The Goddess

[Athena]

In the fertile cresent valley people worshipped the Goddess. During this period, everyone was as equals. Possibly a woman was selected out as the head of commerce and person to recieve gifts, but she did not have the power of male rulers. Settlements were in open areas good for farming. The holy places were natural sanctuaries, often by caves, as mother earth gave birth to life. The arts including the art of medicine was practiced. Games were established to consume the energy that might otherwise be used in harmful competion. That is competing in itself isn't harmful, but violence is, so games were invented to keep the competion reasonably safe, and maintain harmony among the people.

When people who worship male Gods invaded, life was radically changed. People moved to easily defended places, and fortified themselves. They divided into farmers who had to support warriors, administrators, and religious leaders. They built huge temples and government buildings as shows of power. Bigger than life statues if men and gods appear. Art changes from scenes of nature to scenes of war.

On another thread I have been speaking of the struggles of poorly paid women who perform the valuable service of caring for others. I know very well, becoming an engineer and working for the war department, pays much better. I think our values are messed up and that it is self righteous to look down on people who are less fortunate.

Democracy is about equality and Athena is the Goddess of the Liberty, Justice and the Defense of those who stand for these values.

[SoccerfreakAB2]

Who practiced these ways? And do you have any online references? Seems a little utopian to me...

[Technosoul]

I recall reviewing a book about that culture which came about due some fairly recent digs. It was a pretty large number of people and when they started to dig up the remains of that old kingdom they could find absolutly no weapons of any kind, not even for hunting animals. All they uncovered were farming tools so they must have been mainly a veggitarian culture. They found a lot of stone carvings of a big breasted woman and it is assumed she was ether their leader or an image of their Goddess. Dating processes revealed that those stone carvings of that Goddess were much older then stone carvings found at other places. Apparently they had large groves of trees that could produce food of different kinds. Apparently the women tended to the gardens and were good at climing trees to pick the furit and nuts, and knew about planting seeds to extend the farm.

The men apparently did the construction work to build the villages where people lived or to make the tools used for growing crops. Evidence of domestic animals were not discovered. And apparently the men were learning about carving stones (wood image would have decayed and so I don't think they found any of those). The carving of those stone images of the Goddess might have been the orgins of the master craftsmen who built things such as stonehenge or whatever The culture was somewhat advanced in its technology and creativeness - relative to that time and age.

It was suggested by Terrence McKenna that this peaceful culture went through a transfromation into our current one with the invention of hunting tools and with the killing of animals for food, along with the domestication of the horse which allowed people to journey faster to neighboring locations to conduct raids and tribal wars. (as hunting tools were re-tooled for military purposes).

I do not now recall the name of that book, which was written by a woman anthropologist. It is my opinon that this culture that did exist was what later books called the garden of eden or paradise.

Some of the findings of that dig were in that musem in Bagdad that was robbed during the war we are now into. No doubt there is more to uncover about our history which will have to be put on hold until after the wars in the middle east are over, and our researchers can again return to explore for more things in a peaceful environment.

[Athena]

Thank you Technosoul. I would add to what you say that there were many mother goddess cultures. There are indiciations that before Zeus there as a mother goddess culture in this areas as well, by making changes to the stories, she got replaced by a male dominate culture.

I am surprised there is more interest in homosexuality than the Goddess. The issue of the Goddess is that our male dominate culture with its male war God, does not have to be our reality, because it is not are unchangeable nature to be as we are. Human beings can be peaceful. They can be cultured and polite. Even heterosexuals can be everything the thread on hetersosexuality says they are not. Why the fascination with our sexuality and ignoring what male dominance has do to our concept of our nature and what is our human potential?

We can have society where everyone takes care of everyone as tribes did, instead of one where leave people to suffer and die if they need help. Jesus, feminized the male war God of the Jews. Where are all the religious debaters?

[Athena]

If one googles matriarchy, one will can get many, many sites about life before male dominated cultures. When people worshipped the Goddess our human nature was different. Well, not really, but our present understanding of human nature is incomplete and distorted by male demoination. This is so obvious when reading about how people thought women were, when in fact they were as they were because of social pressure.
We have spoken less about the nature of males, but here too, the image of males is culturally dicated and not the whole truth of their nature. Everything in our lives is impacted by our culturally distorted concept of our nature.

http://eve.enviroweb.org/index.html As a practice, ecofeminism is as ancient as our species. Many ecofeminists believe that the nature of our species is more in line with how we lived prior to the debut of written history. This period, extending back as far as 250,000 years ago, was a time when cooperation—not competition—was valued and necessary for species survival. New archeological discoveries of early civilizations in Mesopotamia yield a vast array of evidence that an egalitarian lifestyle and a unity with nature were prevalent among ancient peoples of those regions. Theories supporting territoriality, survival of the fittest, or man the great hunter are appearing to be inadequate, if not false.

[Technosoul]

Ever here about Diana - Goddess of the hunt.

Many musems have carvings of her - she is nomally depicted holding a bow and arrrows.

Unlike the male God many of the Goddesses could be (can be) called upon to manifest their self and they can be questioned or channeled for guidance. The technology or ritual for doing this is called "guided meditations" in the New Ager circles, which is simular to guiding someone into a vision via a hypnotic procedure. The basic usefulness of this method is to be able to get in touch with your inner self to get the answers and direction that is best for your self (best for the individual seeking divine guideance).

Once I was in a group who called upon Diana and a number of them did claim to see her in her manifestaton from the spiritlight. In that case She directed someone to move to another state in search of a job (hunting was changed to finding a good job). He packed up his old car with his stuff and his cat and took off. A month later he came back on the forum for a chat and we found out he was self employed, after hooking up with a girl he met they started doing tours around the country conducting lightworking workshops. Which resulted in a good income for both of them. I was sort of just a witness of those events and not sure just what to make of it all.

During the 1980s we had a large surg in female writers and books were rolling off the printing presses realitive to spiritual topics and as self-help books. Many of the books contained a lot of new concepts and insights that were amazing. Likewise webpages (such as the now discontinued 'Spiritweb' webpage) which were dedicated to the kind of global transformation that those women were advocating. However those ideas did not seem to penitrate the wall of the political arena nor the business world to any great degree.

Americans like to brag about how we now have women involved in politics but most of them are limited to being "politically correct" and so they only speak about things like education, family values, healthcare, and so forth. Other then Miss Rice, reporters seldom ask the women about how they would deal with "man topics" like terrorism, the budget and local economy, and so forth.
the so-called important stuff.

In business many of the women ack just like the men do and so little difference.

People stereotype female dominance as some girl dressed in black leather holding a whip that she uses to punish the bad little boys. (if you know what i mean). Which has nothing to do with how a woman could influence a culture if it was structured on motherly love.

None the less, I see the 1980s as the first wave, and tide has withindrawn at the moment, but soon another wave, and another, and in a usual 'gradual manner' our culture will change, perhaps even globally.

Imagine - 3000 Oprahs marching over the hill. Indeed, things would change.

[Osborn F Enready]

Athena, I have to chuckle a bit.

If I remember correctly, you were one of the folks here who accused me of "romanticizing" early, Constitutional America while ignoring all the bad aspects of the times, and the fact that I didn't actually live "then", so what I know, I know from studies of OTHER peoples works. (my words, not yours, I didn't refrence the exact comments, this is strictly from memory, so correct me if I am wrong.)

Now I value the study of history, especially the more "cross-documented" it is by those who lived during the time in question. Luckily, I tend to focus on U.S. legal history, which is less than 250 years old, so relatively close to our generations, and very cross documented.

Now, I question the way with which you write of this period of Athena. Where are you getting so many "candid" snapshots of history from this period to tell it with such romantic flavor?

Comments like this....

Athena said: During this period, everyone was as equals.

How many cross references are out there on this topic alone? How many sources do those originate from? The privlidged class, or the slave class?

I am not trying to be argumentative, insulting, or anything other than sincere in my question of how you speak of this time with such "assurance" of your position.

I feel you often write to illicit a response from a targeted demographic in the forum, not that most of us haven't at one time or another, but I often question your fascination with the concept of democracy, and would like to know where you get your information?

Are you not also a woman of color?

If you are, I find it odd that you seem to romanticize this time of slaves and elite to the point that you do.

These are sincere questions, so if by some stretch of the imagination I have insulted you, I guess you should report me, but, the questions stand as sincere from here.

I await your reply....

[Technosoul]

While we await her answers to the above questions (concerning the city of Athens?). As I am not sure which goddess culture is referred too in her comments.

The city of Athens is well documented and I am sure a large number of books could be found on that place written by a lot of different people.

They had a government that was set up pretty much along the same lines as our own here in the USA.

The concepts of a true democarcy is in fact a idealistic one. Then, as now, it remains somewhat of a romantic idea who's time of perfection has never really been reached. Democracy is a work in progress and it is the dream that is so attractive to people who might have faith in its potential.

As everywhere you got workers and leaders who do the thinking for most everyone else, so you end up with people who are economically not as wealthy as others. But money and materialism is perhaps not the correct standard to use to determine equality. It is possible that it has to do with respecting one another for our individualistic contrabutions (or whatever). To respect people from all walks of life the same, rather then by how much money they have.

I must log off now but will continue this viewpoint later on.

[Osborn F Enready]

Technosoul said: As everywhere you got workers and leaders who do the thinking for most everyone else, so you end up with people who are economically not as wealthy as others.

I say:
I disagree as to the reason that occurs.

I want someone to explain a classless society to me, and how it could work. I do not think it can.

Even in small groups, this just isn't possible for an extended period anywhere I have seen.

Every person must "earn" life itself, through food and shelter. These are not free. They cost labor, or a trade of a valued "essential", which in our society usually is money or credit.

I contend that there never was, nor probably ever could be a classless society, at least when speaking of humans, and not machines.

I am open to debate this, but I have many times, and have seen no valid proof or extendable logic.

Technosoul said: But money and materialism is perhaps not the correct standard to use to determine equality. It is possible that it has to do with respecting one another for our individualistic contrabutions (or whatever). To respect people from all walks of life the same, rather then by how much money they have.

I say:
I agree. Equality is measured by "ability" of the individual, with regard to law.

Equality does not mean hand-outs and "starting money" to play the game of life. Charity does this for valid causes, but it should not be governments duty or expense.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Technosoul said: As everywhere you got workers and leaders who do the thinking for most everyone else, so you end up with people who are economically not as wealthy as others. I say: I disagree as to the reason that occurs. I want someone to explain a classless society to me, and how it could work. I do not think it can. Even in small groups, this just isn't possible for an extended period anywhere I have seen. Every person must "earn" life itself, through food and shelter. These are not free. They cost labor, or a trade of a valued "essential", which in our society usually is money or credit. I contend that there never was, nor probably ever could be a classless society, at least when speaking of humans, and not machines. I am open to debate this, but I have many times, and have seen no valid proof or extendable logic. Technosoul said: But money and materialism is perhaps not the correct standard to use to determine equality. It is possible that it has to do with respecting one another for our individualistic contrabutions (or whatever). To respect people from all walks of life the same, rather then by how much money they have. I say: I agree. Equality is measured by "ability" of the individual, with regard to law. Equality does not mean hand-outs and "starting money" to play the game of life. Charity does this for valid causes, but it should not be governments duty or expense.

The first question is a bit tricky because it would be difficult to find any advanced culture in the past that was substainable. Like Rome they became great and then flopped, we can see ups and downs in nearly every type of governmentally (and likewise run by religion) run culure as well as chnages taking place to alter its orginality, such as the reduction of power of the King and Queeen in England, etc. Tribalism seems to be the most substainable and we can find pagan tribes deep in the jungles of South America that have not changed since who knows when. In Native American cultues they had a chief, and holyman, a warror, and so forth and everyone was treated economically the same, all sharing the rewards of the hunters and gatherers. Their religion (in parts of Ameirca) was founded on a goddess called the White Buffalo Calf Woman. Their religion stressed the importance of equality and respect, even between males and females, as well as gays. They had no system of money or written laws. (sometimes sea shells were used like an I-O-U).

But to say - "show me a substainabe culture" - well good luck with that for they all rise and fall no matter how they run the show.

In Athens they redirected tax money that was earmarked for military purposes and used it to hire the best artists they could find. The city was a showcase for art, sculpture, music, and other such creative undertakings, and as well they allowed philosophy to gain acceptance. But when someone else attacked them from outside, the place was nearly distroyed. None the less we cannot blame them for not developing the right kind of culture, it was the war makers who were runining everything

Now you are correct that most we cannot prove a lot when it comes to anicent cultures or kingdoms, for the reasons you stated. History books are not our most trustworthy sources and likewise books like the Bible could be missleading in how they documented history. But if they dig up a whole city that is thousands of years old and find no weapons of war, that would be a fairly good indicaton that they lived a peaceful life. But perfectionists are always demanding absolutes in proof and such you can never get, only interpretations of the little data we can patch together. We can say the same thing about dicatorships and capitalism.

Using the Bible we know that Babylon had a three party system of rule, and when Daniel was taken as a slave he was about 15 years old, he was treated with "tender love' by his first supervisor, was well fed and housed, he was provided with advanced education and learned the skills of dream interpretatons, and learned how to interpret the ancient words of Sumer. Although he had been abducted into service from a defeated Jewish village he ended up getting promotions in Babylon and became the ruler of certain districts of that kingdom. In that biblical story we see equality in action relative to what you would call the slave and master environment. Also in that story we see how the women would often step in and direct the king about what he should do, and their words were respected and acted upon. The kingdom of Babylon lasted for a long time and was once one of the most dominate centers of trade and so forth. Their favor for honoring the Goddess of Love resulted in John (Revelations) giving them the nick name "mother of whores". Can I prove it? Well I do not have a time machine to transport you back to those days, so if you are only seeking absolute proof then you are out of luck, but if you are seeking "a better idea" for the future then you came to the right forum topic.

In your last statement you gave the opinon that a government should not provide charity, and such would not be needed if our many religions did what they preach instead of getting into more matealistic projects like gobbling up real estate. However the government is not realistically a seperate identity form the will of the people. Idealistically it should be the will of the people to work collectively to insure that everyone has a fair chance and that those who cannot compete on equal status and for that reason are lacking that they should be taken care of out of love and compassion, no ifs and or buts about it. Anything short of that is just pure meanness.

[Technosoul]

We can have two kinds of worldly environments.

In one situation we each would remain individualistic and mostly self-centered, directing our attention towards our own personal goals and needs. We would desire to get ahead of others within the ranking systems of haves and have-nots. To compete for personal status inside that ranking order of the hen pecking barnyard of co-peckers. Taking pleasure when we can boast of our upmanship - cock-a-doodle doo.

Or we can put aside our individual ego and think as a collective. To think that everyone is part of that unity of oneness, and that as a unity we make sure each part that united identity is operating as well as our part of it.

For example your body is one unit even it it is made up of many individual cells. Now the brain would want the big toe to work as well as the heart or the lungs, so that idealistically the body would be 100 percent healthy and not in want. As a governmental unity we would think that everyone in that united state of being is like the cells that make up the heart, lungs, toes, and all the other parts of the 'body' of people. (in religion it might be called the body of Christ). One for all and all for one was a concept that failed to work well because people could not get into the spirit of unity that is requried to manifest as healthy body politic. Because personal egos became like cancer cells within that body which was distructive to the 'all-ness' structure of unity.

Comprendee comrade?

[Amuse]

Quote by: Technosoul We can have two kinds of worldly environments. In one situation we each would remain individualistic and mostly self-centered, directing our attention towards our own personal goals and needs. We would desire to get ahead of others within the ranking systems of haves and have-nots. To compete for personal status inside that ranking order of the hen pecking barnyard of co-peckers. Taking pleasure when we can boast of our upmanship - cock-a-doodle doo. Or we can put aside our individual ego and think as a collective. To think that everyone is part of that unity of oneness, and that as a unity we make sure each part that united identity is operating as well as our part of it. For example your body is one unit even it it is made up of many individual cells. Now the brain would want the big toe to work as well as the heart or the lungs, so that idealistically the body would be 100 percent healthy and not in want. As a governmental unity we would think that everyone in that united state of being is like the cells that make up the heart, lungs, toes, and all the other parts of the 'body' of people. (in religion it might be called the body of Christ). One for all and all for one was a concept that failed to work well because people could not get into the spirit of unity that is requried to manifest as healthy body politic. Because personal egos became like cancer cells within that body which was distructive to the 'all-ness' structure of unity. Comprendee comrade?

I'd choose the second option but this too is self desrtuctive. This sounds like in ideal concept except that if everybody were equal there would be no evolution. The very fact that we have differences IS what allows each of us to understand ourself in relation to everyone else. As you stated, all societies eventually fade into history. As young as American society is I see it begining to fade already.

[Athena]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready Athena, I have to chuckle a bit. If I remember correctly, you were one of the folks here who accused me of "romanticizing" early, Constitutional America while ignoring all the bad aspects of the times, and the fact that I didn't actually live "then", so what I know, I know from studies of OTHER peoples works. (my words, not yours, I didn't refrence the exact comments, this is strictly from memory, so correct me if I am wrong.) Now I value the study of history, especially the more "cross-documented" it is by those who lived during the time in question. Luckily, I tend to focus on U.S. legal history, which is less than 250 years old, so relatively close to our generations, and very cross documented. Now, I question the way with which you write of this period of Athena. Where are you getting so many "candid" snapshots of history from this period to tell it with such romantic flavor? Comments like this.... How many cross references are out there on this topic alone? How many sources do those originate from? The privlidged class, or the slave class? I am not trying to be argumentative, insulting, or anything other than sincere in my question of how you speak of this time with such "assurance" of your position. I feel you often write to illicit a response from a targeted demographic in the forum, not that most of us haven't at one time or another, but I often question your fascination with the concept of democracy, and would like to know where you get your information? Are you not also a woman of color? If you are, I find it odd that you seem to romanticize this time of slaves and elite to the point that you do. These are sincere questions, so if by some stretch of the imagination I have insulted you, I guess you should report me, but, the questions stand as sincere from here. I await your reply....

Thank you for your concern in wording yourself carefully. It takes a lot more effort, but hopefully it will pay off in ways people aren't even expecting.

Now I am unclear about some things you said. I spoke of the time before Zeus, not the male dominated culture of Zues, when there was a division of labor and slaves. Googling matriarchical cultures, will result in many explanations of how people were organized differently before male domination, and how the male domination spread and took over. There was an equality that seems strange to us now, but we have a high tech, low labor reality now and can return to a more peaceful way of life.

Everything changed when males became dominate. I don't think we would have advanced technlogy if we had not moved from matriarchies to patriarchies. However, now if we do reawaken the feminine we will not resolve the pressing problems we face on a crowded planet.

[Athena]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready I say: I disagree as to the reason that occurs. I want someone to explain a classless society to me, and how it could work. I do not think it can. Even in small groups, this just isn't possible for an extended period anywhere I have seen. Every person must "earn" life itself, through food and shelter. These are not free. They cost labor, or a trade of a valued "essential", which in our society usually is money or credit. I contend that there never was, nor probably ever could be a classless society, at least when speaking of humans, and not machines. I am open to debate this, but I have many times, and have seen no valid proof or extendable logic. I say: I agree. Equality is measured by "ability" of the individual, with regard to law. Equality does not mean hand-outs and "starting money" to play the game of life. Charity does this for valid causes, but it should not be governments duty or expense.

At this point it is obvious you have not done the reading, because your opinion is based on your experience of life, not the findings of archeology. Please, I can not provide all the information that is available, by googling, buying books on the subject, using your local library. I am doing my best, but did you use the link?

[Athena]

Quote by: Amuse I'd choose the second option but this too is self desrtuctive. This sounds like in ideal concept except that if everybody were equal there would be no evolution. The very fact that we have differences IS what allows each of us to understand ourself in relation to everyone else. As you stated, all societies eventually fade into history. As young as American society is I see it begining to fade already.

Equal is not to be mistaken for the same. The Greeks gods were each distinctly different, and yet equal. The sun shines on all of us. Our laws apply to all of us. Yet we are all different.

The democracy of Athens lasted only 200 years. About as long as the US democracy has lasted. We honestly need to study history and learn from it. The US is making the same mistakes Athens made.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Athena Quote by: Amuse I'd choose the second option but this too is self desrtuctive. This sounds like in ideal concept except that if everybody were equal there would be no evolution. The very fact that we have differences IS what allows each of us to understand ourself in relation to everyone else. As you stated, all societies eventually fade into history. As young as American society is I see it begining to fade already. Equal is not to be mistaken for the same. The Greeks gods were each distinctly different, and yet equal. The sun shines on all of us. Our laws apply to all of us. Yet we are all different. The democracy of Athens lasted only 200 years. About as long as the US democracy has lasted. We honestly need to study history and learn from it. The US is making the same mistakes Athens made.

Can you write a brief rundown on some of the mistakes they made for us? As that might be helpful.

[Amuse]

Quote by: Athena Equal is not to be mistaken for the same. The Greeks gods were each distinctly different, and yet equal. The sun shines on all of us. Our laws apply to all of us. Yet we are all different. The democracy of Athens lasted only 200 years. About as long as the US democracy has lasted. We honestly need to study history and learn from it. The US is making the same mistakes Athens made.

Just to clarify, the gods were made up by the people and were not real. They were however equal only in that they were gods but each one had a different responsability and its possible that the people gave each god equal importance with reguards to the various responsabilities. I'll say it up front that I'm not as familiar with Greek mythos as you may be so I'm speaking with limited knowledge on this subject. I think the mistake humans make is to look at an individual based on many factors with certain levels of judgement.
For instance: male/ female, white collar/ blue collar, attractive/ unattractive, educated/ uneducated, fat/ skinny and so on. The very reason that we do this is to see ourselves in relation to others, to guage where we stand in society. If we don't like somebody for whatever reason it usually means we fear something. Fear that that person might do something to us, take something from us, become better than us, reject us, give/sell us something we don't want and probably thousands of other excuses. What your asking society to do is control their egos to the point that everybody sees each other as equals and has no judgement about anyone. If that were possible then at that point is when society stops evolving. There would be no need to help another person because they are less educated than you for instance because you don't see that person as less educated than yourself, no need for skinny people to gain weight or fat people to lose weigh for their health because they aren't seen as such. Is this making sense?
Our differences are what make the human machine keep going. I'm not saying we should stop trying to right the wrongs like hunger, genocide, hatred, the gap between the haves and have nots. The only way for society to survive is for each of us to get control over our fears of each other and start to love one another unconditionaly.

[Athena]

Quote by: Amuse Just to clarify, the gods were made up by the people and were not real. They were however equal only in that they were gods but each one had a different responsability and its possible that the people gave each god equal importance with reguards to the various responsabilities. I'll say it up front that I'm not as familiar with Greek mythos as you may be so I'm speaking with limited knowledge on this subject. I think the mistake humans make is to look at an individual based on many factors with certain levels of judgement. For instance: male/ female, white collar/ blue collar, attractive/ unattractive, educated/ uneducated, fat/ skinny and so on. The very reason that we do this is to see ourselves in relation to others, to guage where we stand in society. If we don't like somebody for whatever reason it usually means we fear something. Fear that that person might do something to us, take something from us, become better than us, reject us, give/sell us something we don't want and probably thousands of other excuses. What your asking society to do is control their egos to the point that everybody sees each other as equals and has no judgement about anyone. If that were possible then at that point is when society stops evolving. There would be no need to help another person because they are less educated than you for instance because you don't see that person as less educated than yourself, no need for skinny people to gain weight or fat people to lose weigh for their health because they aren't seen as such. Is this making sense? Our differences are what make the human machine keep going. I'm not saying we should stop trying to right the wrongs like hunger, genocide, hatred, the gap between the haves and have nots. The only way for society to survive is for each of us to get control over our fears of each other and start to love one another unconditionaly.

Let's try this again. Equal does not mean the same. We are equal under the sun. We are equal under the law. If we were on a sinking ship, we would be in equal trouble. Yet, we are all different.

[Athena]

Quote by: Technosoul Can you write a brief rundown on some of the mistakes they made for us? As that might be helpful.

Well, they got cocky and misused their naval power for one. Actaully they were in a bind.
When the Persians began attacking, Athens promised to protect the other city/states on the condition they pay tribute to Athens for this protection. When the Persians stopped attacking, the city/states didn't want to pay tribute any more. Athens should have accepted this, and accepted it would have to live without this money. But instead, because the war had put military people in power, they had a military response, and killed everyone on an island, to be an example of what happens if you don't pay tribute.

This caused all the city/states to turn to Sparta, which proceeded to put Athens in its place. It might not have been so bad for Athens, but they tried to protect themselves within walls, and I think it was typhoid that killed large numbers of them, destroying their morale, beside loosing one of the most important leaders. But this wasn't all.

They had begun spreading colonies, and thought the best way to do this was educate the young in the technologically correct way to do everything. When a society does this, it entrophies the creative juices. This could turn into a long lecture and that would ruin the thread. If todays citizens had to build the US as generations past, it would be a disaster.
People have learned to be dependent and without leadership are lost. We are living on the achievements of the past.

In Athens, they started to become control freaks, so when Socrates annoyed some people, they could make a case that he was corrupting the young because he was questioning the gods. He had the choice of fleeing or drinking hemlock, and rather than be a hyprocrit by not follow the dictates of the democratically determined decision, he drank the hemlock. This is the anceint version of the consequences of not being politically correct.

The issue of Masculine or Feminine is one of power and how it is used. But when speaking of the rise and fall of civilizations, we are speaking of the concentration and corruption of power, and what war and major events such as sickness or volconos erupting does to a population. The Christian concern about the end of the world was fed by the falling of Rome and the volcanic eruption that covered Pompii. War and disease took its toll on Athens. So have such events impacted the US. We did not demobilize after WWII, but embedded the Industrial military complex into our culture. The US had no designs of being a world power when Willson was in office. The Bush/Cheney intentions of world power are clear in the Project New Amercian Century. These military ambitions come at the cost of the common people, and benefit those in power, in Athens, Rome or the US.

[Athena]

Quote by: Robodoon Democracy is what Communist like! Democracy breeds Slavery, not freedom.

Please, this thread is getting way off subject. I would love to debate what democracy is. If you start the thread for this, PM me and I will get to it as soon as possible.