Thus we pretty much only find bad men in politics. Power corrupts, and it attracts the already corrupt. In the first case, those honest few who innocently pursue it hoping to better things, often end up revolted by it and leaving, or turned by it into what they hate.
In the second case, what better position to seek, if one wishes to be a criminal unmolested by justice, than the seat of 'justice' itself?
People should be political for only as long as it does not harm their ability to think and speak independently. If everything in someone's life is done to please the political side they are on that is the wrong order of priorities and democracy is built on every member of the public being able to exercise judgment based on their own experience.
Thank you for this well-written foundational article. As Thucydides described the cycle of history, Athens being more sophisticated and socially weaker, fell to Sparta. The cycle appears to snowball. In modern times we experience pariahdom, whether based on religion, ideology, or ethnocentrism, challenges the more sophisticated and aspiring democracies’ existence. This includes technological pressures. We need to figure out how to solve pariahs, a word with double meanings.
1. outcast, isolation, disadvantage
2. expansiveness, defiance of accepted norms, laws.
Without solving this dilemma we are continually marching to the large festival drum.
I think it's worth remembering that, by the time Stoicism and Epicureanism appeared on the scene, politics for the average Joe was no longer very relevant. Democracy and freedom no longer thrived in Athens and people had very little or no influence on events. Of course, this doesn't mean the same applies to us today. But it does show what shaped the Stoic and especially Epicurean attitude towards politics.
Those who refuse to engage in politics will be ruled by their inferiors
"Good men do not wish to rule their fellow men."
Thus we pretty much only find bad men in politics. Power corrupts, and it attracts the already corrupt. In the first case, those honest few who innocently pursue it hoping to better things, often end up revolted by it and leaving, or turned by it into what they hate.
In the second case, what better position to seek, if one wishes to be a criminal unmolested by justice, than the seat of 'justice' itself?
I concur - I regularly say that those who want power are the last who should have it…
All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing.
People should be political for only as long as it does not harm their ability to think and speak independently. If everything in someone's life is done to please the political side they are on that is the wrong order of priorities and democracy is built on every member of the public being able to exercise judgment based on their own experience.
Well said!
Thank you for this well-written foundational article. As Thucydides described the cycle of history, Athens being more sophisticated and socially weaker, fell to Sparta. The cycle appears to snowball. In modern times we experience pariahdom, whether based on religion, ideology, or ethnocentrism, challenges the more sophisticated and aspiring democracies’ existence. This includes technological pressures. We need to figure out how to solve pariahs, a word with double meanings.
1. outcast, isolation, disadvantage
2. expansiveness, defiance of accepted norms, laws.
Without solving this dilemma we are continually marching to the large festival drum.
I think it's worth remembering that, by the time Stoicism and Epicureanism appeared on the scene, politics for the average Joe was no longer very relevant. Democracy and freedom no longer thrived in Athens and people had very little or no influence on events. Of course, this doesn't mean the same applies to us today. But it does show what shaped the Stoic and especially Epicurean attitude towards politics.
Thank you - yes it’s important to remember the historical and cultural milieu in which these ideas rose
Could you, please, expand on what was the political dituation, the historical and social milieu?
Yes! Though I think that will make a full article :-) I’m currently writing something on Epicurus, and his context, so I can expand on that.
встает вопрос про цену и про социальное расслоение или это другое уже особенно в эпоху очередных перемен
what is the difference between circular reasoning and irony? I don't understand the use of
"stratification". Aren't we all equal and individual?