Democracy utterly BTFO

Democracy utterly BTFO

youtube.com/watch?v=fLJBzhcSWTk

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=fSQgCy_iIcc
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Uneducated idiots ruin democracy? basically how we got Drumpf

Ancient Greek Democracy ≠ Modern Democracy
Democracy is system best suited for small cities. Once you apply it to countries its a nightmare

The problem is that the rich elite would run the world

...

agreed. democracy should be small and localized only.

The timing of the video makes it clear this guy is just as butthurt as the rest of the liberals.

>We have forgotten this distinction, between intellectual democracy and democracy by birthright. We have given democracy to all without connecting it to wisdom, and Socrates knew exactly where that would lead; to a system the Greeks feared above all: demagoguery.

In other words, a democracy is only rational and intellectual when it leads to results he agrees with.

Wouldn't bernie sanders be the sweet shop owner then?

He wanted to give free shit and legalise weed.

yes but you can't expect a libtard to see that

his point (Plato) still stands even though this libtard is using Trump as example instead of Bernie.

On the DL he's right tho.

Federal government should have little say in the politics of states. Federal government should be primarily concerned with maintaining the freedom of the states.

States should be kept small and be allowed large variation in their policies. This way people can freely move to a state that suits their requirements and desires.

youtube.com/watch?v=fSQgCy_iIcc
>at this point, we're all should be marxists

>States should be kept small and be allowed large variation in their policies. This way people can freely move to a state that suits their requirements and desires.
this is exactly what I always say. but it's like people don't want a happy life surrounded by likeminded people.

The elitists have come up with a narrow set of rules which suit them and they spend all their effort "educating" people on why they are the best
>disarming the population
>open borders
>free trade
>high taxes
>big government
>nanny state
>police state
>high pay checks for politicians

Then in the case of the US people get sick of it and vote for someone who represents the exact opposite of their rules and they start flinging shit everywhere about how awful it is.

People believe it because the other side promised them some candies.

True.

>Implying the state doesn't teach its citizens how to vote right now through the education system and the media.
It would be best to stop giving people voting rights for free and instead make sure they invest in the country first. That way they have an incentive to vote responsibly toward tax distribution and improving the country.

>>Implying the state doesn't teach its citizens how to vote right now through the education system and the media.
the video literally mentions this

I think Platon belived that there could only be one 'objectively' good society, and others societies would automatically suck.

Also, since he's a faggot, he made it his bussiness to 'help' other societies get closer to his dream republic. He'd would've probably done it by force if he could've.

At least Aristote understood that different people = different views of what's good and bad. Since everyone adapts his definition of good and bad to what suits him (and everyone is a selfish cunt), we might as well follow the majority and make the most happy. If we follow a bunch of 'selfless sages', they'll eventually get corrupted by power and fuck us all up.

As far as i can tell it promotes the idea of intellectual democracy in that only educated citizens should vote. That's what the college bit at the end was for, no? I'm just saying what use is letting only brainwashed idiots vote just because they've endured years of stay in an indoctrination camp.

>Democracy utterly BTFO

Kek. What a post to wake up to in the morning.

Remember: mob rule got Jesus killed!

The thing is though, the vox populi or voice of the people is, at least at times (e.g. when it isn't violently coerced or purely a product of manipulation), authoritative by nature. Power likewise ultimately rests in/with the people also by nature: hence if there is a general strike by a sufficiently large enough part of the population, the whole society shuts down. Hence Sup Forums is intuitively aware that a message, once it reaches enough people, reaches a point that it can no longer be ignored by "the elites" or "the establishment"; e.g., the gatekeepers in the MSM say or finally politically leaders actually have to address it. Hence shills try to obstruct a message before they reach a certain critical mass. People have a natural power and right to their own self-determination.

I think legitimate republics work because they are a balance between the reality of the voice of the people and objective law and order as opposed to mob or tyrannical rule. But at the end of the day even dictatorships still ultimately depend on the people, it's just that the critical mass you need to achieve in those societies is often much higher.

The thing is. Higher education nowadays has a leftist bias. The video has too, hinting at trump. What is the ultimate system for the people?

It's bait, but I'm sure it's 100% what the maker of the video had in mind.

>At least Aristote understood that different people = different views of what's good and bad.

I think Aristotle realized perfectly well that things like governmental forms or constitutions were in fact just social instruments for securing certain real ends or goods, some were worthless, some decent, a few others sometimes highly effective. The ends to be secured were things like justice, security, peace/defense and general harmony and prosperity.

It's the fucking democrats/libtards who typically make "democracy" an ultimate end in itself while consistently promoting things horribly unjust and objectively bad for people and society. Just look at what those faggots do to our culture.

>48% 52%Graphic
>Make Athens Great Again

Butthurt Leftist detected.

Aristotle was based.

>make "democracy" an ultimate end in itself
You know an ideology is cancerous when even the foundation (equality) is outright wrong. Yet they still pretend to believe in it in order to impose wealth redistribution and rules of conduct on those that have more.

implying it doesent.

Implying democracy isnt the favored system by elites and by jews in particular because the masses are easily controlled by the media and education system.

Cancerous channel full of bluepilled plebs unaware of the fact that they are the uninformed idiots who should not be voting.

Funny you should post this, I watched it as it came out and I already provoked a discussion about Trump in the comment section.

praise kek

This is retarded because even though rulers are chosen by the mob, the candidates and the people surrounding the rulers aren't. No matter how you put it, you'll get oligarchy, with or without democracy.

True story: Democracy was invented by Cleisthenes to prevent the rioting Athenian mob from killing him.

It was just a meme. Also, it was totally different compared to today. The only country running something remotely similar to the original idea of democracy is Switzerland.

checked. I saw that, too. Demagogue is just a phrase they use against people they disagree with, how is it irrational to point out the disastrous immigration policy in the US, if the majority of people believe that, and it is rational to believe in it, then is a candidate who references it a demagogue, or is some leftie just butthurt?

Too bad our educational institutions have been compromised.

thats only true in the current form of "democracy". Ancient Greek democracy is the only democracy. What we have now is selective oligarchy. In democratic Athens decisions were discussed and enforced by the population

The French revolution was a mistake.

(((compromised)))
oy vey muh six gorillion

this. I bet all the litard college students like this video, despite never giving much thought to any other philosophy.

Not true. People are not going to waste their time 500 people in a row talking about the problems of the city. Instead, you'd probably listen to one or two. These influential people are not necessarily chosen by popular support.

>The only country running something remotely similar to the original idea of democracy is Switzerland.
Maybe before 1970...

are you trying to say that a select few in Ancient Athens that decided the topics of discussion had more influence than the general populace? i struggle to understand your post

Because the population was scarce back then and the vote rights were not universal.

Today direct democracy would be unpragmatic.

I am saying that even in direct democracies, the influential people who can sway the vote start getting popular for some reason and then become truly popular because everybody is talking about them. This person now belongs on an oligarchy of very influential people and that initial "some reason" is why said person is popular. This is exactly what happens with those famous pundits, intellectuals or commentators you see on TV.

oh i agree with you. Democracy cant exist in the current era. i never implied a true democracy would be the idial political system for our current society though

thats the natural order of human life. Some people are born smarter than others and some of them have a personality that attracts others to their cause. You cant combat human nature.

i like how they try and tie it to trump, lol

cause crooked hillary was such a great choice

>contrasts women and POC with people waving national flags

yup not biased at all, also the best leaders know how to balance what people want and need - candy shop owner isn't necessarily entirely wrong since he shows you can't get people mobilised without appealing to desire

That's the point. And it's not solely about differences in ability but also differences in the platform that is given. The 500 people cannot all speak at once - you have to decide at which time, how long each one speaks or even who's allowed to speak, for instance. This might be key.

All democracies have a very strong non-democratic basis behind them.

>I think Platon belived that there could only be one 'objectively' good society, and others societies would automatically suck.
if there was a "good" and functioning society, others that would in comparison not be as good and in result worse than it and others would either move to it or copy it

it boils down to how large of a "society we are talking about and how we cut it up by religion, race or physical location (nation)

I'm actually keking so fucking hard at this video and the people agreeing with it. The ideal regime proposed by Socrates is the exact opposite of what they would want. A rigid class structure based on an arbitrary system. Your entire life is determined by what an elder decides your potential is when you are a toddler. You as the individual do not matter, doing your assigned job is what matters because that is what is "just". The entire human condition goes out of the window simply to ensure the city-state continues. The "republic" in the The Republic is actually kind of a weird communist military-controlled dictatorship thing ran by philospher-soldier-kings.

>according to Socrates giving birthright voting leads to demagoguery
No They feared the newfound freedom received from their 'oligarchic fathers' would leave the population feeling too free and they would become greedy with what they wanted. The state ultimately becomes anarchy. Voting's not involved here. The tyrant is the one who is able to gather power in this period and not want to release it. The way the video portrays the transition is just intellectually dishonest.

If they wanted to discuss a Greek philosopher to discuss democracy they should have talked about Aristotle. His views come from Socrates/Plato but it's much more nuanced and developed and it is much more agreeable to the modern condition.

I tend to think that people think that Demaguages are oportunistic and too reductionistic.

All politics are opportunistic.
Not sure what reductionism means in this context. You mean people think demagogues simplify things to appeal more attractive? That's been a "the thing" since they started televising presidential debates. The same journalists like the (((rosenblatts))) of HuffPo use that so they can come off as le educated, with their liberal arts degrees. USA needs a wall, nothing too difficult about that. Plain and simple, such an easy concept that the average Joe could understand it and vote for it, which they did.

Isnt the solution educating the people not fucking splinting its population into the elite and the plebs?
Socrates could have never imagined the modern education systems and the internet.
He was used to uneducated common people who couldnt write or read, didnt know shit as there were no mass availability to information, there werent even books yet. In his time you knew only what you could directly hear from other people around you, and information spread was slow.

If Socrates was brought back to life today he would notice that most people on his ship are smarter and more educated than the actual ship crew. He would change his mind, he seemed more open to debate then most people today.

Donald Trump talking about the issues of the common man=Demagogue
Bernie Sanders talking about the issues of the common man=Man of the people

ISIS to America=Terrorists
ISIS to ISIS supporters=holy fighters/freedom fighters.

It's semantics senpai.

>Trusting lefty Youtube

I'm sorry but the Internet and especially (((youtube))) is too untrustworthy

My thoughts exactly, it's just the journalists enabling faggots on kikebook to virtue-signal. kek wills it.

The channel's response to someone who was advocating fascism
>Fascism has a very strong hold on us emotionally: we all experienced authority in early childhood and it can be reassuring to fall back on an early helplessness and let a 'strong' person take control. But for Socrates, a wiser electorate is the answer - which is a beautiful and highly persuasive answer.

This dumbass didn't even read the fucking book.The system that Socrates advocates is pretty much fascism. The philosopher-king is an authority figure. The individual and the state become one.

People say that ''democracy isn't the problem, it's the culture''

That's crap, because if the government had to intervene with the culture, it be authoritarian.

That, or you just have males voting.

youve never been to america have you

Oh fuck off, american isnt much different form any other developed country.
You have the school dropouts, the rich, the poor, the uneducated violent blacks (ok we dont have those), but the average person is still educated and has access to both the web and tv news stations. If he stays ignorant he does it by his choice not by lack of information.
Also seeing that Trump won your country isnt in such a bad state.

Daily reminder that in glorious Latin Civilisation Circle the democracy is only for local counties and towns and the closest thing that we recently have to a proper Republic was Salazarian Portugal. Idea of democracy for masses, or equality of all is what got us where we are aka shthole that could've been great but it's not.

Also, if Socrates saw how those neosophist use his work and life to justify their sick ideas he would drink the poison even without vote.

The ultimate conclusion reached in The Republic, which this video mentioned, is that the best form of leadership is to select leaders from the top tier of society for certain terms by allowing the others in that top tier to vote. This was probably the most democratic you could practically get before the modern era, especially in states larger than one city, but now with industrial wealth we have public schools, and whether you think they're doing an adequate job right now I think it's perfectly possible to give everyone at the high school level an adequate education in civics.

I don't think I can adequately describe how triggered this video made me. You can just tell by his voice what kind of self-righteous cunt the author of the video is.

I'm sure three months ago he'd happily extoll the virtues of letting women and prisoners and immigrants vote. Or be the first one to argue that we need to make sure low income areas have an easier time voting.

The hypocrisy of these people sickens me, I honestly don't know how they sleep at night.

No, there is no clear-cut case being made by The Republic taken as a whole. The case that is presented is that the best leader would be a philosopher; but the point of contrast made throughout the entire dialogue is that 1) Socrates is the greatest philosopher and 2) Socrates would make a horrible leader.

Socrates' utopia was a communist commune without any culture.

Wasn't it the "philosopher king" concept that was the most popular?
But that seems rather self serving to tell a bunch of philosophers that they should rule athens. The whole thing is a circlejerk

I hope School of Life goes on to talk about how Socrates wasn't against slavery seeing as how Socrates' moral view on a just society is so applicable today.

I wonder if these libcucks realise the irony that Socrates' biggest fear of democracy was someone like Hillary getting elected via the votes of immigrants and former slaves. His precise fear was that the presence of large numbers of people who didn't have the nations interest at heart would swing the balance of power (gibs mes etc)

>The current year
>posting a video by 'the school of cucks'
Opinion discarded. Whoever makes these videos openly sings the praises of everything that's left politically. The only reason they talk shit about democracy is they hate the fact brexit happened and Trump got elected. Find one of their recent videos and they talk about 'muh fee fees, people don't know what's best for themselves fuck democracy, we lost!'

People only pretend to care what Socrates wrote because his name is Socrates and they want to feel smart with zero effort on their part.

If Socrates names was Dave, or Joe, nobody would give a single iota of SHIT about this faggots ramblings.

>The writings of JOE are so DEEP bro, like fuck society and shit!

>Donald Trump talking about the issues of the common man=Demagogue
>Bernie Sanders talking about the issues of the common man=Man of the people

This.

Both Bernie and Trump were populists, but each appealing to their own public.

>he stays ignorant he does it by his choice not by lack of information.

Well, would you say the majority of people spend a lot of time seeking information?

I admit it's been a few years but I specifically remember the conclusion reached regarding who should govern is that it should be a guardian elected by guardians, ruling for a set period, then retiring to take his place with the other guardians again.

I believe the philosopher king came from Aristotle, who taught the concept to Alexander the Great.

checked, kek is right. The west is in this fucking mess because of democracy. No loyalty except for getting votes. Democrats would be done if it wasn't for vote importation.

>spend a lot of time seeking information
That's their fault if they don't. However with the internet it's now much easier to be informed and get exposed differing viewpoints. And without it i highly doubt Trump presidency or Brexit would've happened.

No. They're just riding the waves of current events for views. Watch any of TSoL's vids and you find a remarkable lack of bias or Liberal Bullshit(tm). Especially their videos about archetecture and art which are redpilled as fuck.

Democracy is just argumentum ad populum fallacy