Content uploaded by David Kolb
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by David Kolb on May 23, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Plato, Democracy,
Tyranny
david kolb
may 2017
Who is Plato and why
should we care what he says?
What’s his ideal of a good
government?
Why does he have a bad
opinion of democracy?
What is democracy, anyway?
What about the differences
between his democracy
and ours?
Should we worry?
A cautionary note: current personalities,
campaigns, and officeholders
may make this issue more obvious,
but the problem goes beyond
any one current person or campaign.
Plato (429?–347 B.C.E.) An Athenian citizen of high
status, absorbed in the political events and intellectual
movements of his time, and the questions he raises are so
profound and the strategies he uses for tackling them so
richly suggestive and provocative that educated readers of
nearly every period have in some way been influenced by
him.
He was not the first thinker or writer to whom the word
“philosopher” should be applied. But he was so self-
conscious about how philosophy should be conceived,
and he so transformed the intellectual currents with which
he grappled, that the subject of philosophy—a rigorous
and systematic examination of ethical, political,
metaphysical, and epistemological issues, armed with a
distinctive method—can be called his invention.
Few other authors in the history of Western philosophy
approximate him in depth and range: perhaps only
Aristotle (who studied with him)
Who is Plato and why should we care what he says?
Life and Writings
The Academy
The Republic
What’s Plato’s ideal government?
“It is hard to perceive that the true craft (tekhne) of politics
(ta politika: things concerned with the polis, the city)must
be concerned with the common, not with the private
(idion)--the common tending to cement society, the private
to disrupt it--and that it is to the advantage of the common
and private, both of them, that common well-being should
be considered before private.” The Laws, 875a-d)
there is a craft of politics
the common space of interaction needs to be structured
and cared for
there is no invisible hand, selfishness is disruptive
So, ideally you want to raise a generation of rulers
completely devoted to the city, extremely skilled and fully
trained, with no private interests to disrupt their care for
the city.
In the popular parlance these are “philosopher kings” –
people in whom wisdom and power come together. That
wisdom includes an ability to perceive the right measures
and ratios for mixing and matching the components of the
city, in economics, politics, population, commerce, and
the like.
This is an activist government intervening visibly and
sometimes secretly into all phases of life to keep things
balanced and prosperous.
So, what could possibly go wrong?
Time and Change
Inadequate Knowledge
Human Nature
HH
Time and Change
A city which is thus constituted can hardly be shaken;
but, seeing that everything which has a beginning has
also an end, even a constitution such as yours will not
last for ever, but will in time be dissolved.
And since the Form is eternal and nothing that is made can be eternal,
[the workman] devised a moving image of eternity, which we call time.
Plato, Timaeus
Plato, Republic
Now that which is of divine birth has a period which is contained in a perfect number, but the
period of human birth is comprehended in a number in which first increments by involution and
evolution (or squared and cubed) obtaining three intervals and four terms of like and unlike,
waxing and waning numbers, make all the terms commensurable and agreeable to one another.
The base of these (3) with a third added (4) when combined with five (20) and raised to the third
power furnishes two harmonies; the first a square which is a hundred times as great (400 = 4 X
100), and the other a figure having one side equal to the former, but oblong, consisting of a
hundred numbers squared upon rational diameters of a square (i. e. omitting fractions), the side
of which is five (7 X 7 = 49 X 100 = 4900), each of them being less by one (than the perfect
square which includes the fractions, sc. 50) or less by two perfect squares of irrational diameters
(of a square the side of which is five = 50 + 50 = 100); and a hundred cubes of three (27 X 100
= 2700 + 4900 + 400 = 8000). Now this number represents a geometrical figure which has
control over the good and evil of births.
Inadequate Knowledge
Plato illustrates the inadequacies of our knowledge by writing a
paragraph of mathematical gobbledegook that no one has ever figured
out, to show that not even a theory of mathematical Forms, such as he
may have taught, will be adequate to the contingencies of our empirical
life.
Even one who had attained clear perception of
this principle [put the common interest before the
private] as a point of craft, mortal nature will
always urge him to aggrandizement (pleonexian)
and self-seeking (idiopragian), unreasonably
(alogos) fleeing pain and pursuing pleasure, and
putting these ends before the just (dikioterou) and
the best. This blindness will sink him and his
whole city into all sorts of evils.
Human Nature
The city degenerates
Aristo-cracy
Timo-cracy
Olig-archy
Demo-cracy
Tyranny
Aristoi
Timaioi
Oligoi
Demos
Tyrannos
Krasis
Arkhe
Oligarchy = Pluto-cracy
HH
Here is another defect of oligarchy…
The inevitable division: such a State is not one, but two States,
the one of poor, the other of rich men;
they are living on the same spot
and always conspiring against one another.
: tyrant;
a cruel and oppressive ruler.
a person exercising power or control in a cruel, unreasonable, or arbitrary way.
◦ (especially in ancient Greece) a ruler who seized power without legal right."
"
In Greece there were some "good" tyrants.
But Plato is of the opinion that people in a tyrant’s position
tend toward internal disorder in their personality and chaos in
their city.
Why does Plato have a bad opinion of democracy?
What is a democracy?"
Is it the machinery
of elections
and representatives?
Athens didn’t
have elections
and representatives.
What is democracy?
Demos
hoi polloi
Krasis
the people have power
to make and execute policy and law
by whatever machinery they use
BUT there’s more
Democracy requires freedom,
people debating about policy,
free to speak,
tolerant of different opinions
and willing to accept the democratic decisions
FREEDOM from coercion and restriction
and tolerant of others
Plato’s fear is that these positive qualities of a democracy
are its weakness.
Why does Plato have a bad opinion of democracy?
Democracy has her own good,
and insatiable desire for it brings her to dissolution.
Freedom, I replied; which, as they tell you in a
democracy, is the glory of the State --and that
therefore in a democracy alone will the
freeman of nature deign to dwell.
I was going to observe, that the insatiable
desire of this and the neglect of other things
introduces the change in democracy, which
occasions a demand for tyranny.
a city full of freedom and frankness -
a man may say and do what he likes
the fairest of States,
an embroidered robe
which is spangled with every sort of flower.
freedom from censure and shame,
…and from principle and excellence
at best, a life and character
following modes and fads
and changing interests
no basis for discrimination or ordering
or harmony
among conflicting desires, values, ways of life
a" these quotations are #omRepublic, Book 8
the forgiving spirit of democracy, and the 'don't care' about trifles,
and the disregard which she shows of all the fine principles which we
solemnly laid down at the foundation of the city
--as when we said that, except in the case of some rarely gifted
nature, there never will be a good man who has not from his
childhood been used to play amid things of beauty and make of them
a joy and a study
--how grandly does she trample all these fine notions of ours under
her feet, never giving a thought to the pursuits which make a
statesman,
and promoting to honor any one who professes to be the people's
friend.
see how sensitive the citizens become;
they chafe impatiently at the least touch of authority
and at length, as you know, they cease to care even for
the laws, written or unwritten; they will have no one
over them.
Such, my friend, I said, is the fair and glorious
beginning out of which springs tyranny.
When a democracy which is thirsting for freedom has evil
cupbearers presiding over the feast, and has drunk too deeply of
the strong wine of freedom, then, unless her rulers are very
amenable and give a plentiful draught, she calls them to account
and punishes them, and says that they are cursed oligarchs.
Yes, I said; and loyal citizens are insultingly termed by her slaves who
hug their chains ….
In such a state of society the master fears and flatters his scholars, and
the scholars despise their masters and tutors;
young and old are all alike; and the young man is on a level with the
old, and is ready to compete with him in word or deed;
and old men condescend to the young and are full of pleasantry and
gaiety; they are loth to be thought morose and authoritative, and
therefore they adopt the manners of the young.
…The people have always some champion whom they set over them and
nurse into greatness. This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs;
when he first appears above ground he is a protector. …
having a mob entirely at his disposal, …
by the favorite method of false accusation he brings them into court and
murders them, … some he kills and others he banishes,
at the same time hinting at the abolition of debts and partition of lands:
…if they are unable to expel him … they conspire to assassinate him.
Then comes the famous request for a bodyguard,
which is the device of all those who have got thus far in their tyrannical
career
--'Let not the people's friend,' as they say, 'be lost to them.'
The people readily assent; all their fears are for him --they have none for
themselves.
…At first, in the early days of his power, he is full of smiles,
and he salutes every one whom he meets; —
is he to be called a tyrant, who is making promises in public and also in private!
liberating debtors, and distributing land to the people and his followers,
and wanting to be so kind and good to every one!
….but when he has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty,
and there is nothing to fear from them,
then he is always stirring up some war or other,
in order that the people may require a leader.
economic inequality
tolerance in the extreme
no compulsion to serve
lack of agreement on principles
conflicting desires in the individual and in society
clashes
a champion protector benefactor
…
So, we have
Can we deflect Plato’s criticisms
by pointing to
the differences between Athens and US?
http://www.agathe.gr/democracy/
Plato thought in an ideal city
everyone should agree on basic values and principles
and on what counts as an excellent human character and life.
He also tried to show that in nature
there were Forms or patterns
that could be known
and that guaranteed those patterns.
We live in a society without basic agreements
on values and principles ?
Plato lived in a non-uniform but much less multiple Athens
and he thought that was a weakness.
But note: his criticism becomes more biting
if he is wrong about the existence of Forms
for goodness and excellence
because then the conflicting interests, desires, values
have no harmonious resolution
so a potential tyrant can find many handles to manipulate.
How do we sustain a multi-value, multi-cultural democracy?
What basic agreements must we share?
City-state vs Nation (empire?)
A multi-level federal system could limit the spread of
tyranny, either by confining it a local region, or by
allowing local regions to resist the federal
government.
During the 4th century BC, there might well have been some
250,000–300,000 people in Attica.
The percentage of the population that actually participated in the
government was 10% to 20% of the total number of inhabitants,
This excluded slaves, freed slaves, children, women
and foreigners resident in Athens.
Citizen families could have amounted to 100,000 people and out
of these some 30,000 would have been the adult male citizens
entitled to vote in the assembly. From a modern perspective
these figures may seem small, but among Greek city-states
Athens was huge:
most of the thousand or so Greek cities
could only muster 1000–1500 adult male citizens each;
and Corinth, a major power, had at most 15,000.
City-state vs Nation (empire?)
We have a less Homogeneous more Multipart Population
These factors only increase the chances
for the disintegration Plato is talking about.
We have More participants
Direct versus Representative Democracy
The Assembly (Ekklesia)
about every ten days,
Who could propose laws and decrees and changes? Anyone.
(A quorum was 6,000)
Juries and Courts
magistrates and officials
Council (Boule)
Members of the boule served for one year
and no man could serve more than twice in his life,
nor more than once a decade.
The leaders of the boule (the prytany) consisted of 50 men chosen from among the 500,
and a new prytany was chosen every month.
The man in charge of the prytany was replaced every day from among the 50 members.
magistrates had only an administrative function and were laymen.
Most of the annual magistracies at Athens could only be held once in a lifetime.
There were no lawyers as such;
litigants acted solely in their capacity as citizens.
The use of a lottery to select officeholders was regarded as the most democratic means:
elections would favor those who were rich, noble, eloquent and well-known,
a lottery spread the work of administration throughout the whole citizen body, engaging
them in the crucial democratic experience of, to use Aristotle's words, "ruling and being ruled
in turn" (Politics 1317b28–30).
It gave citizens a unique form of political equality as all had an equal chance of obtaining
government office.
Elections were held only for those required to handle large sums of money,
and for the 10 generals
Each office could be held by the same person only once.
Officials and magistrates were chosen by lottery
Do we have more Checks and Balances ??
In our system three powers have to agree for things to go forward,
though in practice the executive and the legislature are enough,
with the court evaluating later.
That was the case in Athens, though there was no independent executive (usually).
Courts were frequently brought into play to challenge decisions and laws.
Athens did not have court injunctions to stop or delay an action.
On the other hand, courts normally decided cases in one day.
The Athenian assembly could act very quickly and impulsively.
So it was susceptible to demagoguery.
But it could reverse itself or be challenged in court the next day.
The lottery for offices and the lack of elections
did not allow any individual
to have a power position for any length of time.
There was no chance of the kind of voting in a tyrant that was so
successful for Hitler.
Popular demagogues could cause changes of policy but could not get
themselves put into permanent office.
This is a real safeguard that we don't have.
On the other hand the same inertia which
makes it harder to change our system means
that once it is changed, it’s very hard to
change back.
A major difference might be inertia. It’s hard to get our
government moving together in one direction. Some of this is built
into the Constitution, and more comes from the expansion of the
executive.
Athenian government was leaner and could act fast, could reverse
itself more quickly -- less inertia. Ours is big and cumbersome,
which may a real defense against what Plato’s worrying about.
The two systems have different kinds of defenses.
Ours defends well against quick jagged changes of policy but less
well against the installation of new power blocs.
Their system protected well against new power blocks but not so
well against quick changes of policy.
There were many more revolutions in Greece, big changes of
structure
democracy is a charming form of
government, full of variety and
disorder,and dispensing a sort of
equality to equals and unequals alike.
Here is the rub
Plato thinks the solution is to face up to the inequality of people
Find the best and train them
So if you think his criticisms are correct
then put them to work
France?, Germany?
It’s a legitimate and important question
how to reconcile the principles of democracy
with the need for expertise and thoughtful deliberation
Plato’s fundamental issues remain today:
* severe economic inequality
* extreme tolerance for different principles
* no obligation for public service
* little emphasis on working for the common good
* people see little chance of a harmonious resolution of competing
interests and desires
…So should we be afraid ?
What do you think?
… and, why?
One contemporary invocation of Plato: Andrew Sullivan on the need for elites,
plus a pointed response to his article
In at the handout
For another take on Plato’s
contemporary political relevance,
see this article from Aeon.
This program has been brought you by DKolb.org