Toward the end of the Roman Republic, the Stoic philosopher Cato had a disagreement with his friend and famous politician, Cicero.

It was Rome's practice to collect taxes from their provinces through "Tax Collectors". That's how they kept the state rich.

But these tax collectors had to be incentivized to collect the right amounts and not cheat the government.

So, they had a system where Rome would demand a flat sum from the Tax Collectors, and whatever extra they made on top was theirs to keep.

Since they were protected and empowered by the state to forcefully collect taxes and punish those who wouldn't pay up, the Tax Collectors became one of the wealthiest social classes in Rome.

It was relatively easy work, and as long as you were ruthless enough, it was the surest path to wealth.

It's somewhat reminiscent of the "agbero" system used by the Lagos State government to collect revenue from motorists in the early 2000s.

As a side note, you can probably imagine why Jewish tax collectors were especially hated by Jews during Roman rule (according to New Testament accounts).

Romans offered the job to Jews because they were more efficient at collecting from their own people.

They spoke the same language and shared the same culture.

The sentiment among the common folk was, "Why would you sign up to profit from the oppression of your own people, collecting taxes for the oppressors?"

Anyway, a time came when things were tough in the Roman Republic, a recession of sorts.

Due to wars and droughts, less tax was available to be collected.

The tax collectors found it difficult to meet up with the quota they had signed in the agreement with Rome.

Taxable people were either dead or significantly poorer by now, and the Tax Collectors' 'union' requested a renegotiation of terms.

It came up for debate in the Roman Senate, and opinions were divided on the issue.

Cicero understood the importance of striking a compromise with the Tax Collectors.

The Republic had no other system of collections, and in his mind, less tax was better than no tax.

Cato differed, however, and was uncompromising.

He argued that once an agreement was signed, all parties were bound to keep to the terms at whatever cost.

The matter stalled in the Senate for months until finally, the Tax Collectors pulled away from the entire arrangement and set their sights elsewhere.

This was one of the factors that led to the downfall of the Republic.

Cicero wrote about Cato in frustration, "He talks like he's living in Plato's Republic and not Romulus' shithole."

This statement has been an important philosophical framework for navigating the modern world.

Let's disambiguate.

By "Plato's Republic", Cicero was referring to the dialogues of the ancient Greek philosopher Plato.

If you are so inclined, you can download and read "The Republic" by Plato.

Plato's vision was predicated on his belief that the best society is ruled by the wisest people - leaders who have moved past caring only about personal enrichment and have reached a high level of understanding and goodness.

And by "Romulus's Shithole", Cicero was referring to the mythical founder and first King of Rome, Romulus, and how without any special plans, Rome had accidentally grown into a world power - powerful, but fantastically corrupt.

Cicero's argument was that, while it may be useful to wish for an ideal world, one must be prepared to deal with the realities of a corrupt one.

This could be compared to Jesus's cryptic maxim of giving to Caesar what was Caesar's and to God what was God's.

At one point, Jesus presented the idea of turning the other cheek.

At another, he suggested they carry weapons.

In short, Idealism vs Realism.

Jim Rohn wrote, "The best way to deal with life is as it is, not as it should be."

Should political leaders be absolutely trustworthy?

Should celebrities only promote schemes they honestly believe in and have verified?

Should governments protect its citizens from exploitative businesses and advertising methods regardless of the taxable revenue they generate?

Should an electorate be well educated in order to make better electoral choices?

Well, in Plato's Republic, yes, but we do not live there.

We live in Romulus's shithole, so hedge against its realities.

Where in life are you making losing bets because you plan by the rules of an ideal world that exists only in your head?

Why not look at the world for what it is and make more rigorous plans to withstand its realities?

This is not necessarily about Nigeria.

Every country in the world is its own version of Romulus's Shithole, and everyone's life has a microcosm of it.

Just build your house on rock, not the sinking sand of "...but I was hoping."

Wisdom is a defense, my friend.

Talk soon,