Oligarchy- A Historical Look from Plato's Dialogues

How Do You Stop a Oligarchy?

Was introduced from a "consumerism point of view." It was directed toward the idea of governments who "gather money" to operate "their ideal structures of government" while depleting the resources of the "private citizen for that government operation."

Tax grabs to support positons?

I am trying to orientate myself amidst the "politcal terrain" and would like nothing better then to be "set straight" to remove wrong thinking and directed toward finding a "just government?" How do you define a "just government?"

Searching for the "Ideal Government for the 21st Century?"

While one may of exhausted the challenge of a "logic forming apparatus to conclude in law" what becomes "self evident" comes under the "Aristotelean view of logic." What remains then, is to push forward with an "objective look" for a solution. What appeals to my mind after this exhaustion was to now consider the subject of,  "lateral movement" which is to produce "new creative moments" toward idea development for this new "21st Century view" in Law??

This was not inconsistent with Plato's Ideal from idea manifestation toward an ideal per say, but brings us much closer to understanding the relationship Plato had with Aristotle and the view I am pushng toward the future of societies.

Quote:

In this week's edition of The Interview, Edward de Bono tells Lyse Doucet how he became aware of the failings of conventional thought, how he has championed his new way to business leaders, politicians and children, and why he still wants to realise his dream of establishing a Palace of Thinking to encourage a revolution. See:The Interview

One does not discount the process through deliberation with rigour and analysis to arrive at this shift in perspective? Plato's dialogues serve to propel forward writing in the exchanges toward an ideal Plato himself had, yet this is not to say that the constructs development from such exchange could have not warranted , further examination under historical analysis.

Quote:

His contention is that just as language has allowed one generation to pass useful knowledge onto the next, it has also allowed dangerous myths and out-of-date ideas to become enshrined. See:Edward de Bono

I understood then the reference to Myths and out of date ideas in reference to previous commenter point on "purely logical or reductionist thinking" related too, the article placed for inspection and relates, Edward_de_Bono-"has set out to challenge the logical, truth-seeking process established by the Greek philosophers 2,400 years ago and cemented in Western culture in the Middle Ages by the church."

It would be interesting then to see what Edward DeBono has to say about "justice as an ideal" and it's relation to current laws of countries in place?

This to me would suggest that a future forming perspective according to a timeline from the "past to the future" is an evolutionary one and that such a trend in politics would have to coincide with the development of the laws associated with the governance of that country.

Quote:

The concept of "governance" is not new. It is as old as human civilization. Simply put "governance" means: the process of decision-making and the process by which decisions are implemented (or not implemented). Governance can be used in several contexts such as corporate governance, international governance, national governance and local governance.

What is the the trademark then of Good Governance?

Logic forming and reductionistic thinking has taken us to this point in time. Then such a request to lateral thinking would have to include all that came before Good Governance in order for Good Governance to evolve to what it is today. What Good Governance shall become in terms of it's laws in the 21st Century??

Quote:

Let proportion be found not only in numbers, but also in sounds, weights, times and positions, and whatever force there is. Leonardo Da Vinci

First off, I wanted you to know that this post of yours has been governing the process of opinion of mine toward the 21st century view. If you hold that thought you will understand the ideas conceptually being put forward for examination in response to your post.

Quote:

Plato prove that justice does not depend upon a chance, convention or upon external force. It is the right condition of the human soul by the very nature of man when seen in the fullness of his environment. It is in this way that Plato condemned the position taken by Glaucon that justice is something which is external. According to Plato, it is internal as it resides in the human soul. "It is now regarded as an inward grace and its understanding is shown to involve a study of the inner man." It is, therefore, natural and no artificial. It is therefore, not born of fear of the weak but of the longing of the human soul to do a duty according to its nature.Plato's Concept Of Justice: An Analysis Bold was added by me for emphasis.

I am going to deal more directly here as I go along with your points.

sknguy II wrote:

I think it's also important to be aware that most social systems, if not all, have been developed by males. Our economic, government, and legal systems have all revolved around a model of conflict resolution through competition. And competition has long been the nature of male "decision making" in the past.

I used the following quote from my research for examination so that you understand that what you are saying is as you say. I look backward in time and see where this is so and my choice of quotes that follow exemplifies this.

Quote:

A just society must be governed by men of reason.Inventing a new social myth to replace the old. Socrates calls those who rule for the benefit of the whole society and not to it's detriment golden men: in his myth they rightfully govern the men of silver and bronze. This is the myth of metals(415a ff.) the centrepiece of a second accusation that has dogged Plato through the centuries. Plato made clear that merit and not heredity defined the gold man and that gold could be found in all parts of society. Nonetheless, Plato has never escaped the charge that he imposes upon society an elitist and authoritarian rule. The charge is pressed even though in Book IV Plato makes justice in the individual the condition of justice in society.--Pg 16, Para 2 and 3, of Plato the Republic Introduction by Richard W. Sterling and William C. Scott.

So it is more that we find some common bond beyond the gender issue that we can say, yes, I recognize what is being said, and that another standard is being set here. Obama's use of Lincoln's speech, is not without it's merit that a higher ideal has been set.

sknguy II wrote:

:I think that any international legal system in the future will not only need to be restorative, as opposed to competitive, in nature, it will also need to be pluralist in its core values. What I mean is that the present system is very rights or individualist based. Thus, it needs to be as adept and functional at administering the "Law" from alternative worldviews.

In a sense I had assigned justice in terms of an ole notion of Plato's according the elements of Gold and silver, since indeed, these are monetary values in the elevation of ideals that one does not assign to men only, but to woman as well. In early history Newton sought to understand the elemental nature of our disposition toward, that such relations were explored in terms of Chymistry and there prospects in the earth. As ill sounding to the science person, it was a serious attempt as well to understand the process that unfolds according to that "gravitating experience" that we see relationships between these elemental values and the heights of aspiration that one would espouse about societies of men and woman. That it could espouse Einsteinian relations to pretty girls and such according a "space of time" again helped to solidify what experience can do according too, and in this a "baser revelation," to what is earthy indeed. So indeed "not an individualist notion," but of an occupation toward justice and what I felt in Archimedes laws, that differences in perspective were revealing in conceptual possibilities with regard to problem solving, and truth.

sknguy II wrote:

In another thread here on babble, a poster quoted an article that noted Evo Morales "will continue trying to get the international community to acknowledge the rights of Mother Earth". I think it's a good example of how current thought, concerning the basis of our relationship with the Earth, as property, conflicts with the notion that the Earth is an entity unto itself, with entitlements of its own. Although, I'm sure the Earth would 'roll-eyes' at this notion of entitlement. Not only are we western centric in our thoughts, but human centric as well.

I cannot disagree with you again here. And that if I were to move forward it would be on the basis of this interrelationship of what is held in mind and what happens externally in the world, has it's basis in what first is entertained. But before I deal with that directly,  I wanted to put something here and illustrate, for the ideal of views toward the 21st century that are compelling in terms of,  not the competitiveness but of the "absence of" in relation to a gold standard.

Quote:

Galileo Galilei

In 1586 at the age of 22, Galileo (1564-1642) wrote a short treatise entitled La Bilancetta (“The Little Balance”). He was skeptical of Vitruvius’s account of how Archimedes determined the fraud in Hiero's crown and in this treatise presented his own theory based on Archimedes’ Law of the Lever and Law of Buoyancy. He also included a description of a hydrostatic balance that determined the precise composition of an alloy of two metals.

Just as it is well known to anyone who takes the care to read ancient authors that Archimedes discovered the jeweler’s theft in Hiero’s crown, it seems to me the method which this great man must have followed in this discovery has up to now remained unknown. Some authors have written that he proceeded by immersing the crown in water, having previously and separately immersed equal amounts [in weight] of very pure gold and silver, and, from the differences in their making the water rise or spill over, he came to recognize the mixture of gold and silver of which the crown was made. But this seems, so to say, a crude thing, far from scientific precision; and it will seem even more so to those who have read and understood the very subtle inventions of this divine man in his own writings; from which one most clearly realizes how inferior all other minds are to Archimedes’s and what small hope is left to anyone of ever discovering things similar to his [discoveries]. I may well believe that, a rumor having spread that Archimedes had discovered the said theft by means of water, some author of that time may have then left a written record of this fact; and that the same [author], in order to add something to the little that he had heard, may have said that Archimedes used the water in that way which was universally believed. But my knowing that this way was altogether false and lacking that precision which is needed in mathematical questions made me think several times how, by means of water, one could exactly determine the mixture of two metals. And at last, after having carefully gone over all that Archimedes demonstrates in his books On Floating Bodies and Equilibrium, a method came to my mind which very accurately solves our problem. I think it probable that this method is the same that Archimedes followed, since, besides being very accurate, it is based on demonstrations found by Archimedes himself. Galileo and the Scientific Revolution by Laura Fermi and Gilberto Bernardini (Translated with the assistance of Cyril Stanley Smith) Basic Books, Inc., New York, 1961 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 61-7486 SEE:The Golden Crown Sources

I will need to take some time to finish.

sknguy II wrote:

In perhaps an alternative worldview, relationships wouldn't be based upon the boundaries of personal and collective entitlements. Relationships can be based upon the boundaries of personal and collective responsibilities. So that, rather than having a court consider the relationships of rights, a court would be charged with weighing the relationships and boundaries of obligations.

Again with reference to centrist, a Copernican principle or an inverse square law, this has not been defined in full regalia of the possibilities in terms of development by what Plato said about looking "internally into the soul"..."According to Plato, it is internal as it resides in the human soul. "It is now regarded as an inward grace and its understanding is shown to involve a study of the inner man"...reveals a turn toward recognition of finding this underlying structure within reach. In all individuals, however diverse in multicultural relations.

sknguy II wrote:

In most decision making processes used today, as in democracy, personal benefit often determines the outcome of whatever "decision making" is done. What would a decision making process look like if environmental impact were the first order of consideration? What if personal benefit wasn't the point of electing representatives? That our "X" represented the interests of the future, not ourselves? Oh... and by environment I'm meaning our social environment as well.

Here's what some people do not realize while the LHC is warming up again. The research done there has some impact on how we view "cosmic particle collisions" here on earth, as there is a "particle shower" and experimental testing from these experimental collisions to what is seen in relation to the earth from those same particle showers.

What is being showered upon it?

Cerenkov radiation in SNO or Ice as a "faster then light medium?" A preparation then, for understanding our cosmos and our place within it. What is this impact have in relation to environmental conditions on earth?

We may call Earth Gaia, or "our home," yet it exists independent of our probing for the facts and considerations. The future seen then might reveal, that no room is left. An advancement then, toward colonialism in space travel for the future? What governmental rule shall extend toward colonizing "our universe" without appropriate "universal justice" in appeal?

sknguy II wrote:

I'm unsure that the UN's model for good governance is a sustainable model for all worldviews. But I haven't learned enough of my Anishnabek perspectives to be sure that the UN's model would be consistent with Anishnabe rules on personal governance. However, I may stand to be corrected. So, I also don't think that a one size fits all model would be possible in the future. Only systems that are either multilingual and pluralist, or at least acknowledge and differ to the differences in others, will be functional for the future. I think that presently our limitations are our cultures.