In the 4th century B.C., a time of great liberty and great conflict, two books were written: The Republic by Plato, and Politics by Aristotle. These two books hold a philosophical analysis of government and the state of humanity within from the perspectives of a teacher and his pupil, Plato and Aristotle respectively. Even though both of these men were Athenian citizens during the world’s first democracy, they both identified similar flaws in the state of Democracy. Democracy, in Greek society, was when natural-born male citizens made decisions in government, all with equal say, because they all fought together. However, though it seemed like a fair form of rule, both Plato and Aristotle agree that human error is why the system was destined
…show more content…
The criteria for a good government is, according to Aristotle, as follows, “The true forms of government….govern with a view to the common interest…” (Aristotle, Politics). All other forms of government are “perversions” of the three under the good tier, because they seek to satiate “private interests” and are consequently regarded as no good. Now, Aristotle doesn’t see democracy as the best form of government, but rather “the most tolerable of the three” out of a monarchy, oligarchy, and democracy. The reason for this is because a democracy is still run by those who seek to gain for themselves, rather than benefit the whole of society, that idea is what he calls “polity”. Another flaw with democracy is that often times the poor over throw the previous government and when they try to rule, it quickly turns to ruin because they do not know how to structure and direct a government. The other side of this is if the rich rule, it would be just as catastrophic because the ruling class, “are neither willing nor able to submit to authority.” (Aristotle, Politics) So they are prone to tyranny, just as the poor are prone to anarchy. The only reasonable sweet-spot is the middle class, because (ideally) they have enough training in one regard or another to rule, but are not so haughty that they disregard everyone else to satiate their own ego. This prevents the natural decline of a democracy ruled by mostly rich or mostly poor into a
The criteria for a good government is, according to Aristotle, as follows, “The true forms of government….govern with a view to the common interest…” (Aristotle, Politics). All other forms of government are “perversions” of the three under the good tier, because they seek to satiate “private interests” and are consequently regarded as no good. Now, Aristotle doesn’t see democracy as the best form of government, but rather “the most tolerable of the three” out of a monarchy, oligarchy, and democracy. The reason for this is because a democracy is still run by those who seek to gain for themselves, rather than benefit the whole of society, that idea is what he calls “polity”. Another flaw with democracy is that often times the poor over throw the previous government and when they try to rule, it quickly turns to ruin because they do not know how to structure and direct a government. The other side of this is if the rich rule, it would be just as catastrophic because the ruling class, “are neither willing nor able to submit to authority.” (Aristotle, Politics) So they are prone to tyranny, just as the poor are prone to anarchy. The only reasonable sweet-spot is the middle class, because (ideally) they have enough training in one regard or another to rule, but are not so haughty that they disregard everyone else to satiate their own ego. This prevents the natural decline of a democracy ruled by mostly rich or mostly poor into a