Posted on 05/26/2003 7:31:17 AM PDT by TheWillardHotel
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:09:56 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Thanks for your input, since we have beat this thread to death I'll end it with what I've stated before "we will have to agree to disagree". take care, TL
It's not a matter of uniformity of thought. What Warthog, Hanson and I are arguing (or maybe it's just me) is that the concept of individual rights and liberty will grow when the land and climate favours farming by small independent landholders, (Greece, Italy, Northern Europe) rather than collectivist agriculture.
I don't place all that much reverence on what Jefferson et.al said abour Greek and Roman ideals as the source.
1. The 18/19th centuries were very pro-Classical world times
2. While they may have had respect for Classical world ideals (I think Aristotle's Politics is one of the great works on government), such respect would not have found acceptance if there wasn't an instinctive understanding in the society.
As a previous poster said other cultures just don't understand what "liberty" means.
Or as P J O'Rouke said in the Forward to the British edition of Parliament of Whores "Foreigners may believe in individualism in some theoretical way, the way you and I believe in the Big Bang. But we are *individuals*".
3. And while there is evidence of revolting English commoners frequently maintaining their rights from 1066 on, there is not so much from the Classical world.
Indeed, while the Roman world succummed to an increasing tax burden without complaint, the two biggest incidents in England (1640s) and America (1770s) occurred when the populace decided that the Government was introducing illegitimate *new* taxation, which it had no right to so do.
4. What I am arguing is that the centuries of Empire in the Greek and Roman world had destroyed the concept of liberty there.
the ideas of Rome and Greece DID "die" (but strangely not in Italy and the Byzantine empire [to a much less extent than Italy]-where the ideas of representative government continued to exist and flourish,
I find the idea that the Eastern Roman Empire was in any way "representative government", well, the word Byzantine comes to mind. It was an Oriental Despotism as alien to the Western liberal democractic tradition as the Court of King Solomon.
Yes, a matter of extreme degrees here, I admit, but I have stated the same of the All-thing and other parliments in Northern Europe not funtioning as representative bodies, but more as facades for soverign rule.(and yes, you are right that they are much closer to our modern model than any other, and most did evolve back into true representative bodies-as the ones in the East died). Again thanks for the input-I currently don't have anything else to add except you will enjoy those books, they are not right on our topic, but give a good overview of that period and it's long term results. TL
BUMP
Y'know, you really DO need reading lessons. I haven't "moved" anywhere. My original use of "Viking" was imprecise, not fully expressing exactly what I meant, and quickly corrected in later postings. Nor does my position require "uniformity of thought throughout the area". I fully realize that there was wide variability over the geographical area of "PLINES" Europe. Nonethelss, throughout the enire period, there is a strain of thought that "free men have rights", from the earliest days of the cultural milieu. To specifically use Vikings--they were "freemen and thanes", not "kings, lords, nobles, and serfs". Even during the period of monarchy, the monarchy in the "PLINES" area was not as "absolute" as, for instance, in southern and central Europe. Some will say that was because the monarchs were enlightened--I say that was because those monarchs knew that their "subjects" believed that they had rights not flowing from the monarchy, and if they had tried Louis IV style governance, they too would have "lost their heads".
"It is indeed unfortunate that you choose the route of intellectual laziness-I'm going to assume your university or college or wherever you received your education in things medieval allowed such things."
Now you are being stupid. The problem isn't "intellectual laziness"--it's one of TIME. I'm part owner of a small, high-tech venture, currently working on research in detection of bio-warfare agents (and some other similar projects). I'm doing good to spend twenty minutes or so a day on FR. I simply don't have the extra time to go back into my library into various references on an area of "hobby" interest and post footnotes here.
Nonetheless, thanks for your time and your insights, I mean with no disrespect that you DO have a great grasp of what you speak. Ill have to continue further study elsewhere. Soldiers, especially officers, don't have much time, either. Good luck on your business ventures. TL
Oh, I'm perfectly willing to indulge in "reasonable discourse" when you decide to engage in some. FYI, my writing skills are excellent, but I don't typically choose to exercise full "academic" rigor in the give and take on this forum--reserving the mental energy it takes for such to scientific papers at "work" tasks. I come here for news and some relaxation.
My insights and comments here are mostly based on impressions gained from 40 years of reading into pre-history and archeology (Egypt, Mesopotamia, early Greece, Minos, and Celtic Europe) and some connections from there into historic Europe rather than systematic academic study, so I can't cite "chapter and verse" without doing more non-work-related research than I feel I legitimately have time to indulge in.
How to run a prosperous technological civilization, a successful democracy, a military force that would require, oh, about .023 seconds to convert the entire Spartan army into a red stain. I think Euclid might learn a thing or two about higher mathematics.
If a time portal were to be opened between our two societies, people would be coming from ancient Greece to flip cheeseburgers in LA and no one would be going the other way, save for a few misbegotten scholars who'd miss toilet paper soon enough.
As for Aristotle, the greatest of all Greeks, he would be found driving a taxi and while attending night courses at UCLA on how to write screenplays.
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on or off the
"Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list or GGG weekly digest
-- Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
see ottoman empire and 400 years of slavery.
Seriously, did you know the first draft if the post revolution 1821 greek constitution was drafted by a greek schollar and THOMAS JEFFERSON in paris? The european monarchs got scared about the spread of americanism and imposed a constitutional monarchy on the flegling nation.
Greece currently has gasoline refinery, pipeline industries which make them a way point for shipping. They ports in Pireas and Thessaloniki have cargo shipps comming and going every day.
They also only have 11 million people and all the stuck on stupid problems of the EU.
The Greek problem is they have stopped trying to be Greek and have become bad Europeans.
Footnotes: During WW II Greeks in the USA sold the most war bonds. In one survey in the 1970's (ok its old) Greek voters trended close to 70% conservative. Greeks did not vote for Dukakis in overwhelming numbers.
http://www.the11thday.com
If anybody wants to see why Winston Churchil said "Greek don't fight like Heroes, Heros fight like Greeks."
actually one of them founded ebay.
another owns a baseball team.
another was refered to by the Kennedys as "that swarthy Greek."
They also sold more war bonds in WW II that any other group.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.