Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

Democracy On Trial: The Verdict
Democracy On Trial: The Verdict
Democracy On Trial: The Verdict
Ebook269 pages3 hours

Democracy On Trial: The Verdict

Rating: 0 out of 5 stars

()

Read preview

About this ebook

This book is about how to view Democracy and bring the practice of it into our daily lives for the betterment of all. It will show you how the democratic system has developed as witnesses such as Plato and Aristotle are brought forward to explain their roles in developing Democracy in ancient Greece. Famous scientists give testimony concerning the importance of Creative Physics in helping to bring about Global Democracy for the survival of humanity. Democracy on Trial is an attempt to show how our democratic systems have developed, in a lively and interesting courthouse drama format. It is both educational and entertaining.

LanguageEnglish
PublisherChris Deggs
Release dateMay 5, 2015
ISBN9781311569844
Democracy On Trial: The Verdict
Author

Chris Deggs

Hi, my nom de plume is Chris Deggs. I live in the stunning Tweed Valley in New South Wales Australia. I am retired and single. I classify myself as a Science-Art visual artist/author. I love researching, writing and publishing my stories and articles. My stories usually have a ethical message, such as 'Nanofuture - the small things in life'. I enjoy writing 'mostly' novels, although I do write Science-Art articles and books. My Books are available in print from Feedaread, and are sold through smashwords in a wide variety of e Book platforms. I look forward to your comments. I hope you enjoy my stories.

Read more from Chris Deggs

Related to Democracy On Trial

Related ebooks

Historical Fiction For You

View More

Related articles

Related categories

Reviews for Democracy On Trial

Rating: 0 out of 5 stars
0 ratings

0 ratings0 reviews

What did you think?

Tap to rate

Review must be at least 10 words

    Book preview

    Democracy On Trial - Chris Deggs

    Democracy on Trial

    (The Verdict)

    by Chris Deggs: Science-Art Author

    This treatise in dialogue was first enacted as a play at the Science-Art Research Centre of Australia as part of a 2002 Australia Day celebration at Murwillumbah and Byron Bay NSW to introduce a new vision of a kind, sustainable Global Democracy. The author received a Decree of Excellence for outstanding contributions to the betterment of the global human condition. Copyright 2015 Chris Deggs

    Published by Chris Deggs at Feed A Read

    A CIP catalogue record for this title is available from the British Library.

    Copyright 2015 by Chris Deggs

    All rights reserved. No part of the book may be reproduced in any form, or by any electronic or mechanical means, including information storage and retrieval systems, without permission in writing from the publisher, except by a reviewer who may quote brief passages in a review.

    Preface

    This book was written as a result of the Science-Art Festival in Murwillumbah in the year 2000 in which Democracy was one of six chosen topics of the Symbols of our Age seminar. The base upon which society stands shows that Democracy, for it to be real and valid, must rest upon the principles of physics and natural laws, providing for real justice, direction, and balance.

    Democracy is much misunderstood in the world today and is mostly accepted as little more than our right to vote. The democratic process amounts too much more than this as is explained in this book. The reader is taken into the hearts and minds of great humanitarians of history who help us look at Democracy from the standpoint of philosophy, statesmanship, and science. As you follow the progress of the democratic system from its Grecian antiquity to its modern-day applications, the vast significance of this trial will become apparent to you. The democratic process, as a way of governance, is a time-honoured way of bringing about equality and fairness in the human community. It is about much more than citizens having the right to vote for the representative of their choice at political elections.

    Although this practice is part of a democratic process, it is undoubtedly not Democracy as it was intended to be. It was designed to be the government of the people, by the people, for the people, not the parody that could be termed ‘demockery’ that we have as our political system today. This book is about how to view Democracy and bring the practice of it into our daily lives for the betterment of all. It will show you how the democratic system has developed as witnesses such as Plato and Aristotle are brought forward to explain their roles in developing Democracy in ancient Greece. Famous scientists give testimony concerning the importance of Creative Physics in helping to bring about Global Democracy for the survival of humanity.

    Democracy on Trial is an attempt to show how our democratic systems have developed, in a lively and exciting courthouse drama format. It is both educational and entertaining and forms the basis for an impressive play. The author hopes you will find this book useful as it gives an insight into humanity’s political and spiritual future in which the needs of the world’s people must outweigh the greed of the few.

    Dedication

    The author wishes to thank Irene Brown, Professor Robert Pope and Robert Todonai for all their help and assistance in developing the Science-Art Festival 2000 and in particular Robert Pope for his assistance in providing some of the Science-Art background for this script. Furthermore, the writer thanks Barend De Klerk, proprietor of Dali’s Coffee Lounge in Murwillumbah for delivering the stimulating setting for creative thinking and great coffee all of which helped bring this work to fruition.

    Foreword

    Adrian Wiztek knew it was pointless to try and explain what he was doing, but he needed assistance to set the thing up, and the helpers kept asking annoying questions. It wasn't that his assistants were dumb. On the contrary, they were all experts in their fields of science and technology, but none of them had encountered the likes of Adrian Wiztek. The project was very hush, hush, with few people knowing about it. Adrian heard the door to the courtroom open and looked up to see the judge approaching.

    Judge Wright looked at the scrawny man with a scraggly red beard. Could this man be the genius he was purported to be? "How is it progressing? he asked for the umpteenth time, not knowing what 'it' was or what 'progressing', in this case, actually meant.

    The bespectacled, quantum physicist turned to face the balding middle-aged man in the Red robes. It can't be hurried.

    The 'thing' they were constructing, in his courtroom, was way beyond his comprehension. He had enough trouble trying to work out his smartphone. He added, The case starts tomorrow, so it has to be ready by 10 am. Saying that gave him some sense of authority and the illusion of control.

    Adrian sighed, You can't rush these things. Looks like we'll be here all night, but we'll have it up and running by morning.

    Good, good, The portly man with an almost bald pate, acknowledged. Then he asked, Is this really going to work?

    Adrian raised his eyes heavenward. If it doesn't you'll be short of witnesses.

    And we will be able to question them?

    There would hardly be any point otherwise, Adrian stated, testily. He added, Now we do have to get on with it if we are to make your deadline."

    Chapter 1

    Session in which Thales, Pythagoras, Anaxagoras and Democritus, give testimony

    The hearing is in session with the honourable Judge Wright presiding. The Judge, in all his judicial finery, adjusted his robes as he took his seat. Looking out at those assembled in the courtroom, he made his opening remarks. "Ladies and gentlemen, This case is somewhat unusual, to say the least. It is quite singular in the history of the British judiciary. It is being conducted as more of a tribunal than a court case. Therefore, there will be no jury and no members of the public present - only members of the media. I will deliver my verdict based purely on the facts placed before me. First, let me say that the aim of this hearing is for the court to hear the arguments concerning the merits and demerits of Democracy. We will, therefore, begin with no further ado with the opening remarks of the council for the prosecution.

    Sidney Ranger got to his feet. Addressing the bench, he began to put forward his case. "First, let me make it entirely clear that I am not against Democracy. On the contrary, I am an ardent supporter of Democracy. However, I feel we have been sadly let down by the models we have today. The defence will tell you, and I believe rightfully so, let's give credit where credit is due, but let us also take Democracy to task in the areas it has fallen far short of its desired goal. I believe, your Honour, that we have to call a spade a spade because humanity deserves the best form of Democracy it can muster. Now, the only way we are going to achieve this lofty goal is to pick the bones out of the philosophers' 'ideal state' to see its weaknesses, so that we can improve this world for everybody. I do not believe that patting the likes of Plato and Aristotle on the back will achieve this. We have to be honest, your Honour, even if it means being a little harsh and destroying a few sacred cows in the process.

    Sidney looked squarely at the Defence team. Your Honour, I would like to finish by asking a question. If we would like to see a more equitable democratic system in the world what is wrong with criticising the past to improve the future? This, I believe, is the important task for the prosecution in this case. Thank you. That is all I have to say at present, your Honour.

    Peering over his glasses at the defence team, Judge Wright said, The Defence counsel will now make its opening remarks.

    Marcus Dee stopped conferring with his team and stood up to address the court. "Thank you, your Honour. Now, during this trial, we are going to take a long hard look at this thing we call Democracy, right from its enlightened beginnings, through its chequered history, to how we understand it today. Throughout these proceedings the prosecution will belittle the courageous efforts and personal sacrifices many great philosophers and statesmen have made, often to their own disadvantage, to help bring about a fair and equitable system of government to the people. Now, it is essential to remind ourselves that such democratic measures had never been taken before and that changes from Autocracy to Democracy in Athens and other city-states, masterminded by such luminaries as Plato and Aristotle, took great courage and fortitude. The prosecution will point out that these great champions of equality never got it completely right and this is entirely true. Even so, I ask you this. Have we got it right today? I don't think so. The main point here is not how perfect their Athenian model was but rather that these great individuals, the real heroes of antiquity, searched in the darkness for glimpses of light. The very light that has shown us the way to direct our world on a meaningful and sustainable democratic path.

    For this reason your Honour we must give credit where it is due and find Democracy itself innocent of any wrongdoing. We must set Democracy free to spread its enlightenment around the globe to touch the hearts and souls of all humanity. This sums up the opening remarks of the defence."

    Having listened to the opening remarks of both sides, Judge Wright said, This is an extraordinary case for many reasons, one of which is that we are using space-time technology for many of the witnesses to appear before this court. The word 'appear' is, in this case, is used in its literal sense. Although I do not profess to be an expert on the matter I am apprised that we will be able to see, hear and question many of those who are giving testimony. This will take place, by way of a 'time machine' - that strange contraption over there near the witness box, he said, pointing in the direction of the hi-tech device with a seat in the middle. He silently prayed it was going to work as he peered out at the media gallery. That said, let us now proceed with the case at hand.

    Selina Tarrent, the Clerk of the court, spoke up. Call the first witness, Thales to the witness stand.

    Adrian Wiztek took a deep breath, tapped out a sequence on his keyboard and waited. At first, nothing happened. Then lights started flashing, and the sound of a generator could be heard by those close by. Shortly afterwards, the shape of a man began to manifest in the seat in the device. Soon, there appeared in the witness box a man of noble bearing. With a full beard as curly as his Grey hair.

    Sidney, trying desperately to keep his composure, approached the witness who, by then, seemed as substantial as anybody else in the courtroom. Are you Thales of Miletus?

    Yes, your Honour.

    Were you not an early philosopher, mathematician and astronomer?

    All of those things, your Honour.

    Sidney said, This case isn't about those attributes. It's about Democracy. So, Thales, what did you do to help develop Democracy?

    Democracy was, to my mind was a most inefficient and unreliable form of governance.

    Really! Sidney said, hamming it up a little. Is that why you were in favour of a benign tyranny, rather than Democracy.

    Yes, your Honour. Only intelligent men could run the government. Equal opportunity, as proposed by Democracy can only lead to a state being ruled by the lowest common denominator.

    I see, Sidney responded, So you were not in support of equality of the citizens in your society.

    Such a concept is nonsense. How is equality possible when men were naturally better than women, and that Greeks were better than barbarians.

    Thank you, Thales. That's all the questions I have for this witness, your Honour.

    Very well. Does the Defence have any questions for this witness?"

    Marcus Dee rose to his feet. A few, your Honour. He turned to the witness. Thales, were you not considered one of the so-called Seven Sages of Greece?

    Indeed, your Honour.

    And were you not regarded as being the first philosopher in the Western tradition and founder of the Milesian School?

    Yes, your Honour.

    Now, as the founder of the Milesian School of natural philosophy, did you not try to define water as being the substance from which all material objects are composed?

    Most certainly, your Honour.

    Marcus looked at his witness. Did you not go to Egypt and study with the priests?

    Yes, your Honour.

    What did you learn there?

    I learned about various mathematical innovations, the knowledge I took back to Greece.

    Did you learn about philosophy linking 'sacred geometry' to the Egyptian culture?

    They had a religion called Maat, linked to their sacred geometry.

    And what was the philosophy of this Maat religion, Thales?

    Sidney got up, This has nothing to do with Democracy, your Honour.

    I tend to agree, Judge Wright said, "

    Marcus turned to the judge. I have a valid point to make here, your Honour.

    Then make it quick.

    As your Honour pleases, Marcus said. Turning to Thales, he continued, Please answer the question.

    The philosophy of Maat was one of justice and order in the cosmos.

    And what did you make of this system of governance?

    I was very impressed. I conveyed this to Anaximander's student, Pythagoras, when I returned to Greece.

    I see Thales. Now, I am a little confused here because you told this court that you believe 'benign tyranny' to be the best form of governance, yet the Maat system, which you admired, seems more in line with the ideals of Democracy.

    Thales responded, If Democracy was based on the sacred geometrical principles of natural law and order, and not on mob rule, I think it could be preferable to benign tyranny, your Honour.

    Thank you, Thales. No more questions, your Honour.

    Selina spoke up, Call Pythagoras to the, er - thing.

    A tall man wearing white robes and a turban appeared in the room.

    Sidney, a little more confident, approached him. Are you Pythagoras of Samos?

    "Yes, your Honour,

    Were you not an Ionian Greek philosopher, mathematician and founder of a religious movement called Pythagoreanism, after you?

    That is correct, your Honour.

    Sidney looked straight at the man with the pointed beard. Pythagoras, You spent some time in Egypt, did you not?

    Yes, your Honour, Thales told me about their mathematics, I had to go and find out about it.

    Yes, well I'm more interested in what happened when you returned to Samos. Can you tell the court what it was like?

    Certainly. I found the internal affairs of my land in total confusion.

    What was the cause of this confusion?

    Polyerates, although not exactly a tyrant, had banished many citizens from Samos because of their popular beliefs. They sought and found support amongst the Lacedæmonians, and a civil war had broken out.

    So you arrive home to find yourself in the middle of a civil war. What happened then?

    The revolutionaries, with Lacedæmonian help abolished the rule of the few and caused a reversion to the system of giving power to the citizens.

    A form of Democracy - yes?

    Yes, your Honour. It was doomed to failure right from the beginning. They were like headless chickens with no forward planning. It wasn't long before they abolished Democracy and embraced aristocracy.

    Did you support aristocracy, Pythagoras?

    As a mathematician, I thrive on logic and order. Aristocracy reflected this in public affairs.

    Sidney turned to the judge, No more questions for this witness, your Honour.

    The judge looked across at the Defence. Mr Dee, do you have anything to add?

    Indeed I do, your Honour, Marcus smiled. Turning to the witness, he said, It is indeed a great honour to meet you. Now, I would like to focus on your time in Egypt, the period my learned friend quickly glossed over, Marcus stated giving his opponent a look.

    Using Thales as a reference, I was welcomed by the Theban priests and made privy to both their geometries, mundane and sacred.

    Pythagoras, can you explain to the court, in simple terms, the difference between the two?

    I will attempt to do so, your Honour. Mundane or 'plane' is used to construct physical structures. Sacred geometry, as I understand it, has to do with patterns related to Alchemy used to change poisons into harmless substances. This is because sacred geometry creates positive energy patterns that negate demonic vibrations.

    Sidney objected, What has this got to do with Democracy?

    Marcus said, Your Honour, This will soon be revealed.

    I hope so, Mr Dee. Please get to the point.

    Certainly, your Honour. Turning to the witness, Marcus said, "Pythagoras, please

    Enjoying the preview?
    Page 1 of 1