this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2024
567 points (98.0% liked)

Comics

5909 readers
70 users here now

This is a community for everything comics related! A place for all comics fans.

Rules:

1- Do not violate lemmy.ml site-wide rules

2- Be civil.

3- If you are going to post NSFW content that doesn't violate the lemmy.ml site-wide rules, please mark it as NSFW and add a content warning (CW). This includes content that shows the killing of people and or animals, gore, content that talks about suicide or shows suicide, content that talks about sexual assault, etc. Please use your best judgement. We want to keep this space safe for all our comic lovers.

4- No Zionism or Hasbara apologia of any kind. We stand with Palestine πŸ‡΅πŸ‡Έ . Zionists will be banned on sight.

5- The moderation team reserves the right to remove any post or comments that it deems a necessary for the well-being and safety of the members of this community, and same goes with temporarily or permanently banning any user.

Guidelines:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I'd vote for Diogenes, but I know he'd resent me for it

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

In 1930s Germany an edition of The Republic was printed with a swastika on the cover.

They really liked what he had to say about an ethnicly superior society where the government controlled all commerce and decided what children could be exposed to in school.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The really important part missing from the cartoon is that the philosopher kings were not allowed to own anything and all the wealth was to sit with workers. The idea is that those making decisions shouldn't be in a position to personally benefit from it. It's not a terrible idea

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Not owning anything? Like Diogenes?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

Well, no. Diogenes was a twat. Plato wasn't expecting people to be idiots. His idea was that philosopher kings would have to live amongst the ordinary people of the state. They would be dependent on the good will of the governed.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

He's right though. People are stupid and panderer dictaror wannabes continuously get what they want in democracies because people are too dumb to see whats happening

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

That is bullshit. He is not right.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

And what is happening right now in the US? And in the Netherlands? And Canada? And has been happening in the UK for decades?

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Hover-over text of ExistentialComics' comic:

Some people have called Plato the first totalitarian thinker, but if you look at what Democracy is producing these days it's hard to not think he had a bit of a point...

And text beneath comic:

Also, my Dad is trying to raise some money for a surgery, I already posted this before and we met the goal, but then he contracted dengue fever so the surgury had to get delayed, so we are trying to raise a little more money to cover those expenses. If you could spare a few dollars it would really help.

As for Plato, he criticized democracy heavily, claiming that it gave people too much freedom, and if anyone could be elected by the ignorant masses, it would be too possible for selfish people who only wanted power and wealth to get into power. Democracy, ironically, would inevitably lead to tyranny and demagogues. He thought a better system would be for the wisest, most virtuous, and most selfless people to govern society, which of course would be philosophers like himself. How this system was immune to corruption is a little unclear to me, but given what's going on with democracies lately you can probably at least say he has some good points.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

How this system was immune to corruption is a little unclear to me

Only further proof of democracy's failure.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 months ago

Greece had democracy too, and it ran into the exact same basket of problems we experience today.

Candidates would smear each other through rumor campaigns, foreigners would be scapegoated for domestic problems, religious organizations would lobby for special privileges by promising their constituents' support during election season, wealthy men would bribe whomever won to guarantee them favorable treatment, and large portions of the population were disenfranchised in order to maintain a patriarchal nationalist system built on the back of slave labor.

Consequentially, people lost faith in democracy as a mechanism for selecting popular rulers and became increasingly enamored with the military as a source of domestic income, social advancement, and national pride. The Greek system ultimately failed in the face of oligarchy during the Peloponnesian Wars, reemerged in a reformed state for almost a century, and then collapsed entirely following the conquest of the Macedonians.

Plato's idealism not withstanding, his criticism is worth reading because it demonstrates a repeated pattern of human behaviors that modern political groups can learn from and respond to.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago

Fun fact, when he was losing in a debate, he interrupted his opponent by flexing

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί