. . Subject: '(neo) Greek,' '(neo) Roman' ... . . . . . Used those words a lot in a negative way, but didn't meant any insult to the people of Greece, or the people of Italy (and their ancient form of faction-democracy). You could say Greece became well known and its model widely used in the world, because it was the best way to deal with the populations that couldn't do real democracy. Greek democracy is balancing the power of opposing forces not through war but vote, as such a lot better then fighting until one side wins, and then that side installing an absolute dictatorship. All out trade including land and money is also a better system then slavery. I think things could be done better, as long as people in large majority want peace. I suppose that prerequisite wasn't true for a long time. Maybe it only became true after the 2nd world war People finally losing their lust for war & bloodshed (most of them). In that sense Greece could be proud that it had produced a system that could reduce civil war through voting, even if it didn't deliver a democracy that subjugated the state to the people, as indeed they didn't believed would have worked (if the people lusted for war they would have been right, and almost certainly many people did lust for war, probably in majority.) -- ,,,,,,, ,,, http://www.socialism.nl ___/_/////////_//////,. \\\\ \\\\\\\\\ \\\` The Good Feather ASCII Ribbon campaign for ```````` ` decent Usenet discourse & etiquette.