One and the Same: Functional Chaos in Rome and Beyond by Claudio Guler

Over spring break, I had the opportunity to visit my sister in Rome. The call for new articles for our next issue had come in shortly before break and I thought it would be interesting to write on something I observed while there. But what, if anything, does life in Rome have to do with international politics?

For the EU, Rome has many associations. It was there that over half a century ago the treaty that gave birth to the concept of a united Europe was signed. This connection is unambiguous. But in the spirit of Italian uncertainty, I wanted to find something more abstract. How else could Rome relate? Could I discover a more distant connection? It turns out the writing was on the wall.

Life in Rome – and for that matter in much of Italy – is chaotic and often exercised in an ad hoc fashion. Anarchy is too harsh a word to describe the situation, but allusions to its presence can be observed. As both a student of international relations and a citizen of Italy, Rome’s modus operandi is too difficult for me to rationally comprehend in some standard model of organization. There are simply too many unstructured and unexpected events occurring simultaneously. The only manner in which I can explain its continuing existence and fortitude is as functional chaos – a system lacking in ordained rationale.

That which can be accomplished in most of the western world in a few simple steps almost always requires a few supplemental ones in Rome. Where in most developed societies, interactions among individuals are well defined and regulated by the law, in Rome almost everything is negotiable. There, like on the international stage, the law is often more nominal than practical. I have observed this most noticeably in two realms: domestic politics and traffic relations.

Rome, the home of Italian politics is an epicenter of political confusion. Political scientists have diagnosed Italy with polarized pluralism. Under such a system, there exist too many splinter parties along a political spectrum. In order to retain power, each party plays to its own constituency and refuses compromise. The result is political gridlock. Laws are negotiated and passed, however, their binding quality – not to mention their enforcement – is almost always in question. Therefore, if none of your neighbors are adhering to them, why should you encumber yourself? This is exemplified by what in Italy is called l’evasione fiscale or fiscal tax evasion. Although no one knows precisely, it is estimated that more than 50% of anticipated taxes are not collected.

Similarly, traffic relations in Rome work much in the same manner. For example, certain red lights must be observed, while others can be considered optional. This appears extremely dangerous, but where order doesn’t prevail, situational awareness does.

On my last day in Rome, unannounced protests shut down a large portion of the city’s transportation network. Since buses were no longer a good option, I opted for a taxi. I found a police officer and asked him where I could find one. His colloquial response was as follows: “Look…there is one now unloading some passengers. He isn’t supposed to pick you up on the side of the street like this, but if you can get him to do it, hop in.” Unfortunately by the time I had gotten to the taxi he had already driven off. But never mind the taxi, wasn’t that a police officer that just recommended me to break the law?!

Examples of functional chaos can be witnessed on a daily basis in the international arena. Each time a state acts in defiance of international law it is by definition functioning outside a system of ordained rationale. This happens to come about quite often. There is no supranational governing authority and as a result, functional chaos has stepped in to fill the void.

Therefore, Rome, much like the international arena, is fundamentally governed by functional chaos. It appears to be reasonably self-regulating. In both spheres there exist laws and customs – both written, as well as unwritten – yet in the end, the individual’s or the state’s will reigns supreme. That which restricts each entity and forces it to conform is the existence of the other and its own will.

This must all seem horribly pessimistic. But, there is after all something rather reassuring about this condition. Although it takes some time to get used to functional chaos (I often need to assimilate when returning to Italy), it is in the end – well, functional. With a little patience and some nonchalance, it can be endured and out of it grows an exciting and spontaneous society unmatched in utilitarian novelty.

Thus, if we hold true that both Rome and the international arena are fundamentally governed by functional chaos, and, we consider Rome to be a successful example of permanence, then the prospects for the future of international society appear encouraging. Hopefully we will continue to codify our interactions and adhere to our agreements, but until then, Rome may provide a relevant working model.