Philosophers of the coli - Why did Plato hate democracy so much?

[The Real]

The U.S. though is a Republic.......meaning we we elect people to represent our thoughts ....a Democracy is "two wolfs and a sheep asking whats for dinner".........but what Plato would insinuate today is a Technocracy which what has been building up the last few decades and years especially.....

Technocracy: "It's the Stupid Economy" - (1994) - YouTube

Well, Republicanism was established for the same reasons Plato outlines- to actually prevent "the people" in a larger sense, from having too much control, because the belief was that they did not have the expertise to govern and so the results would be disastrous overall. Most of the founding fathers were ardent republicans, not democrats (in the sense of being for more direct democracy.)

 

[Type Username Here]

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

Churchill.

One thing though, I'd argue that this form of Democracy and Republicanism that we witness today is hardly their true form. You can make a strong case that in the United States we have some form of Oligarchy or Plutocracy, as is the case in several other democracies.

I go back and forth between accepting Plato's argument.

 

[No1]

Churchill.

One thing though, I'd argue that this form of Democracy and Republicanism that we witness today is hardly their true form. You can make a strong case that in the United States we have some form of Oligarchy or Plutocracy, as is the case in several other democracies.

I go back and forth between accepting Plato's argument.

The problem is the most educated and the plutocrats are one in the same. It's a self-perpetuating system. So this "technocracy" or republicanism which Pluto wanted is here. It's just that those people don't do what's best for everyone. They do what's best for their own interests. This Republicanism we have has always relied upon the conscience of those in power, both in and outside of government. It's a foolhardy bet.

 

[Slang]

I CHALLENGE YOU TO NAME AN EXTANT NON-DEMOCRATIC STATE THAT'S BEING RUN WITH GREATER "EXPERTISE" THAN THE DEMOCRATIZED STATES, BROTHER! EXAMINE NORTH KOREA, FOR EXAMPLE, DUDE! HOW'S THAT GOING, JACK?

Successful businesses are run better than any democracy.

Any government should be run as a non profit organization.

 

[Black Magisterialness]

Human beings are not perfect...and thus no social structure they create will be perfect. The talents and resources of the few will always trump the will of the many for X amount of years...there's a revolution and then the cycle repeats.

Not Democracy, Oligarcy, Republic ect...none of them will be perfect or even close to it...Anarchy is an even worse/impossible option, because it is human nature to TRY and create order from chaos.

The more people understand this the more people can strive for more efficient instead of "perfection".

 

[Type Username Here]

The problem is the most educated and the plutocrats are one in the same. It's a self-perpetuating system. So this "technocracy" or republicanism which Pluto wanted is here. It's just that those people don't do what's best for everyone. They do what's best for their own interests. This Republicanism we have has always relied upon the conscience of those in power, both in and outside of government. It's a foolhardy bet.

I think that was the case historically, but I don't think it is anymore. I think the bold is becoming less and less true. It seems now that just the wealth alone is worthy of taking a seat at the table. We seem to be heading to a society where wealth and celebrity recognition are the main keys in either determining policy or pushing for acceptance of those policies. "Oh, he's rich and wealthy, he must know what is right" type of nonsense. I think a good example of this, and he's at the bottom of the ladder when it comes to power, is Magic Johnson.

Magic Johnson is a dumbass. I respect his business success, his charity work, his athletic abilities and game, but is there a reason he personally talks to the President and has a direct line of conversation? Is there a legitimate reason why any of these Pastors like Billy Graham have a direct line to the Presidents?

These people are not in any way intelligent people in any realm that would benefit the human race, yet they can call the President when they feel like giving the President their piece of mind.

Just absolute nonsense.

 

[the mechanic]

Human beings are not perfect...and thus no social structure they create will be perfect. The talents and resources of the few will always trump the will of the many for X amount of years...there's a revolution and then the cycle repeats.

Not Democracy, Oligarcy, Republic ect...none of them will be perfect or even close to it...Anarchy is an even worse/impossible option, because it is human nature to TRY and create order from chaos.

The more people understand this the more people can strive for more efficient instead of "perfection".

elaborate on this further

Anarchy is not the antithesis of order nor does it automatically mean chaos.. its also simply the absence of a violently imposed political authority which is IMO the only plausible option humanity hasnt tried yet.

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

Successful businesses are run better than any democracy.

THESE ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF ORGANIZATIONS WITH VASTLY DIFFERENT GOALS, BROTHER! NAME A NON-DEMOCRATIC STATE RUN WITH SUPERIOR "EXPERTISE", DUDE!

 

[the mechanic]

Successful businesses are run better than any democracy.

Any government should be run as a non profit organization.

Corporatocracy would be a disaster... Successful businesses hardly have the well being of people in mind...look at tobacco companies,wall street banks,oil companies

 

[The Real]

Corporatocracy would be a disaster... Successful businesses hardly have the well being of people in mind...look at tobacco companies,wall street banks,oil companies

Essentially, it's what we have now. At this point, the government and these oligopolists collude on pretty much every major issue, thanks to out-of-control lobbying.

 

[Ego Noir]

He is completely right. A democracy is nothing more than a popularity contest in which the contestants water down and simplify their "objectives", to express them at debates to please the masses. When in actuality, this same "democracy" passes bills left and right. 98% of these bills the general public knows nothing about and only finds out when and if it causes friction in society.




Democracy does not work, and its only profitable purpose is to be a smokescreen.

 

[Black Magisterialness]

elaborate on this further

Anarchy is not the antithesis of order nor does it automatically mean chaos.. its also simply the absence of a violently imposed political authority which is IMO the only plausible option humanity hasnt tried yet.

human beings have a NEED for some semblance of order. It's basically what Lord of the Flies was about, without some sort of "big brother" figure be it parents, government, what have you its still needed. Without it either order come from Anarchy or everyone dies.

True Anarchy can't even really exist because at some point at the VERY least a form of feudalism or tribalism will emerge. Let's say there is no major government...ok. Who handles crime and punishment? You can't say vigilantism that would cause too many deaths, you can't just let murderers, thieves and rapists run wild and you can't ignore it so you set up punishments for crimes...i.e. as system. Observe children in a room with no supervision, at first it seems like chaos, but eventually leaders will emerge. Rules get set up and all that...even if they can't fully verbalize it.

No matter what people try a system with people in charge of it will emerge and Anarchy will cease to exist. Humans haven't tried it because they CAN'T.

 

[No1]

I think that was the case historically, but I don't think it is anymore. I think the bold is becoming less and less true. It seems now that just the wealth alone is worthy of taking a seat at the table. We seem to be heading to a society where wealth and celebrity recognition are the main keys in either determining policy or pushing for acceptance of those policies. "Oh, he's rich and wealthy, he must know what is right" type of nonsense. I think a good example of this, and he's at the bottom of the ladder when it comes to power, is Magic Johnson.

Magic Johnson is a dumbass. I respect his business success, his charity work, his athletic abilities and game, but is there a reason he personally talks to the President and has a direct line of conversation? Is there a legitimate reason why any of these Pastors like Billy Graham have a direct line to the Presidents?

These people are not in any way intelligent people in any realm that would benefit the human race, yet they can call the President when they feel like giving the President their piece of mind.

Just absolute nonsense.

You're confusing politics with actual power. That is just political theatre and to some degree that segment of the populace that votes based on religion. The people actual in positions of power to affect policy within or outside of government are part of the same revolving door of elite universities and money. Even if one does have humble up bringings you have to cozy up to plutocrats in order to have any realistic shot of being nationally viable.

What celebrity equals is name recognition and it helps to supplement traditional power structures and even convince certain segments of the population that the person running is a good guy (i.e. Magic). But those people don't make decisions and aren't seriously entertained in doing so.

 

[Food Mane]

Plato's martyrdom of Socrates is a very effective argument against democracy.

But sometimes i can't help but think the whole thing wasn't quite as academic as we make it out to be. Alcibiades really knew how to stir the pot, Plato didn't participate in any of the democratic governing bodies (even though his family members did). I feel that maybe it wasn't so much a principled argument against democracy, but rather an attack on people in Athens who happened to have power due to democracy by an incredible writer who, along with his friends, had been excluded from the power structure.

 

[The Frozen One]

i'm surprised that this thread got so many responses.

Interesting responses. I don't know much about Pluto or his opinion on democracy so I cannot contribute. But i do have to write an essay on it