Platos about Democracy as a Holly Inadequate form of Government - Essay Example

Plato’s Argument Democracy (Insert Name) (Institution Affiliation) Democracy refers to a form of government where the eligible people or the whole population rules a particular state. Democracy is one of the most challenging forms of government (Saxonhouse, 1998). This is mainly due to the complex human nature which does not seem to manage the total democracy supremacy well. The rule by the people finds great opposition from the philosopher Plato who recognized the fundamental flaws in humankind. Democracy allows the strong to do whatever they want and the weak to suffer what they must. For this reason, Plato was right when he argued that democracy is a wholly inadequate form of government since it places the political power in the hands of those least fit to use it. First of all, the reality of fallibility will never square with the faith of a cherished democratic ideology that is usually base on collective wisdom. This is because every society tends to create a scapegoat whenever it is unable to solve a given issue. Thus, democracy faces a major threat from the wicked elites who usually lead the virtuous individuals astray through deception and also turn the government institutions towards private ends in their favor. Secondly, democracy places leadership in the hands of uninformed masses. Without relevant and complete information, the democratic elections in many occasions turn to a popularity contest where majority of people usually favor the charismatic contender even if he or she is not the best candidate. As Plato warned many years ago, allowing the public to emotionally select who should rule them and decide on the ways in which they should be governed could be detrimental to the society in general. The leaders becomes slaves to the people and the available best and most informed minds are denied the chance to decide what is best for the public. Third, the ruling or governing people is a skill by itself. In democracy however, the leaders are usually the most popular rather than the most skilled. It is true that people have different capabilities in acquiring and exercising various skills thus those who exhibit the greatest ruling capabilities should be trained and made the rulers of the society. Furthermore, the doctrine of the expert should also apply in leadership. According to this doctrine, people go to experts whenever they are in need of any advice (Saxonhouse, 1998). For instance, the sick or the injured usually consult a doctor and not a tailor while the convicted consult the lawyer and not a carpenter. In the same case, leadership should be left to the trained experts who have the greatest ruling capacity and they should be given absolute authority to put their laws into effect just like the other professionals. Fourth, since time immemorial democracy has been unsuccessful in eliminating social inequality and this seems to be a structural and permanent failure. In the present era, all democratic societies and states have undeniable social inequalities such as substantial income differences, social status and wealth. Due to this, democracy places the political power in the hands of the rich and fails to protect the despised and marginalized minorities. Fifth, the democratic system sets a platform in which every member of the society is allowed to participate in decision making. However, Plato was absolutely right by showing no fondness for democracy. This is because not all individuals in a given society are capable of making sound and wise decisions. The Platonic principle which was voiced through Socrates suggests that only a handful people in a just city possesses the principle portion of rational soul that desires for wisdom and truth and is capable of delivering just ruling cadre. As long as certain types of policies and outright violence are avoided, democratic majority usually impose their will on the minority which sometimes includes culture, values and language. In this form of government, the leaders do not have the authority to question or reject the will of the people even when it is wrong. For example, the majority race might use their democratic majority impose racial democracy and discriminate the minority. This makes it very hard for the innovative and creative minority to succeed since democracy has an inbuilt bias towards the existing. For this reason, Plato was right when he suggested that anti- racist dictatorship is far much better than racial democracy. The ultimate desire for freedom in democracy is what has been proved to be the root cause of its downfall. A democratic system is usually characterized by a scenario whereby people are the rulers and the official rulers are slaves to their own people who in ideal case should be their subjects. The people persistently demand for more freedom until it reaches a point where they are totally to do anything that pleases them without being responsible to anyone. This anarchy soon descends from the governments to the family. Sons equal their fathers and stop fearing them. The leadership falls into the hands of the irresponsible people since they are the majority and since anyone has the right to do what pleases him or her, crime increases. More measures are put in place to curb crime and as a result some of the freedoms are curtailed leading to the birth of tyranny. Although Plato’s critique on the democracy form of government contains several different strains, having a very good judgment on the destructive nature of the relationship that exist between political leaders and the people was an important part of his work. In the republic, Plato portrays democracy as the beast - one has to learn how to approach and handle it. Furthermore, the desire by the democrats to rule themselves allows the tyrants to snatch the power. Plato condemns the demotic power and likens people to children. He argues that their judgment is usually based on what is most pleasing. This allows the nefarious elites to take advantage and use democracy to perpetuate their wicked ways. According to Plato, the way the people and social life plays mainly depends on the opinion, knowledge and the political consequences arising from an ethical idea. All tyrants are fruits of a democratic governing system. The aspiring tyrants pursue the fruits resulting from individual strongman while at the same time the demos seek material gratification by leeching the rich. A clear distinction between Plato’s republic and the democratic state lies in the leaders’ appointment. In a democratic system, the elections of leaders are usually periodic, competitive, definitive and inclusive. People are given the absolute power to elect their government and they also enjoy total freedom to criticize the government and put it into check (Saxonhouse, 1998). This system does not fit into Plato’s vision; the members of the public may not have the required wisdom that is needed in appointment of a capable leader as many are elected according to their popularity rather than ability to rule. According to Plato, the potential rulers should be objectively and carefully scrutinized by individuals, described by Plato as the guardians, who have thirst for knowledge and right education to make decisions based on ethics and morals rather than emotions. Critiques suggest that Plato was wrong when he argued that democracy is inadequate form of government. According to them, democracy is the best form of government and has been very successful in many parts of the world. Its chief merit is safeguarding the rights of the people by ensuring that real power lies in their hands (Saxonhouse, 1998). They also suggest it is based on the equality principle whereby all members of a state are allowed to freely enjoy the political, economic and social rights. Democracy is also seen as the root of stability, efficiency and firmness since it is based on the public will. However, the critiques fail to understand that democracy is based upon quantity and not quality. Leaders with majority support assume office irrespective of their ruling abilities. Democracy also goes against the law of nature by enshrining the concept of equality. Furthermore, modern democracy is in fact capitalistic and has seen the rise of tyranny due to handing of power to the wrong people through democratic processes. The logical conclusion that Plato was right and the decision of selecting leaders should be left to wise or those who are truly informed. People who might fail to concur with such an idea on the ground that it is undemocratic should be advised that such a leadership would be guaranteed of most informed and best minds available. Reference Saxonhouse, A. W. (1998). Democracy, Equality, and Eide: A Radical View from Book 8 of Plato's Republic. American Political Science Review, 273-283. Read More