In Plato's Republic there is a discussion of the Guardian class, those that are imbued with power from the society in order to help guard it from itself. The only way this Guardian class can exist is if it has a special privilege. This class are the guardian/ruling class of the society. In the Republic, Socrates discusses the founding of a republic with Glaucon and Adeimantus and determine that this Guardian class is necessary for the stability of the republic to exist. I was thinking, yes this may be the case- that a balance of power given by the people to this ruling class is a fair trade, as long as the power is within reason and is held in check.
What we have been seeing lately in the US has been concerning to most people. Increased militarization of federal and even local police forces, aquisition of immense stockpiles of arms and ammunition, and possible use of drones to target citizens. While I don't agree with these practices, I am curious to see how they are measuring to the success of the guardianship model as it has been applied to the earth. Over the past century the 'guardian' has been gravitating toward the western world, almost completely dominated by the US. During this time there have been questionable actions to wage wars that, even if you haven't read all the conspiracy theories on the subjects, seem completely non-credible. With all the ties and connections in countless publications and documentaries about the false flag operations throughout the world, I think we are all just on the edge of our seats to see when the next one will happen- ever since Sept 11.
But getting back to this concept of the Guardian. Are we better off as a nation to have the guardian government militarize our homeland? Has the increased militarization over the past century helped or hurt the communities they have most affected?
Post a Comment