A theory from Selective Breeding and the Birth of Philosoph…

A theory from Selective Breeding and the Birth of Philosophy is that the earliest governments are "totalitarian democracies" in which the conventions of the tribe as a whole are ruthlessly enforced by a group of elders who have no right or ability to make changes. Thus, the elders are not like a legislature that makes laws but are mere interpreters and applicators of law that was established in the days of legend (nomos). This system may be said to be narcissistic at its core because of its lack of boundaries and complete disregard for individualism, not just for the ordinary tribesmen but for the elders themselves. Tribal property is held in common and people are valuable not because of their submission to nomos. For example, if they go out hunting they can be expected to share their excess with the rest of the tribe. Someone who grew up in this environment would be considered mentally unhealthy in our society. He would have grown up having been denied an environment to develop his full personality and his adult self is a total merging with the tribe, akin to a child's psychological dependency upon the mother. The first political leaders were scam artists who we call shamens who asserted a magic power beyond that of an ordinary human. These people may have been intelligent enough to criticize tribal conventions and understand something very foolish about them. We see this theoretical transition play out in Plato's life and philosophy. The Athenian democrats were, at least according to Plato, much like the theoretical elders of "totalitarian democracy" whose role was merely to remember and enforce convention. Plato's politics is the logical conclusion of shamenism, in which the totalitarian democracy is utterly defeated by scam artistry. From this perspective, we may well say that Plato's strategy and vision were, perhaps, the only viable method to proceed under the circumstances. It is unlikely that the Athenian democrats were as foolish as Plato portrays them, but it remains the case that their idea of impiety was merely to suggest that traditional stories, such as for example about Dionysus gestating as a fetus in Zeus's leg, were likely made up and that he would be a better ruler than the ones who ultimately executed him. Can we see anything but extreme weakness in their need to execute a grumbling old man? My point is that Plato's work may well be a great step forward in his day, but today he leaves remnants behind that are poorly understood. His character today would be seen as one of extreme narcissism such as to addict whole classes of intellectuals to him. His program needs to be exposed because it is everywhere now and it is concealed.