HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » freshwest » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Fri Dec 10, 2010, 10:36 PM
Number of posts: 53,661

Journal Archives

Sorry, I didn't spell that right. Plato and Aristotle. Here it is the defense of inequality:

Plato excused / justified slavery:


You know how the RW insists the USA is a 'republic' and not a 'democracy'? Limited government is all they are selling, not the Constitution, which says to look out for the general welfare.

Libertarians say 'democracy'is 'mob rule' as it increases the power of the inferior. Romans used the term 'democrats' as a perjorative since they tried to lift up the working class of the day.

Sound familiar?

More Plato here:


Now to Aristotle:

Some aspects of Aristotle's theory of slavery

Slavery -- natural or conventional?

Aristole's theory of slavery is found in Book I, Chapters iii through vii of the Politics. and in Book VII of the Nicomachean Ethics.

Aristotle raises the question of whether slavery is natural or conventional. He asserts that the former is the case. So, Aristotle's theory of slavery holds that some people are naturally slaves and others are naturally masters. Thus he says:

"But is there any one thus intended by nature to be a slave, and for whom such a condition is expedient and right, or rather is not all slavery a violation of nature?

There is no difficulty in answering this question, on grounds both of reason and of fact. For that some should rule and others be ruled is a thing not only necessary, but expedient; from the hour of their birth, some are marked out for subjection, others for rule."

This suggests that anyone who is ruled must be a slave, which does not seem at all right. Still, given that this is so he must state what characteristics a natural slave must have -- so that he or she can be recognized as such a being. Who is marked out for subjugation, and who for rule? This is where the concept of "barbarian" shows up in Aristotle's account. Aristotle says:

"But among barbarians no distinction is made between women and slaves, because there is no natural ruler among them: they are a community of slaves, male and female. Wherefore the poets say,

'It is meet that Hellenes should rule over barbarians';

as if they thought that the barbarian and the slave were by nature one."

So men rule naturally over women, and Greeks over barbarians! But what is it which makes a barbarian a slave? Here is what Aristotle says:

"Where then there is such a difference as that between soul and body, or between men and animals (as in the case of those whose business is to use their body, and who can do nothing better), the lower sort are by nature slaves, and it is better for them as for all inferiors that they should be under the rule of a master. For he who can be, and therefore is, another's and he who participates in rational principle enough to apprehend, but not to have, such a principle, is a slave by nature. Whereas the lower animals cannot even apprehend a principle; they obey their instincts. And indeed the use made of slaves and of tame animals is not very different; for both with their bodies minister to the needs of life. Nature would like to distinguish between the bodies of freemen and slaves, making the one strong for servile labor, the other upright, and although useless for such services, useful for political life in the arts both of war and peace. But the opposite often happens--that some have the souls and others have the bodies of freemen. And doubtless if men differed from one another in the mere forms of their bodies as much as the statues of the Gods do from men, all would acknowledge that the inferior class should be slaves of the superior. And if this is true of the body, how much more just that a similar distinction should exist in the soul? but the beauty of the body is seen, whereas the beauty of the soul is not seen. It is clear, then, that some men are by nature free, and others slaves, and that for these latter slavery is both expedient and right."

So the theory is that natural slaves should have powerful bodies but be unable to rule themselves. Thus, they become very much like beasts of burden, except that unlike these beasts human slaves recognize that they need to be ruled. The trouble with this theory, as Aristotle quite explicitly states, is that the right kind of souls and bodies do not always go together!

So, one could have the soul of a slave and the body of a freeman, and vice versa! Nonetheless, apparently because there are some in whom the body and soul are appropriate to natural slavery, that is a strong body and a weak soul, Aristotle holds that there are people who should naturally be slaves. It also seems that men naturally rule women and that bararians are naturally more servile than Greeks! This seems like an odd, indeed arbitrary, way for the virtues of the soul to be distributed!

Las Casas deals with a similar problem in regard to the native peoples of the Americas...

Contrast the ancient 1% with:

...John Locke's theory of slavery in The Second Treatise of Civil Government Locke does not believe in natural slaves or in the conventional view that all prisoners of war can be legitimately enslaved. He is a just war theorist who explicitly rejects the doctrine that might makes right.


I don't idolize people who defended slavery in the exact same terms as the Confederacy, in their claims of others' innate inferiority. The Founders owned slaves but realized if equality was going to mean anything it would have to be eliminated eventually.

The South rejected the idea of human equality by the same rationale as Plato and Aristotle. Th Libertarian party's ideas of governance ignore the rights of those whom the powerful regard as innately inferior and put on Earth for their use.


Hope this is not offtopic but the song lyrics (Trigger Warning: Vietnam War scenes, but not graphic)

Until recently the red octagon STOP signs in my area had stickers below the white letters:


We can't forget Vietnam, no more than we can Iraq now. It seems to be all of one piece, the War on Workers, Women, the people in all these civil wars going on.

We are so tired of this but it's a matter of survival. We either embrace our history or it rolls over us.

They hate it because they believe many of us were born to be slaves and work for nothing for them.

Someone was quoting the freedom and tyranny stuff from Plato and Aristotle here at DU the other day. I started to reply and then thought better of it, as both men lived at the top of a society built on the backs of slaves. They were in the leisure class who had time to talk.

Going further, I found the two philosophers' views on slavery, and why they considered it a natural state for some people. Not them, or course. Also they lumped in all those conquered by war and all women as having been born to be slaves.

And in their writings, they said should have no voice in their society, nor any right to decent treatment. It was detailed offensive stuff. I was too angry to post my rebuttal.

This was the basis of the Confederacy that blacks and other groups were born to be slaves. It the reason the hate unions, no inconsistency there.

It's the libertarian version of freedom, as described Lincoln, that they want the liberty to own other people as slaves to serve their own interests and make them rich.

This is view of the GOP and their darling Rand who is against all help for poor and working people, women and immigrants. I'm not ready to go and live on the plantation.

Union till the day I die.

Blood, Sweat, Tears and LOVE:

This Is Why We Fight...

Without the Labor Movement, my union and the New Deal, I'd be dead now,. Just sayin'

So yes, I too, will always celebrate Labor Day as long as I live. I'll post some more on Labor later.

Next from the same school of thought: Kerry danced naked at Bohemian Grove worshiping Moloch and

howled war hoops and cheered human sacrifice with the satanists there!

Well, NOT. He's not even on the list reported by Infowars. Won't link it here, though, but no, he's not on it despite the other Skull and Bones members who attend there.

But Iran's PressTV is very definite on Kerry's evil ambitions and uses ALL the dog whistles. I dare a person to not get their blood riled up at this:


So folks can decide if the Iran, Syria and Russia are the real defenders of human rights, freedom and liberty from the uh, well, you know whatsis.

I've entertained all of this stuff, until I found the JBS, Koch links and kept going down the rabbit hole.

Billionaires do not ignore any chance at pushing their agenda. It is being played from all sides now. Enough people will fall for it who have the best of intentions. The results are the same.

People with experience dealing those who one truly can't stand, but must act nice in public, know how this works. I've had to negotiate with political opponents my gut wanted eliminated from the gene pool for the sake of humanity.

If you listen to your gut and not your mind, things get out of hand quickly. There are usually areas of common cause that can be found, even if the other person is a lying no-good POS. But you can't get anything out of them by venting at them.

Venting is the cheap thing to do on the internet or in a mob. It does not work in the real world when there are causes more important than ego.

So yes, Kerry is going to treat Assad with respect and warmth to his face. It is part of getting support for what one accepts, not a love affair. It's called diplomacy and most people don't have what it takes to do it.

As far as the claims that it is hypocritical for Kerry to get angry at Assad's use of chemical warfare, with over a thousand dead in one day and thousands disabled survivors the same day, they are wrong.

This is just the icing on the cake of a civil war that has taken the lives of tens of thousands as Assad attempts to win a ground war that he has lost.

It's said that half a million people have been made homeless and are fleeing into Turkey and other places. Assad is losing vital territory, even in the nation's capitol, the city of Damascus.

If a fighting force took over part of Washington, D.C., it would have a paralyzing effect on the government. This is last ditch fighting, and for some reason Assad does not seem to have any plans to reconcile by working through their differences in a democratic way.

The fact Kerry called out the US government on its own war crimes in Vietnam, by the use of chemical weapons and free fire zones, etc. and is still hated by the RW, is why this will be pushed from the RW which is merging with the left, having found common ground on one or more issues.

So people should (not referring to you) look to all the alliances, social, military and political before going on the attack, is all I'd ask. The world is not B&W. JMHO.


Regarding the mention of Kerry, Bush and Skull and Bones in the post you replied to:

My citation of the article with this accusation is from a well-known CTer, birther and an Infowars regular:


He is cited by Infowars, Paulites, 2nd Amendment Solution advocates and other fringe RWer groups. Now he is in league with:

Press TV (stylised PRESSTV) is a 24-hour English language news organization of the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB). Its headquarters are located in Tehran, Iran.


We won't see him cited at DU, but the ideas sans the birtherism is, AFAIK. But Paul Craig Roberts, an Infowars idol and father of Reaganomics, which he still supports, is posted here at times.

He is a thinker and some of what he has written is good. He defends Social Security, etc. as private property. But he also supports Ron Paul and likely Rand as well.

They are no good for this country and encourage those who want armed revolt over taxes, the ACA, infringing on the 2nd amendment, etc. Their interpretation of the 2nd is insane. So none of them are in my good books.

REV AL SHARPTON: March on Washington 50th Anniversary Speakers

Published on Aug 24, 2013


"Dreams are for those who won't accept reality. So they dream about what is not there, but will make it happen," Sharpton said.

"We must give us our young people dreams again. You build jails, closed schools and break their dream and you wonder why they are wearing saggy pants."

The Reverend delivered one of the best speeches that day, maybe we should make a poll...

Bill Clinton FULL MLK 50 Year March On Washington Anniversary Speech

Published on Aug 28, 2013


Bill Clinton mlk 50 year anniversary full speech at the lincoln memorial's steps. bill clinton talks stubborn gates. Other luminaries include Lynda Bird Johnson Robb, daughter of President Lyndon Johnson, who signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

A march, led by a replica of a transit bus that civil rights leader Rosa Parks rode when she refused to give up her seat to a white man in 1955, and an interfaith service also were planned for Wednesday morning. A march held Saturday drew tens of thousands to the Lincoln Memorial.

Obama considers the 1963 march a "seminal event" and part of his generation's "formative memory." A half-century after the march, he said, is a good time to reflect on how far the country has come and how far it still has to go.

In an interview Tuesday on Tom Joyner's radio show, Obama said he imagines that King "would be amazed in many ways about the progress that we've made." He listed advances such as equal rights before the law, an accessible judicial system, thousands of African-American elected officials, African-American CEOs and the doors that the civil rights movement opened for Latinos, women and gays.

For those who missed it!

For the BOG: NewsHour Interview with Obama - No Decision on Syria, Taking Action on Voting Rights

Published on Aug 29, 2013


President Barack Obama said he had not yet made his decision regarding a U.S. strike on Syria during an interview with PBS NewsHour senior correspondents Judy Woodruff and Gwen Ifill. The president said that Syrian president Bashar al-Assad's regime alleged use of chemical weapons would factor into his calculation and he warned that the Assad should be held accountable. Mr. Obama spoke to the NewsHour on the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington and Martin Luther King Jr.'s famous "I Have a Dream" speech where he reflected on the challenges Americans still face today in the form of jobs, health care and education. He also vowed to take steps to ensure voting rights for all Americans.

Hadn't seen this one before, even though it is from last week. Thought this would help see what Obama is working on domestically and abroad.



For the BOG: FULL: President Obama Speech at 50th Anniversary of March on Washington

FULL: President Obama Speech at 50th Anniversary of March on Washington, Pays Tribute to MLK

Published on Aug 28, 2013

President Obama's Address on 50th Anniversary of MLK 'I Have a Dream' Speech


Barack Obama marks anniversary of Martin Luther King's 'I have a Dream' speech

Fifty years after Martin Luther King delivered his "I have a Dream" speech, Barack Obama assesses America's progress (USAToday)

WASHINGTON In his address to thousands who gathered on the Washington Mall on Wednesday to mark the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, President Obama paid tribute to civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. and to the anonymous millions who stood by King's side during the civil rights fight of the 1960s.

Obama remembered those who could not marry the ones they loved because of so-called anti-miscegenation laws, African-American soldiers who fought for freedom abroad that they could not enjoy on U.S. soil and white Americans who could not stand by discrimination and sacrificed sometimes with their own blood .

"Because they marched, America became more fair," Obama said. "America changed for you and me and the entire world grew strength from that example."

Before Obama took the stage on Wednesday, former presidents Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton offered stirring tributes to King.

Carter lamented what King might have thought about recent the Supreme Court ruling that gutted voting right laws that he fought for or the high unemployment rate and incarceration rates plaguing the African-American community.

"There is a tremendous agenda ahead of us," Carter said.

Clinton also spoke about the racial divide that he said still exists in the USA and the myriad problems facing the nation. But he also suggested that King would be disappointed by the partisan division that roils Washington. But Clinton posited that King "did not die to hear his heirs whine about political gridlock."

"It's time to stop complaining and put our shoulders against the stubborn gates holding Americans back," Clinton said.

Obama wondered if over the years the progress that came in closing racial disparities as a result of the fight by King and his contemporaries obscured that the March on Washington was not just about a pursuit of racial justice but also about solving economic inequity.

"They were there seeking jobs as well as justice, not just the absence of oppression but the presence of economic opportunity. For those it profit a man, Dr. King would ask, to sit at an integrated lunch counter if he can't afford the meal."

When it comes to economic opportunity--the idea that anyone can approve their lot through honest work--Obama said the country has fallen short of King's vision not just for the black community but all working Americans

While there have been examples of success in the African-American community that would have been unimaginable a half-century ago, black unemployment remains nearly twice as high as unemployment for whites and Latinos are close behind. Meanwhile, middle class Americans wages have stagnated while corporate profits have soared, Obama lamented.

"The position of all working Americans, regardless of color, has eroded, making the dream Dr. King described more elusive," Obama said.

Obama was just a toddler when king delivered his seminal "I Have a Dream" address 50 years ago, but the words of the civil rights leader have served as a rhetorical and moral guidepost throughout his presidency.

As he emerged as a long-shot presidential candidate in 2008, Obama often quoted King on the campaign trail that the "arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." And in his 2008 election night victory speech, Obama echoed King's "I've Been to the Mountaintop" speech, when he intoned "the road ahead will be long, our climb will be steep."

And in the lead up to the 50th anniversary commemoration of the March on Washington on Wednesday, Obama, the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas, has embraced his role as the personification of King's dream while repeatedly questioning whether the nation has lived up to that dream.

His address was the culminating moment for Obama in a summer in which he has repeatedly reflected on King's legacy and taken stock of the country's progress and failures to create a more economically and racially just society.

"Martin Luther King - I Have A Dream Speech - August 28, 1963"

He goes into what MLK was really working on that is so often ignored. There are many important issues here and truths that need to be heard.

I posted the White House video of the entire event, but this is the call to action that many wanted to hear the most.

Enjoy, BOG members!





Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next »