>> To which I said that a man is made to live the good life. He is made and meant to attain to Heaven. Him sinning makes him no less a man, nor does a Polis acting evilly and destroying the common good of those it rules make it not a Polis. <<
Very Important. It's easy for some to say (for instance) that America today is 'not an Empire because it doesn't call itself that, nor does it work for the betterment of its citizenry.'
But ultimately, one needs to evaluate whether the *essence* of America (a la its fundamental frames, behaviours, etc) is toward Empire or not.
& when we do this, it is very clear that America walks around the world *behaving* like an Empire. It can call itself whatever it wishes to, but the rest of the world view America in said way.
Somewhat. But my argument is that a Polis never even existed in America except in the most rapacious kind of forms. @Ahnaf Ibn Qais had a post in his annals of America that I can’t find right now that exemplifies this - where I believe the Dutch and the Swedes make a mercantilist colony together.
The colonists get at odds with each other due to national rivalries, setting up camps on both sides of the river. Their home countries cut off aid to the colony, due to troubles back home. The Brits eventually take over the colony, even before the declaration of independence.
How would one call that a Polis? It’s formed for the purpose of greed, which most of the colonies are at their heart - religious freedom was really not all that big of a deal and is only a founding mythos to us in our contemporary age. They were simply down and out greedy, or poor, or the unclean, unwanted masses.
They did not want the good life, they did not have much in common with each other, they fought and squabbled with each other all the dang time. The more I become acquainted with our history, the less I’m willing to say, “We -might- have had some Polis’s at the founding of our country that are not the DC Polis, but natural Polis’s actually for the common good for the people.”
And we may have, I could be wrong. I’m not tied to it, nor do I think it destroys my theory either way. I simply see little evidence, few standing up to DC besides things like the Whiskey Rebellion, and that was for taxes.
But what about the efficiencies of debt-loaded private equity takeovers and consolidation? Isn't that what America was built off of?
lmao
very engaging thumbnail, 11/10
Thanks
>> To which I said that a man is made to live the good life. He is made and meant to attain to Heaven. Him sinning makes him no less a man, nor does a Polis acting evilly and destroying the common good of those it rules make it not a Polis. <<
Very Important. It's easy for some to say (for instance) that America today is 'not an Empire because it doesn't call itself that, nor does it work for the betterment of its citizenry.'
But ultimately, one needs to evaluate whether the *essence* of America (a la its fundamental frames, behaviours, etc) is toward Empire or not.
& when we do this, it is very clear that America walks around the world *behaving* like an Empire. It can call itself whatever it wishes to, but the rest of the world view America in said way.
Somewhat. But my argument is that a Polis never even existed in America except in the most rapacious kind of forms. @Ahnaf Ibn Qais had a post in his annals of America that I can’t find right now that exemplifies this - where I believe the Dutch and the Swedes make a mercantilist colony together.
The colonists get at odds with each other due to national rivalries, setting up camps on both sides of the river. Their home countries cut off aid to the colony, due to troubles back home. The Brits eventually take over the colony, even before the declaration of independence.
How would one call that a Polis? It’s formed for the purpose of greed, which most of the colonies are at their heart - religious freedom was really not all that big of a deal and is only a founding mythos to us in our contemporary age. They were simply down and out greedy, or poor, or the unclean, unwanted masses.
They did not want the good life, they did not have much in common with each other, they fought and squabbled with each other all the dang time. The more I become acquainted with our history, the less I’m willing to say, “We -might- have had some Polis’s at the founding of our country that are not the DC Polis, but natural Polis’s actually for the common good for the people.”
And we may have, I could be wrong. I’m not tied to it, nor do I think it destroys my theory either way. I simply see little evidence, few standing up to DC besides things like the Whiskey Rebellion, and that was for taxes.