the allegory of the cave is incredibly applicable to this modern era.

My response to u/Ardvarcus :

it is "odd" in my evaluation; it is different from all the other dialogues--which I lend credence to insofar as the separation of Socrates from Plato, and any debate. I tend to see most of the dialogues as Plato 'recording' Socrates: this work makes me wonder at if it is Plato, or another "documentation."

But that is not why I posted it here. The work specifically goes over the idealized creation of government--not a government, but the government/state (innate in Truth/the Universe). Part of this explicitelatly depends on lieing to the population. (before any rush to judgment: the "kings" are not kings in the general sense, but slaves to the perfect population [in a perfect world]).

The kings live in poverty [much against the usual idea of "rulers"]--all the Good do.

This notion is very juxtapose to a conspiratory society exploiting the population for their own gain, we are all familiar with.

The involvement of lies, in a man/men dedicated to truth is odd. (but if need be, at least a failsafe was kind of infered about to prevent self-serving exploitation)

it's the Republic--so much can, and has been, said--but I'm just tossing in my two bits to you guys

I read it a while ago. Why do you feel conflicted?

It helps to keep in mind that it was like the foundations of political philosophy at a time where societies were far less developed than they are now. The ideas it advocates make more sense in its much more simplified era where the populations were far smaller and completely homogeneous (e.g. no hint of multiculturalism). Central planning would have seemed more feasible because societies and economies were less complex. It's nothing like today.

He's a commie who wants communal parenting and everything which is why (((they))) promote him and his books.

I haven't read it, but Molyneux had a 4 hour podcast on the truth about Plato where he describes it as an authoritarian and communist. It's on my read list, but I've de-prioritized most reading material on subjects I've already dismissed.

I've read it. Thought it was shit and boring

No. Should I? Why conflicted?

Haven't actually read the Republic, although I've read all of Plato's other dialogues. It's a long work. I keep meaning to get around to it.

The golden men of Plato’s ideal republic are the philosopher kings, whose throne in the modern day has been usurped by the bronze men, the merchants