Sparta and Guns

They were fighting persians .... we fear them?
On a serious note , I think its the little guy standing up for whats right messege. Not a literal comparison

For what it's worth, I do not fear Persians, Arabians or any other Middle Easterners. I do fear socialist/fascist leaning governments that insist on meddling in the affairs of other countries as well as the personal business of their own citizens.

Just a friendly reminder from the Libertarians...

The nexus occurs via the phrase "Molon Labe", which roughly translates to "Let them come and get them [our weapons]", used by the Spartan king directed as Xerxes, when commanded to "lay down your weapons", which phrase also happens to coincide with the meaning of a similar mantra used by us gunners - "from my cold dead hands" - you can see the connection: "You can have my/our weapons/guns when you come and take them, but you're gonna have to kill me/us to do so". It's bravado/chest-thumping - which I like of course.

But otherwise, you're right - no direct connection.

I wouldn't look to deep into the phrase. We also often use:

"When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns"

"You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold dead hands"

"You can take my guns, bullets first."

So on, so forth; they are just slogans. We've all seen the bumper-sticker that exclaims "My other car is a broom." Does that mean that the driver is really a witch? Does that mean that her other mode of transportation is really a broom? Can you even get a license for a broom?

but it wasn't armed civilians, they were a military force.

Click to expand...

As I understand it, in Sparta all male citizens were expected to be part of the military. True, the 300 represented Leonidas' best, but they were citizen-soldiers, the way militia are supposed to be.

True, that's not a very accurate model for the US today, but we still have the image at Thermopylae of a despot trying to disarm law-abiding citizens by force, to make ruling them easier.

And that image resonates with us.

Because...
This...
Is...
SPARTA!!!

I had to do it...

Seriously, though.
The story of Thermopylae is a great one, truly a historical legend for the ages. No matter what the weapons are, we will always seek to evoke that strength of defiance against tyrants and would-be despots when we cry
"MOLON LABE!!!"

Also, the Texans (civilians) during the War of Independence from Mexico had a banner with a picture of a cannon and the words "Come and Take it!" a variation of, and supposedly, inspired by the Spartan "molon labe."

Ctdemolay0405, I think you are on to something. Using Sparta or "Molon Labe" as some kind of rallying cry for freedom is pretty laughable if you consider that the Spartans were basically a bunch of facist slavers. I personally find almost nothing admirable about their society, which existed as a parasite of the surrounding cities. If I were an average peasant living back then, I would definitely preferred to live under the rule of another Greek city or maybe even the Persians... anyone but the Spartans.

I think Thermopylae was a best-case scenario: A lot of Persians got killed and all the Spartans died.

Hated the movie too... since when do we cheer for people who kill ambassadors?

Spartan citizens were responsible for providing their own weapons and it was mandatory in Sparta society to take part in any call to arms by their city-state.

Sparta also didn't give rights to women and held slaves that did all of the farming/labor. Kinda sounds like our Founding Fathers huh?

We're not trying to replicate the Spartan method of government (which would totally suck). We are merely identifying with the response and mindset of a people that chose to stand against an overwhelming power who wanted to change their way of life, their actions and sacrifices allowed others to survive -including the other Greek city-states, from which Democracy was born.
-This is the part that is admirable.

since when do we cheer for people who kill ambassadors?

Click to expand...

LOL--Ambassador! An overwhelming army sends an advance guard--without any pre-arranged safe passage--and TELLS you you will now swear allegiance to your new king, or be destroyed. "Resistence is futile."

There has always been a thin line between ambassadors and spies. The Persians first coming to Sparta could easily have been considered a scouting party, looking at the strength and resolve of the adversary, with battle certain and soon.

An ambassador who says surrender now or else, or a spy who is about to report back the number and location of your men, belongs where he ended up--the bottom of a pit.

JMO. And who knows how it really happened.

For what it's worth, I do not fear Persians, Arabians or any other Middle Easterners.

Click to expand...

It was a joke about current national relations with Iran

An ambassador who says surrender now or else, or a spy who is about to report back the number and location of your men, belongs where he ended up--the bottom of a pit.

JMO. And who knows how it really happened.

Click to expand...

Loosedhorse, my objection to killing ambassadors was not historical. I was talking about the movie, which is based on a modern fantasy. And in the context of modern fantasy for a modern audience, then yes, killing an ambassador is an evil act.

The Warrior Spirit.

I apologize for not being clear. I was referring to the movie (as no history buff knows exactly what happened, and I know far less along those lines than they do).

I only saw the movie once, and it was a while ago, when it came out. But my understanding of the term ambassador is a situation where both sides have agreed to have an agent of one side on the soil of another, under a guarantee of protection.

As I remember the movie, there was no agreement by the Spartans to receive these emissaries, so the guarantee of their safety rested solely in their assumption that Spartans would be too fearful to attack them. They bet wrong, and they paid for it: they were not due any protection.

If I've misremembered, and Leonidas (in movie) did in fact at first guarantee safe-passage of the guests, and then changed his mind--well, that is an act of war, and he got what he asked for (of course, it was coming anyway).

I think the modern movie audience gets that, before the Geneva conventions civilized war p) in the last century, deceit and treachery often marked how adversaries in a war treated each other. Unlike the genteel and legal wars we have today.

So, it was evil? Sure--wars used to be evil like that.

Why are you even posting about a movie based-on a comic book?

If you wish to discuss historical events which have been documented and how it may apply to us today, I can maybe understand...

but why are you posting about a movie based-on a comic book?

but why are you posting about a movie based-on a comic book?

Click to expand...

Because

This

Is

The

INTERNET!!!

Loosedhorse,

You make some good points, but for me it comes down to this: The movie Spartans had the ambassadors in their power, and they killed them. To me an ambassador is an ambassador, whether the message they bring is "let's be friends" or "surrender or die".

Anyway, to relate this back to the point of the thread, I don't like "molon labe" for a pro-liberty slogan because the Spartans - whether in movie, comic or real history - were hardly people to look up to, except in the very limited sense of being efficient killers.

Possibly the most relevant portion of the battle was how, even with unflinching devotion to the battle, they were finally undone by a traitor leading the enemy to outflank them......

Any parallels........

"You can take my guns, bullets first."

Click to expand...

Americans wouldn't do that? Would they? There trying to take our bullets now. Just not at the speed some would like...........

If all the spartans were citizen soldiers, then why did they have that part where they asked the other guys on their side, "what is your profession"? They answered stuff like blacksmith, farmer etc. Then the spartans made it clear that there only profession was "BLAAAARGH" or something which I took to mean soldiering.

So they were professional soldiers and not armed citizens. Right?

P.S. That movie was lame.

I like the Texican "Come and Take It" flag, with the old cannon on it. Or the Gadsden flag, which has become a modern symbol for old American liberty and anti-federal sentiment. The political context of these symbols much more relevant and familiar, but the message is the same. The Spartans are so distant as to be almost an alien species when you start learning about their way of life. There is no culture in the world today like it. IIRC, it had been merged into hellenistic culture and gone extinct by Roman times. Bits of Athenian culture are much more familiar to us, and have stood the test of time. The radical notions that all doctrines should be questioned, and that government can be controlled directly by the citizens (just to name a few) come to us from the streets of ancient Athens. Not Sparta. Though it might be said that the weird soldiers of Sparta were critical in saving Athens from erasure.

I think the point was the Spartans THOUGHT of themselves FIRST as soldiers, and secondarily as farmers, husbands, fathers, etc. It was a main point of the movie that other Greeks didn't "get" the Spartans, with their emphasis on martial training for all boys once they came of age, and discarding those (as infants) who would not be able to defend the state. But they sure appreciated them when a fight came their way.

(The image of imperfect babies left in an isolated area to die, or thown off a cliff, is another way by which our modern sensibilities are scandalized and horrified by what Sparta considered necessary).