Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by 151, Nov 23, 2008.

  1. 151


    I wonder if we wouldn't be better off with a society modeled a little closer to that of Sparta.

    I think it would have to be more of an ideology that policy based society.

    With policies to limit the power of the strong over the weak. But never policies to prop up and support weak ideologies.

    Trust me this is way over my head. At least I know that though and am willing to submit it to you smarter people here.

    The issues are separate at this point in time but the reason I even mention this is because I am getting tired of being forced by laws and regulations to support those weaker than me.

    But I am also tired of those stronger than me thinking or being forced to support me.

    I truly feel over time we are not doing each other any favors.

    Lets regulate corruption out and let the strong survive.

    It very well could be that only a new great depression will allow great change to take place.

    The $64K question is in what way are we going to change ourselves.

    Or maybe it is in to what pasture are we going to let ourselves be herded.
  2. Ignore the culture. Train yourself to be a Spartan.
  3. Go read The Prince. Basically democratic ideology pushes towards two opposite extremes. When one extreme is pushed to the limits a leader and/or party will become hated. When the opposite extreme is pushed beyond it's limits a leader and/or party will become contemptible. Each of these extremes it should be fair to say relate to far left and far right ideologies.

    On one extreme the leaders become hated and the other leaders become contemptible. So what is deserving of hatred and what is deserving of contempt? What is most deserving of hatred is to be rapacious and a usurper of property and the women of his subjects. Whenever a leader does not take away the property or honor of men they live content. So what is deserving of contempt? What makes a leader contemptible is to be held vairable, light, effeminate, pusillanimous and irresolute.

    So what is the best philosophy of rule? The best philosophy is a mix between the two. A ruler must be a lion and a fox. He must be able to endure every trouble yet he must not rule with such authority that he makes his people hate him. On the other side he must be able to represent his people yet not with such sensitivity that he becomes indecisive and variable. One without the other is not lasting.