Am I free?

[Conrad_Jalowski]

The period of the French Revolution was a period of extreme liberties. The vulgar, savage and elemental rabble butchered the innocent and slaughtered the weak. In addition, innocent maidens were ravished and sullied. In such a period of lawlessness, demagogues and mendacious politicians arose driving the masses to an even greater frenzy. The rabble or the licentious people swept aside all in their path in which the streets of Paris became covered with the blood and dismembered limbs of the innocent. With such social chaos and anarchy, the Committee of Public Safety under the nominal control of Maximilian Robespierre achieved absolute hegemony in the revolutionary atmosphere of France. May Danton, Marat, Maximilian Robespierre and Saint-Just be cursed. May such individuals be condemned to perpetual execration!

In a state of extreme and unrestrained liberty, the people trample upon the rights and natural autonomy of the individual. In periods of civil tension, social disequilibrium and social chaos, ruthless and imperious men such as Robespierre are able to assume political power. According to Polybius and Niccolo Machiavelli, principalities transform into despotisms, aristocracies degenerate into oligarchies and democracies devolve into periods of anarchy in which the state is plagued with the usurpations of tyrants. In addition, a state of kleptocracy is a state with the exploitation of one group or interest for the benefit and pleasure of another group or interest. A state descends into a period of anarchy due to the usurpations of the rich and the brigandage of the poor.

[Skirata]

In a society controlled by a majority, Conrad, the rights of the minority are trampled upon. How is that any different from an individual doing that to another individual?

[DeSalvionjr]

Am I free?

I'm not a slave.

There are limitations controlling me and what I may do or say. Whether they be laws passed by a government or norms set in stone by society, I cannot just act and preach as I please.

I was not born with inherent freedoms, I am only granted acceptable ones. Someone or some organization has written out what I may do and what I may not. Were I truly free, I would not have such limitations placed on my back. They say I'm free to vote, but limit my choices. They say I'm free to travel, but monitor my movements. They say I'm free to purchase what I please, but offer only 1 product packaged under different labels.

How can you say that you are free? You are only blind to the walls and boundaries keeping you trapped.

no.............you were wrong, i read them. also I hope you can get some sleep soon

[Demonhero]

Freedom is a loose concept which is based entirely around perspective. If one were to perceive themselves to be free, then they would judge that based on the freedoms they can see others having. In Western society, we tend to be "free-er" then the much of the rest of the world, due to having liberties that some places don't, which do have limitations however.

In Western society, we can do a great many things as our desires dictate, within the limitations only of the law, and how we feel the rest of society will view us. In other societies, for example, Middle Eastern societies, they don't have the liberties that we do. Unmarried women can't leave the home without a family member, and are often forced to marry people they may not know, or don't know very well, and are restricted from showing their face. Just a look at this alone makes us feel more secure in our freedom.

As I said, it's all based on perspective. View another society, and you may find yourself thankful that you have the freedoms you do, or wi****l that you had more freedoms.

Of course, if you want to step outside the bounds of laws and the way society will judge you, you can do absolutely anything, so long as you can avoid the repercussions.

[Conrad_Jalowski]

During the French Revolution, where the Liberty of Brotherhood was openly proclaimed in boundless ebullience throughout the streets, an imperious despot arose out of the bloodshed and social chaos. After the deposition of Louis XVI, there arose the National Convention under the ephemeral hegemony of Alexandre Beauhernais. After his fall, there was a struggle between the Girondists and the Jacobins with the emergence of an unofficial triumvirate of Danton, Marat and Maximilian Robespierre. The political factions were divided as such: Jacques Antoine Marie de Cazales and Jean-Silfrein Maury led the Conservative Party. In the middle of the political spectrum were John Joseph Monier, the Comte de Lally-Tollendal, the Comte de Clermont Tonnerre and Pierre Victor Malouet who supported a constitutional monarchy on the model of the British monarchy as a compromise between constitutionalists and republicans. Slightly to the left side was the National Party that supported a republic which included Honore Mirabeau, La Fayette, Bailly, Barnave and Alexandre Lameth. On the far radical left was Maximilian Robespierre himself, the hubristic monstrosity who sullied the soil of France with his rapacity and cruel sanctimony.

After the fall of Maximilian Robespierre through the reactionary movement of Thermidor, a more moderate republic was erected through the support of the notables and the bourgeoise. From the Thermidorean Reaction arose the Five-Man Executive Directory of 1795-1799 CE. In the French Directory the legislative branch formed a buffer zone between the Five Executive Directors and the populace. The 750 proprietary holders, notables, plenipotentiaries and deputies who were part of the legislative process were divided into two chambers: the Council of the 500 and the Council of the Ancients. Initially, the French Directory provided the nation of France with peace, prosperity and concord. However, the three Directors Reubell, Barras and La Revelliere were ex-Jacobins. The remaining two Executive Directors Carnot and Le Tourneur were less radical. This created a politically divisive setting and gave birth to further disruption. In the coup of the 18th of Brumaire in 1799 CE, Napoleon Bonaparte, Emmanuel Sieyes and Roger Ducos replaced the Directory which had become decrepit and ineffective with a triumvirate of Citizen-Consuls.

[WN1 Hit]

I think I am unable to read that.

[Zen Master]

omg im sorry but i hate ppl that always post long rant

(alot of that in this thread)

[SunTzu123]

freedom is an illusion.

[kailbomb]

My intellectual interests are vast and varied in terms of their scope and magnitude:

Classical Antiquity, Late Antiquity, the Medieval Period, the period of the Renaissance, Early Modern European history, the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Period, Renaissance Neoplatonism, Aesthetics, General Philosophy, the History of Philosophy, the Philosophy of History, Stoicism, Existentialism, German Idealism, the Sophists and the Pre-Socratic philosophers, Aristotelianism, Ciceronian thought, Medieval Scholasticism/Scholastic Logic, Machiavellian philosophy, the Age of European Romanticism, the Age of Enlightenment, Ethics, Metaphysics, Aretology, Epistemology, Poetry, Literature, Renaissance Art, Baroque Art, Rococo Art, Political Science/Political Theory, Military Science, Literary Criticism and Literary Theory.

I would liek you to post about Pink Coloured Stuff

I am nineteen years old. However, in approximately four months I shall become twenty.

Child Prodigy ?
Also I cannot determine what brought you to Evony whatever it is it must be the Answer to Life.

[trogdor1316]

My personal take on humanity:

Humanity is foolish. The entirety of humanity, when brought together as one, is just as likely to create something miraculously wonderful as it is to destroy all of civilization as we know it. A classic example is that of the Holocaust. Out of the millions upon millions of people who had to know that something horrible was happening, how many actually spoke out? Very few, and those that did were silenced immediately. Sadly, they were not silenced by the top 1% who knew exactly what was going on; no, they were reported by their friends and neighbors, sometimes even their families. One of the most idiotic yet often-encountered problem with humanity is the mob mentality, as described above.

Another example; the atomic bomb. There is not a single well-educated human being that does not realize the sheer destructive power of this weapon; many predict that these weapons will in fact cause the end of the human race. Yet every war-minded individual in the governments of every major global power (and beleive me, there are quite a few of those individuals) has their mind set on acquiring as many nuclear weapons as they possibly can. This seems to be incredibly redundant reasoning. Once again, humanity shows an incredible capacity for death and destruction with little more than the press of a big red button.

The examples of atrocities commited by humanity against humanity sprawl across a list several pages long. So one must pose the question: Should humans truly be free? Or would the freedom, the true, unshackled freedom, of humanity lead to nothing but chaos, death, and anarchy? If those that we elect as our leaders, or at least those that we allow to lead us (in the case of some dictators such as Hitler and Mussolini) commit such atrocities, can we ourselves actually be trusted?

I would liek you to post about Pink Coloured Stuff


Child Prodigy ?
Also I cannot determine what brought you to Evony whatever it is it must be the Answer to Life.

There is a difference between a prodigy and one who simply pursues his interests.