"Start with the Greeks"

Which is clearly different from what OP says.
And still allows for

Look at the filename (and the fact it got spammed x times lately).
It's a /pol/tard spamming a pic he saved because he thinks Aristotle was a nazi since he never read Aristotle.

Yes, it allows for peaceful relations between citizens of different cities, provided everyone lives where they belong. This isn't going where you think it's going.

>Yes, it allows for peaceful relations between citizens of different cities, provided everyone lives where they belong. This isn't going where you think it's going.
Which means Aristotle would have to move out of Athens and stop being scribed in Attic and move back to Macedonia, to prevent Attic unrest.

>This isn't going where you think it's going.
Where do you think I think this is going?

How long are you going to keep this up? Apparently there is ethno-cultural unity between these peoples. Also, the text is talking about his ideal of a society, not about his personal real-world circumstances brainlet.

>Apparently there is ethno-cultural unity between these peoples.
....Are you retarded enough that you don't know Macedonia corrupted the Attic democratic system and marched through there on its way to owning the known world? KEK, why did you think Aristotle died under the Macedonian Empire and not the antiMacedonian place he was educated? What shitty school did your parents send you to?

Like I said, how long are you going to keep this up? Does the text not say what it says anymore because Aristotle didn't actually live in the ideal society he described?

>philia is skin colour
Americans everybody

dumb pol cuck lmao

Your interpretation is wrong, and has been wrong for thousands of years before you were born. So, in answer to how long you're going to keep being pointed to as wrong: forever, pleb.

What's that book?

There isn't even anything to interpret in this snippet, you just misunderstood something and started talking about segregation and then, after receiving an explanation, tried changing the subject.

Aristotle: Niggers and How to Enslave Them

Nope, I'm responding to this chain:
>that's not what he said at all dickbrain
When that first post is exactly what he said and the guy saying dickbrain has no classical education or understanding of Aristotle, Attica, or the Greeks in general, let alone Aeschines, Demosthenes or even Timarchus, his sexual rolemodel.
>How long are you going to keep this up? Apparently there is ethno-cultural unity between these peoples. Also, the text is talking about his ideal of a society, not about his personal real-world circumstances brainlet.
This is also wrong, as is
>Yes, it allows for peaceful relations between citizens of different cities, provided everyone lives where they belong. This isn't going where you think it's going.
Anyone with a primary school knowledge of the period can tell you why it's wrong, pleb. Get better educated.

>even Timarchus, his sexual rolemodel.
>accusing dumb /pol/tard of hubris
I like it. They won't get it, but it's probably true. **votes for Aeschines**

It says that there would be tensions and not that you should kill them. Also, why did you ruin that book with your fluorescent autism inducing marker you underdeveloped subhuman.

I know what chain you're responding to and I'm also noticing that since this post of mine you're trying to weasel yourself out of the embarrassment of having been told. You had your chance, please don't convince yourself you win arguments by autistically repeating "but your wrong tho xD"

>peaceful relations between citizens of different cities
Aristotle counselled Alexander who did not have peaceful relations between different cities and whose father did not have peaceful relations between different cities. That would be why Sparta told Philip If they invade that Sparta would lose every man they had rather than be ruled by Macedon, and why Aeschines is accused of Macedonian corruption. I've already told you why you're wrong in the post you're responding to, that's how dumb you are, you can't even see you've been owned and now blather about "you can't touch my SHTYLE"
fuck off back to facebook.

You didn't refute anything relating to the marked paragraph you misunderstood, you just tried to change the subject to something else when you noticed you were wrong, like you're doing now.

>if I stick my fingers in my ears, the classics departments of the world will change history for me
Good luck with that.

No, you're right, Aristotle talked to this robot who was saying that people should be segregated to their home cities, right before he flew Diogenes back to the sea and Aristotle back to Macedon. It's all in Aristotle's diary, that guy is just pulling your leg trying to teach you false news, don't believe him, you're bang on the money. #STOPTHEROBOTGENOCIDE

>if I cover my eyes with these epic twitter mic drops I printed out and posted on my wall the thread topic is what I've been trying to change the subject to for 20 minutes now and not to OP post anymore

holy shit

>I'll keep pretending that Aristotle really said what he didn't
>nobody will be able to correct me even when they cite contemporary sources or Aristotle himself
Are you saying you need more than luck for that?

It's totally true, Aristotle wanted everyone segregated back to their home cities and the only reason he argues against that in his texts is because robot haters corrupted his texts and burnt the ones that say otherwise. Don't fall for it. Keep strong.

Are you saying Aristotle's real-world political counsel has any bearing on his philosophical model of an ideal society?

epicly roasted dude

Yes, since his counsel to Alexander is based in his ethnocentric ideal. Explicitly so, in fact. But who are we to take Aristotle's word for it when that robot guy seems to think his works are forged?

That would mean that his philosophical model to some degree influenced his counsel, not the other way around. You can see how the marked paragraph has relevance outside of any specific political or historical context, right? Whatever circumstantial modifications he added in his counsel have no bearing on his ideas.

>would mean that his philosophical model to some degree influenced his counsel, not the other way around.
It would if he weren't raised in the Macedonia palace, and didn't break with the Platonic school because of its antiMacedonian sentiment. Though, he did, so that hypothetical never became history since it's wrong.

>be raised by Philip
>work for Philip
>counsel Alexander
>but no really, my allegiance is to the school of thought i rejected in favour of Macedonia
wut?

It's not usually in the nature of ideas and philosophical models to become reality.

And yet, Aristotle hoped they would, and counselled as though they would, and Alexander following his counsel succeeded in becoming hegemon as Aristotle had hoped for. It's almost as if history is trying to prove you wrong at this point, like it's got this entire body of corroborating texts that don't care about your hot opinions.

>like it's got this entire body of corroborating texts that don't care about your hot opinions.
Yeah but those are anti-robot hateful lies.

Despotic systems like the EU commission do seem to love the idea of multiracial society very much.

A very shortsighted plan from the leftists, but the power ends up at the hands of the few again. All's well ends swell.

That's not really a problem in a time where political counsellor's main occupation is philosophy. I don't know what opinions of mine you are referring to since all I've done is correct your tumblr-tier "don't judge by color" misunderstanding of a paragraph I didn't write myself, and point out how irrelevant the historical context you keep bringing up is.

>That's not really a problem in a time where political counsellor's main occupation is philosophy. I don't know what opinions of mine you are referring to since all I've done is correct your tumblr-tier "don't judge by color" misunderstanding of a paragraph I didn't write myself, and point out how irrelevant the historical context you keep bringing up is.
>calls the person who knows what a metic citizen is a tumblr reader
Might I say "no u", and add to it that Aristotle is clearly saying that division between races is a tool of tyrants and bad government while unifying them was his ultimate goal for Greece, which he would have succeeded at if not for the Spartans. I'm referring to you being wrong about that, about the fall of Athens, about the history and texts of Aristotle and many other places I've pointed to you being directly contradicted by your source and his contemporary sources. It's not my fault you're wrong, if you want Aristotle to say you should keep people to their home cities, you're going to need to talk to the robot guy about time travel. Otherwise, you're forever wrong, with thousands of years of scholarship saying why your interpretation is wrong and your history inaccurate.

>you're going to need to talk to the robot guy about time travel.
The robot doesn't need to time trave, he was there with Aristotle, don't you shills listen@?

Sorry, darling, I don't have the Robot Codex.

>division between races is a tool of tyrants and bad government
So we're here again? He says having different races live together in a city is a means of control for tyrants, not that a good ruler would have different races live together in one society in harmony.
>about the fall of Athens, about the history and texts of Aristotle and many other places
You keep bringing up things I made no mention of, much less any statements that could be wrong at all.

>So we're here again? He says having different races live together in a city is a means of control for tyrants, not that a good ruler would have different races live together in one society in harmony.
No, he says creating division between them is a tool of tyrants. He's against that in the same way he's against the Go Home Diogenes commentators. You're wrong, and Aristotle says you're wrong. >You keep bringing up things I made no mention of, much less any statements that could be wrong at all.
It's almost as if Aristotle was a major player in that, and his views on ethnic harmony were a major part of the campaign which to be ignorant of is to be basically ignorant of the history and the philosophy of two major Greek periods, and the foundations of Western Government. But surely you're aware of that, because otherwise not only would you first interpretation be wrong, but wholly ignorant to the point where robot guy knows more than you. I'm sure that's not the case and the mean classical texts are just bullying you by quoting Aristotle saying the opposite of your interpretation.