Plato's Republic

[NyChe21]

In Plato's Republic, he names different types of government and states that all forms of government result form a degradation of the 'rule by the best' which he describes as a monarchy/aristocracy. His vision of a workable type of monarchy/aristocracy is a government by philosopher-king(s) who rationally judge the best for the people. In a country beset by an unfair educational system and higher illiteracy rate than most of Europe, especially the socialist democratic states such as Germany and Sweden, I believe the American government degraded into forms described by Plato. Most importantly in the past century.


First I'll list the degradation of government as Plato described:

1. Aristocracy/Monarchy (rule by the wisest philosopher-kings)
2. Timocracy (rule by honorable and celebrated, militaristic few)
3. Oligarchy/Plutocracy (rule by the rich few)
4. Democracy (rule by the masses without education, Plato would have viewed Communism as extremely impractical in his age)

5. Tyranny (post democratic rule of one due to the masses incompetence and dividing powers, resulting in appeal to a charismatic dictator such as Hitler and Germany in the 1930's)



Now I would like to loosely apply this to 20th Century America:

1. Aristocracy- This can be determined to be the New Deal Era in American history. Wisely conceding to socialist ideas of Keynesian economics, Franklin Delano Roosevelt provides leadership out of the Great Depression.

2. Timocracy - Post World War II conflicts start the Cold War, encouraging the 'crusade against communism' (the 'honorable' fight) carried out by Eisenhower and even President Kennedy in Korea and Vietnam respectively. Meddling in foreign affairs continues for years after.

3. Oligarchy/Plutocracy - The failures of Keyneisian economics provide Conservative think tanks and corporate America with an opportunity to regain political power and again dictate international relations for their own profits. Truly 'rule of the rich'.

4. Democracy (as Plato understood it, rule by the uneducated masses) - the illusion of a responsible public voice is effectively removed by a corporate media and Conservative think tanks dictating limited and biased information creating exactly what Plato feared, an uninformed public making decisions that create more uneasiness among the international and domestic community. Appeal to strong leadership is obviously needed, but who is that leader?

5. Tyranny - Critical terrorist situation creates panic among the public and fear is present, 'leadership' is on its way however. Weilding that fear in his hand, a dictatoral-like President George Bush and cronies becomes a tyrant for all peoples of the world, even his own military, who die for a cause that half do not support.



Any thoughts? I know its loose and propaganda-like, but hey, its PLATO!

[NovelGentry]

I don't know for sure, cause I don't read Plato. But I don't assume he meant for this to be applied within a century of time. It would seem more so he was trying to explain the whole of history and how power would shift focus over time.

As you have pointed out though his idea of Democracy was "rule by uneducated masses." This is of course something which he probably understood would be the case without the invention of things which facilitate or bring education to more. Take for example computers. Had plato assumed it was to be "rule by educated masses," would he ever have thought it would eventually fall to tyranny? Why would an educated bunch need or allow such a thing?

Given this if we are currently under oligarchy, which I consider the case, Democracy would seem the logical next step. So if we assume Plato is right, it will be the next stage (but as I said more likely with an educated mass). If we also assume Marx was right, we cannot see democracy without a truly free people, and under no form of class society is man truly free.

[NyChe21]

Agreed. It is pretty obvious that we are under an oligarchy of elitists. But I would also like to question what WE define as an 'educated mass', fully aware of the situation that they are in, especially economic situation. In electing a President who does not provide for either the working or middle classes, can we really say that we are part of an 'educated and informed population'??? I think this is easily debatable. May I also note that my opinion is that Plato never truly had faith in democracy as in the communistic sense. Like the Anti-Federalists view of an extensive democracy, he believe that democracy would split the population into factions, which would not be able to rule justly or effectively (even though they may be educated). Out of this notion, can we expect a centralized democracy like Lenin and Trotsky desired? To socialize and educate a mass of people is very difficult and it would take a very gradualized reform process.

Another note on Plato's theory of degradation. We have seen it occur in this century twice. Italy and Germany both 'democratically' elected their fascist tyrants. So Plato's theory is correct in these contexts. The use of fear and exploitation by 'tyrants' is real and we are experiencing it today in America. In that sense, it is a tyranny, maybe not by one man, but one neoliberal conservative regime.