Chapter 10
I. Introduction to the Chapter: The Separation of Political Classes
- Key Concept of Separation:
- Aristotle begins by emphasizing the idea that a well-ordered city should divide its population into distinct classes, specifically between those who fight (the military class) and those who farm. This separation is a hallmark of ancient political thought and is not a new concept.
- Aristotle references the long-standing traditions of various civilizations, including Egypt and Crete, to demonstrate that this separation of political functions is a recurring theme in history, suggesting it is a necessary feature of effective governance.
- Historical Precedents:
- In ancient Egypt under the rule of Sesostris and in Crete under Minos, such divisions were institutionalized. Aristotle argues that these historical examples demonstrate the practicality and longevity of this political structure.
- By citing these examples, Aristotle reinforces that such divisions are not novel or arbitrary but have been established as beneficial by powerful and lasting civilizations.
II. The Institution of Common Messes and Its Origins
- Common Messes as a Political Institution:
- Aristotle shifts the discussion to another important political institution: common messes (public meals). This practice, like the separation of classes, also has historical roots, most notably in Crete but also in ancient Italy.
- Aristotle recounts the legend of Italus, a king of Oenotria, who instituted common messes for his people and converted them from a nomadic lifestyle to an agrarian one. This, he claims, further highlights the ancient and widespread nature of common messes as a beneficial practice.
- Function of Common Messes:
- The practice of common messes, where citizens eat together at public meals, is not merely a social custom but has political significance. It helps to unite the citizens by promoting shared experiences and equality.
- Aristotle implies that common messes contribute to social harmony and cohesion, as they reduce the distinctions between citizens by encouraging communal life.
III. Historical Foundations of Political Structures
- Discovery of Political Systems over Time:
- Aristotle asserts that many of the principles of political organization, such as the division of social classes and the institution of common messes, have been discovered multiple times throughout history due to necessity.
- He suggests that human society learns through trial and error, refining political systems as new needs arise. This historical process shows that certain political structures are not merely accidental but are developed to meet practical requirements over time.
- The Egyptians as a Model:
- The Egyptians are referenced as one of the most ancient peoples, known for having established a sophisticated political structure, including laws and governance systems. Aristotle uses Egypt as evidence that fundamental political arrangements have deep historical roots and should be respected.
- This historical perspective serves as a basis for Aristotle's broader argument that political order should draw on established traditions while still being open to further refinement.
IV. Land Ownership and Division of Labor in the Ideal City
- The Division of Land and Property:
- Moving from historical examples to his own prescriptions, Aristotle emphasizes that in a well-ordered city, land should be divided between those who participate in the regime (i.e., those who bear arms and govern) and those who farm.
- He previously discussed that the fighters and farmers should be distinct, with farmers not holding political power. In this chapter, he elaborates on how the land should be divided to maintain justice and equity.
- Property and Community:
- Aristotle reiterates his belief that private property is necessary for the proper functioning of a city but qualifies this by stating that property should become common in use, as it would be among friends. The goal is to ensure that none of the citizens are left in want and that the city operates as a cohesive whole, avoiding the problems caused by inequality in wealth and property.
- This principle reflects Aristotle’s concern for social stability and the prevention of internal strife due to economic disparities.
V. The Importance of Common Messes in the City
- The Role of Common Messes in Civic Life:
- Aristotle reiterates that common messes are essential for the proper functioning of a well-instituted city. These communal meals help to foster equality and mutual trust among citizens.
- He acknowledges that one of the challenges is ensuring that all citizens, especially the poor, can contribute their fair share to the common messes without burdening themselves or neglecting their personal households.
- Public Funding for Common Messes:
- To address this, Aristotle suggests that the city should publicly fund both the common messes and religious expenses. This ensures that all citizens can participate in these important civic activities without financial strain.
- By making these costs a shared responsibility, Aristotle ensures that the city’s social fabric remains strong and unified, as no citizen is excluded from communal life due to poverty.
VI. The Allocation of Territory in the Ideal City
- Territorial Division for Public and Private Use:
- Aristotle outlines a plan for the division of territory in the city. The land should be divided into two parts: common land (used for public purposes) and private land (owned by individuals). Each of these sections should be further subdivided to ensure that everyone shares equally in both the public and private responsibilities.
- Specifically, the common land should support religious functions and the costs of the common messes, while the private land is divided between territory near the city and near the borders. This dual allotment ensures that citizens have a stake in both urban and rural concerns, promoting greater unity and responsibility.
- Promoting Civic Equality:
- This system of land division, Aristotle argues, ensures justice and equality among citizens. By having all citizens own land in both rural and urban areas, Aristotle reduces the potential for conflicts of interest and ensures that all citizens are equally invested in the defense and prosperity of the city.
- Additionally, this territorial arrangement guards against selfish interests that could lead to border disputes, fostering a sense of solidarity across different regions of the city.
VII. The Role of Farmers and Slaves in the Ideal City
- The Ideal Class of Farmers:
- Aristotle discusses the role of farmers in his ideal city. Ideally, the farmers should be slaves who are neither of the same ethnic stock as the citizens nor particularly spirited, as this would make them more reliable and less likely to revolt.
- He suggests that using non-Greek or barbarian slaves as farmers ensures that those who provide the city’s sustenance are submissive and focused on agricultural work rather than political matters, reducing the risk of subversive activity.
- Private and Public Ownership of Slaves:
- The farmers on private land should belong to private citizens, while those working the common land should be owned collectively by the city. This ensures that both public and private agricultural needs are met.
- Aristotle proposes that the treatment of slaves should aim at efficiency and security, while also suggesting that offering slaves the hope of freedom as a reward for loyal service is beneficial to the stability of the system.
VIII. Conclusion: The Practical Realization of the Ideal City
- Balancing Tradition with Innovation:
- Aristotle concludes by emphasizing the importance of using what has been discovered in the past, while at the same time seeking improvements where necessary. His vision for the ideal city builds upon historical precedents but also refines them to create a more just and stable political order.
- Avoiding Excessive Change:
- While innovation is important, Aristotle warns against radical changes that disregard the accumulated wisdom of tradition. His political philosophy is fundamentally conservative in the sense that it values the slow evolution of political institutions and practices that have stood the test of time.
- The Centrality of Prudence:
- Ultimately, Aristotle’s ideal city is one in which prudence governs political decisions. The separation of classes, the division of land, and the institution of common messes are all designed to foster a stable, harmonious society where individuals can pursue the good life in accordance with justice and equality.
Video Explanation
Video Explanation Not Yet Available.
No comments:
Post a Comment