[an error occurred while processing this directive]
About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 0

Tuesday, April 15 - 9:49amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

This, to me, is an interesting summary of Athenian Democracy

 

http://www.stoa.org/projects/demos/article_democracy_overview?page=5

 

Crudely summarized by me as follows: (don't take my word for it, read it.)

 

1] Anyone(male) could not only speak at Assembly, but listen as well. In fact, it was an obligation for all(including female)to listen at Assembly, to be informed. But only Athenian Citizens could vote. However, the non-egalitarianism of ideas was strictly enforced; 'bakers' who stood up to put forth on the topic of 'building' were loudly laughed away by the crowd, intent as it was to self-police the strength of its Democracy. If you stood up at the Assembly to speak, you damn well better have an informed something to say.  There was no egalitarianism of opinion.

 

2] Membership in the roles of Athenian Citizenry was achieved after two years of military training/service, passing through the Ethebes.   Of the many occupants of Athens, many of whom who could speak at Assembly and had an obligation to listen at Assembly,  only a fraction were Athenian Citizens with voting rights.  And it was possible to lose that status.  See 3.

 

3] Idiots who passed that hurdle could lose their right to vote for being idiots. Idiocy included debt to the state. This was common sense; if someone was already bleeding the state, then giving them the power to ask for more blood was not regarded as a reasonable thing to encourage, and so, it was explicitly forbidden.

 

4] Athenian Citizens who passed those hurdles were paid to participate in debates in the Assembly; not just the poor, but including the poor, who passed those hurdles.   This was paid for by penalties on those with debts to the state.

 

If American democracy was anywhere near Athenian Democracy, what is the possibility that we ever see the spectacle of an Obama in office?

 

 

Compare the above with the modern 'correct historical narrative' retelling of Athenian Democracy; pure democracy of 'The People.'  The cherry picking from history.  Cleanup in aisle nine?

 

Remove the gender bias, and me and the wife would move to that Athens in a heartbeat.

 

regards,

Fred

 

(Edited by Fred Bartlett on 4/15, 9:54am)



Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 1

Tuesday, April 15 - 10:11amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Compare denizen with citizen.

 

America is on a new Holy tear to convert all denizens into citizens.

 

Very un-Athenian Democratic.

 

Hope is reduced to wishing the Democrats restrict this latest campaign to the human species, and don't implement human 'helpers' to devine who bovine want for president..

 

Is there anyone here who thinks that was said as a joke? 

 

On what basis in evidence does anyone think the Democratic Party would not do that if it thought it could get away with it?  A good cause is a good cause, and justifies any means.

 

regards,

Fred



Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 2

Tuesday, April 15 - 11:58amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

The Progressives campaign to herd everyone even remotely human into a voting booth (two or three times per election if possible) has, as Fred has pointed out, nothing to do with a love of democracy and everything to do with an almost carnal hunger for power.  Registering and then getting all these un-Athenian individuals to vote only works if they vote for the Progressives, the ones who brought them to the dance.  They think it is because the person who asked them to the prom finds them attractive and cares for them.  And that is where these three things tie together:

  1. Get everyone to vote,
  2. Trash the constitution and any concept of natural rights replacing these beliefs with a utopian view of unlimited democracy,
  3. Use class warfare, identity politics, lots and lots of lies, and redistribution to ensure that the majority of the votes come from supporters infused with partisan hatreds and fears.

All of these can only be done efficiently to the degree that Progressives establish these two conditions:

  1. One is that Progressives lie through their teeth.  They have to convince blacks and hispanics that their opponents are all racist, convince women that their opponents are all misogynists keeping women in an oppressed state, empower parasites and cronies with the belief that redistribution is a right, and reassure anyone listening that the constitution is out of date, that the majority supports their view and it is okay to vote away the rights of those opponents because there really are no such things as individual rights (only entitlements and the application of 'social justice'), only the rights of a majority and besides, opponents are evil one-percentors, racists and oppressors.  

  2. The second is that having told some real whoppers, again and again, Progressives need the media to be on their side enough to not give away the giant ponzi scheme of false promises.  And even they can't help unless Progressives have used the educational system to precondition the masses to receiving these deceptions dressed up as valid talking points.  In other words, the entire progressive scheme rests upon weaving together a web of dishonesty.  

 

In pragmatic terms, this can work - at least so far it has.  But there is no way around the fact schemes built on dishonesty fail when exposed.  It might be a real wet dream of true Progressives that all of the population becomes so stupid, ignorant and pathetic that they'll like being lied to and used.  But that's not going to happen.  All but the tiniest minority are not going to like seeing the actual means and ends of Progressivism.  They'll want to find something that would justify putting up with that, and the deeper they look the less value there is.  End of wet dream.  Even the Progressives know this in their dark little hearts, because they try so hard to get everyone in debt to or totally dependent upon the government - like it was a race to nail everyone down before they find out it is scheme.  It explains the fears and the hatreds they have (like women or blacks with libertarian beliefs, like voter IDs, like a Tea Party movement, etc.).

 

If there is still a possibility of reversing this trend that has slowly, but surely been moving us towards the end of liberty, it can only be done with an effective exposure of all that the Progressives do that is dishonest - exposing it as dishonest.  Exposure of the very method of using deception.  Exposure of the their little bag of tricks - which is nearly unlimited in the content to which it can be applied, but very limited in the general structures (like the Trojan Horse type of legislation, like the use dividing people into classes and special groups to turn them against each other, etc.)

 

When in an open debate you don't just counter a specific argument, but go further to show a deep and all encompassing dishonesty in the purpose of the other debater and the way they structure each of their key arguments, you have destroyed them totally.  Dishonesty is NOT a good foundation for a debate style, or a political movement.  There is nothing weaker  or more pathetic than repeated attempts to justify lies that are already seen as lies, especially when the ugly motives for those lies is also clearly seen.



Post 3

Wednesday, April 16 - 1:13pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Steve:

 

Speaking of Progressives, have you run across this yet?

 

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/03/125409-crazily-scary-common-core-problem-asks/

 

I heard it being discussed on local radio this morning.  

You know what follows that?    Remove two more.   Lather, rinse , repeat.

 

It just speaks for itself.  There is hardly a reason to comment.   Someone either finds that abhorrent, or not, and thye try to rationalize it.   "Well, its an exercise in critical thinking, blah-blah-blah....."

 

Oh just fuck me with a chainsaw rather than to listen to 20 more milliseconds of nonsense like that..

 

regards,

Fred



Post 4

Wednesday, April 16 - 1:43pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

16 (income tax) and 17 (direct election of senators)



Post 5

Wednesday, April 16 - 2:59pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Nice try, Peter - I'd agree with those, but the teacher would give us an F.  It has to one of the first 10 amendments.

---------------

 

Fred,

 

It is unbelievable!  The progressives are much better at seeing what they need to change to get rid of our pesky liberties then most Americans are at understanding what liberty is or what is protecting it.



Post 6

Thursday, April 17 - 6:59amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Peter/Steve:

 

I'd agree with those, too, but the intent was clearly to target the 'archaic' Bill of Rights.       But that is part of Peter's point, I think; it is exactly the willy nilly rot of the constitution via amendments such as those that is making the parchment moth eaten.

 

Apparently, there are parts of the original BoR that are perceived as standing in the way of Progress and are in need of culling.

 

Which two of the first ten do you think these Common Coremunists are targeting?

 

regards,

Fred



Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 7

Thursday, April 17 - 8:23amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Fred,

 

You mean which two do they most want to START with.  I'm pretty sure they'd like to get rid of all of them just to be safe.  And then they could put in 'proper' rights, like the right to free health care, right to food and shelter, right to a living wage, etc.

 

As to which they'd like to start with... I'd say that in their little, weasle-like souls they want to disarm the people they are in the process of shackling. There is always a lot of agitation over the second amendment.  

 

After that... maybe the 10th, if they see the states getting agitated.  Or the first if they fear that the masses might get stirred up when nearing their end game and need to be muzzled - "Let's keep our speech and our press politically correct and not get all rowdy when we assemble."  The 3rd and 4th make it easier to use the courts as tools of progressivism if they can get rid of that pesky due process and it's search and seizure data gathering restrictions.  Actually, I think they'll want to get rid of all of them except maybe the one about quartering soldiers in the homes of citizens.  Once the Takings Clause is eliminated they can just take the homes.

 

I'd guess they most want to start with the first and the second.



Post 8

Thursday, April 17 - 11:39amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Steve:

 

It's like "The Second first, and then any other at their liesure."

 

regards,

Fred



Post 9

Thursday, April 17 - 12:26pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

The third,

 

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

 

might not be missed.  During the Vietnam war, some tried to turn this into an argument against the draft (don't ask me how).  It went noplace.

 

If the students are required to make a case for their choices, the assignment could be thought-provoking, as school ought to be.  I don't find it quite so objectionable as most here do.

 

(Edited by Peter Reidy on 4/17, 12:29pm)



Post 10

Thursday, April 17 - 12:36pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Peter:

 

And I'd agree, if the process was open ended, and not 'guided' by some state school instructoid or worse, some Ivy Leager.

 

Is there someone here who believes such assignments are delivered as open ended exercises?

 

Where in the history of Naked Sweaty Apedom have we naked sweaty apes ever resisted the urge to foist our political agendas?

 

regards,

Fred



Post 11

Thursday, April 17 - 12:48pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Peter:

 

Look at how 'Athenian Democracy' is described today, not in any scholarly articles, but in the thin veneer wallpaper that reaches back to cherry pick, to spraypaint with 'the correct historical/political narrative,' and compare it with reality.

 

Instructoids come pouring out of the Cookie Cutter U's with a 'flavor' of Athenian Democracy summarized as 'democracy of The People' where 'everyone had a voice.'

 

If exceptions to 'The People' are ever pointed out, it is only to double down on the ever popular RaceGenderClass card so popular today.    And then, the comparison is made to the global catastrophe of  Bush Gore 2000, and what democracy has become.

 

Seriously.

 

Where the Hell does that come from if not very careful 'guidance?'

 

regards,

Fred



Post 12

Saturday, April 19 - 6:34amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Athens had a silver mine at Laurium. It was worked by slaves who were owned by the city. The silver was paid to the citizens.  They got an annual lump sum by reporting to their home tribe neighborhood.  They also got paid to goto the Assembly.  In fact, over time, they voted to pay themselves more for that.  They also got paid to goto war. Such payments were in line with general wages, about the same as a rower on a trireme, a drachmon per day. (Contrary to story, galley rowers were not slaves.)

 

In other cities, citizens were also required to show up at the gynmasium and work out every day.  That was because of the requirement for military duty. When citizens went to war, the people who voted on that were the ones showing up on the field.  (We ought to do that today.)  



Post 13

Saturday, April 19 - 8:19amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Michael:

 

And, was a path to slavery not "debt to the state?"

 

It begs the question; if debt incurred by denizens was a path to slavery to the state, then in modern times, what is debt incurred by the state?

 

It seems all such paths lead to 'slavery to the state.'

 

regards,

Fred

 

(Edited by Fred Bartlett on 4/19, 8:20am)



Post to this thread
[an error occurred while processing this directive]


User ID Password or create a free account.