Você está na página 1de 14

Aristotle:

The Politics 271


'ethical

character.
rf the good fife for

enough:we must
ay becomegood.
:y would rightly
: would have to
ver to encourage
:ausea character
I by virtue, they
lo goodness and
'd not by a sense
: it is disgraceful,
of emotion, they
;an obtain them,
not even have a
r tasred it. What
argument what
noteasy....
r tO XfI argument
sibly persuade a
motion does not
r be a character
that loves what
icult, unlessone
self-control and
Therefore, their
ey have become
nough that they
Since they must
have growr up,
in general. For
by punishmenrs
)w we can learn
slation unexameral problem of
our philosophy

B. The Politics
"A state existsfor the sakeof the good life."
ft is often stated that Aristotle, in his Politics, was blind to the political facts of
life in his day in that he ignored the imperial state of the future that Philip and
Alexander were creating and dealt only with the political life of the small citystateswhose independent existence was largefy over. But this view ignores the
fact that the Politicswas meant to be a continuation of the Ethics,that the purpose
of the state is to promote and maintain the welf -being of its citizens, and that this
"good and honorable life" would seem to him to be impossibleof achievement
in a huge and heterogeneousempire in which people could not act as free citizens
participating in a shared life. Yet what,^.::stotlewrites in the Politics remains an
excellent summary and interpretationof Creek political experience,and most of
its penetratinggeneralizationson political and social behavior remain valid and
illuminating today.
The eight books of the Politics fafl into two main divisions, to which Book
I servesas an introduction.In Books ll, lll, Vll, and Vlll, Aristotlegivesevidence
of the influence of Plato as he describesthe characteristicsof an ideal state,but
in books thought to have been written last (lV, V, Vl), he puts aside considerations
of an ideal commonwealth and more realistically deals with practical matters
relating to the nature and stability of the existing Creek statesof his day. The
conclusions reached in this second part of his treatise were supported by the
multitude of facts gleaned from his analysis of the constitutionsof one hundred
and fifty-eight Creek states.

1. Nafure, Origin, and Purpose of the State


In Book I Aristotleindicatesthe refationshipof the Politicstothe Ethicsby insisting
upon the necessaryconnection between the state and the individual's goal of a
virtuous and happy life. The state is not an artificial creation, as the Sophists
argued, but is the natural culmination of earlier and simpler forms of society,the
famify and the village, which people naturally and instinctivelycreate in order
to satisfy their immediate and elementary wants. But a life of moral virtue and
happiness,the highestof their wants,can only be providedby the finat manifestation of the "social instinct . . . implanted in all men by nature," namely the state.
So "the state comes into existence, originating in the bare needs of life, and
continuing in existence for the sake of the good life." The modern concept of
man versus the state would be unthinkable to Aristotle, for "man is by nature a
political animal" who can realize his highestidealsonly as a member of society.

From The Politics of Aristotle, translated by Benjamin Jowen, ed. by H. W. C. Davis, 1905. By
permission of rhe Oxford Universiry Press, Oxford.

272

i
t

I
I

{ II

I
!
I

Creek Civilization: 34

I, 1. Every state is a communiry of some kind, arrd every community is


establishedwith a view to some good; for mankind always act in order to obtain
that which they think good. But, if all communities aim at some good, the state
or political communiry, which is the highest of all, and which embracesall the
rest, aims, and in greater degreethan any other, at the highest good. . . .
Governments differ in kind, as will be evident to anyone who considers
the mafter according to the method which has hitherto guided us. As in other
departments of science,so in politics, the compound should always be resolved
'W'e
into the simple elementsor least parts of the whole.
must therefore look at
the elementsof which the state is composed, in order that we may see in what
they differ from one another, and whether any scientificdistinction can be drawn
berween the different ki^,ds of rule.
2. He who thus considersthrngs in their first growth and origin, 'vhether a
state or anything else,will obtain the clearestview of them. In the first place (1)
there must be a union of those who cannot exist without each other; for example,
of male and female, that the race may continue; and this is a union which is
formed, not of deliberate purpose, but because,in common with other animals
and with plants, mankind have a natural desire to leave behind them an image
of themselves.And (2) there must be a union of natural ruler and subject, that
both may be preserved.For he who can foreseewith his mind is by nature intended
to be lord and master, and he who can work with his body is a subject, and by
nature a slave; hence master and slave have the same interest. Nature, however,
has distinguishedberweenthe female and the slave.For she is not niggardly, like
the smith who fashions the Delphian knife for many uses;she makes each thing
for a single use, and every instrument is best made when intended for one and
not for many uses.But among barbarians no distinction is made ber'weenwomen
and slaves,becausethere is no natural ruler among them: they are a communiry
'Wherefore
of slaves,male and female.
the poets say, "It is meet that Hellenes
should rule over barbarians"l as if they thought that the barbarian and the slave
were by nature one.
Out of theserwo relationships,berween man and woman, master and slave,
the family first arises, and Hesiod is right when he says "First house and wife
and an ox for the plow," for the ox is the poor man's slave.The family is the
associationestablishedby nature for the supply of men's everydaywanrs. . . . But
when several families are united, and the association aims at something more
than the supply of daily needs, then comes into existencethe village. And the
most natural form of a village seems to be that of a colony from the family,
composed of the children and grandchildren, who are said to be "suckled with
the same milk." And this is the reasonwhy Greek stateswere originally governed
by kings; becausethe Greeks were under rcyal rule before they came rogether,
as the barbarians still are. . . . \Therefore men say thar the Gods have a king,
becausethey themselveseither are or were in ancient times under the rule of a
king. For they imagine, not only the forms of the Gods, but their ways of life to
be like their own.

Aristotle:The Politics 273

ery communiry is
in order ro obrain
ne good, the srate
r embracesall the
cgo.rd....
ne who considers
:d us. As in orher
lways be resolved
therefore look ar
: may see in what
tion can be drawn
origin, whelhgl 3
the first place (1)
,rher; for example,
a union which is
rith other animals
rd them an image
and subjecq that
)y nature intended
a subject, and by
Nature, however,
rot niggardly, like
makes each thing
nded for one and
e benryeenwomen
are a communiry
reet that Hellenes
rian and the slave
master and slave,
;t house and wife
The family is the
l a y w a n t s . . . .B u t
. something more
: village. And the
from the family,
be "suckled with
riginally governed
3y came together,
)ods have a king,
rder the rule of a
eir ways of life to

lfhen several villages are united in a single communiry, perfect and large
enough to be nearly or quite self-sufficing,the statecomesinto existence,originating in the bare needs of life, and continuing in existencefor the sake of a good
life. And therefore, if the earlier forms of socieryare natural, so is the state, for
it is the end of them, and the completed nature is the end. For what each thing
is when fully developed,we call its narure, whether we are speaking of a man, a
horse, or a family. Besides,the final cause and end of the thing is the best, and
to be self-sufficingis the end and the best.
Hence it is evident that the state is a creation of nature, and that man is by
nature a political animal. And he who by nature and not by mere accident is
without a state is either above humaniry or below it; he is the "tribeless, lawless,
heartlessoner" whom Homer denounces-the outcast who is a lover of war; he
may he compared to a bird which flies alone. . . .
Thus the state is by nature clearly prior to the family and to the individual,
since the whole is of necessiryprior to the part; for example, if the whole body
be destroyed,there will be no foot or hand, except in an equivocal sense,as we
might speak of a stone hand; for when destroyedthe hand will be no better than
that. But things are defined by their working and power; and we ought not to
say that they are the same when they are no longer the same, but only that they
have the same name. The proof that the state is a creation of nature and prior
to the individual is that the individual, when isolated, is not self-sufficing;and
therefore he is like a part in relation to the whole. But he who is unable to live
in sociery,or who has no need becausehe is sufficient for himself, must be either
a beast or a god; he is no part of a state.
A social instinct is implanted in all men by nature, and he who first founded
the state was the greatestof benefactors.For man, when perfected,is the best of
animals, but when separatedfrom law and iustice, he is the worst of all; since
armed injustice is the more dangerous,and he is equipped at birth with the arms
of intelligenceand with moral qualities which he may use for the worst ends.
Vherefore, if he have not virnre, he is the most unholy and the most savageof
animals, and most full of lust and gluttony. But justice is the bond of men in
states, and the administration of justice, which is the determination of what is
just, is the principle of order in political sociery.

2. A Criticism of Communism
As a preliminary to his discussionof the ideal state, Aristotle condemns the
communism in Plato'sutopian Republic.The nub of his argumentis that communistic unity runs counter to both human nature and to the nature of the state, a
view supported in our day by the record of totalitarianismin modern communist
"utopias"-{he U.S.S.R.and other Maxist states.Aristotlearguesthat people are
in the first instanceaware of their own private interests,and to deprive them of
these would be to create hostility to society and destroy the natural tendency to
cooperate with fellow beings in creating the good life through the agency of the

274

Greek Civilization: 34

state.The greaterthe degreeof individual interests,activities,and possessions,


the
richer will be the individual'scontributionto the community. Aristotleadvocates
reforms "by good customs and faws," but he condemns the radical who would
"disregard the experience of ages" in an extreme hasteto remove present evils.

rl

iii

iff

'lj

il

II, 5. Next let us consider what should be our arrangementsabout propeffy;


should the citizens of the perfect state have possessionsin common or not? . . .
There is always a difficulry in men living together and having things in
common, but especially in their having common properry. . . . The present arrangement, if improved as it might be by good customs and laws, would be far
better, and would have the advantagesof both systems.Properry should be in a
certain sensecommon, but, as a general rule, private. For when everyonehas his
separateinterest,men will not complain of one another, and they will make more
progress, becauseeveryone will be anending to his own business.Yet among
good men, and as regards use,"friendsr" as the proverb says,"will have att things
common." . . . For although every human has his own properry, some things
he will place at the disposal of his friends, while of others he shares the use
ofthem....
Again, how immeasurably greater is the pleasure,when a man feels a thing
to be his own! For love of self is a feeling implanted by narure and not given in
vain, although selfishnessis rightly condemned. This, however is not mere love
of self, but love of self in excess,like the miser's love of money; for all, or almost
all, men love money, and other such objects in a measure.Furthermore, there is
the greatestpleasurein doing a kindnessor serviceto friends or guestsor companions, which can only be done when a man has private properfy. These advantages
are lost by the excessiveunification of the state. . . . No one, when men have all
things in common, will any longer set an example of liberaliry or do any liberal
action; for liberaliry consists in the use a man makes of his own properry.
Such [communistic] legislation may have a speciousappearanceof benevolence. Men readily listen to it, and are easily induced to believe that in some
wonderful manner everybody will become everybody's friend, especiallywhen
someoneis heard denouncing the evils now existing in states,suits about contracts,
convictions for periury, flatteries of rich men, and the like, which are said to arise
out of the possessionof private property. These evils, however, are due to a very
different cause-the wickedness of human nature. Indeed, we see that there is
much more quarreling among those who have all things in common, though
there are not many of them when compared with the vast numbers who have
private properry.
Again, we ought to reckon, not only the evils from which the citizens will
be saved, but also the advantageswhich they will lose. The life which they are
to lead appearsto be quite impracticable. The error of Socrates[i.e., Plato] must
be anributed to the false notion of uniry from which he starts. Unity there should
be, both of the family and of the state, but in some respectsonly. For there is a
point at which a state may attain such a degree of uniry as to be no longer a
state, or at which, without actually ceasingto exist, it will become an inferior

Aristotle:The Politics 275


rnd possessions,
the
Aristotleadvocates
radicalwho woufd
movepresentevils.
s about properry;
lmon or not? . . .
having things in
The present arws, would be far
ry should be in a
everyone has his
'will make
more
ress. Yet among
ll have all thingl
'ry, some
things
r shares the use
ran feels a thing
,nd not given in
s not mere love
lr all, or almost
:rmore, there is
3StSOr companreseadvantages
'n men have
all
do any liberal
proPerry.
nce of benevo: that in some
;pecially when
)out contracB,
re said to arise
: due fo a very
-' rhat there is
lmon, though
ers who have
: citizens will
'hich rhey
are
., Plato] musr
'there should
For there is a
' no longer a
,e an inferior

state, like harmony passing into uniscn, or rhythm which has been reducedto a
single foot. The state, as I was saying, is a pluraliry, which should be united and
made into a communiry by education. . . . Lrt us remember that we should not
disregard the experience of ages. . . .

3. Good and Bad Constitutions


Aristotle'sclassification
of governments
hasremainedstandardfor nearly2,SOO
years.His divisioninto six typesis basedupon his studyof Creek politicat
experience,
while his criterionfor distinguishing
betweengoodand bad governmentsis derivedfrom his viewson the natureand purposeof the state.Thetrue
end of the stateis well-beingand happiness,and this is the common interest.
Cood Sovernments
aredevotedto thecommoninterest,
while bador "perverted"
placetheselfishinterest
of a rulingclassabove"the commongood
Sovernmens
of all."
III, 6. . . .We have next to consider whether there is only one form of government or many; and if many, what they are, and how many; and what are the
differences berween them.
A constirution is the arrangement of powers in a srare, especiallyof the
supremepower, and the constirution is the government.For example,in democracies the people are supreme, but in oligarchies, the few; therefore, we say thar
the nrio constitutions are different; and so in other cases.
First let us consider what is the purpose of a state and how many forms of
government there are by which human socieryis regulated.We have already said,
earlier in this treatise,when drawing a distinction benryeen
householdmanagemenr
and the rule of a governor, that man is by nature a political animal. And therefore
men, even when they do not require one another's help, desire ro live together
all the same, and are in fact brought together by their common interests in
ProPortion as they severallyattain to any measure of well-being. !7ell-being is
certainly the chief end of individuals and of states.. . .
The conclusion is evident: governmentswhich have a regardto the common
interest are constituted in accordance with strict principles of yustice,and are
therefore true forms; but those which regard only the interest of the rulers are
all defective and perverted forms. For they are despotic, whereas a state is a
community of free men.
7. Having determined these points, we have next ro consider how many
forms of constitution there are, and what they are; and in the firsr place what
are the true forms, for when they are determined the perversionsof them will at
once be apparent.The words constitution and governmenthavethe samemeaning;
and the government, which is the supreme authoriry in stares,is necessarilyin
the hands either of one, or of a few, or of many. The rrue forms of governmenr,
therefore, are those in which the one, or the few, or the many, govern with a
view to the common interest; but governments which rule wirh a view to the
privateinterest,whetherof the one, or of the few, or of the many. are Derversions.

276

Creek Civilization:34

For citizens, if they are truly citizens, ought all to parricipate in the advantages
of a state.IJ7ecall that form of government in which one rules, and which regards
the common interest, kingship or royalry; that in rvhich more than one, but not
many' rule, aristocracy.It is so called, either becausethe rulers are the best men,
or becausethey have at heart the best interest of the state and of the citizens. But
when the citizens at large administer the state for the common interest, the
government is called by the generic namHonstitutional government. And there
is a reason for this use of language.One man or a few may excel in virtue; but
of virtue there are many kinds. As the number of rulers increasesit becomesmore
difficult for them to attain perfection in every kind, though they may in military
virtue, for this is found in the masses.Hence, in a constitutional government the
fighting men have the supreme power, and those who possessarms are citizens.
Of the above-mentioned forms, the perversions are as follows: of royalty,
ryranny; of aristocracy)oligarchy; of constitutional governmenr,democracy. For
tyranny is a kind of monarchy which has in view the interest of rhe monarch
only; oligarchy has in view the interestof the wealthy; democracy)of rhe needy;
none of them the common good of all.

4. The ldeal State:Its True Object


The true obiect of the stateis neithertrade nor empire nor the preventionof crime
nor anything but the good life. By "state" Aristotle does not mean ',country,"
but "government" or "constitution," and the best statesare those in which the
rulersare best fitted by their possessionof virtue to rule "in such a manner as to
attain the most desirable life." Whether this is to be the rule of one (kingship),
or few (aristocracy),or many (constitutionalism),
depends upon the nature and
tenrperamentof the people. In any case,in an ideal statethe laboringand business
classeswill not be citizens,for "the vi(ue of a good man is necessarilythe same
as the virtue of a citizen in a perfect state," and these classeshave not the
"leisure necessaryboth for the development of virtue and the performance of
p o l i t i c a ld u t i e s . "

/
t
I
\

III, 9. . . . But a state exists for the sake of a good life, and nor for the sake
.
of life.only. If life only were the obiect, slaves
b.ur. animals might form a
state, but they cannot, for they have no share "r,d
in happinessor in a life of free
choice. Nor does a state exist merely for the sake of-alliance and securiry from
iniustice, nor yet for the sake of trade and mutual intercourse; for then the
Tyrrhenians and the Carthaginians, and all who have corrunercial treaties with
one another, would be citizens of one state. . . . Those who care for good government take into consideration the larger questions of virnre and vice in states.
Whence it may be further inferred that virtue musr be the serious care of a stare
which truly deservesthe name. Otherwise the communiry becomesa mere alliance,
which differs only in place from alliancesof which the memberslive apart. And

Aristotle:The Politics

.he advantages
which regards
n one, but not
: the best men,
ne citizens. But
n interest, the
rent. And there
I in virtue; but
becomesmore
nay in military
;overnment the
Trs are citizens.
ws: of royalty,
lemocracy. For
rf the monarch
r, of the needy;

eventionof crime
mean "country,"
'osein which the
.h a manneras to
rf one (kingship),
,n th natureand
'ringandbusiness
the same
:essarily
ses have not the
e performanceof

not for the sake


ls might form a
in a life of free
rd securiry from
;e; for then the
ial treaties with
or good governd vice in states.
rs care of a state
; a mere alliance,
; live apaft. And

277

law is only a convention, "? surery to one another of justicer" as the sophist
Lycophron says, and has no real power to make the citizens good and just. . . .
Clearly then a state is not a mere society, having a common place, established
for the prevention of crime and for the sake of trade. Theseare conditions without
which a state cannot exist; but all of them together do not constitute a state,
which is a community of families and aggregationsof families in well-being for
the sake of a perfect and self-sufficinglife. Such a community can only be established among those who live in the same place and intermarry. Hence arise in
states family connections, brotherhoods, common sacrifices,amusementswhich
draw men together. They arc created by friendship, for friendship is the motive
of sociery.The end is the good life, and these are the means towards it. And the
state is the union of families and villages having for an end a perfect and selfsufficing life, by which we mean a happy and honorable life.
Our conclusion, then, is that political sociery exists for the sake of noble
actions, and not of mere companionship. And they who contribute most to such
a society have a greater share in it than those who have the same or a greater
freedom or nobiliry of birth but are inferior to them in political vinue; or than
those who exceed them in wealth but are surpassedby them in virtue. . . .
18. We maintain that the true forms of government are three, and that the
best must be that which is administered by the best, and in which there is one
man, or a whole family, or many persons, excelling in virtue, and both rulers
and subjectsare fitted, the one to rule, the others to be ruled, in such a manner
as to attain the most eligible life. We showed at the commencementof our inquiry
that the virtue of the good man is necessarilythe same as the virtue of the citizen
of the perfect state. Clearly then in the same manner, and by the same means
through which a man becomestruly good, he will frame a state which will be
truly good whether aristocratical,or under kingly rule, and the sameeducationand
the samehabits will be found to make a good man a good statesmanand king. . . .
VIII, 9. . . . Now, sincewe are here speakingof the best form of government,
and that under which the state will be most hrppy (and happiness,as has been
already said, cannot exist without virnre), it clearly follows that in the state which
is best governed the citizens who are absolutely and not merely relatively just
men must not lead the life of mechanicsor tradesmen,for such a life is ignoble
and inimicalto virtue. Neither must they be husbandmen,sinceleisureis necessary
both for the development of virtue and the performance of political duties.

5. The Ideal State: Education


Like so much in Aristotle'swritings, his discussionof the central importanceof
public education is pertinentto our modern civilization where stateversusprivate
education has long been a subject of controversy.He also distinguishesbetween
liberal education (he was the first to use the term) and vocationaleducation,and
his argumentsin favor of the former stem from his all-pervadingdesireto provide
the good life for everyone. lt should be noted that what Aristotle terms "music"
i n c l u d e sa l l t h e a r t sa n d l i t e r a t u r eo, r w h a t w e t o d a y c a l l t h e " h u m a n i t i e s . "

278

Creek Civilization:34

VIII, 1. No one will doubt that a lawgiver should direct his attention above
all to the education of youth, or that the neglectof education does harm to states.
The citizen should be molded to suit the form of government under which he
lives. For each government has a peculiar character, which originally formed and
which continues to preserveit. The character of democracy createsdemocracy,
and the characterof oligarchy createsoligarchy. The better the character, always
the better the government.
Now for the exerciseof any faculry or art a previous training and practice
are required; clearly then they are required for the exerciseof virtue. And since
the entire state has one end, manifestly education should be one and the same
for all, and should be public and not private. It should not be as at present,
when everyone looks after his own children separately,and gives them separate
instruction of the sort he thinks best. The training in things of common interest
should be the same for all. Neither must we supposethat any one of the citizens
belongs to himself.,f.or they all belong to the state, and are each of them a part
of the state, and the care of each part is inseparablefrom the care of the whole.
In this particular the Spartansare to be praised, for they take the greatestpains
about their children, and make education the businessof the state.
2. That education should be regulated by law and should be an affair of
/
state
is not to be denied; but what should be the characterof this public education,
I
I and how young personsshould be educated,are questionsyet to be considered.
For men are by no means agreedabout the things to be taught, whether we aim
at virtue or the best life. Neither is it clear whether education should be more
concerned with intellectual or with moral virtue. Existing practice is perplexing;
no one knows on what principle we should proceed.Should the useful in life, or
should virtue, or should higher knowledge,be the aim of our training? All three
opinions have been enterrained.Again, about method there is no agreement;for
different persons,starting with different ideasabout the nature of virtue, narurally
disagreeabout the practice of it.
Undoubtedly children should be taught those useful things that are really
necessary,but not all useful things. For occupations are divided into liberal and
illiberal, and to young children should be impaned only such kinds of knowledge
as will be usefulto them without vulgarizing them. Any occupation, art, or science,
which makes the body or soul or mind of the free man less fit for the practice
or exerciseof virtue, is vulgar. Therefore we call those arts vulgar which tend to
deform the body, and likewise all paid employments; they absorb and degrade
themind....
3. The customary branchesof an education are four, namely, (1) reading
and writinE, (2l'gymnasticexercises,(3) music, to which is sometimesadded (4)
drawing. Of these, reading, writing, and drawing are regarded as useful for the
purposesof life in a variety of ways, and gymnastic exercisesare thought to infuse
courage.As to music a questionmay be raised.In our own day most men cultivate
it for pleasure,but originally it was included in educationbecausenature herself,
as has been often said, requiresthat we should be able, not only to work well,

The Politics 279


Aristotle:

aftention above
; harm to states.
under which he
ally formed and
rtes democracy,
laracter, always
ng and practice
irtue. And since
te and the same
e as at Present,
s them separate
ommon interest
re of the citizens
r of them a part
re of the whole.
r gfestSt pains
te.
be an affair of
ublic education,
r be considered.
whether we aim
should be more
:e is perplexing;
useful in life, or
rining? All three
) agreement; for
virtue, narurally
, that are really
into liberal and
Js of knowledge
r, art, or science,
for the practice
rr which tend to
'rb and degrade
e l y, (1 ) r eading
'timesadded (4)
rs useful for the
hought to infuse
rstrDocultivate
e nature herself,
v to work well.

but to use our leisure well. For, as I must repeat once again, the prime end of all
action is leisure. Both are necessxry,but leisure is berter than labor.
Hence now the question must be asked in good earnest, what ought we to
do when at leisure?Clearly we ought not to be always amusing ourselves,f.or
then amusementwould be the end of life. . . .
Apparently then there are branches of learning and education which we
should study solely with a view to the enjoyment of leisure, and theseare to be
valued for their own sake; whereas the kinds of knowledge which are useful in
businessare necessary, and exist for the sakeof other things. Thereforeour fathers
admined music into education, not on the ground of either its necessityor its
utility; for it is not necessary,nor even useful in the same way that reading and
writing are useful in wealth gening, in the management of a household, in the
acquisition of knowledge, and in political [ife. Nor is it, like drawing, useful for
a more correct judgment of the works of artists, nor again, like gymnastics,does
it give health and strength, for neither of these is to be gained from music. There
is, however, a use of music for intellectual enjoyment in leisure, which seems
indeed to have been the reason of its introduction into education. For music is
one of the ways in which, it is thought, a freeman might pass his leisure. . . .
Evidently, then, there is a sort of education in which parents should train
their sons, not becauseit is useful or necessary,but becauseit is liberal or noble.

6. The PracticableState:The Best Constitution


ln that part of his Politics which Aristotle seems to have written last (Books
lV, V, Vl), he turns from a discussionof the ideal state to deal realistically
with the subject of practicableconstitutionsfor existingstates."For the best is
often unobtainable, and therefore the true lawmaker or statesmenought to be
acquainted. . . with that which is bestconsideringthe circumstances."In keeping
with his doctrine of the Golden Mean, he defines the best such constitution as
one that combines the best featuresof democracy and oligarchy and restsupon
the social foundation of a large middle class.This representsthe practicableform
of that ideal type of statethat Aristotle had called "constitutionalgovernment,"
and is often called today a "republic" as distinct from a "democracy" by those
who share Aristotle's fear of the excessesof democracv.

N, 11. We have now to inquire what is the best constitution for most states,
and the best life for most men, neither assuming a standard of virtue which is
above ordinary persons, nor an education which is exceptionally favored by nature
and circumstances, nor yet an ideal state which is an inspiration only, but having
regard to the life in which the majority are able to share, and to the form of
government which states in general can attain. . . . If it was truly said in the Ethics
that the h"ppy life is the life according to unimpeded virtue and that virtue is a
mean, then the life which is a mean and a mean amainable by everyone must be

280

GreekCivilization:34

best. And the same criteria of virtue and vice are characteristic of cities and of
constitutions; for the constitution is in panern the life of the ciry.
Now in all statesthere are three elements;one classis very rich, another very
poor, and a third in the mean. It is admirted that moderation and the mean are best,
and therefore it will clearly be best to possessthe gifts of fortune in moderation; for
in that condition of life men are most ready to listen to reason. . . . Those who
have too much of the goods of fortune, strength, wealth, friends, and the like,
are neither willing nor able to submit to authority. The evil begins at home; for
when they are boys, by reason of the luxury in which they are brought up, they
never learn, even at school, the habit of obedience.On the other hand, the very
poor, who are in the opposite extreme, are too degraded. So that the one class
cannot obey, and can only rule d"spotically; the other knows not how to command
and must be ruled like slaves. l'hus arisesa ciry, not of freemen, bu: of masters
and slaves,the one despising,the other envying. Nothing can be more fatal to
friendship and good fellowship in statesthan this; for gclod fellowship starts from
friendship. When men are at enmity with one another, they would rather not
even share the same path.
But a ciry ought to be composed, as f.ar as possible, of equals and similars;
and these are generally the middle classes.Wherefore a ciry which is composed
of middle-classcitizens is necessarilybest constituted with respect to what we
call the natural elementsof a state. And this class of citizens is most secure in a
state, for they do not, like the poor, covet their neighbors' goods; nor do others
covet theirs, as the poor covet the goods of the rich. And as they neither plot
againstothers nor are themselvesplotted against,they passthrough life safely. . . .
Thus it is manifest that the best political communiry is formed by citizens of
the middle class,and that those statesare likely to be well administeredin which
the middle class is large, and if possible larger than both the other classes,or at
any rate than either singly, for the addition of the middle class turns the scale
and preventseither of the extremesfrom being dominant. Great then is the good
fortune of a state in which the citizens have a moderate and sufficient properry.
For where some possessmuch and the rest nothing, there may arise an extreme
democracy,or a pure oligarchy; or a ryranny may grow out of either extreme{ut
of either the most rampant democracy or out of an oligarchy. But it is not so
likely to ariseout of a middle and nearly equal condition. I will explain the reason
for this hereafter when I speak of revolutions in states.. . .
Democraciesare safer and more permanent than oligarchies, becausethey
have a middle class which is more numerous and has a greater share in the
government. For when there is no middle class and the poor greatly exceed in
number, troubles arise and the state soon comes to an end. A proof of the
superiority of the middle class is that the best legislators have been of a middle
rank; for example, Solon, as his own versestestify, and Lycurgus, for he was not
aking....
!7hat then is the best form of government. and what makes it the best is
evident. Of other states,since we say there are many kinds of democracy and
oligarchy, it is not difficult to seewhich has the first and which the second or

The Politics 281


Aristotle:

ic of cities and of
;iry.
rich, another verY
the mean are best,
in moderation; for
,n....Thosewho
:nds, and the like,
egins at home; for
: brought up, theY
her hand, the verY
that the one class
t how to command
,en, but of ^.^asters
o be more fatal to
owship starts from
would rather not
quals and similars;
,rrhichis composed
espect to what we
is most secure in a
,ods; nor do others
s they neither Plot
rugh life safely. . . .
rmed by citizens of
ninistered in which
other classes,or at
lass turns the scale
:at then is the good
sufficient proPeffY.
ry arise an extreme
:ither exremHut
ry. But it is not so '
I explain the reason
chies, becausetheY
reater share in the
,r greatly exceed in
rd. A proof of the
,e been of a middle
'gus, for he was not
nakes it the best is
of democracy and
,hich the second or

any other place in the order of excellence, now that we have determined which
is best. For that which is nearest to the best must of necessirybe the better, and
that which is furthest from it the worse, if we rare judging absolutely and not
with reference to given conditions. I say "with reference to given conditionsr"
since a particular government may be preferable for some, but another form may
be bener for others.

7. The PracticableState: Causesof Revolution


Aristotleseemsto feelthateventhebestpracticable
described
abwe,
constitution,
was too visionaryfor the Creeksof hiT?ay whose govqrfrmenu;_
ygg_eglgglly
bulent-dbrnocriCies
or
exTmplesoI tF-eworst tvp
selfi-sli-oliga
rcTIB:Tle Th-erelore
tu rnsfi-ii aft-en
tion to thesebad or "perverted"
constitutionsand realisticallydescribesmethodsfor makingthem more stable
and,equalfyimportant,lessliableof degenerating
further.He turnsfirstto analyze
the natureof the dangerthat constantlythreatened
of his daythe governments
particularlyin democracies,
revofution. His accountof the causesof revolutions,
hasparticularrelevancefor us today.

V, 1. The design which we proposed to ourselvesis now nearly completed.


Next in order follow the causesof revolutions in states,how many they are, and
what is their narure; what elements work ruin in particular states,and out of
what and into what they mostly change; also what methoj_slherqare qf-preserying
statesgenerally, or a pafticular state, and by what means each state may be best
preserved:iFese questions remain to be considered.. . .
2. In considering how dissensionsand political revolutions arise, we must
first of all ascertainthe beginningsand causesof them which affect constifutions
generally. They may be said to be three in number; and we have now to give an
outline of each. I7e want to know (1) what isl[._f:gli"_Atd (2) *hat:gl!S_
motives of those who make them and (3) what causespolitical disrurbancesandqgrgqsTFe uniffie
of revolutionary feeling hasalieaTfT6en
mentioned; namely, .1thg@
whqn gel f!!4_that thev are

eqggl-le-elltg-rglle

o', tt'i Jeeuq|q1'"gg9@'fia-

superioriry, when they believethemselvessuperior and think they have not more

b"^ti6a;"-e or lessim" tmit ilGiorE pretenliions


wh-icli-*;t;;;"y

U.

"ot
iust. Inferiors revolt in order that the-ymay be e9exl, and equals that they may
'- - ==be=s-gpglor.-Su;IT the stite oT-mda'wliiEh-Cr?aGirevolu-t-ions:The motives for making them are the desire for gain and for honor, or the
fear of dishonor and loss. The authors of them want to divert punishment or
dishonor from themselvesor their friends. . . . Other causesare insolence,fear,
love of superioriry, contempt, disproportionate increasein some part of the state.
Causesof another sort are election intrigues, carelessness,
neglect about trifles,
dissimilarirvof elements.. . .

282

4. In revolutions the occasions may be trifling, but gteat interests are at


stake. . . . Revolutions are accotnplished in rwo-tga5 -bl_.force and-by fraud.
revglgqiqq qlafterwards-.
Force -ry_!q Appltgdeithgl_l! the time of making$:
sometimes the g4izspr-s;qe deceived inqo
FraudfZfliln, is of rwo kindt-Gim
change-ofgo-v&nmenr,
"ietptrn;a
"r,i are
"fr. p-rsuadid at first, and afterwards, by
eople
wil
a Epetitien of the persuasion,their good will and allegianceare still retained.. . .
5. . . .Revolutionsin democraciesare often causedby the intemperanceof
/
who either in a private capacity report information against rich men
demagoguj:S,
I
\ uniilTh-eycompel them to combine (for a common danger unites even the binerest
enemies),or else come forward in public and stir up the people against them.
The truth of this remark is proved by a variery of examples.At Cos the democracy
was overthrown becausewicked demagoguesaroseand the nobles combrrred.. . .
Much in the same manner the democracy at Megara was overturned [Selection
21DJ. There the demagogues drove out many of the nobles in order that
they might be able to confiscate their property. At length the exiles, becoming numerous, returned, engaged and defeated the people, and established
anoligarchy....
Of old, the demagogue was also a general, and then democracieschanged
into ryrannies.Most of the ancient ryrants were originally demagogues.They are
not so now, but they were then; and the reason is that they were generalsand
not orators, for oratory had not yet come into fashion. Vhereas in our day, when
the art of rhetoric has made such progress,orators lead the people. . . . These are
the principal causesof revolutions in democracies.

8. The PracticableState:PreservingConstitutions
How to preserveexisting constitutionsfrom revolution, and even how to cure
them of their defectsand make them more workable,is the lasttaskwhich Aristotle
sets for himself in the Politics. His views on the preservation of democracy are
drawn from his observationof Creek politics, and their evident applicability to
our presentworld indicateshow fundamentallysimilarwere the political developments of these specific periods in the history of the two civilizations. At the
end, Aristotle returns again to the importanceof education. He insiststhat in a
democracy it is fatal to educate people to believe in an extreme and hence "false
idea of freedom" which leads men to "think it slaveryto live by the rules of the
constitution." Respectfor.law is the fundamentalsafeguardof any constitution.

lr
li
rl

tit

V, 8. We have next to consider what means there are of preserving states in


general, and also in particular cases. In the first place, it is evident that if we
understand the causes which destroy states, we shall also understand the causes
which preserve them; for opposites produce opposites, and destruction is the
opposite of preservation.

Aristotle:The Politics 283

nterests are at
and by fraud.
or afterwards.
: deceived into
rn againsttheir
afterwards, by
illretained....
ltemperance of
gainst rich men
ren the bitterest
: against them.
;the democracy
;combined....
rrned [Selection
in order that
the exiles, beand established
:racies changed
ogues.They are
re generals and
r our day, when
e....Theseare

Constirutions
:ven how to cure
skwhichAristotle
of democracyare
to
nt applicability
politicaldevelop.,ilizations.
At the
le insissthat in a
: and hence"false
cy the rulesof the
f any constitution.

'servingstatesin
ident that if we
stand the causes
:struction is the

In all well-organizedgovernmentsthere is no3hing_fyttr_cfr$gul_d_bgestg.


jealously maintained than the spirit-of obedienceto law, more especiallyin small
l

rffi
matt?F;-IilIawlessness creepsrn@st
-a6rtune.TtEihanll
in tlmeE-ts up
thET6nstantrepetition*oTsmall expenses
d is deceived,
doe@iTonce,
andt
as by the fallacy which says, "if each part is liale, then the whole is little.". . .
VI, 5. The mere establishmentof a democracy is not the only or the principal
businessof the lawgiver, or of those who wish to create such a state, f.or aoy
state, however badly constituted, may last one, rwo or three days. A far greater
tasklsthep'.le*ation9*f-it.Tl'.l"@ereforeendeavor-t.o|9y-z-

fi"n f;
p!ggly{ig!_
elements,indand-ilesuuctionof starc$EA;Ft"ld guard aeaime
erv ai i ue i-lmaTe li w {Tii n gn or gnw r i nen, whicE; ilG-ontarn 4 -olol-ig-irclilc
l *:ar;_rI.J prei"measilaT
staG. He musi noi-iEinFlat
the iruly ZEmgcii$
rihZt-ever*iII giu. t
iEofiearc-h/Jtua'rfiat will
r pr"p..ty
*"
.@qr$
in orde. io pl."t. th. p.opl.Now,inthe[astandworstfor@zensareverynumerous'
a
there are no revenuespresseshard

o
things;hich havebefor. **

s, for the money must be

t pr".tt..toft
ouffiffiGre

*ffitr,

are revenues,tlEjgnqagogues should not be allowed after their fashion to distrib,rt. th.- ru.piu
more, To-uch help is
of .
th-e peopleT6ollllsee t
arler-er-lo-q1e1qjhs-)
character of the democracy. Measuresshould also be-takenwhich will eive them .t
laisisequallytotheinreresrofalIclasses,rhe-p,oceed,.t
of public revenuesshould be accumulated and distributed among the poor, if I
possible, in such quantities as may enable them to purchasea linle farm, or, at /
any rate, make a beginning in trade or agriculture. And if this benevolencecannoy'
be extended to all, money should be distributed by tribes or other divisions. . . .
V, 9. . . . But of all the things I have mentioned, that which most contributes
to the permanenceof constirutions is the adaptation of education to the form of
government, and yet in our own day this principle is universally neglected.The
best laws, though sanctioned by every citizen of the state, will be of no avail
unlessthe young are trained by habit and education in the spirit of the constitution,
if it is democratic, democratically, or if it is oligarchic, oligarchically. For there
may be a want of self-disciplinein states as well as in individuals. . . .
ln democraciesof the more extreme type there has arisen a_false idea of
freedom which is contradtlto.11o the true interestsof the st:te. For rwo principles
are cnarac
overnment
malorlry a
Men
----thinf that what is equal-isjust,
.q,r^@lbgpopnl"t
"ttEThat
wlll,

fr
and t
.ry1tfand-tEa,

. ln sucn
.6Ze-ocr"democracies everyonC lives as he pleases, or in the words of Euripides, "according to his

284

Greek Civilization: 35

gy_to Jr_ve_aesordin&
{3n:y. " I " lrh t_l . tl_ry:eng; men _r!egl@y
to the rule ofThe constiiutign, for it ii their salvalion
I havenow discussed
genetallyiF. inw.s ofGe revolutionsand destruction
of states,and the meansof their preservationand-continuance.

DemosthenesVersus
lsocrates:
"Nationalism"Versus
"lnternationalism"
The defeatand destructionof the Athenian Empire in 4O4e.c.marked the collapse
of a movement toward internationalismin the Creek world. The half-century that
foflowed was characterized by almost continuous warfare punctuated by futile
peace conferences as the chief Creek states-Sparta, Thebes, and Athens, aided
and abetted by the intervention of Persiain Creek affairs-successfulty used the
principle of the balance of power to prevent any one state from dominating
Creece. The resultingpolitical anarchy interfereddisastrouslywith interstatetrade
and produced within the Creek states a continuing economic depression that
manifested itself in bitter class strife, The plight of the poor led them to promote
radical socialistic attackson the property of the rich, while the resulting fears of
the rich produced in them a reactionary opposition to even moderate reform.
lsocrates(436-388 s.c.)noted the bitter and uncompromisingcharacterof this
class struggleat Athens as he contrastedthe conditions of this later period with
those that had prevailedduring the prosperousdays of the Athenian Empire:,'ln
their mutual relationsthey are so mistrustful and hostile that they fear their fellow
citizens more than their enemies; and whereas, during the period of our supremacy, they were united and readily assistedone another, they have now become
so unsocial that those who are possessedof wealth would rather throw their
property into the sea than assistthe needy, while the poor would prefer to take
what they want from the rich by force rather than find a treasure.,'
Unity and stabilityfor the Creek world were finally achieved in 338 e.c.,but
they were imposed from outside Creece by Philip of Macedon and at the point
of a sword. All the Creek statesexcept Spartarwere forced into a federaf union
under Macedonian leadership. Each state retained its local autonomy but was
required to renounce the right both to make war on is neighbors and to engage
in civil strife at home. No tribute was required, but each state was to rrppty
military assistancefor a projected war on Persiawhich Philip's son Alexander
fater carried out.
tAlthough Sparta
was still greatly admired, its Lycurgan sysremhad collapsedand ir could no longer
play a significant role in interstate relarions. By allowing proud Sparra to remain
outside rhe new
federation, Philip could maincain the fiction rhat memberrt ip *"i voluncary.

Você também pode gostar