Skip to main content

Why Thucydidies Was Wrong...

...and why it matters for post-modern people. Otherwise who would care what some Greek said, or some ancient Chinese sage said....and why you should listen to them all.

The Ancient Greek Historian Thucydides lays bare for us the mechanisms that occur when a society becomes overpopulated and cruel. In his history of the Peloponnesian War, he takes shot at all the things we think of as normal in human relationships.

His premise is "the strong do what they want, the weak suffer what they must." Herodotus on the other hand, from Chapter 1 of his book, proved that this attitude only comes about as a reaction to the material resources and our lack of them our perception that we do not have what we want; Herodotus says people are cruel when they want things. Olive oil, wine, gold, women, land.

When people do not want things and think about them in their relation to society they are called philosophers or historians.

The philosophers and historian's job, as it was understood was to seek truth, not only for its own sake, but in Socrates example, for society too. Society then became the realm of the philosopher who would use whatever of the truth he learned in honesty for the sake of his fellow citizens. This was not some altruistic love fest, no, this was for the serious business of making the society one that people could and would want to live in. How to make laws that people will want to live under. This is the basic gist of Plato's work Statesmen. It should be read for anyone even thinking of entering public life.

Lao Tzu on the other hand was a statesmen first, and a philosopher second. He was a sage always. He never minced words about his own position on things. His philosophy is the ancient equivalent of the enlightenment and revolutionary period thinking in America. it is a remarkable testimony to the development of human nature that people separated by time and place have frequently and often developed similar ways of thinking about the world based on conditions they have seen and experiences they have had.

I am reminded that the march of civilization has been one from the public individual of the Greeks, to the private individual where people's rights and privacy are respected, back to a system where all of our public information is neither respected or protected but sold on a market. In the reduction of the human person to a commodity on the market one has to wonder what Socrates would say. And one can only guess whether he would think we have regressed to a point beyond hope.

Thanks to MIT, many of these texts that were seminal in the development of society are online and should be studied by anyone interested in making an impact in the world of public affairs: http://classics.mit.edu/Browse/index.html

Thanks to the Lao Tzu page for having so much information on it: http://www.taopage.org/laotzu/

After you read them both, you should all take time to pay homage to William Penn- who studied the classics and practiced Quakerism- for the remarkable system of government and Quaker society he created for us in Delaware, and take time to join in with us and lament its passing into a post-modern world.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...