4. Plato's typology of political systems
Plato, whose actual name was Aristocles, was a Greek philosopher living from 427 to 347 B. C. No doubt, he was one of the greatest thinkers and philosophers in the history of the world. He was Socrates' disciple as well as Aristotle's teacher. He is famous especially for his conception of two worlds. Besides, he showed specific views of the state. He was the first author of the conception of the ideal state as well as of the chronological typology of systems.
Talking about Plato and his system conceptions, one should at the outset emphasize that his ideas of the state (as well as the way of organizing it) and his typology had pro-aristocratic overtones, which is understandable, given Plato's aristocratic background. It follows that his ideas were anti-individualist and anti-democratic (Plato considered people as the masses who are unable to decide for themselves, and who should be ruled by the best representatives, that is by aristocrat-philosophers.).
Plato's typology of systems also results to a large degree from his other views. In his typology, one can see a number of features shared with, let's say, the conception of the ideal poleis (as a matter of fact, the typology contains successive deviations from the ideals; ruling groups are those which appear in this conception with different tasks to fulfill). Here one can also notice the influence of views that Plato shows in the story of the cave.
Thus, the ideal system would be the one that is ruled by philosophers (or by those who are the best), that is the people who can follow the path of philosophical ideas rather than live in the material world. These are the people who are the `head' of the state-town, and whom gold is attributed to.
Such rule would ensure success of the state, the rule would be just (in Plato's way). It would ensure power and peace in the state that is growing as a result of the `common need'. According to Plato, the best state system should show a number of features of political organization and of moral virtues that would guarantee that the most important tasks are achieved.
Such a state should, firstly, manage protection means efficiently so as to defend itself against a vicious enemy attack. Secondly, the state should provide all the society members with goods that are essential for living. Thirdly, it should monitor the development of spiritual activities. To achieve all the above tasks would mean to realize the idea of goodness as a higher idea that rules over the world. However, such a system does not occur because people are not mature enough to implement it and because they have their own ambitions and faults.
In practice, political power is seized by ambitious warriors who are to defend the state as well as those who have already demonstrated bravery on the battlefield (that is, in the conception of the ideal state, it is the second group, which is not meant to rule). In this way, timocracy develops (the rule of the brave, knight aristocracy). This system of government is similar to that instituted in Sparta. This is a good system too. In timocracy the features of the old ideal system remain: rulers are honored, warriors are free from farming, craft, and all worries concerning material needs (e.g. meals were shared), military training and gymnastics develop. However, those who are the bravest quickly undergo degeneration (which means that the system is weak). The first symptoms of the destruction turn out to be a craving for wealth and greed. Over time warriors who love precious metals (mainly gold and silver) begin to collect them and store, so the old, modest lifestyle turns into a luxurious one. In the soul of such a citizen the balance between different powers is lost. There is no longer balance between rational part and two irrational parts, with the result being that the medial part (the `violent' one) takes over.
When the above is the case, the richest become the ruling group. In part they originate in the third group who are to work for the rest in the ideal polis. This leads to oligarchy.
The rich want to possess more. They are characterized by penny-pinching. They care only about themselves. As a result, pauperization grows up. Those who come from the group of idle warriors have a huge craving for luxury and money. Those who become rulers owing to their money have only money rather than skills and competence. This is a state system and ruling, in which shares are based on wealth qualification - lists and evaluation of property. According to Plato, `oligarchy' is in fact `plutocracy'. It means further degradation of values because the rule of virtue is replaced by the rule of wealth (which is only the good on the surface). Moreover, in oligarchy nobody respects the law, which is considered by Plato as a basic criterion for an ideal state. This law is such that each member of the society does his, and only his, own job, for which he is responsible for, without doing other members' jobs.
In turn, in oligarchy some members of the society deal with different things: farming, crafts, and war. According to Plato, it is unacceptable for a member to combine these tasks. Public affairs are in the hands of the rich while the virtue and good people are put aside, and the poor and the poverty are despised. Since it is an unjust system, the people protest and take over the power (moreover, there is lack of a commonly respected virtue that would be superior to wealth and poverty, as the virtue is neglected both by the rich and the poor; thus, although the poor are oppressed and rebel they do not deserve power either.)
This is the way democracy develops. However, as Plato remarked, this system is characterized by anarchy, the fight between fractions, and lack of stability. He said that people are not able to benefit from freedom and quickly undergo demoralization. People do not respect power given by themselves (as the rulers have the same status as the ones who are ruled). There is lack of authority, and people distrust each other. Such a situation leads to anarchy. Moreover, in a democratic state, differences between the rich and the poor become acute more and more than in oligarchy. The development of luxurious and easy lifestyle, which has already begun in oligarchy, an extremely strong desire to have money, quick degradation from the poor to the rich, they all generate envy, the poor's anger with the rich, and cause activities against the whole system of government that protects the rich against the poor.
At the same time democratic conditions of life make it inevitable that the poor often meet the rich, they often participate in the same activities (e.g. games, competitions, war). The aggravation of the poor's anger against the rich leads to an uprising. If the uprising ends with the poor's victory, they destroy some of the rich, expel others, and divide the state government and functions among all members of the society.
After some time there appears a tribune, who takes advantage of the lack of intellectual base of the democratic power. He says that he acts in the interest of the people, and promises to improve their lot, but in fact he wants to take the power, and he usually succeeds in it. In this way tyranny arises.
However, a tyrant acts in his own interest, not the interest of the state or the people (in this system the rights of the state are equivalent to the rights of the ruling person). Furthermore, he rules by force and fear because he has no authority, nor does he care about his subordinates. A tyrant has to wage wars so that simple people feel the need for a strong emperor. Because a continuous war creates a general opposition and hatred against the ruler, and because the people who have once helped him to take the power stand against the current state of affairs, the tyrant destroys anybody who stands in his way. It is only after some time that the people begin to appreciate other, better systems of government.
Thus, according to Plato, only after having lived through the worst system are the people able to appreciate aristocracy, that is the ruling of the best.
It is thus easy to see that Plato was a philosopher who presented the complex theory of the ideal state, the theory of the development and evolution of systems of government, combining them with his other philosophical theories. It should be emphasised that Plato's conception was based on a priori reasoning, and assumed, what is characteristic for the Greek perspective on the world, a cyclical nature of events (Systems change one after another, and as soon as they reach the last stage, they return to the first one again, closing the circle. It also results from the fact that people, having lived through tyranny, begin to notice better systems. However, given the imperfections of man, even the most efficient systems turn out to be impermanent.)
Karol Rybczyński SSP II rok.
Bibliography
„Historia doktryn politycznych i prawnych”, Henryk Olszowski, Poznań, ISBN 83-900964-2-0
„Leksykon myślicieli politycznych i prawnych” , pod. red. Elżbiety Kundery i Marka Maciejewskiego, Warszawa 2009 , ISBN 978-83-255-0297-9
Historia Doktryn Politycznych i Prawnych Opracowanie.
Inne publikacje używane w małym lub bardzo małym zakresie.