Kidnap some kids and brainwash them to become ideal humans

He didn't though.

Where did you get that from the republic?
The only child kidnapping their involved kidnapping the deformed newborns that accidentally come out of a rigged sexual lottery system.
Those kids don't get raised though. He suggested straight murdering them.

Exposure of defective children was a common practice, wasn't it?

Depends on the city. I believe.

He was trying to mirror a spartan practice with that one if my half memory serves me right.

frankly, his ideal republic would have fallen apart at the seams.
That and his proposed definition of justice effectively lead him to describe a society where it contradicted his earlier premise that justice is to benefit all members of society, not just the weak, strong nor ones friends or self.
Granted he didnt outright say it, but he played on the emotions of his imaginary adversaries in an attempt to demonstrate the implausibility of rival models for justice.

>implying the Spartan garrison in Athens were Plato's star pupils

Are you deliberately misleading this user or are you just fucking stupid?

Nope. They were Athenians appointed by Sparta, and guess where they had all gotten their education?

he definitely did

Pics or it didn't happen
A-Argos....?

Some would call taking children away from their families at birth and expose them solely to state education "kidnapping"

I'm not that user, but you've just blown my mind. I somehow never connected the dots. I always just assumed the Thirty Tyrants were just a footnote made up of dumb opportunists, but you make it sound more like they were ideologues more than anything. Very interesting... Do you have any more information on this or any recommended read about this short period? Also, did others ever hold Plato and Socrates accountable for this?

Well we do "brainwash" people into becoming proper citizens.

Plato's noble lie with the metals in the blood isn't really any different than for example nationalistic myths being inculcated into children at a young age.

Thanks, but I actually went back and checked my sources and want to issue a retraction

The Thirty Tyrants were not educated by Plato, but rather Socrates. The leader of the thirty, Critias, was Socrates's star pupil, so he and Plato were cut from the same cloth

The tyrants were extreme ideologues, ultra-conservative, staunchly anti-democratic and pro-oligarchy. Their reign was short and brutal, and Socrates' trial happened in the immediate aftermath of their expulsion

There-in lies one of history's great conundrums: how does a city which prizes itself on free inquiry (there was a freaking anti-war play put on by Aristophanes in the middle of the Peloponnesian war) put one of history's great thinkers to death, and why did they wait until he was over 70? We may never really know what the Athenians meant by "corrupting the youth" but considering that Socrates not only survived but thrived during the brutal purges of the Tyrants, and was even partially responsible for their rise in that it was his pupils calling the shots, we have to consider the possibility that Plato wasn't being all that sincere when he described Socrates as being above politics, and may have casually failed to mention that Socrates was corrupting the youth by teaching anti-democratic ideals, which he tried to downplay as him just being a "gadfly"

Plato later traveled to Syracuse which was ruled by Dionysus, who was basically the Hitler of the ancient Greek world, a man whom everyone remembered as a byword for bloody and coercive authoritarianism, because he thought Syracuse was a perfect fusion of knowledge and power. He even took a disciple, Dion of Syracuse. But this ended up being sheer autism as all three of Plato's expeditions to Syracuse ended up as disasters, one of which times he even ended up enslaved and needed to have his freedom purchased back for him. Dion of Syracuse ended up being a despicable power-monger who waged war against his own country in an attempt to control it

So to follow up on two points
>which he tried to downplay as him just being a "gadfly"
in other words, one of history's greatest philosophers may have been the ancient equivalent of an alt-right troll, murdered unjustly by a frothing mob of ancient SJWs

>Dion of Syracuse
This was the point I was originally reinforcing: Plato's belief in coercion as a tool for good proved to be a blunder, all it does is make society arbitrarily oppressive because now the tyrant is justifying his cruel grip on power with metaphysics.

I always thought that Socrates was a fucking dickhead, maybe because I had a friend that acted just like him when we were kids. I think that for the most part Socrates comes off worse than than many of the sophists they keep accusing. The sophists are just applying their techne and trying to make it by. Meanwhile Socrates takes this higher-than-though approach, demeaning people with his endless rhetoric, while ultimately adding nothing to their lives but a good dose of public humiliation. Pretty sure that no matter what time you live in, humiliating people publicly won't get them to like you or have a care for anything you say. It's the kind of opposition that only entrenches their bad beliefs and puts you in physical harm. Reminds me of the New Atheists and the way they pick on easy targets, always going in full assault mode rather than trying to get to the bottom of things.
Ah well. Thanks for you reply. I feel motivated to go back and brush up on this stuff now.
>in other words, one of history's greatest philosophers may have been the ancient equivalent of an alt-right troll, murdered unjustly by a frothing mob of ancient SJWs
How the fuck would the Athenians appear as SJWs in this context? And how would Socrates be in any way alt-right? Never mind the fact that they weren't a "frothing mob," and that he was sentenced only because he mocked the trial itself, and then went on to drink the hemlock and purposefully suicide despite the fact that the majority of people got away and it was often implied that being sentenced to death was only a formality and you'd only be going away in exile - shamefully.
Stop bringing retarded American politics into this.

>This was the point I was originally reinforcing: Plato's belief in coercion as a tool for good proved to be a blunder, all it does is make society arbitrarily oppressive because now the tyrant is justifying his cruel grip on power with metaphysics.
And that's a bad point. Where does Plato talk about coercion in this sense? You clearly haven't read Plato, so why are you trying to pass him on as some sort of ur-fascist?
If you read the Republic and all his other works it's pretty clear that Plato means that virtuous people should rear the young so that they in turn will be virtuous, and that others will want to join into these practices when they see how well a polis can operate once it's run like this.
That this was taken by some to mean that the should take power by violent force by no means suggests that Plato recommended that. Maybe he did in private, but you don't get that from the Republic.