SOCRATES WAS AN ELITIST PIG

The great liberal journalist I. F. Stone, who once made the very true statement that "all governments lie," late in his life turned to examining some near-sacred classical philosophy using the same critical and investigative approaches that he used for understanding twentieth century politics. He ended up taking on Plato's defense of elitist intellectualism, Socrates' Apology.

(Remember, Socrates was supposedly put to death by the democracy loving Athenians for "corrupting" their youth, a charge I have feared having leveled against me since I started teaching five years ago.)

Here is a sample of Stone's work which he wrote as an interview with himself:

Why should this fascinate an old Washington muckraker like you?

Because it’s a black eye for all I believe in, for democracy and free speech. Anyone who starts out to study the problem of free speech in depth – as I did after ill health forced me to give up my Weekly – is irresistibly drawn back to ancient Athens, where it all began.

Isn’t that pretty far from home base, from current concerns and difficulties?

Not really. All our basic problems are there in miniature. I fell in love with the Athenians and the participatory democracy they developed. Free discussion was the rule everywhere – in the Assembly, the law courts, the theatre, and the gymnasiums where they spent much of their leisure. Free speech – what the Greeks called parrhasia – was as much taken for granted as breathing.

But then I was stopped, or stumped, by this contradictory and traumatic spectacle of what they did to Socrates. These people and this city, to which I look back for inspiration – how could they have condemned this philosopher to death? How could so blatant a violation of free speech occur in a city that prided itself on freedom of inquiry and expression?

But why should we care at this late date?

Because Plato turned the trial of his master, Socrates, into a trial of Athens and of democracy. He used it to demonstrate that the common people were too ignorant, benighted and fickle to entrust with political power. In Plato’s "Apology," the contrast drawn between the nobility of Socrates and the grim verdict of his juror-judges indicted democracy in the eyes of posterity. And thanks to his genius, no other trial except that of Jesus has so captured the imagination of Western man.

Plato made Socrates the secular martyred saint of the struggle against democracy. He stigmatized it as "mobocracy." Yet this was the very same "mob" which applauded the anti-war plays of Aristophanes when Athens was fighting for its life against Sparta. (No such antiwar plays were allowed, by either side, during our last two World Wars). This was the same "mob" whose eagerness for new ideas, and its readiness to hear them, drew philosophers from all over the ancient world. It made Athens – in the proud words of Pericles – "the school of Hellas," the university of the Greek world. It is the high repute of Athens that makes the trial of Socrates so puzzling.

Stone eventually goes on to show that Socrates may very well have been corrupting the youth of Athens; that is, Socrates, as a pro-authoritarian, was most likely presenting a very real threat to Athens' fragile democracy, and that Plato's writings about his trial amount to so much intellectualized propaganda. I strongly urge you, dear readers, to go read the Stone essay in its entirety for a couple of reasons. First, the essay is an excellent exercise in critical thinking that manages to reveal how even university professors and intellectuals are awed by reputation and prone to herd-like behavior. Second, the essay reveals that democracy, as a concept, has always had strong opposition, often from people who are smart enough to know better--these are very valuable lessons for today; we should never blindly believe the so-called experts.

It is a bit long, but it is well worth the read. Click here.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$