One needn’t look far beyond the history of the common law to unfold the threat of mercenary devotion to stupidity and greed. It was after all the putative psyche of James II, a former king of England, Scotland and Ireland. And it survived into his exile to France where he received the support of Louis XIV, the equally offensive manifestation of the divine right of kings. Finally it heralded the atrocious reaction to Marie Antoinette in the ensuing French Revolution. Parenthetically it is of interest and note that among those who participated in the recovery of the English population from the Glorious Revolution headed by William of Orange (“King Billy“) and Mary II was Sir Isaac Newton “widely recognised as one of the greatest mathematicians and physicists of all time and among the most influential scientists“. Coincidentally t was also Newton’s Third Law of Motion that “for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction“.

“But there could be no such hope for a child educated by a father who was the most stupid and obstinate of tyrants, in a foreign country, the seat of despotism and superstition; in a country where the last traces of liberty had disappeared; where the States General had ceased to meet; where parliaments had long registered without one remonstrance the most oppressive edicts of the sovereign; where valour, genius, learning, seemed to exist only for the purpose of aggrandising a single man; where adulation was the main business of the press, the pulpit, and the stage; and where one chief subject of adulation was the barbarous persecution of the Reformed Church. Was the boy likely to learn, under such tuition and in such a situation, respect for the institutions of his native land? Could it be doubted that he would be brought up to be the slave of the Jesuits and the Bourbons, and that he would be, if possible, more bitterly prejudiced than any preceding Stuart against the laws of England?

Excerpt From
The History of England, from the Accession of James II — Volume 2
Thomas Babington Macaulay Macaulay

It is this small compliment to the past which succeeds to energize the present. Seemingly the broad progress of humanity is forever destined to succumb to the imperturbable disqualification of self-interest in spite of repeated assault and failure. What makes the repetition so particularly sad and astonishing is its ready prior recognition. It would be more tolerable to watch a dog chase a ball where at least the objective is guaranteed to satisfy without the diminution of purpose. And though every schoolboy knows the adage of history repeating itself nonetheless we persist in the face of the most obvious clues to omit to acknowledge its truth or relevance. Our revulsion towards its inevitability has regrettably misguided our judgment. But we mustn’t ignore the obvious. We do so at our collective peril notwithstanding the predictable collateral sequence of reaction to the action – another of those silly aphorisms.

Understanding the peculiarities of others may however lie in other than the imputation of intellectual incapacity or even base avarice. My preferred calculation is something more generous to the universal human spirit than blind accusation of inadequacy. As riddled as my theory is with the saccharine gloss of beneficence I can assure you my native inclination is anything but; that instead my ambition is the fruitful product of reluctant analysis and unwitting evolution – as the consequence of any sustainable argument should be.

Quite inadvertently earlier this morning I stumbled upon the insight that thought – like any contamination of the body – may have its resource beyond the carcass itself.  And that whatever the nature of the impetus the greater and more revealing diagnosis is source of the design in the first place. Plus there is the added and not insubstantial dimension that the dispute is not between people but rather difference among experiences. It is appreciating these differences of learning and meaning that enlarges our composition as humans and contributes to our mutual accommodation.

This does not mean I am so guileless to presume the personal ambition of autocrats does not exist. But the popular support of those demagogues depends upon the masses for whom a greater understanding is deserved; and with which our collective well being is more certain by the identical weight. There ain’t no army without soldiers.