‘Plato’s critique of democracy is as relevant today as it ever was.’ DISCUSS
Plato’s views on politics, specifically types of regime including democracy, were conveyed through Socratic dialogue in his work The Republic in 380 BC. His criticism of democratic rule has instituted considerable debate over history, where an abundance of reputable philosophers and scholars have argued with or continued to build on his beliefs. Plato’s tone throughout The Republic may be perceived as somewhat authoritarian, where he dictates his critique in a dominant manner. However, it can be argued that this was his method of establishing the groundwork of his political philosophy that remains applicable even today, and shares striking resemblances with notorious, modern democracies.
In order to analyze Plato’s critique of democracy, understanding the relationship between the ‘soul and the city’ seems to be a crucial introduction. The ‘good soul’ and the ‘good city’ give rise to justice, which is ideally existent in all appealing types of regime. According to Socratic thought, it can be said that there was an underlying association between a city and the individuals living within it; if people residing in a city are just, then the city itself will be just as well.
However, this view may be seen as more of an utopian theory rather than a practicality in today’s world. In Book II of The Republic, Socrates says ‘more plentiful and better-quality goods are more easily produced if each person does one thing for which he is naturally suited, does it at the right time, and is released from having to do any of the others’. In the words of Socrates, justice upholds the precedent that every society consists of certain roles to be played by certain individuals, based on which role fits their nature the best, where they are not allowed to indulge in any other field. In the interest of applying Plato’s views on democracy as a suitable regime today, targeting a specific administration is necessary, such as that of Donald Trump, the President of the United States. Before beginning his journey into politics, Donald Trump was actually a television personality as well as a businessman, consequently he was already quite a wealthy man. It can be said that his wealth is what primarily supported his campaigns and support. Without having any political background, someone who majority of American citizens, as well as the rest of the speculating world, believed would not have a chance of becoming the leader of one of the most powerful and influential countries in the world, became president. Based purely on Plato’s work, an individual without any specialization in a field that he is not naturally suited towards, cannot be seen as a candidate for leadership. Yet, the 2016 elections proved that this was indeed possible.
The fact that Donald Trump actually won the elections and is now the president of the United States, builds on Plato’s views of humans and their ‘unnecessary desires’. Plato argued that democracy is not an appealing system of rule, since majority of humans are motivated by the ‘appetite’ part of our tripartite souls. Plato believed that the human soul are split into three categories, where the appetite is representative of lust, hunger and the thirst for wealth. Thad Williamson’s article concerning Plato’s criticism of democracy mentions the conflict between ‘public good and private interests’. Human psyche is consequently vulnerable to democratic rule, since democracy is a system which places wealth as the ‘highest good’, in Plato’s views. Democracy engages in the public voting for their leaders, yet if they are motivated by the wrong intentions, it is impossible for people to elect someone fit to rule over them. Relating Plato’s theory to today’s day and age, Donald Trump’s presidency is a perfect example of the fact that democracy allows political positions to be granted, without enough consideration of who is suited for which role, which was one of Plato’s fundamental opinions on democratic rule.
Another fitting example to illustrate Plato’s theory in today’s context is the current Prime Minister of Pakistan, Imran Khan. Like Trump, Imran Khan barely had any political history, and was in fact a cricket player. Although he failed in his last election, Imran Khan was appointed the prime minister in 2018. There has been anger as well as praise about his candidacy, since the public of Pakistan has been under the influence of mainly Pakistan People’s Party and Pakistan Muslim League for over a decade. Nevertheless, this feeds on the previous explanation of Plato’s idea that democracy avoids the ‘principle of specialization’, which was depicted in Book II of The Republic.
Plato’s depiction of an exemplary system of rule illustrates his negative views on the affiliation of the public and its unnecessary desire to gain worldly materials, such as wealth or property acquisition. This implies his notion that democratic rule is built in order to gain more wealth, causing an inequality between classes of people. Wealth and power are concentrated into the hands of a few, and these elitists learn not to care for the poor, even if it is the poor who allowed them to acquire their position as a leader. Since it the public, whether poor or rich, electing their leaders, it will never be possible for such a system to flow together in perfect harmony and work towards the good of the country as a whole, as everyone has their own individual unnecessary motives, which they will naturally deem more important.
Plato’s depiction of an exemplary system of rule illustrates his negative views on the affiliation of the public and its unnecessary desire to gain worldly materials, such as wealth or property acquisition. This implies his notion that democratic rule is built in order to gain more wealth, causing an inequality between classes of people. Wealth and power are concentrated into the hands of a few, and these elitists learn not to care for the poor, even if it is the poor who allowed them to acquire their position as a leader. Since it the public, whether poor or rich, electing their leaders, it will never be possible for such a system to flow together in perfect harmony and work towards the good of the country as a whole, as everyone has their own individual unnecessary motives, which they will naturally deem more important.
Having explained this, we can further build upon human tendency to feed off what is appealing to them. Delving into administrations existent today, enough evidence exists to dictate that politicians are able to easily manipulate the public, where literate or illiterate, simply by promoting what the public wants. For example, Trump’s campaign drew its attention from mainly white, male supremacists, who needed a voice to freely express their misogynistic, racist opinions. One of Donald Trump’s most notorious promises were to ‘build a wall’ in order to keep out other races from America. An abundance of his supporters genuinely believed he would fulfill his promise, which provides further encourages Plato’s belief that humans cannot correctly elect their leaders, despite being well-informed or having no information whatsoever. As suggested in the book Anti-democratic Thought, Thom Brooks directly addresses the fundamental issues with democratic rule, one of them being, ‘Democracies are essentially governments run by fools’. Regardless of their knowledge or familiarity with politics, everyone is given ‘an equal voice in political decision-making’.
When describing the types of regimes in Book VIII, Plato delineates the idea that the existence of democracy will eventually result in the emergence of tyranny, where tyranny is a regime executed through oppression and fascism. Democracy itself is constituted of numerous aspects, including freedom as well as equality, making it one of the most complex and detailed systems of ruling. Therefore, it can be argued that in order to unite these divisions, a single leader is needed to force them into simultaneous existence. Dr. Kuehnelt-Leddihn’s article in the Foundation for Economic Education, describes democracy’s evolution into tyranny, where he says, ‘Equality does not exist in nature and therefore can be established only by force’. The class conflicts preceding in almost all democracies in the world foster greater levels of inequality, therefore it can be said that dictators are appointed their positions during times of such revolt. For example, in 1999, General Pervez Musharraf took control over the current Pakistani prime minister Nawaz Sharif’s seat through a military coup. His control was exerted through force, due to the instability of the Pakistani government under Sharif’s administration. Although this specifically does not portray the extent of Plato’s beliefs on democracy’s descent into tyranny, since Pakistan has returned to democratic rule once again, one may argue that it illustrates tyranny emerging through the uncertainty of democracy. When public passion and insatiable desire for ‘freedom’ override their ability to allow optimal governing, it becomes easy for democracy to turn into dictatorship. Perhaps Plato could have been writing about the future, since it seems as Trump’s ‘democratic rule’ could slowly assume the form of a dictatorship.
Nevertheless, although Plato’s ideas can be exercised on targeted situations and specific examples, one may argue the extent of their applicability. If Plato was correct, most democracies-turned-tyrannies would have had a dictatorship as their final regime, yet Pakistan has found its way back to a democratic government. It is also necessary to exemplify that Plato’s theory does occur today, but mostly in the opposite motion, where tyrannies are evolving into democracies. In order to further comment on this, it may be difficult to continue using the term ‘tyranny’ since excessively oppressive and fascist leaders are not in plain sight due to the difficulties they could face for extortion of human rights. There are numerous countries flourishing today as democracies, without any precursors suggesting a transition to dictatorship, such as Denmark, Finland, Norway, or New Zealand. Representation and implementation of democratic, political decisions exists in these countries, with systematic electoral structures. Democracy has not descended into tyranny in these cases, despite the obvious relationship between consumers and capitalism, which exists everywhere. Democracies today have numerous checks and balances, regulation for corruption and other non virtuous actions. A transition from democracy to tyranny is not inevitable, especially when put into context of the democracies that are existent today.
To an extent, Plato’s thoughts on democracy cannot be directly applied to modern democracies, due to an enormous amount of interfering factors, the primary difference being the amount of time that has passed since Plato published The Republic. Nevertheless, it is important to consider the shared similarities that do exist between his depiction of democracy and what is occurring in specific countries today. If something written over a thousand years ago can predict resemblances in political regimes today, Plato’s arguments cannot be held invalid either.
References
Taylor, T. & ebrary, Inc, 1992. The Republic of Plato [electronic resource] / Thomas Taylor., Kila, Mont.
Williamson, T., 2008. The good society and the good soul: Plato’ s Republic on leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 19(4), pp.397–408.
Kofmel, E., 2008. Anti-democratic thought / edited by Erich Kofmel., Exeter.
Kuehnelt-Leddihn, E.V., 1988. Democracy’s Road to Tyranny.