The Gladiator Effect: Why Modern Right-Wing Politics is Obsessed with the Roman Empire
From the corridors of Westminster to the West Wing, a dangerous pattern is emerging: the weaponization of antiquity. A growing political obsession with the Roman Empire is being used not to educate, but to cloak modern militarism and xenophobia in the prestige of a fallen superpower.
This trend has shifted from academic curiosity to a strategic tool for leaders who seek to justify conflict and domestic repression through the lens of “timeless wisdom.”
For specialists in the field, this is a recurring nightmare. Much like how astronomers cringe at the conflation of their science with astrology, or psychology researchers struggle with the enduring popularity of the Myers-Briggs personality test, historians of Greece and Rome are watching their discipline be stripped for parts to serve right-wing narratives.
These analogies rarely explain the present; instead, they project current anxieties onto a sanitized, imagined version of the ancient world. But when these projections are used to justify a Donald Trump-led war of choice in Iran, the stakes move from the classroom to the battlefield.
The ‘Prepare for War’ Mantra: Rhetoric Over History
Former British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak recently epitomized this trend in an op-ed for The Times of London. Titled “To save the West, remember what Romans taught us,” Sunak used the conflict in Iran as a catalyst to urge Britain to ramp up munitions for a vaguely defined “European War.”
Sunak capped his argument with the Latin phrase si vis pacem, para bellum—”If you want peace, prepare for war.” While he previously expressed regret over Britain’s lack of a role in the Iranian operation, his turn toward Rome serves to lend a veneer of dignity to geopolitical saber-rattling.
The irony is twofold. First, the slogan is more famous today as the name for handgun ammunition or the title of a John Wick movie than as a cornerstone of Roman statecraft. Second, the actual source—Vegetius’ treatise on military theory—was written during the late 4th century C.E., a period historians widely recognize as the very “decline and fall” Sunak claims to be preventing.
Sunak’s nostalgia for the Royal Navy’s era as a “global hegemon” mirrors a darker tradition. Historically, the British Empire used the Roman model to frame colonial violence as a “civilizing” mission. By invoking Rome, Sunak attempts to transform raw power into “prestige.”
Weaponizing the Fall: From London to Washington
Sunak is far from alone. Boris Johnson spent the early part of his career writing a book on Rome, only to later claim that the empire collapsed due to “uncontrolled immigration.”
Historians were quick to dismantle this claim as simplistic and dangerously inaccurate. Yet, for the general public, the “glory of Rome” provides a convenient, albeit false, historical precedent for xenophobia.
This narrative has migrated seamlessly into American politics. The central thesis of “The Death of the West,” a book by Patrick J. Buchanan, echoes Johnson’s claims, helping fuel the modern culture war. Similar sentiments have been amplified by Elon Musk and Steve Bannon.
The rhetoric extends to moral policing as well. Speaker Mike Johnson has attributed the fall of Rome to homosexuality, while White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller—the architect of mass deportation policies—has invoked the lineage of Athens and Rome to justify his agenda.
Are we witnessing a genuine interest in the classics, or is this merely a superficial attempt to sound learned while enacting brutal policies? When history is used as a weapon, who actually wins?
The ‘Gladiator Effect’ and the Architecture of Power
This collective obsession creates what can be called the “Gladiator Effect.” It is a psychological trick that makes state-sponsored violence feel virtuous, framing the modern state not as an oppressor, but as a “great civilization” protecting itself from perceived threats.
In the United States, this obsession has manifested physically. President Trump has issued executive orders mandating “traditional and classical architecture” for federal buildings, essentially attempting to build a Roman aesthetic into the American government.
The physical evidence is stark: the demolition of portions of the White House to create a ballroom featuring classical columns—symbols used by the Romans to mark conquered territories. Furthermore, the desire to construct a triumphal arch mirrors the Roman tradition of celebrating victory parades with the display of enslaved captives.
As ICE raids continue and Middle Eastern tensions escalate, these symbols reveal more than an aesthetic preference. They signal an authoritarian bent. As noted by critics of fascist architecture, dictators have long used classical symbols to claim prestige for violent politics.
While we may not be able to stop politicians from misquoting Vegetius or romanticizing the Caesars, we can refuse to accept the “Gladiator Effect” as truth. History is not a mirror for modern anxieties; it is a record of the consequences of power.
Deep Dive: The Psychology of Classical Appropriation
The use of Roman imagery is rarely about the actual history of the Republic or the Empire. Instead, it is about symbolic capital. In political science, this is known as “associative legitimacy,” where a leader links their regime to a perceived “Golden Age” to bypass critical scrutiny of their current actions.
This pattern was most evident in 20th-century Italy, where Benito Mussolini explicitly modeled his “Third Rome” after the empire, utilizing the fasces (a bundle of rods symbolizing authority) to justify totalitarian control. By framing the state as the successor to an ancient, inevitable power, the leader makes opposition seem not just illegal, but “anti-historical.”
For further context on how these narratives are shaped, one can look at the broader history of political rhetoric, including how leaders bridge class divides or how threats against the ‘radical left’ echo historical patterns of purges. Even the modern discourse surrounding political polarization often stems from this desire to define an “in-group” (the inheritors of Rome) and an “out-group” (the barbarians at the gate).
To truly understand the fall of Rome, one must look at the scholarly consensus, which emphasizes economic over-extension and systemic instability over the simplistic “immigration” narratives favored by modern populists.
Frequently Asked Questions
- Why is there a political obsession with the Roman Empire today? It allows leaders to project modern anxieties onto a sanitized past, using the prestige of Rome to justify militarism and authoritarianism.
- How do Roman Empire analogies impact modern immigration policy? By falsely claiming that immigration caused Rome’s fall, politicians use a flawed historical narrative to fuel xenophobia and justify restrictive policies.
- What is the ‘Gladiator Effect’ in political rhetoric? It is the strategy of associating modern state violence with the perceived glory and strength of ancient Rome to make it seem virtuous.
- Is the phrase ‘si vis pacem, para bellum’ actually Roman? While it sounds Roman, it is often a later adaptation of military theories, such as those from Vegetius, and is not found in the ancient texts as commonly quoted.
- How does classical architecture relate to the political obsession with the Roman Empire? Authoritarian leaders use columns and triumphal arches to symbolically link their power to the imperial authority of the Caesars.
Join the Conversation: Do you think the use of classical history in politics is a harmless aesthetic choice or a calculated tool for authoritarianism? Share this article and let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
Related reading
Discover more from Archyworldys
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.