right, as demonstrated by Mill’s
example of Marcus Aurelius.

Robert D. Kaplan is a foreign correspondent for The Atlantic, a
senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security in
Washington and a member of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board.
His most recent book is Monsoon: The Indian Ocean and the Future
of American Power (Random House, 2010).

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_032203