Original Post Due Sunday by 3 p.m. Please feel free to comment on each others posts as well...if they are good, I might find some extra credit for you!
******ATTENTION*****
Daniel Schorr, a nationally acclaimed reporter, will be speaking this Thursday, September 11 at 7 pm, at the University of Maryland, Parkway (UNLV). The event is free, open to the public, and begins at 7 pm in Artemus Ham Hall at the North end of campus. There are no tickets required, however, seating is first come. So...bring your family, friends, neighbors, and your SAFMEDs early and make sure you get a good seat!The Athenian in you would go just because it is a great opportunity, but the Plato in you will be allowed to count your attendance in place of one article for your current event notebook. If you can't make it, don't worry there will be others like this.
If you would like to know more about Mr. Schorr, follow this link: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=2101143
131 comments:
alright. so, first off, do we have to do that reading abstract? no? good. everytime the word "government" comes up someone has to mention that they think they know the solution to everything, as if they know how to make the perfect government. but maybe the way we have it isnt so bad? maybe we should stop just listening to what the media says or what everyone else says and look at exactly what is going on and choose our own side. early athenians believed that the citizens over which the government rules where the best at making the decisions that best benifited the populace. which at first sounds like a good plan. the vote was unbiased and simply selected members regardless of their occupation or social status, because each member of society had an equal say. but a simple lesson in psycology (hope i spelt that right?) will show that the common man is subject to many worldly distractions. every man that takes the office is subject to other peoples wills, and just maybe a little coin will convince the newly appointed politician to allow them to continue thier business without disruption. in plato's system, the appointed are educated in the ways of properly ruling a country, city-state, etc. and these educated "politicians" if you will, can rule with justice and systems of checks and balances. for those who support the system where the people hold the power, the system may seem empowering, and may leave the governed in control. but what happens when 1/4 of the population is uneducated? are those the people you want to make the decisions. its hard enough for many to relalize that by simply voting you can have a greater say in the way issues are resolved. now you want to go and let them solve the issues themselves. if they dont have the education to employ a small amount of power, how can they be trusted with all the power. leave the "politicians" (gets me everytime, people who's job it is to lead with the peoples best interests in mind, what a crazy concept) to make the "policies" and if you dont like it, then vote. the system america has right now words petty darn well. lets give it a chance.
oh well my point. first of all I want to say I'm not smart so my point must suck :)and and and what was with that article I read it like 5 times and only got like a sort of understanding of it.
Well the Anthenians believed that they can pick out any random member without knowing their skills or their plans. What just because they have an equal say they can randomly be picked and be on stage? I think that is ridiculous, pathetic, pitaful and piteous stupid of them.
Every one at Clark High school can imagine if i was randomly selected to rule Clark High school what will happen to me right I'll let you decide on that one. :D
I think Plato's Idea is magnificient, brilliant, exellent, splendid, and marvelous. (dont I just love adjectives :D )
He saying that members should be Eduacated to rule a country or a city well normally would'nt you want a Eduacated person to be ruling or governing your city or your country.
It will lead the country/city In a better Econimic way rather having a Uneduacated person telling what you to do. I would rather have a person that knows what he/she is doing.
So I fully support Plato's Idea.
Thanks for reading even though It's been like one week and I'm already struggling and dieing how am I going to cope :( now I dont know why im in Ap Goverment lol :D lend me your spirts people :D
oh 4got to adam yes we were suppose to do that reading abstract thing I just guess :(
A few comments from teacher:
Make sure you have at least first name initial and last name...like mine...R. West!
YES you have to do that Abstract/Critique thing!!!
Make sure you look at the WHOLE question...I do not see a single historical/contemporary example in either of the first two posts...
James Campbell
I am going for the plato side.
He is right who is better at doing a job thatn someone who has been trained for that job. As Socrates says " Would you ask a shoemaker or a musician for advice on politics? No you would ask a man who specializes in politics." Tho Socrates has a good point there may be a couple things that I dont agree with for instance, his way of helping hitler in his facist state of communism. There was a good example of Socrates plan for government in a movie that came out in the past couple years called 300. The spartans when they went to war and met up with ( im going to butcher their name i think its the BRUTHINIANS or somthing like that) King Leonitous asked one of the (brutinians) What was his profession and the man stated " I am a shoemaker." Right after he asked a couple more names of the (bruthinians) he asked what was the profession of his men and they all shouted " OWUUUU....OWUUUU...OWWUUUU!!!!" Which meant they were all pro's at what they were doing which is fighting. Thats also the reason the
(Bruthinians) Got slaughtered. It also in the begining of the movie shows a FREE Society. Where women can speak in the courts of men. Where freedom of speech should be allowed and draw out the wrongs in the government system. We should leave the Horse shoeing to te horseshoers, and the music to the musicians, and so we should leave the the politics up to politicians. One more thing im not saying lets leave it all up to them we should have a say in it but at least let them explain why they have made such a decision and if the people agree.
Plato's "expert government" is the obvious choice of what is needed in today's world, and is what i agree with. If we lived in a small city-state with a group of dedicated and interested people who wanted the good of the country, then direct democracy would be great. The fact is, we don't, and direct democracy no longer has any practicality in a large country like America. When Aristotle was saying that "man is a political animal" he was not making some amazing philosophical statement, but was just simply observing what was working at the time. Government is not something that can be predicted or philosophized because it is a reflection of the social and economical needs of the time, and therefore government will change. It is ridiculous to suggest direct democracy today. Would you want America's Casey Anthony's, O.J. Simpsons, or any other of the thousands of people who are completely off their rocker making decisions over your life? I think not. Unless we want to call the majority of Americans "idiotes," (which i'm pretty sure the majority of American's would not be too pleased with), we will be under Plato's style of democracy for a long time.
1) i will take the humilation of writing that really long post that didnt even anser the question. BUT i wrote the first one, so doesnt that make me a trend setter or something?
2) kevin is on to something about america being "off [its] rocker". platonian government works quite well. take for example, the catholic church. now im not going to go on a religious rave, but for the most part, their system follows most of the guidlines of platonian government. priests and bishops and popes (oh my) are selected through a scrutinizing process to lead churchs and to guide and teach the masses. they need to be of sound mind and strong faith to guide thousands of souls in their direction. the church wouldnt just pick any follower to be a priest, not only might they have little faith, but they may not be knowledgeable in the religion or not able to speak before a crowd.
perhaps it would be different if citizenship in america was different, as the article clearly states in the opening paragraphs, citizenship was highly regarded to athenians, they valued their citizenship and the "obligations" (think back to mr. west's talk about it) that came with it. americans now dont quite value citizenship and the rights to participate as much as athenians did. and until each and every member of the united states of america views their status as "citizens" the athenian system will fail in america.
I'll just keep it short simple.
Of course, I would enjoy improvising both ideas, if I had to really really really choose, Plato's idea does definitely make things alot more safer than having low educated people to run it. Yes people, should be very involve in political decisions and such. But leaving it for the sake of the country leave it to the people who studied the past and the present and has smart and intelligent ideas for the future for the people and the country.
ugh this is retarded
K.Hwong last comment.
Should anyone choose Athenian democracy it would be like having Mr. West (no offense, first name off the top of my head, really) teach some ballet class for little 8-year-olds. I can only imagine the chaos that would ensue.
I believe that Plato is the way to go. When dealing with matters of the State why should they be decided by someone who's never picked up a book in his life? Those that are knowledgeable in government should run and control government.
"If you want to know who is good at math, you would ask a mathematician?" Plato further supports Socrates' argument with his own, the ship analogy. When comparing the State to an extravagant and grandiose ship, in order to have a safe and successful trip the ship must have a skillful navigator or it will lose its way and all is lost.
Historical event? Well, there's the Chinese giving Civil Service Exams. Only the people that knew their stuff could be a Government Official or some other high-ranking position.
We've used this model of democracy for more than 200 years. (I agree with Kevin) Plato's style isn't going anywhere anytime soon.
*Claps* I would love to see Mr West teaching ballet to a eight year odl class lol.
The government serves as a resource to any individual seeking for advice or help. Throughout history, we understand that every human has a little knowledge in every field, no matter how difficult the subject matter is. From biology to basketball, we all at least understand the basic concepts, if not , even more. Athenian's randomized selection of officials proves the necessary method for everyone to participate in government and to get different perspectives on one issue.
When Athenians randomized the selection of citizens to authority, they selected people with little knowledge in the subject of politics. The statement made by Aristotle "man is a political animal" supports the idea that any person can take part in the judgment of government based on natural instincts. Most important things in life are decided not by education or learned experience, but by the inert morals within since birth. If citizens were chosen at random, there would be a much better chance that new ideas will be presented. "The shoemaker" have set rules in the advice he can give and styles of shoes to make because of what he learned in school; only when an artist comes in can the shoemaker make innovative shoes with unique designs he never would have thought of.
Take the Lincoln-Douglass debate for instance. Clearly, Douglass had the experience with politics and speech, a huge advantage over Lincoln's inadequate failings to get elected in politics. Lincoln failed to be elected for more than 4 previous positions he ran for. Based on political statistics, Douglass would have been much more qualified to be elected as president. However, Lincoln also had a secret power. He knew what it was like to live as a human in poverty. He understood the people's worries more than he knew the rules of government. Bringing a different perspective to politics, Lincoln was luckily voted president, and successfully freed slaves. By chance and arbitraryness, Lincoln was one of the best things to ever happen to democracy.
Comment on Kevin Reel's Blog:
When Kevin Mentions "Government is not something that can be predicted or philosophized because it is a reflection of the social and economical needs of the time," I completely agree with his statement. And although government has been changing since the beginning of civilization, we must also remember that sometimes, the original government or idea is better than the deviation. Such as the Plato's government, he adapted his method to the ever changing political system. However, is that the best way? Using an analogy, I bring in global warming. If global warming does exist and the temperature is always rising, does that mean we base our everyday lives off the rising temperature? No, we try to alter the temperature so that it returns to the normal climate that keeps the world in balance. I think in this case, Kevin is right about how government is always changing, but we might also want to take into mind that sometimes, it is better to change back to normal ways.
Well, I would love to give thought to the first question to which we are supposed to respond too, however, not even an ounce of thought is required. Much less than an ounce, actually. Quite clearly, the better pick of the two would be Platocrian democracy. For one thing, it is most similar to the governmental system that we run today, with our "experts in politics." Not only is our system running more or less smoothly, the argument that you would "ask a shoemaker for advice on shoes," and "a musician for musical advice" is irrefutable.
However, Athenian democracy is a great idea. Lovely, in fact. Unfortunately, as Kevin R. said, Athenian democracy "no longer has any practicality in a large country like America." Athenian democracy is quite possibly the best idea ever, however, not practical at all, because it requires near perfection in the education of each citizen, and complete participation by all. Not only that, it would require all to have the same view, so that all could agree equally on the same subjects and not have disputes. Much like the modern chemistry gas laws, made for perfect gasses only. Something that I would like to see sometime ever would be the participation by all individuals in political activities, or at least voting come election year.
In the year 2000, and also most years leading up to 2008, the government system that we have all been subjected to has been an overall successful government, one which is very similar to the Platocrian democracy, where professional politicians are elected to professional political jobs. Contemporary times are working quite well underneath our mostly Platocrian system, so what's wrong with that?
So let's hop on this bandwagon of agreement and camaraderie, shall we? I agree with William and Kevin that there are too many that are uneducated enough anyway to run such a great country as ours. Too much is on the line for that job!
Even if the world was an amazing place, the population is too large to control by the random process of Athenian democracy, because there will be conflicts. Oh yes, there will be.
Love,
Nicholas.
Ryan Edwards
Hey, check it out. I didn't know that I actually had a google account. Sweet.
Anyways, I'm with Plato on this one. Why? Well, Athenian Democracy sounds, ironically, a lot like communism. I mean, I know that it isn't run by a single dictator and everything but just take a look at the citizens. Everybody has the same interests (politics), same hobbies (politics), and same personality (politicians). Anyone who tries to be different or has a different religion or has different political beliefs would have a pretty rough time. Just take a look at Socrates.
First of all, I definitely wouldn't want to live someplace that's filled with nothing but politicians because I'd get really annoyed and I'd end up moving and not living there anyway.
Second,a community that is filled with a bunch of brain dead zombies would really have some problems when it comes to individuality. Like I said before, nobody would be different and anyone who tried to be different would pay dearly for it. It's basically like an ant colony without the queen. I also couldn't help but think of Anne Rand's "The Anthem" (I don't know how to italicize stuff on here) when I read this.
So what's so good about Plato's idea? Well just take a look at our country. Like some other posts here said, we leave government up to the experts and we live our lives.
It should be noted, however, that going to one extreme or the other isn't a good idea. It's a good idea to leave politics to politicians but it is a bad idea for those politicians to ignore the citizens or else the citizens will initiate a revolution and over throw the government and put in its place a government that follows the will of the people anyway. That's why most governments these days have taken ideas from both ideas (did that make any sense?).
Oh yeah. Everyone here should check out Living Legends because I was on iTunes yesterday sampling a bunch of their albums and they totally blew me away! I would totally buy all of them right now but I'm saving my money for something else. So if anyone here has any money lying around that they don't want (lol) can you give it to me?
-Ry-Man
By the way, do I get extra credit for commenting on my own post? If so then I have to say that I totally agree with myself. lol
If I had to choose a type of government to follow, I would have to choose Plato's expert government over the Atlantians. I would choose this because I would rather have someone that knows what they're doing rather than someone who has no experience in the matter and just let them wing it.
To prove my point I will use a random person for an example. Say you went to a dance teacher, you would want them to teach you how to dance, because that is what you went there for. You wouln't want to go to the dance studio to find that the dance instructor is teaching the flute, which he/she may have never played before. It's the same with government.
as nick said "Not only that, it would require all to have the same view, so that all could agree equally on the same subjects and not have disputes."
well nick. i dont exactly agree with you on this topic. i think that yes, in order for athenian democracy to work, there needs to be full participation. but you dont need to all have the same opinion on everything. thats the whole point of government isnt it? do what is best for the people. what is best, what people want, and what EVERYONE agrees on are not always the same. plus. there will always be disagreement amoung people, the issues always have two sides. thats why they are issues. like tissues, which also have two sides. thats the point of government, thats why cavemen all the way to athenians made government, so that arguements about the issues can be decided to best suit the people.
First off I did not really understand most of “Of the People, By the People” by Simon Goldhill until I read some of the other blogs that were poster before me. I don’t have much knowledge of politics or a mind of a politics; I’m guessing that is the reason for me being in AP Government/Politics Eh. I had to even ask my Economics teacher what the difference between the Republican Part, and Democratic Party, and what I got from his little spiel what that there are several definitions to go with each of the parties.
So from reading the article, and reading past blogs, I thought about everything I read and came to the conclusion of saying Plato is who I would side with. As I would not want to have Modern Merchants, or specialized persons of tailoring, mechanics, dance, teach, art, or anything else that is not of being a Person with a Political Mind to be. I want a government who has people who run it that are Politicians and not random persons off the streets. Speaking of random persons, and the 08’ Election, can any ONE person become President (with the met requirements)… Yes, is it meant for everyone to run for, no. Many are not suited for Politics or running/ being apart of a Government.
Like the United States Marine Corps Slogan “The Few, The Proud”… not everyone can become a United States Marine. Not everyone can run a Government. If you want to learn how to be a tailor, go to fashion school pick up sewing and knitting, but you want to become Political and or the one who runs the state on a bigger level, then learn politics, live politics, be politics.. everyone is not fit for politics. Plato is where I side and stand for I have no other opinion but do what you love to do, not what you falsely enjoy… I was once told “Do what you HAVE to do, to do what you WANT to do” – Truck Driver … Hopefully all this made sense.
- R.Velasco
Nick really brings up a great point. The pragmatic thinking of any type of government needs to be speculated in order for a successful government to take place. Communism, for example, is a great idea and is the ideal society for every country-- if communism worked. The impracticality of everyone being treated equallly causes such a government to fail. However, I also believe that in this case, Athenian democracy may actually work. Athenian is unlike communism in that, the idea is not exactly an ideal situation. No one wants randomness, but the process still makes politics fair. In a way, this system is like jury duty; everyone gets chosen to do the job. Plus, it will take away all the unfair bribes and deceits when we elect officials right?
I would side with Plato’s government. His form of democracy is so much like ours today, in a way it is quite hard to imagine life without it being like it is present day. As past students’ have said, Socrates made sense with his questions: if you would go to a shoemaker for advice on shoes, wouldn’t you go to an expert on politics for advice on politics? Also if our government was like the Athenians, it would be complete chaos. For one, being chosen at random to control every single citizen’s I guess you could say thoughts and movements, is fairly dangerous. There’s billions of people living in the US, it’d be near impossible if not impossible to know every single person, every single personality, every single secret. And like Ryan E had said, Athenian government looks a lot like communism: every one the same regardless.
Hmm. Now to think of an example to further prove my point, haha. Well, I’ll use myself as an example. I’m very technology challenged, so if I had a question on how to run or install or anything else technology related that I couldn’t figure out how to do, I wouldn’t go to a person like me who’s technology challenged, I’d go to someone that knew completely an fully understood how to do what ever I needed help with [I hope that worked as an example…] . This would just relate back to Socrates’ point, that if you wanted someone to run a good government, go to a professional.
This is a long comment... so read it at your own risk.
After reading the article twice and reading through the other comments posted above mine, I agree that Plato's idea of government makes the most sense to me. I have a few points of my own to make about this though, so bear with me here.
First of all, I feel like the Athenian Democracy was not a complete disaster - it was obviously working for their community at the time. However, Plato was one step ahead of everybody else. The Athenians were still using a system that was around for a long period of time, and they were in serious need of a change. Their idea of a perfect, fair, and well-organized government is almost mediocre compared to Plato's idea.
Secondly, in response to almost everyone else's comments, I completely agree that no one wants a random person to rule our country. This concept worked back then with the Athenians though, because there was not a huge population of people living there. Everyone pretty much knew everybody else, and everyone knew their places in the city. Today however, having a single person with little or no experience leading a country with over 300 million people is not an acceptable or reasonable choice at all.
I don't know about you, but i don't want some average joe who watches television all day long and weighs 3439849328 pounds to be randomly chosen to rule America. No thanks.
A point made from the article we read stated that "the people have not been educated into rule, cannot be expected to make informal judgements, and cannot reasonably be asked to evaluate complex arguments." Asking that extremely fat guy who watches tv all day that i mentioned above to make a choice for the entire populace by himself is ridiculous, and we would all be completely doomed by his decision making.
The British statesman Robert Lowe, who was mentioned in the article, says that the ordinary people are "impulsive, unreflecting, and violent." I agree with this statement in the modern sense, because America has a lot of stupid people. I certainly dont want a 50% chance of being ruled by any "idiotes." I wouldn't want a person who specializes in running a farm to run a democracy - they would only know how to run cows... and we're not cows lol. My point though, is that I would not "ask a shoemaker or a musician" for advice on politics - I would ask an experienced politician, obviously.
The act of voting for a choice was a revolutionary idea created to make every decision as equal and fair as humanly possible. There will always be that one jerk who doesn't agree with everyone else, but at least within the Platonian Government, they have their say in everything - they have the right to say they don't agree, don't they? In the Athenian Democracy, what if I didn't like the person who got randomly chosen to rule? I couldn't exactly stand up and protest, because that would mean I didn't want to participate in that decision, which ALSO means that I would "have no business [there] at all." I would probably get rejected by the entire society.
For a historical example, I actually have two. My first one has to do with Venezuela, and the president there, Hugo Chavez. I asked my dad about this one, and he told me that Chavez has tried to pass some laws in secret that benefit him more than the actual country. Once the citizens find out about this, they become outraged, and sometimes have riots and protests, because they were not allowed to vote on the law.
My other example is that in China, the rulers passed a law that said each family could only have one child, and if they had more than one, then they would have to pay a fee. The citizens were not allowed to vote on this law, and now they have no choice but to follow it. Ever since then, there have been a growing number of orphaned or dead children who are mostly girls, since the families want boys to carry on the family name. In effect, this is going to hurt China in the near future, since the men in the country are severely outnumbering the women. So, my point is that voting is a great thing, because the choices of a single ruler or a single party are not always the best thing for a country as a whole.
Anddd the amazing, wonderful, crazy asian named William Fang posted an interesting statement: "Most important things in life are decided not by education or learned experience, but by the inert morals within since birth. If citizens were chosen at random, there would be a much better chance that new ideas will be presented." I have to say that I disagree with this, because how are important things decided merely by the morals we have at birth? Not everyone is born with the urge to make amazing decisions for the country - most of these are learned and experienced throughout our lives. We all need to learn and discover the right choices in many situations, and I dont think that we are simply born with these concepts. Your comparison with Lincoln was interesting, but even though I have not lived with the poor or anything, I still know that it's hard for them to live from day to day, and I know that they all have their own point of views with political subjects as well. I have learned all this from personal experience, not just by the morals I grew up with. Sorry William... I dont want to sound mean, lol, but I'm just saying my point on this matter. :)
SOOOOO in conclusion, the Platonian Government is clearly the better choice for a government. I'm sorry my comment is so long... but I think I pretty much made my point... and thanks for reading it! :)
Harry Potter's girlfriend, Karina Marshall
hi
:)
OK I wanted to wait but I can't take it...I have to jump in with a few comments!
First of all re-check the original post if you have already posted because I put an interesting opportunity...
Second, Athens didn't EVER rely on just ONE person...several of you make it sound like you would be choosing some bum and they would have TOTAL control..NEVER WOULD HAPPEN! Think about your SAFMED for democracy???
Third, again targeted at the Platoians...you say we (U.S.) already have "experts" running our government and they're doing a great job but then why does the Republican President have a 30% approval rating and the Democratic Congress a 19% approval rating? If they're such experts why can't they seem to make the people happy?
Fourth, again Plato happy people, think about all the things we already do that are required? We pay taxes, serve on juries, you HAVE to go to school until 18, you HAVE to take this miserable government class??? Those don't "feel" like obligations or burdens because you see the value in them as a part of supporting the greater good. Is it really that unimaginable that people could serve each other in government roles and actually enjoy it?
OK I've said tooooo much...I like what I'm reading A LOT! Keep it up!
Ok Mr. West lol, thanks for showing us your points.
In response to your statement about how we "make it sound like you would be choosing some bum and they would have TOTAL control..NEVER WOULD HAPPEN!" oOk but even so, the president does have most of the say, don’t they? I completely understand your point though. That single person would definitely not have 100% of the control, but their point of view and their influence would be the greatest among the rest of the government officials.
And I know we don’t have experts running the country; of course we don’t. No one is perfect at everything, which means that we definitely do not have the most perfect people in office. We need improvement like everyone else. But when it comes down to choosing between either the Athenian or the Platonian Government, Plato’s idea would be more suitable for America. The Athenian ways would not suit the American people, since I certainly can't trust everyone in this country... like I said before, I want someone who is trained for the job, not some random person leading us.
And no, it is not unimaginable to see that people serve eachother in government roles. I agree with you on that one.
divona john - hello to you too! LOL :)
Harry Potter's girlfriend, Karina Marshall
I had to revise.
I'm terribly hungry, so I'll use a food analogy.
Let’s say my family of 1896532 (that’s just a random number) has decided to let one person, whose name will be randomly drawn, pick where we will eat dinner tonight. Most of us want to eat at a different restaurant, and we suddenly turn into Athenians by some unforeseen superpower so we go for random selection. Now let’s say my brother is the one randomly picked, and he decides that he wants all of us to eat at some purely vegetarian restaurant that smells like socks. Now, that’s fine for him and my mom who’s a vegetarian but it’s not fine for the (1896532 minus 2) rest of us. I’m sure most of us would want meat in our food. Thus, randomly selecting the Athenian way isn’t “for the people” it’s for the lucky people. And I don’t have much of any good luck.
So then, the next day our Athenian spirit diminishes and we decide to try picking a restaurant the Platonian way. Since I am a food expert (in my imagination) I am “elected” and therefore decide to go to a place for the “general good.” Thus, I pick the buffet. TADA. Not only are there meat AND vegetables (ooh, magic) but there’s a variety of food for my family to pick what they want to eat in that restaurant.
Now I'm not saying that one person ultimately decides what happens, but that THAT person has a very big influence compared to those who are not randomly chosen.
If you can’t tell by my analogy already, I am for Plato’s expert government. I would not want a randomly selected cook or even a medical doctor to have a major part in governing this country. Because they aren’t experts in politics to understand what is better for the country, “the ability to do what is right is constantly compromised by the need to please the people—the untamed beast.”
Plato’s expert government can even be seen in school. We have teachers who have been studying their specific major teach us in that particular subject. I wouldn’t want a randomly selected artist to teach us government nor would I want the cashier at the nearest 7/11 to be the principal.
“The people have not been educated into rule, cannot be expected to make informal judgments, and cannot reasonably be asked to evaluate complex arguments.” With that said, it doesn’t mean that the people should not participate in politics. We should all partake in some way whether it be voting or just discussing in this blog, but governing should be left to the experts and not to just anyone who happens to have a “lucky” break.
I choose sides with Plato. We cannot put our trust in people that have no experience in politics. People that have studied politics should be in politics. You wouldn’t have a chess player play professional baseball just because he was elected to. Athens had the power to select at random because they did not live in metropolitan society. Athens was able to select at random because of the amount of citizens they had and “a man who takes no interest in politics…[had] no business [there] at all.” Everyone was involved because that’s what being a citizen was about. If you weren’t involved then you were considered an “idiotes.”I’m not saying Athenian democracy was wrong or bad, I’m saying that Plato was there to upgrade democracy at the time. The democracy we have today is a lot like the democracy of Plato. There are some rough times where the people don’t like what the government’s doing but that is the down side of “majority rules.” There is a saying that is said in Student Council: “Everyone can’t do everything, but someone can do something.” This can apply for democracy because not everyone can be president or secretary of defense. Everyone has their place and everyone shines doing different things.
This is like the third time I'm posting... is that ok Mr. West?
Anyway, I agree with what Alex is saying. The simple fact that today’s democracy is so much like what Plato’s ideas were demonstrates that the Platonian Government works very well, and has obviously been working for thousands of years.
Also, Alex said that "there are some rough times where the people don’t like what the governments doing but that is the down side of majority rules." In a way, this has to do with what Mr. West was saying, about why the president and congress don’t have that many supporters – but when it comes down to it, the majority of people voted them into that position, and there will always be those people who do not support what’s going on at the time.
Thanks for reading another one of my comments lol.
Harry Potter's girlfriend, Karina Marshall
i agree with Plato. America is such a large country that the Anthenians way wouldnt work for us. how could we, just at random, pick our leader, not knowing what they are capable of doing? like Socrates asked " if you want advice on politics, would you ask a shoemaker or a musician, or would you ask an expert on politics?" you would obviously ask someone who was an expert at politics, i know i would. i think the Athenian democracy would work if we werent a big country. back then everyone knew everyone and what they were able to do, so they didnt really have to worry if that person was going to good or not. thats why Athenian democracy worked. but times have changed and people have changed. so we cant go by that way anymore. i think it would just cause chaos. not everyone agrees with who are leaders are now a days but thats the beauty of being able to vote for you you want. there will be disputes, there always is, but thats why we all vote for who we want.
karina marshall potter- hello to you too
:)
There is definitely lots of people on the Plato side on this one. But I agree with Mr. West dudes, no matter how much people vote on stuff and no matter how many rules are passed, isnt it back to the original people? No matter how skilled a politician is, isnt the ultimate goal to try to satisfy peoples needs?
If you choose random people off the streets, the probablity that more than 5 out of 10 of them are just like you is high. For pessimists (not saying you are), the whole world is not filled with bums and wacked out people. Most people in this world are just like you. Wouldn't people that you can relate to make better rules than politicians who only work because thats the only job they can do to get paid a decent amount of money?
Plus, its not like the Athenian democracy lets those people rule forever. Most likely, they would vote on one rule and leave. Then the next set of random people are chosen. Seems fair to me.
Its hard to chose between the two extreme forms of government but I am going to have to go with the Athenians.
Even though our politicians are educated before we elect them nothing can prepare them to lead us in what they believe vs. what the people want. The only way to learn is on the job. Like Will said it doesn’t really matter how skilled they are it depends on how they are able to please the people and that is how they get their approval rates West stated earlier.
Like Mr. West pointed out our government is kind of like Athenians. We are all required to school and take a government class, in a way they are educating us all. Which does not seem that bad after all. Now everyone is able to make an educated vote in some sort of way.
The whole choosing leaders at random seems not right. But if everyone has the same education and experience then I don’t see what is wrong with that. If someone does not want to be part of the whole political process they just don’t participate. Sorry for them they are considered “idiots”.
The only great argument against the Athenians seems to be:
Plato’s first point with the musician and the shoemaker. I wouldn’t want a shoemaker operating on me…I would want a doctor. So it only makes since to have an educated politician run our government.
Then I would argue, how do we know that the educated politician isn’t going to screw us over?
We don’t. So we might as well go with the random selection…we might have a better chance. :D
I agree with Plato’s idea. Why, because why would you want someone who did not know anything about politics being our leader? C’mon, really? In the lines for Athens is “One of the most intractable problems for democracy is the notion of “what the people want. ”Democracy is said to enact the will of the people, but it is extremely difficult to determine what that will is or how it should be enacted.” To me those quotes show me that their government did not know what they were doing half the time. If the United States were like that our country would fall apart slowly. I mean yes, not everyone will like the leader we have. That is why they have votes for who goes against who to show who United States really is best for. Also, like it is said many times in students’ comments, Plato’s ideas are just like how our government is today. And to see it change to Athens views would be different. [mmmm, now for example] So, say if you were going to a mall with a group of friends, right? And you were trying to find a good outfit for your next party with your parents and you need advice to see if it’s a polite outfit so you ask one of your friends. Which one would you ask.. a friend who wears party clothes all time and doesn’t really care if it is a trashy outfit or what not. Or would you ask someone who is conservative and knows what you want? OF COURSE, someone who is conservative… [ I hope that’s a good enough example?] That just shows that Athens ideas aren’t as good as Plato’s idea in my point of view… :]
I agree with the Athenians idea on Democracy. Many people complain about the government yet their not doing anything to fix it. More people should be involved in politics because most of the time it personally affects thier lives. The Greeks called private citizens "idiotes". "In democracy to be unengaged means to be useless" People want things to change but there is no action on their part so they have no choice but to live by the decisions of those involved.
Response to: William Fang
Hi by the way :)
Well seeing that I chose the side of the Athenian government William Fang's respone just helped me understand more and look at the Athenian government a little different however I still agree with it. No government is perfect however this system seems to be close and would be one of the best way to satisfy the people
Omg I must be electronically challenged! This is the 5th time I've had to post and none have gone through! (cries in fetal position) Anyway, I'm hoping this one goes through... >_<
I agree with Plato's idea. I believe that we should leave the decisions we don't know anything about to the people who do. And I don't mean the people who think they know it, but the people who eat, drink, and dream of it. (Creepy) The experts. In the article it said that Hitler used the idea to organize his tactics. I know that what he did was horrible, but on a different note, what he was able to accomplish was mind boggling. Those people knew they were killing the Jews, and they felt okay with it because they were confident with their leader. They knew their ranks and what they could accomplish and what would be done by the other people. Now what if we had a government like that? (Not killing a massive amount of people. What he did was wrong!) Where we listened to what the government was saying and did what was asked of us. Of course we'd still vote, but on topics that we had complete knowledge of and we could accomplish.
The Anthenians' form of government is too arbatrary. (sp?) we all know that we don't think alike. Do most men really care if their butt looks fat in a certain jean? No... Do most women really care how big their biceps are? Not likely. Randomly selecting people to run the government or to be a judge is rather stupid because there is going to be bias about something one way or another, and not just based on their gender. Does a horseback rider really care about waterpolo? Meh. And if given the choice to buy better equipment for either of those sports, which do you think they'd chose? The one they'd benefit from, huh? We've become (more like already were) concerned with what only will effect (affect? o.O) us. Example:
Say you're THE head surgeon at an emergency hospital and you've just got a patient with a ruptured organ. To keep them alive is going to call for an extensive and pretty grusome (sp?) procedure. The other surgeons are all for it, but the idiotic janitor (nothing against janitors, just proving a point) objects. He doesn't want to clean up the mess, and tells you to do something else cause he doesn't like it. You're the expert and there are very few options for this person's life, but the janitor says no, and because he is 'just as capable' as you, you have to take it into consideration. To make it fair you vote. Too bad there are only 4 surgeons and 15 janitors. You lose and that patients life is in the same hands that just got done cleaning a toilet. Very reassuring.
I believe that if we could work in the areas we are best in (and we can always learn something new, so it isn't very limited to what we can be involved in) we could make our country so much better and not continue to watch our economy roll around the rim. I've read an article a while back that said a 'Second depression' is only a few decades away at the rate we're heading. And most people don't care enough to do anything. Let's save the children in third world countries! If it's gonna keep me from getting my plasma TV, them little kids can die! What the heck? Global warming is causing the temperatures to rise, which is creating more powerful and frequent hurricanes! Aww that's so sad. I think I'm gonna drive 50 miles to buy some food and a 24 pack of soda...and not recycle. Woo hoo landfills and CO2! Everyone should learn to swim... There is a staggering amount of obese people and if they don't improve their health, they're going to have many problems and could possibly die very soon... Want a Twinkie? :D Cigarettes cause freaking cancer, but people still smoke them! >_< Where was I going with this...? Oh yeah!
We need to actually do something to help the economy. Even if we have to sacrifice a few things, in the long run it'll create a better life for us. In Plato's theory we'd all know what we are best capable of and would be able to accomplish more if we worked in the specific groups. A new president doesn't mean our past debts are paid, and until Genetic Engineers can create a money tree, (and not let anyone know) we're going to have to pay in some way. If it's raised taxes, so be it. We have hundreds of millions of people in the US, if everyone gave a dollar, that's quite a considerable amount of debt paid off. Now what about just 5, or 10 dollars. Sure you won't get that book, but our economy will improve. :D... No? Poo. -_-
Anyway, I agree with Plato's theory! This better freaking go through!!!
Ok so while reading everyone comments I realized a lot of people make pretty good points. I understand why they would think the certain things they do. I read D.John's comment I see how an Athenian governemt would be difficult due to our population. I still do not think politics should be left only to the professionals because at times leaders will do what they think is best or what supports their beleifs but not whats best for the people. When it comes to important issues there is usually not a 100% agreement, there will always be someone who is left unhappy. Therefore i will finish by saying everyone makes interesting points and I see how both would work and both would have problems so I'll be a scaredy cat and say I'm mutual :/
ps:
Aleena Goodson
Great surgeon vs. janitor example
so I'm leaving
bye everyone
I know I sound like a broken record when I say that I also agree with Plato’s form of government but it is the most similar view to today’s way of life. To rule with someone that has no prior education is a scary situation. Socrates asks “If you want advice on who is good at playing music would you ask someone who is an expert at playing musical instruments?” Of course the obvious answer would be yes because the most knowledge on that topic would come from a person in that field. The politicians in today’s society have gone to school and revolved their lives around politics and have made it their career to understand so it would make obvious sense to follow a leader who knows what they are talking about.
In Athenian society government was a way of life for everyone, every citizen. Choosing a leader on a random lot can be a dangerous thing, though there might have been some citizens who might have been educated to rule but I’m sure that not all were as capable. This way of life is just a mere fantasy and if you tried that in today’s society it would be hard for it to work out with as many personalities these days just picking one can cause many to rebel. Going back to what Mr. West said “Athens didn't EVER rely on just ONE person....several of you make it sound like you would be choosing some bum and they would have TOTAL control..NEVER WOULD HAPPEN!” Though they did not rely on that one person I don’t think that it was safe to say that everyone that was in their council knew what they were doing. I also agree on what Karina said an response to Mr. west by saying “[a] single person would definitely not have 100% of the control, but their point of view and their influence would be the greatest among the rest of the government officials.” It’s understandable as people to play follow the leader especially with someone in high command. Life can’t be lead with someone clueless driving it takes someone with the understanding of the road to take you down the right path to a better society.
-R Ogawa
I agree with the Athenian Democracy. It is similar to the way we run our government today. Each party (Democrat, Republican, Independent, etc.) is represented by several candidates running in the primaries. They do not have to be “politicians.” Just like Athenians they are from different walks of life, some are lawyers, movie stars, peanut farmers, and workers in clothing stores. The Athenian Council “drew up lists of citizens selected from each of 10 tribes.” It is reasonable to assume that they would choose people who were good citizens. It was an open society where everyone knew what everyone else was doing. They knew “how you walked, how you wore your hair, and what you ate.” This does not mean that they were all carbon copies of each other; it just means that they knew what everyone was like. Today we know all about Edward’s affair and Palin’s daughter’s pregnancy.
In our country citizens are selected at random for jury duty. Each defendant is entitled to a speedy trial by a jury of their peers. People serving jury duty are from every occupation, race, religion and cultural background. This process works and I will put it to any test against any other system in the world, past or present. We trust mechanics, housewives, and plumbers to make an informed and ethical decision when serving jury duty just as they do with government issues.
Over 40 million people tuned into the tube to watch the acceptance speeches for our presidential candidates. That tells me that people are involved, informed, and active. When everyone gets excited about the issues and is proud to be an American we can think like John Kennedy, “Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country.”
the cut off was midnight right???
i hope so
i agree with plato, because not everyone is born to be or wants to be a leader and in todays society if everybody was, then we would have some serious chaos because there are so many directions to go versus the 4 way intersection of choices to choose from in the athenian times( i dont know if that made any sense but im taking traffic school so it relates right now ha)
also, if someone is doing something they dont enjoy the outcome will reflect that so i think its best that only people who enjoy government should be involved.
I agree generally with Plato, like most of the people.
Athenian government to me seems a bit too extreme - especially when they say "we do not say that a man who takes no interest in politics minds his own business; we say he has no business here at all." This quote is basically saying that any person's business is interest in politics. Now, when I imagine myself living in that kind of world, it literally scares me. Should a person be categorized as "useless" just because he doesn't care about government? Like Plato says - I think the shoe maker, musician, or mathematician would rather leave the thought on government to the "philosopher-kings."
If simply put, it is dangerous for non-educated people to be given the power to actively participate in government. I don't know if all Athenians received similar education as to take part in their votes and systems, but especially with a large country such as United States, it is unlikely that everyone would have the ability to analyze, think, and carefully manage their choices in political decision.
I agree with Plato because USA was also found under the similar idea. I think in US History Mr. Mac said the citizens (and actually, the voting-registered citizens) only take about 1/3 of the political action, and the actual decisions are done by electoral college. Mostly, it is the three branches (I guess you can call them the "philosopher-kings") that runs the system. It's through this system that America became the superpower and it is evident that it worked much better than the Athenian government.
K..well its weird...
at first i was going to talk about how i believe in the athenian (spell check please) system but not so much anymore...i know easily pursaded. Plato's form of government may not be the worst idea in the book. I mean people today constantly talk about how they hate our Pres. and how he makes the biggest choices in the world but who put him there? we did. and on another note its not just him. I love how this guy gets blaimed for every move made when the reality of it is when he says jump America doesnt ask how high...other people are there with him making choices and desicions and whether or not you agree with the guy i still believe you should have respect for him. He is our Pres. and our leader and whether or not we agree with the roads he takes he still is in front of us.
As for answering the real question i guess i think that Plato's system works within reason, it makes sense to choose people who belong in government. I mean you wouldnt choose your math teacher to make you monday's outfit for school right? But the issue is i believe everyone has a say, if u are from here you should be a part of it as least right? But the problem with that is you always get those over eager sign wavers who know nothing about the real topic anyways. So i think a little bit of both is a happy medium.. and im sorry but i also like the way our government is set up today as well. Yes, it has its flaws but for crying out loud, its people running it. its not coming out perfect anytime soon. As as for an example, hmm ok well at the risk of loosing all my points for credit....
i just watched live free and die hard. ( intense movie by the way) and its just. the guy who was taking over the world and putting a scare on america was a person with an inside hook. he built his own product and made his own game, he hired some of the best hacker nerds and he attempted to get the job done...Stealing all of America's money isnt a job for chumps, especially using the one thing this country has turned to, tech. and i mean you really wouldnt hire a group of kids who gets the best cheats on x box you would hire the best, just because a large group knows about computers only a few know how every glich really works, and why it does all that it does.
I think that basically covers what i want...hope that works out a little.
Response to William Fang and Amber Kane's comments:
I disagree with Will when he says "Throughout history, we understand that every human has a little knowledge in every field, no matter how difficult the subject matter is... Athenian's randomized selection of officials proves the necessary method for everyone to participate in government..."
First of all, I do not think that every human has a little knowledge in every field. There are many students even around us who fall asleep during biology classes, fail all tests, do not meet the requirement to pass the proficiency (which demonstrates your knowledge of these basic fields) and just drop out of high school. I do not think that our government would truly want the inputs of these individuals.
Will also says "If citizens were chosen at random, there would be a much better chance that new ideas will be presented." Okay, I might be stressing this but the new ideas from the individuals I mentioned above would be like "Don't make it a law for anyone less than 16 (is it?) to go to school!" or "Let's have five day weekends!"
Will also mentions Lincoln-Douglass debate. Although Lincoln did not have as much experience as Douglass, we shouldn't be too rushed to judge his knowledge of politics. Lincoln did not have proper education but he was an extremely avid reader ever since he was young. He also was a lawyer and I'm pretty sure in order to run for all those positions he tried out for, he had to be pretty knowledgable. Also, I don't think anyone can truly say that "He understood the people's worries more than he knew the rules of government...By chance and arbitraryness, Lincoln was one of the best things to ever happen to democracy" Should the psychologists or even psychology majors run as presidents rather than senators or majors dealing with government and politics? I would more likely vote for the latter.
Velasco, I concur! When we're talking about people that make decisions that alter everyone's lives, we've got to make sure that the person that is chosen knows what's going on. "The Few, The Proud,..." That's exactly it. I'm mainly focusing on the "Few" here but anyways, not everyone is meant to rule over the greatest nation in the world. When I say everyone, I mean the majority of the populace.
Now to oppose someone....
William, randomized selection necessary? Really? Say that you were nominated for Student Body President, but little did you know that Bert the Nerd (I don't have anything against nerds, honestly) was on the ballot as well.
How would you feel if Bert was chosen over you because of that randomized selection you hold so near and dear. What do you think his idea of a proper dress code would be? Let's take it a step further. What IF he held homework in such high recognition that he would declare a 'Do Nothing But Your Homework' Day? Pretty outrageous? THAT'S randomized selection for you.
If you're still gung-ho on that method let's just hope that Bert's the one that's chosen over you, not some "Carrie". (You know, that crazy girl that has telekinesis and ends up annihilating almost everyone at her Prom because of a really really mean prank?)
Velasco, I concur! When we're talking about people that make decisions that alter everyone's lives, we've got to make sure that the person that is chosen knows what's going on. "The Few, The Proud,..." That's exactly it. I'm mainly focusing on the "Few" here but anyways, not everyone is meant to rule over the greatest nation in the world. When I say everyone, I mean the majority of the populace.
Now to oppose someone....
William, randomized selection necessary? Really? Say that you were nominated for Student Body President, but little did you know that Bert the Nerd (I don't have anything against nerds, honestly) was on the ballot as well.
How would you feel if Bert was chosen over you because of that randomized selection you hold so near and dear. What do you think his idea of a proper dress code would be? Let's take it a step further. What IF he held homework in such high recognition that he would declare a 'Do Nothing But Your Homework' Day? Pretty outrageous? THAT'S randomized selection for you.
If you're still gung-ho on that method let's just hope that Bert's the one that's chosen over you, not some "Carrie". (You know, that crazy girl that has telekinesis and ends up annihilating almost everyone at her Prom because of a really really mean prank?)
I did not in any way steal Ann's ideas, I just posted later because I temporarily forgot my own username. Just thought I should let that be known.
In my opinion, if a country wanted to have a foolproof government and have all its people be involved, then they would need to choose the Athenian style of democracy. In the article it said: "democracy....more as duties." The sound of people being a part of a government where they are required to act as an active member of their society, is what I feel makes people turn away from this form of democracy. They think of duties and automatically are turned off from the concept, regardless of the success it could bring to the society. Starting off, the Athenians were required to participate and everything they did revolved around their government. This is what it should be like, condidering the fact that our world does revolve around the government and we don't even realize it. When a government gives its people the huge privelage of letting them decide how the nation is going to run or anything else along those lines, then the people can at least do their part by participating and being knowledgable about whats going on in the world around them. Who runs the country, what laws are to be passed; things this great of a stature should kind of sort of maybe.....mean something to someone for once in a blue moon, and if by forcing citizens to care about their country has to go about in this fashion, then by all means...let it rain.
Hola Everyone!!!!! =)
Well i think I would have to go with the Athenian Democracy. I know alot of you guys are saying we wouldn't want the person who is going to be running our country randomly picked, but look at how things are going for us now. I don't think randomly picking someone would be such a bad idea right now. I think that someone who might not be as educated as the next person could do a good job running the country.
I agree with Alexis. She said that "Many people complain about the government yet their not doing anything to fix it." I think that in the Athenian Democracy people would actually be able to make the changes that are needed.
In the article it says that "...citzens were directly involved in passing laws, setting budgets, and declaring war." I feel like that was one of the best parts. To me its saying that we can get exactly what we need. I think it would make the country a better place because the citizens of the country know the things they need to make it better for them.
ok im done. i hope i made some kind of sense. =/ if not sorry. im easily confused. =/
Peace out! hehe. =)
Ann Kang what was your comment concerning my argument when you said " Response to William Fang and Amber Kane's comments" Because I read your comment and all you talked about was William so I was just curious
Thanks Amber
VIEWER DISCRETION IS ADVISED: LONG BLOG!:
Plato was a socialist Marxist and hid it with clever word play. How can we be supporting a governmental system that is only established for those that are well off? What about the laborers, slaves, and women; do you really believe that someone who is a proclaimed expert is going to care about what the people think?
There would be no balance, if we relied on strictly professionals. Actually, I was under the impression that that was the intention of our elections today. But if that were true, why would we be considering a vice president that only has two years of experience with a 6,000 population? Also, when we put voting for officials in the hands of the people, we get presidents that like to read My Pet Goat in a time of crisis. Even today the catch phrase is “Politics is the conduct of public affairs for private advantage.” But hey, even though we don’t trust them, let’s stick with expert liars only.
Plato was a man plagued with sorrow and anger because the Athenian government killed Socrates. Last time we trusted a loose cannon, we ended up with twenty-three killed at Virginia Tech. Plato’s main argument was an analogy amidst a shoemaker and his shoes. I think, everyone who has an opinion is an expert at politics. Just because he is a shoemaker does not mean he does not know what rights he wants.
The Athenians were “Of the People, By the people.” They developed a democracy based on equality, the idea of universal participation, and citizenship. As the article stated, “Athens were directly involved in passing laws, setting budgets and declaring war.” To do these things was not an obligation, but a way of life, and to some, a privilege. This idea is closer to social equality than even our “democracy” today. I mean even though it is not random draw, as long as you have connections in Florida you are all set.
The most communal argument I have been reading is the argument that the draw could end with disastrous leaders. In reality, with a democracy like this, almost all the citizens would be of equal standing, and if not, the drawing is more than likely going to have at least one expert and other “fresh” minds that are uninfluenced by the pressures to be pretty in order to be elected.
Overall, the Athens’ form of government is the most practical and makes the most sense. As Harry Emerson Fosdick stated, “Democracy is based upon the conviction that there are extraordinary possibilities in ordinary people.” An Athenian government is best for anyone that wants rights.
-Ashlie : ]
p.s.
HAHA.. My security code is umsac..
First of all I agree with Athenian democracy. The were very intellectual people back in a day and are still known today. Because of them being so smart I choose the side of Athenian democracy.
As it says in the article"citizens were directly involved in passing laws, setting budgets, and declaring war." Athenians were like a government of many people where everyone's voice could be heard, but today in U.S. government does whatever they want like the war in Iraq even though so many people were and still are against it.
Contemporary event that I can think of is the Olympics. Everyone was involved in this during the summer in one way or the other athletes or spectators. Many athletes had to work together as a team in sports such as basketball, volleyball, swimming, running, etc, to represent their country. Each one of them was involved as much as the next athlete and they had to work together as a team when choosing what plays to run, who is gonna go first, who is second and so on.
So as you can see it might not be the Athenian democracy, but it sure is very similar to it.
SOOOOOOO, i do agree with Plato's expert government - why should you have someone else who isn't so qualified to run for a position that requires at least some knowledge of how to run a government, or what it takes to run a goverment. pretty much, its kind of like saying that you shouldn't rest your lives upon the hands of someone who doesn't know what to do with it.
I don't agree with Athenian governement, because it doesn't seem equally fair to women.I kind of sound like a feminist here but honestly... women are and should be citizens of the state, if Athenians took "citizen equality to the extreme"..why not include women?? It is said in the article that women were not allowed to "appear in court" when they were prosecuted and had no rights to even be in the "assembly, the Council, and even the law court."
It's true when history was repeated when Women weren't allowed to vote, but it took only a mass of individuals who shared the same cause to fight for women's rights and that goes along with Plato's expert government because at least he allowed women to be included - I quote: "Women may -theoretically, at least - be included"
hmmmm....i dont know if i got off topic there...buttt fact still remains..you shouldn't let some random person be the leader of your goverment ..I agree with Adam when he says that they shouldn't have that much power and so much trust when they aren't educated enough to employ that power...
Also...like..going into government to please people..is...wow..pretty clever..i mean...your ideas should be able to create CHANGE to government, not sit in the seat and try to please the people without making changes for the better..does that make at least any bit of sense??...
anyways..its late...im super-sleepy...
I agree with the Athenian Democracy. I noticed that some Platomaniacs defended their opinion by using examples showing people being put in power that did not understand what to do. Well as the article said, everyone in Athens that was a citizen was involved in their community and politics. So unlike nowadays the regular people actually knew what was going on and how everything worked (has anyone watched "Jaywalking" on The Tonight Show?).
Also, other than Plato and Socrates it did not seem like any one else had a problem with how things were being run, now think about how the United States is right now, i mean is anyone that doesn't have a 7 figure income happy with whats going on in Washington? And so even if the Athenians were running a subpar government they didn't know they were, and as the old saying goes "Ignorance is bliss."
Im on the Plato's government and he has a point. He makes a logical argument, if you want something done you ask an expert. Even though he also points out that a politician would want to please the people, its better to have them than have someone that doesn't know anything about politics.
History shows that government with kings and educated people have survived a lot better.
i would have to side with the athenian democracy because randomly choosing people is very interesting.
like its said the athenian assumed people was capable of making good judgement...isn't our society that way? we know from whats right and wrong. Plato's government would cancel the equal rights of the people. we might as well have only one person doing each thing than having a lot of people doing the same things.
I'm gonna side with the athenians on this one. yes, you might get someone who isn't an expert on politics but, everyone was involved and had been educated in it. They would pick people at random and could do so because everyone had some understanding of what they were doing. and the statement "man is a political animal" suggests that based on their natural instincts they are able to participate in political affiars. and its not like someone would get chosen at random and then be in that position for a long time, they would go do what they were asked and go home and then some other random people would be chosen for whatever is next. I agree that it might be smarter to have experts on politics but they aren't always there doing what the people want they're there to do what they want. the athenian way allows the citizens to participate and so they can get things done that they believe is best for the people therefore making the people happy.
Dear Ann,
I apologize for not making myself clear enough. First of all, I did not mean every human had little knowledge in every field; i meant they had little knowledge in every fundamental fields, such as life itself and how it is run.
Secondly, do not stereotype that just because a person sleeps in class, fails biology tests, makes him a useless person in society. Such as Adam, Bill Gates, or Thomas Edison: Adam slept in class, Edison and Gates flunk out of school; yet you see them the most intelligent of the group. You "do not think that our government would truly want the inputs of these individuals"?
irst of all, I do not think that every human has a little knowledge in every field. There are many students even around us who fall asleep during biology classes, fail all tests, do not meet the requirement to pass the proficiency (which demonstrates your knowledge of these basic fields) and just drop out of high school. I do not think that our government would truly want the inputs of these individuals.
Again, Don't be stereotypical Ann. Don't you think that most people mature when they grow older? You never see old people in bars partying 24/7 (except a few exceptions, who will not impact laws when they get randomly chosen because the rest of the people ratifying the same law will outrule him or her).
Similarly, I would choose psychologists over "senators or majors" because Athenian government is based on selection of around 10 people to make a law, not necessarily one person. There were no presidents or one person in power. Psychologists want to know what people want, because that's their field. Politicians want to establish their own ways to run government. Aren't politicians ordinary people? I think if we randomly choose 10 people, occupations of different fields will show up : a person working at Mcdonald's can show us the real goals of a major fastfood corporation; doctors can show our healthcare plans and what is covered; unemployed can show us how poverty stricken people are doing; lawyers can show us the justified court cases and what needs to be changed, etc. We can all learn from each other. Instead of hiring the middleman (politicians) to communicate our problems, maybe we should solve it with the direct source.
Well the question asked to pick a side from athenians and platonians but to tell you the truth i dont know which to choose.But for me the one that makes more sense is the Platonic idea. Not everyone is eqipped for politics and to know how properly solve a problem. It is a good idea to have everyone involved in the government and for everyone to actually understand what is going but not everyone actually cares what is going on. that is a problem because if anyone can decide what goes on than we would have a government run by unsmart people. today we can actually be active in our government by voting but many arent even register to vote as the article said. People who care and know about politics are going to get involved and and try todo whatis right for the people. "Platos first critism then is that experts should judge in their sphere of expertise" This was said in the article and it makes sense to let the people who know what they are doing to handle policts. I am not saying we should do nothing and juust leave it to the experts whe can get involved and if we see something is wrong then we can speak against it. For example way back in history We had the Aztecs Who had their leaders and their experts. But the people of the aztecs did not agree of having cortes in their home and they rebelled against their own emperor that is what we can do. Im not saying to kill our leader but just take action and we all know how that Aztecs ended like but that is not the matter. What am i saying is that Platos idea makes more sense to let the people who know to do what they know.
I'm back...
Oh Julia, why would you bring poor Ayn Rand into the conversation? I know objectivism well. You're right to say her characters (Roark and Keating) are written so extreme as to allow the reader to find ourselves in both. With that in mind, there is a famous exchange between Roark and Keating, (Roark says this to Keating one night when Keating is begging Roark to design the Cortlandt for him)
“To sell your soul is the easiest thing in the world. That’s what everybody does every hour of his life. If I asked you to keep your soul—would you understand why that’s much harder?”
I read that and think about government, and what a sell-out it is to leave government up to “experts.” I keep asking myself this question: Who gets to decides what an expert is?!!! Roark endured such criticism from most of the “experts” of his day about his buildings, yet kept designing buildings…enough on that for now :)
In today’s Las Vegas Sun, there is an editorial from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. If you have a chance, read it. It discusses experience, age, and expertise in relation to the current presidential election. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08251/909787-372.stm. Find specifically his statement on experts. I’ll reserve my comment for now, but do you agree or disagree with his statement?
Finally, for those of you that keep choosing Plato, STOP thinking of his government as being about ONE person. It isn’t, wasn’t, never will be about one person making ultimate decisions in the United States or most other industrialized nations. If you’re going to make the argument that experts are better, go beyond thinking of just the leader. Government and politics is filled with many people at the national, state, and local levels making decisions.
I completely agree with Alexis and Kendraya. People complain about the government today. We are heading towards an economic downfall: dont we need change? Some people are afraid of change and that is way they dont want to alter our government. We need everyone's imput right now, which is what athenian government can do. So far, we let politicians run the whole country. How was it that Al Gore lost to George W. Bush when Al Gore won the popular vote? That are many errors in our government. Change from a bad situation never hurt anyone.
do you guys know how long it took me to go through and read all of these for a possible comment post? not that long cuz i didnt read them but still, massive scrolling time...
anyways, for this article, i strongly side with plato and his beliefs that the general people should not be given any control of the government. I have sided with the platonic beliefs because they are true, for example, this is a quote taken from the article, pg.31 on the top right side of the page: "when democracy places authority for decision making in the hands of the people, it is tantamount to asking a shoemaker for advice on music or a musician for advice on horseback riding." I dont know about you guys, but i sure wouldnt want a horseback riding, musical, shoemaker in charge of our government, know what i mean? politicians should be in charge of politics while the people of the country or city or whatever it may be stay in charge of their own trade and do what they have been specially trained to do.
Another point is that plato's beliefs and criticisms have modified our present democratic way of government, as seen in the quote on pg 30, right above DEMOCRACY'S HARSHEST FOE. "...the modern citizen is not expected or required to engage fully in polital process and is radically divorced from the decision making of government."
true that...double true
so now that i went for a round 2 and read some of the previous comment posts, i strongly agree with angelica(jelly)lai and her food example, imagine if we were to elect people into government that way today, not just the president, but into all levels of government, just a name out of a hat and they'd be in charge of whatever it may be, although it would be a straight up dictionary definition(of the people by the people for the people) of democracy, we cannot be running our present day governments like that, it would spark utter chaos and would ultimately lead to destruction of the american government as we know it, that is why plato's criticisms came in to play and ignited the need for modifications to the democratic way of government. the athenian government wasn't based on who was better for the job, it was based on who was lucky enough to get it, but we in present day america need the better person, not the lucky one...
Erica Calva
Ok so.. I would say that I would agree with Plato’s expert government.
Why? You may ask, well really why would you want to pick someone who doesn’t
have experience. You want to pick someone who knows what’s going on and someone who knows how to fix things. You don’t want someone who is just going to make things worse, right? It’s like asking someone to go to the Spelling Bee Contest, not knowing how to spell.
Sithara has a point, ”if Athenians took "citizen equality to the extreme"..why not include women??” You would want everyone to vote doesn’t matter what gender or ethnicity you are, as long as we vote for someone who has experience on politics or whatever their experience is. I’m going to use myself as an example, ok so I’m one of the leaders of the youth group. I’m not the only girl in the group….but if I know how to be a good leader and I know what I’m doing because I’ve already experience so many things and really if I didn’t know what to do or how to handle a big group of kids I would rather not be a leader.
I hope I made sense, I’m pretty bad at this:/
first formost the athenians are Crazy. With a capital C. Picking official at random not very bright. For a society known for its intelligence that is very stupid. Plato is correct that government should be run by trained people that know what their doing. Though I agree with Plato's idea the government should be run by those who know what they're doing but thats how dictators come into power.
I strongly agree with Plato's expert government of not giving power to the common person. As a government ages the government becomes more and more complex ,as ours did since it was established, this makes the government harder to interpret for the common person. If you were to give the people power of the government we would find ourselves in a system with constant change in the policies and laws because many people only seek short term fixes. Most Americans don't understand how the government works and they go to politicians for advice, like Plato said "If you want advice on how to make shoes,whom would you ask?" I believe that a government that gives power to the people would only lead to Plato's expert government as like minded people will start political groups led by those who know the government well, people we call "experts".
I completely agree with my boy Rafaelius Maximus. Today's government cannot be run by the people and should be run by the "experts" who studied politics for years. Politicians should handle the politics as plumbers should handle backed up toilets.
I guess I'm going to have to agree with Plato's side of the "government debate". In my opinion, he's right when he says that expert government is better. The Athenians randomly selected people, as well as REQUIRED participation in the society. Women, and slaves were excluded. With Plato's argument, he includes all citizens. As Socrates says,"The man of it offers it food, watches the animal's moods, and learns what voice to use when he wants to soothe or annoy it..."
It's true. In order to be good at something, or to "master" it, there must be research involved. You cannot just randomly select something and automatically be good at it. I can't just pick up an instrument and play it, not knowing how to read notes. With Plato's idea, you're going out on a limb and basing it on the "public opinion" and in our society now days, I think that is what we would all think is prounounced as "fair".
The United States government is similar to Plato's government, in the sense that we base decisions on public opinion. We elect the leaders we feel should represent us. We vote on what we think is fair and we argue what we think is wrong.
I just feel there would be too much rebellion and controversy with the Athenian government.
so, following along with my opinion, i read ralf's second blog and i completely agree. We can't base the leader on luck, as in other aspects of life as well. We can't just sit down and take a test that we haven't studied for, saying "Oh well if the government can be run on luck, then luck will give me an A on this test." We may want it to work like that, but it doesn't. We need trained experts.
good job rafaelius maximus (:
oh and Sithara's point is agreeable as well. Even though it seems too feminist, it's true. Women should be included as a citizen of the state, and their voices should be heard as well.
ok so im going to have to go with the Athenian democracy. everyone that sides with Plato thinks thatsomeone with no expertise on politics will ruin the government. i feel that that will not always be the case. choosing someone random gives EVERYONE the opportunity to do something. if we only had one type of people running the country then they will only be interested in one thing. in an athenian democracy a farmer could be choosen and maybe he could, in his time as a government official try to make life more simpler for farmers. or this could be the same for doctors, teachers, lawyers. each of them gets a chance to have their say.
Plato's has only one group of people to run the country, and as the article said that lead to "Hitler's facist state and the communism of the Soviet Union." Also plato's republic can have a negative outcome with religion. take iran for instance, this group of "elite professionals" is controlling millions of people into a strict orthodox islamic regiem. that doesnt seem like leaving the government to professionals to me.
Our government is just that it is ours and although Plato had many good points about leaving the politics to the politicians, the general idea creates conflicts. I see and understand both points but agree with the Athenians.
Everyone who is a citizen of America has the right to be involved in their government. I believe that in this country the government and its leader’s answerer to the people, it is not only right that we question our leaders it is our job.
Although we are not all politicians we all have political view and most of us have the chance, even in the smallest way, to help change or at least question the things happening. In Athens it was there so called “civic duty” to be involved. They were schooled and had understanding of the ways that the world as they knew it worked. Although the Athenians would see our government system today and laugh, the world has changed so much and a citizen does not value other citizens as much as Athena’s did.
“We do not say that a man who takes no interest in politics minds his own business; we say he has no business here at all.” This is a WONDERFUL GLORIUS way of thinking. It seems almost impossible to consider the world today but if we cannot trust our peers to help s in every way possible and to think of every possible outcome to the best of their ability then what can we trust.
John F. Kennedy was one of the most wonderful presidents in our history and is reminder for many different thing that he accomplished, such as his expansion of the space program, he created many new research projects and although he made the mistakes in the “bay of Pigs” he stood his ground and excepted reasonability for it and stood his ground at the begins of the cold war, he involved the people in every possible aspect if he very short term. But his brother although never severing as president did many things his brother did not. They were both raised in a wealthy family but came out with very different views. He would have been one the greatest presidents in history. Bobby Kennedy took on civil right and the organized crime (THE MOB) two things JFK would not touch in office.
I feel the Politians will take advantage of getting to much power there is already corruption ut if we leave it up to one set of people then it will get worst. One mind it great many are better, the more we have seen together the better we can do in the choices we make.
Ok, Let me start by saying that both extreme forms of government are ridiculous and impractical, but if forced to live by the rules of one or the other, I would have to agree with Plato. Government should be the job of informed citizens. Whether or not the attitude and spirit of the society is perfectly euphoric, the overall group would be relatively safe and maintained. Random drawing of citizens to govern particular projects, could lead to disaster. They would not have the groups interest in mind, and they would not have the proper training to do said project correctly or efficiently. I'm not denying the negative aspects of such a government, Hitler and Stalin for example, but I am accepting those over the alternative. In today's society, I do not believe that everyone should have a say in how our country is run. Uninformed decisions often lead to unpredictable ruin, and I wouldn't want a politician randomly chosen to run my nation. Change isn't always a good thing when it's coupled with government. While I would not want to be governed only by the privileged, I could not be ruled by ordinary people whom I believe are too easily manipulated and deceived by others within the society. Their main desire is usually to gain fame or admiration of their peers, when they should be focused instead on the well being of the country as whole. Informed reason, according to Plato and myself, is the best suited way to make all the right and necessary decisions in a society.
I disagree with KmarshPotter when she said “The president does have most of the say, don’t they? …That single person would definitely not have 100% of the control, but their point of view and their influence would be the greatest among the rest of the government officials.”
Take for example today’s government the president does NOT have most of the say rather congress and the president must both come to a compromise for any major decisions to be made. Congress enacts the laws the president has to enforce. This means the president is limited to acts within the scope of power that Congress gives him unless the Constitution gives the president a power that cannot be regulated this way. Congress also passes the law that adopts the federal budget. This means that the president can only do as much as the Congress will let him pay for. Congress can impeach a president and then turn him out of office for what the Constitution calls "high crimes and misdemeanors." This ensures that the President follows the laws like everyone else has to.
I am not saying that Congress is MORE powerful than the president. Take for example Lincoln. He jailed members of Congress who disagreed with his war policy. Clearly Congress didn't have more power than the president. And the President cannot do anything without funding, so he needs Congress to fund his war policy. BOTH maintain an equal footing, and neither has "the last word". They are co-equal branches of government. That is how the system was designed. This is why it works and we don’t have a dictator.
In Simon Goldhill's article, he explained the differences from the Athenian Democracy and Plato's expert government. After reading through the articles many times, i came to the conclusion that Plato's expert government is the the ideal government.
The main thing that won me over in the article was what Socrates said, "If you want to know who is good at math, you would ask a mathematician." Why should the government be ran by people who are not even interested in it? In my humble opinion, a lot of people in America could care less about the government, it is unfortunate to hear, but it is true. I would rather have someone who studies politics, go to school for it, and actually have a passion to pursue it to run the government that I live in.
Could anyone imagine our government being run by every single person that lives in the United States? There would be so much turmoil, and internal affairs, that the government would fall apart. Even now, you see somewhat of a quarrel in the government, imagine the entire country arguing with each other. We have a government where we elect the people qualified to do what they do, and so far, for the past two-hundred plus years, it has gone well. Plato's idea rules over the Athenian Democracy.
If I were given the chance to pick and choose bits and pieces from these two, I would. However, since I wasn't, then I would have to choose Athenian Democracy.
Athenian Democracy, I think, is better than Plato’s Republic. Who is better at knowing what the people want and who is better, therefore, at serving the people, than the people themselves? The “expert” politician can’t possibly know what everyone needs and wants, and besides, what is an expert politician anyway? I think the author also has the same question, he expresses his doubts on such expertise, it says, on page 33: “...nor is it evident how voters should evaluate or discuss such expertise.” I personally think that there is no such thing as an expert politician. Politics is not a skill one can be good at; it can’t be compared with shoemaking or music-playing. Politics is a thing, I don’t know what you’d call it, an institution perhaps, something, a way to serve the people’s wants and needs. In order for that to happen, it needs the people’s inputs, it needs to have everyone involved, not just a select few. Heck, America’s founding fathers weren’t expert politicians; they were farmers, soldiers, merchants, shopkeepers, lawyers, etc. granted, they weren’t picked at random, but it refutes Plato’s argument and makes truth out of the fact that one can go to a farmer, or a bookkeeper, or a soldier, a shoemaker, a musician to discuss politics and policies. Using the randomized system would be brilliant; it would give everyone a chance to put in their two cents. If one fears that the village idiot or a member of a very small dangerous group might be randomly chosen, well then just use probability, they probably won’t get the job. This system has been tested and proven to work. How’d Athens turn out with this form of government? Well, it had a Golden Age that lasted for decades, only to end because of war.
As for Plato’s Republic, I say bad idea; it looks nice on paper, but in reality it probably won’t be as good. With Plato’s way, if a person/group/the whole country wants something and the “expert” thinks otherwise, then it won’t happen…doesn’t that defeat the purpose of the politician, the supposed servant of the people? That sort of system of government makes me think of the books: 1984, or Brave New World. Big Brother and his Ingsoc Party and the world controllers know what the people want and so they pretty much control everything, making people’s lives miserable by our standards. It also makes me think of Hitler and his Nazi Party and Stalin and his Communist Party, controlling every aspect of the people’s lives because they “know” better, as the text points out. Look what wonderful things came from those two philosopher-kings.
Well … I guess it all boils down to whether you want to have all your needs and wants be given to you by those who know them best, or do you want to be told what to do, what to want, or what to need by the supposed experts to create a “perfect” society? I choose the first the first option.
~Louis Rotea
Regarding Will and Amber's comment again:
Sorry Amber, it was really late at night and I was gonna write to both of you but my comment got so long and I was gonna write a second comment to you today morning but forgot to delete the "Amber Kane's" part in my comment.
So Amber, your main argument as I understand is that our present government is pretty similar to the Athenian democracy as of the government system, jury duties, and how everyone knows about what's going on in politics by watching the "tube."
First of all, I think that the part where you said it is likely that the Council probably drew up good citizens as the people who would go up on their list is only an assumption. Just the paragrah above that statement says "Athenians assumed that each citizen was capable of performing the duties of democratic authority - of judging well." May be in Athenian times that might have been capable. But I don't know if the present government should assume that each citizen in America is capable of judging well. Just because you grow older does not necessarily mean that your judgment matures (I'm referring to you too Will). Call me stereotypical, but some people simply do not care about government and could joke around about voting. I think you might be trusting people too much.
I was just in Ms. Nebe's class the other day and we were given Active Votes. There were only choices A, B, C, D, and E. However, few people pressed the button F. Even in AP Literature there were people joking around. Absolute democracy, of everyone participating in process of voting, will lead to consequences that would be much worse than "philosopher-kings" running the government.
Also, I would just like to say that jury duty is only a small part of government where citizens are selected at random. In this case I think it's okay, but the ENTIRE government where every random person would be given equal power to run government will not work.
Also, I don't think that people are well informed about government as you might expect. I don't know about 40 million people tuning into the tube but really, I'm not really updated about government unless my mom tells me what was on the news this morning.
OKAY, now back to you Will:
I still think that every human doesn't have little knowledge in every fundamental fields. REALLY, I've seen people have no clue about MOST fundamental fields. You also mention that as they grow older they will mature in their judgment. The voting age right now is 18, and if America had the Athenian system, all those people at those age will take it as their duty to vote even though they may lack understanding of government.
Also, I never said that people those people mentioned above is useless in society. But I think in order for them to live their TRUE potential as wherever their talents may lie, Platonian government would be the better government to live in. In this way, rather than concentrating in politics or any areas they don't really care about, they can concentrate in some area they are better at.
Also, you keep mentioning all these people from history but you only concentrate on the fact of how they did not have proper education. I'm not talking about proper education; I'm talking about ignorance. These individuals you mention were not ignorant; the government would certainly want thoughts from these individuals. However, would the government truly want inputs of ignorant individuals? No. By the way, I believe that after Bill Gates got big (sorry for the informal language?) he went back to a college to finish a degree, even if he flunked school. That was his conscious choice because he knew it was better that he should just focus on the computer business; it was not because he lacked any knowledge about fundamental subejcts.
Will, I'm not being stereotypical. I'm just saying things from what I've seen and from objective viewpoint. If all these people from different occupation gathered up their ideas together, there won't be a good government. In reality, a "philosopher-king" as Plato mentioned would be qualified enough to set a government (because he's expert at it) that would satisfy the needs of majority of people. Just take a look at how America was found. The founding fathers set the government by themselves, drew up the Constitution in secrecy. Had it been Athenian democracy, I'm sure America would have been a lot more different. These founding fathers, "philsopher-kings" of their day and age in America, had more of a Platonic idea than Athenian idea. Result? The most flexible document in the world - the Constitution, which has served as a foundation for US to become a superpower.
First of all, yes, I know that I am basically the definition of procrastinator. But who cares as long as it gets done in time, right? (:
Second, I’m sorry if my response is just like repeating what everyone else has already said, but honestly I’m way too lazy to go through and read everyone’s reaction.
Majority rules: I think I’m gonna have to choose Plato’s form of democracy. (haha that was a funny typo before I fixed it… democrazy)
It kind of seems like the Athenian democracy is like communism… it’s a really good idea but it would never work in context. It was probably great back in the day: everyone had a fair and equal chance when it came to political decisions, and there were no secrets between people so there really couldn’t be any crime. However, there obviously wasn’t nearly as many people back then in Athens as there is in America today. The random tablet drawing in itself would take ages… and it wouldn’t be nearly as simple to control corruption and uprisings. Not to mention the fact that people have a right to keep some aspects of their lives private nowadays thanks to the Constitution and stuff, so that part wouldn’t be effective either. Also, I just think that if everybody HAD to vote, there would be a bunch of people who didn’t give a crap about the government voting… and by chance someone that the country didn’t actually want to be elected could be. It would be anarchy. Haha (:
In the Platonian democracy, however, the people who know what’s up, or “experts”, are the ones who make the decisions. Isn’t that basically how it is today? (or how its supposed to be, anyway… haha) The shoemaker theory just makes sense. Hah and idk what else to say about that because it was a lot easier to criticize the Athenian government than to support the Platonian one. But I think this is long enough… hopefully (:
yeah, what enrique said about the toilet. word.
-Kenneth H.
OMG OMG OMG I love this Blog Thing Makes me spirited already. Every body has thoughtful interesting Comments If i had to write Comments or reviews for the comments written it will be 10 years long :D lol I expectionally (hope I spelled that correctly) like the one where she uses the food example was quite imaginational. I like all the comments that I saw every had nice ideas and arguments :D I would just like to say well done every one :D
Anyways I need to prove my point right yes my comments is like at the top of the blog and now im writing somthing to add on :D .
I guess I'll use George Bush :D He is a very Eduacated person went to Harvard Business School and graduated from Yale University. His best Accomplishment was not raising the "tax". I do not think a person with no politcal Eduacation can do this.
therefore plato's Idea is the most sensible choice.
(Mr. West is this a good enought reason?)
and reply to mr west about the approval rating
yes its pretty crappy, thats why we as a people need to be more involved so we can ALL choose better candidates.
ken h.
id first like to say that i dont like the fact that we have to choose either the way of ancient democracy or modern democracy, because i see flaws in both.
however, I am siding with the Athenians.
their idea of citizenship is an "issue of duties"; meaning that all chosen citezens are "involved in passing laws, setting budgets, and declaring war".
with modern democracy, we elect who we feel is the best representative of the people, and our involvement ends there.
yet with athenian democracy every citizen had a say, allowing the will of the people to be the actual will of the people.
when first reading the article, the automatic reaction would be to side with Plato and his idea of modern democracy.
its seems logical.
the athenians randomly selected their government officials and every citizen had a say in the political issues. it seems as though these problems would never be resolved due to too many people having too many different opinions, therefore making athenian democracy a failure.
but there are two sides to every story arent there...
people think that every citizen having a say wouldnt work due to the idiots of the world contributing their idiotic opinions (which we definitely dont need even today).
but with modern democracy, idiots still have as much an equal chance of opinionating their beliefs as others.
every person knows that politicians are dirty rotten liars. they say what the people want to hear in order to get elected into office and gain the power unattainable to the average everyday citizen.
the idiots of the world still get to elect who the better liar is.
lets look at a somewhat stretched example..
lets just say that a broadway play is holding auditions for thier masterpiece.
they dont seperate thier auditioners (if that is even what the people who audition are called) into two different groups, lets just say into "boys" and "girls", and then choose randomly from those two groups the people who get to audition.
they let everyone have a fair chance to audition.
this applies to the athenian democracy. every citizen gets to submit their opinion, whether it be considered brilliant or ignorant to others.
i believe that plato had the right idea. first, who would want to be forced to do something they really didnt want to do, and really really suck at what you do? the athenians randomly selected people to rule their country. the idea that best supports my opinion is the quote when socrates asked citizens "if you want advice on how to make shoes, whom would you ask for that advice?" and of course the person would answer "a shoemaker." if someone is ruling the society that you live in, wouldnt you want them to know what theyre doing? a shoemaker, "the expert" in making shoes, only has the right to judge in his own "sphere of expertise." an example that i can think of is picking the president of the united states. what would happen if the bum down the street gets picked to lead america? i dont think he would be qualified for the job. and you can already imagine all the chaos that would occur if the bum president is faced with problems such as the war, the economy, or environmental problems. andddddd im done!
Yo yo yo! props to all these postizzles! they tight fo real fo real g. gotta represent for both sides cuz thats what they make history out of home skillet. Word on the streets is that Athenian is like communism and Plato is like democracy. Wrong dawg! Athenian is like aristocracy and Plato is like plebianism yo!
To Ann: If we had an Athenian democracy, we could change voting age to 30 years old homie! I doubt that Athenians in the olden age let young babies or 18 year olds vote! Your saying that ignorant people would mess up government right? Well, who influences the society to work harder? the ignorant people! Plus, again with the jury duty. Everyone does jury duty in our government! and there still is ignorant people there!
Good debate peeps. Peace!
I totally agree with louis about the people serving the people. How can one or a few expert politicians know what we all want?
Even if they know what people want how do we know they are going to follow our believes vs. their own?
I like the points Will, Kendraya and others made-that everyone complains about the government. But if everyone was involved like the Athenians then it would be hard to complain about our own decisions.
-WEST/anyone-were we suppose to have a response to two different classmates last night or tonight????
After reading many of these blogs, I have to say that I still support Plato's view of an expert government. Although living under Athenian Democracy seems appealing because of the increased participation of its citizens, this type of democracy does not have any practical use in today's society.
First, defining Athenian Democracy as one "of the people, by the people" is a fallacy. The article clearly states that "the good citizen of Athenian democracy was...always a man." Therefore, Athenian democracy was very limited; women, slaves, and those who were not born to an Athenian father and mother were excluded. Athens' direct democracy was only democratic to those who were male citizens. To others, it was not democratic at all.
Second, Athenian democracy relies on civic virtue, where the lack of private concerns is replaced by the thought of one's duties toward one's country. Because officials were appointed through randomization and citizens were expected to participate in the direct democracy, citizens were expected to have open lives and provide services for the country without thinking about individual motives. However, the concept of having no private life and performing duties for the benefit of all is idealistic only in small homogeneous populations with the same goals. For example, the colonists of America sacrificed their own interests and worked together for the benefit of the whole in order to survive. However, in today's society, where people are driven primarily by selfish motives, it is unrealistic to expect people to act with the whole population of the nation in mind. Especially since Americans have been emphasizing individual rights, it cannot be expected that people will give up their private lives in order to have a direct democracy.
Of all the countries in the world, our country, the United States of America, became the leader. Why? Because the way our government runs just simply worked out the best. Although the majority votes do not go to the people of America (instead the electoral college), the leaders that are chosen for our government are chosen because of they are trained and experienced for the job. Of course, like Mr. West mentioned, that not all those that are chosen have done such a great job, but the random selection system used by the Athenians is just absurd.
(Ah, man I can't type in this comment box, it's too small and I have to keep scrolling back since I suffer from short-termed memory therefore I can't remember what I typed. So hold on, and let me write it somewhere else where I can paste it here later on...arghhh)
Okay. What was I saying… Oh yes.
So reference to history, when the Puritans came to a wondrous land called America and founded Massachusetts, they established a state church. Later on, their local government was run by its male members and guided by its minister. Because they felt the need to produce a supply of learned Puritan ministers, the Puritans even founded colleges where they will train educated elites to be elected to run their government. If they really believed that they can just randomly select someone from the colony and hope that everything runs smoothly, then why go through all the trouble of finding a college?? Save the trouble, then none of us today would have to stress over choosing which college to go to and what to major in! Every field has its experts. My mother went to beauty school and received a license which allowed her to do facials for women who feel that they need better skin because a single pimple appeared on their precious little faces, would the women PAY for someone like my mother, or someone chosen randomly? I suppose that random person could attempt at it, but my mother’s got the skills which that person doesn’t have :D I would rather trust the experience that my mother has if that’s where my money is going to.
Same concept applies, although many of the citizens have their fair share of opinions on what decisions to make (like how the random person has his/her own idea of how to attempt to do a facial), generally it all comes down to the required experiences and skills. That is Plato’s idea (not about my mother‘s facials but about modern democracy), and that is what worked, and will continue to work, for America and its people.
PeiPei OUT.
I agree with Plato’s idea of having experts do the governing.
Like what Plato said, “The ruling class will be the philosopher-kings, men especially selected and trained for the business of government. It is to them, that ruling should be entrusted.” Not everybody is an expert of shoe-making or music, so does government, if somebody does not understand government and if this person makes a wrong decision for the government, and if many people are like this, then the government will be ruined. We should let people who could really do government and who really understand it make the decision, this is why we have voting.
Ohhh, one more thing.
Aristotle's definition of man as a "Political Animal" defined man's need for a political life to be content. I do not believe that this statement is relevant to today's society, because many people live alienated from today's politics. A look at the number of unregistered voters shows the lack of concern or the extent of alienation of America's citizens. So, people would not be willing to give up much for an Athenian democracy.
I have to agree with plato because it makes a lot more sonse than pure democracy.
With the athenian democracy everyone votes and participates. Always giving in to the popular vote. Which is fine and dandy if no one minds ignoring the minority.
Which is not fair.
Plato's idea lets us choose a leader. Like he siad, it makes sense to ask a shoemaker when it comes to shoes, so makes sense to ake a politician about politics. They would know the ins and outs of the system. Another advantage is that it leads the people all in one direction or group of people. I'm not saying like a monarchy just something to give it order.A country wont be able to go far if people are randomely selected.
The negative of it is that the elected will only say things to please the peolpe. That is true but a good politician is able to show the people what would be the best route for everyone.
In the end true democracy can't really exist. many countries have tried but it does not last long. Empires and countries have lasted a lot longer with someone in charge that makes it their job to control and make laws. Just look at Babylon and the great dynastys of china. These civilizations lasted for hundreds and hundreds of years. Even America is doing well by selecting someone who knows. It might not be perfect but nothing is and we are a lot better off than other countrie.
Less than an hour before deadline and I’m just now posting :/
As most can agree, Plato seems to have the popular vote for how a government should be run. I couldn’t agree more. The article itself stated that it has shaped modern democracy. If it wasn’t a better option, why has it dominated? His idea goes with the way that our constitution is made. It gives us freedom. If someone is an expert in a certain field, I’m sure they wouldn’t mind making it their future. It’s what they know and what they’re good at. The Athenians were run by random selection. This takes away our rights as a citizen. I know that if I was randomly appointed to a position in government, I’d freak out and be extremely upset. I have no knowledge or interest in it, so it would be devastating for me that I didn’t have a choice – where is the freedom in that?
Apparently, Plato’s way is more America’s way because of that. It makes sense. If you allow people to do what they want, they are going to choose something they enjoy doing and are good at. If people work when they’re happier, then they’re going to do a better job because it’s what they want to do. Nobody is going to do something that they’re bad at. Why tell jokes if you’re not funny? People won’t laugh and you’ll feel lame.
When it comes to politics, anyone can claim to be a politician. Whether he’s a good one or bad one is purely based on chance. As the article states, “a politician cannot be simply committed to truth or justice but has to follow the whim of a fickle and willful people, or try and deceive it.” This statement is truth and is one of the bad things about politics. Public opinion is held high, but changing the public’s view can be easy. “The people” are referred to as “untamed beast.” This statement makes me smile :] We must put our trust into an appointed government though, because “when anything goes, order cannot be maintained.” But how we appoint this government can be controlled and Plato’s way is the most convincing.
It is very intersting to see all the different points made. These opinions help to make a response.
The Athenian democracy had an era, and that government would definitely not work in today's world efficently. Maybe one day Athenian government will become suitable again for the people but i do not see that happening. America has such a large quanity of people and that form of government is suited for a smaller scale of population. A town that is devoted to one thing or a town that was established from one idea fits that government but America definitely does not fall in to that catergory.
Platonian government just flat out makes sense to me. You could even relate this idea to our teachers. I would not ask mr.mac or mr.blank for help on claculus homework nor ask mr.bombino how to write the best essay ever. Having elected officials works. The truth is, it is very hard to please everyone, but at least in this "expert government" we get closer to the idea of pleasing the people. Im not saying that the people of expertise are the only ones that can get the job done, but they are the most willing, experienced, and somewhat trusted with the job.
i agree with the ideas of many of you. One statement does stick out in my mind though and that is kevin's statement about government not being somehting that can be predicted or philosophized.
It really cannot be. The people cannot predict the problems of health care or violence of tomorrow, things happen and then government has to deal with them. I know i would not want certain people to run my government such as a convict, an athlete or even myself. Not everyone is suited for the job nor is everyone wanting to be. Plenty of poeple would not want to be put in the position of making these huge decisions, but some do.
This arguement could go one for years. No one will ever truly be happy with the government as a whole, and that is kind of ridiculous to think about. In my opinion the Platonian government is the best suited for our country and the most effective. Unless something undescribable and crazy happens i dont believe everyone would want the Athenian government to take charge because not everyone wants to be involved. So until then Plato's democracy is best suited and reasonable.
oh yea to comment on in agreement with Carina, the amount of unregistered voters also goes against Athenian government ever working.
im on Plato's side. he point out that rulers of the government must be "experts." you wouldn't not want to see a shoemaker rule the government because they have no idea about "politics," they expertise is shoe making. our government needed an expert ruler because if not, it will result to downfall.
i disagree in the idea of Athenian government:
first, women were treated as a lower class, same as the slaves. the idea of prohibition in voting and even appearing in the court in prohibited. this oppose to Plato's idea. women and men must be treated equal. its preposterous to describe women as "deformed man."
secondly, the idea of choosing random person to rule the government is absurd, because they dont even care if the person is educated or illiterate. an illiterate person will never had any idea how to rule the government, because the "experts" has the knowledge on ruling our government.
john velasco
Louis Pombo
Original post
Alright, let's get down to it.
The clear idealistic choice here is the Athenian Democray. I believe that if you can't trust the people of your country to educate themselves in the political process when it is REQUIRED of them, then what type of country are you?
Granted, the Athenian democracy may have functioned in a small city state, but it's nothing that can't be implimented into any society. Take a city and break it into districts where each district controls it's own interests through what the people are most inclined to, and in smaller towns and other rural areas this is already practically the case.
With Plato's argument of, "if you needed advice on how to make a shoe who would you go to?" theory, sure, you would go to the shoemaker, but does that mean that the shoemaker can't be educated enough to be a juror or a judge also, or even partake in assembly and law making? No, it absolutely does not. Anyone can learn a political process and partake in governing themselves and community.
To say that no common man can possibly be intelligent enough to partake in the running of his own life is near lunacy. Think about us in an AP Government class, as of now we are probably more educated than the rest of the public on how our political process works maybe even just from US History, but does that mean than no man woman or child can't learn more and becom a functioning member of a true democracy? I think not.
Throughout history when a republic fails, it resorts to a tyrannical ruler, but the only reason a republic(practically) ever fails is because of populous's ignorance on what they are supposed to do to keep their society functioning. Take for instance Germany and the Reich system, where every time the country fell on a hardship they resorted to a single tyrannical ruler to make it through. Hitler is an example of where a republic did not follow what was best for the people, but what they believed was the correct man to rule the country. Blatently, this crippled the country in the long run and resorted in a huge, terrifying world war.
In a true democracy, the people control the people, not the tyrants and the astutely trained politicians. Pfft, we have definatley seen where our dual party republican system has failed time and time again to get things done in our government for our people
Granted, not everything was perfect about the Athenian democracy. Where the shoemaker may have been able to make shoes and take part in a political process, the muse or musician may not have been so educated, and that's where the system fails.
Ideally, eliminating political ignorance, a true democracy offers the most freedoms and the best quality of life to its participants. Also, I do believe that women should be allowed in a political process, but at the time, it was common for women to be seen as a man's possession, totally not my belief.
All the same, in a republic, if the people do as they are supposed to, it should be a democracy anyway, where you just consolidate the general vote into one vote. Politicians should be the servants of the people, not the other way around!
I have no doudt in my mind than not one politician would ever trust the general populous enough to change our ocuntry to a true democracy because of the general IGNORANCE of the populous, but if that ignorance were ended, things would get done and everyone, fulfilling their instinctive political will, would reap the benefits of a real democracy
Woo! So I'm finally posting my comment...
I agree with the Athenian Democracy. Plato's Democracy is closer to what we have in the United States today, but in my opinion, it isn't working very well. As Mr. West pointed out earlier, the approval ratings for our democracy are very low. People are not happy. And I think this is leading back to the way our democracy is being run.
The Athenian government had almost the entire society involved in government. People in our society today don't even always vote, but if you didn't vote in that democracy you were considered an outcast of the society. I think that is one of our problems in today's government...not enough of the population is involved.
A lot of people are saying that they don't agree with the Athenians because they don't want some random joe shmoe who doesn't know anything running our government. However the article states that "participation was the watchword in the government of classical Greece. The Athenian citizen was expected to attend the Assembly, to serve on the Council, to act as a juror, to vote, to take part in festivals, and to fight in the military." They were expected to participate...it was just part of their normal life. If we had that much participation in our government today, we wouldn't have uneducated people to randomly choose from to run our country. That is why their system worked. Because every citizen participated in the government, when officials were randomly chosen, it didn't matter because they were educated on the issues and knew how politics work.
I think this system would actually be better for our country. It would probably have to be changed a little seeing as we don't live in ancient Greece, but I think the idea that the government is chosen at random is a good one.
Hope that makes sense. :]
Well...I'm kinda between Plato and Athenians...but if I choose only one, I would choose Plato.
The dialogue between Socrates and the citizen conveys that there are experts in different areas of different things. It would be wrong to ask mathematicians about English. Also, even if you get some kind of answer, it would be not credible. Of course, we can prefer the Athenian government by means of giving everyone a chance to do whatever they want. But, this is only possible for the people who are interested and motivated in politics. Unfortunately, many people are not interested in politics which means that they are not educated about politics, like me. This kind of government was only possible to Athenians because citizens were politically involved and had no privacy, they "took citizen equality to an extreme." In other words, citizens' life was open to public, everyone knew what each other did: there was no private lives. Like the article says, it would be awkward to Athenians to say, "My private life is my own and no business of the state." And, like Aristotle said, Athenians were "political animals." But, today, not everyone are involved in politics and we have our own private lives. Also, we are interested in different things other than politics. What could be the consequence if we follow the way of Athenian government with people who are not really interested in politics? Probably, our government would collapse.
I'll use myself as an example. To become a citizen of US, one have to take the test that approves that he or she has basic knowledge about America beside being born in America. I would have to learn about basic history of America (expert) to become a citizen. So my point is that one must be an expert in politics to run a government. (-_-;;;)
So my whole point is that Plato seems right that experts of politics should run our government because they know what to do. But I'm not saying that democracy is good thing. I'm just saying that people like me(not interested in politics) should participate in government. Like I mentioned, every one of Athenians were involved in politics but today, not all the people are interested in politics.
Since I've already posted my point of view I figured I could write another one that would say all of the things I wanted to say in the first post, but because I had to be decisive, I never got to say anything about the other side of each story.
Time to be a pessamist. (sp >_<) Neither of the governments would work for the size or requirements that need to be fulfilled for our country. A random person in our modern society probably won't be able to make future decisions because of the past problems. They'd have to be educated with the past beforehand, right? And if they weren't well.. we'd be in trouble. Well, I've already said my point for the bad things about the Athenians, but here's the good. Everyone will be just as likely as anyone else to become president or any other position of higher standing. And you'd be able to make possible (or at least try) what you think the country needs. With the Athenian's government, life would be everchanging, and in order to know what is legal or not, you'd have no choice but to keep up with the government. On a bad note, it would be very unstable.
Now for the bad with Plato's theory. How many of us do you think would really be in school if it wasn't forced on us? (I would cause I am weird and like learning... lol >_>) Do any of us really like the restrictions put on us? Not really. Why is the legal drinking age 21? Because that is the age where your brain is no longer in the critcal stage of development and alcohol can damage it severly. It's for our own good, but there are a lot of people who don't like it even if it is to help them.
How many of us really like to listen to our parents? "What do they know, they haven't been through this. They grew up in the 60's without...(insert thing here)." Unfortunatly, they probably have. Everyone has skeletons in the closet, and you'd be suprised at what your parents probably did in their youth. Anyway, the point is they make rules so you don't end up making the same mistakes. Do we really listen? Not most of the time, and to tell the truth I can't wait for the day I can tell my father "I told ya so." With the Plato's theory there would be so many people to tell you "I told ya so" and there would be so many restrictsions (sp >_<) because 'that would be best for us.' Now a lot of us don't like going to school, but for the people who are directly effected by the "No Child Left Behind" they're grateful to actually have the opportunity to go to school despite their home and financial issues. Cause they'll have just as much a chance to go to a college and be successful as a rich kid. (with help of scholarships)
But people don't like to be told what they can and can't do if they don't see the reason behind it. We lived out in the country (wow what a surprise -_-) in Texas and I drove back and forth to work, and I'd be running late quite a bit. Well I'd speed... a lot. I mean, hardly anyone is ever on the road, what harm could it do? Right...? Except one night I sped around a corner and I ran over something...big. My heart stopped and I was crossing every part of me that could cross, hoping it wasn't a person. It turned out to be an overly large armadillo, but I thought, what if that was a little kid? I would have killed them cause I didn't obey the law. Did I like having do drive 15 MPH on that stupid road? No. But it was 15 MPH because there were a lot of turns and bends and many places you could crash or hit something because you didn't see it fast enough if you were speeding. I got lucky and never crashed once, but it would only take one time.
Anyway, people don't like being oppressed so Plato wouldn't work because it's a form of heirarchy, and I don't see many that are successful nowadays. That's why we had a Revolution right? Tired of being put into catagories and have to follow other people around cause they know better. So we rebel and do what we're told not to cause we think it's okay. And Anthenian's wouldn't work because this country is too large to leave up to a randomized selection. Anyway I know this won't make the deadline, I didn't intend for it to, but I really enjoyed reading all of the articles. I didn't even think of all of the different views that were put into perspective here. I like this blog thing. :D
If you ask me...I personally believe that this article, although it contrasts the views of Plato and Aristotle, trule questions the value of a democracy rule.
In the article, the most primative form of democracy was founded upon by the ancient Athenians. These people greatly supported the means of citizen participation. In their belief system, everybody was thought of to be of equal rank and status, therefore each and every individual was given the right to rule randomly. When I first read of such rule, I believed this system to be somewhat corrupted. Although it placed equal status on all its citizens, the 'random' selection really brought up the notion of how efficient the government would truly be. Despite that fact, because the government ruled by such a system, everyone was not only expected to take part in the government system, but also take an active role in each and everyone's life.
Although this initial form of democracy may not be apparent today, the participation in politics is essential for the excercise of our rights as free Americans. Millions of people have sacrificed their lives just so we, the citizens of this nation, can live with freedom and equality. Without active participation in government, whatever decisions are held in office, would not properly represent the true beliefs of the American nation.
On the other hand, the other philosopher believes in the notion that individuals should be elected. Although democratic forms of elections do represent the votes of the American citizens, the validity of such votes are minimal. A predicament our society faces, especially in the upcoming election, is the bare fact that all people, regardless of education, are voting for who to take role as the new president. In the article, it says something about allowing only those who are properly 'educated', decide the rule of the American government. Although this may seem like a 'wise' decision, because usually those who are educated knows best, it would not properly represent the American perspective or point of view. For Americans to have a voice, it must come from Americans, regardless of how great that American is.
If you truly ask me which philosopher I believe in the most, I would have to say I am right in the middle of this argument. Each of the philosophers had his own point of view in the overall meaning of democracy. Despite the fact, I believe this article should convey a view Americans should all excercise in their right as citizens: the notion to participate in government and take an active role in the growth of our nation.
If I had to had to choose an argument it would be plato's expert government, because Athenian Democracy seems obsessed with politics and their citizens duties. Besides the Athenian's system worked randomly, they appointed people by lots! What if we had random selection to choose clark's principle and the janitor got chosen ( no affense to the janitor) but it wouln't be his expertise, you should have some kind of qualification right... like socrates said " if you want advice on politics, would you ask a shoemaker or a musician, or would you ask an expert o politics?" (a politic common sense). I think the way our government is now is well, all people have a voice but we all vote for someone who has expertise on politics.
I have to go with the Athenian democracy, I think their way of government seems unusual to us, but at least they got the whole people involved. They had rights just like us, but unlike us, they did not forgot about their duties as citizens. Their “Participation” was crucial. They “were directly involved in passing laws, … and declaring war.” They knew that their empire or nation or whatever it was, depended on how united they were, they did not compete with each other like the candidates do today, they did not insulted each other like Obama and McCain do in public television . They were united and I guess that’s why nobody ever criticized the government, because everyone took part in the decisions. Modern democracy or Plato’s expert government is criticized every time a decision is made because the what’s so called “government of the people and by the people” does not really exist. Or why else do people protest against the government, why do they protest against the war in Iraq. I mean, if they elected a president, it was because the president is the leader and as leader he knows what’s best for the nation, right. Well if the people protest against their leader, then the leader is not so good after all. And how do we know that a shoemaker can’t make a good president, just because he’s uneducated it doesn’t mean that he has no brains. He probably didn’t have the money to go to school and that’s why he became a shoemaker.
I agree with adam because their is people that complain about the way things are but they don't vote. If your able to vote and didn't then don't complain!
After reading this passage, I believe that Plato's government proves superior over the Athenians'. Plato believed in knowledgeable leaders to run a government, rather than have common people lead a country. The Platonian government would have experts in the field of politics to lead our nations rather than uneducated commoners. I believe that the leaders in the Athenian society are the followers in government because they are merely selecting their leaders by random, thus possibly electing a weak leader for their nation.
By the way, sorry this is late Mr. West! Please have mercy on me!!! lol :)
I agree with Kevin Reel because his points are true about how not everyone cares about government. Having an elite government full of leaders who care about leading the nation will govern the country better than common people voting on leaders. I think that Kevin's point provides the idea that leaders selecting their leaders will result in a powerful government.
I have to agree with the Plato's expert government. Although Athenian Democracy has a closer relationship between the government and the people, many major flaws are bound to happen. First off, people need privacy. Without privacy, the personal affairs of one person could easily be exploited to anyone. This could lead to havoc between other citizens. I believe this because if that case was to appear in today's society havoc would most likely occur. Plato's expert government is the only right way to go. If a leader was selected at random, he/she could easily ruin or be the downfall of the nation. To elect an expert in politics to do the job very well suits the position as the leader of the nation. Because even if we do not agree with his/her ways it can be corrected. An expert should understand the will of the people because that is what qualifies that person to be an expert. Therefore, if they suggest an idea that is not popular among the citizens, the citizens may disaprove of it. On the otherhand, athenian government elects someone by random. Therefore, choosing someone not technically qualified for that position. And when there is something wrong with what that randomly chosen person does, no one can act against it because no one really understands. Citizens who are chosen have no choice but to become the leader, and what they do as the leader may have already been determined. So the citizens that live in an athenian government cannot act against the government or the leader, since it is the job of the leader to do what he has to do. Another problem that I believe that might occur if there were rebelious acts in an athenian government, it would be neglecting it's leader. This leads to the opposite of the purpose of a democracy. Instead of bringing people closer to the government, people ignore it because they have no part in choosing their leader. The idea of having the nation revolve around politics does not make it strong, it definitely involves more people but can easily damage the nation from the inside. If a citizen really does not want to be a leader and instead make shoes all day, he should be entitled to do so. What is the point of a democratic government if a person cannot choose what he wants to be.
West, you got my text. I swear it. So basically, this is what I said...again. This time, I'm saving all my blogs.
Just to let everyone know, I did my blog. NO JOKE. And I did it on time, but I am not seeing my blog so now I am freaking out. Therefore, I am writing a brand new one...and saving/printing this *BEEP* out. ldkfjakldfjasladlkjfakljfalk. Here I go.
While I was reading this article, I saw many different views on both arguments. In the Athenian Democracy, their views about random selection both provided pros and cons along with the thought that everyone is judged from their "duties" as a citizen. Similarily, Plato's expert government has pros and cons too. It is true that no one wants to be govern by an idiot but the "bare truth" is hidden sometimes by the effects of the "untamed beast" (the people). There are strong points to both but if I had to choose on what democracy I want, I would have to go with Plato's view of democracy.
Not only does Plato makes sense when he states that we would want experts in government to lead us but that they can use their ability to guide us to a more ideal future. Even though his philosophy might have influenced the notorious Hitler, his philosophy still is proven. Hitler was seen as an expert in government and the citizens of Germany wanted his expertise to guide them out of their despair. On a softer note, think of our first president, George Washington. Even though he was unanimously elected as our first president, it is from his experience that he was chosen. This was not a random selection like the Athenian would have stated. This philosophy has influenced our modern democracy because the citizens of the United States would not want to randomly choose candidates without getting to know their views on the issues at hand. Our democracy is not perfect, but up until now, our democracy has lead us to be one of the most powerful nations. Plato's influence not only makes sense but his philosophy compared to the Athenian is a much better choice.
His views on presentation does bring a question to mind about our modern democracy now because it made me think about the "bare truths" and if our government is simply hiding the truth with their presentations. But I would want to believe that they are simply trying to show us that our idealist fantasy is in their minds and that they would want to present what is best and what the majority would vote for. This is because our democracy changed and is still in the process of changing so a clean cut democracy can not exist anymore.
The point of presentation before bare truths, in the Platonic view, made me consider what side I should pick but our government is still alive due to the experts we have chosen to lead us. Thus, Plato's view of government seems most ideal and the better out of the two.
NOW I AM PRINTING AND SAVING THIS! UGHHHHH :[
SARO
i have to say that i don't agree with Mgallegos because the point of the government is to protect everyone so i think everyone has a say on how the government should be run, even if it's stupid. and how do we know who are the unsmart people. i didn't know the posts were due at 3:00 PM
I agree with Athenian Democracy. It think that it is great to have a shoemakers' ideas as part of the system. Even though there may not be as much education as Plato's democracy. It is big time citizenship. With Plato everyone has social class and with the Athenians everyone is equal and there voices our equal too. I like that it is almost completely opposite than our government system in America. I don’t think that our government should only be run by expert, because not everyone is an expert.
I agree with Athenian Democracy. It think that it is great to have a shoemakers' ideas as part of the system. Even though there may not be as much education as Plato's democracy. It is big time citizenship. With Plato everyone has social class and with the Athenians everyone is equal and there voices our equal too. I like that it is almost completely opposite than our government system in America. I don’t think that our government should only be run by expert, because not everyone is an expert.
Response to Denise's comment.
I totally disagree when you say america became the "leader" and when you say americas goverment works out the "best" why, because you can't say one country is a better than the other that is just your opinion. To me america is not a leader yet a loser. ( though that is my personal opinion :P ) Can you prove that america is the leader over every other nation.
americas goverment is doing very well but you can't say its doing the "best" because there alot of other countries in the world that has a goverment also doing just as well as america for example New Zealand (yes I have to drag in New Zealand) we might be small but our government is in "good shape" if not better than americas.
Do correct me if I am wrong or if I misunderstood you.
-warning, this post may end up dripping with sarcasm-
wow...so i must say i only took time to read the shorter comments, because it is 7 10 already and i am TIRED. Everyone seems to be agreeing with the Platonian government, but i definently don't. I mean, I know it has its good points, but EVERYTHING has its good points, including COMMUNISM (cue dramatic music), which, GASP, stemmed from Plato's ideals. Like Mr. West said, look how low the approval rates for our own government is, which is also...yep, you guessed it, based on PLATO'S ideas. Marcus said that picking officials at random wasn't very bright, considering how intelligent the Athenians are portrayed. HELLO!! Does anyone else see that...double play thing kinda going on? Maybe their INTELLIGENCE had some influence in their government? It might be said that even intelligent people, or societies in this case, make mistakes, and the Athenian government might be called one of those mistakes. But do you honestly think that such an esteemed and intelligent society would make that big of a mistake in their government? Well, I don't. I think the Athenians had a pretty darn good idea. They DID know what was going on. Like Shanith said, the citizens were so involved, they really couldn't HELP knowing what was going on, so they were all perfectly informed, thus capable of leading their country. I should have commented sooner, because almost all of my points towards Athenian government have pretty much been said. I hate it when that happens, cause I'm sure Mr. West doesn't want to read the same thing over and over. But thats my price for being a procrastinator. =/ I also agree with Louis and Suzy in that the people should lead the people, and that the variety of the leaders will benefit the country. Not all of our leaders know what we all need. Not the best of them, and certainly not the worst of them. But WE know what we need and want in a leader. I do agree that only the educated in politics should lead a society, but "back in the day", all of the Athenians WERE educated in their local political scene. Just as the Athenian society and their government have faded into history, so have governments led with Platonian ideals, such as Fascism and Communism.
Now, SAFMEDS, what is a democracy?
POLICY REFLECTS THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE.
one person...does NOT understand the will of all people.
'nuff said.
Wow, Im over four hours late to post, and I was considering suicide, but I decided that I'd just take the consequence of few points of something unless my post is so fantastic that Mr. West will forgive me. ahem cough cough. And assuming you could give a flying hoot as to why I am late I will get right to business.
I am for Athens. At first I was thinking Plato, and I was a little worried seeing that practically everyone who has posted has picked Plato's experimental government, but I have thought about it thoroughly and I am all for the classical Athenian Republic.
In the last four decades of presidential elections only 54% of the eligible population has voted. Some people question whether one vote really will make a difference, but I assure you that the other 46% of the population could make a huge difference. In Athens, all of its citizens, aka white males, were expected to participate, because voting, running for office, and any sort of political participation wasn't a "right" as it is consider today by many Americans, it was a "duty".
Classical Republicans believed the goal of education was to instill values of civic virtue into young peoples education. Thus, making the idea of joining in the political fun and actually participating as an adult as natural to them as breathing. They believed in teaching morals such as repect and generiosity along with the idea that it was an honor to serve in the emilitary and to participate in politics. Every citizen was well educated in the issues. This Destroys some of Plato's resonings, when he says that experts should judge in there spere of expertise. If every citizen is well endowed with the details of the government, then couldn't everyone be considered an expert? If your neighbor knew just as much as you, who knew just as much as the mayor, and you were all intelligent in the art of government, then all of your opinions should be equally heard. The things politicians say affect us all, so we should all have a say.
Nick said,"the argument that you would 'ask a shoemaker for advice on shoes,' and 'a musician for musical advice' is irrefutable." Well I shall prove you wrong. May I ask, where would you go if you needed some blood work done, say, the Endoscopy Center of Southern Nevada? Oh wait, what happened there, the medical practitionaors, nurses and doctors who went to school to do just this, experts in their field you might say, reused syringes and reused bottles that were clearly labeled for single patient use. Because these medical practices, that went on since 2004, 6 people have contracted hepatitis C, a potentially lethal disease, and 40,000 were exposed to these usafe conditions. Theses "experts" made a drastic mistake. And jsut as any human, politicians, too, are proned to mistakes. Just because the shoesmaker knows how to make shoes does not mean he will make every make and model right. Just as politicians can have extensive background, and even your father as the president, does not mean that they will be perfect in the politcal making process and know what to do all the time and knwo what is best for others. I am sure that nurse meant well, too bad she just gave a man a cancer causing disease.
Kevin Reel said that an Athenian style government,"no longer has any practicality in a large country like America." We take a door to door cencus every 10 years for each and every person in the United Sates of America. Im sure we could find a way to require the population to vote, just like we require jury duty from every citizen. (Notice its called jury "duty" nor jury "right") Fines perhaps?
Just because some of us citizens may not be "experts" in governemt doesn't mean that we don't know what will be good for us an what will not. I'm no mathmetician, but I sure as heck can tutor a freshman in algebra, because a little information can go a long way. And I do not want a so called professional politicain making every one of my decisions for me.
I would first like to apologize for submitting my comment late, it will be the first and last time that i miss the deadline but i just got home from church and i previously thought i had till midnight, but whether or not this is excepted for credit i will still post it.
As i began to read the article i first read about the Athens and their view on politics and i began to think this article was for our entertainment because of how ridiculous the Athenians are.
When the author switched his focus from the Athenians to Plato's view i was excited because it seemed to be a light of brilliance compared to the Athenians. Plato's view is a rather interesting and amazing view. I agree with Plato's view because even on the basic level of intellect it is the logic view of how politics or any other organization should be ran. You don't randomly pick who you want to run a school and you would never randomly pick some one to baby sit your children.
Just in the same was it is (for lack of better words that come to mad) Stupid. It is almost psychotic to randomly pick a leader.
Aw man... 3pm?
I should start paying more attention in class for these deadlines X.X
Well I am for Plato's Expert Goverment as that is basicly the only logical way to go. As he said, you wouldn't want some shoemaker that may not even be interested in politics running your government would you? No, You want someone who wants to be there and has the knowledge needed to run the government such as how we elect officials here in the US.
Well that's it, Plato's expert goverment is the only way to go, unless you'd like my randomly selected friend here that works at McDonalds to run our country.
ok so i'll just jump right to the point. I would have to say that i compoletely agree with Plato. For the fact that from the article I am lead to believe that he saw politicians as different people than just your everyday human being. Politicians are the people who will run your country basically, and who wants someone running their lives who does't have a clue what they are talking about.
The Athenians pay no mind to the people who have to abide by rules and decisions the political people make. That is first off not right, and secondly unfair to the people.He selected representatives at random when really there are possibly better persons for the task at hand.
Then again Plato saw things how they are today with the whole system of voting for who we as people think will be the best to run our society. Everything seems to be more organized and well planned out and of course more fair towards the thoughts and opinions of the people.
So I posted in the wrong spot
I'm in Mr.V's class but I can't find his blog
someone help me please
oooh i must be bored to be checking out this blog! i wonder if theres an extreme pessimist amongst the 09ers? a little talk about Classical republicanism? how about "oooh lets not think for ourselves or read, because the government can do that for us!," and early democracy "hey lets give everyone a vote! because stooges have a say in the government too!," or the american governments blend of the two, "people are stupid, so lets make it so only rich white protestant males can vote! and then we'll shove our heads up our bums for a few hundred years and pretend like we have the morale high ground!"
ohhh yah i love govo bashin
Plato's idea of democracy is not the best way to go at it, but it is the least worst. :)
Remember wayyy back in time... the first successful civilizations were those in which people specialized. There were hunters, gatherers, berry-pickers, medicine men/doctors, sort-of-lawyers, and more. What constitutes a prosperous society is when people are allowed to excel in the things they are good at. Equally as important, is that people are prevented from doing things they are simply HORRIBLE at doing.
In a different sense, if there existed no specialization and everyone had "equal participation" as in Athenian democracy, then on one day, maybe the carpenter will operate on your brain while the doctor builds a house that might or might not collapse on you. Then the next day maybe a barber can serve you a raw steak that kills (literally), and a chef can give you a unique haircut. Probably won't work out very well, will it?
In the same respect, the government should be kept to those who know it best. I know that sounds like high concentration of power, but it's high concentration of power in MANY experts who know what they are doing. And many of these "MANY experts" will have opinions that reflect those of the people. Or the "untamed beasts." :D
Politians will have debates amongst each other, which helps to ensure that the best solution arises from the not-as-good solutions.
Specialization allows government to operate in a more professional and orderly sense than if it were to reflect EVERYONE'S opinions...
And, politicians actually CARE about the law and government, because either:
1) They get paid to care, or
2) It is their calling/passion... lol
Take a look at the percentage of the population voting today. Not a very high number. Doesn't that reflect how much the general population cares? We all like to complain, but at the same time we don't care enough to do something as simple as voting. Do you really want to put the country's future into these hands?
Okay... I should probably post this before 12am so that it's not another day late. :)
Aw.. crap! Last post! D:
I would have to agree with Platos government. Plato’s government makes way more sense then picking random people.
Plato says reason and wisdom should govern and I also believe that. Everyone is given a chance to run but usually people educated in the area of government and well known by the masses usually win which is what we want right?
You don’t necessarily have to be an expert at being leaders but We need solid faces to give the US a good name for having a good leader. Kinda like the new Batman movie!! :D A lot of people cant really help themselves so how can they help America? We don’t really need an expert we just need someone truly dedicated to society. Like batman is dedicated to protecting Gotham. People need a hero! Lol jk. Just the way that everyone worked together is how our government should be run.
I also agree with Adam when he says only a select few should not hold all the keys. That’s why we vote for other leaders who even out our government.
And to the question “would you ask a shoe maker or a musician advice for politics?” I would have to say yes I would. I know many people that do not govern anything but them selves and know so much more then I would ever dream of knowing and we obviously have the same rules as we did two weeks ago. We are America. We vote. We decide.
We vote for many leaders which make up the government. I’m not sure if government is a required class for every school but it should be so that if people feel that they are not involved enough they can start. So If we want the best results we should pick the best leaders, become educated in what they are doing, and make sure there are no mistakes from what we know.
Vannessa F.
Ps. Oh crap! Sorry its late Mr. West! Im spending the night at a friends house who has internet. :D
Mr. West: Excuses!! *Laser gun*
Me: Gaaahh!!...nooo!.. x_x
Ronnie Corcuera -- UNR '12
(Alumni :D)
R. West, it seems like you've put your foot down this year. I'm sorry '08 Kinda screwed it up :)
Hey West, I miss you. Did I tell you that I love it here in Reno?
Love,
Ronnie Tee Smith
Okay, so yea sorry it took SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong (you get the point) to post this. So i am going to try and repost my blog without a grudge for having to retype my first one that never stuck to the blog.
And of course there is definately no angst towards such a proposterous notion. Therefore, my efforts to write this blog should be relatively easy.
Okay, now for real.
I feel that most people underestimate the ability that humans contain within them to arise to the challenges that face them.
Having said that I agree with the Athenian's Democracy. That being, i feel that giving up your power so quickly as you do with Plato's view. Plato is to quick to give up the power that makes our government so special/unique.
Its true that there are people who can "Learn the ways of a Politician". However, there is no better way to rule or organize a group then through personal experience. No matter how many times I read about how airplanes are constructed and how aerodynamics aply to them, I will never be able to do as well a job in creating one without first having experiance.
So by allowing people the chance to arise to the challenge, we not only maintain the ability to stay involved with the government but we become more suited to ruling the people as a government.
i'm new to this and i missed a couple of blogs.idunno what to do, can someone help me out?
So im like a month late on this blog =/ but thanks Mr. West for allowing me to do this blog still, even tho pts will be deducted, but hey better super late then never and better some points then none.
I had to read this article all over again and i agree with Plato, a person that specializes in a field or job is the best for the job. You wouldnt want someone to run out country who has no experience right?
In Response to Kendraya
I dont think randomly picking a person for our government would be smart, yeah things arent going to good now but picking a random person might make things worse cuz he/she wouldnt know what they are doing and just panic
In response to S.
First off, good point about the whole mr west teaching a ballet class for 8 year olds haha
But i agree with you, we need experienced people to take control so we can avoid "chaos"
Post a Comment