Becoming Political or Staying in the Private Comfort Zone – With the Stoics or with the Epicureans?

by Altay Coskun for Think Centrist! (Waterloo, 16 January 2022)

In my childhood and youth, I often dreamt of becoming a politician. I was hoping to be elected to a position of power to help improve the world. Dedicated teachers, such as Bernd Esser, drew my attention to the waste and the pollution by which we were damaging our environment. Likewise inspiring were my youth leaders, my cousin Gaby Bayer-Ortmanns and her co-leader Wilfried Hammers. They made me aware that doing the right or wrong thing is complex and not limited to individuals making the right choices. Some of the structures we live in are unjust and call for correction, such as trade networks that perpetuate the wealth of the wealthy and the poverty of the poor.

A deeper level of reflection was added by my high school teacher Theo Joeris. In his Latin class, I first read and reflected on Greek and Roman philosophy by painstakingly working through some Latin treatises of Cicero (1st century BCE) and Seneca (1st century CE). Many of their works focus on ethics, on recognizing the right thing and having the courage to take action for it. And, following more or less closely the Stoic tradition established by Zeno of Citium (around 300 BCE), they encourage their readers to think and act politically. They did so in open contrast to Zeno’s contemporary Epicurus: he built his life around his friendship circle, with whom he joined in his Kepos (‘Garden’) in Athens. While discussions on the nature of things in good company and perhaps with a good amphora of wine were charming, I was certainly more attuned to the philosophy of action. Cicero and Seneca enthused and empowered me. I was confident that if I had the good and right aims, I could go anywhere with energy and courage.

And yet, while still at high school, I also began understanding, if slowly, how difficult a political career would be, if I wanted to stay true to myself and my values. It was one thing to thrive in classroom discussions: I was good at seeing problems and sometimes even pathways for possible solutions; this was paired with an inclination to disagree, or at least to claim that some argument or nuance had not yet been accounted for. But things played out differently in the real world. Once you leave the comfort zone of your home, it is not so much about what you have to say, but whether anyone cares to listen to you.

Sometimes, it matters more who your parents, your network or publisher are – something that I resented out of principle. I wanted the value of a message to be appreciated for what it was and not for the messenger. At times, I admittedly tried to amplify the message by shouting, but I was not very successful with that. Many dislike raised voices as such and put you in the wrong irrespective of what you say. Others may like your rhetoric and join, but group dynamics may require you to shout out what you do not actually believe in. Things can easily go sideways or downhill, if you don’t keep in mind with whom you are howling.

When I was a young grown-up, the most obvious move would have been to join a political party. One could expect that values and goals, as well as the procedures to articulate views, wrestle for policies and seek appointment would be set out clearly. But I did not like the reality of party work either: shouting in choirs, maintaining questionable loyalties, and engaging in untransparent networking were indispensable. As painful was the need to bear with compromise: not that I was unable to see that needs, interests and resources had to be balanced, but the refusal or watering down of urgent measures were hard to stomach. Add to this the boredom of day-to-day business and contentless formalities: killers of the youthful zest of action.

Cicero and Seneca’s idealizing philosophies had not taught me much about negotiating compromise and sitting through petty agendas – perhaps because they had never lived in democracies. For Cicero, politics was trading with fellow aristocrats behind closed doors, and for Seneca it was gaining the ear of the emperor. In hindsight, it is difficult for me to say what gradually put me off most: factionalism, my inability to articulate in plain and simple terms all the nuances that matter to me, or the tedious realities of the political business.

Small wonder that I ended up at university. I was lucky enough to develop my interest in the Greek and Roman world into a profession that pays the bills and even a bit more. Academia provides me with an environment in which I can thrive. Admittedly, I gradually had to find out that, even here, personal loyalties as well as fights for power and resources can be quite unpleasant. But I learned to cope and found my ways to be productive and respected. Over the years, I have come up with solutions for century-old historical problems published in international research journals, and year in, year out, I have managed to encourage a handful of each student cohort to become subversive, that is, to mistrust authorities when their evidence or arguments are lacking. In addition, I am the guest or the host of occasional friendship gatherings, where we enjoy (with moderation) good food and drink, always with lively discussions about culture, society and politics. In short, I have a good life and am thankful for it.

Apparently, I have become an Epicurean. However, in some regards, the teachings of the ‘Garden’ converge with Stoicism: Zenon (see here #2) dispenses those from political activities whose efforts would be in vain from the onset, that is, those whose resources or authority would be insufficient to impress anyone. This is another reminder that the most prominent philosophical schools of old were geared towards an aristocratic audience.

Through the years, I continued being aware of huge problems in far-away countries, while my personal environment in Germany and Canada seemed pretty safe and enjoyable to me. And yet, three problems of global dimension have been growing constantly:

– Green movements may have resulted in much improvement of the air we are breathing in the cities – but the squandering of resources is becoming ever more reckless and is killing our water, climate and livelihood.

– Unjust economic and political systems ever more often let people despair of their home countries; in search of better lives, many of them drown in the Mediterranean, freeze to death before the fortress of Europe, or become the victims of human trafficking on their way to or in North America.

– Add to this the erosion of democracy worldwide: autocracy and pogroms are becoming tangible possibilities, again. None of these problems is making halt before our borders.

While still easily bearable for those willing to close their eyes before what is emerging on the horizon, this should not be an option for those who show concern for the future of their children.

The story is not yet ending here. One thought of Epicurus has stuck with me since my schooldays. It has come down to us in a quotation from Seneca (On Leasure 3.2), and a short translation could run as follows: “The Wise does not engage in politics except in times of need” (click here #2). Since our modern society and democracy in general is less open to the concept of the Wise, we should rephrase as follows: Citizens have the privilege to pursue their individual happiness and the well-governed society should provide the fair and safe framework for this. But when society and its democratic institutions are at risk of disintegration, all citizens are called on to raise their voice, to stand on guard, and to take action. I want to be one of these citizens, trying to serve our society the best way I can.