Yes, I was wrong about that, communist utopia is good, but bakunist utopia is best. Happy?
The latter was developped in the Marxist communism anyway. With a different end-state, namely anarchist freedom. In the end, it's not that different. Instead of a moral obligation, there's a state regulating what needs to be done.

"you said a communist state in its utopian form is the best government possible. its not, its the worst government possible.  communism is a struggle for equality; its a struggle for an impossibility that has no benefits when approaching it."

You're wrong. An utopian communist state can only be established when people are already equal, not when they're fighting for it. And again, in it's utopian setting, equality would be reachable, as it would involve people with a better morality, namely utopian selfless people. In that case it would be worth approaching it. You need to make a full abstraction when you're discussing utopias..

BTW: you'd need the same kind of people to establish the bakunist utopia too though..

"Macedonians were hellenic not hellenes. The asians they conquered became hellenistic. From what i know they wrote with the greek alphabet. Canada australia and usa are all anglophone."

There's a difference. I just said that they shared their civilisations.

"your expert can argue implications all he wants, but to go from a mythos to reality is sketchy."

It's the only proof I know of ET, but Greeks used their mythology in a different way the jewisch-christian tradition does. Their mythology adapted where it fitted the society or certain events.
You're probably right when you say that our perception of homosexuality is different of theirs, but there was quite some tolerance towards it. Anyhoo, I'll ask a fellow-student who actually focusses on this period of time

"sounds more like anarchist"

Well, bakunist anarchy is indeed very much like communism. The only difference lies in the fact that a bakunist anarchy wouldn't have any form of gouvernment. In this case it's hard to determine wether social pressure can be considered as a form of government (the policing social pressure). Anyhoo, I think in this case ca can consider them "communist".

"OK, China is not Communist.
Fill us in, what is it ?
No one is communist.  After all, the Leftists need to grasp their Utopian state theory as the perfect Communist state would be the perfect state"

No need to so negative about leftist ideas BW. And you're right that a Communist state in it's utopian form is the best government possible. But to answer your question, I think oligarchy sounds more like it..

I rely on my course of ancient history rather then a film Vampman And it's far more complex then you said. As I explained before. Your arguement is silly (no offence meant)

"your sticking point should be that the greeks themselves never considered the macedonians greek, until long after the macedonians paved the way for their dimunition of national identity."

I didn't know that, I should check that. Thing is that they shared a lot of things, and I think I'm right to consider them Greek in the time of Alexander the Great.

"finally, saying the greeks embraced homosexuality is an anachronistic pipedream. familiarize yourself with the pederasty and then understand its extant, practice, and (d)evolution, and the demagraphics of the class that practiced it."

Well, only recently in a class we had about religious history, we had a lecture of an expert of greek mythology. he told us about a myth of Zeus seducing "world's greatest athlete" Ganymedes. He argued that this implied greek people embraced homosexuality. So it's far more then an "anachronistic pipedream".
Thus, to return to my point: that women has absolutely no idea about history

It's so hard to care when you're this comfortable

True, but I'm just not comfortable in Antwerp at all

"And my point is that Greek political organizations didnt last a thousand years, which is different than saying a Greek civilization lasted a thousan years. And Macedonians were a Hellenic culture"

True, political organisations changed, but they remained the polis political structure didn't last a thousand years. However, ther remained polis political structures who were now incorporated into a larger empire. Not much changed on a local scale.
But there's no fundamental difference to call them different civilisations

I agree DPS, but I'd like to quote a part of your post:

"I've always held this view on homosexuality, as long as gay men aren't harassing me by constantly hitting on me or attempting to ridicule me for being straight, actually had one guy do that it made me laugh, they can go about their merry way."

I never understood that part to be honest. The "I have nothing against gay people, as long as they don't try to seduce me"-arguement is the oddest ever seen, I think. It speaks of clich

There have been. The first settler societies can be viewed as communist

Joy Division - Love Will Tear Us Apart

"No Macedonia wasn't a part of greece or even a greek city-state. Greece was united with macedonia by philip II. And yes gayness was acepted in their society. Alexander the great was thought to be gay."

Debatable, I consider them Greek and I support my statement with Stearn's method.
-they shared the same cultural background (although assimilated, but interiorised)
-same economic system
-a political system very similar to other greek city states
-geographicly they were part of the greek world
-same polis structure as in Greece (until the Macedonian expansion)

According to Stearns, that's enough to consider them as greek

The Animal Collective - Unsolved mysteries

[Mind the language in here lads!]