Plato's Criticism of Democracy

            Ancient Greece, specifically Athens, is the birthplace of democracy. Athenians pride themselves on establishing a true, direct democracy. Citizens (defined as land holding males born of Athenian mothers) were able to vote in an assembly where they represented their polis or communities.[1] These male individuals were the elite of Athens, the aristocracy who were not toiling away day after day to survive. The elite citizenship of Athens was motivated by power, greed, and prestige. Plato was a member of the Athenian elite, born “of ancient and noble lineage.”[2] However, Plato decided to become a philosopher instead of following his lineage into politics.

Plato believed that the pursuit of knowledge was a more noble cause than chasing political glory and power. His belief that money and power dictated public policy is the reason why he was so critical of democracy. He believed that democracy enabled the elite citizenship to do things that were not virtuous and unjust. Through this belief, and his pursuit for higher knowledge, Plato laid out his philosopher king hierarchy as an ideal city. Plato’s ideal city is a utopian idea that would eliminate greed and the pursuit of power among the ruling class. Plato’s philosopher king hierarchy is an ideal way to run a society, not only in ancient Greece but today as well, as it encourages the pursuit of knowledge and education as a governing body.

Plato’s writings give readers an idea of why he felt that democracy was not a viable option from a philosophical stand point. Plato believed that a person’s soul contained three parts or three desires. The first part was the desire for personal gain and self interest. People in this state were interested in self desire or self interested gain. In Political Questions Larry Arnhart states, “We all begin at the preconventional level where our only concern is our own selfish pleasures and pain. If we help others, it is only because they have promised to help us in return.”[3] Plato’s idea was to place people in this phase into the producing class because their main desire was monetary gain and would therefore be able to run a business that would be successful so they could gain what they wanted therefore pursuing the “good life.”

The second stage is the public honor desire. People who were in this phase were concerned about enacting laws and rules that would govern the society. Arnhart says, “at this point we see ourselves not just as isolated individuals, but as members of society. We want to be approved by others and we obey authority because it preserves social order.”[4] Their needs were placed below the needs of the city and therefore were more admirable then those of the desire phase. This group, known as auxiliaries, would be in control of enforcing laws and regulations because their desire was honor rather than monetary gain.

The third stage was a life of reason and this stage is where Plato classified philosophers in his hierarchy. Arnhart states, “…they took to universal moral principles that go beyond the authority of a particular group or society.”[5] Due to the pursuit of knowledge, philosophers would be disinterested in monetary gain or power therefore philosophers would make great rulers because they were looking for absolute truth and metaphysical knowledge. Plato believed that this pursuit placed philosophers above anyone who valued common sense or scientific knowledge.

Addressing these three phases makes Plato an elitist thinker. Arnhart states, “Many would also regard this Platonic teaching as unduly elitist and antidemocratic and therefore contrary to modern liberal democracy.”[6] Arnhart believes that Plato’s antidemocratic teachings are difficult for some to grasp, however they do offer a great suggestion in appointing knowledgeable and educated citizens in leadership positions. Ogochukwu Okpala describes it as “a system designed to optimize the happiness of its citizens.”[7] The philosophers would rule while the auxiliaries would assist and police the producing class.[8]

            Plato’s view of democracy is critical because he saw the government as corruptible and greedy. In S. Sara Monoson’s book, Plato’s Democratic Entanglements, she says, “Plato’s writings unquestionably urge readers to adopt a highly skeptical attitude toward democracy.”[9] Plato was urging readers to understand that democracy has its problems just as other forms of government do. Monoson continues “They [Plato’s writings] counsel us to look beyond the powerful allure of democracy, that is, to be constantly on guard lest we become attached to democracy.”[10] Plato knew that democracy was a great form of government but by having people who were not knowledgeable about the issues would cause problems for the state and its citizens by not offering the most qualified candidate to make and enforce laws.

Plato suggests that democracy is not best for the state because it does not bring knowledge to the forefront, but rather, the most popular politician or best speaker. In this ideology the state is not being governed by the most qualified but by the person with the best image. Plato has a right to be disappointed with Athenian democracy because Socrates was put to death by a function of that governing body.[11] In Plato’s eyes democracy is not a healthy government because the leadership is not seeking knowledge. The rulers of the city-state are seeking wealth and prestige and not placing the needs of the community above their own. Ogochukwu Okpala offers the perfect synopsis of Plato’s ideology in his writing titled “Plato’s Republic vs. Democracy” when he says, “When authorities are left unchallenged, their characters appear to be altered, inverting their true selves with alter egos incapable of putting the welfare of others before their own.”[12]

Plato believed that philosophers would make the best rulers for a society because they would be able to put aside worldly desires since their main goal was to obtain knowledge. Okpala states in his article on Plato and Democracy that “Plato believed that the philosopher king was incorruptible since his only desire was knowledge.”[13] Plato understood that Athenian politicians were looking for power and money, not what was best for the city state. For this reason Plato thought it would be best to have an “incorruptible” philosopher ruler that would be trying to obtain metaphysical knowledge. Monoson suggest this same argument when she states, “Plato submits that the philosopher is the most vigilant and effective subduer of menacing tyrants (in the soul and the city), a liberator from civic ills and founder of a just regime, a model civic benefactor, and one whose erotic attachments (to philosophy and truth) prove the salvation of the city.”[14]

Gerald Mara states, “Democratic governance cannot be guaranteed through an artificially closed political sociology.”[15] Mara thinks that Plato’s ideology of setting up a new political system cannot work when it is set up artificially like Plato was suggesting. However, Plato’s idea of a governing body of philosopher rulers seems like it could be the best idea in this day in age when so much emphasis is placed on a politician’s image and rhetoric rather than his leadership or stance on the issues. Larry Arnhart agrees with Mara when he states, “It seems that the possibility for a few people to live like Socrates depends on the stable political order secured by the very opinions that he questions.”[16] The idea that democracy gave Socrates the very freedom to become a philosopher is absolutely true however Plato’s utopian society would still give citizens the opportunity to seek the “good life” and the possibility that a few would still become philosopher kings with education and knowledge.

Plato also thought that the average citizen was not knowledgeable about the issues or a particular political cause to make a judgment on it. A citizen would use his subjective experience and common sense to form an opinion and then vote using that opinion. In discussing Plato’s vision of democracy and the average citizen, Okpala says, “The average individual may not have the wisdom to be involved in the appointment of a leader. Those individuals that Plato described as ‘guardians’ are the only ones with the knowledge, wisdom and virtue to run a just city.”[17] Plato is right in his criticism of democracy and the average individual. The average citizen uses emotion and heresy instead of objective moral knowledge when making a judgment in the best case. In the worst case the individual is not active, nor cares about the politics of his community. Monoson tells his readers, “Plato suggested that to be a true political player is to care for the well-being of the Athenians.”[18] Therefore democracy is then governed by the masses but the masses do not have the education or the selfless pursuit to direct the affairs of that community.

Plato offers a valid criticism of democracy by suggesting that political figures as well as citizens are not working for the betterment of their communities, city-states, or countries. Okpala states that Plato’s vision requires a high moral standard for citizens and politicians alike and it may be asking too much of human beings.[19] This view seems to give citizens a way out of their moral and political obligations which is how Plato envisioned it as well. To be involved in the city-state was an obligation and if a citizen was not going to be involved it was better for that person to chase the idea of the “good life” and leave the politics to those that had a higher moral standard and more education. Plato’s ideology is sound in suggesting that too often those seeking power and gain are not the right people to lead. In this way Plato’s criticism is still valid and compelling today.

Bibliography

Arnhart, Larry. Political Questions: Political Philosophy from Plato to Rawls. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, Inc., 2003.

Field, G. C. Plato and his Contemporaries: A Study in Fourth-Century Life and Thought. London: Butler & Tanner Ltd, 1967.

Mara, Gerald M. The Civic Conversations of Thucydides and Plato: Classical Political Philosophy and the Limits of Democracy. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2008.

Mara, Gerald M. "Thucydides and Plato on Democracy and Trust." The Journal of Politics, 2001: 820-845.

Michels, Steven. "Democracy in Plato's Laws." Journal of Social Philosophy, 2004: 517-528.

Monoson, S. Sara. Plato's Democratic Entanglements: Athenian Ploitics and the Practice of Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000.

Okpala, Ogochukwu. "Plato's Republic vs. Democracy." Neuman Business Review 4, vol 1 (2009): 49-59. Accessed February 19, 2012. http://www.neumann.edu/academics/divisions/business/journal/review09/okpala.pdf.

Saunders, Trevor J. "Plato's Later Political Thought." In The Cambridge Companion to Plato, by Richard Kraut, 464-492. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

---

[1] [1] G. C. Field, Plato and his Contemporaries: A Study in Fourth-Century Life and Thought. (London: Butler & Tanner Ltd., 1967), 5.

[2] Field, Plato and his Contemporaries, 5.

[3] Larry Arnhart, Political Questions: Political Philosophy from Plato to Rawls. (Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press, Inc. 2003), 33.

[4] Arnhart, Political Questions, 33.

[5] Arnhart, Political Questions, 33.

[6] Arnhart, Political Questions, 32-33.

[7] Ogochukwu Okpala, “Plato’s Republic vs. Democracy” Neumann Business Review 4, vol. 1 (2009): 55 accessed February 19, 2012, http://www.neumann.edu/academics/divisions/business/journal/review09/okpala.pdf.

[8] Okpala, “Plato’s Republic vs. Democracy,” 55.

[9] S. Sara Monoson, Plato’s Democratic Entanglements: Athenian Politics and the Practice of Philosophy. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000), 113.

[10] Monoson, Plato’s Democratic Entanglements, 113.

[11] Fields, Plato and his Contemporaries, 10.

[12] Okpala, “Plato’s Republic vs. Democracy,” 50.

[13] Okpala, “Plato’s Republic vs. Democracy,” 50.

[14] Monoson, Plato’s Democratic Entanglements, 113.

[15] Gerald M. Mara, The Civic Conversation of Thucydides and Plato: Classical Political Philosophy and the Limits of Democracy. (Albany: State University Press of New York, 2008), 236.

[16] Arnhart, Political Questions, 29-30.

[17] Okpala, “Plato’s Republic vs. Democracy,”54.

[18] Monoson, Plato’s Democratic Entanglements, 118.

[19] Okpala, “Plato’s Republic vs. Democracy,” 55.