PEACEABLE DIRECT DEMOCRACY !
UNIFIED LIST for elections TO FACE CORRUPTION - FEAR
CONTENTS
1. PEACEABLE DIRECT DEMOCRACY MAKES PEOPLE HAPPY !
2. MECHANISMS OF ADDICTION
3. THE SLANDERED ANCIENT DIRECT DEMOCRACY OLYMPICS
AND THE SOCRATES ADMISSIONS in his apology

1. PEACEABLE DIRECT DEMOCRACY MAKES PEOPLE HAPPY !
'Happiness, Economy and Institutions' by Bruno Frey and Alois Stutzer, of the University of Zurich, is published in the October 2000 issue of the Economic Journal.
Note that in Switzerland the use of the Reconciliating Unified List for elections, prevents from corruption, that's why in the rest of the world, universities and media never speak about this system...(http://www.bk.admin.ch/themen/pore/index.html?lang=en)

Studies of what makes people happy have found that employment and low inflation are two key factors, but until now there has been no research on the effect of direct democracy. In the first systematic empirical analysis of the effect of different political systems on happiness, Professors Bruno Frey and Alois Stutzer show that the more extensive the political direct participation rights of citizens, the more satisfied they are with their lives. Their research, published in the latest issue of the Economic Journal , uses data from 6,000 residents of Switzerland to show that people are happier the greater the local level of democracy. What is more, this increased happiness stems more from direct participation in the democratic process than from the outcome of the process itself.
Because constitutional arrangements are fairly stable over time, analyses of the effect of political institutions on happiness can be carried out at one moment in time. The problem of comparing across countries is that numerous other factors vary and it is difficult to isolate the sole effect that political systems play. The researchers overcome this problem through a cross-regional comparison that uses survey data from the 26 different regions of Switzerland. Due to the federal structure of Switzerland, the citizens control major areas of decision-making (e.g. changing state laws, referenda to prevent new expenditure, etc.) at a degree of control that varies greatly between the regions. In some, citizens have many opportunities of directly participating in the democratic process via referenda and initiatives; while in others, these possibilities are severely restricted.
The survey carried out between 1992-4. The degree of happiness attributed to these people is based on their answers to the following question: HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH YOUR LIFE AS A WHOLE THESE DAYS? The respondents could choose from a 10-point scale of predetermined answers that ranged from "completely satisfied' to 'completely dissatisfied'. According to psychologists, the responses to such questions correspond well to real-life manifestations of personal well-being such as frequent smiling and successful social interactions.
The answers to these questions are compared against standard economic and demographic data and against the degree of possible direct democratic participation. And as with other studies, the effect a higher income has on happiness is relatively small and statistically weak.
But the effect direct democratic participation has on happiness is large. For example, the results indicate that the happiness of a citizen who moves from Geneva (the region with the lowest participation possibilities) to Basel Land (the region with the highest participation possibilities) is considerably increased.
Frey and Stutzer conclude, 'Happiness mainly depends on how well developed democracy is. The study's main finding establishes political participation as an important determinant of citizens' well-being'.
There are two possible reasons why a higher degree of direct democracy may raise individuals' sense of well-being. First, due to the more active role of citizens, politicians are better monitored and controlled, and government decisions are subsequently closer to the wishes of the people. Second, the institutions of direct democracy extend their opportunities to get involved in the political process. Experimental evidence suggests that people value this procedural effect in addition to the actual outcome of the activity.
To discover which of these two reasons is responsible for the happiness that direct democracy brings, the researchers note that political participation in referenda is restricted to Swiss nationals and therefore mainly them can reap the benefits from the participation effect. Foreigners have no direct participation political rights but they cannot be excluded from the favorable outcome of direct democracy.
A direct comparison of the impact of direct democracy on foreigners and nationals, after other factors have been removed, shows that the benefits for nationals are approximately three times the size as the benefits for foreigners. This suggests that around two thirds of the benefits of direct democracy stem from simply being involved in the process of political decision-making. Indeed, Frey and Stutzer conclude, "Direct Democracy should not only be favored because it forces politicians to obey citizens' wishes, but also because people value directly engaging in the political process".


2. MECHANISMS OF ADDICTION

By Dr. Paul C. Eck and Dr. Larry Wilson
Introduction
Addiction is defined as an unhealthy attachment, habituation or dependency. There is also a positive use of the word addiction, meaning devotion. We will use the word in its more common negative or pejorative sense. Let us examine some basic principles involved in addiction. What is an addictive substance or habit? Anything that causes a temporary "high" or feeling of well-being, followed by a 'low', will tend to be addictive [such as several drugs, alchool, sugar, tv-mania, sleeping late, bets...] . As the effect wears off, another dose is needed to regain the temporary high. A negative addictive substance or habit is one that weakens the body or mind. It stimulates, rather than nourishes. When the "high" wears off, the addict feels even worse than before. He or she is attracted back to the addictive substance to feel good once again. This is the basic principle of all addiction. Something that causes well-being by nourishing the body is not usually considered addictive, although one could become devoted to it in a positive sense. The feeling of being nourished is usually different. Instead of a temporary high, there is a gentle lasting effect from nourishing substances or habits. It is possible that a substance or habit is in part nourishing or nurturing and in part stimulative or addictive. This is true of habits, co-dependant relationships and food substances such as coffee.

Addiction and the adrenal glands
A simple mechanism involved in addiction is that cortisone and cortisol secreted by the adrenal glands provides a natural 'high' or euphoric feeling. If you doubt this, ask someone who is taking high-dose cortisone. They feel no pain. Ever wonder how football players smash into one another at full speed and often jump up again smiling? It is not just due to knee pads and shoulder pads. Many professional athletes receive cortisone shots for painful knees, elbows, etc. Also, the excitement of the game itself revs up their adrenal glands temporarily and they feel less pain. Cortisone and cortisol are called the glucocorticoid hormones because they raise sugar levels in the blood. They cause the conversion of amino acids and glycogen to glucose. One, but probably not the only reason for the euphoria resulting from these hormones, is the increase in blood sugar that results from their secretion. Any substance, activity or habit that weakens the adrenal glands lowers the normal output of cortisone and cortisol. A person with weak adrenal glands craves the old euphoric feeling they once had. This is one reason Dr. Paul Eck says that slow oxidizers with weak adrenal glands think in the past. They remember the 'old days' when they felt better. Slow oxidizers may be attracted to any substance or activity that even temporarily restores their adrenal secretions to produce a sensation of well-being. Adrenal activity is related to the level of tissue potassium and especially sodium. Substances that raise sodium can enhance adrenal activity. Nutrients that raise sodium include vitamins B, C and E, manganese, chromium and molybdenum and eating adequate low-fat protein. Toxic metals that enhance sodium levels include cadmium, found in abundance in cigarette smoke. Another way to enhance adrenal activity is to eliminate or reduce elements that lower sodium levels. Elements that lower tissue sodium include zinc and magnesium. For example, phosphoric acid in cola drinks lower both calcium and magnesium levels. Phytates found in grains lower calcium, magnesium and zinc. Alcohol consumption lowers zinc and magnesium. Understanding how substances, habits and even emotions affect the adrenal glands can be a key to understanding their addictive power.

The Cola Generation
Among foods, soda pop and colas fulfill the criteria for addictive substances: They contain as much as 10 teaspoons of sugar. Adding so much sugar to the blood at one time causes a 'rush' in many people, followed by a low blood sugar a person weaker after consuming sugar. Many cola beverages contain caffeine. Caffeine stimulates the adrenal glands to produce adrenalin and cortisone, adding to the 'high'. But the glands are then left weaker, producing fatigue and depression later. The FDA attempted to ban Coca Cola in the 1920's for precisely this reason. Cola drinks contain phosphoric acid. Phosphoric acid cuts the sugary sweetness and provides a tangy flavor. However, it also binds calcium and magnesium and prevents their absorption from the intestinal tract. The mineral deficiency causes one's rate of metabolism to increase temporarily. Later, however, the body returns to its normal rate of metabolism, causing a 'low' feeling.

Sugar Blues
The rapid rises and subsequent fall in blood sugar that occurs due to the use of cola drinks and other sugary foods eventually weakens the adrenal glands and the insulin secretion apparatus system. This occurs through depletion of vital minerals and vitamins that are involved in the normal functions of these organs and systems. Nutritional depletion and nervous system dysfunctions initially lead to symptoms associated with hypoglycemia or low blood sugar. These include sweet cravings, reactions after eating sugar, irritability before meals and in the more extreme cases confusion, tremors, violence and even psychoses associated with sugar starvation in the brain. Later in life, high blood sugar or diabetes may result. In both low and high blood sugar, the cells starve for fuel. This syndrome produces strong cravings for any substance that will enhance adrenal activity to help raise glucose levels. Coffee, colas, cigarettes and cocaine will all fill the bill. Alcohol is burned like sugar, so it too will help raise glucose levels. All alcoholics tend to have blood sugar problems, sometimes called carbohydrate intolerance. Ever notice at Alcoholics Anonymous meetings all the coffee that is consumed, often with sugar?

Secondary Effects
A mineral imbalance, especially combined with sugar consumption, often leads to other conditions such as a chronic intestinal candidiasis. Deficiencies of zinc and other minerals weaken the normal immune responses. Weakened adrenal glands cause copper to become biounavailable. Copper is the body's natural yeast killer. Also, eating sugar 'feeds' the yeast which encourages its growth. Candida produces alcohol and acetaldehyde, both toxic substances. The alcohol can produce its own addiction, even though a person has not touched a drop of alcohol. Both substances further weaken the body, affecting the will power and mental clarity. Repeated antibiotic therapy, birth control pills and steroid therapy are additional addiction factors as they contribute to yeast overgrowth and weaken body chemistry. Are Artificial Sweeteners The Answer? Nutrasweet and saccharin are not the answer to the sugar problem. Artificially sweetened drinks still contain phosphoric acid, many questionable chemicals and often caffeine. Nutrasweet has its own toxicity for some people. By deceiving the body's sweetness indicator, body chemistry is still affected. The sweet craving goes on. Also, studies reveal that people who consume diet drinks tend to overeat on other sugary foods.

Starting Young
Today, consumption of sugar and caffeine is so high and often begins so early in life that the seesaw pattern of blood sugar fluctuation feels normal to many children. No wonder many of the revved-up Pepsi generation are mixed up and attracted to stronger drugs later in life, both prescription and street drugs. Recently, a teenager consulted me who admitted he was addicted to Coca Cola. He had spent time in a local mental institution for severe depression. During his stay, he was allowed all the Coca Cola he desired. No one understood why he made poor progress. When his nutritional imbalance was corrected, his depression lifted.

The Dropout antisocial aggressive system
In 1979, the New York City school system began to remove all sugar, preservatives, additives and food colorings from the school lunch program. Eight-hundred-thousand children took part. Test scores raised 15 percentage points, from below national average to above average. No other changes were made in the school system. The entire experiment was carefully documented, controlled and reported in the International Journal of Biosocial Research (Vol. 8(2):196-203). A separate paper was even written that attempted to find a fault with the experiment. Children need to understand that television advertisements for junk foods are total lies. Drinking Pepsi will not make you slim, beautiful or popular, even drinking gallons every day. Until simple issues such as these are addressed, much time and money are wasted on education, drug abuse, mental illness and even the homeless. These pressing problems will be solved much more easily when there is a return to healthful eating and living habits.

Weakening The Will
By weakening the adrenal glands, a person's resolve is also weakened. The adrenal glands are called the fight-or-flight glands. Our ability to secrete adrenal hormones, in large, determines our ability to handle stress. Adrenal glands weakened by sugar consumption or constant anger may reduce a person's ability to resist the temptations of other drugs. In other words, our ability to cope with our reality depends in part upon a balanced body chemistry. The use of any item or habit that weakens or unbalances the chemistry reduces the ability to handle reality. The temptation to go into denial then increases and with it the temptation to utilize drugs or other habits to deny reality. It is possible to overcome these habits through faith, concentration or motivation. However, the chemical imbalances just make the process of overcoming these habits more difficult.

Emotions And The Adrenal Glands
Emotions can be powerful addictions as well: Watching violent movies, x-rated movies or horror movies, listening to loud music or the ghastly headlines on the nightly news are other ways to temporarily stimulate the adrenal glands. Arguing with your mate, hating the government and holding prejudices and resentments are other methods. Many people have a fear-based personality. They feel separated from their Creator, which causes fear. Fear tends to produce paralysis, feelings of helplessness and a victim mentality. Paralysis shuts down the adrenal glands which are designed for action (either fighting or running). For some people, the response to this condition is to turn inward and become depressed. However, another response is to become angry and resentful. Such emotions stimulate the adrenal glands into action. The emotion can become a drug. Many people are secretly angry all the time. They must continually find something or someone to become upset with in order to feel 'well'. We tend to project outside of ourselves everything we don't like, so that we can feel upset about the conditions around us. It is no wonder problems like violence, racism and domestic abuses are difficult to get rid of. They will never go away as long as we need them to stimulate our weakened adrenal glands.

Getting Well
As some people know, before real healing can occur one often has to feel the pain, exhaustion and depletion of the body. Alcoholics Anonymous calls this 'bottoming out'. It leads to a shift in attitude. One no longer seeks the temporary high, but rather seeks the truth about what one has become. This rests the adrenal glands. Without rest, little rebuilding can take place. The basis for practicing the old virtues of forgiving, loving, allowing, accepting and non-judgement is that these attitudes rest the body, allowing for a restoration of adaptive energy. One gives up fighting and running, so that true rebuilding can occur.
Along with an attitude shift, depleted glands and an imbalanced body chemistry can be supported and balanced through scientific diet modification. Other natural therapies can also support these changes. Once the emotional and the physical aspects of addiction are understood, one is on the road to a solid basis for health.


3. THE SLANDERED ANCIENT DIRECT DEMOCRACY OLYMPICS

All first human communities were peaceful, as the anthropological research, the most ancient traditions and paintings show and professor Raymond Kelly wisely presents in his book "Warless societies and the origin of war" -www.press.umich.edu/titleDetailDesc.do?id=11589(see also saharasia.org). 10.000 years ago, unfortunately, the overpopulation occurred in Middle East, drove some stressed, fear addicted and aggressive adults to start wars... That mostly lethal disease spread little by little through genocides and exhaustion to the greater part of Earth, with the exception of the Arctic areas.
Many communities resisted - and the luckier still resist and hope - adopting the precious habits of self-denial and mutual aid. This is the case with the slandered and slaughtered ancient Greek (Ellenic) Direct Democratic cities: to face the war epidemic that approached Asia Minor and the islands around 2000 B.C., they formed defensive confederations and insisted on negotiations for truce and peace, sending ambassadors all over Mediterranean Sea; among regular celebrations of succeeded peace-time were the Olympics !

[PARENTHESIS:
Peaceable people suffer when aggressives slander any collective decision civilization:
Aggressives never present the opinion of peaceable defenders. So the well-advertised deserter oligarchic general Thucydides, make never comments on ephors' genocides in Platea, Athens, Egos Potami and so on, while they took tons of gold from satraps to give them democrats as slaves - they managed this in -387...
In addition, the deserter general admits (E 110-) that the oligarchics in Milos, not only they made an antidemocratic coup d' etat, but had called satraps to give them the island... So, when anyone reads in his text that the democratic majority called the slandered Democratic Alliance (1.000 members during the great antidemocratic war - Aristophanes, Wasps, 707) to save them and they opened the doors, can we believe that poor Athenian sailors could kill any traitor after the battle, or even the majority of their brothers? Why there is no other relative text saved?
LIES AND HATE MAKE AGGRESSIVE DANGEROUS.
The other mostly advertised "selected" hater idle Socrates admits in his poisonous apology that
1. his 'demon'(megalomaniac ego) guided him not to work for decades but to spend nights with young "selected" aristocrats, pushing them to follow his pupils Kritias and Harmides to slaughter the democrats that feeded them... (Plato wrote: the tyrants 'in quite a short time they made Democracy seem by comparison precious as gold'. Seventh Letter 324D).
2. he took an order by this maniac Kritias, did not obeyed and had NO consequences...
3. he never went to the General Assembly (Ecclesia of Dimos) he hated , except once, as deputy (!, even he was threatening Peoples with his "superiority"...)-coordinator of the Assembly, where he tried in vain to protect from trial his pupils-generals that had left poor democrats shipwreckers to drown in Arginouses: they said next day that there were hard seas, but not for the democrat general they ordered to save anyone he could... Some of the next oligarchic generals together with satraps and Lysandros committed one of the worst genocides in Egos Potami, as other maniacs had done in Egypt (where several of the 50.000 Athenians were murdered because they helped Egyptians to unload from persian occupation, in -457, and that provisional lack of fleet was the hushed-up reason of the transportation of the Alliance's ship fund) and in Sicily, where Athenians were called to save democrats from Syracuse haters, who eventually led Carthage tyrants to destroy Agrigento -409...
4. He never said, himself before his suicide or anyone of the other "selected", what did they do to defend Democracy from the hateful conspiracy of spartan ephores - satraps - Carthage tyrants... They only helped them (Isocrates, About Peace: 5.000 talents=tons of gold ephors took from satraps...) to slander and destroy one of the happiest civilizations ever appeared... THEY NEVER CARE ABOUT THE FUTURE EVEN OF THEIR OWN CHILDREN. ALL PEACEMAKERS SHOULD UNITE TO CALM AGGRESSIVES AND HELP REVIVE BENEFICIAL PEACEABLE COLLECTIVE DECISIONS TO FACE THE COMING ICE-AGE
Besides, for the lie that collective decisions are wrong, we must remind that when the democratic majority of Athens - or any other city- was absent in the ships defending fearlessness, the oligarchic minority was making trials against brave democrats as Themistocles, Anaxagoras, Alkiviades, Aspasia... So they were not Athenians, but the "selected" haters that destroyed this Golden Century, elsewhere too].

Which was the hushed up main characteristic of this calming system (until its sapping by the conspiracy of the "selected" tyrants of Persia, Phoenicia, Cartage, Rome and their socratic supporters in Greece), to which mankind owes the memory and the hope for an harmonic coexistence? The agreement of the celebrating cities to encourage other cities to participate as soon as they changed their fobic regimes of some maniacs, with COLLECTIVE DECISIONS and ONE YEAR SERVICE i.e. Direct Democracy ! That was exactly the criterion of participation in Olympics and other similar festivities!
How do we understand this unwritten law? First from the catalogue of the participating cities, where tyrannies, kingdoms and other warlike (=barbarian) regimes were excluded. With the only exception, the war addicts tyrants of Sparta (even there, its malicious ephores, that put children to fight each other every day until exhausted, they had one year service) because democratic Greeks (Ellines) wanted to calm and remind poor Spartans the joy of peace and save their Messinians slave-helots from extinction. Note that several brave Spartan generals, as Pausanias, Aghis and Cleomenes, were murdered before they manage to liberate helots...
In addition to the criterion cited, we remark that fearless democrat athletes contended nude, not for money, records or other egoistic reasons, but to continue the tradition of inspiring the new generations, in contrast of AGGRESSIVE Achaians dwellers of Mycenaean times, gladiators of Rome and of TV & crowd arenas of nowadays.
Furthermore, the entrance was free for all, natives and foreigners, poor and rich, citizens or not, except women. Women were not permitted because the continuous antidemocratic wars didn't give enough time to defending majorities to persuade oligarchics to give women full rights, as in the past (see plebiscite for the name of Athens chosen from Athena Dimokratia - aspirator of Direct Democracy, its presentation on Parthenon-monument of Direct Democracy FEARLESSNESS and the attempts of Aspasia for example) as they managed 7 times (594, 508, 490, 480, 406, 403, 338 b.c.) for Athenians and foreign employees of the self-styled "selected", that accepted to defend Democracy, according to Aristotle's "Constitution of Athenians". But women, respected mothers of fearless kids, had their own Olympics, Irea and, in every city, Thesmophoria. They had also more rights than all of us, today's subjects of feardoms...
We also know that truce or regulation infringements were condemned, and ephores at least once were punished.
Finally Olympics used to be a real celebration of PEACEABLE COEXISTENCE with participation, group songs and dances, not just performances, in order to keep in mind, live and help everyone live with the priority of friendship and happiness, preventing and curing antisocial behaviour and catastrophical fear addiction.
WHEN ARE WE GOING TO SING WITH OUR FRIENDS THE JOY OF LIFE?


Socrates' confessions of guilt in his apology

What oligarchy really meant for the majority of the Athenians (the harmonically collaborative rich and poor that offered Golden Century Courage to humankind, thanks to which we can talk now), one can also read in pro-persian socratic Xenophon's `Hellenika'. Describing the reign of the Thirty tyrants (comprising two uncles of Plato), Xenophon states: `The oligarchs went on a killing spree murdering all democratic opponents, more Athenians than all the Peloponnesians did in ten years of war ...'
Introduction
Unlucky, unlulled, incapable but antisocial haters mainly hate peaceable people, because haters cannot imagine therapy or stand any control of their parasitism by anyone. Just see the origin of wars (www.saharasia.org) and the present continuity of the much-advertised misanthrope farao's tyrannies and young Plato's 'ideal terror regime', which now are the disguised parliamentarisms self-styled as 'democracies';... Where are the customs of the peaceable past and today's societies taught? How many historians dare to reveal that mature Plato in his Seventh Letter accepted that (direct) 'Democracy is gold', and that he proposed to the citizen of Megalopolis, what oligarchs denied to Aspasia: women participation in General Assemblies again, after aggressive king Kekrops had stopped centuries ago !
Critias stands condemned as the most bloody and vicious of this gang of terrorists. The terror was directed not only against democratic leaders but even against moderate oligarchs like Niceratus, son of Nicias, and wealthy metics such as Leon of Salamis. It was when the victims of this prosecution began to include even leading, if moderate, oligarchs, that Theramenes and other relatively mild conservatives began to suspect that all was not well. As often happens, political terror created a monster devouring its own children. Of these victims Theramenes is the most prominent. His characterization of Critias, in fact the whole speech given by Xenophon, is self-explanatory. "I agree with Critias, indeed, that whoever wishes to cut short your government, and strengthens those who conspire against you, deserves justly the severest punishment. But to whom does this charge best apply? To him, or to me? Look at the behavior of each of us, and then judge for yourselves. At first we were all agreed, so far as the condemnation of the known and obnoxious demagogues. But when Critias and his friends began to seize men of station and dignity, then it was that I began to oppose them. The man who gives you this advice, and gives it to you openly, is he a traitor-or is he not rather a genuine friend? It is you and your supporters, Critias, who by your murders and robberies strengthen the enemies of the government and betray your friends. Depend upon it, that Thrasybulus and Anytus are much better pleased with your policy than they would be with mine. You accuse me of having betrayed the Four Hundred; but I did not desert them until they were themselves on the point of betraying Athens to her enemies. You call me the 'Buskin,' as trying to fit both sides. But what am I to call you, who fit neither of them, who under the democracy were the most violent hater of the people-and who under the oligarchy have become equally violent as a hater of oligarchical merit? I am, and always have been, Critias, an enemy both to democracy and to oligarchical tyranny. I desire to constitute our political community out of those who can serve it on horseback and with heavy armor;-I have proposed this once, and I still stand to it. I side neither with democracy nor despots, to the exclusion of the dignified citizens. Prove that I am now, or ever have been, guilty of such crime, and I shall confess myself deserving of ignominious death."
Where was Socrates through all this? There can be little doubt that he was very intimate with the oligarchical leaders, many of whom he had instructed in the notion that only the 'good' and the 'wise' and the true haters should rule; that government should not be the art of collective decisions, but depended on "knowledge, knowledge of ultimate principles of the "good" and the "just,"-knowledge which could only be gained by the oligarchical study of terror and a painful askesis. But it was not only on the theoretical plane that this intimacy existed. Two years earlier Socrates had shown himself willing to execute a practical political commission for his friends and his clique.
With Theramenes and his sect, men who were convinced oligarchs; who, in practice, were willing to intrigue with Sparta, overthrow the democracy, betray the state, destroy its fleet and, perhaps, regrettably enough, abandon hundreds of its finest sailors. But at the prospect of turning the terror against the wealthy and the prominent, these men drew back in horror. Neither Socrates nor, for that matter, Plato made any attempt to conceal their criticisms of Athenian democracy, its dependence (as they were poisoning other oligarchists) on the whim of the multitude; "nor did they conceal their preference for Sparta's more aristocratic, oligarchic and servile organization of society." Moreover the essence of Socrates' teaching was, as we have seen, profoundly anti-democratic, striking at the very theoretical roots on which the democratic way of life was founded.
we must nevertheless realize that the instinct of the democracy was profoundly right when it saw in him the evil genius behind the scene; the fons et origo malorum; the intellectual center from which emanated the very heart and soul of anti-democratic beliefs. We must here reflect once again how closely philosophy was bound up with the factionalism of the Greek states; and we need only recall once again the names of Anaxagoras (democrat), Pythagoras (oligarchist) and Aristotle (silent democrat to escape murder by Pelleans).
Bearing this in mind, we are in a much better position to appreciate the feelings of the men who came back from the Piraeus with the experience of the terror fresh in their minds.
Viewed from this point of view we read the Apology (confession) of Socrates in a very different light. We are so used to thinking of the work as the high-minded apologia of the philosophic man, remote from mundane things, high above politics and political striving, that it is difficult to think of it as the extremely adroit and facile plea of a putschist.
The setting of the trial, to begin with, was extremely interesting. The democracy, having restored itself and balanced the rather precarious political position, 3 years after the end of the coup d'etat, and while a new one was probably in plan, felt it necessary to deal with the problem of Socrates. Three men came forward as his accusers: Meletus for the poets, Anytus for the craftsmen and political leaders, and Lycon for the rhetoricians. These three groups represent the intellectual as well as the practical leadership of the democracy. Several facts about the trial are of great interest. There is no reason to think that Anytus-the central figure in the prosecution-was acting from any feeling of personal vindictiveness. We know that during the rule of the Thirty tyrants he had been forced to leave the city and that his property had been confiscated. Yet upon his return he distinguished himself by waiving any claims he might have made in the law courts. As for the idea that the democrats were acting out of an irrational mania to pay back their enemies in kind, we have even the evidence of Plato to the contrary. "Those who then came back conducted themselves very moderately."
As a matter of fact the democracy was almost incredibly tolerant toward the men who attempted to destroy it. The only intelligible motive we can ascribe to the democrats arose out of a perfectly sober estimate of the danger both past and present represented by Socrates. Fortunately we have two separate accounts of the indictment which check with each other admirably. Favorinus quotes the actual charge as follows: "Socrates does wrong by not worshiping the gods which the city worships and introduces new deities. And lie corrupts the youth." Plato's version differs slightly but is substantially the same. "Socrates does wrong, in corrupting the youth" and disbelieving in the gods that the city believes in, but [introduces] other gods."
We can only regret that so little may be regarded as established, fact about the trial. It is even very doubtful whether Socrates made any defense at all. We are inclined to believe that Dr. H. Gomperz and Prof. W. A. Oldfather have proved conclusively he did not. Their arguments briefly summarized are as follows: In the Gorgias, Callicles draws a merciless if imaginary portrait of Socrates' utter helplessness when he will, some day, be brought to trial for his life. Socrates responds (somewhat later) by picturing the helplessness of Callicles before the Judge of the Dead, fused and bewildered, standing at a loss for what to say. ' there, exactly as I here." In, the Thaeatetus the same theme appears-the frustration and helplessness of the philosopher court. Again the words, "all helplessness" (pasan aporian)! . Them by way of direct evidence, there is the explicit statement of Maximus of Tyre that Socrates gave no defense for himself, but that he "kept silence without faltering." To this Oldfather adds, "In the first place, there is an astonishing multiplicity of speeches ascribed to Socrates, or designed for Socrates, at the time of his trial, or composed in behalf of Socrates at some later date, by Plato, Xenophon [or pseudo-Xenophon], Lysias, Theodectes, Demetrius of Phalerum, Zeno of Sidon, Plutarch, Theo of Antioch, and even, seven hundred years too late, by Libanius." 33 The three speeches that have survived differ so widely both in content and manner that it is impossible to believe that they go back to one original. There are frequent references in Plato to the "ridiculous or pathetic figure which the philosopher cuts in the court room."
The picture in the Platonic Apology of Socrates completely in command of the situation, exercising a quiet but compulsive mastery; the aloof, detached philosopher, the aristo scornfully mastering the noisy impulses of the canaille, contrasts very vividly with Diogenes' picture: "Justus of Tiberias in his book entitled The Wreath says that in the course of the trial, Plato mounted the platform and began: 'Though I am the youngest, men of Athens, of all who ever rose to address you,'-whereupon the judges shouted out, 'Get down, get down.�" "The fact that Justus was a Jew," says Oldfather, "may not be regarded as quite sufficient to discredit his authority with others as readily as it does with J. Geffcken." And it is no wonder that discipleship through the ages has preferred not to linger on or credit so unpleasant a picture.
Moreover, Plato's picture of the serene objectivity with which Socrates and the jurors discussed the fitting penalty, is turned by Diogenes into something like a riotous scene. The prosecutor had demanded the death penalty: Socrates proposed a trivial fine -- 25 or 100 drachmas. The jury, a very large body in Athens, went wild. Whereupon Socrates said that such a man as he should be pensioned for life. It is no wonder that in reply to such an impertinence as this, the death sentence was immediately passed. Eighty additional jurors apparently felt that that man was incorrigible.
Around the figure of Socrates a veritable literary warfare developed. His friends and supporters poured forth a flood of argument, rhetoric, direct and indirect defense. As part of this systematic campaign, we can certainly include the Gorgias of Plato, the Meno of Plato, the Apology of Lysias, the Memorabilia of Xenophon, the Apology of Xenophon (or pseudo-Xenophon) as well as the well-advertised Platonic Apology. Nor were his opponents silent; in the year 393 or shortly after, Polycrates published an attack on Socrates which purported to convey the case for the prosecution at the trial. The belief grew up in some quarters that this was the actual speech delivered by Anytus, but Favorinus pointed out, even in antiquity, that the mention of the walls built by Conon made this chronologically impossible. The fact, however, that this particular identification breaks down does not invalidate the view that the pamphlet of Polycrates embodies substantially the actual case of the prosecution.
It is important to notice that the whole effort of the oligarchist faction was to lift Socrates above the struggle of contending factions and make him a symbol of certain eternal and absolute moral. and religious ideas. The aim of the democrats, on the other hand, was to keep the argument on a strictly political level. The oligarchists were eager to take their philosopher from earth to heaven; the democrats were equally eager to pin him down mother earth. In this way two distinct conceptions of Socrates developed. Out of the one evolved the figure of the symbolic Socrates-the mouthpiece of the eternal, the prophet who enunciates ideas of absolute and universal validity, principles of morality and justice which arc to be regarded as always and everywhere true, without reference to time and space; out of the other, the lost Socrates, an historical personality, the intellectual leader of a murdering faction, the man who more than any other was responsible, in an intellectual and moral sense, for the counterrevolution, and even for the excesses of the Thirty. And it is important to see that for the oligarchist intellectual position as Plato developed it, with its emphasis on the eternal idea, the claim of absolute obedience, the insistence that fear is the very incarnation of the eternal principle, the subordination of the governed to the governor, the "agreement" between classes that only the "guardians" must rule, for all this the figure of the symbolic Socrates was essential. Hence the eagerness of the Socratics to pitch the argument on an ethical, moral, religious and absolutist plane, to divorce Socrates from the struggle of his faction against people and to make him a figure antipathetic to both sides. Xenophon, for example, does his best to make it appear that Critias and Socrates were at odds. He represents the decree passed by the Thirty tyrants against the sophists, forbidding men "to teach the art of words," as a direct personal insult to Socrates himself. This is distinctly improbable, and it is a view which Xenophon himself refutes when he discloses the fact that in spite of the decree Socrates continued to teach the technique of interlocution. The Thirty tyrants, the uncompromising terrorists, who were responsible for something like fifteen hundred political murders including that of Theramenes, were not the kind of people to pass such a measure without intending its enforcement.