DEMOCRACY: Ancient vs. Modern

An in-depth explanation of democracy in ancient Athens and the United States of America.

This video isn’t sponsored. If you want to support me, here are the best ways to do it:

1) Watch the whole video
2) Share it with a friend

0:00 - Intro
01:10 - The Origins of Greek Democracy
12:14 - Democracy in Athens
24:05 - The Premise of American Democracy
34:49 - Democracy in America
38:57 - Conclusion

Sources:

Pericles of Athens - Donald Kagan
The Classical Athenian Democracy - David Stockton
The Life of Greece - Will Durant
Athens on Trial - Jennifer Roberts
Origins of Democracy in Ancient Greece - Raaflaub, Ober & Wallace
The Athenian Constitution - Unknown (probably a talented student under Aristotle)
Lives - Plutarch
Politics - Aristotle
The Peloponnesian War - Thucydides
Democracy - Paul Cartledge
Preface to Democratic Theory - Robert Dahl
On Democracy - Robert Dahl
Empire of Liberty - Gordon Wood
Founding Brothers - Joseph Ellis
The Radicalism of the American Revolution - Gordon Wood
The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution - Bernard Bailyn
The Federalist - Hamilton, Madison & Jay
The Rise of American Democracy - Sean Wilentz
The Debates on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution - Jonathan Elliot

[realryanchapman]

Some took issue with the notion that the United States was the first democracy following ancient Greece. When I said 'the word democracy wouldn't be linked to another state for more than 2000 years, ' that afaik is correct. Democratic practices did exist between ancient times and the American founding, and there were even local elections in America before the founding, as well as some democratic practices in England and smaller societies around Europe, but they almost entirely went by the name of republicanism. These other societies also practiced limited forms of democracy, and that was truer the bigger the society got. You could claim that some viking societies had meaningful (but still limited) democratic practices, for example, but they didn't have a state. That was also before modern nations. Nation-states at the time (with the very controversial exception of England after the 15th century) did not exist. So we're talking about societies that typically had fuzzy borders, a looser idea of who belonged within them and what their roles were as 'citizens, ' no modern government state, and where the sovereign political authority is typically divine or an individual/family. Combine that with democratic practices being limited, and you have no state that was being called democratic until the U.S. founding. I chose my wording there carefully.

Given all that, the main democratic breakthroughs the U.S. had were 1) Forming a nation (strict borders, concrete and firm law extending to all citizens within) with its own sovereign, secular government that is responsive to the people, 2) Those people were to hire and fire heads of state and top representatives, 3) Practicing this on a scale of a massive nation-state, with significant cultural and ethnic differences, where citizens across the nation have no way of knowing one another, but still had to trust one another with political power. So there was some contemporary precedent for what the U.S. did, but they also significantly experimented and innovated. Democracy and an impersonal secular state were thought to be impossible in a society on the scale of the U.S. It was thought that monarchies were best for large societies and that democracies/republics were controversially well-suited for small societies, and that even then those smaller political systems needed a mixed character in order to be stable (perhaps still a monarch or divine authority). 'Pure democracies' were thought to be entirely untenable, and tended to be associated with mob rule (a judgement that affected the Founders).

To go into that last part further - the 'mixed character' model mainly came from Aristotle, through Polybius (Greek/Roman historian), and finally through Montesquieu's 'Spirit Of The Laws.' Aristotle said there were three forms of government: government by one, government by the few, government by the many (monarchy, aristocracy, democracy) and that a mixed form of government was best - one that blended aspects of those three forms in its institutions. Montesquieu influentially wrote that those institutions should have limited power and have the ability to limit the powers of each other, now known as checks and balances. That influenced the Framers, who made the executive branch roughly correspond to the 'government by one, ' the senate roughly 'government by few' and the house of reps roughly 'government by many.' That also inspired the checks and balances seen in the constitution. If you're wondering why I didn't cover mixed constitution theory in the video, I think it's interesting, but the interpretation in America is somewhat loose. It's a bit of a stretch to call the executive branch 'government by one, ' I think even more of a stretch to call the house of reps 'government by many, ' and it leaves out the judicial. More importantly, Madison's language of politics consisting of conflicting factions was seen as a more realistic update to the classical mixed constitution theory. Basically mixed constitution theory was seen as rigidly ideological, not realistic, and warring factions was seen as practical and realistic. Theory that could be usefully guide policy. I have to make decisions about what to include and what not to include for runtime purposes, and decided to relegate mixed constitution theory to the comments and just include Madison's factions in the video.

- Ryan

[nyariimani]

If you're feeling pressured to produce more, know it's your own internal drive and not any expectation. It's always great to see a post from you, but each one is a gift. What you're putting into the world is great, and it's fine for it to happen on your time. None of us are going anywhere. Thank you for this one. :)

[youtubeviolatedme]

I feel like Ryan was the smart kid in class who didn't raise his hand to answer every question the teacher asked just to give the other students a chance.

[hoggypare]

Hello Ryan. A historian of antiquity here. I always enjoy hearing your insight on politics and this video is no exception, but considering all of the efforts I spent on researching ancient political processes, I think I might have some remarks that could be of interests.

- I think you have mistaken Thucydides the politician and the historian of the same name. This is a minor nit-pick but it also means that we should give more credibility to the claims on how Pericles governed over Athens
- You have touched on this, but I think it does not come across clearly enough how widely criticized was the democratic system of Athens by its contemporaries and their immediate descendants. It is also disputable how competent the demos was at governing, and it certainly was not perceived as such by our sources, who often present Athens as some sort of cautionary tale, where the power was in the hands of the mob, commonly manipulated by unsavoury individuals (like Alcibiadies), making horrible decisions (like deciding on the Sicillian expedition).
- It might be due to the time and topic constraints, but I got the sense the video is implying as if the Athenian democracy was an absolutely unique concept for the pre-modern era. This is not true. Democratic institutions on comparable scale to Athens existed way before the American Revolution. To name a few, Germanic tribes had a popular assembly for all freemen called Ting, the Slavs had Veche, and those were the primary govering bodies. The Swiss direct democracy can be traced to middle-ages. Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth had an assembly that decided on the matters of the state and technically any member could even veto the king (it was comprised of nobility, but having the title was incredibly common there - about 8% so not that far off the Athens).
- One, in my opinion major, difference that you did not mention is how communitarian the Greek society was, compared to generally individualistic American one, which also reflected on the politics. This is especially vivid in the matters of religion – the enlightenment ideals of freedom in that regard for the Greeks would simply be criminal – punishable by death even, as it was the case with Socrates. Polis was not only the city and its surroundings, but primarily it was the political community – and within that community everyone was responsible for one another – which in turn meant it was possible to single non-conforming people or groups out, to avoid the wrath of the gods and secure the prosperity of the community. This is exactly what your founding fathers sought to prevent.

Anyway, I do not think those critical remarks detract from your overall conclusions, which I feel is again interesting. All the best, and I await more videos.

[nobuckle]

Thank you Ryan for this wonderful lesson on Democracy. The word Democracy is thrown around a lot today but I dare say that not many people understand it. This presentation certainly helped me understand more about how our version of democracy came to be.

[lastjedi-]

I appreciate so much that you take the time to actually learn and teach all these important and relevant topics.

[omalakastispareas]

As a Greek, I would like to inform you that this stuff are mandatory in the Greek education system at 10 . 13. 16 and 18 years old. By the end of high school, you know this stuff by heart. Great video dude

[Thanatology]

The only problem with a new Ryan Chapman video is that I hunger for more once it's done. Stellar work as usual. Both your topics and angles of approaching them never fail to be thorough and fascinating.

[saeidnourian]

Once again you made an incredible video. I never seen a better explanation of American democracy and democracy in general. I appreciate the fact that you take your time to make theses videos with care and avoid rushing them. Keep up the good work.

[Miguell]

And to echo other comments: Don't feel pressured to have an upload schedule. I think that this kind of content, as it currently stands, isn't one that can be pushed out either in mass or quickly, without losing context and quality. Keep up the great work and just know we'll be here for the next one, regardless!

[Ardathair]

Thank you very much. As a European viewer, I really enjoy your videos as they seem well researched and calmly presented. In my opinion, they aid to understanding the US and its developement in a historical context for outsiders. Not only do I find your videos very interesting, I consider them therefore really helpful, as a compact yet thorough overview, so one does not have to spend a lot of time delving too deeply into the literary sources for one's self. I also very much enjoyed your presentations on other political and philosophical topics.
Understand, that if a topic creates a lot of waves in US public (ref. to videos on free speech, 'wokeness' etc.), the ripples in the water can usually - with some delay - be felt in non-English speaking countries over here as well. It's not always easy to understand the roots of such developements from afar, so thank you for your work.

[MrPastaTube]

Your videos is remarkably thorough and well produced. Thank you, Mr. Chapman.

[garrettrinquest]

Thank you. I love growing my understanding of what words mean and where they come from. This is a prime example of that

[mlineberry]

Enjoy your videos, as always, Ryan. You can see the amount of research you invest and the level of quality you strive for. It's also great to hear about politics and government without feeling like there's an angle or bias.

Keep up the great work.

[johnkent]

I cannot stress how deeply and profoundly I appreciate the quality of your work. This world needs more people like you.

[blackmr]

Subscribed for months but first time to leave a comment. Your videos are so full of concentrated knowledge that I feel guilty just watching it for free. So +1 Patreon supporter for you Ryan. Looking forward to learning more from you.

[xverxverxverga]

You are pure gold. Discovered you last night. I’m so happy to follow you

[jshamel]

This video should be a mandatory viewing for the youth of this nation. Outstanding video!!!

[polyMATHY_Luke]

Hi Ryan! I wrote this response to your comment on Metatron's video. I'm a huge fan of you both, and I'm convinced there was just a misunderstanding. I have the greatest admiration for both of you as academic scholars, so my hope is to encourage a possible reconciliation.

Like I wrote in that thread, it was I who recommended this video to my friend Metatron (his given name is Raffaello). He had nearly finished his video, and asked me a few questions on Classical Greek terms and how they are pronounced in Ancient Greek.

Having seen your video come out recently, I mentioned to Metatron that he might want to take a look at your excellent work, as he wasn't aware of your channel. I thought this was an especially good idea for him to do, since his video was going to cover a lot of the same material. Due to the fact that he had researched similar resources, Metatron indeed had already made similar comparisons as yourself, but only because these comparisons are ultimately self-evident. 

I would argue that ancient vs. modern democracy is well-tread material that is repeated so often in academia that the major points have become famous memes (in the pre-Internet sense of the term); for example, that Pericles quote was in my college textbook, and also occurs in the Ancient Greek language textbook I teach my students with. In my judgement, knowing the the man, and with the evidence at hand, it's my estimation that there was no plagiarism involved. Moreover, the fact that Metatron wanted to credit you and your video in his (at 8 min 50 sec), quoting your excellently phrased sentence, and encouraged his audience to see your video and subscribe to your channel, with the link to your video in the description, demonstrates to me that everything here was done in good faith. I could be wrong — but you might want to reach out to Raffaello to hear his side.

If you watch more videos by Metraton, you'll see that this video of his is one of countless similar comparisons. In fact, the video you commented on is episode 3 in a series about Ancient Greece that he had long planned. Actually, I find it remarkbale that both you and Metatron covered the same topic, a topic that has been done to death in the academic world for centuries (and rightly so due to its importance), yet your videos are so strikingly different, and you each reveal different important parts of the story. The similarities come from the fact that there are only so many facts and points of comparison. Being a scholar of Ancient Greece myself, I was very pleased to have learned new things, and different things, from each of you.

So if you get the chance to read this, I would encourage you to write a private email directly to Metatron, as he is a rigorous academic with an open heart, so you can hash out what I perceive to be a simple misunderstanding. 

If my comment does not meet you well, then please forgive my butting in. I look forward to your future videos, as your essays have been extraordinarily informative to me, and I recommend them widely. Thanks again for such extraordinarily insightful research. My very best to you, sir.

- Luke Ranieri

[turnipslop]

Whooo! An amazing video Ryan, and deeply informative. Thank you so much for taking the time to make these videos and further our understanding of the systems we live in, as well as those that have come before.