Introduction
Plato in his work The Republic dialogues with other great thinkers of his era in an endeavor to develop a perfect governance system. In the dialogue, various elements of the government become prominent. The key elements are justice and leadership of the city. The dialogue seeks debate on and develops a system of governance or a city where there are minimal disputes and perfect leadership. The main argument in the platonic dialogue is that the other governments that Plato approached with varying scorn were ineffective in running a state; on their stead, Plato proposed his version on a republic. His ideas on how the Republic seems both naïve, impossible and horrifying in some instances. The ideals behind Plato’s ideal are based on good and just principles but are his attempt to describe a republic run by them leads to a utopian and completely unworkable governance system. In this paper, emphasis is laid on the government that Plato proposes with special regard to the ideals that govern it.
Plato’s Position and Main Arguments
Plato’s position regarding the forms of government governments that prevent is that they are inefficient and infective. He discusses the four main forms of government; timocracy, tyranny, oligarchy and democracy. His opinion of the government is clearly demonstrated when he refers to the four governments as unjust cities. He argues that inevitably a city must pass through all the fours forms of governments to tyranny that is the most destructive form of governance. The first government he describes is the timocracy that is where the rulers are motivated and guided by love of honor or ambition. Plato considered the timocracy form of government as a government that involves a lot of and constant compromise between wealth and virtue. Timocracy eventually gives rise to the second form of governance or the second unjust city, the oligarchy. Oligarchy in Plato’s dialogue was used to mean a situation where a small group of people ran the city. The group of people running the city would be the rich people. For obvious reasons, such a government would have constant feuds between the rich and the poor. Eventually, the oligarchy would transform into democracy that Plato seems to reserve most scorn.
Democracy, according to Plato occurred in a city that had more poor people than rich people. As a direct result of having too much freedom in a democracy the poor end up revolting. The revolt gives rise to a city that has the power distributed among people who have no idea what to do with the power. Therefore, the emergence of people without an understanding of leadership form the basis of Plato’s suggestion that power should be limited to those with experience in statecraft. The final and most destructive form of government that the city could have was tyranny. In tyranny, Plato points out that a leader would be obsessed on focusing his people and the city to war and feuds. The tyrant would focus his people on wars to permit himself to enjoy his extravagant lifestyle on at their expense. In tyranny, the ruler enslaves everyone and takes his or her property.
Having established Plato’s grounds for considering other forms of governments inadequate and lacking this paper shall now examine Plato’s republic. Plato held that only those fully equipped with the training and who were fully experienced should rule. He argues that most leadership decisions are based on emotions and guesswork rather than well thought put legislation. Plato, therefore, proposed a government or a city-state that is equivalent to the heavens. A philosopher king would govern the city-state. He stated that, ‘either kings should rule as philosophers or philosophers should rule as kings’. The philosopher king is a benevolent man with absolute power which governs a state with wisdom. In support of the philosopher king, Plato used the allegory of the cave, in the allegory he sued the metaphor of a ship to demonstrate how the state should be run. In a naval vessel, it is the most qualified man that commands the vessel. When contrasting the ship with the city Plato argues that, the philosopher king was the most qualified person to captain the city-state. A democracy to Plato is comparable to a ship whose ship owner’s seafaring knowledge is lacking. The sailors claim to understand sailing yet are uninformed on navigation. The stargazer or the navigator which is a metaphor for the philosopher is the only on fully aware and knowledgeable enough to navigate the ship.
Plato also suggests for the institution of a class to defend and attack behalf of the city-state. The guardian class must be educated properly in various disciplines to ensure that in their leadership they are just. Guardians were expected to be trained in four virtues; temperance, wisdom, courage and justice but both fiction and poetry would be excluded from the guardians' educational system. The guardians would undergo a rigorous and extended training period lasting until 50 years to ensure that they develop into good leaders.
Critical Analysis
It is important to note that even Plato himself acknowledged that his republic exists only in theory and would face insurmountable challenges if applied as a form of governance. Plato’s arguments regarding the republic are well reason and argued out. Nonetheless, his ideas seem to make sense only in an abstract or a philosophical level. On the practicality of his ideas they seem to lack in the implementation, this shall be demonstrated in the following section. Despite the challenges that face Plato’s ideas there are various aspects of his republic that are positive and even applicable in the modern world and any good governing system.
There are numerous interpretations of Plato’s Republic ranging from his periods of antiquity to the modern age. Plato’s student Aristotle, one of the greatest philosophers also wrote a treatise on systems of government that relied on Plato’s Republic for guidance. The great Roman spokesman Cicero also imitated the style of Platonic dialogues to deliver his works and provide his interpretations on the work. Hegel, a past thinker, has also varied interpretation of Plato’s work about his day. Plato’s republic being one of his best-known works has been subject to many diverse and varied interpretations throughout the history.
Challenges of Plato’s Ideals
The philosopher king would have to be a god or a human with a deity like attributes to fulfil the requirements Plato based the philosopher king on God. The philosopher king is expected to rule with wisdom and in a just manner. Obviously, a human being would be a poor fit of the shoes of the philosopher king. Human nature in itself eliminates humans from ever attaining the standards that the philosopher king uses. The philosopher king also exercises absolute power. The exercise of the absolute power over his subjects makes him a dictator regardless of hi benevolence. For a deity, such power may be wielded with enough fairness and justice. However, a human being would be prone to abuse and misuse of the power. If human history is an indicator of exercise of absolute, it equally serves as a warning against granting such powers to an individual. Throughout history, most if not all the individuals granted absolute power or who seized absolute powers ended up being the tyrants described by Plato. From Caligula in ancient Rome, through Napoleon to Hitler in the Nazi Germany those leaders demonstrate the tendency of human nature when granted absolute power to be corrupted absolutely. In fact, it is arguable that the philosopher king would set the ground for the emergence of a tyrant.
Plato’s republic would be nightmarish for its citizens. In fact, on closer examination the republic is a despotic government that would treat its citizens with a paternalistic attitude making decisions for them. The government would regulate their lives and keep them in careers or occupations that it considers best suited for them rather than granting them the freedom of choice. Also in the republic, both wealth and poverty are discouraged because they lead to practice of vices. The basic family unit would also be subject to measures separation on various grounds. In Republic, ‘men and women should have children in common’ in order for the government to avoid the citizens from having too much love for each other. Furthermore, children are taken away from their mothers at birth. Plato also advocates deliberate and controlled breeding of the citizens by the government, the ‘best of each sex should be united with each other.’ The breeding has disturbing implications considering that the inhumane and evil Nazi regime in Germany advocated the same. ‘The state has a solemn duty to ensure that the weak souls and the inferior of the two sexes never unite and reproduce.'
Plato recognizes that there exists a war ‘between every man and the state’, and his republic would be no exception. His utopia would face resistance from people. In his Republic, he assumes, albeit naively that people once provided with a perfectly functioning system would acquiesce and do as they are asked. Human nature abhors being forced into a situation it does not seek regardless of how “perfect” the situation. Furthermore, the policies of separating the family unit are simply unworkable and would only lead to revolt by the citizens. A government should not seek to regulate “too much love” and an attempt to do so would have disastrous ramifications.
It is also important to realize that the democracy that Plato holds so much scorn for is a pure democracy. Pure democracy means that the will of the direct majority is carried out by the state. The will of the majority in a pure is done despite any unreasonable or even absurd aspects of it. Such a democracy is impossible and virtually absent in the present day world. The democracies of today are mainly representative democracies with numerous safeguards to prevent the same situation that Plato’s allegory of the ship advocates of democracies. In summary of this section, it is clear that Plato’s republic is not feasible.
Positives Aspects of Plato’s Ideals
Plato’s republic while not feasible does have some aspects that would aid a government that applied them in its running. Plato’s suggestion on training of leaders is a key and relevant topic in leadership. To avoid situations that arise where incompetent or unqualified leaders attain leadership positions with numerous repercussions, the individuals seeking leadership ought to have requisite training. The training would equip the leaders with the skills and necessary experience to be great leaders.
The standards that Plato sets for the philosopher king would also serve as a yardstick with which to measure our leaders. Relying on the allegory of the ship the philosopher king or the leaders in the present day should be the fit leader to lead or captain the ship. The king is expected to have a thorough understanding of justice; ‘The philosopher king would rule according to the universal truths.’ In addition, the philosopher king is a king by virtue of his abilities and not inheritance. Plato had the foresight to realize the problems that arise from unfit leaders who attain leadership by virtue of their birth.
Plato’s Republic has also served as a guidance for numerous modern and past thinkers, writers and philosophers. Karl Marx is an example of one of the people guided by The Republic in their work. He shared the same philosophy that property should be shared among the people and that the people poverty or excessive wealth would be actively discouraged by the state. As with all utopian theories, Karl Marx communist theory was destined for failure. In contrast to Plato’s work the Republic, communism was tired out and proven as an absolute failure.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Plato’s republic was a giant leap forward in thinking about politics and leadership, which explains its prominence even in the present day. However, the form of governance hypothesized in the Republic is not feasible and can only operate in theory. The philosopher king cannot possibly exist with the exception of deities. Furthermore, people would not willingly bear under a government bearing striking resemblance to a tyranny that separates families and takes their children away from them. Despite its shortcomings, Plato’s work offers an amazing insight into matters of justice and leadership. As such, Plato’s the Republic should be interpreted as a utopian model for governments and treated as such.
Works Cited
Plato, Republic (ca. 380 BCE), trans. C.D.C. Reeve, rev. John M. Cooper, 2nd edn. (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2004)
