HawgGoneIt Posted November 11, 2019 Report Share Posted November 11, 2019 At the dawn of democracy, Plato foresaw an unfortunate end. vangelis aragiannis/Shutterstock.com Why tyranny could be the inevitable outcome of democracy Lawrence Torcello, Rochester Institute of Technology November 11, 2019 9.11am EST Plato, one of the earliest thinkers and writers about democracy, predicted that letting people govern themselves would eventually lead the masses to support the rule of tyrants. When I tell my college-level philosophy students that in about 380 B.C. he asked “does not tyranny spring from democracy,” they’re sometimes surprised, thinking it’s a shocking connection. But looking at the modern political world, it seems much less far-fetched to me now. In democratic nations like Turkey, the U.K., Hungary, Brazil and the U.S., anti-elite demagogues are riding a wave of populism fueled by nationalist pride. It is a sign that liberal constraints on democracy are weakening. To philosophers, the term “liberalism” means something different than it does in partisan U.S. politics. Liberalism as a philosophy prioritizes the protection of individual rights, including freedom of thought, religion and lifestyle, against mass opinion and abuses of government power. What went wrong in Athens? In classical Athens, the birthplace of democracy, the democratic assembly was an arena filled with rhetoric unconstrained by any commitment to facts or truth. So far, so familiar. Aristotle and his students had not yet formalized the basic concepts and principles of logic, so those who sought influence learned from sophists, teachers of rhetoric who focused on controlling the audience’s emotions rather than influencing their logical thinking. There lay the trap: Power belonged to anyone who could harness the collective will of the citizens directly by appealing to their emotions rather than using evidence and facts to change their minds. Pericles gives a speech in Athens. Philipp von Foltz/Wikimedia Commons Manipulating people with fear In his “History of the Peloponnesian War,” the Greek historian Thucydides provides an example of how the Athenian statesman Pericles, who was elected democratically and not considered a tyrant, was nonetheless able to manipulate the Athenian citizenry: “Whenever he sensed that arrogance was making them more confident than the situation merited, he would say something to strike fear into their hearts; and when on the other hand he saw them fearful without good reason, he restored their confidence again. So it came about that what was in name a democracy was in practice government by the foremost man.” Misleading speech is the essential element of despots, because despots need the support of the people. Demagogues’ manipulation of the Athenian people left a legacy of instability, bloodshed and genocidal warfare, described in Thucydides’ history. That record is why Socrates – before being sentenced to death by democratic vote – chastised the Athenian democracy for its elevation of popular opinion at the expense of truth. Greece’s bloody history is also why Plato associated democracy with tyranny in Book VIII of “The Republic.” It was a democracy without constraint against the worst impulses of the majority. Comment on this article Lawrence Torcello Associate Professor of Philosophy, Rochester Institute of Technology Lawrence Torcello does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment. Rochester Institute of Technology provides funding as a member of The Conversation US. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorCalRuss Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 Did you get lost? The good mb is 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 1 hour ago, HawgGoneIt said: At the dawn of democracy, Plato foresaw an unfortunate end. vangelis aragiannis/Shutterstock.com Why tyranny could be the inevitable outcome of democracy Lawrence Torcello, Rochester Institute of Technology November 11, 2019 9.11am EST Plato, one of the earliest thinkers and writers about democracy, predicted that letting people govern themselves would eventually lead the masses to support the rule of tyrants. When I tell my college-level philosophy students that in about 380 B.C. he asked “does not tyranny spring from democracy,” they’re sometimes surprised, thinking it’s a shocking connection. But looking at the modern political world, it seems much less far-fetched to me now. In democratic nations like Turkey, the U.K., Hungary, Brazil and the U.S., anti-elite demagogues are riding a wave of populism fueled by nationalist pride. It is a sign that liberal constraints on democracy are weakening. To philosophers, the term “liberalism” means something different than it does in partisan U.S. politics. Liberalism as a philosophy prioritizes the protection of individual rights, including freedom of thought, religion and lifestyle, against mass opinion and abuses of government power. What went wrong in Athens? In classical Athens, the birthplace of democracy, the democratic assembly was an arena filled with rhetoric unconstrained by any commitment to facts or truth. So far, so familiar. Aristotle and his students had not yet formalized the basic concepts and principles of logic, so those who sought influence learned from sophists, teachers of rhetoric who focused on controlling the audience’s emotions rather than influencing their logical thinking. There lay the trap: Power belonged to anyone who could harness the collective will of the citizens directly by appealing to their emotions rather than using evidence and facts to change their minds. Pericles gives a speech in Athens. Philipp von Foltz/Wikimedia Commons Manipulating people with fear In his “History of the Peloponnesian War,” the Greek historian Thucydides provides an example of how the Athenian statesman Pericles, who was elected democratically and not considered a tyrant, was nonetheless able to manipulate the Athenian citizenry: “Whenever he sensed that arrogance was making them more confident than the situation merited, he would say something to strike fear into their hearts; and when on the other hand he saw them fearful without good reason, he restored their confidence again. So it came about that what was in name a democracy was in practice government by the foremost man.” Misleading speech is the essential element of despots, because despots need the support of the people. Demagogues’ manipulation of the Athenian people left a legacy of instability, bloodshed and genocidal warfare, described in Thucydides’ history. That record is why Socrates – before being sentenced to death by democratic vote – chastised the Athenian democracy for its elevation of popular opinion at the expense of truth. Greece’s bloody history is also why Plato associated democracy with tyranny in Book VIII of “The Republic.” It was a democracy without constraint against the worst impulses of the majority. Comment on this article Lawrence Torcello Associate Professor of Philosophy, Rochester Institute of Technology Lawrence Torcello does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment. Rochester Institute of Technology provides funding as a member of The Conversation US. That is why our brilliant founding fathers did not create a democracy 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted November 12, 2019 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 40 minutes ago, NorCalRuss said: Did you get lost? The good mb is Figured a little "smarts" has been sorely missed over here in the absence of Sportsnut and Drummer. Thought maybe dropping a little off over here could help fill the vast hole in the knowledge base left by them. Even if it was not my own smarts being dropped. I do enjoy a good read at times. That one turns out was a nice read to me. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted November 12, 2019 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 1 hour ago, Bormio said: That is why our brilliant founding fathers did not create a democracy I suppose that this would be the point where we stepped into the fray of debating "constitutional republic" or "representative democracy." I figure there has been more fore-fathers and leaders call what we have a democracy moreso than a republic. Whether that amounts to a hill of beans in this day and time or not, I don't know, but, I do expect that the facts would/could be disputed as is the norm today. I do also suppose that regardless of how circular that debate could be, our current leader fancies himself as a supreme leader, and so many of us are apparently willing to grant him such an authorization as we apparently either applaud the attempts of, belittling at best, or, usurping at worst, the constitutional expectations and authorities of the other branches of government. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
15yds4gibberish Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 19 minutes ago, HawgGoneIt said: Figured a little "smarts" has been sorely missed over here in the absence of Sportsnut and Drummer. Thought maybe dropping a little off over here could help fill the vast hole in the knowledge base left by them. Even if it was not my own smarts being dropped. I do enjoy a good read at times. That one turns out was a nice read to me. @HawgGoneIt. Plato is one my all time favorites. I think you might enjoy the original. As the author indicates, what he's writing about comes from Book VIII of The Republic -- Which contains one of the best descriptions of democracy ever written. It also describes the telltale signs of the rise of the demagogue -- he gets rid of former allies who have independent thoughts, he has no friends, only sycophants surround him, he is a slave to his passions, and is willing to act on those impulses etc.. Plato wrote from first-hand experience as he lived through the tyranny of the 30. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted November 12, 2019 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 8 minutes ago, 15yds4gibberish said: @HawgGoneIt. Plato is one my all time favorites. I think you might enjoy the original. As the author indicates, what he's writing about comes from Book VIII of The Republic -- Which contains one of the best descriptions of democracy ever written. It also describes the telltale signs of the rise of the demagogue -- he gets rid of former allies who have independent thoughts, he has no friends, only sycophants surround him, he is a slave to his passions, and is willing to act on those impulses etc.. Plato wrote from first-hand experience as he lived through the tyranny of the 30. The similarities were not lost on me in the light of current events and revelations from authors like Nikki Haley and Anonymous. Maybe even all of that was the reason I dropped that take off over here, to tickle the intellects here, as it were. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 1 hour ago, HawgGoneIt said: I suppose that this would be the point where we stepped into the fray of debating "constitutional republic" or "representative democracy." I figure there has been more fore-fathers and leaders call what we have a democracy moreso than a republic. Whether that amounts to a hill of beans in this day and time or not, I don't know, but, I do expect that the facts would/could be disputed as is the norm today. I do also suppose that regardless of how circular that debate could be, our current leader fancies himself as a supreme leader, and so many of us are apparently willing to grant him such an authorization as we apparently either applaud the attempts of, belittling at best, or, usurping at worst, the constitutional expectations and authorities of the other branches of government. If it was Trump’s aim to suppress dissent (it’s not), he sure is doing a damn poor job of it. We do not have a democracy. The government is designed very specifically to frustrate the passions of a momentary majority. A democracy could dispense with rights having a majority at any given time. Our constitution can be altered, but only with a painstaking process. But you know that. You just wanted once again to crap on Trump and those who support him. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
World Citizen Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 50 minutes ago, Bormio said: If it was Trump’s aim to suppress dissent (it’s not), he sure is doing a damn poor job of it. We do not have a democracy. The government is designed very specifically to frustrate the passions of a momentary majority. A democracy could dispense with rights having a majority at any given time. Our constitution can be altered, but only with a painstaking process. But you know that. You just wanted once again to crap on Trump and those who support him. I think the whistleblower would disagree with you. Trump has no interest in hearing what others have to say especially if it runs counter to his. The recently fired Col. Vindman may feel 'suppressed' as well. So basically everyone who can give advice or counsel to Trump is gone and not only that but they soon become an enemy and a never Trumper. He knows more than anybody and only he can fix things, according to him, and you all believe him. Anyone who thinks they alone can fix the worlds problems is delusional at best. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted November 12, 2019 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 10 hours ago, Bormio said: If it was Trump’s aim to suppress dissent (it’s not), he sure is doing a damn poor job of it. We do not have a democracy. The government is designed very specifically to frustrate the passions of a momentary majority. A democracy could dispense with rights having a majority at any given time. Our constitution can be altered, but only with a painstaking process. But you know that. You just wanted once again to crap on Trump and those who support him. Suppress dissent directly or just chip away at the constitutional authorities of the other branches of government and the long standing institutions to raucous applause and encouragement from his supporters? Of at least one, he is guilty, as are his supporters, at both his political rallies and on here daily. Frustrating the "momentary majority" does not mean this isn't a democracy, as, "momentary majorities" each make their own marks, some permanent, some perhaps permanently weakening or damaging, on this representative democracy as a whole. See the previous paragraph. Defecating on anyone was not my intent. Having folks stop and maybe think about things from a historical angle was more likely the intent. It's not so easy to look at situations or moments in time when emotionally involved in them directly. My intent was nothing more than to get people thinking about something more than the moment, where they all appear to be entrapped. The fact is, all of this same type of stuff we see now has great similarities to something that has happened before. See the OP. I guess it could be debateable whether asking the president or his supporters to think outside of the supposed apparent "momentary majority" could be an insult though. If it is, I do sincerely apologize as it wasn't meant as such. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedZone Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 10 hours ago, HawgGoneIt said: I do enjoy a good read at times. That one turns out was a nice read to me. Powerful read actually. Sadly a "read" best suited for a more mature and educated audience. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedZone Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 6 minutes ago, RedZone said: Powerful read actually. Sadly a "read" best suited for a more mature and educated audience. "Meathead threads" work well here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorCalRuss Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 2 hours ago, RedZone said: Powerful read actually. Sadly a "read" best suited for a more mature and educated audience. Shouldn’t you be at your sons school recruiting for your next clan rally? Drop any N bombs lately Clyde? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueliner Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 2 minutes ago, NorCalRuss said: Shouldn’t you be at your sons school recruiting for your next clan rally? Drop any N bombs lately Clyde? I thought that little bitch was "gone" after his last little middle-schoolgirl, meltdown, tantrum, dramatic-exit. I guess he's a racist POS AND a liar. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorCalRuss Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 35 minutes ago, Blueliner said: I thought that little bitch was "gone" after his last little middle-schoolgirl, meltdown, tantrum, dramatic-exit. I guess he's a racist POS AND a liar. Typical liberal clown show. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedZone Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 1 hour ago, NorCalRuss said: Shouldn’t you be at your sons school recruiting for your next clan rally? Drop any N bombs lately Clyde? Shouldn't you and bluedot be in the popular daily "Kill a damn Muslim thread", mtnjohn" Yes, we know who you are!.....coward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorCalRuss Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 1 hour ago, RedZone said: Shouldn't you and bluedot be in the popular daily "Kill a damn Muslim thread", mtnjohn" Yes, we know who you are!.....coward. Looks like your summer camp is growing racist pussy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted November 12, 2019 Report Share Posted November 12, 2019 So I'm curious anyone going to address the fact that the whistleblower collected illegal funds???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AztecPadre Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 On 11/11/2019 at 3:01 PM, HawgGoneIt said: At the dawn of democracy, Plato foresaw an unfortunate end. vangelis aragiannis/Shutterstock.com Why tyranny could be the inevitable outcome of democracy Lawrence Torcello, Rochester Institute of Technology November 11, 2019 9.11am EST Plato, one of the earliest thinkers and writers about democracy, predicted that letting people govern themselves would eventually lead the masses to support the rule of tyrants. When I tell my college-level philosophy students that in about 380 B.C. he asked “does not tyranny spring from democracy,” they’re sometimes surprised, thinking it’s a shocking connection. But looking at the modern political world, it seems much less far-fetched to me now. In democratic nations like Turkey, the U.K., Hungary, Brazil and the U.S., anti-elite demagogues are riding a wave of populism fueled by nationalist pride. It is a sign that liberal constraints on democracy are weakening. To philosophers, the term “liberalism” means something different than it does in partisan U.S. politics. Liberalism as a philosophy prioritizes the protection of individual rights, including freedom of thought, religion and lifestyle, against mass opinion and abuses of government power. What went wrong in Athens? In classical Athens, the birthplace of democracy, the democratic assembly was an arena filled with rhetoric unconstrained by any commitment to facts or truth. So far, so familiar. Aristotle and his students had not yet formalized the basic concepts and principles of logic, so those who sought influence learned from sophists, teachers of rhetoric who focused on controlling the audience’s emotions rather than influencing their logical thinking. There lay the trap: Power belonged to anyone who could harness the collective will of the citizens directly by appealing to their emotions rather than using evidence and facts to change their minds. Pericles gives a speech in Athens. Philipp von Foltz/Wikimedia Commons Manipulating people with fear In his “History of the Peloponnesian War,” the Greek historian Thucydides provides an example of how the Athenian statesman Pericles, who was elected democratically and not considered a tyrant, was nonetheless able to manipulate the Athenian citizenry: “Whenever he sensed that arrogance was making them more confident than the situation merited, he would say something to strike fear into their hearts; and when on the other hand he saw them fearful without good reason, he restored their confidence again. So it came about that what was in name a democracy was in practice government by the foremost man.” Misleading speech is the essential element of despots, because despots need the support of the people. Demagogues’ manipulation of the Athenian people left a legacy of instability, bloodshed and genocidal warfare, described in Thucydides’ history. That record is why Socrates – before being sentenced to death by democratic vote – chastised the Athenian democracy for its elevation of popular opinion at the expense of truth. Greece’s bloody history is also why Plato associated democracy with tyranny in Book VIII of “The Republic.” It was a democracy without constraint against the worst impulses of the majority. Comment on this article Lawrence Torcello Associate Professor of Philosophy, Rochester Institute of Technology Lawrence Torcello does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment. Rochester Institute of Technology provides funding as a member of The Conversation US. Great post brother! Love to learn about that era. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 On 11/11/2019 at 10:47 PM, Bormio said: If it was Trump’s aim to suppress dissent (it’s not), he sure is doing a damn poor job of it. We do not have a democracy. The government is designed very specifically to frustrate the passions of a momentary majority. A democracy could dispense with rights having a majority at any given time. Our constitution can be altered, but only with a painstaking process. But you know that. You just wanted once again to crap on Trump and those who support him. It worked in Rome for a long time too, but not very long in the Weimar Republic. Imagine if Trump wasn't a clown but a Caesar or a Hitler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
concha Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 7 hours ago, Belly Bob said: It worked in Rome for a long time too, but not very long in the Weimar Republic. Imagine if Trump wasn't a clown but a Caesar or a Hitler. Imagine if the Democratic Party Cavalcade of Morons actually had evidence of something. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSFBfan Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 To compare trump to Hitler is such a dumb argument 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bormio Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 41 minutes ago, HSFBfan said: To compare trump to Hitler is such a dumb argument Intellectually vacuous. The refuge of people who have lost the argument 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belly Bob Posted December 9, 2019 Report Share Posted December 9, 2019 6 hours ago, HSFBfan said: To compare trump to Hitler is such a dumb argument 5 hours ago, Bormio said: Intellectually vacuous. The refuge of people who have lost the argument What argument? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hardcore Troubador Posted December 10, 2019 Report Share Posted December 10, 2019 On 11/11/2019 at 9:23 PM, HawgGoneIt said: I suppose that this would be the point where we stepped into the fray of debating "constitutional republic" or "representative democracy." I figure there has been more fore-fathers and leaders call what we have a democracy moreso than a republic. Whether that amounts to a hill of beans in this day and time or not, I don't know, but, I do expect that the facts would/could be disputed as is the norm today. I do also suppose that regardless of how circular that debate could be, our current leader fancies himself as a supreme leader, and so many of us are apparently willing to grant him such an authorization as we apparently either applaud the attempts of, belittling at best, or, usurping at worst, the constitutional expectations and authorities of the other branches of government. THIS close to keeping your thread interesting... ...that being said thank you for posting the initial article. As you noted, a good read. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.