text:
The Piraeus in the Republic
The City Of Being Under The Twilight Of The City Of Becoming
Oh Athens, queen of cities!
How fair your Navy Yard! How fair your Parthenon! How fair your Piraeus!
Fragment of a lost comedy.
R. Kassel and C. Austin. Poetae Comici Graeci (Frg155, Vol VIII)
“To abstract from a circumstance is not to deny it.”
Grounds of Validity of the Laws of Logic
“Metaphysics itself grows out of a particular historical situation, from the situation of the decline of the polis, the decline of Athens. It creates a heritage that can survive in the declining polis, and survives even de decline of Hellenism…”
Plato and Europe
The problem of Socrates: that place, at that time. Its importance.
It is not possible to begin any interpretation of the content of the Republic if one does not take a position concerning the meaning, the limits or the possibilities that its form, –its genre– brings to the discussion. Before even entering into the specificity of the Republic, the form of all Platonic works (excluding the epistles and epigrams) raises all sorts of questions regarding authorship, fatherhood of certain notions, intention of the philosophical project and the tension, sometimes even contradiction, between what it is said and agreed in a dialogue and the form of it, that is, its inconclusive dialogical nature. In other (and perhaps more Platonic) words: we read Plato’s dialogues looking for the “being” of his philosophy, the “what it is” of his contribution to Western philosophy and the history of the world; but Plato just offers to us the “becoming” of a conversation around that veiled being. The work of unveiling its truth belongs to the reader.
A new question arises then: which reader? Are Plato’s dialogues available to all readers? In other words: is all that is needed to unveil the “what it is” of Platonism contained in the dialogues themselves? It could be so, but it is more reasonable to consider that every dialogue is full of signs that appear opaque to us, but were presumably luminous or obvious to Plato’s contemporaries. The task of bringing meaning to these signs is then central to the work of unveiling Plato. Moreover, Plato is an author who — precisely because of the nature of his works, their narrativity, his care in placing the tension between ideas in someone’s mouth and in a particular place and time — cannot be interpreted through any concrete thing or character in particular. There is neither speaker of the truth nor of Plato’s position in the dialogues. Beyond the speeches themselves, each thing, place, person or moment in his works is in dialogue with everything else. This is why, as Leo Strauss says, everything in Plato’s dialogues is relevant. Nothing is accidental:
“The speeches deal with something general or universal (e.g. with justice), but they are made in a particular or individual setting: these and those human beings converse there and then about the universal subject. (…) Nothing is accidental in a Platonic dialogue, everything is necessary at the place where it occurs.”
The conversation that gives form to the Republic happens in a particular place and in a particular time. We know, because it is explicitly said in the first book of the Republic, that the place is Cephalus’ house, in the surroundings of the Piraeus (328b3). Also, although the year in which it happens is not stated, there are some signs that let us know an approximate date. Probably, most of them were easier to grasp some twenty five centuries ago. For example, the fact that the conversation happens the same night that a certain public religious celebration, i.e. the festival in honor of the goddess and the torch horse-race, is performed for the first time in the city could give some clue to Plato’s contemporaries about the exact year in which it happens (328a). Nevertheless, there are other signs that are easier for us to interpret: the fact that a man called Polemarchus, son of Cephalus, takes part in the conversation means that he is alive, so it must necessarily be before the uprising of the Thirty Tyrants, the regime that condemned him to capital punishment (327b). Indeed, this is a good example of a sign that carries information not contained directly in the dialogue itself. At first glance it may seem like a mere detail, but the presence of Polemarchus (not to forget that he is the host) in the Republic is significant for three reasons: a) the matter of the Republic is justice and the just regime, b) among the Thirty Tyrants there were kins and friends of Plato and Socrates, and c) the Republic was written after that regime ended and after the new one, namely, a democracy, had condemned Socrates to drink the poison.
However, we are facing here a time with political significance, not a real time. In the Republic we experience a sort of fictional time that allows a conversation to happen, and a silence to be meaningful (such as Cephalus’ early mutis), but the text itself, as so often happens in Plato (e.g. the Symposium), is self-contradictory in terms of both internal and external time.
We are therefore compelled to ask not which year Plato wants us to think the Republic to have transpired, (however interesting this inquiry might prove to be), because such a year does not exist; but rather what is the meaning, the philosophical, political and literary meaning of that time. As Leo Strauss says: “…we must understand the “speeches” of all Platonic characters in the light of the “deeds.” The “deeds” are in the first place the setting and the action of the individual dialogue.”
What, then, was Plato’s intention when he created that conversation at that time in that particular venue? What did it mean to a Greek reader? How does all this affect the entire project of the Republic? In other words: what is the relation between the “becoming” of the conversation and the “being” that lies behind its veil? Since the place is precisely delimited, Cephalus’ and Polemarchus’ house at the Piraeus, while the time is only approximate, we will focus our inquiry on the place by attempting to unveil part of the symbolic and historical meaning of the Piraeus at that time. Since the Piraeus is, indeed, a city, a community, a sort of polis, we will attempt to see the perfectly just city of the Republic under the light of the meaning of the Piraeus.
The Piraeus as the place to go down to: exegesis of 327a
It is in the very beginning of the Republic that Socrates tells us where and when the action happened. The first sentence already contains relevant information for our purpose. First, Socrates says that he “went down to the Piraeus yesterday” (indeed, the first word in the Greek version is “went down”, Κατέβην). This simple narrative sentence implies that the reader already knows what and where this place called “the Piraeus” is. If Socrates (or Plato, for that matter) thought that the place needed more explanation, he could have included a short description of it, “I went to the port-city called Piraeus”, or “the city next to the navy yard”. But he did not. At the same time, he could have included a more detailed localization. He could have been more precise: “I went down to the Piraeus, next to the Zea Harbor”, or “just two blocks from the Hippodamian Agora”. But he did not. So we can safely infer that whatever Plato wants to imply by mentioning the place where Socrates went is already included in the word “Piraeus”. Moreover, Socrates says “went down”. Taken literally, we must assume that Socrates comes from a higher venue. If we didn’t know anything about Attica’s geography, we would know just that: from high to low, Socrates went down. But, since Socrates was an Athenian, and in fact Athens was five or six miles north the Piraeus, and the way (i.e. the Long Walls) had a descent slope from the main city to its port-city, it is easy to conclude that at a first reading this “went down” means that Socrates went to the Piraeus from Athens, rather than from the sea.
However, this “went down” welcomes other less literal interpretations
, (in fact the concept in Greek, Κατάβασις, was used in several religious rituals). The place where Socrates comes from could be “higher” in a non-geographical sense. Socrates “goes down”, meaning that he approaches the world of the mundane. Even more: if this “going down” of the Book I is connected with the cave allegory of Book VII, being Socrates a philosopher, it seems plausible that Socrates goes down to the interior of the cave, in order to discuss the shadows of the world of senses, and to give notice of the higher world of real –intellectual/intelligible– things. Moreover, this line of interpretation would account for a confused Socrates. According to the cave allegory, if someone who had gone to the upper world “were to come down again and sit in the same seat, on coming suddenly from the sun wouldn’t his eyes get infected with darkness?” (517e3-5). So in “forming judgements about those shadows while his vision was still dim” he would be the source of “laughter” (517e7). Also, since it was “yesterday” that he “went down” to he Piraeus, in present time of the book, while giving his account of the conversation that forms the Republic, he is no longer “down” there; but he could equally be confused by the change, this time from darkness to light, which is a painful process (515c4-516b2). This coming down explains the nature of the conversation, or, more precisely, the nature of the way in which Socrates “teaches”; that is, through maieutics rather than through magisterial lectures. The difficult dialectical process to knowledge that Socrates proposes, the fact that Plato’s ultimate “lessons” on the “good” were esoterically hidden, never written and available only through real dialogue
, and the way in which the conversation of the Republic transpires, with double meanings, irony, reductios ad absurdum, contradictions and the absence of a closed conclusion in favor of an open reflection that calls for more and more conversation, all these and other characteristics of Plato’s works and Socrates’ teachings in them are partially explained by this “going down” to the cave. This unavoidable difficulty is then always present: accessing the truth inside the cave, down at the Piraeus, means finding the way out of it.
However inspiring or plausible this metaphysical interpretation of the “coming down” of Socrates may be, in the text he says that he “went down” with Glaucon. And throughout the Republic we see that whatever virtues Glaucon possesses, he is not (yet) an enlightened inhabitant of the upper level, the outside-of-the-cave realm. The analysis of why Glaucon accompanies Socrates, or whether it is Socrates who actually accompanies Glaucon would take us too far afield. Leo Strauss, however, mentions Xenophon’s Memorabilia to assert that Socrates tried to ease Glaucon’s political ambition, and that that might be the reason for him to be one of the main interlocutors of the Republic.
Be that as it may, what we know of Glaucon is that he is the son of Ariston, that is, the brother of Plato and Aidemantus (who will be another main character in the Republic), and that means that he is a member of the wealthiest families of Athens, an aristocracy, so to speak, close to power, and a nephew of one of the Thirty Tyrants. This Κατάβασις to the Piraeus could then have another non-geographical meaning. It could have a political meaning: going down from the old, rich, political, oligarchic Athens to its port-city, with all that port cities entail at a first glance
. It could be then a going down to the political arena with one young ambitious Athenian who must be taught and appeased.
However, the reason for them to go down to the Piraeus, as we also find out in the very first sentence, is not to discuss anything. The purpose of the visit is “to pray to the goddess; and, at the same time, I [Socrates] wanted to observe how they put on the festival, since they were holding it for the first time.” So, first, the main reason for going doing has to do with piety, religion. But, at the same time, Socrates wants to “observe;” he wants to examine the festival because it is “new.” Socrates is curious about the novelty of the festival. Pray and observe. Whether this is Plato’s way to respond to the accusation of impiety that lead to Socrates’ death sentence, or it is a way to express the balance between these two activities, it is difficult to say. However, the statement draws a first profile of Socrates, both respectful with tradition and enthralled by novelty, both interested in religion and in observation (however, this profile will seem ironic in light of the rest of the book,).
On the other hand, which goddess is the new “festival” celebrating? The next sentence of the paragraph of this translation (“Now, in my opinion, the procession of the native inhabitants was fine; but the one the Thracians conducted was no less fitting a show”) and the kind of city that the Piraeus was (as we will see later), together with the fact that we are in front of a new festival and that a little later on in the dialogue the torch-race is mentioned as part of the celebration, imply that Socrates is not talking about Athenea here. Rather, it is more likely that he is talking about the Thracian goddess Bendis, a version of Artemis, whose cult had been introduced to Attica.
This, then, would be the first celebration of the festival devoted to Bendis, which used to be celebrated at the beginning of June, a perfect time for a night-long conversation.
Therefore, even before we start discussing the historical reality of the Piraeus at that time, we can glimpse the kind of “city” it was. It was a city in which foreign goddesses were not only admitted but celebrated,
a city of plurality not only of options but of peoples (the Thracians to start with, but also the rich Metics, Cephalus and his sons, hosts of the Republic among others), and a place were cultural or religious manifestations performed by foreigners, namely the procession conducted by the Thracians, compared with the local one can be “no less fitting a show” according to an Athenian hoplit, a veteran of the Peloponnessian Wars, called Socrates.
These are the first characteristics that we learn of the place where Plato puts forth a dialogue on justice, on justice as it is in itself, és a dir, on universal justice. The question of the possibility and limits of the perfectly just city, together with (or as a consequence of) the question of justice in itself are the foundations of Political Philosophy. The beginning of it, as it were. It would be excessive to claim that it is the Piraeus, as the place of diversity, that is the cause or the reason for raising the question of universal political concepts. First of all, there had been many diverse places in history before the Piraeus to call the Piraeus the primordial ooze out of which outcropped Political Philosophy as such. Secondly, the diversity of the Piraeus was a Greek diversity, with too few “barbarians” taking part in its life to consider it the crystallization of an ultimate diversity. And finally, the social and political context is not the only cause for Western Philosophy as we understand it to have come into life.
Nevertheless, it is arguably necessary to overcome tribalism and localism for a universal idea of justice to flourish. And to overcome tribalism it is also necessary to go beyond confrontation. The denial or the will to destroy the other, meaning, another people, country, culture, language, religion (or Greek city-state) implies a certain degree of knowledge of the enemy, especially of its weaknesses, but the primary will is founded in the conviction that one’s own community is superior in every sense. Defeat is fatalism, and alliance is deferral of the inevitable confrontation. To overcome localism a community of diverse individuals, or of diverse sub-communities must be able to live together peacefully and prosperously. And the Piraeus is, at a first glance, a good example of this. So, independent of the real influence of the existence of the Piraeus, and of the Athenian naval empire, in the birth of Western humanism, or in the birth of Political Philosophy, the place really works as a mythical, political setting to develop such a system of thought.
However, the political/social context is necessary but insufficient. There is also an ontological premise for this beginning of political philosophy to become real. It is necessary to be able to make the distinction between what is visible and what is invisible. Or, what is the same, to be able to make a distinction between what is perceptible and what is intelligible. Or, what is the same also, between what is common and what is particular. Class and case. Being and becoming. Once the setting of the action of the Republic is established, once the conversation starts at the Piraeus, the rest of the night climbs this ontology, this path from becoming to being to utter what is behind the veil of the worldly world. Call it dialectic, abstraction, induction or revelation; and an entire system of thought will appear. In order to better understand Plato’s version of it, in order to ascend with him to the highlands of the outside-the-cave realms, we must first go down to the Piraeus, once again. This time to its historical, mundane sounds, smells and shadows. And consider then how relevant it is for the just city in speech to have been uttered in such a place.
The Historical Piraeus
The Piraeus was built after the battle of Salamis, like so many other things in Athens, both physical and intangible. Democracy, Aeschylus and the Republic are probably consequences of that battle, cunningly led by Themistocles, that Athenian who in 483 B.C. envisioned a city linked to the sea, proposed in the Assembly of Athens to use the silver surplus that the mines had produced that year to build up the greatest navy in Greece (170 triremes) and ultimately led the fleet against the Persian invader just 3 years later
. Salamis was the end of a rather mediocre city called Athens, and the beginning of the Delphian League, the maritime empire that would make of Athens the city we remember when we utter words like Socrates, Sophocles, Pericles or Demosthenes. That city lasted only a century and a half, and in order to absorb all the wealth, people and military power that the imperial enterprise demanded, the Piraeus was built.
The meaning of the historic Piraeus as a setting for the Republic has, at least, three vectors that converge in that friendly conversation, and then diverge and disappear under the regime of the Ideal City. The first one is democracy, the second one is diversity, and the third one is sensuality. These three vectors shape the character of the Piraeus. All of them are the consequence of the rule of the sea by Athens, the consequence of their navy, and the consequence of their imperial ambition. By the time of the conversation of the Republic all these three characteristics have reached their zenith; by the time Plato wrote the Republic their decadence was already present. The history that is whispered now and then in the Republic by Plato is the history of the limits of a city that puts all its eggs in the basket of the “becoming”, the strength of the opinion of the mass, the power of the muscle of thousands of rowers, and the force of the desire for novelty, pleasures and eros. All trusted to the will of a bunch of different capricious gods, as relativistic in their will as the desire of their people in the marketplace. In the Republic, Socrates will purge all these three characteristics by showing their weaknesses when contrasted to the “being” of justice. But it is in the tension between these two extremes, and in the presence of its limits –injustice in one case, impossibility in the other– that this tension finds its meaning.
Just as democracy, the luxuries of the market or the lively diversity, the city at the Piraeus was a consequence of the Athenian naval empire
. The increasing role of the navy and the maritime trade led to the need for both a fortified Piraeus with its Navy Yard and its city of merchants. What is really significant for our purposes, however, is that the city of Athens decided to hire a urban planner to design the entire city, to create a city capable of both serving the navy and directing the traffic of all kinds of goods that the Athenians, as rulers of the sea, controlled. The man for the job was Hippodamus of Miletus. The city of Miletus had been rebuilt on a grid plan after the Persian War, and the success of the project made of Hippodamus a professional urban planner throughout Greece.
Hippodamus’ ambition was to design the physical setting for a perfect community. He would have been a perfect character in the Republic, but he was not, unless we consider the possibility that he was indeed present through his work, the Piraeus. Some of his ideas and deeds were close enough to the ideas defended by Socrates in the Republic to make us think of a connection:
“In his ideal city the population would be divided into three classes: craftsmen, farmers, and warriors. Land should also have its tripartite division: sacred, public, and private. Hippodamus even proposed that juries should be able to choose from not two but three possible verdicts: guilty, not guilty, and not sure. How his heart must have leaped when he caught his first glimpse of the three natural harbors at the Piraeus.”
The most relevant characteristic of his project, however, was its rationality. His idea was of a city based on a grid plan,
in which every space would have its purpose, and each public and private purpose would have its place. The Hippodamian plan was logical, rational, planned ahead not only to respond to human necessities, but in order to create a type of community, that is, an ideal city. Leo Strauss comments on the difference, however, between Hippodamus’ and Socrates’ projects:
“In spite or because of his ambition, Hippodamus did not succeed in founding political philosophy or political science because he did not begin by raising the question “what is political?” or rather “what is the polis?” This question, and all questions of this kind, were raised by Socrates who for this reason became the founder of political philosophy. The “what is” questions point to “essences”, to “essential” differences –to the fact that the whole consists of parts which are heterogeneous, not merely sensibly (like fire, air, water, and earth but noetically: to understand the whole means to understand the “What” of each of these parts, of these classes of beings, and how they are linked with one another.”
The Hippodamian ideal crystallized in a space-order. This is important because although it can be claimed that the Ideal City of Hippodamus was a rational project, it was a project aimed at re-ordering a society through stones, buildings, and streets, that is, through the physical world. It was not a project of re-building souls with souls, the aim of education and philosophy. The Hippodamian grid plan was conceived as series of straight streets (fig1), that had a proportioned size-ratio between them, and an idea of why and how each thing was as it was.
Even private houses were designed to follow the totalizing ideal of perfect community that Hippodamus had.
In what concerns the first vector of this city, namely, democracy, the form of Themistocles proposal in the Assembly showed the nature of change that came along with the leadership of Athens from the old democracy in Athens to the naval democracy. According to his old-style proposal, “one hundred of Athens’ richest citizens would each be allotted a talent of silver, (that is, six thousand drachmas). Each man would then use the money to buy raw materials and organizing the building of a warship.”
The form of this proposal expresses very clearly the preeminence of the wealthy class of Athens in a democracy that excluded the thetes, the lowest class of citizens, from the deliberation process as well as banning them from holding any public office in the city. But that would later change. One hundred new triremes would call for “seventeen thousand men to pull the oars.” Considering that Athens already possessed seventy ships, the only way that the city had to put all one hundred and seventy ships into battle was by conscripting the thetes: the new navy would empower the city’s masses. Not to forget that the rowers were always free men. Actually, most were citizens:
“They took pride in their navy and welcomed the steady pay and political equality that it offered. At times of supreme crisis, all free adult males in Athens –rich and poor, citizens and aliens, aristocratic horsemen and common laborers –would board the triremes and row to save their city. On one desperate occasion, when the main fleet was blockaded in a distant harbor, the Athenians freed thousands of their slaves so that a new fleet could row to the rescue. All these former slaves received citizenship.”
The victory of Athens based on the navy, that is, on the peoples’ muscles and sweat meant a turning point in the development of Athenian democracy. As Aristotle said in his Politics: “The Athenian democracy was strengthened by the masses who served in the navy and who won the victory at Salamis, because the leadership that Athens then gained rested on sea power.”
But not only the navy meant an empowerment of the masses, it also meant a new kind of proximity between horsemen, hoplits and thetes. For the Persian War, Athens had mobilized its entire citizen body. An experience of equality came from that enterprise, not only because of the convivial atmosphere that any war brings, but also because of the nature of the task that they performed: indeed “rowing demanded perfect unison of action.”
When Socrates discusses in the VIII book of the Republic the coming to be of democracy he sees the roots of the democratic convictions against political and economical inequality in the experience of a community of shipmates from diverse social origins (556 c6-e), and in Adeimantus answer we are probably witnessing an historical assertion rather than an ideological one:
“When the rulers and the ruled, each prepared in this fashion, come alongside of each other –either wayfaring or in some other community, on trips to religious festivals or in campaigns, becoming shipmates or fellow soldiers, or even observing one another in dangers themselves –the poor are now in no wise despised by the rich. Rather it is often the case that a lean , tanned poor man is ranged in battle next to a rich man, reared in shade, surrounded by a great deal of alien flesh, and sees him panting and full of perplexity. Don’t you suppose he believes that it is due to the vice of the poor that such men are rich, and when the poor meet in private, one passes the word to the other: “Those men are ours. For they are nothing?
I certainly know very well, he said, that this is what they do.”
The years following the battle at Salamis, Athens’ relationship to the sea became extremely politicized. The age-old battle between democracy and oligarchy was expressed in terms of more or less sea-power right from the beginning. Two main examples of the link between the seapower and democracy:
a) During the battle at Salamis, the people of Athens had left the city and had found shelter either on the ships –if they were able to fight or row– or in allied cities. The city was given to the Persians because Themistocles didn’t want to face them by land, and he decided to concentrate all their efforts on the sea front. The Persians reduced the city to ruins. After the war, Themistocles tried to persuade his fellow citizens to “abandon the old city around the Acropolis and rebuild Athens directly on the coast.”
That would have completed his dream of transforming Athens into a polis absolutely devoted to the sea. His proposal was not accepted, but the Assembly decided to “finish constructing a fortified port at the Piraeus, a project that had lain dormant for more than a decade.” And also to “offer incentives to attract skilled craftsmen from other cities to immigrate to Athens.”
b) In the mid-5th century, two great Athenians, Ephialtes and Pericles changed the way Athenians had done politics for decades. Ephialtes emptied the Council of Areopagus of almost all power and brought it to the democratic council of the Five Hundred, the Assembly or the jurors. Pericles, after him, went beyond that. The wealth that the Athenian naval empire had brought permitted him to complete the democratic revolution. Before them, “all archons and generals came from the ranks of the wealthy, and the bar of property qualification was set so high that even the ten thousand hoplites were excluded.”
They could vote “yes” or “no” to some of their leaders decisions but leadership itself was denied to the common citizen. Pericles’ change meant exactly the opposite: democracy came to mean the possibility for all citizens to hold office.
Concerning the second and third vectors, namely, diversity and sensuality, as much rational as it may have been as a receptacle, Hippodamus’ Piraeus had a content that was far from being ordered, or as straight or proportioned as its streets were. The Piraeus was the place where sailors arrived from every patrolling trip to the Aegean Sea, and from every commercial trip all around the Mediterranean. The Piraeus was the hub of an extensive international trade. It was filled with foreign merchants that had finally stablished their houses and headquarters at the better place to control their goods and also to enjoy as many different products and luxuries as one could find in Greece. With them, these merchants and mercenaries brought their religions, customs and styles of dress. The Piraeus also received envoys from all the allied cities who either visited the city for political purposes or to pay tribute to the leader of the sea.
The Piraeus was a good place to find a doctor, a barber or a prostitute. The piraeus was a good place to taste the best and the worst wine, to find filthy taverns or luxuriously dressed daughters of rich merchants. In its two open-air theaters, free citizens from all around Greece could enjoy Aeschylus’ Persians, funded by the young Pericles, which explains the battle of Salamis from the Persian perspective, in which the queen of the Persians is amazed by the news of the Athenians not being subject to anybody, and by their courage in fighting as a commonwealth of free men; or later on, they could laugh at comedies such as Aristophanes’ Clouds, in which Socrates is ridiculed. Their naval endeavor represented everything, from being the source of a perfect sexual metaphor (vz. “nautria” or “female rower” for a certain position) to the source of both wealth and freedom. In this context, the Piraeus was both the place of eros, and the place of difference. From the taste of an almond to the power of a god, difference and desire were present everywhere.
Even cemeteries were witnesses of this diversity in peoples and souls:
“Egyptian merchants carried Isis with them from the banks of the Nile, just as the traders from Asia Minor brought Cybele the Mother Goddess and the Syrians imported Astarte. The Phoenicians introduced to the Piraeus not only the cult of Baal but also a mysterious divinity with the body of a man and the head like the prow of a warship, complete with ram. In one of the tombstone of a Phoenician resident of the Piraeus, this strange ship god was shown wrestling with a lion for possession of the corpse.”
And bodily desires were called to be fulfilled in many different ways:
“Athenians of the Golden Age never tired of enumerating the sea-born imports that flowed into the piraeus. From Libya came ivory, hides and the medicinal plant and dietary supplement called silphium. Egypt provided papyrus and sailcloth. Cretan cypress wood was good for carving images of gods, and Syrian incense could be burned at shrines in thanksgiving for safe return. (…) An Athenian feast could include salt fish from the Black Sea, beef ribs from Thessaly, pork and cheese from Syracuse in Sicily, dates from Phoenicia, raisins and figs from Rhodes, pears and apples from Euboea, almonds from Naxos, and chestnuts from Asia Minor. The rounds of flat bread, often dressed with relish or fish sauce, were usually made from Russian, Egyptian, or Sicilian wheat. As they enjoyed these delicacies, Athenians could rest their feet or elbows on brightly colored carpets and cushions from Carthage. If the dinner lasted into the night, a bronze lamp-stand of Etruscan manufacture from central Italy might light the convivial scene.”
This state of licentiousness, tolerance, and freedom, however, was not a time of peace. The First Peloponnesian War (449-446 B.C), the Samian War (440 B.C), and, finally, the Peloponnesian War (431-404 B.C.) kept Athens and the Piraeus occupied with military activity. The action of the Republic happens right before the beginning of the last Peloponnesian War, but it was written after its end. What does this time lapse mean? At 404 B.C the Peloponnesian War ended with the surrender of Athens to the Spartan Lysander’s forces. The Long Walls were torn down, the navy was reduced to twelve triremes, all the fortifications of the Piraeus destroyed, and an oligarchy of Thirty Tyrants hand-picked by the Spartans was imposed on Athens. Democracy was terminated. Athens would no longer have any overseas policies of its own but would follow Sparta’s lead on land and sea alike.
Just one year later (403 B.C.), however, the regime was overthrown and Democracy was restored. There had been a “resistance movement that took as its headquarters the old democratic stronghold of the Piraeus.”
In 399, after the democratic restoration, Socrates is condemned to death. This time-lapse then was the beginning of decadence for both Athens and the Piraeus. Although democracy was restored, Athens was never to be the same. The cave of shadows that the Piraeus was, with its shadows of freedom and knowledge in the Assembly, with its shadows of health and happiness in its marketplace, and with its shadows of faith in its festivals was finding its limits. Under the twilight of its day, the city in Speech will show the blinding light of being, and its own limits.
Undoubtedly, the political, social and economical significance of the Piraeus is central to understand 5th-century Athens, and the disputes of its daily politics, as well as its long term goals and its discussions on the best regime, but this is not our purpose. Our purpose is to explore the tension between the city of becoming and the city of being.
The City in Speech as the antagonist of the Piraeus.
The city in speech that Socrates builds up in the Republic is the opposite of the Piraeus in several aspects. The conversation that Socrates leads from the moment in which he compares the soul with a city in order to better grasp what justice is (468d) until the completion of the city in speech and the acknowledgment of its impossibility at the end of Book VIII, is a process of increasing abstraction. The city in speech, the so called Ideal State, is a regime that appears after the abstraction of all worldly differences. As Strauss says, the first abstraction is the abstraction from eros,
and, then, from all the diversity that comes from eros, that is, almost all particularity, all what is private and corporeal is extracted from the city.
On the other hand, however, once the city is abstracted from all difference, Socrates starts the opposite process, a process of distinction of what it is essential. This is apparent in the two arguments behind the claim that philosophers must rule: first, they must be able to ignore the irrelevant differences of the world (i.e. shadows in the cave) and, at the same time, they must be capable of knowledge, that is, capable of distinguishing the forms in themselves (474b4-6): the essential difference of justice in itself, of beauty in itself, etc. Moreover, in this moment, Socrates will re-introduce eros into the equation, but this time, eros will be directed to knowledge of real objects, with real differences (474d-475d).
It is our claim that this perfect just city is the opposite of the Piraeus because the Piraeus, as we have seen, is the place of mundane difference, the place of liberated eros and the place of Athenian democracy, that is, the place where all opinions count just the same as the one and only knowledge. The Piraeus is the city where every particularity can take place, and indeed it does. It is the city where every desire and every vice can be fulfilled, and this is its great virtue. It is the city where the opinion of the many, however wrong, irrational or impulsive, rules; and this is its only political knowledge. It is the regime ruled by private dispositions, however publicly spirited their navy might seem. It is the realm of shadows and its hermeneutists, demagogues and imitators. And, nevertheless, it is the perfect place to have the friendly conversation (dialectics) to understand its nature, and the limits of its opposite. It is where Socrates utters the tension between the limits of a décadent democracy and the limits of rational utopia.
Three moments in the Republic show in a more perfect way the abstraction of the ideal city from Piraean differences and the pursuit of essential distinctions: the change from the true city to the feverish city (372c) and the consequences it produces (399), the noble lie (414b) as a point of no return, and the three waves (454-484) as the fulfillment of all abstraction, and hence, the impossibility that it entails.
Concerning the original abstraction, namely, the abstraction of eros, Strauss says:
This abstraction shows itself most strikingly in two facts: when Socrates mentions the fundamental needs which give rise to human society, he is silent about the need for procreation, and when he describes the tyrant, he presents him as Eros incarnate. (573b-e, 574d-575a). This is to say nothing of the fact that the Republic almost opens with a curse on eros (329b6-d1). It seems that there is a tension between eros and the city and hence between eros and justice: only through the depreciation of eros can the city come into its own.
The silence about procreation in the city of sows, is not the only silence that wraps up that “true and healthy” city. None of the institutions or laws that Socrates proposes later on are present either, and the social structure that is implicitly attributed to it is rather different from the final one that is at the core of the city in speech, vz. in the healthy city there are families (372b).
However, when Glaucon complains about the austerity of the city arguing that it is more akin to a city of sows than a city of human beings (372c), and urges Socrates to go beyond necessity, beyond peace and survival, Socrates accepts taking the “feverish” city (373e), full of “luxuries,” as the starting point for their project. This is a very “Socratic” acceptance, however. We will see how Socrates does not look for justice or injustice in this feverish city as he promised to do. On the contrary, he will exclude bit by bit all these luxuries from the city before he makes the essence of the perfect regime present in his speech. In fact, the institutions and laws that this city will have are a response to control and erase this feverish state of Glaucon’s city. It is arguable that in the healthy city they are not necessary, but once necessity is substituted by eros, then all these laws and controls must be put in motion. Or, as Socrates himself puts it, they must “purge” this city (399e).
In the few pages that go from the acceptance of the feverish city as the plan of work, to the first explicit acknowledgment of the purging, Socrates has already accomplished several “abstractions”. He has separated the city from tradition: both Homer’s and Hesiod’s traditions are undermined and subjected to the interest of the city (377e-378a, and most of Book III).
In doing this, Socrates is introducing a public religion, and, hence, a sole religion. Or, as Jan Patocka puts it, he turns mythology into religion.
Moreover, in his new public theology for the city, Socrates tends to reduce the manifold of greek divinities into a unified conceptual divinity. We see an example of this in the fact that while his interlocutors always speak of “gods” in the plural, he always answers with the singular “god”,(379a5-8) except when he speaks of actual rituals, and temples (437b-c). But his characterization of “god” is an expression of unity, in the sense of “one”. God is good, simple and true (381-382).
Even more explicitly, before admitting the purge, he states the need for moderation of the guardians (389d), condemns licentiousness in sexual intercourse (389e) and bans sexually loaded stories about the gods (390e). He also reformulates the style, voice and content of public speeches and poems in such a way that the only admitted style (that is, no diversity) is a style without many changes, and the only admitted way of expressing a voice in a speech or poetry is a voice focused on the narrator’s perspective rather than on giving form to the manifold of voices or characters. Therefore, poetry is now more mono-cord, unchanging in its style and themes and less varied in terms of perspective. (397c). This is exactly the same as he does with music: harmonies are to be monotonic; both many-toned and pan-harmonic melodies are banned in the city (399c). The laws and means of this city in speech are aimed at both banning sensual richness and encouraging simpler lifestyles.
The essential principle, however, that unifies all these laws is “one man does just one thing”, which comes from the idea that justice is “minding one’s own business.” This principle, that ironically is a principle of disinterest in public affairs will end up being “do the only thing you can do for the common good.”
Doing one’s part for the common good is a form of convergence: unity is the goal. There is a tension between the many and the one that will be present in the whole dialogue, and it works behind each law and institution: unity is accomplished by both harmonizing real differences and by excluding all other “virtual” difference (i.e. the mere “shadows” of difference). This is what we call the abstraction of difference and the acknowledgment of essential distinctions.
Stating all this in the Piraeus had to be, at the very least, comical: the characterization of sex as a dangerous corrupting pleasure (403a), the banning of homosexual intercourse (403c), or the condemnation of exotic goods as luxurious (404d). In the place where the navy was trained in complex and sophisticated rowing maneuvers, Socrates proposes simple gymnastics for the guardians (404e), and exactly in the place where these soldiers spent their pay after a trip in barbers, prostitutes, alcohol and cosmopolitan meals, Socrates proposes that they must not have any private property, no pay (just food and drink according to necessity) and no house (416d-e).
The epitome of the contrast between the Piraeus and the city in speech is the abstraction from all economical difference. The guardians must take care that no wealth and poverty exist in the city (421e-422a). The reason behind this abstraction from economical difference is, once more, unity. The true city that can be called just “one city” is the city in which differences do not exist. Other so called cities are, in fact, many cities (its rich part and its poor part being the most evident separated cities, 423b). From here on, then, it is only a matter of logical deduction: in order to be just one true city, one sole education is needed for the youth (423e), and women and children must be in common (424a), all desires must be prohibited, especially for the guardians, and moderation must be the rule for everybody (432d), because there is only one form of virtue but and an unlimited number of vices (445c).
However, the point of no return in this process of abstraction is the noble lie (414b). Socrates introduces the noble lie as a form of inner control of the ruled, and especially of the guardians. The noble lie is a form of belief, a foundational myth that shapes a cosmology, a theory of nature and a theory of human nature. It is the Eden or the Theogony of the city in speech. The consequence of this originary myth is the establishment of an exclusive religious story. This time, after the correction of the Greek tradition, and the exclusion of all its inconvenient parts, Socrates adds his own positive narrative. In the noble lie we witness the production of a distilled religion meant to sanction the abstraction from eros in the city, and aimed at placing its principle in the most private realm of an individual, his or her beliefs.
Moreover, concerning its content, in the noble lie we also witness how the process of abstraction from eros, and from all the differences that eros produces away from the control of the city, necessarily arrives at the point in which nature itself must be negated. The erotic natural impulse for procreation and the strong sense of belonging that family ties create must be overcome if the laws of the city are to prevail. “The good city is not possible then without a fundamental falsehood; it cannot exist in the element of truth, of nature.”
The noble lie has two parts. The first blurs differences among citizens that arise out of family origin and rearing. All citizens come from the earth, as if they were vegetables, and belong to the same mother: the land where the city is. They are sons and daughters of the polis, and to the polis-mother they owe their life, that is, everything.
This is a vertical relationship with the public affairs: the preeminence of the city overcomes all private interests, desires, and alliances. But there is also a horizontal relationship: all citizens are brothers, there are no hereditary differences. This time, this equality not only includes the economic inheritance but now it includes also the imponderable leverage that a name, a family name, a tradition of power, give to an individual. Socrates erases with this move all the meanings and leverage that come with the becoming of a human life. How one becomes citizen is no longer part of the city: all becomings are to be equalized in this noble lie. The difference of becoming is to be abstracted because it is not relevant in the construction of a political justice.
The second part of the noble lie, however, aims at the opposite goal: the distinguishing of being. Each soul is made out of gold, silver or bronze. Depending on which predominates, one is meant to be a ruler, a guardian or a ruled. The new differences that Socrates introduces here, are differences of the soul. Essential differences, differences of the being: permanent, incorruptible, imperceptible through the senses.
The unifying power of the noble lie contrasts with the religious diversity of the Piraeus. Moreover, the religious diversity of the Piraeus was often a difference in ritual, a difference of phenomena, of liturgy. The common practice of translating gods in ancient polytheistic religions, (from Artemis to Bentis, for example, the different processions devoted to which are the reason for Socrates to go down to the Piraeus), makes this phenomenological difference especially relevant. It is true that the Piraeus is a place of religious diversity, but, above all, it is a place of ritual diversity. Socrates both excludes this diversity, along with a more theological one, and gives birth to a more essential one, which is always more exclusive, as monotheistic religions tend to be: the content of his new religion is precisely the possibility of distinguishing the hierarchy of beings.
The tension between the perfect just city and eros, finds its final moment in the three waves. The three waves come into the conversation despite Socrates. Polemarchus and Adeimantus, (and “the others”), want further clarification of the common possession of women proposed by Socrates. This is the extreme point of the abstraction away from eros: no exclusive sex, no marriage, no family, no erotic alliance. Socrates widens the question to an even more difficult one: the question of women in general. The first wave, then, is the problem of gender equality: is it possible and beneficial that women and men do the same? The answer will be positive: men and women have the same nature with respect to guarding a city, to ruling it and to everything else. It is possible for women to be equal to men (456a) and it is the most beneficial thing for the city (457a). The shame that comes from the fact that women are now to exercise in the gymnasium along with the men, that is, naked, must be overcome by the acknowledgment of its beneficiality and its fairness. Socrates, again, blurs this form of difference, i.e. the physical difference of genitality, that found its social importance in the ruling of eros. Actually, for Socrates, the difference between men and women is comparable to that of baldness and longhairedness (454c).
The erasing of this difference finds also its contrast with the Piraeus, and especially with traditional Greek society. In the Piraeus, beyond its sexual business, and its licentiousness, women and men had so greatly different roles that even Hippodamus, in his model rational “Piraeus house” included the traditional “men’s room” (see footnote 22 above), the place for men to rest, and talk with their friends: indeed, most probably the room in which Socrates and the others were saying that women should exercise naked along with men in the gymnasium, i.e., that such a difference must be ignored in the new city. The radicallity of the measure (457b7-c), however, contrasts with the entire feminine areté of the ancient Greek values, as seen in Homer, that reserve for women nothing more than beauty and wit, at the most.
The overcoming of the first wave brings meaning to the second (457c5-7). The second wave is the question that Adeimantus and Polemarchus first asked: how will this “women in common” law be organized? Given that women “belong” to the men, at a first glance it seemed that Socrates’ proposal led to the extreme licentiousness of permanent orgy, in which everyone has intercourse with everyone. However, it turned out to be a complete rationalization of sex and procreation, given that, in fact, women are equal to men, and that child-bearing must be carried out by the community and not by men’s personal, private, wife, that is, the mother of one’s children. The law establishes that all women belong to all men,
that no wife is to live privately with any man and that all children will also be in common, no parent knowing who his or her children are, and no children knowing who their parents are.
Again, this law destroys the family as an institution, and with it, the privacy of love, education, wealth and power. But it also creates a new institution: the city must take over the power of deciding when and through whom the city will increase or maintain its population. It is the institution of eugenics (461). It is in this battle that the war between ideal justice and eros arrives at its zenith. Until here, the beneficality of the abstraction of all differences that the presence of eros produces in a city had been accompanied with a sense of possibility: the law made it possible, so to speak. While the perfection of the city grew, also the difficulty of its realization increased. In this second wave, Socrates has postponed the question of possibility (458a) in favor of the beneficiality of the measure. This postponing of it will end up being the principle of utopia: its impossibility does not lessen its goodness. (472). And, eventually, the impossibility of accomplishing the perfect union, the absence of privacy, the abstraction of eros and its differences will open the path for the third wave, and the rest of the Republic. After having identified the good city with the perfect union and the bad city with the existence of the many (in any realm of things) (462b), after having ended with political parties, through the establishing of the power of family ties among the rulers (463c), after admitting nothing private but the body (464d-e),
after having even turned the traditional Greek wars into family quarrels (supposedly, at the beginning of the Peloponnesian War! In the Piraeus!), after the abstraction from eros and the extraction of all differences, once impossibility is unavoidingly present, then, and only then, the real purpose appears.
The purpose that opened the long path of the Republic: to know what justice is in itself, one must be able to distinguish things in themselves. Philosophers must rule, this is the best way to be as close as possible to the perfect just city, because they know how to distinguish being (474b4-6). After undermining becoming, after abstracting pure thought from its insignificance, the realm of being can be discovered. Socrates now reintroduces delight, desires and eros, but its a desire and a delight for learning (474d-475d). It is the difference of the soul the it is relevant for a real philosopher. He seems to be, in his becoming, a useless citizen, a stargazer, but in his being, he is made of gold. Philosophers ignore irrelevant differences, contemplate things in themselves and take into account relevant, real differences of the forms(576a-b). Philosophers are those who are able to “grasp what is always the same in all respects” (484b).
Therefore, in an ever changing world, a world of shadows and sensual chains, where each imperfect regime is followed by its decadence, only philosophers can introduce the adequate reforms to approach the ideal. But, how can this be done if the ideal is impossible? This is when the democratic Piraeus finds its most important significance. Given that in the world of becoming, in the world of mundane possibilities, in the world of eros, decadence and change is unavoidable, only philosophy can bring some truth and justice, both in the individual and in the collective sphere of life. But, when and how is philosophy possible? According to Socrates (524e-525), at the individual level, only the experiencing of difference, that is, the experience of sensible contradictions, provokes the question for the whole. Differences produce thought. Equally, at the collective level, democracy is the only regime that brings to the forefront the phenomena of all other regimes, and their differences provoke the question for the whole, the ideal justice.
The Piraeus means here this place of convergence, the place where all these differences are present, where eros shows its powers, and where shadows and demagogues have their paradise. But, at the same time, it is the place of the Republic, meaning that it is the place where a philosopher can utter his speeches, a place where he can accomplish the quest for a better regime, and a better man. Reading the Republic, figuring out the radicality of the City in Speech, under the light of the Piraeus is a process of discovering the fundamental tension that goes undercover in the dialogue. There are many ideas of justice, and many ideas of a just city in the Republic, but at the end, the city in speech, and its failure, the revindication of philosophy that follows it, and the promise of Being, the fundamental Socratic project, finds its mirror in the Piraeus, as both its negation and its condition of possibility.
Why the Piraeus is the antagonist of the City in Speech has been shown: the reign of eros and its effects are perfectly clear in the port-city; as well as the presence of different regimes in the souls of its inhabitants; e.g. aristocracy in its heros, timocracy in its soldiers, oligarchy in its merchants, tyranny in the temptations of Socrates’ interlocutors, and democracy as a ground. The process of abstraction and purge that we have seen throughout the Republic up until the limit of the possible brought in front of our eyes, for us to witness it, the being of justice. Once the city in speech is rendered impossible, the analysis of the other regimes appears as an analysis of the relation between imperfect forms of political justice, — i.e. the rule of age-old areté, the rule of honor, the rule of money, the rule of freedom and the rule of hate –, and the ineffable form of perfect political justice. However, the ultimate goal of the conversation is to give form to the relation between the being of justice and the becoming of the polis and to acknowledge the tension between them, because only through the consciousness of this tension will the inhabitants of the cave be set free from their chains and capable of distinguishing the things in themselves.
Embodied human beings are thrown into the cave, this is why only imperfect forms of political justice are possible in the polis. There is no actual choice between perfect justice and its perversion. Justice is not ‘corrupted by human affairs’: justice is simultaneously present in and absent from all human activity. Every shadow of the cave indeed outlines the light as much as it shapes the object of which it is a sign. A shadow is always a presence and an absence of both light and matter. Once one sees a shadow as a shadow, light and matter can be thought. But in order to see a shadow as it is, there must be both a will to overcome it and the possibility of contrasting the whole scale of grey that shadows can display.
In the Republic, relative justice (or, what is the same, politics) is the name of such a scale: perfect justice being its whiteness and the objects of mundane eros being its blackness; presence and absence of all colors at the same time. This is why we claim that the Piraeus is both the negation and the condition of possibility of the City in Speech. It is not to be understood as the condition of possibility of Justice, but of its coming into be in speech. The differences present in the Piraeus bring doubt to private beliefs, its democratic character brings the will to the proscenium, and the extreme sensuality it hosts conveys the distance between the spirit and the body. More importantly, the fact that its freedom implies that everything can be said makes possible for the truth to be uttered.
The realm of becoming is the realm of politics. The description that Socrates makes of the evolution of each regime into its decadence, and the presence-abscence of justice in each of them show that the place of justice is an inner place. In other words: only the soul can host justice because the soul is of the same nature as the outside-the-cave realm and as the idea of justice. We have said that the experience of contrast and the will to overcome it are conditions for seeing things in themselves. But that would be a mere form of banal empiricist induction. There is a metaphysical condition: the care of the soul. Philosophy is this path from becoming to being, and it expresses the lack of knowledge as well as the eros for truth. But, in its extreme, philosophy is a form of justice. In its askesis (ἄσκησις) it elevates the soul to the eidos. We face here the ultimate tension. Perfect justice is not possible in the world, (nor perfect beauty nor perfect goodness), because it does not belong to the world, but it is present in the world with enough evidence for us to try and follow its path outside the world. Philosophy is a worldly askesis that connects both realms: things as they are and things as they appear. But Philosophy only gets to rule in an impossible city, a city that can only be spoken of, not realized. Its actualization would destroy its perfection, its being. But in the speech, in the city that appears in speech, Philosophy can convey and make present the nature of the things in themselves. And this possibility to convey and make present the things in themselves in the impossible city in speech is perfect justice. Therefore, insofar as the world of politics is the realm of the cave, only the possibility of the speech matters. And this possibility depends on the possibility of a conversation to happen.
The Piraeus is the place chosen by Plato to host this conversation. Its characteristics display a richness of meanings and contradictions that brings meaning to the difficult question of justice in several levels: sociologically, politically, philosophically, and so forth. When we say that the Piraeus is both the negation and the condition of possibility of the City in Speech it is our claim that difference, sensuality and democracy are this negation and this condition of possibility. The City of Being finds its light outlined by the shadow of the City of Becoming. And thus the Piraeus is a masterly chosen setting for the Republic.
“I do not imagine that philosophy would be the driving force of the world and that it would even ever have any chance for this. But this is how it is. As soon as this human possibility once emerges, it steps into the radius of all other human possibilities. Although philosophy as clarity, as radical reflection about the world in its whole evidently will never be realized and who knows whether it could ever be realized, it forces all the other possibilities of man, the non-philosophic, to reflect. And by this it brings not-philosophy itself onto another level and into another state than it had been prior to reflection. That is the task of philosophy.”
Bloom, Allan (trad). The Republic of Plato. Basic Books, US, 1991.
Hale, John R. Lords of the Sea. The Story of the Athenian Navy and the Birth of Democracy, Viking Penguin Group, New York, 2009.
Jaeger, Werner. Paideia.The Ideals of Greek Culture Vol I: Archaic Greece, The Mind of Athens. Translated by Gilbert Highet. Oxford University Press, New York 1976. (first edition, Berlin 1933).
Patocka, Jan. Plato and Europe. Translated by Petr Lom. Stanford University Press, Stanford CA, 2002.
Strauss Leo, The City and Man. The University of Chicago Press, 1978.
Pabón, José Manuel and Fernández-Galiano, Manuel (tranlators). La República de Platón. Alianza Editorial, Madrid 2009.
John M. Cooper (editor). Plato. Complete Works. Hackett Publishing Company, IN, 1997.
The Republic of Plato translated by Allan Bloom, Basic Books, US, 1991.
Strauss, Leo and Cropsey Joseph, History of Political Philosophy. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1987.
Friedländer, Paul, Platone Vol I-III, Translated to italian by Andrea Le Moli. Bompiani, Milano 2004. Translation to English by Jordi Graupera.
Monserrat, Josep (ed) Hermenèutica i Platonisme. Barcelonesa d’Edicions, Barcelona 2002.
Swoboda, Heinrich, Historia de Grecia. Transated from German by Guillermo Zotte. Editorial Labor, Barcelona-Buenos Aires, 1930.
Reale, Giovanni Por una nueva interpretación de Platón. Herder, Barcelona, 2006.
Gorman, Vanessa B. Miletos: The Ornament of Ionia. Ann Arbor, Mich., 2001
Flacelière, Robert. Daily Life in Greece at the Time of Pericles. New York, 1965.
Garland, Robert. The Piraeus from the Fith to the First Centuries B.C. London, 2001.
Assmann, Jan.The Price of Monotheism, Stanford University Press, CA, 2010

domain: library


text:
team cross street racing forum de la team C.S.R du jeu trackmania
team cross street racing est désormais compatible avec l'extension FastNews.kiwi disponible pour votre navigateur. Avec cette extension, vérifiez s'il y a des nouveaux sujets sur ce forum en un clic depuis n'importe quelle page !Cliquez ici pour en savoir plus.
Categories: Star Trek, Star Trek: Gold Key Archives. You may also like… Star Trek: New Visions #2 Times Echo $3.99–$7.99 Star Trek: Harlan Ellisons City on the Edge of Forever #4 $1.99–$3.99 Star Trek: Gold Key Archives, Vol. The Gold Key comics made a wonderful companion to the live-action series and are rightly deserved of the praise they received for helping to keep interest in Star Trek alive long after the shows unfortunate cancellation. Wikia Skip to Content Skip to Wiki Navigation Skip to Site Navigation Advertisement The Home of Fandom Games Movies TV Explore Wikia Games Movies TV Trending Wikias Community Central Memory Alpha Search all of Wikia Sign In Register Username Password Forgot your password? Stay logged in Or Connect Start a wiki Memory Alpha Navigation On MA Wiki Activity Random page Videos New files on this wiki Portals People Bajorans Borg Ferengi Humans Klingons Romulans Vulcans Starfleet personnel Society & Culture Borg Cardassian Union Dominion Ferengi Alliance Federation Klingon Empire Romulan Empire Vulcan Science Alpha Quadrant Beta Quadrant Gamma Quadrant Delta Quadrant Tech Spacecraft Starships Spacecraft classes Starship classes Stations All technology Alt Reality History People Places and Things Starfleet personnel Production Timeline Calendar Performers Studio models Retcons Deleted scenes Unused material Merch DVDs Blu-rays Novels Comics Collectibles Star Trek TOS & TAS James T. 1 $11.99–$29.99 Format Choose an optionDigitalPrintClear Add to cart SKU: 9781613779224. Categories: Star Trek, Star Trek: Gold Key Archives. The Gold Key comic proved to be a hit with readers, ultimately running for 61 issues a 62nd issue was planned but went unpublished and helping to establish Star Trek as a viable property outside of the cathode ray box. Navigation IDW Publishing Home Main NavHome About News Shop Catalog On Sale! Digital Bundles 0 items - $0.00 Return to Content Star Trek: Gold Key Archives Showing all 5 results Default sorting Sort by popularity Sort by newness Sort by price: low to high Sort by price: high to low Sort by Release Date Sold OutStar Trek Gold Key Archives, Vol. They journey to desolate planets and amazing cities of the future, all beautifully rendered by Zaccara and Giolitti in eye-popping color reproduced in all of its garish, period-appropriate splendor. ..

domain: entertainment


text:
This weekend Mouse Guard creator David Petersen attends the Detroit Fanfare convention. It’s a great chance to catch the native from Michigan closer to his natural habitat. Here is a quick excerpt from The Oakland Press:
“I love conventions for getting to meet fans and chat with them about (‘Mouse Guard’), comics in general or anything, really,” he said. “While the big flashy conventions are really cool, there is a special treat to having a more back-to-basics local show where fans and creators can get time together without massive crowds for video game announcements. Because this is a local show, it’s also nice to see some of the local talent I don’t always get a chance to see.”
To read more, click here.

domain: geography


text:
We develop a theoretical model for how organic molecules can control the electronic and transport properties of an underlying transistor channel to whose surface they are chemically bonded. The influence arises from a combination of long-ranged dipolar electrostatics due to the molecular head groups as well as short-ranged charge transfer and interfacial dipole driven by equilibrium band alignment between the molecular backbone and the reconstructed semiconductor surface atoms.
|Original language||English (US)|
|Journal||Journal of Applied Physics|
|State||Published - 2009|

domain: chemistry


text:
What to Do If You Have Been Denied Social Security Benefits?
Most people hear or learn about Social Security Disability benefits and apply on their own. Few realize that most claims are initially denied.
If you have received a denial letter and need help deciding what to do next, please contact the respected lawyers at Adler Firm, PLLC, right away. With offices in Detroit and Traverse City, we represent clients throughout the state of Michigan. We may even be able to help you without requiring you to travel to our office.
Waiting Too Long or Appealing on Your Own Can Be Costly
If your initial Social Security Disability application has been denied, the next available step is an appeal. You must take action promptly or your case may be closed.
Unlike many other states, Michigan currently has no “reconsideration” phase other than to start a formal process that can lead to a hearing before a judge.
Our attorneys have an outstanding track record of winning benefits for people who cannot work. We are proven trial lawyers deeply immersed in Social Security law and the workings of this complex government system. Steps we can take include:
- Improving the medical evidence to substantiate your qualifying medical condition and inability to work, sometimes obtaining a clear diagnosis that fits the government agency’s “list of impairments”
- Effectively addressing other reasons — such as questions about your income or work history
- Preparing you and your appeal case thoroughly for your hearing, based on our extensive knowledge of how judges in southeast Michigan make their determinations
Put Our Experience and Determination to Work for You:
Wondering what to do if denied Social Security benefits? The simple, most effective next move is to get help from a professional who can evaluate the reason for denial and develop a strategy for winning your appeal. We charge no attorney fees unless we take your case and win benefits for you — and then the fee is determined by law as a percentage of the back-due benefits you receive.

domain: law


A lorry which burst into flames on the A34 was carrying scented candles, firefighters say.
The road is due to remain closed for "several hours" and crews have spent most of the night getting the fire under control.
The incident was reported at 12.25am on Thursday, March 5.
Highways England has confirmed the incident happened on the northbound carriageway between Speen and Donnington in Newbury and has damaged the road surface.
As a result, a resurfacing operation will have to take place before it can reopen.
The road has already been closed for more than 10 hours and is likely to remain closed for several more hours.
Thames Valley Police tweeted to say it is hoped it will reopen by midday after the resurfacing.
Recovery of the vehicle will commence.
Once that is done, the resurfacing work can start.
As of 8.30am, fire crews were still at the scene and recovery had not started.
Diversions around the incident are in place, and more information on how to avoid the A34 can be found here .
Lorry was carrying scented candles
Firefighters from Newbury said the lorry was carrying a load of scented candles.
Station manager Matt Reilly told BerkshireLive the fire broke in part of the lorry’s trailer.
The driver spotted the flames and was able to detach his cab and move it to safety.
He was not injured.
All the stock being carried has either been destroyed or deemed damaged goods.
Fire crews from Newbury, Dee Road in Reading, Berkshire, and Hungerford all attended the blaze.
Berkshire traffic and travel Facebook group
- We'll keep you up to date with all the traffic and travel news from across the county
- From the M4, M3, M40 and M25 to local roads across Berkshire we'll be bring you the latest traffic updates
- We'll also have the latest from the trains and buses across the area.
Join the group here.
They eventually left the scene at around 6.30am.
Station manager Reilly said the wax from the candles would complicate the clear up operation, but the real problems was the fire damage to the carriageway.
BerkshireLive is providing live updates on the incident as it progresses this morning.


Monday, November 29, 2004
The US mass media “reports”, the style, content and especially the language, echo their Nazi predecessors of 70 years ago to an uncanny degree. Coincidence? Of course!
Nazi vs American propaganda
Post a Comment
If you run accross anything that you think I might be interested in,
Enter your email address below to subscribe to
powered by Bloglet


text:
1987: Prepared Raw Beef for David Letterman
Julia brought her cooking equipment and a supply of ground beef to prepare a hamburger on Late Night with David Letterman. She revealed that the meat was leftover from her segment on Good Morning America. Letterman chatted with Julia as she set up her station, asking if she ever cooked anything that was awful, to which she replied, "Yes." Letterman followed up with, "and what do you do with it?" Without skipping a beat she replied, "I give it to my husband." The audience roared with laughter following her honest answer. Whether a set-up or another actual incident of a failed recipe, the burger meant for Letterman failed miserably, which he blamed on the pan on loan from Good Morning America. Julia, who always had a backup in mind, turned the meat into a raw beef tartar, which Letterman refused to eat.

domain: food


text:
Second Act Jennifer Lopez Coat In Black Leather
The Leather Coat is worn by Jennifer Lopez who assumes the job of Maya in the Second Act film. This is a 2018 American lighthearted comedy film. The subsequent Act is coordinated by Peter Segal and composed by Elaine Goldsmith-Thomas and Justin Zackham. Jennifer Lopez is an American entertainer, maker, artist, style planner, artist, and also a business specialist. She got a Golden Globe selection and turned into the primary Latin entertainer to acquire over US$1 million for a movie.
This Jennifer Lopez Coat is made from a real quality fabric in wonderful dark shading. Its internal has a thick viscous coating for your solace. The one of a kind element of this ladies outfit is that it has a front open style alongside lapel style neckline. It has full sleeves and belted cuffs. Its front open style gives you another and classy look.
This coat is amazing and I love the TV actor Jennifer Lopez. Wearing this coat makes me look elegant and trendy just like him.
Nancy Graner –
This coat has become my favorite its black color looks attractive. Wearing it makes me look stylish and graceful everywhere.

domain: artistic


text:
The La Quinta Inn and Suites-Denver Boulder/Lousville is located between Boulder and Denver near the University of Colorado. We are close to Rocky Mountain National Park; stay here and you will save a bundle! Down the hill is Denver; Six Flags, Butterfly Pavilion, and the concert and sports venues of Pepsi Center. Up the hill is Boulder; Flatirons Mall and the ever-popular Pearl Street, a pedestrian-only mall featuring street musicians.
Pets stay FREE at La Quinta! Domestic pets, like cats and dogs, are welcome to stay at La Quinta. While rooms are spacious, no more than two (2) domestic pets are allowed per room. Be sure to keep your pets on a leash or in a carrier if they’re outside your room. Pets may remain alone in a guestroom so long as the pet is well-behaved. With the exception of authorized service animals, pets are not allowed in the breakfast area, the fitness center and the laundry room or at the pool. If your cat is staying with you, you’ll need to provide a litter box.
or call 303-664-0100
Address & Contact:
902 West Dillon Rd
Louisville, CO 80027

domain: pet


More than a dozen coders handpicked from across the U.S. Department of Defense spent a week chipping away at data and software challenges associated with swatting down drones in the Greater Middle East, Central Command said.
The effort, dubbed Sandtrap, produced prototypes that improved the speed and accuracy of unmanned aerial system countermeasures, according to a Feb. 9 announcement from CENTCOM, the Pentagon’s combatant command whose area of responsibility includes Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Yemen.
Downing a drone or other aerial threat requires spotting, classifying, tracking and targeting it in a process that is increasingly digital.
The U.S. military has in recent months faced a barrage of drone and missile attacks, including in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. A one-way drone strike at the Tower 22 installation, near the al-Tanf garrison and Syrian border, killed three soldiers in January. Iranian-supplied militants were blamed.
Schuyler Moore, the chief technology officer at CENTCOM, in a statement said the command is committed to “leveraging every talented individual, technical solution and innovative process available” to advance counter-drone efforts.
“The Sandtrap hackathon combined all three: exceptional coders, brilliant software prototypes, and a repeatable process that can give us creative solutions in the future,” she added. Moore previously served as the chief strategy officer for Task Force 59, an outfit designed to quickly fold artificial intelligence and uncrewed systems into Navy operations.
Additional events similar to Sandtrap are expected going forward. Hackathons are organized to bring together specialists — developers, data scientists, software engineers and others — who then quickly improve upon existing programs or build novel ones.
Army Gen. Michael Kurilla, commander of CENTCOM, in a statement said the Sandtrap endeavor brought “new and creative solutions to the table.” Future hackathons, he added, “will drive better solutions to critical missions and advance data-centric warfighting for the command.”
Colin Demarest is a reporter at C4ISRNET, where he covers military networks, cyber and IT. Colin previously covered the Department of Energy and its National Nuclear Security Administration — namely Cold War cleanup and nuclear weapons development — for a daily newspaper in South Carolina. Colin is also an award-winning photographer.


text:
the shop I had this crazy dream that people would click 'Add to Cart' on the basis that they sought personal development, empowerment, emotional clarity, spiritual guidance, a kick-start to the next leg of their own incredible journey.. I had this vision for Tarot's future and my own hand in making that future a reality. I wanted to carve out my own little place in which to show people how to dance to the beat of their own drum - the only drum worth dancing to, after all. Last weekend I made my 200th sale and suddenly something in me clicked: This is a big part of what I want to do with the rest of my time on Earth.
I used to think that maybe, just maybe, I had to make a straight up choice between writing and the personal development thing. I knew I wanted to become a qualified Spiritual Counsellor, as a form of proof to myself that my own incredible journey could be recognised, and I made that happen this year. But I always felt that I couldn't take my life in both directions. Writing or helping - it would have to be a crossroads of sorts and I'd have to choose wisely. The truth is now becoming apparent: I am writing and helping and I'm doing that every day. My words can bring people closer to their personal power. My empathy and my words are closely linked. And now I just want my mother tongue to explode into my life and everyone else's, more than I've ever wanted that before. I somehow found a way to tie both passions into my life and I'll keep experimenting with that, not for glory, not for praise, just for the sheer joy of it. Once you've told yourself you're entitled to be glad, you know you're on the fast track to total appreciation of the reality you're in, not the one you're waiting for.
I would like those who have an interest in me as a person to get closer to the action. I don't want to hide so much - I want us all to tie our incredibly intricate stories together in a whirl of experience and discovery. I am spending the month of May here at the blog writing about relationship issues, matters of the heart, break-ups, break downs, repairing those breakages -both inner and outer- which leave that sense of desolation when things go wrong.. I will start with myself. My personal heartbreak and what it showed me, the way I felt I was holding my heart in my own hand for the very first time, knowing that I could nurse it back to health or throw it against the wall - it was my choice.
I want to bring more of my personal trials onto the blog in a way that charts a chaotic and creative journey from then to now and beyond. I am ready to be a big, shiny mirror of what I urge others to see and accept in themselves.
I have no impatience in me. No grand plans, no sense of urgency, no desire to be bigger, better or more well known. I have no ego drives behind anything I do. I am free of all that complex muck - I am free to simply feel so blessed to have the opportunity to step into someone else's journey for even a second in time and tie something from my heart space onto something from theirs. This is the moment at which I really know I'm alive for the right reasons.
Much love x


text:
What brand of hash browns does waffle house use? Learn how to make crispy hashbrowns just like you get at a diner!
Add about 1 1/2 cups of simply potato hash browns to the waffle maker.
How to cook frozen hash browns like waffle house. You simply need to heat up the griddle/waffle maker and then put your hash browns in the griddle and then close it completely. Put a metal ring down on grill if not ordered scattered if scattered then pile a scoop of hash browns on grill without ring. She paid close attention to how waffle house prepares their hash browns and noticed the following:
As with any other ingredients, it’s recommended to thaw hash. To get all those deliciously crunchy bits, you need to use a griddle so you have enough of a wide cooking surface. Like i said, i don’t usually use oil to cook my hash browns.
Waffle house does use a dehydrated potato (very similar to what you can buy in the stores in the center of the aisle from idahoan or basic american) and they use a butter style oil. Place your hash browns (loose or in patty form depending on the brand you bought) into the skillet and then cover. All food sales are final
How to cook frozen hash browns in a skillet. They are a must have in our house, and as a matter of fact, i made them for the kids for dinner tonight. Put some of the potato in a bowl and season it with salt and pepper.
Waffle house does use a dehydrated potato (very similar to what you can buy in the stores in the center of the aisle from idahoan or basic american) and they use a butter style oil. Serve it with some warm gravy for a more tasteful meal! There's one more very important tip for getting hash browns just right like waffle house does, and it comes down to a lot of surface space.
Waffle house world famous hashbrown potatoes enjoy our famous hashbrowns right at home! Pin501 they are a must have in any diner. They start with dehydrated potatoes, reconstituting and draining them very well.
Reserve 2 teaspoons of butter mixture for later. These are super simple and only require a real potato, butter, oil and a technique. I think there is a real trick to great hash browns though, and everyone likes them a bit different whether they are mixed with bell peppers, or onions, or ham, or heck, even bacon.
They start with dehydrated potatoes ( not flakes for making mashed potatoes ). It's also really important to have a wide, thin spatula for pressing down the hash browns. A cast iron skillet, griddle or a heavy saute pan is the best tool for cooking these hash browns.
My favourite is in a frying pan on the stove. Should i thaw frozen hash browns before cooking? Close the waffle maker and put something heavy on top until the potatoes cook down.
Can you get breakfast all day at waffle house? They wanted seconds, so two batches of hash browns were in order. Do not cover the hash browns while cooking.
Heat the pan over medium high heat. The potatoes will cook down so it's ok if they are heaping. Continue to cook until potatoes are brown.
Then, take them out of the griddle. Here’s what you should know about how they make hash browns at waffle house: Whisk together butter and oil in a small bowl.
It’s really easy to cook frozen hash browns this way. 1st put a dip of oil the add hash browns then add toppings if any or ordered cook till golden brown or some like them cooked longer so they have a crunch then when you have the one side cooked flip and finish if cheese is ordered then add cheese then take out of ring put on plate or if. We suggest them scattered, smothered and covered® about 6 servings per containerlimited quantities.
Allow the hash browns cook for five or 10 minutes or until they are as cooked as you want them to be. Cook for approximately 5 minutes before flipping them to the other side with a spatula.


text:
My Basmati Bat Mitzvah
Tara questions whether she wants to have a Bat Mitzvah, and what it means with regard to her Indian heritage. This book is about what she learns from her relationships with friends and family members.
This is a charming book. There are many things about Tara's story that are relatable to a wide range of readers. The gap between Tara's wishes and her mother's, and the exploration of self as she prepares for the Bat Mitzvah, and the competition at school that pairs her with an irresponsible kid and puts her at odds with a friend - all of these conflicts strike realistic tones with the intended audience.
"If I wanted to honor Nanaji by wearing my sari, then why not? It was my party. Why couldn't I express my Indian heritage and my Jewish one at the same time?"
If you like this book, you may also like . . .


text:
MOSCOW, Feb 8 (Reuters) - The Russian government on Monday approved a formula-based export tax system for wheat, corn and barley that is designed to help combat domestic food price inflation.
The system will come into force on June 2, according to an order signed by Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin.
Russia’s Economy Minister said last week the country was accelerating plans to switch to a formula-based tax on wheat exports, as part of efforts to curb food price inflation during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The switch to a formula, which will take place a month earlier than previously planned, will mean the tax will automatically rise in response to any increase in prices.
The formula will be set at 70% of the difference between a base price for wheat per tonne and $200, the government said.
Russia previously imposed a series of fixed tariffs on exports, which will start from Feb. 15 and will be in place until the formula is applied.
The tax is designed to cut domestic prices as it curbs exports and therefore increases the amount of wheat available within the country.
The new formula for barley and corn will be similar to that used for wheat, but will use $185 instead of $200 for calculations, the government said. (Reporting by Darya Korsunskaya and Vladimir Soldatkin; Writing Gabrielle Tétrault-Farber; Editing by David Evans and Mark Potter)
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

domain: news


text:
Puyallup may be a small town, but it’s still smack dab in the center of the Puget Sound, and living in the area isn’t exactly inexpensive. That being said, rents here are much more reasonable than they are in the surrounding areas, with one-bedrooms going for a good $300 less a month than you’d pay on average 60 miles north in Seattle.
Puyallup’s convenient location coupled with its rural ambience makes finding an apartment and moving to the city remarkably easy when compared with relocation to a lot of other communities. Apartment complexes are plentiful and openings relatively easy to come by, so you’re virtually guaranteed to find just about everything you’re looking for without having to do a lot of compromising. The other benefit of the current plethora of apartment options is that if you’re planning a move to Puyallup, it won’t take a lot of advance planning. If you have enough money to cover a deposit of an average first and last months’ rent, you should be able to find an apartment quickly and easily even if you wait until you get to the area to start looking.
In some small towns you might be able to expect to find privately owned rentals held by landlords who can be negotiated out of credit checks and rental history reports, but it’s unlikely to happen in Puyallup. This is largely the case in the whole of the Puget Sound area; the vast majority of apartments are in professionally-managed complexes and will require at least decent credit and references from previous landlords. Even if you do happen to find a daylight basement to rent (if that’s your druthers), it’s safest to expect that private landlord to run the same investigations of your background and ask for the same amounts in the way of deposits. It’s simply the way things are done in the Northwest. Happily, residents of the Puget Sound area are used to frequent transplants from other parts of the country thanks to the presence of large corporate headquarters for companies like Amazon.com and Microsoft, so you won’t always be required to have proof of current income, as long as you can prove that you have enough money to pay at least a few months’ worth of the rent.
Since Puyallup is a smaller place, you aren’t going to find gigantic discrepancies between qualities of life in different neighborhoods the way you would in a bigger city, but there are still things to consider in order to make the best possible decision about where to live. For instance, for many people, one of the biggest concerns when moving to Puyallup is whether or not they’ll be one of the large number of residents who commute to nearby cities for work. If you plan on working in Seattle, for instance, it might be worthwhile to consider living in a neighborhood near the downtown business district, which houses the station for the Puget Sound’s very convenient and speedy heavy commuter train, the Sounder. It wouldn’t make a lot of sense to have to fight in-town traffic trekking to the train just to avoid the out-of-town traffic, right? But then again, living too close to the railroad tracks is bound to be noisy and, in some places, leave you with an unsightly view from that balcony you paid extra for. So, if you’re a likely commuter and want to live closer to the downtown area for that reason, just do a little extra homework before you commit to a property.
Downtown/Central Business District: Primarily older buildings and houses. The majority of apartments here will be above shops and likely closer to the railroad tracks, which run through the center of downtown Puyallup. Rents here are relatively affordable, but options will be more limited and you’ll be dealing with crowds come time for the annual fair.
South Hill/South Hill Graham: Built in the ‘80s and ‘90s, these neighborhoods were a result of the expansion of the South Hill Mall area and the population boom in Puget Sound at the end of the last millennium. Most of the apartments in these areas will be in the mid- to high range when it comes to rent, but the buildings will be newer and have more amenities.
Summit: Located on the west hills of Puyallup,much of the housing available here was built in the 1960s, but there has been a recent resurgence of development in the area. Rents and housing qualities here are likely to vary quite a bit, but a little bit of homework could score you an awesome apartment in this area.
Waller: Similar in feel to the Summit neighborhood, Waller is composed primarily of houses rather than apartment buildings. There are, however, some apartments available, and a number of them are in great locations given Waller’s close proximity to neighboring Tacoma.
Alderton: A quieter neighborhood just east of downtown for those who don’t want to live directly in the center of the city. Homes here will probably be on the older side, similar to those in the Downtown area, but the location could make it a worthwhile place to live.
Outlying areas (Midland/Parkland/Fredrickson): Boundaries between towns in the Pacific Northwest can get a little fuzzy, and Puyallup is no exception. These neighborhoods can claim either Tacoma or Puyallup as their homes. They all have a distinct flavor and very different job prospects and commute times to other areas, so a little homework goes a long way if you’re considering a property in one of these zones.
Living in Puyallup can be rewarding and comfortable for those who enjoy suburban life with access to the big city. But be sure to bring your car along. Puyallup has an extraordinarily decent public transportation system for a small town, but everything is relative: public transportation in the Puget Sound area in general is notoriously atrocious. Even the daily commuter train only runs at very restricted times of the day. If you plan on visiting surrounding towns even on a semi-regular basis, plan on either lots of three-hour bus rides or bringing that beat-up Chevy with you when you come. Don’t feel too bad about it, though: as long as that Chevy still has some horsepower to it, it’ll grant you access to the gorgeous nature and world-class hiking trails that pepper the surrounding areas, as well as the nearby Cascade Mountains and Mount Rainier National Park less than an hour away.
Puyallup is probably best known for its yearly hosting of the gargantuan Washington State Fair. Better known locally simply as the “Puyallup Fair,” the 17-day event ranks among the top ten fairs in the country on a yearly basis and regularly hosts a slough of celebrity acts, drawing more than a million people to the town every September.
Revel in the small-town feel and the genuine kindness of your new neighbors—the Puget Sound is famous for its hospitality. With a little preparation and effort on your part, Puyallup can be the perfect place to live.


text:
I have been staying here for the last three years at least twice a year. Although this hotel may be considered off the beaten path, I think it's convenient to everything. It's a short walk to the subway, has two ATM's nearby, several cafe's around the hotel and is by far one of the newer SPG properties. Every time I feel I am treated with the best service possible. I always get upgraded to a suite which is very impressive. It's like having my own apartment in the city. The club lounge offers some of the most delicious items of any SPG property with a wide selection of wines to try. The club lounge staff are so friendly. For example, for my birthday this year they delivered a cake and a bottle of wine with a note signed by all of the staff. It's those small touches that make me loyal to the SPG program. The concierge Limi, was so helpful in helping us organize our school visits throughout Beijing. We had a list of about 15 questions and without hesitation, he answered each and every one of them with a smile. He even provided some helpful travel tips to make getting to each of our meetings easy in addition to making reservations for my friend and I to celebrate my birthday in one of Beijing's coolest restaurants.
- Official Description (provided by the hotel):
- The Sheraton Beijing Dongcheng Hotel is conveniently located on Beijing’s north Third Ring Road, in the heart of the city’s transportation network. Just 20 minutes from Beijing Capital International Airport (PEK), we have easy access to major attractions such as the Olympic Stadium, Tiananmen Square, Financial Street, the Forbidden City, and the Great Wall.Our 441 contemporary guest rooms and suites range from 43 to 240 square meters. In addition to the celebrated “ahhh” of the plush Sheraton Sweet Sleeper™ Bed, you’ll also enjoy a 42” LCD Flat Screen Television, High Speed Internet Access, and a separate bath and shower.During your stay, share a meal in one of our four restaurants—featuring Chinese, Japanese, Italian, and all-day dining—or get a refreshing drink in our Lobby Lounge. Relax with a massage at the Shine Spa for Sheraton, take a dip in our indoor heated swimming pool, or work out in our modern fitness center. And you can easily stay connected to home and the office with wired and wireless High Speed Internet Access in your guest room, the business center, or meeting rooms.Let us bring your vision of a grand meeting or lively social event to life in our 13 functions spaces, totaling more than 2,400 square meters. State-of-the-art audiovisual facilities are available, as are experienced event and catering specialists. ... more less
- Reservation Options:
- TripAdvisor is proud to partner with Agoda, Booking.com, Hotels.com, Expedia, Ctrip TA, Ebookers, Odigeo, Travel Republic (UK), TripOnline SA, Traveltool, S.L.U., Evoline ltd and HotelQuickly so you can book your Sheraton Grand Beijing Dongcheng Hotel reservations with confidence. We help millions of travellers each month to find the perfect hotel for both holiday and business trips, always with the best discounts and special offers.

domain: travel


The State of Democracy 2019
A new report by the Unite America Institute on the “State of Democracy” grades all fifty states based their efforts in adopting key reforms that increase participation, accountability, and competition in the political system.
The Unite America Institute's mission is to study the causes and impacts the growing partisan divide has in our politics, as well as study potential solutions.
In the state of democracy paper, states are assessed on the status of their efforts in five key reforms:
- Ranked Choice Voting: Allows voters to rank their candidates in order of preference, guaranteeing a majority winner and eliminating the spoiler effect.
- Automatic Voter Registration: Automatically registers eligible citizens who interact with the DMV to vote, which expands the electorate, improves the accuracy of voter rolls and makes elections more secure.
- Vote by Mail: Voters receive their ballots by mail weeks before Election Day to fill out at their convenience, engaging more voters and while saving election administration costs.
- Open Primaries: At minimum, opens party primaries to independent voters; ideally, replaces party primaries with a single, nonpartisan ballot that advances the top four vote getters, regardless of partisan affiliation, to the general election, increasing choice and competition.
- Independent Commissions: Creates independent redistricting commissions to draw district lines, ensuring voters choose their politicians instead of politicians choosing their voters.
California scored highest with an A-, while nine other states received an F.
Since 2010, 20 ballot measures advancing one or more of the five identified reforms appeared on voters’ ballots, and 16 were approved. In the 26 (mostly Western) states that allow them, ballot measures provide a way for citizens to circumvent gridlocked legislatures and directly ask voters to change incentives for elected leaders. These reforms have traditionally been passed with supermajority support, indicating the broad political appeal of addressing root causes to political dysfunction at a time when trust in government is at all time lows.
Momentum for structural reform initiatives is likely to continue in the 2020 cycle, with many campaigns already underway. In Virginia, lawmakers passed legislation to create a redistricting commission in 2019; they will vote on the legislation again in 2020 and if passed, a ballot measure will give Virginians an opportunity to end gerrymandering on their November ballot. Vote at home legislation recently made its way through the legislature in Hawaii, and automatic voter registration will likely pass in Maine.
As the State of Democracy report demonstrates there remains significant work to be done to advance structural reforms in all fifty states. Making democracy more representative and effective must remain a priority of the democracy reform community.