The Best Form of Government - Essay Example

The best form of the government Introduction Aristotle is the prominent Greek philosopher. He introduced many important and relevant concepts in the political and social contexts. His philosophical ideas are still the leading ones. The greatest thinker avoids ambiguity and bias, and his ideas are worth following. The philosopher underlines three main forms of governing: the rule of one (mon-archy), a few (olig-archy, arist-ocracy), or many (dem-ocracy) (Robinson, 1995). To his mind, democracy was not the most effective form of governing. In this form of government, the rule is for needy people. Under conditions of law or aristocracy, the ruler is interested in the outcome of his actions in the name of his country (Mindell 1996; Randall, 1960; Robinson, 1995). Aristotle on government Government should develop virtue and common good. The rulers are interested in people with enough knowledge, power and time to follow their ideas. Nowadays there is a need to promote the development of the best ruler. The politics must be open for the “ready” rulers, who are focused on their own ideas and the developments in the name of the virtue. The politicians should not cash in on the misery of their citizens; they must develop their policies in the name of the common good. The rulers have to invest their money into the development of the common virtue, because the laborers are too busy and they will not be able to contribute much into a common good. In his Book III we can read: “…a state is a body of citizens sufficing for the purposes of life” (Aristotle 1997, p. 43). Concerning the negative forms of the government, Aristotle claims that under conditions of tyranny, the interests of the monarch are supported. In terms of oligarchy, the interests of wealthy people are taken into account. In case the rulers are common people who are promoting their own interests (democracy), it will be difficult to support their interests at the governmental level because of the lack of knowledge and experience. Therefore, in accordance with Aristotle, monarchy and aristocracy were closer to the best forms of government (Ives, 2003). Nevertheless, in his later developments Aristotle came to the conclusion that a constitutional government (politi) is the best among the governments. It is a kind of a mixture of democracy, monarchy, and oligarchy. I think that in the modern context it is possible to apply the ideas of Aristotle successfully. In case the modern rulers do not consider democracy as the most successful form of the government, there is a need to implement the mixed forms of ruling (Jackson, 2001). Aristotle justifies his choice of a mixed government employing the example of the social roles: for instance, a father shows different roles in his relations with his children and his wife: in the first case these rules are royal and in the second case these rules are constitutional ones. Moreover, we can analyze the following quote by Aristotle: “…but in most constitutional states the citizens rule and are ruled by turns, for the idea of a constitutional state implies that the natures of the citizens are equal, and do not differ at all. Nevertheless, when one rules and the other is ruled we endeavour to create a difference of outward forms and names and titles of respect” (Aristotle 1997, p. 185). Consequently, we can claim that rules of governing are changing during a certain period of time. The constitutional government implies relations of a wife and a husband. There are permanent inequalities within the governmental structure. In their essence, these relations are equal, but in fact there is always a kind of difference in the relations between wives and husbands. Consequently, “polity” is the best form of the government, as Aristotle claims. Every citizen has a right to rule. Ruling is a complex activity and there are many social layers involved in the process of governing. Therefore, an option of a social control over different forms of the government place both rich and poor people under equal conditions. Aristotle defines “polity” in the following way: “a fusion of oligarchy and democracy” (Annas, 1996). There is a need to combine the freedom of poor people with the wealth of the rich people. In case of this mixture, the constitution implies characteristics of democracy and basic characteristics of oligarchy (Jaffa 2001; Jeffery, 2001). So, why not to apply these ideas of the wisest philosopher of the ancient times onto the modern context? Rich people have a lot of finances, poor people have many ideas; it is possible to create a perfect conglomerate (Dougherty 2008; Barkers, 1959). Very often poor people are prevented from development of their own ideas because they are lacking money. We should not say that it is better to make a shift in the direction of poor people and democracy, because rich people have a weighty benefit, which is their money (Mayhew, 2003). There are many positive issues and principles in the form of oligarchy, such as family, education and wealth. These three basic principles should be mediated into the context of democracy; in the result, we would obtain a wealthy and a wise government where the needs of every member of the society are taken into account. Maybe, the modern society is actually lacking this conglomerate? There are some amendments with respect to “polity” as the form of the government: “election is an oligarchical practice; democracies choose office bearers by lot, on the assumption that all are competent enough” (Aristotle 1997, p. 186). We can see that we adopted this oligarchical practice in the modern governmental context and we choose our rulers in the process of elections. Therefore, the most complicated issue remains unresolved: there is no perfect balance between democracy and oligarchy (I Know Who Was Behind, 2009). Nowadays businessmen are in power and they have enough potential to help common people to satisfy their needs. Moreover, it should be noted that democracy in its pure form is hardly effective, especially in those countries where an order of tyranny lasted for centuries. For example, in the countries of ex Soviet Union, such as Russia and Ukraine, there is no democracy in its pure form. In reality, their policies and the governmental orders are far from pure democracy, and an unseen tyrant is ruling from within… Therefore, why not to create a perfect and an efficient union of different forms of ruling? No one knows if one does not try… Aristotle is right when he talks about common good and virtues (Slotnick, 2008). It is a challenging and a complicated job to establish the basis for a healthy, wealthy and wise polity. There is no doubt that the modern politicians and rulers may borrow many effective ideas from the ideas of Aristotelian polity. He also claims that “it seems a thing impossible for a city that is not run by aristocrats but by the wicked to be under good laws, and it seems likewise impossible for a city that is not under good laws to be an aristocracy” (Aristotle 1997, p. 198). Consequently, modern rulers should develop the laws which are beneficial both for common citizens, as well as oligarchy or aristocracy. The needs of both classes should be taken into account for sure. Aristotle develops his ideas about polity on the basis of real examples. Thus, the practices of polity are noticed among the Malians, where the both sorts of social layers were included. He also claims: “When some have control over some things and others over others -as when war and peace and audits are in the control of everyone but the rest is in the control of the rulers, and these rulers are elected or chosen by lot -then there is an aristocracy or a polity” (Aristotle 1997, p. 198). We can correlate this claim with the process of the modern governmental elections. The present day government is created by will of the common citizens, but those who have no power, money or protection cannot be elected as the rulers (Fortunes Given to Wives of Tycoons Lost to Taxpayers, Says Government, 2010). Conclusion Therefore, the modern governments do not always take into account the interests of their voters who, supposedly, have the same right to be elected. Moreover, I am sure that modern investors would benefit much more if they had an equal access to power, as well as the common people would benefit from their access to power. There is no need to draw democrats or oligarchs to the opposite side. It is more effective to create a unity and efficient cooperation between these two social layers. Polity is a perfect alternative for the modern political world; to my mind, there is a chance for different governments to introduce this policy as an optional practice of ruling. Bibliography Annas, J., 1996. Aristotle on Human Nature and Political Virtue. The Review of Metaphysics 49:731+. Aristotle, 1997. The Politics of Aristotle. Translated by Simpson, Peter L. Phillips. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. Aristotle. The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. Columbia University Press: New York, 2009. Barker, E., 1959. The Political Thought of Plato and Aristotle. New York: Dover. Dougherty, J. P., 2008. Sim, May. Remastering Morals with Aristotle and Confucius. The Review of Metaphysics 61:863+. Fortunes Given to Wives of Tycoons Lost to Taxpayers, Says Government, 2010. The Daily Mail (London, England), December 22, p. 11. I Know Who Was Behind Bobby Kennedy's Murder; (1) THE ACCUSED: Tycoon Aristotle Onassis and Glamorous Friends at a Party in Paris in 1974 (2) MEETING OF MINDS Robert Vaughn, Left, with Bobby Kennedy, Right, and Norman Topping, President of the University of Southern California, in 1965. 2009. The Mail on Sunday (London, England), January 11, p. 8. Ives, R. J., 2003. The Rise and Rise of Open Government. Contemporary Review, November, pp. 265+. Jackson, M., 2001. Designed by Theorists: Aristotle on Utopia. Utopian Studies12:1+. Jaffa, H. V., 2001. Aristotle and Locke in the American Founding. Human Events, February 12, p. 10. Jeffrey, T. P., 2001. The Catch-22 of Government Education. Human Events, May 21, p. 7. Mayhew, R., 1993. Aristotle on Property. The Review of Metaphysics 46:803+. [Online] Available at http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5000147823 [Accessed March 3, 2012] Miller, F. D., 1996. Aristotle and the Origins of Natural Rights. The Review of Metaphysics 49:873+. Randall, J. H., 1960. Aristotle. New York: Columbia University Press. Robinson, T. A., 1995. Aristotle in Outline. Indianapolis: Hackett. Slotnick, M., 2008. Good Enough for Government Work. Policy & Practice, August, pp. 22+. Read More