More proof that there are no fascists

[Joseph Tracy]

What you are saying her would be nice if it were true.  I.F. Stone ( The Trial of Socrates) puts a lot of historic evidence on the table that  Plato and Socrates were active political players who supported militarist coups  accompanied by political purges. Might try reading it.  
On Jan 23, 2013, at 6:13 PM, alice wellintown wrote:

> 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.