A contemporary person would imagine that the greatest Greek philosopher, Socrates, would be in favor of democracy. After all, Athens, his home, was the birthplace of democracy. However, contrary to popular belief, the Athenian philosopher was against the idea of democracy as a system of government. In fact, he was in favor of a Spartan-type monarchy.
Was that possible? In Socrates’ time, Pericles was the elected statesman, and Athenian democracy was celebrated by citizens. The Athenians were proud of their democracy. It was innovative and in no other city-state in Greece did the majority rule.
Unlike in all other city-states, Athenian democracy did not forbid one from embarking on a political career. Even people of lower social status had the opportunity to hold a public position. According to Pericles, Athenian democracy was equivalent to freedom.
Pericles was loved by Athenians for he gave them the freedom to live as they pleased—without authoritative rules or tyrannical laws. For a broad-minded Athenian philosopher such as Socrates, democracy would have been ideal. However, it wasn’t so.
Socrates’ Idea of a Ruler
In Plato’s Republic, which contains Socrates’ views on democracy, the philosopher has a completely different perspective of what a ruler should be and how he can come to power.
For Socrates, a ruler must be one who is elected not merely because he is popular but because he has the necessary skills to govern and officially hold authority (to the extent legally permitted). Socrates believed it was unreasonable for just about any citizen to be allowed a chance to rule a state, as this would mean that even an incompetent person could potentially do so if chosen by the citizenry.
For Socrates, democracy was an absurd concept. He claimed that the best form of government was one in which the ruler possessed virtue, knowledge, and understanding of the state. For that reason, Socrates admired the Spartan monarchy. He believed that Sparta was the most well-governed contemporary city-state.
The great philosopher believed democracy gave demagogues the opportunity to mislead people by appealing to their emotions rather than their logic and rise to power without deserving to do so. According to Socrates, demagoguery posed a grave threat to the security and prosperity of a democratic society. He believed in a responsible form of government, one that was founded on the careful evaluation of facts and the search for truth.
In Socrates’ time, the democratic assembly was an arena where unconstrained rhetoric ruled without being held accountable to the facts and the reality of things. Educated orators controlled the audience’s emotions rather than influencing their logic. In Socrates’ opinion, democracy was therefore subject to the influence of demagogues who preyed on the emotions and biases of the multitude.
Demagogues, Manipulators, and Socrates’ Thoughts on Democracy
For the great philosopher, the rise of demagogues was a sign of a more important issue in democratic societies. It signaled a lack of education and absence of critical thinking among the populace.
Socrates believed that democracy required an educated and informed public to distinguish between truth and falsehoods and form logical conclusions based on facts and reason. In Plato’s book The Republic, Socrates converses with a character called Adeimantus and attempts to get him to see the inherent flaws in democracy by comparing a society to a ship.
In Socrates’ view, voting is a skill rather than random intuition. It is a skill that needs to be taught like any other, and only those competent enough should be allowed to vote. He was not an elitist but believed people who vote should do so carefully and critically. According to Socrates, if voters cast their vote carelessly, then democracy will inevitably be susceptible to demagoguery.
Socrates knew that a demagogue seeking election could exploit people’s desire for easy answers by telling them what they wanted to hear. He further argued that democracy was vulnerable to instability and chaos and believed that in a democratic system, there was a constant struggle for power between different groups and factions. This would lead to political instability and social unrest.
Athens did in fact have a relevantly painful experience as a result of such a demagogue. Alcibiades, a rich, charismatic, smooth-talking wealthy man usurped citizens’ votes through democratic procedures and then proceeded to erode basic freedoms. He ultimately helped push Athens to its disastrous military adventures in Sicily.
Death of Socrates by Democratic Vote
Socrates had chastised Athenian democracy for its elevation of popular opinion at the expense of truth prior to being sentenced to death through a democratic process. Ironically, he was the first distinguished man who was brought to trial and convicted in a purely democratic setting.
However, his accusers, primarily Meletus, pressed against him with the charges of impiety and corruption of Athenian youth. It was a social and political environment in which just about any citizen could bring charges against another to have that individual prosecuted. The accusations against Socrates were undefined and incomplete, and there was no judicial body to oversee the process.
It was, all in all, easy for prosecutors to twist the truth and express the sentiments of the majority. As an ethical philosopher, Socrates accepted the verdict that was death through hemlock poisoning. However, he proved to be way ahead of his time with his intellectual capacity, while the trial and his death made a mockery of Athenian democracy which was, at the time, still a novel and imperfect concept.
See all the latest news from Greece and the world at Greekreporter.com. Contact our newsroom to report an update or send your story, photos and videos. Follow GR on Google News and subscribe here to our daily email!
