VJMP Reads: Aristotle's Politics IV

VJMP Reads: Aristotle’s Politics IV

This reading continues from here.

In Book 4, Aristotle considers the various forms of constitutions in practice, having considered constitutions in theory in the previous two books.

Of the perverted forms of government listed in Book 3, tyranny is the worst, oligarchy the next worst and democracy the least bad. The more severe and dominant the perversion, the more a system will incline towards oligarchy, and the more soft and relaxed the more it will incline towards democracy.

Aristotle tells us that “democracy exists wherever the free-born are sovereign, and that oligarchy exists wherever the rich are sovereign.” There are several different types of democracy, but they all share the characteristic of a low bar to entry. This can be manipulated by demogogues, who make populist decrees appealing to the masses.

Like Plato, Aristotle is very much against rule by the lowest common denominator. “It seems impossible that there should be good government in a city which is ruled by the poorer sort.” This is because good philosophy is contingent on sufficient leisure time, which itself is a function of wealth: “Of course, there cannot be opportunity for leisure where there is no income.”

Regarding the big picture vs. the details, Aristotle wrote: “Law should be sovereign on every issue, and the officials and the constitution should decide about details.” Herein we see the importance of getting the laws right, which requires selecting the right lawmakers. This shouldn’t be about birth or wealth, but rather character. Aristocracy is rule by the most excellent of mind and character: “merit is the criterion of aristocracy, as wealth is the criterion of oligarchy, and free birth of democracy.”

There are two senses in which government can be good. The first is one in which laws are obeyed. The second is one in which the obeyed laws are good.

Aristotle might have despised democracy, but he was no craven elitist. His prescription was for power to be held with the middle class: “the best form of political association is one where power is vested in the middle class.” As in ethics, the doctrine of the mean (from Nicomachean Ethics) applies to politics. Aristotle wrote that middle-class people are more inclined to listen. The noble are arrogant, the ignoble criminal; together they commit most offences.

Constitutions do not need to include everyone equally. Aristotle observes that even when excluded from the constitution, the poor are happy to keep quiet as long as they do not suffer violence or loss of property.

Alluding again to Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle writes that “an association depends on friendship.” Friendship is a necessary ingredient for political associations because it is the basis of solidarity. Absent friendship, there are just slaves and masters.

The definition of someone who holds political office is that they have someone to delegate powers to: “Giving instructions is the special mark of one who holds office.”

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

If you enjoyed reading this piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!

Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2024-25
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2023
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2022
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2021
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2020
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2019
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2018
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2017

VJMP Reads: Aristotle’s Politics III

This reading continues from here.

Much of this part is devoted to the question of who counts as a citizen. Speaking about a discussion that is still current 2,300 years later, Aristotle wrote “There is no general agreement on who is a citizen.” Citizenship cannot be a matter of residence, because aliens and slaves share in residence but not citizenship. The best definition of a citizen is one capable of sharing in the administration of justice and in holding office. A city is enough of such people for self-sufficiency.

Constitutions, Aristotle holds, primarily differ in terms of who has sovereignty. He believed that to work with one’s hands was servile, and that to include them in democracy is “extreme”. Manual labourers are not capable of reason to the same extent, and therefore must be excluded from decision making: “The best form of city will not make the mechanic a citizen.” The major difference between a manual labourer and a slave is that the latter works for individuals, the former for the community. Both are incapable of reason.

However, Aristotle was not the elitist that some portray him as. Everyone must take turns at being on top and on the bottom: “It is a good saying that ‘you cannot be ruler unless you have first been ruled'”. He also states that the common interest must come before that of individuals: “The good in the sphere of politics is justice, and justice consists in what tends to promote the common interest.” Barbarians tolerate despotism, Aristotle writes, because they are naturally servile.

Presaging modern mass immigration, Aristotle writes that a shortage of population makes cities expand citizenship to those they shouldn’t. This has consequences in damaging social cohesion. Tyrants are fond of doing this. Aristotle writes “Kings are guarded by the arms of their subjects; tyrants by a foreign force.”

Following on from the Nicomachean Ethics, in which Aristotle claims the meaning of life is happiness, he writes here “The good life is the chief end, both for the community as a whole and for each of us individually.” Happiness, not wealth or power, is the purpose of politics.

His theory of right and perverted constitutions is different to Plato’s. Constitutions that consider the general interest are right; those that only consider the ruling class are perverted. Either breaks down into rule by one, the few or the many. The right constitutions are monarchy if ruled by one, aristocracy if ruled by few, and polity if ruled by many. The perverted constitutions are tyranny if ruled by one, oligarchy if ruled by few and democracy if ruled by many. Here we can see that Plato and Aristotle both considered democracy a degenerate system. Aristotle writes that democracy is not in the interests of all, but in the interests of the poor. However, he also writes that cities are now so big that it’s hard for anything other than democracy to exist.

The best claim to contributing to political life comes from culture or goodness, not birth or wealth. In this sense, Aristotle is a true aristocrat, speaking for the higher and subtler qualities as opposed to the lower and baser ones.

Dispassionate people make better lawmakers, he contends, writing that “most people, as a rule, are bad judges where their own interests are concerned.”

The battle to find the right form of political system is, to a large extent, the battle over which form of superiority is recognised: “All forms alike recognise the claim of some sort of superiority, though the kind of superiority in question varies.” Some recognise superiority of goodness, others of wealth or birth, others still of sheer numbers.

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

If you enjoyed reading this piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!

VJMP Reads: Aristotle’s Politics II

This reading continues from here.

In this book, Aristotle reviews the existing forms of political constitution. Although he is not a fan of democracy, he believes that all groups of citizens must participate in office for there to be justice. The lower classes must get something if they are to support the constitution: “If the constitution is to survive, every part of the city must have a common desire for its existence.” Here also Aristotle emphasises the importance of friendship, which he calls philia, considering it the best defence against factional disputes.

This book contains one of the oldest arguments against communism. In criticising Plato’s proposal for the guardian class of Republic to keep all property in common, Aristotle writes “What is common to the greatest number gets the least amount of care.” and “those who do more work and get less of the produce will be bound to raise complaints against those who get a large reward and do little work.”

Phaleas of Chalcedon proposed the equalisation of property many centuries before Karl Marx. But equality doesn’t work, Aristotle contends, because the educated feel like they deserve more.

The best solution, according to Aristotle, is if property is private, but the owners are persuaded to share the proceeds of it through goodwill. This is primarily the job of the legislator, who achieves this by passing laws that create men disposed to sharing and not to stinginess. Correct regulation of property is also important to avoid factional conflict.

Also Aristotle only hints at this here (he assumes the reader is familiar with Nicomachean Ethics), but part of the solution to politics is spiritual: “It is more necessary to equalise people’s desires than their properties.”

The other leftist dogma to get skewered in this section is the one claiming that criminals commit crimes out of poverty and desperation. Aristotle correctly points out that many crimes are committed for fun: “The greatest crimes are committed not for the sake of necessities, but for the sake of superfluities.”

Those aren’t all of the typically right-wing arguments made herein. Aristotle also argues that changing laws in general is a tricky endeavour because people follow them out of habit. If you change the laws too much, people stop obeying the government.

As in Plato’s Republic, Aristotle agrees that selection by means is characteristic of oligarchy, whereas selection by merit is characteristic of aristocracy. There are several different ways of choosing kings and judges. In Carthage, kings were chosen by election from families that were already outstanding.

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

If you enjoyed reading this piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!

VJMP Reads: Aristotle’s Politics I

Next for the VJMP Reads column: Politics by Aristotle. This naturally follows on from Nicomachean Ethics, which I read earlier in the year. This reading is of Book I.

This section is from where we get the quote “man is a political animal”. Aristotle writes that people naturally form political associations for the sake of securing some good, usually ready access to the means of life. Surprisingly, if one considers how individualistic the West is, Aristotle considered the city-state to be the basic political unit. This is because smaller units are not self-sufficient.

Book I also gives us the banger “Man, when perfected, is the best of animals; but if he be isolated from law and justice he is the worst of all.” This is an incredibly deep insight into human and animal nature. The worst humans really are the worst beings imaginable.

Much of Book I is about slavery, which is hard to make sense of from a modern Western viewpoint.

For example, Aristotle writes “The element which is able, by virtue of its intelligence, to exercise fore-thought, is naturally a ruling and master element.” He goes to argue that those capable of reason are naturally masters, and those incapable naturally slaves. The argument that some people are naturally slaves is extremely unfashionable today.

He discusses the possibility that people are enslaved by war, i.e. by force, and considers it illegitimate. Slavery is good and natural when a rational element enslaves an irrational element, but when slavery merely rests on law and force it is not natural: “Just as some are by nature free, so others are by nature slaves, and for these latter the condition of slavery is both beneficial and just.” Aristotle discusses and rejects the might makes right theory of justice.

This fact, when considered, shows that Aristotle was not as pro-slavery as is often believed. Aristotle would likely see a modern workplace, with a boss who presumably knew more about the subject than his employees, and consider it an example of successful slavery.

One idea in particular appears central to European culture. Aristotle considers the relationship between men and women, in barbarian culture, akin to the relationship between master and slave. The woman is subjugated as the slave. But for the Greek, the relationship between men and women is more akin to the relationship between statesman and his fellow citizens. Thus the woman is intermediate between man and slave.

Aristotle is certainly not a feminist. He writes “The male is naturally fitter to command than the female, except where there is some departure from nature.” But his philosophy is vastly more pro-feminine than equatorial culture.

Aristotle speaks out about usury in this section: “Of all modes of acquisition, usury is the most unnatural” and “The trade of the petty usurer is hated with most reason.” This is very interesting if one considers how totally commercialised life is today thanks to usury.

Being pro-slavery and anti-usury marks Aristotle as an utterly unmodern philosopher.

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

If you enjoyed reading this piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!