Aristotle’s idea of the ideal citizen, while important to consider, is an unrealistic expectation for everyday Americans. He expects participation in political office, a willingness to understand each other, and comprehension of the basic dynamic between rulers and their people. All of these areas would be helpful in creating more informed and involved citizens, however the current state of politics illustrates the infeasibility of Aristotle’s idea.
To begin, Aristotle believes that the ideal citizen should hold public office at some point. “The citizen in an unqualified sense is defined by no other such thing so much as by partaking in decision and office”(Lord 63). While a citizen would be more involved by holding public office, the average American does not have the resources necessary to campaign and win an election to hold public office, whether at a local, state, or national level.
First and foremost, campaigning for public office requires time and money. The average American does not have the amount of time necessary, as they already have a career. Additionally, the increasing amount of money required to win elections is staggering; an average amount raised for a member of the House is nearly $1.7 million, while the number for senators is nearly $10.5 million (Frumin Web). An …show more content…
For one, average Americans do not have the resources necessary to hold public office as Aristotle suggests. Further, Americans do not understand how to rule and be ruled; rather they prefer to complain about issues in the government that they dislike, without offering any alternatives. Thirdly, Americans involved in politics at any level refuse to try to understand the other person’s side, which is against Aristotle’s advice. To sum up, Aristotle’s idea of a citizen is unrealistic for modern American
To begin, Aristotle believes that the ideal citizen should hold public office at some point. “The citizen in an unqualified sense is defined by no other such thing so much as by partaking in decision and office”(Lord 63). While a citizen would be more involved by holding public office, the average American does not have the resources necessary to campaign and win an election to hold public office, whether at a local, state, or national level.
First and foremost, campaigning for public office requires time and money. The average American does not have the amount of time necessary, as they already have a career. Additionally, the increasing amount of money required to win elections is staggering; an average amount raised for a member of the House is nearly $1.7 million, while the number for senators is nearly $10.5 million (Frumin Web). An …show more content…
For one, average Americans do not have the resources necessary to hold public office as Aristotle suggests. Further, Americans do not understand how to rule and be ruled; rather they prefer to complain about issues in the government that they dislike, without offering any alternatives. Thirdly, Americans involved in politics at any level refuse to try to understand the other person’s side, which is against Aristotle’s advice. To sum up, Aristotle’s idea of a citizen is unrealistic for modern American