Amazon review

[Anonymous No.6589714]

am probably alone in thinking that Socrates was a pompous windbag and that the citizens of Athens deserve a small award for putting and end to his tedious speeches. This book is pure propaganda suggesting that Socrates was a saintly figure martyred by the evil mob. They had concocted ridiculous charges of corrupting the youth of Athens and then had him convicted in a kangaroo court.

The truth is of course more complex. Athens had been a democracy. Socrates and Plato were enemies of the democracy believing in rule by the rich. After the defeat of Athens by Sparta the democratic government was replaced by an oligarchy who used repression to maintain control. It was this government that was supported by Plato and Socrates. Both were in reality traitors to their country in much the same way that Pinochet was a traitor to Chile. After the corrupt rule of Plato's friends was overthrown democracy was re-instituted and Socrates was put on trial for his role in forming the views of those who destroyed the democratic system.

Plato spent his life writing crude anti-democratic propaganda such as this book. His philosophical system of government was that of a totalitarian society run by un-elected guardians. Popper the famous 20th Century Philosopher saw him as one of the forebears of the closed society along with Marx and Lennin.

If this book is to be believed and there is no particular reason to see it as accurate or truthful then Socrates bought his own fate upon himself. He had the chance of exile and he also had the chance to suggest an alternative punishment.

Despite his role as a traitor surely Socrates deserved death because of his life spent as a tedious bore. One cannot read any of the dialogues featuring his alleged sayings without seeing contrivance and he mis-recording of his opponents. At the conclusion of this book one can put it aside and feel a certain sense of satisfaction that the people of Athens did the right thing.

[Anonymous No.6590121]

>>6589714
hurr durr

[Anonymous No.6590878]

>>6589714
Was this review helpful to you? Yes

[Anonymous No.6590895]

>Tell socrate to stfu or kill himself
>He actually does it the mad man.

[Anonymous No.6590904]

>>6589714
>democracy is da best :DDD

[Anonymous No.6590941]

>>6590904
>mom shut up i'm trying to advocate a meme political theory

[Anonymous No.6590973]

>>6589714
>His philosophical system of government was that of a totalitarian society run by un-elected guardians. Popper the famous 20th Century Philosopher saw him as one of the forebears of the closed society along with Marx and Lennin.
>He actually thought The Republic was about politics

[Anonymous No.6591045]

>>6589714
>Socrates and Plato were enemies of the democracy believing in rule by the rich
Stopped reading there

[Anonymous No.6591073]

I kek whenever leftists praise socrates because they've obviously never read plato, otherwise they would know hes basically advocating for fascism

[Anonymous No.6591322]

>>6589714
the Athenian people misconceived the relationship between the pleasant and the good.

[Anonymous No.6591331]

Guess what book:

I read a lot of books, and have been for a long time.

This is the worst book I've ever read.

Technically, that's a lie. I quit after about 50 pages, and I rarely quit on books.

I don't know what to say, other than the following:

1. It literally makes no sense whatsoever.
2. Yet somehow, the writer's extreme hubris manages to shine through the written garbage.
3. Please remember that the good reviews you see are only from those insane enough to actually finish the book. I would bet 95% of people never actually finish it.
4. Read the reviews. Even the good ones don't exactly consist of glowing praise. "Read one of his other books first, then you'll understand him a little better." "Just ignore the fact that you won't understand a lot of things and it will be better." "I have no idea what the hell that was about but I feel so special for having read it."

I could go on and on, but let me just say that of the hundreds of books I've read, this is easily and without a doubt the worst of them all.

If I wanted the experience of reading this book, I would eat 4 hashish brownies and hang out with demented senior citizens with WWII PTSD. Those conversations would probably make much more sense, and be more entertaining.

0/10.

[Anonymous No.6591352]

>>6590895
>I told socrates to drink the hemlock and he actually did it
>the absolute madman!

[Anonymous No.6591406]

>>6591331
One of the meme triumvir?

[Anonymous No.6591962]

>>6591073
Oh yeah, he was totally talking about the 20th century conception of the State and corporatist theories of economics.

I kek whenever people mention fascism, because they've obviously never read anything at all.

[Anonymous No.6591990]

This argument is dumb. The "democracy" of Athens is more of a large aristocracy. Only few could actually vote and discuss.

[Anonymous No.6592006]

>>6591331
I'd like to think that because of the 'literally makes no sense whatsoever' comment they're talking about Finnegan's Wake or A Pickle for the Knowing Ones but I'd imagine it's actually something relatively easy to understand if you know your stuff beforehand.

Which meme-author was it? We all know it's one of them.

[Anonymous No.6592017]

>>6590904
The way democracy is simply axiomatically understand as superior in the West is rather annoying. All throughout school in the US I don't think democracy was ever really critically examined; instead, it was just unquestioningly accepted. I am not sure I'd want to live under something different, but still it would have been edifying to at some point have examined its benefits relative to other less participatory forms of governance.

[Anonymous No.6592024]

>>6591331
Something by pic related.

[Anonymous No.6592027]

>>6590941
I'm sick of the "democracy 4ever" meme when there are other perfectly respectable forms of government.

>>6592017
iktf

>tfw almost showed my power level in high school and argued that absolute monarchy was superior

[Anonymous No.6592030]

>>6590973
>politics
it was

[Anonymous No.6592039]

>>6592017
not really

in that i don't think it's reasonable to expect them to teach that

most people don't participate in democracy at all really

it's just something in the background that keeps things going

knowing how that works and what ideals it's based on is enough

[Anonymous No.6592044]

>>6592017
Was I the only one that had to read the federalist papers for school?

[Anonymous No.6592056]

>>6592027
I agree with you, in part at least. I think an enlightened despot of some sort is probably the best form of government; however, ensuring the despot is enlightened is tricky. Monarchy does certainly have its appeals though.

I also think even just an aristocratic republic redolent of the Roman Republic would probably be preferable to the type of relatively unfettered democratic republic we have today.

>>6592044
Neither side was anti-democracy; they were just for varying amounts, or am I wrong? Federalism and its alternative of divested power are both democratic, but differ on where the power bestowed by the people ultimately rests: locally or at a distance in the capitol.

[Anonymous No.6592060]

>>6591331
Beyond Good and Evil

[Anonymous No.6592069]

>>6592039
Maybe you are right. Public school government is not supposed to be Phil 350 Political Philosophy.

However, even in my AP Euro class I felt as though history was presented as an orderly progression from odious monarchy to righteous democracy, and that, to me at least, seems to be a facile narrative and unfair to monarchy.

[Anonymous No.6592075]

>>6592056
>however, ensuring the despot is enlightened is tricky
Assuming that an enlightened dictator is better than a democratic government, the problem is having a consistent succession of whatever an enlightened dictator is.

[Anonymous No.6592180]

wait a second, was OP just baiting everyone so that actual discussion develops? Shit, this is going to be the new meme from now on, making shitposts ironically just to get more people to post and get more people replying.

[Anonymous No.6592195]

>>6589714
S. was a troll. he knew that it is all there is

[Anonymous No.6592202]

>>6589714

I think that you must acknowledge the effect of scale to understand that a country is not run like a city.


>Polybius' sequence of anacyclosis proceeds in the following order: 1. Monarchy, 2. Kingship, 3. Tyranny, 4. Aristocracy, 5. Oligarchy, 6. Democracy, and 7. Ochlocracy.

>According to Polybius' elaboration of the theory, the state begins in a form of primitive monarchy. The state will emerge from monarchy under the leadership of an influential and wise king; this represents the emergence of "kingship". Political power will pass by hereditary succession to the children of the king, who will abuse their authority for their own gain; this represents the degeneration of kingship into "tyranny".

>Some of the more influential and powerful men of the state will grow weary of the abuses of tyrants, and will overthrow them; this represents the ascendancy of "aristocracy" (as well as the end of the "rule by the one" and the beginning of the "rule by the few").

>Just as the descendants of kings, however, political influence will pass to the descendants of the aristocrats, and these descendants will begin to abuse their power and influence, as the tyrants before them; this represents the decline of aristocracy and the beginning of "oligarchy". As Polybius explains, the people will by this stage in the political evolution of the state decide to take political matters into their own hands.

>This point of the cycle sees the emergence of "democracy", as well as the beginning of "rule by the many". In the same way that the descendants of kings and aristocrats abused their political status, so too will the descendants of democrats. Accordingly, democracy degenerates into "ochlocracy", literally, "mob-rule". During ochlocracy, according to Polybius, the people of the state will become corrupted, and will develop a sense of entitlement and will be conditioned to accept the pandering of demagogues.

[Anonymous No.6592207]

>>6592202

>Eventually, the state will be engulfed in chaos, and the competing claims of demagogues will culminate in a single (sometimes virtuous) demagogue claiming absolute power, bringing the state full-circle back to monarchy.

[Anonymous No.6592234]

>>6589714

>Socrates and Plato were enemies of the democracy believing in rule by the rich

HAHAHAHAHAHHA

[CE_Student !!6Oo0uwnBIza No.6592257]

>>6589714
>Socrates and Plato were enemies of the democracy believing in rule by the rich

[Anonymous No.6592365]

>>6589714
how can a society be called damocratic while its keeping slaves. Its just an oligarchy with a larger number of oligarchs. The whole "you are not a citizen, slave" is just a feudalist concept where there is a bigger group of lords who ceased to compete because they share the riches of slave labour.

>sweet sweet slave labour
>mfw wearing nikes

[Anonymous No.6592373]

>>6591331
something pablo coelho

[Anonymous No.6592375]

>>6592075
hereditary male succession
the merit will be formed by education

[Anonymous No.6592378]

>>6592365

democracy never really meant rule of the people in Ancient Greece. That's a modern definition. The Greeks understood it in a very specific way. If anything, they'd probably see our "democracies" as something totally different in nature.

What people usually advocate when they speak of democracy today is technically populism.

[Anonymous No.6592388]

>>6592378
I know dude, i was making an exclamation about the people of today, advocating democracy, involving the noble Greeks in their arguments.

>Hurr durr our western democratic culture is so civilised, human-friendly and ethically superior
>We are the definition of modern civilisation, we didnt most brutally kill each other 60 years ago at all
>fuck colored people

[Anonymous No.6592397]

this is the problem of the mdoern democracies: that they do not go without liberalism//libertarianism.

[Anonymous No.6593094]

>>6591331
cmon already, just tell us.

[Anonymous No.6593103]

>>6593094
quick google search tells me it's from Gravity's Rainbow

[ΟΥΤΙΣ No.6593106]

>>6592378
"Democracy" literally means "rule by the people".

Democracy in Greece was a lot more radical than democracy in the early United States was, and was extremely populist. They're the ones who came up with the idea of paying jurists so poor people could participate.