FREE ESSAY ON PLATO: GRANDFATHER OF DEMOCRACY

PLATO: GRANDFATHER OF DEMOCRACY

Plato: The Grandfather of Democracy
The history and the evolution of what we know as law, has developed out of many different
viewpoints and philosophies. It has been the result of the operational and manipulative
aspects of public affairs, and also seems to be the creation of different philosophical
systems. There have been many that have been innovators in this area of thought from
political leaders and dictators, to others who were simple political idealists and
philosophers. Through the wisdom and teachings of Plato, law has evolved into many
different systems, and through this paper we will discuss the impact this particular
philosopher had had on our modern system of democracy. We will also try to recognize that
law will continue to evolve, as does man throughout history. 
Many people believe that Plato, whose life span was 427-348 B.C., has exerted a greater
influence over human thought than any other individual studied throughout history. He was
a student of another tremendous contributor to human thought, Socrates. Plato had written
a commentary on democracy called "The Republic." In this book he discusses the ill
effects democracy has on the people, but also analyzes the inevitable need for political
leaders. Plato argues that the inherent weakness of democracy exists and calls it the
"extreme of popular liberty"(Plato's, The Republic). But, when we discuss Plato's views,
we must take into account that his vision of democracy is much different than the modern
system of democracy that we know today. Plato goes on to say…"this system is where
slaves -male and female- have the same liberty as their owners," and where there is
"complete equality and liberty in the relations between the sexes"(The Republic). 
Another quote from "The Republic" shows how different it was from our own current view of
the democratic system. "Then in democracy," I went on, "there's no compulsion either to
exercise authority if you are capable of it, or to submit to authority if you don't want
to; you needn't fight if there's a war, or you can wage a private war in peacetime if you
don't like peace; and if there's any law that debars you from political or judicial
office, you will none the less take either if they come your way. It's a wonderfully
pleasant way if carrying on in the short run, isn't it?"(The Republic).
In "An Introduction to Plato's Republic" by Julia Annas, she argues "Plato presents
democracy as defined by tolerant pluralism, but Athens was a populist democracy, with a
clearly defined way of life separating those with power from those without, and about as
tolerant of openly expressed nonconformity as McCarthyite America!" Here, Annus is using
the comparison of democracy to "tolerant pluralism," as a way of saying that within
Plato's view of this type of political system there exists many different realities, and
seems to question if law exists at all. She compares his so-called "democracy" as what is
commonly referred to as "anarchy."
Plato believes there are three social classes in democracy: the drones (unemployed), the
rich, and the working masses. He says there will eventually be a period of unrest between
the people and the government, and the working class "will put forward a single popular
leader, whom they nurse to greatness," and it is this leader who is "the root from which
tyranny invariably springs"(The Republic). Here I would like to point out that Plato's
leader who rises through a period of unrest from the working masses could be compared to
Germany's Adolph Hitler. He too rose to greatness from a Democratic system, and what soon
followed was the inevitable…Plato referred to this as "tyranny." Plato's system of
democracy in The Republic is much different than what we know of today as democracy, but
the foundation is there, and we know that his system would inevitably lead to chaos, as
it is indeed anarchy. But, as we see in Hitler's Germany, McCarthyite America, and
Plato's idea of democracy-tyranny, we also know that whenever there is a ruling class we
must question if it is truly for the good of the people.
Still discussing the foundations of Plato's democratic system, we see that Plato
concluded that most people do not maintain the ability to assemble the difficult and
necessary decisions that would result in a just society. He says, "The average person
lacks wisdom and self-restraint"(The Republic). This means that Plato would argue that
participating in politics, and the exercise of political powers was a skilled profession
as any other. "[They must be] full of zeal to do whatever they believe is for the good of
the commonwealth and never willing to act against its interest. They must be capable of
possessing this connection, never forgetting it or allowing themselves to be either
forced or bewitched into throwing it over"(The Republic). Through his writing in "The
Republic", we see that Plato believed one must not only learn how to rule, but it is a
quality inherent to the character, acknowledging that this dominant part of a person is
within their soul. In his book, "The Great Political Theories: Volume I", Michael Curtis
discusses this idea presented by Plato…"The three elements to the soul -appetite,
courage, and reason- were related to class and to function in the state. If appetite, or
the satisfaction of physical desires, dominated, the individual would be in the laboring
class, if it was spirit or courage, he would be a warrior, if it was reason, or the
faculty of possessing true knowledge, he would be a ruler. Constitutions were thus
related to the character of the citizen body. The good state, like the good man,
possessed the character of temperance, courage, and wisdom." Plato believes that the
state is also inevitable, as no one man is self-sufficing. We all have many needs, and
the state helps to create a system to satisfy all our requirements. Because the state
needed to create laws that would allow the citizen to achieve all these requirements, we
see a notion in "The Republic" similar to our modern concept of contract-law. Plato
embraces what we know of now as consideration: "If one man gives another what he has to
give in exchange for what he can get, it is because each finds that to do so is for his
own advantage"(The Republic).
If democracy is "the extreme of popular liberty," than our system of democracy, may be in
theory, not democratic at all. In reference to what Annus referred to as "McCarthyite
America", one could definitely question the validity of our governing system, and the
effect legal reasoning has on the court system…if there is any at all! While many
were publicly humiliated, blacklisted, and put behind bars through as series of court
sessions because of their non-conformist beliefs of communism, we must realize that the
true nature and function of democracy did not endure during this period in American
history. Through the culmination of the philosophies Plato has presented, we can assert
that this type of behavior is unavoidable, and as history has proven, we must conclude
that Plato is correct in this belief.
Plato believes this concept of moral decency for the people will inevitably, as stated
before, lead to tyranny. He couldn't get over this inescapable outcome, although he did
realize the possibilities of a good state. We must comprehend that Plato accepted the
need for law, and how pluralism should not be a concept in a governing system or else it
will lead to chaos. But, he also concludes that democracy will eventually lead to
tyranny. I think that Plato does give credence to the idea that we as humans are innately
good, but as we succumb to the pressures of society, especially when placed in a position
of power, most people would act for the good of themselves. 
Plato recognized the good of man, but also rationalized that the good will of man will
not last very long. With logical reason he always resolved that even with his good
intentions, man would inevitably succumb to his power. In another excerpt from his book,
we see Michael Curtis finding a conclusive foundation for Plato's philosophies:
"Certainly, Plato was pessimistic in his view of the inevitable, progressive
deterioration of government from the starting point of timocracy until the final form of
tyranny"(The Great Political Theories: Vol. I). Even though Plato sees the need for
political leaders, and recognizes their invaluable function in society, he acknowledges
that man indeed becomes pixilated with his power, using it in audacious measures. But, as
history proves over and over again, law will continue to evolve with the future of man.
Bibliography
The Republic, Plato
The Great Political Theories: Volume 1: Michael Curtis