Archive for June, 2013

Athenian Constitutions

June 18, 2013

Athenian History, no matter how I slice it, is complicated, the narrative not as unified, as say the story of Rome’s ascendcy, or American History; much like the growing pain herself of History, starting off so as it does with Greek History.

Now though I see Greek History as narrating mini-rises, and falls, sort of like tragic? lòwer class follies, contrasting the order and ascendancy of rome

I was studying Constitutionalism, positing such document as fundamentally in error, via its atheism assocciated with voting, not in public squares, with ayes and nays, but privately, in polling places; the atheism that invests so much in the face value of “the people” while ignoring how ineffective the people have been.

So I wanted to see what the Athenian Constitution actually wrote. And in googling such, found a discertation by a student of Aristotle regarding Athenian History that is too rich and ripe a product to pass up remarking as a deacon upon “Athens” might.

My method is as easy as saying good morning. I read this text from 350bc, and anything out of today’s ordinary, I note.

1) There was much more class war back then. Athens was agricultural. A few countrolled all the land and rented it out to the many. The many would go into debt, and the collateral for debt, and this was in their constitution, was themselves, so that more and more ended up in slavery. The author refers to this as serfdom, and says the lower classes involved, were very disaffected with it. The people had no political power or share in decisions. Athens, in these early years, I guess before the fifth centurey bc, was essentially an oligarthy.

My only remark on this situation; is it is hard to believe the people dont change the situation with reason. Later Athens, according toBurkhardt,; the lower classes understood their prosperity depended on a wealthy upper class, and the upper class understood abusing the lower, was inconsistent with a prosperous way of life. Yet this was not the case in the beginning. Yet it is hard to believe, the poor could not be reasonable with the wealthy. Indeed, the going into debt may be incurred by the wealthy land owners neglecting the land because they dont work it, and the renters neglecting to improve the land, because they don’t own it. Indeed, it is difficult to believe the rich can be mean to the poor, for the conscience would then oppress the enjoyment of life. Greek History, is then, an asciatic movement away from tribal paganism of daily circles, to a removed historical form of power, that does not make sense, prima facea. When I look at the remaining jobs at wal-mart, etc, I see a corporatism domianating, that is harmful to the economy. Yet whatthis infrastructure of early athens might pronounce, is a criminal element hiding behind the rich, and possibly manipulating the poor through sexual abuse. For we have to ask, how can the oppressed not stand up and resolve things? And how can the oppressors, go on?

You can say the poor are apathetic, and the rich are mean, but that’s simply not true, to blame the sheeple. This is God’s recorded History. What we are subjecteed to. And this may explain the illogical gaps, as consistent with the avatar nature to History, that history serves up human kind, as playthings to its story and ways and purpose.

The first constitution, rich ruled over the serf for this oligarthy, had a king, a leader of the council, and leader of war, and then all that served as leader of council, automatically joined a council, of themselves upon retiring. The terms were for ten years, but there could be nine leaders of council, like the prime minister to a parlimentary system; and yet only the upper classes, as defined by how much taxes they put out for the war effort, were available for these upper positions. There were lower positions, and the lower the class, the less eligible the citizen.

I note that back then, war was a rich man’s sport, and paid for by the rich, even by the government confiscating the property of a wealthy person, to pay for a few days of soldiers. The political leader did not stay back in the capital, but led battles, and marched along as a soldier. The surest way to avoid draft, was to be poor as can be, and do agriculture work, as agriculture was very important.A certain Morris, who became governor of N.J.. Was a rich oligarth who practically provided the american revolutionary army with their whole navy. There is a little idea thus here, that the upper classes can be more oppressed than the lower classes, insofar as they must go to war, or are more vulnerable to a systemic crime, as wealthier targets, as having less reoourse by virtue of a power that hides wealth behind a dubious justice system. Specifically, the author cites as a requirement for voting, being abe to furnish military equipment. The archons, nine in all, led a council of 401. Missing council was punished with fines, but the richer classes werefined more for missing them. Everyone of the higher council was to serve once on council before another could serve twice. So in this sense council was inclusive and precluded career politicians.

Constitutions then, place power, or at least have so far, in the wealthy. So how can the disapointed people, or America and Athens, not find fault with constitutions? It’s iexpliquable, right? Constitutions have led to corruption and folly, yet the constitutional system, escaped scrutiny for such per se. Is this the effect of pro constitution propoganda? Do we really not exist enough to determine a way oflife without constitution, an alternative form? Does the constitutions assumptions of everyone’s sentience in effect rule public opinion of constitutions, as that public has the energy of individualism, without honest individualism? Does constitutionalism relegate public opinion atheistic enough to preclude questioning constitutionalism?

Anyway these rules led to an oppressive way, of debt leading to slavery, and oligarthy, and the people of athens rose up against the upper class, and the two sides were divided and living in competing camps. They then though, appointed Solon, to resolve things, who wasa bit of a poet in his mediation of the issues. He was respected, but wealth-wise, middle class, and he exhorted the upper class not to be greedy, but understand humilty. Whereas I think the thing to understand is, how easy people are to be controlled, and therefore how obvious it is people dont want to be greedy, but work together, and the whole class division, a product of the control ofan oppressed human race and earth to effect of history, and way without sacrifice, but foolish society.

So Solon then ended slavery as a way of debt forfeit, and passed laws forgiving and the people were happier. Apparently athens was of four tribes, as well as classes, and each tribe could pick a hundred for the 401 council, yet again, I dont see how tribal environment,could be consistent with oligarthy and serfdom. Therefore it must be like all the inconsìtency and what does not make sense, of society and life; another system, that does little good, that would obviously result, were there real people, and not avatarsrepresenting a way and form, that is little now more than symboliic, or cloaking, way for society. Solon was respected for ending the surfeit of oneself for debt, establishing the right to petition a court for redress of grievance, forcing a court to deal with pperceived wrongs by citizens, but most important, that these disputes be decided by juries. For this last gave power to the poorerr people the most. And yet, again, lets ask why can’t disputes be resolved in simple circles of those that know the principles? Why the formalities of court that tend to hold back justice? Again, because the creation of history, is this way, the oposite of sensible, and so that inverse, is what the athenian, went through; a suppllication to history, at the expense of reason, with all the complicated ramififications of spirit therein.

Solon angered the upper class by forgiving debt. And the lower classes by not redistributing property. Yet he did not cling to power byadhering to one party.He chose theemnity of both to the security of enfolding by one.. There was still officially disapointment, but things were better. Yet his relying on written law, rather than people reasoning together, of a constitution limiting powerful places tothe richer, but also the few, who are then eassier to control than the people, suspect origin of constitution. He clearly dealt with the leaders of the two parties, who having weight behind them, were not easy to deal with, and his poetry put down both sides.

So Solon left, and after four years there were troubles again. For which the tribes agreed, the pivotal archwhich numbered ten now, shall have so many from each tribe. And yet still there was strife, and only four tribes, which had their own rules each.. History though, has moved up from an oppressive situatoin of serfdom, to a gaudy situation of poilitical entertainment, if admittedly more foolish and folly and causing the reaction that something is wrong, rather than a reaction of satisfaction, nevertheless, For after Solons laws, 30 years later, of the three factions, limited government, excessive democratic government, and oligarthy, P. Of cemocratiy won, but he was no true democratic, but seeking power, and achieved such by claiming injuries by political rivals, and gaining bodyguards because of that, who turned into a goon squad that then took over the acropolis.

So he ruled, then fled, was paid to come back, then left again due to the danger. The third time, after leading a colony, he had mercernaries and allies, like thebes, and they took athens. He then asked the athenians to parade in military gear, upon which his soldiers confinscated their weapons and told them it was ok, he would be good, and handlle affairs of the state. Thus here you can see an atheistic vanity to athenians that accepts their troubles as too daunting to face, and accepts accapting immersion into their privateaffairs as the way to go. It is not just P.’s tyranny, but a state of mind, or state of people, that accepted the situation, as precursor of history, being accepting, and not demonstrating the charactor of the people to tyrnanny, nor the natural reason of tribes and pagans, that way being metaphysically shit down, for a covert way of sacrifice through society and gaudy history.