Essay about Analysis Of Plato 's ' The Guardians And Warriors '

1551 Words Dec 11th, 2015 null Page
Plato more explicitly says that no person can challenge another’s position or role in the Kallipolis because if someone is suited to the role of ruling or shows leadership, no individual can interfere in their duty to do so (Popper, 1962) and if for any reason these roles are conflated or practised by the wrong individual than this will have dangerous consequences for society (Kallipolis). Not only is this approach extremely problematic because it completely diminishes he idea of any meritocracy or choice, but the very idea of there being a natural craft suited to people is ambiguous in itself. This implies that Plato’s Kallipolis has some very authoritarian and undemocratic elements in it because wants to demonstrate in his Kallipolis that some people are superior to others and that it places great emphasis on an unquestioned and ruling elite in leadership (popper and popper, 1962). The guardians or warriors who are here to protect the Kallipolis as well as the leadership are not accountable to any electorate or in any competition for power against any other party or group demonstrates the strict and rigid form of government and the undemocratic tendencies of Plato’s republic (friedrich and Brzezinski, 1959). So it is fair to say that the fundamental factors that constitute a free and fair democratic society such as meritocracy, government accountability, elections are neglected, instead the totalitarian criteria is endorsed in the republic. Another important aspect is…

Related Documents