Dr. Clifford Angell Bates, prof. ucz., a native of Rhode Island, specializes in political science with a focus on political philosophy and theory, including comparative politics, international releations, literature and politics, and American constitutional thought. He is the author of Aristotle’s Best Regime (LSU, 2004) and The Centrality of the Regime for Political Science (WUW, 2016).
BOOK 4 Chapter 12 Which is Advantageous to Which?
Chapter 12
I. Introduction: The Best Regime for Different Cities and People
What is to be addressed:
Aristotle turns to the question of which regime is most advantageous for different types of cities and for different types of people.
General principle: In any regime, the part of the city that wants the regime to continue must be superior to the part that does not want it to persist.
Two components of a city:
Cities are made up of two main elements: quality and quantity.
Quality refers to aspects such as freedom, wealth, education, and good birth (nobility).
Quantity refers to the numerical superiority of the multitude, usually represented by the majority of citizens (often the poor or less privileged).
II. Balancing Quality and Quantity in Governance
Quality vs. Quantity in different cities:
Often, quality (nobility, wealth, education) belongs to a minority, while quantity (the larger, less privileged population) belongs to the multitude.
However, the numerical majority (quantity) may not always be large enough to compensate for their lack of quality, and vice versa.
Determining the regime based on dominance:
If the multitude of the poor is numerically dominant, then democracy is the regime that aligns with the natural order.
The type of democracy depends on the composition of the multitude:
If farmers predominate, the regime will be a more moderate democracy.
If the majority consists of workers and wage earners, it will lead to a more extreme democracy.
If the well-off and notables predominate in quality more than they lack in quantity, then oligarchy is the regime that aligns with nature.
Similarly, different kinds of oligarchy arise depending on the degree of preeminence of the wealthy or noble class.
III. The Role of the Middling Class in Regime Stability
The importance of the middling class:
The legislator’s goal should be to incorporate the middling class into the dominant element of the regime.
If enacting oligarchic laws, the legislator should align the middling class with the wealthy.
If enacting democratic laws, the legislator should align the middling class with the multitude.
A lasting regime is more likely to exist where the middling class dominates either:
Over both extremes (the rich and the poor).
Or over one extreme alone (either the rich or the poor).
Role of the middling class as arbitrators:
The middling class is seen as a natural arbitrator between the rich and the poor.
Neither the rich nor the poor would want to enslave the middling class because they both fear being enslaved by the other.
The middling class can create a common ground for the city to function peacefully, as neither extreme would trust the other enough to allow rotation in ruling.
IV. The Mixture of Regime Elements and Its Longevity
Better mixtures create stability:
A well-mixed regime is the most stable and long-lasting.
Many attempts to create aristocratic regimes fail because they:
Distribute too much power and privilege to the wealthy.
Deceive the people, leading to false stability that eventually collapses into true disorder.
Dangers of aggrandizing the wealthy:
Excessive enrichment and empowerment of the wealthy is more ruinous to a regime than when the people (poor) gain more power.
A regime that privileges the wealthy at the expense of the common people sows the seeds of its own destruction by undermining balance and moderation.
V. Conclusion: The Role of the Middling Class in Political Stability
Middling class as the key to regime success:
The middling class plays a crucial role in maintaining balance and moderation within a regime.
Their presence mitigates the extremes of both wealth and poverty, ensuring that neither group dominates and that the city remains free from the destructive forces of factionalism.
Summary of Key Themes:
Quality vs. Quantity: Cities are made up of both qualitative (freedom, wealth, education) and quantitative (the multitude) elements, and the balance between these determines the type of regime.
Democracy vs. Oligarchy: Where the multitude is dominant, democracy aligns with nature; where the wealthy and noble are preeminent, oligarchy arises.
The role of the middling class: The middling class is key to the success of any regime because they provide stability and act as arbitrators between the extremes of wealth and poverty.
Mixture of regime elements: A well-mixed regime is the most stable, but regimes that disproportionately favor the wealthy tend to collapse due to the resentment they create.
Avoiding extremes: Stability is maintained by ensuring that neither the wealthy nor the poor dominate, and the middling class serves as the crucial buffer.
No comments:
Post a Comment