Why Aristotle Feared Democracy (and so Should You)

Is democracy truly the best form of government, or could it be fundamentally flawed? Aristotle, the father of Western philosophy, had some startling thoughts on this 2,300 years ago. So in this video, we'll dive into Aristotle's 'Politics' yet again to uncover his provocative critiques - and why it matters today.

Following our explorations of tyranny and oligarchy, we now turn to democracy - a system Aristotle saw as deeply problematic. Drawing from his study of 158 different constitutions, Aristotle's insights go far beyond just theory. We'll examine how the rule of the majority can gradually shift into a tyranny of its own, and the various forms this can take.

Discover the mechanisms of democratic rule that Aristotle warned against - from the misunderstanding of equality to the potential for corruption and conflict. Learn how Aristotle's experiences in Athens and his time tutoring Alexander the Great shaped his understanding of governance. We'll explore the true nature of democracy according to Aristotle, how democracies can disregard the rule of law, the dangers of leaving out the qualified in the name of equality, and why democracies risk devolving into worse forms of government. We'll also delve into Aristotle's proposed solution: the concept of 'Polity'.

Aristotle's analysis of how power operates in a democracy is as relevant now as it was in ancient Greece. His insights shed light on political dynamics that continue to impact our world today. After watching this, you might start questioning what you thought you knew about democracy.

Timestamps
0:00 Introduction: The Problem with Democracy
2:09 Democracy's Disregard for the Rule of Law
5:07 Leaving Out the Qualified in the Name of Equality
7:13 Potential for Corruption and Conflict
10:29 Risks of Devolution: From Democracy to Worse Forms
13:21 Aristotle’s Alternative to Democracy
16:03 Conclusion: Rethinking Democracy with Aristotle’s Insights

[MiguelReyes]

As a citizen of a third-world country, I've always thought about how democracy hinders development . One government tries to advance development while the opposition tries to convince voters how this is a bad idea .. even though they know it is a good idea...4 years, the country goes in one direction. The next four years a new government comes in, and the country goes on a completely different directing .. is like running in circles.

[jsto]

Solidly delivered arguments that I wouldn't be able to refute. All evident in recent news, as well as the last 150 years of political changes.

[cautiousoptimist]

Perhaps, I'll fear democracy should it ever become a problem. However, I live in the US which I think is better described as a misrepresentative republic, or an oligarchy hiding behind the curtains of a political theater they own and operate.

[Ladynine-kk]

"When the poor majority holds power, there is a strong incentive to use that power to take from the rich". Very interesting. I would be interested to ask Aristotle a question (by that i mean, maybe in his writings he already spoke about that) : when the poor are the majority, cannot we consider that the system already failed ? If a small minority holds the wealth, isn't it ONLY because they hold power (or their fathers did). And isn't it in the common interest to redistribute wealth in some way ? In which way was it fair that a few got all the wealth to begin with ?

[JPErwin-lz]

I rather not have the rich in charge of my freedoms, my rights, my finances, and my life and liberty.

[What_do_I_Think]

As we currently see, a Constitution is not a solution that works indefinitely. When the people in charge have the will and power to pervert the meaning of a constitution, the road to oligarchy and tyranny is paved. Checks and balances are good, but only as good, as they really work and as the will of society to upheld them is strong enough.

[Frisbieinstein]

Having read Aristotle's Politics, I can tell you that he defined democracy differently than the way we do today. To Ari "democracy" was the common people ruling in their own self-interest to the detriment of the general good. What we call democracy he defined as "polity" -- the common people ruling for the betterment of the general good.

I will note that today in the USA we actually have what Aristotle called "oligarchy" --rich people ruling in their own self-interest to the detriment of the general good. The mask of democracy is transparently phony.

[krisburke]

Polity does not ensure that those that lead are of good moral character..the US democracy experiment has a constitution as is the same with Canada each Constitution has a clause whereby the government can circumvent the laws within...leaders ought to be well educated, proven merit, service to the poor..the best suited are those that do not want to lead..those that do not seek power..

[MIKEMIKE-tedt]

Thanks for this very educational video!

[snoverstudios]

When a polity system does not offer the opportunity to chose the very best and brightest, the most empathetic towards the individual rights and true freedom for us, and only offers, as presented by the producers of South Park, "...choices are a giant douche and a turd sandwich", then that system is one I cannot consent to, and if they/it doesn't have my consent and uses force against me, that is tyranny. If I do not consent, if it is not voluntary, then it is tyranny.

[scottpeterson]

How did the Rich accumulate so much wealth in the first place? Such things as wage theft, monopoly and policies that actively work to prevent competition

[architeuthis]

In today's world, a lot (though not all) of the pitfalls Aristotle was concerned about can be overcome.
For example, providing high quality education to everyone, minimizes (but doesn't eliminate) the likelihood that the masses will make poor decisions.
Such advantages could very well tip the scales to favor democracy over the other forms of government he describes.

[michaelgracey]

It's like he travelled in time to today and thought "Nope that's just dumb"

[CraigAnderson-hh]

We don't have a democracy so nothing to worry about. Much ado about nothing...

[Apollyon-erut]

Good stuff. This is why Ben Franklin responded to a woman's question about the US establishment, that they had established a Republic, but with the qualifier "if you can keep it." Sadly, we haven't. The US abandoned the the ultimate rule of law (US Constitution), long ago. Now, we've abandoned basic rule of law such as theft, destruction of public and private property, arson, violence, etc. This is why El Salvador is now a safer place to walk the streets of any large city of Kalifornistan. Though this serves the purposes of the Leftists who run our state, in has left the state in utter decay, crime, burdensome regulation, living costs, etc.

[techtoth]

The rich would feel threatened even at the cuspid of their power. There's no end to their greed. That's a mistake Aristotle made. He basically considered humans too good, compared to the sad reality. Probably because in his times the rich would still have a sense for beauty and social consideration. I can't see that now.

[Mykey]

I enjoyed this. I also learned a lot about the application of confirmation bias through reading the comments.

[jamesnasmith]

He presumes merit underpins most wealth. Also, the creation of a truly solid constitution requires a remarkable ‘disinterest in gain’ from its founders, an improbable condition.

[v.g.r.l.]

A lucid and balanced synthesis. Thanks.

[dorianphilotheates]

Aristotle didn’t fear democracy; democracy feared Aristotle.