More proof that there are no fascists

[alice wellintown]

well, itz easy enough to call everyone who came before us names, but
not so easy to comprehend what they had to say and undersatnd this in
the context in which they thought, acted, and felt.

So what was Plato up to? Was he, like some fasciest of the 20th
century, trying to make  a state by applying his ideas through gnostic
propaganda and a cult of national Unity?

No.

So, we need to back up and undestand what Plato was into.

He wasn't into what modern fasciest were into. In fact, as a
philosopher, he didn't even concern himself with what 20th century
philosophy was obsessed with.

So, what was Plato about?

Lotz of things of course, but, and we can turn to his works and to
Aristotle's critiques of both Plato and Socractes, and others, and I
contned that there is no better critical source than Aristotle, to
discover what Plato was up to.

Sure, Aristotle goes after him on Unity.

But what is Plato's Unity? What is he thinking about if not modern
states or modern nations and how to improve them through some kind of
Unity?

Next, how does he work?

Why, with dialogue, as we said before.

And what is his world like and what are the forces that move it?

Not material forces. Not existential ones. Not conflicts unresolves.
Not essential causes, but dialectical ones.

It seems to me that PLato goes with Marx on this one.
So Aristotle criticizes his communism not his fascism.

And, it is not about our world, our Existential, existing world that
Plato speaks.

On this, he is surely not Marxist, for Marx's world is a material one,
a world that the powerful shape to their ideas, these powerful people
may be fascists, of course, but not Platonists. Not even
Neo-Platonists.

So, Mark, you are wrong about Plato. He has nothing hidden, nothing
cyrptic or latent that pertains to fascism.

He is, after all, a Platonist. So his Kingdom is not of this world.