Are the riots of London the new sack of Rome?

On August 24, 410 AD, Rome -- no longer the capital of the Roman Empire but still its most important city -- was sacked by a Gothic army under King Alaric I.  Alaric and his army were ostensibly operating under Roman command but he revolted for monetary reasons.  The Western Roman Emperor Honorius did absolutely nothing to stop Alaric. Honorius was safe in a castle in Ravenna, surrounded by marshes and, it seems, could not have cared less about Rome.  Indeed, according to legend, when Honorius was told about the sack of Rome, his first thoughts were of his pet chicken.

The Byzantine Emperor Honorius, by Jean Paul Laurens (1880).  Honorius (who was not actually Byzantine but was Western Roman Emperor), safely ensconced in his castle in Ravenna, would not lift a finger to save Rome from sacking by Alaric's Goths on August 24, 410 AD, instead, according to legend, more concerned about his pet chickens.  Is Honorius the model for our current political class?

The sacking of Rome, while more symbolic than strategic, completely dispirited the Roman people, who were helpless in the face of Alaric's barbarians, and played no small part on the dissolution of the Western empire.

I can't help but think of the Sack of Rome when watching the riots in London.  London, an imperial capital all its own, is at the mercy of barbarians, while its leadership does nothing to stop the riots, instead congratulating itself on its understanding and restraint while working in secure compounds, living in gated communities and traveling with bodyguards.  Otherwise known as "Ravenna."

A similar plague is afflicting the United States. With our own political class safe in "Ravenna."
Read more »