In considering the seemingly off-handed decrees of Alexander the Conqueror, one should be informed of his education, and that of his tutor, Aristotle, student of Plato, Student of Socrates. It is possible, that another student of Socrates, Xenophon, was more influential in Alexander’s mind, than Plato. That is an opinion that encroaches as Alexander follows in Xenophon’s footsteps into Asia. Xenophon had for his experience in government, the stewardship of a mobile Republic under arms. That republic is a Timarchy, according to the Socratic definition, which begins the cycle or republican evolution. The modern mind, used to a less nuanced understanding of republican forms being simple Oligarchy versus Democracy, might note Alexander’s permissiveness as to governmental forms adopted by the subjects of his conquest/liberation as a hasty, even blithe impatience with justice and civics. This leads to a gross misunderstanding of his character. We should then view these actions, as they occur, in the light of Socrates’ forms of republican government, in the shadows of the cave he warns us of, a cave constructed of the baser human natures, the stewardship of which is left to extra-national financial interests.
A summation of Plato’s Republic, specifically the Shadow Cave of Book 7, and the five forms of Republic in Book 8.
…
The dialogue of Socrates, as presented by Plato, reaches the form of high art, perhaps of the most important dialogue conducted in human language by two mortals, the second being Glaucon, the Gray-one. [0] How might the postmodern person think of the allegory of the cave, chained, facing the indirect sunlight, backed by fire, flickering behind a wall, atop which statues are paraded like puppets, giving only the shadows on the walls as a “reality.” This dialogue concerned the “blue-pilled” [prisoners in the shadows] versus the “red-pilled,” those who have actually escaped the prison to see the source of things—being the sun—and are thus forever separated from the conventions of the shadowed cave; enlightened and alone.
Socrates quotes Homer and Hesiod as his baseline sources, arming us with the same source material, with Homer being Alexander’s bedrock. “The ascent of the soul to the realm of what is knowable… it would take God to know if it were true or false…” So spoke Socrates in his assisted quest to determine the good, right, truth and justice, not just for the individual, but for his community. Book 7 instructs upon dealing with souls who may have come from darkness or light, and are both blinded in any case coming into this life, this brief field of trial. Socrates’ focus is on “the soul” and darkness and light, the quest of the soul to take on “It’s brightest form, which we call The Good.” This is established, with concessions that evil criminals may have a keen mind’s eye for gain, and in so doing shackle their fellows in the shadows.
The old sage does predict his own death in this book. He also notes The Isles of the Blessed, the segment of the afterlife reserved for just and honorable and good mortals, who passing from life have not attained divinity, but are no longer compelled to return to the land of the living or sulk in the dreary realm of Hades. Socrates calls for a waking reality rather than a dream. The axiom is established that the republic that is ruled by the reluctant is the best and that ruled by the most eager are the worst.
…
Book 8 outlines the evolution of five types of republics. Each leads to another form. The forms are, in order:
-1.) Timocracy, rule by the most honorable
-2.) Oligarchy, rule by the richest
-3.) Democracy, rule by the mob
-4.) Tyranny, rule by the strongest
-5.) Aristocracy, rule by the best
Tyranny is the fourth and most diseased form a republic can take. Agreement is reached that the many forms of government the world over conform to the many forms of human character [1], and that forms of republics were no different. Socrates states numerous times that revolutions in republics all involve money and outsider intervention. The work of Thucydides is a case study in this sorry truth.
-1.) Timocracy, rule by traditional honor culture, has as its basis in character the honorable man. Its downfall is the eventually poverty of the honorable man. This impoverished and dutiful fellow will not provide his wife with the high standard of material comfort that the greedy, money farming coward does. So, the impoverished and bitter mother, and the family slaves, who wish better feed than an honorable master provides, all whisper in the ear of the honorable rustic’s son, and convince him that money is the way.
The outside force assisting in the suicide of the Honor Republic must be backed by, or possess, money.
-2.) Oligarchy, rule by the rich, is based on the character of the Money Lover. This brings many quick evils: low military man power, a dependence on forced labor, crime, and weakness sapping the souls of the rulers who become easy prey for their restive slaves. Police become a necessity in the Oligarchy. The downfall of the Oligarchy, funded from beyond the Money Republic, is the envy of the poor for the rich. Democracy grows out of Oligarchy as a kind of auto immune disease.
-3.) Democracy, rule by the majority, is based on envy and the desire for equality and freedom in the hearts of the crooked timber of oppressed humanity. Democracy loves “variety and diversity, dispensing equality to equals and unequals alike.” Military man power grows, efficiency wanes, crime increases and is less punished, while failure to deliver entitlements or success on the part of the elected rulers brings harsh punishment for the most honorable, while the criminal goes increasingly on his way. Rule by the Majority brings chaos, which threatens the economy and the security of all. Outside financing will be used to elevate a strongman as a champion for the poor. The Mob Republic will vote itself into ruin chasing envy over the cliffs of Tyranny. There is mentioned, the possibility of a return to Oligarchy when democracy fails, as its does so in a civil war. Democracy is equated with the “young person’s soul,” by nature a naive mind. “Lying, bragging and pretending… returns to live in the land of the Lotus Eaters,” is how the democratic soul is described.
Members of a democracy are classed in three echelons, Drones [unorganized parasites], Wealthy, [organized, pasture of the drones], and the working class subject to demagogues, one of whom might rise as a “protector.” The Oligarchic reaction will tilt towards tyranny, not back to Oligarchy.
-4.) Tyranny, rule by the strongest, within a collective, means rule by the most ruthless, making for a nasty day at the civic office. The tyrant is equated with the wolf. The root from which the tyrant grows is the “Protector of the People,” “armed with the great power of having a submissive mob to command.” The strongman must be voted guards, who may turn on him or the people, as became the main engine of executive power in Rome for 300 years. Thus, to stay in power, the dictator must have outside financing to hire mercenaries, making him the puppet of foreign interests.
-5.) Aristocracy, rule by the best, does not often naturally come about. Its reconstitution from a fallen, golden age, is the aim of this dialogue. [1] It is wise to listen closely to Socrates here, that is to books 1 through 6 and 9 & 10. Alexander certainly had seen himself in this position, having been cultivated by Aristotle [Bestpurpose], his stern tutor, queen grandmother and military genius father, to be equipped to fight the evils afflicting communities. These evils, rampant in neighbor states, were financed and encouraged by international money powers that sought to return his homeland to its enslaved condition as a mineral and manpower extraction zone. [2]
…
In the Light of Monotheism: Babylonian, Isrаelite, Theban, Persian & Christian [Roman]
The growth of Monotheism and the upscaling of human faiths improves banking efficiency similar to corporate amalgamation of craft business and military corps structures of the Napoleonic Era. This is so, even if the faiths are not expressions of the banks, as large faiths require tithing and must begin banking, and may then be infiltrated by that expert financial class. Increases in slave trading, precious metal currency manipulation, and financial collapses follow monotheistic trends in Antiquity just as they followed reformation and ideological trends in Modernity.
Do note, that mature economies tend to have great efficiency and that individual fortunes are more dynamically built in immature economies that have in-effeciencies, with the reaping of power-shifting profits going to efficiency innovators. For instance, margins in retail food, the most mature economy in any society, are lowest. It is my suspicion, that the standard imperial life cited by Glubb as 200 to 250 years, which held also in non expansionist Egypt, is in part or whole, caused by external/internal financial intervention. In order to retard the establishment of a stable, but marginally profitable “feudal” economy that burns minimal resources [including people] financial actors are in a position to crash economies to reboot the cycle and thus supercharge consumption, the capitalist engine. In Socratic terms, the feudal economy is Timarchy.
USG was established as an Oligarchy, yet is operated as a Democracy to include a constant dread of reactionary tyranny, and international policy by the executive branch identical to that established by Socrates as the main gambit of tyranny—a dire and distant war. Rather than fund that dire and distant war as tyrants do, Alexander went there and died fighting in it. Can the WHY really be so petty and egotistical as we have been told?
…
Notes
0.) The other speakers are more or less foils, while Glaucon is deeply concerned.
1.) Such as Solon, Lycurgus, Phillip, Alexander, Augustus, Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antonius Pious and Marcus Arelius. Aristocracy harkens back to barbarism, or the traditional, organic, tribal traditions of war bands.
2.) This power was either Persia or the financial network financing Persia military supremacy. See Undertaken, 2026, JL
