Page 68 - DPOL201_WESTERN_POLITICAL_THOUGHT_ENGLISH
P. 68

Western Political Thought


                    Notes               between the human being and the state, for the former by nature was a social person with an
                                        instinct of sociability, while “the state was a natural institution within which the development
                                        and the fulfilment of the individual was possible. It was natural because it offered conditions
                                        of good life, the true end of all associations. Green and Bosanquet, the nineteenth-century
                                        British Idealists, developed this argument in detail. For Aristotle, ethics and politics were
                                        complementary. Ethics studied the virtues that made up a good individual, whereas politics
                                        studied institutions that enabled individuals to find their true potential. Though contemplation
                                        for Aristotle was the highest form of activity, he still probed into the practical good of an
                                        individual’s social relations and existence. Like Plato, the societal dimension was never lost
                                        in his theory.
                                   •    Aristotle’s main focus was on the best practicable state or constitution. In the Laws, Plato
                                        contended that the mixed constitution was the best and most stable regime, a panacea against
                                        the cycle of development and degeneration that was implicit in the six fold scheme. Aristotle
                                        adopted the scheme, perfected and elaborated it, and since then it:
                                        ... has served as a basic taxonomy through the ages and into the 19th century ... . It is the first
                                        explanatory theory in the history of political science, in which institutions, attitudes, and
                                        ideas, are related to process and performance. It is the ancestor of separation of powers
                                        theory.
                                   •    Of the six regimes, Aristotle saw only four as being important: oligarchy, democracy, polity
                                        and tyranny. Aristocracy was the ideal, but difficult to achieve and even harder to sustain.
                                        Hence polity, or the mixed constitution, was the best for it reconciled virtue with stability,
                                        quantity with quality. Tyranny was the worst. He reinforced his arguments by pointing out
                                        that the social structures of cities differed according to their economies, occupations,
                                        professions and statuses, but these variations could be reduced in terms of the rich and poor
                                        sections of citizens. If the rich dominated it, then it became an oligarchy, and when the poor
                                        controlled affairs it became a democracy. When the middle sections held the reigns of
                                        authority, extreme forces were ruled out, guaranteeing inbuilt stability. Aristotle’s faith in
                                        the middle class has been reiterated in the writings of Smith and the English Classical
                                        economists. The theme of mixed constitution has been repeated subsequently in the writings
                                        of Polybius, Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-143 BC), St. Aquinas, and Machiavelli.
                                   •    Aristotle was a vigorous critic of democracy but still offered a fair assessment of its advantages.
                                        To enumerate some, collective opinions and judgements were more satisfying than individual
                                        ones that many rather than few would rule. Its disadvantage was the treatment meted out to
                                        the extraordinary. However, he did not, like Plato, fear the mass of people and had more
                                        faith in their ability to collectively articulate their judgement on the effects of policies and the
                                        ability of the rulers. Here, Aristotle echoed Pericles, who had faith in the ability of the
                                        ordinary citizen.
                                   •    Aristotle defended the rule of law, for it provided stability and reason as opposed to passion.
                                        The distinction that he made between numerical and proportionate equality, distributive
                                        and corrective justice, the importance of liberal education and leisure, limitations on wealth
                                        Without undermining the right of property, the distinction between use-value and exchange
                                        value, the difference between a good man and a good citizen, the importance of property
                                        qualifications with regard to citizenship, have been extremely influential in subsequent
                                        political discourse.
                                   •    Every aspect of justice had a twofold natural foundation: (a) relation to the political community
                                        in which each man occupied a position, fulfilled a function and value in proportion to the
                                        share of social goods; and (b) private relations with other men whereby every man possessed


          62                               LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY
   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73