So what have we learned? We’ve learned that the power and influence of secularism is sustained through denial and complaint. Denial is the refusal to see the world as it is inviting complaints against all who through the practice of philosophy and the essence of religion are willing to sacrifice the joys of denial and self satisfaction for the experience of objetive human meaning and purpose..
The trouble is that the reliance on dualism expressed through denial assures that on a large scale nothing will change other than technology. Humanity remains the same on the inside producing the same cyclical results.
Plato understood this and a seeker of truth open to the comparison of the five regimes he describes can only marvel that there have been people in the past which such a quality of reason. It makes a person wonder what is lost through the joys of denial and complaints.
To make matters easier for me I’ll just post from Wiki. Plato describes the descent of the quality of society. Of course the Philosopher king would never be accepted in the modern world. The modern world leading to rule by the tyrant must be the inevitable result of complaints and denial
Aristocracy is the form of government (politeia) advocated in Plato's Republic. This regime is ruled by a philosopher king, and thus is grounded on wisdom and reason. The aristocratic state, and the man whose nature corresponds to it, are the objects of Plato's analyses throughout much of The Republic's books, as opposed to the other four types of states/men, that are studied primarily in Book VIII.............
2. You can read how Aristocracy degenerates into Timocracy through the lessening of the quality of human being
The lessening of quality leads to Oligarchy. Plato defines oligarchy as a system of government which distinguishes between the rich and the poor, making out of the former its administrators.
An oligarchy is originated by extending tendencies already evident in a timocracy. In contrast to Platonic aristocrats, timocrats are allowed by their constitution to own property and thus to both accumulate and waste money. Because of the pleasures derived therefrom, money eventually is prized over virtue, and the leaders of the state seek to alter the law to give way and accommodate to the materialistic lust of its citizens. As a result of this new found appreciation for money, the governors rework the constitution yet again to restrict political power to the rich only. That is how a timocracy becomes an oligarchy.
4. This where America is now. It is creating an oligarchy and a growing division between the haves and the have nots
Oligarchy then degenerates into democracy where freedom is the supreme good but freedom is also slavery. In democracy, the lower class grows bigger and bigger. The poor become the winners. People are free to do what they want and live how they want. People can even break the law if they so choose. This appears to be very similar to anarchy.
Plato uses the "democratic man" to represent democracy. The democratic man is the son of the oligarchic man. Unlike his father, the democratic man is consumed with unnecessary desires. Plato describes necessary desires as desires that we have out of instinct or desires that we have in order to survive. Unnecessary desires are desires we can teach ourselves to resist such as the desire for riches. The democratic man takes great interest in all the things he can buy with his money. He does whatever he wants whenever he wants to do it. His life has no order or priority.
We see this now in the demand for rights and the obsession with materialism. But for some reason all this materialism isn’t sufficient for the needs of the soul and society moves towards anarchy. Society will destroy itself and who saves the day? You guessed it: the tyrant.
Democracy then degenerates into tyranny where no one has discipline and society exists in chaos. Democracy is taken over by the longing for freedom. Power must be seized to maintain order. A champion will come along and experience power, which will cause him to become a tyrant. The people will start to hate him and eventually try to remove him but will realize they are not able.
The tyrannical man is the son of the democratic man. He is the worst form of man due to his being the most unjust and thus the furthest removed from any joy of the true kind. He is consumed by lawless desires which cause him to do many terrible things such as murdering and plundering. He comes closest to complete lawlessness. The idea of moderation does not exist to him. He is consumed by the basest pleasures in life, and being granted these pleasures at a whim destroys the type of pleasure only attainable through knowing pain. If he spends all of his money and becomes poor, the tyrant will steal and conquer to satiate his desires, but will eventually overreach and force unto himself a fear of those around him, effectively limiting his own freedom. The tyrant always runs the risk of being killed in revenge for all the unjust things he has done. He becomes afraid to leave his own home and becomes trapped inside. Therefore, his lawlessness leads to his own self-imprisonment……………………………
The question of the thread asks if Hitler will be saved. We can’t know but we can contemplate why the quality of being expressed by the philosopher king must degenerate into its opposite: the tyrant. But such contemplation is rare. The modern trend is the refusal to see the world as it is. This refusal is defended by complaints.
It does seem inevitable that America will experience its first tyrant in the not so distant future. It has to. All the complaining and denial invites the tyrant, Plato’s description of the five regimes details why it must be. What is capable of minimizing the descent into a tyrannical regime? It is denied so the lawful descent of human being as described in the five regimes is just a lawful result of fallen human condition.