Introduction

Plato’s defines political justice as each social class doing what it is supposed to do according to its nature and function within society.  This definition then serves as the basis for his criticism of democracy.  Plato in his work ‘’The Republic’’ believed that philosophers should be kings and kings should be a philosopher. He believed that only people with some education background who would be competent enough to make to the ruling class (Hoffman, 2003).  Plato’s work believed that the philosopher king would make the best rulers since they were not corruptible and their only objective is to increase their knowledge (Roochnik & Plato., 2005). This conviction brought about the question whether it is plausible to decide leadership through such convictions. Plato gives the elite rulers to act as they wish while the weak continue suffering under their leadership. It is on this premises that the concept of democracy to Plato’s philosophy becomes an important topic for analysis. In this paper, we will critically look at democracy to the Plato’s work on justice.

Plato’s idea on democracy

Democracy had no place in Plato’s thinking. This is because he strongly believed that not all members of the society had the capability of making good leaders since they had little knowledge essential in making wise decisions. The platonic principle argues that only a few people in a just state that possess truth and wisdom required in leadership. According to Plato, kings should be philosophers and vice versa. Plato was convinced that these kinds of kings would ensure justice in their states since their souls and mind is always in pursuit of truth and wisdom that are components of a just city (Cornelli & Lisi, 2010).

The Plato’s view is against the modern definition of democracy. Democracy is defined as the rule for the people and by the people. Modern states have a democratic process where leaders are elected through competitive elections. Justice as expressed by Plato has no place in modern capitalistic society as well as in the free democratic state. Other factors such as money play a significant role in determining the ruling class in most modern states. It is however wise noting that Plato never understood why money and wealth would be used to determine leadership.  He strongly believed that money was responsible for corruption and a society would be happier without it. Additionally, the Socrates was very much against using war as form of defense (Mangongera, 2014). This is however not the case today, where democracy has advanced, where war is considered as a form of increasing country’s wealth. A case example is the manipulation of oil fields in Iraq that lead to overthrowing the government.

Plato argued that leaders who are not motivated by justice will always find ways of rationalizing inactions and immorality for the end to justify the means. Instances that confirm the Plato’s view of justice states can be explained by genocides experienced in Rwanda and Darfur that are good example of inactions from leaders not motivated by justice. The escalation of such genocide activities happens as the West turns blind eye all in the name of democracy (Santas, 2010).  Democratic nations see no political gain to be had from interference in foreign governments where innocent people suffer but no wealth or control is to be gained. Plato believed that if money and wealth do not override the society’s value and systems then morality will be the basis upon which equal footing in the society will be eminent. A state guided by moral principles will have fewer wars and actions of injustices since there would be no financial gains. Additionally, mutual respect among nations’ would also substantially reduce instances of war (Mangongera, 2014).

The difference between the Plato’s Republic and the modern democratic state lies on the criteria used in determining leadership. A democratic state conducts democratic elections that are conducted periodically and in fully participation of the citizens (Dae-Hyeon Song, 2012). The electorate is also allowed to criticize their government and also offer alternatives. Democratic state requires one to offer his policies and ideologies and then let the voters decide. This is however not in accordance with Plato’s assertion of leadership. This is because the voters may lack the necessary wisdom to make the choice of good leadership. It is also difficult to analyze objectively the wisdom and leadership ability of the potential leaders (Hoffman, 2003). According to Plato, guardians are as the only people that posses the required knowledge, virtue and wisdom essential for a just city. Plato describes the guardians as people with education and thirst for more knowledge essential to make decisions that are based on morals rather than emotions. The guardians had the best knowledge to determine who would become philosopher king.

A selection of the guardian gave the society a Philosopher-king who according to Plato is the supreme ruler at the top of the hierarchy that also consisted of the auxiliaries and producing class in that order (Roochnik & Plato., 2005). Platonic principle viewed this as a perfect society where the leadership and systems ensured happiness for the citizens. The strength of the Plato’s view on democracy is the fact that the rulers should not be obsessed with money and wealth but instead, they should be pursuing truth and wisdom all aimed at creating a just society. Plato wanted a corruption free society where equality and happiness to citizens was guaranteed. In addition, Plato’s argument has another strength in the sense that if offers a small group the leadership roles. Having fewer people in leadership roles enables easy congregation, set ting agendas and implementation of ideas as well as enhanced unity.

It is however imperative noting that Plato’s view on democracy has some weakness. The platonic view is seen as being over optimistic since it requires exceptionally high moral standards among the ruling class. Plato emphasis on having a rational soul that is pre occupied with moral desires aimed at having a just society (Dae-Hyeon Song, 2012). Nevertheless, the platonic work failed to address the possibility of people who would use their passions to deceive and manipulate others for their selfish interests. There is high likelihood that people would use their passions to escalate instances of injustices among the society (Mangongera, 2014). Plato’s work has much emphasis on the importance of following rational desires of their souls on assumption that they will behave in a just manner. The doctrine fails to address instances where the people would fail to act on this assumption.

On this note, the platonic provision in ‘’the republic’’ is also criticized for placing too much power in the hands of selected few. This is viewed as very dangerous since it allows a small group of people offering leadership to masses. The work of Plato assumes that the Philosopher-king was the supreme rulers and their leadership should not be questioned (Roochnik & Plato., 2005). This is in contrast to the modern democracy where the ruling class is subject to critics and correction from the ruled. Lack of checks and balances in any form of leadership is likely to lead to an environment of tyranny. It is also wrong for the Plato’s doctrine to conclude that the normal electorate elects their leaders based on emotions rather than thought. This because there are high chances that people can be thoughtful in making election decision thus having high quality leaders.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the work of Plato as explained in ‘’ The Republic’’ has total disregard for democracy. According to Plato, the role of leadership should be entirely in the hands of the highly knowledgeable and educated in the society. He vehemently attacks the fundamental upon which democracy is based by arguing that full liberty leads to anarchy (Santas, 2010). Anarchy consequently leads to disunity in the society and hence making it difficult making a just city. Plato wants to have clear distinction between the desire and what individuals are suited to do (Hoffman, 2003). According to Plato, leadership was a talent and only talented people should follow their passion. Plato believes that a society that follows passion will be pursuing social justice, unity and efficient society. Plato believes that these essential elements in a society cannot be found in democracy where money, wealth, sex and food among other earthly gains take the leading role. Plato asserts that political equality and outright liberty are not guarantee to justice and happiness that the community craves for. To sum it up, Plato ranks oligarchy and timocracy being more favorable to democracy, only Tyranny according to Plato is less preferable to democracy.

References

Cornelli, G., & Lisi, F. (2010). Plato and the city. Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag.

Dae-Hyeon Song,. (2012). Aristotle’s Criticism of Plato’s Republic. 철학사상, null(45), 95-130. http://dx.doi.org/10.15750/chss..45.201208.004

Hoffman, P. (2003). Plato on Appetitive Desires in the Republic. Apeiron, 36(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/apeiron.2003.36.2.171

Mangongera, C. (2014). The Military vs. Democracy. Journal Of Democracy, 25(2), 67-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jod.2014.0019

Roochnik, D., & Plato.,. (2005). Plato’s “Republic”. Chantilly, VA: Teaching Co.

Santas, G. (2010). Understanding Plato’s Republic. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell.

Thomas Carothers,. (2008). Democracy Assistance: Political vs. Developmental?. Journal Of Democracy, 20(1), 5-19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jod.0.0047

 
Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?