My post was 'perhaps', Wei, more geared to prompt some recognition on
your part of your Pollyannish views on democracy--Athenian and American.
Your physiocrat stuff was insubstantial but I suspect there is not much
there anyway. The rest of your piece, from my perpsective, has all of
the problems of your posts and most of the same information. Nice
gymnastics on the Greeks; but how are you when you have to play in
somebody else's ballpark? CP

En Lin Wei wrote:
>
> "C.Parcelli" <[log in to unmask]> wrote
>
> <<Subject: Re: What is particularly bad or undemocratic in this?
>
> Perhaps, Pound did not support the notion of Athenian democracy because
> it was in actuality anything but democratic. >>
>
> We know precisely why Pound opposed Greek democracy.  He stated the reason
> in the Guide to Kulchur.  Pound prefers the Roman Empire and Confucian
> totalitarianism to the "loose talk of argumentative greeks."
>
> "Rome was the responsible ruler . . .  The sense of responsibility , the
> need for cooordination of individuals expressed in Kung's teacing differs
> radically both from early Christain absolutism and from the maritime
> adventure morals of Odysseus or the loose talk of argumentative greeks . .
> ."  (GK, 38).
>
> Aristotle's Politics speaks quite favorably of democracy.  Pound however,
> says "As a working hyupothesis say that Kung is superior to Aristotle by
> totalitarian instinct . . ." (GK, 279)
>
> Another problem would be "the love of wisdom or the responsibility of that
> carries wisdom into details in action is not a Greek glory but a Roman."
> (GK, 40)  So much for the Plutarch's lives, so much for Solon, Lycurgus,
> Themistocles, Pericles, Alcibiades, Demosthenes, and even Alexander (a
> person we might expect Pound to admire).   I don't think Pound mentions any
> of these historical figures in favorable light (or in any light for that
> matter, except for Alexander).  Let me know if you can find any references
> to Greek democrats.  Of course, in the guide to Kulchur we have the quote:
>
> "Battle of Cheronea.  END of liberty.  Achaia a Roman province.
> Headline or whatever, B.C. 146  "
>
> refering to the demise of Europe's first democratic civilization.  Doesn't
> seem to trouble him too much, this "end of liberty", but this is
> understandable in light of great praise of Mussolini scattered throughout
> the Guide to Kulchur, and in light of his praise of Confucian
> totalitarianism.  For example, in this passage he praises Mussolini for the
> victories of fascism and BLAMES ARISTOTLE for fascism's imperfection.
>
> "I wd. go even further and state in parenthesis, with the date Ap 16 anno
> XV, that the things still needing to be remedied in the Italian state are
> due to an Aristotelic residuum left in Mussolini's own mind.  Despite all he
> has sloughed off in evolving his totalitarian formulae."  (GK, 309).
>
> I think you will agree that there is nothing in any of these statements to
> indicate that Pound disliked the Athenian democratic system because it was
> not democratic ENOUGH.
>
> Now, allow me to briefly address your claim that:  2) Athens was not a
> democracy.
>
> It is a bit beside the point, since Pound did not seem to care about
> Athenian democracy, or about any of its heroes.  Now, I have heard Zaire
> referred to as a kleptocracy (and the government of Rhodes, because of the
> high consumption of seaweed, was perhaps refered to as a kelp-tocracy); But
> I have never heard the term used to refer to Athens.  How many Greek rulers
> were depositing their excess funds in Persian or Phoenician banks--- a la
> Mobutu Sese Seko?  :
>
> I would agree with the proposition:  Athens was far from being a perfect
> democracy.  But what other state came anywhere close during that period
> ?(except for Republican Rome, perhaps.  Pound has no interest in the Roman
> Republicans either.  He never mentions, as far as I know, the original
> Brutus, the Grachii, Cincinnatus, Cicero, Cato, Spartacus, or Marcus Brutus
> the tyrant-slayer)  If one looks at Athens in comparison to all it's
> historical competitors, I am hard pressed to find a polity which comes
> closer to the ideals of democracy, in spite of its short-comings (Yes,
> Pericles can be accused for spending too much on the Acropolis, but some of
> the statues he put up there are "worth more than any metaphysical
> argument").
>
> Grecophiliac greetings,
>
> Wei
>
> PS.  You said,
>
> <<It was part cartel, part
> Lion's Club.  . . .That's why our Found[l]ing Fathers, out
> of admiration, erected so many buildings with big, white pillars. Any
> 'leftist' who trucked all the way here to Washington, which I
> affectionately refer to as Satan's Anus, to protest IMF and World Bank
> policies, should be able to make this connection as a matter of reflex.>>
>
> <<Further, he should realize that there are no 'democratic' Half Measures
> tolerated inside this money/power nexus.>>
>
> More or less true, I think
>
> <<Have you read Edward Bernays
> 1928 classic, Propaganda, on the method and manner of authoritarian
> control in the so-called democracies?>>
>
> No.  Sounds good to me.  I look and see if a copy is available in my area.
>
> <<And Bernays is no Chomsky. He
> worked for the other side.>>
>
> All the more interesting.
>
> <<One of his most famous achievements was to
> supply PR cover for the brutal overthrow of the Arbenz government by the
> CIA and Dept. of State in Guatemala in 1954. CP>>
>
> Pretty horrific.  I'd like to know more about Bernays (do you recall if he
> mentioned in "Bitter Fruit"?)
> ________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com