Learning Goal: I’m working on a history discussion question and need a reference to help me learn.
Our goal for this discussion board is to consider Greek democracy. Let’s think about democracy-as a foundational political concept-and its evolution as both an ideology (a system of ideas and a form of government. Have the ideas behind democracy withstood the test of time? Keep in mind that Greek democracy is not identical to what you think of as American democracy. Yet, are the problems that we deal with today similar to those with which the ancient Greeks struggled? Consider how concepts like patriotism (devotion to one’s country), sovereignty (authority to govern another), and civic virtue (proper behavior of citizens who work together for the success of a nation, country, or state) might change depending on time and place.
The following discussion questions are there to help guide your note taking and discussion post. You will need to read Reilly’s Worlds of History (chapter 3, pp. 88-90, 90-95, 95-106).
- Are the ideas about statehood laid down in these selections similar to our own understanding of the modern state? Did the Greeks create a blueprint for civic identity that we still use today? Or was their understanding of the state and the ideologies that supported it (patriotism, democracy, sovereignty) different than our own?
- Is Athens’s “democratic empire” a contradiction in terms? Does Pericles make a convincing case that Athens can be both a democracy and an expansionist empire? Can democracies be empires (today as well as in the past)?
- Do the various authors here see a conflict between personal interest and public service? If so, do they offer a solution to this conflict?
Does this conflict still exist in the democracies of the modern world?
4) “..for the truth is that you can have a well-governed society only if you discover for your future rulers a better way of life than being in office” (105)
democracy or a way to
Do you agree with Plato’s argument here? If so, do his claims hold true even today? Do his arguments represent an indictment of
improve it?
