There is a traditional Greek view on Sparta as an ideal country where the citizens are equal (well, almost equal) and which statehood is a balance between democracy, aristocracy and monarchy. Sparta as a motherland of real Greek manhood.<br>
<br>
The other, modernistic point of view is Sparta, a country where Greek compatriots are held in a cruel slavery , citisens are dull and good-for-nothing (except for war) martinets. Something like a dead end of Greek civilization.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
warrior11<br>
<img src="http://www.chathome.com.ua/smile/182.gif" style="border:0;"/><br>
<p></p><i></i>
They were certainly statists. I don't think I'd call them fascist so much as totalitarian. AFAIK they were the only <em>polis</em> with a "secret police", the <em>krypteia</em>. <p></p><i></i>
It all depends on what you mean by the term ‘fascist’. You mean ‘totalitarian’ and ‘anti-aristocratic’.<br>
I meant ‘anti-aristocratic’ too. But most of all I meant their treatment of the conquered in Pelopponess. This distinction between superhumans and subhumans. Then this legend of defected new-born babies thrown down from the cliff. Military education of boys. Girls were seen as future mothers of soldiers. Everything was so thought over, precise and having in mind only one purpose – military might of the nation of Spariats.<br>
<p></p><i></i>
John Maddox Roberts
Unregistered
One factor endemic to fascism/national socialism is the personality cult or fuhrerprinzip: the need to subjugate the mass will to an adored, virtually worshipped leader. The Spartans seem to have had no interest whatever in a charismatic, dictatorial leader. <p></p><i></i>
It all depends on what you mean by the term ‘fascist’. You mean ‘totalitarian’ and ‘anti-aristocratic’.<br>
I meant ‘anti-aristocratic’ too. But most of all I meant their treatment of the conquered in Pelopponess. This distinction between superhumans and subhumans. Then this legend of defected new-born babies thrown down from the cliff. Military education of boys. Girls were seen as future mothers of soldiers. Everything was so thought over, precise and having in mind only one purpose – military might of the nation of Spariats.<br>
<p></p><i></i>
Quote:</em></strong><hr>Spartans seem to have had no interest whatever in a charismatic, dictatorial leader.<hr><br>
Definitely. Some elements, in particular the dual kingship; the Council of Ephors; and the idea of citizenship (for the <em>homoioi</em> class) and the concomitant ability to vote in the full Assembly, compare favorably to the Roman Republic (two consuls; senate; Roman citizenship). What made the Romans so much stronger was that they were more inclusive, i.e., the second generation or so after they conquered a people, those people could aspire to becoming "Roman". The Spartans were exactly the opposite, with many ways for the few thousand <em>homoioi</em> to get "demoted" out of Peer status, and no way to get back in, or introduce new blood. At the end there were only a few hundred Spartiates.<br>
<p></p><i></i>