Right. He refused to recant. Athens was caught up in a horrible internecine war between oligarchs and democrats. Socrates was aligned with the former. That’s why he talked so much about philosopher-kings, Truth, etc. He didn’t leave a lot of room for democratic consensus.

@ArturoS The fact that Socrates was "aligned with the former" (Oligarchs), does not imply that is why he talked about the topics he talked about. Plato talked about Philosopher Kings in his republic, Socrates as I recall, talked about TERMS. Justice, Truth, Mercy and so forth. What do they mean, and based upon what they mean what does society mean by them, then "Does how our society applies these ideas enshrine or destroy the base idea?"

Just talking about those base ideas put them under scrutiny, where those in power did not want them.

True democracy winds up as mob rule, one human one vote.
The problem with that can be seen all over the net, ANY and EVERY opinion is held in equal esteem, when not all ARE equal. Some have actual evidetiary support and some are based on raw assertion.
The bigger problem with that is reactiviity.
What do you think America might have done on Sept 12th 2001, if we had True Democracy, nuked Saudi in a blind nationwide rage?

To be fair, he was allowed to pick between exile and suicide. I agree that either punishment is inconsistent with freedom of expression, which was Stone’s point.