2000 years ago

how is not wanting to be oppressed averse to the ego and its own?????

no need to go to a non-university town my bernbot friendo

wrong

People in university don't vote

Or, maybe, reread book one of the Republic and understand that the whole text is a metaphor for the human soul; if you want to understand what Plato thinks about political structures, read the Laws.

Because it's:
>DUDE WHAT IF WE CHANGED THE SYSTEM AND PUT PHILOSOPHERS ABOVE THE MILITARY GUYS SO WE EDUCATE THE LATTER TO STOP PREYING ON THE WORKERS IN THE FIELDS AROUND THEIR OWN TOWN LMAO

Were the old time basileus/wanax actual oppressors? Or were they sort of a paternal figure, ruling as head of the extended family of the city?

>when you destroy society and build ancap but Vico comes in so you've essentially just got everyone back to theological societies and killed huge amounts of people lol

Giving the power to geniuses is a terrible idea. The government body should be filled with people smart enough to perform their function of maintaining order, but not too smart to get any caesarian/hitlerian/napoleonian aspirations. Thats why corruption is acceptable, it keeps the meek minds happy.

Both Republic and Politics are cringe tier readings nowadays. Goddamn these people were truly dumb as shit when it came to politics and governin

>intelligence = corruption
No

They are just archaic.

>muh oppression

Enjoy your dysfunctional shithole 'democratic' societies run by political rats

True, but there are some parts that are really arbitrary, crazy and weird coming from the great thinkers . Like definitions of work, free, and citizens (especially Aristotle)

You are comparing their definitions with yours. You have to look at the historical context.

>the helicopter pilots manual

do you realize that Athens was not an autocracy?

Athens ain't free. The agora gotta be litterd with the blood of Sophists. Glaucon aka GlauCON is NOT my interlocutor. I am his guest and he keeps interrupting me. boys and hemlock not girls and wedlock, okay? praise the law

>when a Marxist tries to read Plato

every tiem

I said literally the opposite, you dumb nigger

>whoever has the most capital is in charge

woah

Elites already existed in those days. They always think of themselves as indispensable. THIS is why he held influence and still commands respect, despite there being better philosophers in his era.

>Exxon Mobil
>Trump
>Giant banks and corporations
>sick and slavish
Wew lad.

You fail history, lad. Miserable analysis.

>>humanity oppressed by strongman rulers

If you want to sound pretentious, naive, and disregard context. The Republic emerged as Plato's critique of Athenian democracy after the execution of his mentor, Socrates. His idea was to essentially place philosophers in positions of uncontested authority to avoid such examples as what happened to teacher. This sentiment underlines basically all of his politics. The Republic is not only influential for its invention of the 'Philosopher King,' but also the Cave Allegory is the basis for Rationalistic philosophy and supports the disciplines of mathematics and the hard sciences for millenniums to follow.

What you should really do now is read Aristotle, particularly Nicomachean Ethics and Politics. I like his approach more, but Plato is a considerable authority. They were both, of course, wrong about a lot of things. You just have to appreciate what they did for their time and that we have built empires according to the schematics provided from their philosophical musings.

Fuck off triptrash.

Plutocracy is inevitable when heredity does not check the power of wealth. You abolished hereditary rule and now the capitalists run everything. Well fucking done.

>Why was this hack so influential?

have you seen the mess democracy has made of the world?

A benign dictator isn't the worst thing that could happen

Except the Philosopher King did materialize some years later, in the character of Alexander. Plato was absolutely right. Schopenhauer had a similar perspective on the basis if eugenics.

Societies do not try to produce philosopher kings anymore. Vermin and clever herd animal types rule everything today.

The main flaw in Plato’s argument is the fact that he is describing and arguing in favour of what Voltaire defined as a “‘benevolent dictatorship’, where an enlightened despot, without the need to consult people, would nevertheless govern in their interests”.

In terms of the modern state, where people are continuously asking for a greater say in the running of government, and with a negative view towards totalitarianism due to the happenings of the 20th century, Plato’s argument becomes increasingly inapplicable. As Karl Popper argued, it is wrong to place political power in the hands of an elite. Nevertheless, it is also unrealistic to claim that an elite does not exist today, as for instance, there are always several main political parties who take turns running governments.

>You abolished hereditary rule and now the capitalists run everything. Well fucking done.

sounds fine to me

That's great you bring this up! I'm doing a lot of research into Alexander's legacy currently and his record as a model projected throughout antique and modern politics. His role as a philosopher king is disputed. While he was the student of Aristotle, he wasn't so much a philosopher as he was a conqueror. He was heavily indulgent in vices, corrupt and licentious. Not to say this makes one less of a philosopher, but that wasn't so much in line with Plato's suggestion of satiating the bodily temptations with reason and philosophy. I think the better model for a philosopher king would be Marcus Aurelius. Alexander is just often unduly utilized as this cosmic force for Greek Rationalism and Universalism to suggest a natural supremacy of Greek (and later Western) thought. I'm also only so far into western philosophy as Kant, but in contemporary view, we know how fundamentally flawed eugenics was as a natural science.

Have you by chance read The History of White People by Neil Irving Painter?

>have you seen the mess democracy has made of the world?

No, because no country on Earth is actually a democracy. We just have republics, which are really not democracies at all. Never do citizens get to vote on anything actually meaningful, like drug laws or immigration or taxation.

If we had genuine democracy, we would never have countries as large as the US or China or Russia. Which is why I find it so strange that modern day leftists often advocate for democracy while also advocating for countries to be part of larger unions like the EU. But in a genuine democracy, you would see many more countries and city-states leaving their home unions and becoming independent,

Also, one of the greater ironies is that Macedonia wasn't considered so much Greek at the time of Philip II. They were an outlier kingdom that recruited neighboring tribes on an equal platform to conquer the Greek Peninsula. This would have been unthinkable to the minds of Greek's epicenter, like Sparta or Athens.

Look at the people who work at those corporations, welfare, social security etc

Seriously a bad thread. That's probably the most correct part of his whole philosophical system

t. dumb rural person

>In terms of the modern state, where people are continuously asking for a greater say in the running of government

Who says they deserve it?

>He was heavily indulgent in vices, corrupt and licentious.

Ah yes, the slander of Alexander's Athenian detractors remains alive and well. You should try reading something other than history textbooks.

Aristotle argued, man is a political animal and it is inevitable for us all, not just for an elite of old men, to be interested and have a say in politics, as it is a force which inevitably affects us all.

Plato’s argument is asking us not only to be disinterested in the political process, but also to leave our rights and opinions in the hands of a benevolent dictator. For this reason his argument is not only unpersuasive but is also unrealistic.

"There will be no end to the troubles of states… humanity itself, till philosophers become kings in the world… and political power and philosophy thus come into the same hands."

Would you recommend anything that depicts a more accurate portrayal of his character and imminent downfall as a Persian autocrat?

>Plato’s argument is asking us not only to be disinterested in the political process

I think this is really ideal. Political freedom is grossly overrated. Economic and human freedom are far more important.

Literally anything not written by or based on the accounts of Athenian slanderers. Read Arrian for starters.

Renault's 'The Nature of Alexander' is as favorable an account as exists today. You could use that to balance out all the claptrap you've evidently been fed thus far.

Furthermore there was no 'downfall' in the case of Alexander. He dropped dead at 32 after twelve years of relentless campaigning through uncharted territories, having lead every major battle in person and, according to his own account, 'having been wounded by every form of weaponry in existence'. He was undisputed king and center of the world at the time of his death and was preparing further campaigns.

>Rome, America

What? two of the biggest empires in the entire history of men?

Without mentioning the fact that every single country in the world at the moment practices some form of democracy.

>oppressed
how's that anthropology major working out for you?

>tfw you ruin the economy and deforest the land by building too many triremes

ITT:
>yesh, it is I that shuld rule over the plebian mashes with my superior intellect

>Without mentioning the fact that every single country in the world at the moment practices some form of democracy

If you count the merry "let's have an election, I win" of a number of African and Asian countries democracy, yes.

Have you actually read the thread or are you just eager to meme like a 14 year old?

T. Every politican and public intellectual ever

T.riggered /pol/tard

So b) it is then.

Political freedom is still intertwined with economic and human freedom, rights for freedom are constraints on the discretion of individuals or institutions to act, as freedom in the additional sense of the discretion to act (instead of a duty). Waiving your political freedom could therefore neutralize your freedom all together into a position of subjugation and servitude.

First order rights:
Claim - to use x, active
Privilege - to use x, passive

Second order rights, with an ascendant over first order rights

Power - waive, annul or transfer your claim, active
Immunity - aginst others altering your claim, passive

Any political consitution is a much more complex structure of rights on multiple levels that distribute authority distinctly. In a democratic constitution, voters have the power to elect legislators, who have powers to enact laws, which the judiciary has powers to interpret and the police have powers to enforce, leaving certain courses of conduct as open for citizens to pursue.

>Waiving your political freedom could therefore neutralize your freedom all together into a position of subjugation and servitude.
>could

And it could just as well enable an intelligent and effective leader to claim power, crushing all inferior candidates and running the state as best it can be run.

Democracy is a hedge against uncertainty and human folly. It limits the harm of bad rulers, but also the benefit of good ones.

In Mill's On Liberty, Mill inquires in the nature and limits of justifiable social control over the individual. Mill argues the measure of a person's liberty or personal autonomy is the measure of the person's independence from social control from influences that control the person's preferences, thoughts, and behavior.

With a benevolent dictator in place, you, one could inquire on the nature of benevolence, as beneficent acts and policies that are obligatory, or merely the pursuit of optional moral ideals.

Paternalism has roots in the notion of paternal administration, government as by a father to administer in the way a beneficent father raises his children. He makes all or at least some of the decisions relating to his children's welfare, rather than leaving them free to make those decisions.

An act of paternalism, therefore overrides moral obligations to respect autonomous choice on grounds of beneficence.

It's funny you mention that work because it's literally the next book in my queue. I have a copy sitting on my desk right now. I don't think it's entirely inaccurate to portray him as gluttonous. The drunken murder of his friend and general, Cleitus, supports the idea of his hubris and the rapacity of his ego following his campaign. There's now suggestions of his death being related to poisons mixed in his wine, which would make sense for how his empire was divided and his son killed following then.

I still dispute the idea that was the first philosopher king, although he was the first Greek to campaign and succeed in such a massive scale.

>corporations that build militaries in order to control land and rule over/protect the people that live there
>not governments
why do ancap retards never think about what will happen shortly after their idealistic hellhole comes to reality

The Roman Republic fell when the accumulation of too much land by Roman senators displaced veteran solider-citizens into urban centers to work as essentially common thugs and criminals. Caesar exploited this by giving charitably to the plebians and winning their favor, thus setting himself at odds with the aristocratic elites and securing his tyranny in the form of de facto mob rule. The healthiest society is one with a large middle-class who can afford to participate in civics and pleasurable society while affording their living. The Roman Empire was the peak of Roman power but imperialism dependent upon slavery and corrupt leadership led to its downfall. It's much easier to corrupt an individual than an entire society when it has an integral, moral backbone of people devoted to its collective survival. Similar to what is happening in the US right now, we have too much divisive politicking going on and it has really split the nation into many factions of class, race, gender, and party. The recession and stagnating economy has played a huge role in this as well, although Obama was making well of it.

The royals rarely ever "checked" the power of wealth. Weak.

Capitalism has a multi tier class structure to it. The comfy middle class are simply "house niggers" for the big wealth. Those that "work" there, the clerks and managers, don't produce anything of value but security to those that don't work at all. Those people at the top may be considered sick in a way but they are the master class and in no way slaves.

If he was poisoned it was by Cassander, whom the fates scourged with wrath unbending. Kleitos instigated and provoked his own murder by all accounts, but Alexander still exhibited the utmost contrition for it, laying in shame for three days and taking neither food nor water, so that his life was feared for. He was neither a drunk nor an alcoholic. Any physician can tell you what the work tolerance of a 30 year old alcoholic is. In many parts of the world to which his campaigning took him, it was not safe to drink the water, so they drank wine for hydration. Alexander was not a glutton for anything, save knowledge and dominion.

>Kleitos instigated and provoked his own murder by all accounts
This is contestable. The accounts may make this claim so that Alexander's impulsivity would not draw his subordinates into doubt, as his military was already insurrectionary from his rapacious campaigning and no one wanted to challenge him after his demonstration of foul temper. The conclusion of poison is also contested. The Greeks and some Classicists like to prop him up as this poster boy for the austerity of Greek virtue and culture, but there's no validity to that. He was also absorbed by the mixing of cultural influence. He crowned himself Pharoah in Egypt and became a God-King in Persia. What you just read me counts for nothing.

Congrats on being the worst Veeky Forums trip for two years running

I didn't "read" you anything, cur. It was my own wording of history.

You also have no idea what you're talking about. Cleitus instigated his own death by insinuating that Alexander had turned his back on a Persian noble in combat, only to be saved by him at the last moment. This is factually incorrect as well as a grave insult. Alexander was dispatching another Persian when the aforementioned noble tried to take him from behind; Cleitus did as any other Macedonian would have and cut him down.

Alexander's military was nowhere near insurrectionary at the time when Cletius was slain, in 328. That only became an issue later, in India, and even then they were no mutinous but unwilling to march any further. After Alexander slew Cletius the Macedonians called a tribunal and charged Cleitus with treason to assuage Alexander's guilt. Much later, when he attempted to discharge his oldest soldiers, the army went into an uproar and demanded to be sent home one and all. Alexander responded by giving top commands to Persian officers. After several days of dismal, the Macedonians ran to his tent en masse and threw themselves at his feet. When he came out and asked what their grievance was, they responded that none of them had been given leave to kiss his face, as the Persian lords did.

Try reading historical works with some fucking rigor and nuance you imbecile.

several days of dismay*

"humanity" consists of a wide spectrum of life forms and these life forms often have diametrically opposed interests, government being some sort of all-encompassing boon is a ridiculous fable, and often used by the masses because they think that they should be catered to due to there being a lot of them

You didn't list an a) or a b)

i like these types of shitposts

you get to read all the shitty interpretations of people

No, the Philosopher King materialized in the Pope, who is literally a Philosopher King in that his rule is based on his teaching a spiritual doctrine and not on blood or inheritance. The papacy is also the most successful monarchy in history. The Catholic Church is Plato's ideal state.

>a or b

What if Plato is the only philosopher and everyone else has been a sophist that missed the point?

Except the Pope is a title, not a person. And a pope is really the antithesis of a king.

Not true. While in university, I voted.

QED

for the dialogues and critical methodology.
not the republic.

>believing in spooks
spooked

>an-cap meme

Probably voted for bernie too you fucking cuck

No I voted for Gary Johnson because I am tired of being oppressed

If you wanted in illiterate unlettered baffoon as president there was a major party candidate who fit the bill. Is the joke of voting for the Libertarian 'idea' still a thing people haven't outgrown?

>opressed
>hahahahaha
Good one user

You gotta hand it to him.
If you're gonna write a government manual that gives totalitarian control to yourself and a few of your buddies, while you're at it, it's best to also organize sex lotteries that you rig so that all the hottest girls have to have sex with you.

Plato is perhaps the best supervillain to ever exist.

At least Gary's honest enough to admit when he doesn't know things, and outwardly said that he would approach the Presidency as a partnership with his VP Bill Weld, whom I think highly of from what I've seen of him.

>often have diametrically opposed interests
No, they're just too stupid to see that all their interests are the same.

When your ideology's most acclaimed thinkers are Von Mises, Huerta de Soto and Ayn Rand you should really re-evaluate your position.

>despite there being better philosophers in his era.
>this is your brain on communism

AWOOGAH

>historical relativism

No

Ah, Papist snakes worming their way into rational history yet again