Greek democracy: the Basis for Western

Originally posted by pinguin Yes, Greeks didn't invented slavery but they didn't abolish it either. I think Classical Greece (or Rome) was a place very much like the U.S. Confederacy. A place where the upper class landlords have a democracy between themselves, where the poors were excluded from the club, and were a mass of slaves had to work all they long to mantain it. So when people say they admire Rome or Greek political systems, they usually forget or downplay this another disgusting aspect of those societies. It is curious that's also true with Britain's Magna Carta, where the term "Free Men" mean landlords. The serves were not free-people, because they were proletarians, and as such absolutely excluded of having a saying in any matter.

Originally posted by pinguin Yes, Greeks didn't invented slavery but they didn't abolish it either.   I think Classical Greece (or Rome) was a place very much like the U.S. Confederacy. A place where the upper class landlords have a democracy between themselves, where the poors were excluded from the club, and were a mass of slaves had to work all they long to mantain it.   So when people say they admire Rome or Greek political systems, they usually forget or downplay this another disgusting aspect of those societies.   It is curious that's also true with Britain's Magna Carta, where the term "Free Men" mean landlords. The serves were not free-people, because they were proletarians, and as such absolutely excluded of having a saying in any matter.   Pinguin

Edited by pikeshot1600 - 17-Mar-2007 at 16:45

Yes, Greeks didn't invented slavery but they didn't abolish it either.

^ that i agree with that and attempted (rather clumsily maybe) to make the point earlier.

Greeks didn't invent or conceive slavery before any other group. slavery should be understood in terms of economics over politics even if they can be linked.

Well, the myth of the "Noble Greek"  or the "Noble Barbarian" is also quite exagerated (just read the violence in Illiad, for example ), don't you think? Remember that all ancient societies had forms of slavery. Small band societies, and the "barbarians" of Northern Euroope were democratic in a natural way as well.

 

Originally posted by Antioxos Well I  disagree  with you the reason is that perhaps the Byzantine empire's greatest contribution to literature was their careful preservation of Ancient Greek literature, which was thereby transmitted both to Europe and to the Islamic world, as well as compilations of works on certain subjects, with certain revisions, most notably in the fields of medicine  and  history.I have to point out that the Byzantine actually preserve the Greco Roman tradition the real progress  of this culture came in the begining from the Islam and after  the Western Europe because the spiritually bios of the Byzantium was focus more on the politically and doctrine controversy with the Western Christendom.

I concede the east romans refugees kick starting the renaissance, and along with earlier migrants yes their was a more direct Greek role. however I have always thought that most of the ancient texts weren't preserved in the west but in the east. Trust me, its better for me if you point out that the east romans didn't let their religious bigotry burn all the books as they had attempted in Alexandria.

When I wrote that post, I was thinking about works from Aristotle which formed the basis of western science. Looking into it, a great amount of scientific, medical and philosophical Greek texts came to Europe via the Islamic world before 14- 15 century and also before, in some cases, any surviving Greek originals were made available to the west..

Look at the Toledo translation school to see what i mean, here

One translator, Gerard of Cremona, translated in the 12th century : Ptolemy's 'Astronomy' translated rom Arabic, along with Aristotelian science developed by Al-Farabi, Ptolemy's Almagest ("The Great Book") from Arabic, Euclid�s Geometry... from Arabic




Edited by Leonidas - 17-Mar-2007 at 00:36

Well, Yes, I have to admit Greek democracy was important. It was also important the Roman Republic and institutions like the Senate.

Edited by pinguin - 16-Mar-2007 at 22:14

A quick look at many Western official buildings, US especially, will show a clear attempt to imitate the Greek and Roman traditions in architecture. Try telling me that a stepped building held up by Doric or Corinthian columns is not drawn from Greek inspiration.

As to the Greek impact on modern democracy - it more provided the ideal for a system of government representative of the people. It was a form of inspiration.

The real work of building the modern representative democracy is traced back to medieval times. In many cases, such as England, the rulership of the monarch never had an easy time establishing itself on the basis of divine rule - which was the case in many parts of the Islamic, Byzantine or Asiatic world. A democratic franchise existed for members of the aristocracy, a franchise which was later extended as social and economic conditions changed to embrace ever greater segments of society.

Athenian democracy is important for the West as the first step away from tyranny towards a political system which empowers more of the nation's constituents than one man or his family. Certainly it wasn't perfect, not everyone received access to the franchise of democracy - that wasn't practical. But democracy in Athens was an important milestone, and a praiseworthy one, as an advance for the human race away from traditional autocracy and towards a more equitable distribution of power.

 

Modern city towers don't look Greek. Actually, the plantations' houses of the time of Confederation looked Greek, not today architecture. Greeks didn't have universities either (just free-lance teachers), and libraries kept scrolls, etc.