Notes on Democracy
In The Republic, Plato expressed his belief in the idea of a philosopher King as the ideal form of Governance in the Utopian Kallipolis in the following words: "philosophers [must] become kings…or those now called kings [must]…genuinely and adequately philosophize". For Plato, other forms of Governments like Timocracy, Tyranny, Plutocracy and Democracy were not sustainable. However, there is much argument to be made against the very idea of a philosopher King that Plato espoused. Many philosophers have dismissed Plato's utopian idea as unrealistic, if not simply harmful. 20th century philosophers, like Sir Karl R. Popper have blamed the platonic idea for the rise of two of the most notorious political figures of the century, Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler. The Iranian Ayatollah Khomeini was also said to have been inspired by Platonic ideas. While these men exhibited strong leadership, they were all dedicated to wrong philosophies that have caused immense suffering to humanity. Even Plato himself failed to raise Dionysius II along the lines he had himself laid down for the development of a philosopher King. The lessons from history highlight the great risk of mistaking a ruthless tyrant for a benevolent philosopher King.
Timocracy, a Government formed by men of honor, also suffers from the risk of becoming corrupt and turning into an Oligarchy (Plutocracy) where the 'men of honor' are replaced by or are transformed into 'men of wealth' over time. This Plutocracy is probably the most dangerous form of Government that can exist. A single despotic monarch can be removed from power easily through a co-ordinated uprising of the masses, but a Plutocratic Government, consisting of the most wealthiest men, will have firmer roots that can run deep into both the politics and the economy of the State. It may be argued that it is this form of Government has existed and continue to exist in most parts of the world in the guise of democracy. However, in spite of the position and power that the ruling members of an Oligarchy enjoy, they are not immune to existential threats. Their biggest enemies are the class struggles. As the financial divide between the rich and the poor (the oppressor and the oppressed) increase, the tension gives rise to defiance, and eventually leads to violence against the rulers. In world history, the scepter of Communism has often haunted the Oligarchies and their Feudal predecessors. Class struggles lead to new social orders where the principle of equality becomes most dominant, and this usually leads to a more democratic framework for Governance.
But achieving a true democracy can be as hard as realzing the utopian concept of a philosopher King, if not harder. This is because raising a single child to develop into a philosopher King with the adequate knowledge may be easier than educating the entire mass to empower them with a sense of good judgment. One of the foremost requirement of Democracy is the participation of well-informed masses. It is the only way it can function effectively. Without it, Democracy attains the definition that Bernard Shaw provided for it: "Democracy is a form of government that substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few."
However education is an expensive commodity and it demands dedication. The masses may never be able to grasp the true importance of education before being allowed to exercise their voting rights. And for politicians in many countries it may well be in their own interest to deprive the masses of this enlightenment, as doing so might hurt the attempts at realizing their own selfish goals. Moreover, even in a democratic environment, the minds of the people may be influenced, in fact controlled, by their potential rulers to vote in their favor. After all, psychoanalysis has revealed the irrational tendencies that lurks beneath the human skin, and that these forces if manipulated carefully can be used to mislead people. In another lesson from history, one should not forget that Hitler became the Chancellor of Germany in 1933 through a democratic process.
The biggest threat to democracy indeed lies in the irrationality of the unconscious human mind. A charismatic demagogue may win the minds of most citizens with passionate propaganda and fervent rhetorics that appeal to their inherent prejudices, fear and expectations. Only over time do such leaders expose their true despotic nature. The other threat to democracy comes from its fundamental structure itself -its ability to create partisanship. At the core of democracy lies the forced acceptance of the agenda of the majority by the minority. The resulting society with a split opinion can hardly function in a healthy way, and that too the majority may in fact be much misguided. If majority opinion were to decide the right and wrong, we would still be believing that the sun revolves around the earth or evolution is a hoax. The reason is not too difficult to grasp -if there are too many different voices in a room, most of which are loud and ignorant, then none of them can be clearly comprehended. This discussion brings out some of the inherent weaknesses of democracy that are often overlooked in modern societies. But arguably, it is one form of Government that has a better chance of success than the alternatives.
In the next post, I will discuss the impact of a democratic framework on the Society. As alluded to earlier, a democratic society is one where the minority is expected to bear with the agenda of the majority. This often leads to disagreement, dissent and, in extreme case, civil struggles. In this context, the concept of a society and its relation to the Individual will be discussed as well. In later posts, I will analyze the relation between an Individual and the larger democracy. In the last post of this series, I will focus on the concept of morality and its relation to the individual and the society.
Timocracy, a Government formed by men of honor, also suffers from the risk of becoming corrupt and turning into an Oligarchy (Plutocracy) where the 'men of honor' are replaced by or are transformed into 'men of wealth' over time. This Plutocracy is probably the most dangerous form of Government that can exist. A single despotic monarch can be removed from power easily through a co-ordinated uprising of the masses, but a Plutocratic Government, consisting of the most wealthiest men, will have firmer roots that can run deep into both the politics and the economy of the State. It may be argued that it is this form of Government has existed and continue to exist in most parts of the world in the guise of democracy. However, in spite of the position and power that the ruling members of an Oligarchy enjoy, they are not immune to existential threats. Their biggest enemies are the class struggles. As the financial divide between the rich and the poor (the oppressor and the oppressed) increase, the tension gives rise to defiance, and eventually leads to violence against the rulers. In world history, the scepter of Communism has often haunted the Oligarchies and their Feudal predecessors. Class struggles lead to new social orders where the principle of equality becomes most dominant, and this usually leads to a more democratic framework for Governance.
But achieving a true democracy can be as hard as realzing the utopian concept of a philosopher King, if not harder. This is because raising a single child to develop into a philosopher King with the adequate knowledge may be easier than educating the entire mass to empower them with a sense of good judgment. One of the foremost requirement of Democracy is the participation of well-informed masses. It is the only way it can function effectively. Without it, Democracy attains the definition that Bernard Shaw provided for it: "Democracy is a form of government that substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few."
However education is an expensive commodity and it demands dedication. The masses may never be able to grasp the true importance of education before being allowed to exercise their voting rights. And for politicians in many countries it may well be in their own interest to deprive the masses of this enlightenment, as doing so might hurt the attempts at realizing their own selfish goals. Moreover, even in a democratic environment, the minds of the people may be influenced, in fact controlled, by their potential rulers to vote in their favor. After all, psychoanalysis has revealed the irrational tendencies that lurks beneath the human skin, and that these forces if manipulated carefully can be used to mislead people. In another lesson from history, one should not forget that Hitler became the Chancellor of Germany in 1933 through a democratic process.
The biggest threat to democracy indeed lies in the irrationality of the unconscious human mind. A charismatic demagogue may win the minds of most citizens with passionate propaganda and fervent rhetorics that appeal to their inherent prejudices, fear and expectations. Only over time do such leaders expose their true despotic nature. The other threat to democracy comes from its fundamental structure itself -its ability to create partisanship. At the core of democracy lies the forced acceptance of the agenda of the majority by the minority. The resulting society with a split opinion can hardly function in a healthy way, and that too the majority may in fact be much misguided. If majority opinion were to decide the right and wrong, we would still be believing that the sun revolves around the earth or evolution is a hoax. The reason is not too difficult to grasp -if there are too many different voices in a room, most of which are loud and ignorant, then none of them can be clearly comprehended. This discussion brings out some of the inherent weaknesses of democracy that are often overlooked in modern societies. But arguably, it is one form of Government that has a better chance of success than the alternatives.
In the next post, I will discuss the impact of a democratic framework on the Society. As alluded to earlier, a democratic society is one where the minority is expected to bear with the agenda of the majority. This often leads to disagreement, dissent and, in extreme case, civil struggles. In this context, the concept of a society and its relation to the Individual will be discussed as well. In later posts, I will analyze the relation between an Individual and the larger democracy. In the last post of this series, I will focus on the concept of morality and its relation to the individual and the society.
1 comment:
brilliant thoughts...
Post a Comment