Ancient and Medieval Political Theory - Essay Example

ANCIENT AND MEDIEVAL POLITICAL THEORY no. ANCIENT AND MEDIEVAL POLITICAL THEORY Plato and Aristotle both believe the “best” city is the most “just” city. And yet, Plato supports monarchy and Aristotle supports aristocratic democracy. Why do they arrive at different notions of the “best” form of government? Who has the more persuasive argument? According to both Plato and Aristotle, the best city is the most just city since such cities serves everyone justly. However, according to Plato, monarchy is the best system of government that can provide citizens with the best city which is the most just city. On the contrary, Aristotle believes the aristocratic democracy is the best for the people. Nonetheless, Plato is highly convincing in defending why monarch is the best mode of government for the people than Aristotle’s contributions on the democratic government. It should be noted that, Plato’s support of monarchy as a system of government followed after the killing of Socrates for what was seen as not supporting the ideals of the government, the Athenian democracy. Socrates was killed on the basis that he never supported the Athenian god and that he corrupted their youths1. From this point of view, it is clear that democratic government are highly dictatorial that they are ready to eliminate any person seems to be opposing them. Following the death of Socrates, it is true to Plato’s ideas that democracy is unjust and corrupt system of governance. Plato also tried to examine different types of systems of governance and their principles towards determining which would lead to the best city which is the just city. Of all the systems of governments that existed then, Plato analyzed and realized that democracy was mainly military state that aimed at having honor. Democracy as it is in the current world as before, allow few individuals to rule over many2. It bring about the distinction between the rich and poor cities so are its people. This kind of division usually make some people to plot against others. The power of the democratic government is not in the people but in the money thereby making people lovers of money. According to Plato, democracy makes few private individuals to “accumulate gold in the treasury … and seeing another grow rich, seeks to rival him, and thus the great mass of the citizens become lovers of money3. . . . And so at last, instead of loving contention and glory, men become lovers of trade and money; they honor and look up to the rich man, and make a ruler of him, and dishonor the poor man4.” In this sense, Plato denotes that democracy divides people into classes of poor and rich. Hence, in democracy the poor tend to work hard to rich the poor and the rich will ever use all means possible to remain above board; therefore, leading to corruption. Since the poor will see the rich as corrupt and lead better life, then this system of government usually creates war between the rich and the poor. According to Plato, since “the excessive increase of anything often causes a reaction in the opposite direction5,” at immense corruption and discrimination, the poor may wedge war against the rich. Plato states that, “excess of liberty, whether in states or individuals, seems only to pass into excess of slavery6.” This statements note that, democratic systems of governments often fool the mass that the power is in their hands, but in the real sense, they are slaves of the rich. Hence, once the poor feel that the rich are increasingly oppressing them, they often reach a limit that they overturn these types of governments to put their own (the poor). This has happened in numerous states in the world. These evil characteristics and nature of democratic systems of government, Plato opted for monarchy where there is importance and advantages of laws. In monarchy, law cannot be corrupted in the favor of few people or an individual; therefore, according to Plato, when one had “entered into an implied contract that he will do as . . . [the laws] command him7.” In this type of governance, everyone is subjected to the law equally. In stressing this fact, Plato stated that, “in my view, is not far off; but if law is the master of the government and the government is its slave, then the situation is full of promise and men enjoy all the blessings that the gods shower on a state8.” Therefore, an “ideal and just state is an aristocracy9” and provides the best rule that leads to the best and just city. Contrary to Plato’s, Aristotle argued that only democracy can lead to best which is the just city. By definition, democracy is considered as the rule of people that usually arises due to lack of equity. If democracy is pegged on the lack of equity, how then can it lead to best and more just city? For instance, most African states are democratically governed and they are the most corrupt states in the world; therefore, democracy is not the best system of governance. According to Aristotle, Plato was an idealist whose real state would “contain two states in one, each hostile to the other . . . . [Plato] makes the guardians [the warriors] into a mere occupying garrison, while the husbandmen and artisans and the rest are the real citizens10.” Moreover, he noted monarchy require many laws, but “having so good an education, the citizens will not need many laws . . . but then he confines his education to the guardians11.” These are ideas are not well convincing in that without law there will be no order. Additionally, what measure of education will bring order when there are no systems regulating and moderating such orders? Therefore, a lawless city attributed by lawless government will only make the city corrupt and not fit for all human races within it. However, Aristotle’s aimed at considering “not only what form of government is best, but also what is possible and what is easily attainable12.” This is best for human race and for the just city, since it considered every person within the city. Not everyone can be equal; hence, it is proper to have a government that will have practical and attainable policies and according to Aristotle, that was democratic government. This idea and contribution was perfectly placed but it does not define or constitute the known elements of a democratic governance where few people govern the state affairs. Therefore, Aristotle ideals are welcomed, but they are not supportive of ideal characteristics that propel democratic governance. Aristotle could have realized that democratic government usually have a lot of promises that are defined in their constitutions and manifestoes to the people, but in reality such promises are never fulfilled since they will lead to equality. “True” constitution must serve the interests of the common citizens, but democratic governments’ constitutions are usually “Despotic” since they only serve the interest of the selfish leaders and their specific interest groups13. Therefore, democracy can never bring the best cities which is the just cities. In other words, democracy is a form of “arbitrary power of an individual or individuals . . . responsible to no one, [which] governs . . . with a view to its own advantage, not to that of its subjects, and therefore against their will14.” It should be noted that Aristotle also desired kingship or the monarchy, but he noted that this kind of governance has high possibilities of turning into a tyranny. However, Plato considered it as a governance with wisdom since the kings were trained into philosophers who in turn led with wisdom and took all their subjects as one and without discriminations15. With the philosophy learned by persons to be kings, there are no ways that their regimes could turn into tyranny. Additionally, the leaders of these governments were chosen before they were born; therefore, they can never rule with sense of discrimination or favors. On the other hand, democratic leaders are put in leadership through their popularity, form statistic, most of them often favor those who put them power and discriminate upon those who oppose them. Despite the difference in ideas on the ideal and best governance that leads to best and more just society, an ideal society is difficult to find. All the systems of governance have their weaknesses as well as their strengths; however, governance that places the subject at the center of the government is the best since it will provide justice to all. On the contrary, democratic government is never the best since the power among all other resources are in the hand of the few. These few are more powerful than the rest of the citizens. This kind of distinction often creates classes of the rich and poor despite both living in the same society. This therefore often create the rich cities and poor cities; hence, it is impractical that a democratic regime that creates different status in terms of class generated by resources allocation and accumulation can lead to the best and more just cities. In other words, there is no justices in the society without equality. The equality will always create a rift between the classes that are already defining the society. Therefore, despite the limitations of monarch, it is the best form of governance the can create the “best” city which is the most “just” city compared to the democratic system of governance. Notes Alvey, Jim. 2011. A short history of ethics and economics the Greeks. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pub. Aristotle, and C. D. C. Reeve. 2014. Nicomachean ethics. http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=1643868.Anagnostopoulos, Constitutional Rights Foundation. 2010. BRIA 26 1 Plato and Aristotle on Tyranny and the Rule of Law. Volume 26, No. 1. Retrieved December 8, 2014, http://www.crf-usa.org/bill-of-rights-in-action/bria-26-1-plato-and-aristotle-on-tyranny-and-the-rule-of-law.html Davis, Michael, and Aristotle. 1996. The politics of philosophy a commentary on Aristotles Politics. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. Georgios. 2009. A companion to Aristotle. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell. Klosko, George. 2012. History of political theory: an introduction. Volume 1, Volume 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Plato, and H. D. P. Lee. 1966. The republic. Baltimore: Penguin Books. Plato, Giovanni R F Ferrari, and Tom Griffith. 2001. The Republic. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ Pr. Rubin, Leslie G. 1997. Justice v. law in Greek political thought. Lanham [u.a.]: Rowman & Littlefield. Read More