Plato Yesterday and Today

By Jack Lee, with thanks and credits to Desmond Lee

2500 years ago Plato defined his version of a perfect society. He went on to compare that society to contemporary ‘imperfect’ societies and this lead him to certain conclusions about human nature. Plato criticizes the imperfect society where the ultimate desire is for wealth/power and one’s character is governed by emotions absent much compassion or reason, exemplified today by despots like Hitler to Idi Amin or Pol Pot. .

He observes the working masses and the poor are exploited by the avaricious class, which he calls the Oligarchic. He sees that the masses will become so discontented they revolt and form a democracy and give everyone equal civil rights and opportunities. Plato’s description of events bears a remarkable resemblance to the French Revolution and more recently events in Tunisia.

In America we may have more people becoming rich than in previous years, but we also have a greater parity spread between the very rich and the masses of poor. Plato would call that dangerous and an imbalance that natural forces will seek to correct.

He says the rich with their Oligarchic psyche governs from emotions, but without any reason behind it, i.e., the Oligarchic character balances his desires in order to gain the greatest wealth/power, but he does not really know why he does this. He is driven by motives hidden to him.

Plato’s main criticism of Democracy is that the state gives all men equality, whether they are equal or not. This is also reflected in our formative years with the Hamiltonian theory for a Republic. Plato notes the egalitarianism of the Democratic state can be seen as misguide and if Plato’s statements are taken and elaborated upon: the idea of equality and equal rights for all citizens is based upon a noble ideal, but is not practical. In pragmatic terms, all men are unequal in almost every sense: some have greater ability, some can control their desires better, and others are a potential danger to themselves and others. All opinions are not equal: the politician who panders to popular opinion in order to further his own career is not a true statesman. The desires of the people must be controlled by the character of authoritarian conditioning, which is itself supported by the reasoning of a government which knows the best course for the state to follow.

Plato’s idea of a Democracy was different from our current government: in his city-state of Athens, a state decision was decided on by a general vote of the ‘Assembly’. And this was made up of the available men gathering to hear arguments and conclude with a vote. It was very close to a direct governemnt.

However, the establishment of the internet and television as the main political medium has opened up opportunities of anm even more direct approach. This medium exposes certain flaws too, for instance it allows us to see how politicians maintain popularity, even at the sacrifice of the nation’s long-term welfare. Most politicians do not want to upset the people by leading them in an immediately upsetting, but ultimately rewarding direction: so they protect their own popularity at the expense deferred maintenance which the peoiple will ultimately pay for, these are not statesmen, just opportunists.

Plato’s main criticism of Democracy is that the increased power of immediate public opinion, without discriminating the merit of that opinion, leads to an inadequate and unsatisfactory result: an excessive desire for liberty at the expense of everything else is what undermines democracy and leads to a counter force – tyranny. The Democratic state becomes more and more extreme in its pursuit of liberty and equality: everyone has their say, but nothing is ever achieved: instead the state consists of rulers who behave like subjects and subjects who behave like rulers. The people begin to desire a strong leader, who will make the difficult decisions for them and bear the consequences: the Democracy has become a Tyranny.

In summary, Plato’s comments are incredibly perceptive and relevant: a lot of what he says has been proved true in one way or another throughout history. The transition of our own country from an early 19th century Oligarchy to the Democracy we have today seems to have been predicted by Plato over two thousand years ago. It may also be true that our contemporary politicians are to be ousted by the dissatisfied public, and replaced with a tyrannical dictator. Finally, though not everything Plato says is in concordance with what we can now see for ourselves, his ideas are still relevant in any study of modern politics.