What do you think of the classic philosophical texts which developed into Western philosophy as we know it? In the Republic, Plato clearly advocated for a militarized state ruled by a class of guardians skilled in combat and gymnastics. He argued for a socialistic view of roles within a community, each producing their own share and consuming what they need from each other. He also argued for censorship of intellectuals, fashioning works into moral texts very similar to the socialist realism tendencies advocated by György Lukács and exemplified during the Soviet Union. From Plato what does Marx owe philosophically, and how much can Marx take credit for original thought in the context of western philosophy? This does not mean to be explicit criticism but rather constructive inquiry.
Plato’s Republic and philosophy before Marx
Military juntas and socialist realism have nothing to do with Marx.
That's ok. They're good things anyways
Do you know why you find similarity in Plato and Marx, because both advocate socialism, but let me tell you the difference.
Plato, and his teacher, Socrates, was living in the period of Athenian tribe dissolution, where private property began to erode every corner of society. The "Athenian democracy" now we celebrate, was nothing but the democracy of owners of private property, who demanded the opinion of "normal man" (who actually were mainly rich men, and the mobs they hired) to be equivalent to the opinion of elders in the tribe. Plato belonged to the class of aristocrats in tribe, and Republic was nothing but his attempt to reform the old communal tribe society to the new mode of production. That's why Plato was noble in his idea, but at the same time, reactionary and doomed to failed.
Socrates died, trying do oppose Athenian democracy. Plato and Aristotle were exiled, that was the fate of them. Medieval society can only appropriate the idealistic philosophy of Plato and Aristotle, but cannot do the same with their political idea, because it's too reactionary. Similar thing happen to Confucius in the East.
And the father of ancient Diamat, Heraclitus was even more extreme than Plato and Socrates. He rejected the new society totally, living as a hermit. Funny, the same thing also happen to Laozi, the father of dialectic thought in China.
Plato hated democracy, thought it was the worst possible system. In the Republic he argues for a system where everyone would be fulfilling their innate purpose, this purpose to be recognised by Philosopher Kings. Most people think PK's would have power in the classic sense, but all they could do is assign jobs to people, which is pretty powerful in and of itself. They would also take care of diplomacy. The Auxiliaries, next on the hierarchy, would be charged with defense and keeping the order. Below them would be various Necessary and Unnecessary Workers. People would be educated to the level that is necessary for them, PK's the most, then Aux, then the rest. Social mobility would be non-existent, once a Worker always a Worker, your offspring though could be born for any position. So no, Plato doesn't advocate for socialism at all.
Precious little. Marx flat out rejected Plato's Theory of Forms, and his focus on determining truth through observation of the matrerial world was developed by Plato's philosophical opponents.
I suppose so if you happen to enjoy the taste of boot leather.
Anarkiddies are so predictable.
Not even an anarchist. You are, however, a boot-licking bitch.
by direct consequence you're saying shit like military juntas are inherent to a state
Betch please. You don’t know me.