B| THE EVOLUTION OF DEMOCRACY

The Western beginnings

I will embark on a fundamental review and discussion of democracy and the complexity of the criteria under which such political system might be sustained or, even more accurately, improve its functioning.

Western thought has been incipiently and rigidly influenced by Greek philosophers like Aristotle who is credited with developing political theory. Aristotle believed that the human is a “political animal”, needing to engage in political exchange and discourse. He suggested that since politics engages legislative activity it becomes complex considering the presence or absence of virtuous politicians, known as aristoi (άριστοι).  In further discussing his political theory, he suggests that within a political system those with wealth consider themselves to have greater political rights than those who do not have such wealth.  He called the former ones Oligarchs and the latter ones Democrats. According to Aristotle the political system should perform noble actions with the goal to achieve the highest possible quality of life.

In his work known as Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle emphasizes the direct connectivity between personal ethics and politics and that personal orientation toward ethics increases as the nonending effort for spiritual growth increases. I would further suggest that the term aristoi, suggested by Aristotle, has a theological connotation meaning that such virtuous individuals exist only in a theological construct. We can infer that the quality of democracy increases as the level of moral excellence of the people increases. Aristotle considers the constitution to be a gospel of virtue that can only be applied to, and by, virtuous people. The democratic rule asserted by oligarchs, who either enjoy notoriety or wealth, is ill-advised and does not result from virtue. Aristotle frowned upon oligarchic rule because he thought it would be unjust and discriminatory toward the less wealthy and less powerful.

In the democracy of Pericles, known as the golden age of Athens, public institutions were empowered and positioned to bring into the political system the lower social strata of the Athenian society. Until Pericles came into the Athenian political life, democracy was limited to the upper classes of the society. Inclusivity was Pericles’ conception to achieving greater participation in the democratic rule and hence strengthen democracy in the political system. Institutional orientation to governing the political system was thought to be a fundamental key to the functioning of democracy. Furthermore, political leaders must be fully engaged in safeguarding the principles of democracy and promote the understanding and participation of the citizens in it. Such concepts and strategies were later supported by philosophers like Plato who added that democracy regards all citizens as equal but that it may be unjust if it does not differentiate between unequal needs. Aristotle, on the other hand, did not subscribe to the above position. This is consistent with their individual philosophies, that of collectivism for Plato and individualism for Aristotle.  

A preview of contemporary democracy

Here, we should pause to discuss the concept of “quality of life”. What is “quality of life”? What criteria characterize or describe “quality of life”? Such criteria include freedom, individual rights, equality, and, social nobility. What level of such criteria would be adequate in defining “quality of life”? Is the concept of “quantity” relevant? For instance, what “quantity” of freedom does the functioning of democracy require? At what level of “quantity” does freedom produce anarchy? Collectively, what are the enemies of democracy? What behaviors undermine democracy? What is the necessary and sufficient criterion for achieving and further enhancing the functionality of democracy? How engaged is the political system, the leaders and the hoi polloi, with the concept of democracy and its utility? Does the political system require direct or indirect democratic rule? In the direct form of democracy citizens are fully engaged in the governing function of the government. Under this form, the differentiation between government officials and citizens is narrow, legitimizing democracy which expresses equality. This direct type of democratic rule gives to citizens the advantage of evaluation and control of the government officials. That was the Periclean form of Athenian democracy. For instance, in Switzerland elections and referenda take place once a year. Once a year, the Swiss are given the opportunity to evaluate and vote for government policies and officials.

Angela Merkel of Germany in 2015 assumed the political cost of her open-border refugee policy which resulted in her party's loss. Although Angela Merkel was democratically elected her open-border policy had a political cost. So, government policy or decision-making must at all times be congruent with people's relevant will. In the U.S. the political system is cognizant of the need to introduce policies that reflect people's expectations and attitudes. The U.S. paradigm of democracy or democratic rule warrants reflection upon the functioning of its democracy.

The presence of political Media in American society presents a compelling evidence of the effort of the political system to implement and safeguard a democratic system. However, political Media have become a non-formal, non-regulative form of government with non-regulative institutional influence. Such influence is deemed to exert greater psychological impact on the citizens’ perception of government’s policies or decision-making. Exerting such influence on the democratic rule has made implementing democracy highly complex, given that the foundation of democracy is more so virtue (areti) than talent. It follows that the institutional influence of political Media should be thoughtfully disciplined or even controlled. The genesis or cultivation of virtue is suppressed or bounded by money which works against equality in democracy, as the wealthy stratum is more able to exert influence on government policy-making than the non-wealthy strata. This reality will promote oligarchy (oligarchia) which is a subtle threat to democracy as it would effectively balkanize the society.

In the indirect type of democratic rule, depicted in regionalism, citizens are more likely to engage in safeguarding their interests by influencing the direction of political leaders’ decision-making. In the American political system, the ever-present focus on preserving and advancing democracy is onerous given the increasing complexity of American institutionalization. For instance, the proliferation of political media or the advent of social media, as democratic as they may appear to be, seem to embrace oligarchic positions that promote their interests or the interests of oligarchic classes.

Democracy is asymptotic and requires virtuous leaders and an engaging virtuous society capable of exhibiting virtuous behavior. Virtue disappears when political media obfuscate and become biased, protecting or promoting their own oligarchic interests. The current advantage of the corporate environment over the political power of governments works against democracy, as it exerts oligarchic expediencies at the expense of democratic rule. Within the context of a virtuous society and virtuous political leadership lack of virtue in a society may be thought to be more critical than lack of virtue in political leadership. Isocrates said, "The character of the governors reflects the character of the state." A political system that allows the wealthy to be more influential with government policy lacks justice and therefore it lacks virtue. In an oligarchic environment or an environment of political disarray and turmoil justice seems to be the privilege of the powerful.  

Fine-tuning the U.S. political thinking

Reforming the democratic rule is indispensable in a democracy since democracy is the best and most dynamic political system. Two criteria must be the focus of reform in the American democratic system: Capability and Ethical disposition.Capability is defined by knowledge and education of the political leaders, whereas Ethical disposition refers to the proclivity of political leaders to be virtuous. Achieving capability, that is, knowledge and education, is uncomplicated and measurable. Achieving a virtuous character and behavior is arduous and its development convoluted.

A virtuous political environment is essential to safeguarding against injustice. Constitutionally prescribed rights such as freedom, individual, religion, etc. may be observed but such recognition is regulative and may or may not be safeguarded by a virtuous environment. Is a particular behavior lawful or virtuous? Socrates said that “justice is a virtue”. But, justice is the fair and judicious application of the law unaffected by self-interest. Politicization of the law is unethical given that it allows self-interest to permeate the application of impeccable justice. Virtue affects the concept, formulation and application of justice, as Virtue is the moral foundation of Fairness.

The American political environment is under stress, as a result of effects of multiculturalism which has introduced value systems and ethics that define or look at virtues differently, contributing to social division which may lead to balkanization. Political polarization, racial strained relationships and the increasing gap in wealth have greatly contributed to escalating anomalies in the application of democracy and the subtle encouragement or proclivity of various models of democracy such as democratic oligarchy. Most of the political systems, around the world, qualify for being rather oligarchic than democratic. The more powerful the political expediencies and the greater the wealth gap in a society the less the presence of virtue and the greater the likelihood of an oligarchy. Defending against oligarchy would require citizens’ political participation, muting or restraining the power of wealth, in political and regulative decision-making, as well as, frequent and unimpeded accounting of government’s performance and that of political leaders.

Political participation is an active strategy with which to defend a political democratic system. In ancient Athens, Athenians engaged in political discourse in a place known as "Agora" where political leaders, philosophers and regular citizens would exchange on all issues concerning the governance of Athens. In our contemporary world the concept of "Agora" exists on the internet and the multiplicity of media. Although this contemporary "Agora" may be more dynamic, its challenge is that it is highly complex and the discussants are virtually unlimited and quite often nefarious.  

Discussion highlights

The purest form of democracy requires a genuinely virtuous society with high ethe (Ηθη) and ethics as well as manageable heterogeneity of interests. It would seem that the American political system shows signs of Oligarchic democracy. The signs of Oligarchy in the American political system emanate from the innerworkings in that political system. Oligarchical tendencies would, then, seem to be increasingly enhanced as political leaders climb the ladder of political leadership exhibiting Machiavellian behavior. Furthermore, I should note that orientation toward Oligarchy does not seem to be the broad idiosyncrasy of the American people who, in this writer’s opinion, seem to come closer to embracing the value of Aristotle’s concept of aristoi (άριστοι) than their political leadership.

Author: CGP .+.