Democracy is dead??

[eagles fly free]

The ones that had the chance to listen to the BBC last night (20/12) and the news coverage regarding the change of the jail sentence that was imposed to David Irving in Austria have heard in complete astonishment, I hope, from (does not remember his name) who has advised that after the war he was working to secure the conviction of all responsible of the holocaust the following.

- BBC presenter : Isn’t democracy supposed to mean that everybody is entitled to his opinion?
- Reply : Yes, but within limits

So, according to this ‘’expert’’ we can say what we believe as long as what we say does not come into conflict with what he, or better put what it is said about the holocaust, says about the certain issue.

‘’I may disagree with what you say but I will defend your right to express your opinion freely with my life is same is necessary’’ – That is democracy.

Democracy means to express yourself freely and believe to what you want and think is right. Yes ofcourse they are limits but they are there to safeguard that somebody will not go out and start preaching the killing of other people or breaching the others rights.

Yes, the holocaust happened. Yes there were scores of people that died BUT they were not only Jews. They were gypsies, communists, political opponents, freedom fighters from the occupied countries, disabled people, etc. I wonder why when they talk about the holocaust they always mention the one particular race of people. The others why they are not mentioned or mentioned only if they have to, usually when the interviewer mentions them and they acknowledge it.

Furthermore lets not forget the katin massacre in Poland that was ‘’credited’’ to the nazis only to be later be proven that was carried out by the Russian red army.

Last but not least a tribute must be paid to the innocent victims of Dresden, a city which was declared as an ‘’open city’’ during the 2 WW with no military installation which was bombed to the ground by the allies who have used also the equivalent of today’s napalm bombs. Over 200,000 dead innocent civilians….. forgotten.

As regards to democracy lets hope that it is not dead yet and what the ancient Greeks taught us will not be forgotten.

 

[Alana]

As regards to democracy lets hope that it is not dead yet and what the ancient Greeks taught us will not be forgotten.

Let's hope it's not though as the ancient Greeks implemented it: "all" were free to express their opinion except women and slaves.

The others why they are not mentioned or mentioned only if they have to, usually when the interviewer mentions them and they acknowledge it.

I would wholehearterly recommend you to read Controversy of Zion by Douglas Reed, online here. Your questions will be answered, and especially chapter 42.

Democracy instead of meaning the "rule of people", for psychopaths means "ruling over people".

 

[Petey of Lone Tree]

According to Wikipedia
http(semicolon slash slash)en(dot)wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
during WW II, there were 24,456,700 military deaths, 32,327,000 civilian deaths, and 5,754,000 "Jewish Holocaust" deaths. The site also has a list of "casualties suffered by each country (57)".

 

[Kesdjan]

As regards to democracy lets hope that it is not dead yet and what the ancient Greeks taught us will not be forgotten.

Let's hope it's not though as the ancient Greeks implemented it: "all" were free to express their opinion except women and slaves.

Actually, the first real democracy, that is the first paricipatory or all-inclusive democracy, originated in America.

The people of the Six Nations, also known by the French term, Iroquois Confederacy, call themselves the Hau de no sau nee (ho dee noe sho nee) meaning People Building a Long House. Located in the northeastern region of North America, originally the Six Nations was five and included the Mohawks, Oneidas, Onondagas, Cayugas, and Senecas. The sixth nation, the Tuscaroras, migrated into Iroquois country in the early eighteenth century. Together these peoples comprise the oldest living participatory democracy on earth. Their story, and governance truly based on the consent of the governed, contains a great deal of life-promoting intelligence for those of us not familiar with this area of American history. The original United States representative democracy, fashioned by such central authors as Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson, drew much inspiration from this confederacy of nations. In our present day, we can benefit immensely, in our quest to establish anew a government truly dedicated to all life's liberty and happiness much as has been practiced by the Six Nations for over 800 hundred years.

Also,

During this era [the 1700s] the thinkers of Europe forged the ideas that became known as the European Enlightenment, and much of its light came from the torch of Indian liberty that still burned brightly in the brief period between their first contact with the Europeans and subsequent decimation by the Europeans.

Another interesting thought from a very interesting person:

One of the strongest forms of social continuity is continuity of place. In spite of complete changes in the nature of the population, the tendency is very strong for institutions in the same general locality to persist to some noticeable extent. Where a new people take over a locality, there is a strong tendency for them to acquire at least a powerful admixture of the institutions of the people that lived there before them...
It is also true that a new organisation may develop a continuity of its own before it can take control. Thus, if it is a propaganda organisation, excluding all opponents, its continuity is likely to result in general "purges" and other forms of repression, etc.

This last paragraph seems to describe the ponerization of our culture pretty well. I think that only through education, especially of psychopathy, ponerology, etc., will we save a pure democracy based on human values.

sources:
http://www.ratical.org/many_worlds/6Nations/
http://www.danielnpaul.com/NativeAmericanDemocracy.html
sidis.net

 

[name]

Democracy, n. - a form of government which implies consent of the ruled and the fiction of participation in government affairs via plebiscite. commonly thought to mean "Rule of the Commoners" when its meaning is derived from the Greek words Demos ("the common people") and Cratos ("strength" or "rule"). A meaning doing more justice to current democracies would be to understand the word as deriving from the greek Deimos ("dread" or "terror") and Cratos, thus correctly spelled Deimocracy and meaning Rule by Terror.

Because, really, if you thing about it, that is what so-called "democracies" have always been about. They just stopped pretending andbb/c of that we now see things more clearly.

 

[Kesdjan]

Name,
Well if your talking about current democracies, I agree that they are ruled by terror. But the democratic confederations of the red "indians", perhaps the only real democracy in history, are definitely not about terror. One article on the signs page mentioned that the asian, and native american populations are the only races with a practically non-existent percentage of psychopathic individuals. That such a group of individuals are the creators of true democracy is an interesting correlation, no?

 

[eagles fly free]

Dear Kesdjan,

With all due respect if you believe that democracy was created in america i suggest rethink... because the next think i will hear is that the real olympics wer einvented by coca cola and cnn.... Or wait i am wrong they found democracy after they slaughtered milions of native indians and enslaved scores of africans that were enslaved, carried across the ocean and used are objects.

Quote

The Athenian democracy (sometimes called classical democracy) was the democratic system developed in the Greek city-state of Athens (comprising the central city-state of Athens and its surrounding territory Attica). Athens was one of the very first known democracies and probably the most important in ancient times. Other Greek cities set up democracies, most but not all following an Athenian model, but none were as powerful or as stable (or, relatively speaking, as well-documented) as that of Athens. It remains a unique and intriguing experiment in direct democracy where the people do not elect representatives to vote on their behalf but vote on legislation and executive bills in their own right. Participation was by no means open to all inhabitants of Attica, but the in-group of participants was constituted with no reference to economic class and they participated on a scale that was truly phenomenal. Never before had so many people spent so much of their time in governing themselves.

Unqote

reference from wickepidia: http://en(dot)wikipedia(dot)org/wiki/Athenian_democracy

quote

Among the enduring contributions of the Greek empire to Western society is the foundation of democratic society. But what did the development of Athenian democracy actually involve?

unqte

source BBC the link below.

Regarding the etimology dear name since i am greek i can tell you that 'cratos' means 'state' in free translation and not force. Further more demos means "people" and has nothing to do with deimos. I donot know were you found the etimology but being greek i tell you i would not trust this reference since they seem not to check what they say, at least for that particular item. Therefore the true meanign of 'democracy' is people state.

Irini i think that the basic of the athenian democrasy was for everybody to say their opinion freely (yes women and slave not included in that) but the idea is what it matters, not how it is implemented. Lets not forget that the basic right of expressing your opinion freely is what allowed women to vote in the states and in other countries or they had the power to vote always? Ideas evolve with time. What was 'correct' for the athens or pericles and solon 3000 years ago does not mean it is correct now and forever.

And to conclude offering my best wishes to all for a wonderful and Merry Christmas a few links about the athenian democracy.

http://www.stoa.org/projects/demos/home?greekEncoding=UnicodeC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/greeks/greekcritics_01.shtml

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?AthenianDemocracy

http://www.vu.union.edu/~kingj/classics.pdf

http://www.ahistoryofgreece.com/athens-democracy.htm

http://www.fact-index.com/a/at/athenian_democracy.html

Last but not list dear Kesdjan donot take anything personaly as it is not directed to you as person who i dnot know but respect like everybody.

 

[Kesdjan]

Dear Kesdjan,

With all due respect if you believe that democracy was created in america i suggest rethink... because the next think i will hear is that the real olympics wer einvented by coca cola and cnn.... Or wait i am wrong they found democracy after they slaughtered milions of native indians and enslaved scores of africans that were enslaved, carried across the ocean and used are objects.

But you forget that "America" (though it was not called that) has existed well before the first settlers arrived- and it is this "America" that I am referring to when I talk about the birthplace of democracy. I think you are not distinguishing between the indian participatory democracy from the european representative democracy which was established much later than the former system.

Or wait i am wrong they found democracy after they slaughtered milions of native indians and enslaved scores of africans that were enslaved, carried across the ocean and used are objects.

As I have written above, I am not talking about the current American representative "democracy", but the former democracy of the Native Americans (indians). However, suppose I was talking about the current "democracy", do you think that the Athenians you admire so much were any more noble?

The central political institution in Athens of the sixth and fifth centuries B.C. was the Assembly, usually composed of 5,000 to 6,000 members and open to all adult male citizens. (Women, slaves, and foreigners were excluded.) By simple majority vote, the Assembly could decide virtually any domestic issue without any legal restrictions. Trials were conducted by juries of 501 citizens who also decided guilt or innocence by majority vote. ...It was democratic Athens, after all, that condemned to death the philosopher Socrates.

That women, slaves, and foreigners were excluded in Athenian "democracy" is why I said the native american democracy (which did not have such limits) was the first real democracy.

Irini i think that the basic of the athenian democrasy was for everybody to say their opinion freely (yes women and slave not included in that) but the idea is what it matters, not how it is implemented.

But no, the basis of the Athenian "democracy" was not for everyone to say their opinion freely (limits on participation are not democratic). I think how democracy is implemented matters a lot. If it is implemented as it is now, with a choice between two versions of essentially the same thing, or as the athenians did, with limits on who participates, it is not democracy.

Regarding the etimology dear name since i am greek i can tell you that 'cratos' means 'state' in free translation and not force. Further more demos means "people" and has nothing to do with deimos. I donot know were you found the etimology but being greek i tell you i would not trust this reference since they seem not to check what they say, at least for that particular item. Therefore the true meanign of 'democracy' is people state.

I think name meant that a better name for current "democracies", or rule by the people would be deimocracy, or rule by terror.

Last but not list dear Kesdjan donot take anything personaly as it is not directed to you as person who i dnot know but respect like everybody.

Likewise.

 

[eagles fly free]

Dear kesdjan

I wonder at which point of the slaughter of the native indians the ones that claim to know how their tribes worked seat down and discussed with them about democracy. Before or after they killed them. And i wonder why this does not qualify as genocide and rarely is mentioned.

Also did the women that their role to stay home and tace care of the children while the men fought had the sam rights with them? Could they go to the tribe chief and complain against somebody or was it their husband who did that for them.

Well you do have your ideas and fight for them but allow me to have the ideas that the vast majority of historians support and it is taught is the univercities.

Also you used what i said to supprt your thesis but you excluded something...

qte

Irini i think that the basic of the athenian democrasy was for everybody to say their opinion freely (yes women and slave not included in that) but the idea is what it matters, not how it is implemented. Lets not forget that the basic right of expressing your opinion freely is what allowed women to vote in the states and in other countries or they had the power to vote always? Ideas evolve with time. What was 'correct' for the athens or pericles and solon 3000 years ago does not mean it is correct now and forever.

unqte

i think name was refering to the old and the new ones.

qte

Because, really, if you thing about it, that is what so-called "democracies" have always been about. They just stopped pretending andbb/c of that we now see things more clearly.

unqte

best regards

 

[Kesdjan]

I wonder at which point of the slaughter of the native indians the ones that claim to know how their tribes worked seat down and discussed with them about democracy. Before or after they killed them.

Whoa... talk about loaded questions. "The ones who claim to know how [american indian] tribes work" are academics- why would they kill anyone, let alone the subjects they are studying. You were probalbly talking about the European settlers, but you can not just lump them all together as a group of murderous psychopaths (though undoubtedly, there were quite a few psychopaths who settled in the "New World").

And i wonder why this does not qualify as genocide and rarely is mentioned.

Actually, this so-called genocide is popping up more and more in the mainstream media (though I admit it was not in my high school history books)- in fact, I remember a special on it this thanksgiving on the History Channel. Genocide, however, is a heavy word and should not be said without looking at all of the available evidence. Besides this, genocide is an ambiguous term that incites emotional reactions in people, thus hindering their ability to discern the truth of the matter.

any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such: "Killing members of the group; Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; and forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

According to the UN's definition any murder constitutes genocide. The ambiguity of the term genocide and the reaction it evokes in people, renders it a useless psychopathic rhetorical device. A more objective phrase to describe such atrocities might be "the murder of x (group of individuals)", such as "the murder of 5,754,000 Jews (as a result of the holocaust)". Apparently, the UN does not consider war deaths as genocide (though it should be considered as such by their own definition), adding further evidence to the uselessness of the term.
As to the actual depopulation of native americans, from the evidence I have collected thus far, it seems the biggest factor was the epidemics caused by foreign pathogens, something which settlers to America never intended. There were, as you state, massacres in the new world (both settlers killing indians and vice versa) they do not seem to be a major source of the total death toll. We have, what is called in statistics, confounding variables- that is we have several variables (epidemics, massacres, war, etc.) whose effects on a given event (the depopulation of native americans) are indistinguishable. I would also like to point out that there were massacres of native americans by the United States Government, though this occured long after colonial times. Please do not think that I am condoning the murder of American civillians by its own government, I deffinately am against any form of murder and am horrified by the actions of the US government of the past and present... but I think that attributing the deaths of the majority of native americans to the US government or any intentional action of a foreign entity is pre-mature at best, foolish at worst.

Also did the women that their role to stay home and tace care of the children while the men fought had the sam rights with them? Could they go to the tribe chief and complain against somebody or was it their husband who did that for them.

Women were given the right to the chief's titles and the power to remove dissident chiefs. Jikohnsaseh, by hearing of her actions, taught me to respect women and honor their role. Women are the connection to the earth and have the responsibility for the future of the nation. Men will want to fight. Women know the true price of war and must encourage the chiefs to seek a peaceful resolution.

Well you do have your ideas and fight for them but allow me to have the ideas that the vast majority of historians support and it is taught is the univercities.

As someone who supports democracy :) i will allow you to have any idea you want Adreas. You should keep in mind, however, that authorities are human too- they may not have all the data and make mistakes like everyone. Reality and truth are NOT democratic.

Irini i think that the basic of the athenian democrasy was for everybody to say their opinion freely (yes women and slave not included in that) but the idea is what it matters, not how it is implemented. Lets not forget that the basic right of expressing your opinion freely is what allowed women to vote in the states and in other countries or they had the power to vote always? Ideas evolve with time. What was ''correct'' for the athens or pericles and solon 3000 years ago does not mean it is correct now and forever.

Your last sentence kind of bothers me- I believe that basic human rights are correct now and forever. Because I believe such, I refuse to call any government, whether its that of the USA or hallowed Athens, a democracy, unless it respects basic human rights. I completely agree with you that the principles of Anthenian governance has influenced the west, but so has "indian" democracy. The importance of the American democracy is that it was the first (possibly only) system of governance in which all of the people got the chance to participate.

i think name was refering to the old and the new ones.

Well the only conclusive way to know what he was referring to was to ask him... so what were you reffering to name?


Hope I got my point across and this doesn't degenerate into a ceaseless debate.

Regards,
Kesdjan

 

[Marie]

Interesting discussion.

I think something that should be mentioned is that there is no such thing as "native American customs" when taken as a whole, because "Native Americans" includes hundreds of different tribes, each with its own laws, religions, social organization, esthetics etc etc. and had a cultural diversity similar to that within Europe, or even within Eurasia. (between other things two Native languages were shown to be as different from one another as German is different from Chinese).

I can only speak for the Native traditions I have encountered - namely the Mi'gmag from around here, Algonquins in La Verendrye and some partial contact with Crees in Manitoba.

And it seems to me, indeed, that those social organizations beat any other by miles. See, way before I found Cassiopaea I had already theorized the idea of pyramid-shaped societies vs. circle-shaped societies, and the idea of circle-shaped societies was based on what I had been told about Native societies almost exclusively.

Also did the women that their role to stay home and tace care of the children while the men fought had the sam rights with them?

First of all, you assume that women's role is to "stay home and take care of the kids", whereas is seems that at least some Native societies considered that women had a choice in the role they wished to fill, including potential roles of chief, healer, shaman, artisan, just like men did. And yes, they seemed to have equal rights with men, or at least more rights than women do in present-day societies.

For example among the mi'gmag and algonquins women were allowed to choose their husbands, refuse marriage and demand divorce. Millions upon millions of women in today's world have no such rights. They also had a right to safety that AFAIK no present-day woman has.

If we want to consider the ancient Greeks' treatment of their women, it was simply horrifying. Women were sequestrated in "gyneceas" (sp?) for the vast majority of their lives, beaten and forced to marry men in their thirties when they themselves were around twelve or fourteen years old. And didn't the Greeks invent prostitution?

Could they go to the tribe chief and complain against somebody or was it their husband who did that for them.

You're kidding, right? They could BE the chief, yet they weren't allowed to talk?

See Andreas, I think you might have been slightly taken in by a "programmed" point of view, that is presently pushed by the MSM and academia. This POV claims that it is "natural" for women to be subservient to men and have less rights. This is simply not true. And don't you find it kinda funny, the way ancient Greece is proclaimed by all things PTB to be admirable and exemplar?

In the Native societies I have heard of the general organization was that of a circle, with everybody being equal and a center composed of the Chief, Healer and/or Shaman, and Elders - which would make it, indeed, a real democracy. The people at the center may have had "higher" status but, as was noted in this editorial

In Amazonian (or North American) societies,[...] the position [of chief] was so demanding, and so little rewarding, so hedged about by safeguards, that there was no way for power-hungry individuals to do much with it.

Whereas in ancient Greece it is now calculated that only one person out of ten could be a citizen. Hmm?

 

[eagles fly free]

Dear Marie,

First of all as you very well put since the native americans were broken down in so many tribes we cannot claim that one or two ro a number of them had a certain way of governing themselves was what was the common rule and judge them by that.

Therefore the claim that the idea and i stress the word idea, not its implimentation, of democracy originated in them.

Yes prostitution was invented in ancient greece as well as astronomy, geology, mathematics, geometry, the periodic table of elements etc and as we all know the cultural ''enlightment'' of europe happened when greece was occupied by the ottomans and the ''intelectuals'' fled the country. So i wonder why you mention only the first and not the others. Furthermore prostitution was evident in every ancient civilisation and not only in greece. It is the oldest proffesion in the world (okay politicians excluded and thats a joke donot take it seriously).

qte

If we want to consider the ancient Greeks' treatment of their women, it was simply horrifying. Women were sequestrated in "gyneceas" (sp?) for the vast majority of their lives, beaten and forced to marry men in their thirties when they themselves were around twelve or fourteen years old. And didn't the Greeks invent prostitution?

unqte

gyneconitis, gynaeconitis
In Eastern Christianity, the part of the church reserved for women, formerly the galleries, now chiefly the narthex.

Thats is the modern use so to say of the word.

In ancient greece it was part of a families house and not what you describe. This link describes much better what it was but i cannot copy from the website even a small text... it is about in the middle of the page which also provides a lay out of a typical ancient athens house layout.

http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/Furniture/Furniture2.htm

unqte

Dear Kes so according to the united nations the slaughter of the indians does not qualify as genocide because we donot have accurate figures.... You also mention that massacres happened from the side of the settlers and the native indians. I wonder if another country or group of people invade your area and starts killing what the local people do? Keep records to make sure it is recorded as genocide or fight back. The natives were invaded, their land taken away from them, they were in most cases attacked without reason and after we accuse them for fighting back, yes they should have just rolled back and died like good savages.... Sorry but if anybody attacks my country i will fight back with everything i have.

And in order to reply to all i agree with all, WE DONOT HAVE REAL DEMOCRACY NOW OR EVER. The idea is wonderful but it does nto suit the ones that have the reigns of power and i think it is something we all agree. Furthermore history is always written by the winners, the way it suits them.....

 

[eagles fly free]

A little more insight regarding the beating and mistreatment....

In ancient Greece, boys were educated in schools while girls were educated at home. In fact, evidence supports that women were educated at home except for music and dance lessons. Often educated by their husbands, brothers, or fathers some Greek women became famous throughout history due to their advanced education level. But this was not common. Women in ancient Greece were considered essential in order to take care of their families' well-fare, but education was not something they were allowed to invest time in pursuing. The main idea behind this concept was that women did not need a formal education because they did not need to compete with men. The fallacy of this is that women need to support the work of the men and if they are not educated then they cannot provide support and will not be able to educate their children.A specific category of ancient Greek women, who attended special schools where they learned entertaining, conversation, and rhetoric, was the Hetaera group. Since these women kept company to men while they discussed and enjoyed long food festivities, they needed to be better educated so as to converse with the privileged men, but were not considered citizens. The ones who never received the privilege of being educated were slaves (men or women). The interesting thing is that in case they had been educated before they became slaves, they were able to work and be considered to win back their freedom. In principal boys learned grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic; these were selected so as to help students communicate effectively. Moreover, the classic ancient educational system included a study of literature and language, apart from arithmetic, music, geometry and astronomy. On the other hand, girls were taught weaving and other household chores, like dancing, music, and physical education. The girls that were intended to become hetaerae-as mentioned above-also learned grammar, rhetoric and dialectic. Although today's women who read the educational system of ancient Greeks can be lead to believe that Greeks did not care about their women, historic evidence suggests that in fact Greek women seem to have been the best educated women of any culture up until fairly recently, into the 19th century. As sociologists and anthropologists support, culture involves skills that are passed on by education and training and are developed by discipline and practice. Ancient Greek women have always been involved with their own culture related to the family and child upbringing. But the interesting fact remains that they have always been involved in early childhood education as well. According to evidence, other societies involved women in later aspects of education later in history, but in ancient Greece the distinction between women and men in education emphasized a separate women's culture that had its special religious holidays and festivals devoted to the worship of the female spirit. In fact, music was one of the main subjects for the education of women and some ancient Greek women became important in the area of entertainment-not in ancient Greek theater where all the roles were played by men. In relation to music, ancient Greece laid the theoretical foundation for contemporary polyphonic music so it is probable that the women of Greece enjoyed success in that field. Furthermore, before the Trojan War women in Greece were permitted to vote, but they lost this privilege because men felt that they voted irresponsibly. Unfortunately, Greek women did not regain their voting privileges until the twentieth century as a result of various political, cultural and social misjudgments. Finally, it should be noted that the schools of ancient Greece were so effective and well-known that they have been widely copied. This is true even for today's schools. Like ancient Greek schools, the day is divided by subject periods and a teacher presents his or her subject matter to students, who are divided by age.

Source : http://iwomensworld.net/women/articles/Women-of-Ancient-Greece.html

Aspasia of Athens
by Jennifer Brainard
The most famous woman of Ancient Athens was Aspasia, the companion of the great leader of democratic Athens, Pericles. Because she was a courtesan, Pericles was not permitted to marry her, but in every way she was his partner and an important Athenian in her own right.
Aspasia was probably a hetaira. There is no English word to accurately translate hetairai, but they were more than courtesans. They were indeed sexual partners, but they were also companions, better educated than other Greek women. They were educated in philosophy, history, politics, science, art and literature, so that they could converse intelligently with sophisticated men. Aspasia was considered by many to be the most beautiful and intelligent of the city's hetairai.

Source: http://www.historywiz.com/historymakers/aspasia.htm

The above explains what kind of ‘’prostitution’’ you are talking about … Not exactly what you had in mind I think.

Also :

GREEK WOMEN: With the exception of ancient Sparta, Greek women had very limited freedom outside the home. They could attend weddings, funerals, some religious festivals, and could visit female neighbours for brief periods of time. In their home, Greek women were in charge! Their job was to run the house and to bear children. Most Greek women did not do housework themselves. Most Greek households had slaves. Female slaves cooked, cleaned, and worked in the fields. Male slaves watched the door, to make sure no one came in when the man of the house was away, except for female neighbours, and acted as tutors to the young male children. Wives and daughters were not allowed to watch the Olympic Games as the participants in the games did not wear clothes. Chariot racing was the only game women could win, and only then if they owned the horse. If that horse won, they received the prize.

So they may have been ‘’beaten’’ and mistreated as you claim but they could own a horse and receive the winnings… And also lets not forget that a woman was the one that changed history by attending the Olympic games and making that change since after her the participation of women was allowed.

Furthermore as if i recall well in the temples they were priestesses and they were highly regarded. Wasn’t the Delphi run by women and even the heads of nations were visiting them with many gifts in order to obtain their favour. Not bad. And didn't ancients greeks had a number of Godesses that they were worshiped? Athens=Athena the godess of wisdom. Strange having a godess for wisdom and choosing her name for your city when you mistreat your women... And Athena won the battle with Poseidon a MALE god to give her name in the city. So a male dominated city choose the gifts of a woman instead from a man as their benefactor. Proves who really rule at the end....

Also lets remember we are talking for ancient Greece, 4000 years before were the life expectancy was much much lower than today therefore when you had a life expectancy of say 35-40 getting married at 25-30, as opposed to the young age of 13-15 would have resulted in an almost certainty not being able to help your children grow up to be even teenagers. You try to compare what happened 4000 years before with what ‘’morals and values’’ we have today. Not exactly resulting in accurate results.

 

[Marie]

Therefore the claim that the idea and i stress the word idea, not its implimentation, of democracy originated in them.

If "them" can be taken to be a specific cultural group, then it seems to me that democracy was also implemented there, as the little people did have a say in their own lives and politics. No?

Yes prostitution was invented in ancient greece as well as astronomy, geology, mathematics, geometry, the periodic table of elements etc

But did the Greeks invent those sciences, or just transmit them? As for prostitution, slavery is slavery regardless of the name.

as we all know the cultural ''enlightment'' of europe happened when greece was occupied by the ottomans and the ''intelectuals'' fled the country. So i wonder why you mention only the first and not the others

Because I happened not to know that.

Furthermore prostitution was evident in every ancient civilisation and not only in greece.

True. Thinking about it more, I think the earliest traces of it were found in Mesopotamia – it seems to come with the package deal of monotheism and patriarchy.

It is the oldest proffesion in the world

Not true. Healers, hunters and gatherers, cultivators, leaders, and artisans of all kind existed first. In order to have a society that allows slavery, you have to have people that build the society first – including all of the above “professions" . Also “prostitute" is not a profession, seen as the vast majority of people performing it do so against their will, now as in the past.

In ancient greece it was part of a families house and not what you describe

Hmm. Several books I have read mention quite specifically that women weren’t allowed outside without their husband/ father/ owner’s permission. The link you quoted mentions:

Their women are forbidden to participate in so much of public life that their own peculiar world is especially reserved to them.

Just like jails are “especially reserved" for inmates?

This link describes much better what it was but i cannot copy from the website even a small text... it is about in the middle of the page which also provides a lay out of a typical ancient athens house layout.

Here’s what worked for me: right click, “select all" , then copy/paste it on a word treatment program.

Now a few things that struck me from the second post:

The main idea behind this concept was that women did not need a formal education because they did not need to compete with men

Of course. Slaves do not have to compete with their owners.

A specific category of ancient Greek women, who attended special schools where they learned entertaining, conversation, and rhetoric, was the Hetaera group. Since these women kept company to men while they discussed and enjoyed long food festivities, they needed to be better educated so as to converse with the privileged men, but were not considered citizens.

So a few got a peek and a limited education, for the exclusive purpose of being more agreeable servants. Can that really be called “freedom" in any way?

Source: http://www.historywiz.com/historymakers/aspasia.htm

The above explains what kind of ‘’prostitution’’ you are talking about … Not exactly what you had in mind I think.

Therefore, because one woman was able to get one man to respect her means the women were free? One thing that is not mentioned about “Hetairai" is if they had any choice regarding their “occupation".

Most Greek women did not do housework themselves. Most Greek households had slaves.

In that regard my sympathies lay with the slaves.

So they may have been ‘’beaten’’ and mistreated as you claim but they could own a horse and receive the winnings…

First, you seem to have a problem with me mentioning they were beaten. I’m sorry I have to break this to you, but in our world violence is the almost unavoidable result of social, legal and economic disempowerment - which happens to be the condition ancient Greek women were stuck in. For proof of this causal link one may look at any current day big society.

Second, surely you can see how being allowed to own a horse and receive the winnings becomes kinda meaningless when your life is in someone else’s hands.

And didn't ancients greeks had a number of Godesses that they were worshiped? Athens=Athena the godess of wisdom. Strange having a godess for wisdom and choosing her name for your city when you mistreat your women... And Athena won the battle with Poseidon a MALE god to give her name in the city. So a male dominated city choose the gifts of a woman instead from a man as their benefactor. Proves who really rule at the end....

Well, churchanity with its extreme misogyny has a female “god" too (virgin Mary). Does that mean women ruled Christianity as you claim that they ruled Greece? Plus, isn’t there an obvious contradiction between having no legal rights and ruling?

Also lets remember we are talking for ancient Greece, 4000 years before were the life expectancy was much much lower than today therefore when you had a life expectancy of say 35-40 getting married at 25-30, as opposed to the young age of 13-15 would have resulted in an almost certainty not being able to help your children grow up to be even teenagers.

I suppose that might be a good reason for everybody marrying young – but then, why place in such a big age difference, which was guaranteed to bring about a huge power imbalance? Most important of all, why was it ok to marry women (or more accurately, girls) against their will?

Now to come to the basic point: I think my first post might have been a bit unclear. The first reason I wrote at all was because I found it very weird that someone would claim that ancient Greece was democratic while no Native society was – and to use women’s rights as an argument for that pov, of all things!

Let’s put it this way: imo the whole issue can be reduced to a single word:

Self-determination

Which is really the fundamental measure of a democracy. Since women and slaves had not the slightest hope of self-determination, I hold the society they were in to be non-democratic.

If you are interested in the subject, may I suggest this article?

 

[eagles fly free]

Dear Marie,

I can see that you have a set of ideas which you believe that they are true and not wanting to move from them no matter what therefore i will not reply.

Best regards and happy new year

ps.

qte

True. Thinking about it more, I think the earliest traces of it were found in Mesopotamia – it seems to come with the package deal of monotheism and patriarchy.

Unqte

Were you learned that ancient greece and messopotamia were monotheistic????
Patriarch, yes but monotheistic?