>>82434478
(Part I of II)
i think the other anon's point was that your inability to appreciate men, especially ones who listen to you prove that you are neither worthy nor capable of a sustainable healthy relationship and especially not in taking a leading role in that relationship. You treat the role casually when it would be actually a very strenuous morally taxing role if you were worthy of it, and are not sufficiently appreciative of people when they off it to you.
Allow me to clarify, why are the most worthy rulers people that would not want the role? Because to be unworthy of the role means to abuse it for your own pleasure, and so in this case to be worthy of power over others means that you are basically only ever just taking on more responsibility and strain in the care for others and never for yourself. The exemplar for this is Marcus Aurelius, nicknamed Markus the golden soul, for being an exceptionally moral and hardworking Roman emperor who never abused the position, and subsequently wrote a journal being weepy of the role. Similarly we can point to Diocletian, who would rather be a cabbage farmer instead of ruler, and who when a senator pleaded for his return, pleadingly asked the senator to find someone else, "If you could show the cabbage I planted with my own hands to your emperor, he definitely wouldn't dare suggest I replace the peace and happiness of this place with the storms of a never-satisfied greed." Socrates in Plato's republic could only identify one reason for a worthy ruler to do the deed of ruling, fear that an unworthy ruler might do harm to those in their stead.
