Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The evolution of democracy
Evolution of democracy
Contrast of oligarchy and democracy
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The evolution of democracy
There is also a wide variety of oligarchies. In one type there is an arrangement where there are a few property requirements in order to be in office, other arrangements require that the son has to succeed the father, in others the officials rule rather than the law. As stated in the Aristotle’s Politics “it is evident, then, that those regimes which look to the common advantage are correct regimes according to what is unqualifiedly just, while those which look only to the advantage of the rulers are errant, and are all deviations from the correct regimes; for they involve mastery, but the city is a community of free persons.” (Lord, 2013, 1279a-18)
There has not been a true pure polity regime that has existed throughout the centuries. The
…show more content…
Without the two, a city will not be able to be properly managed if it is not run as an aristocratically. Aristocracy 's defining principle is virtue, oligarchy 's is wealth, and democracy 's is freedom. The “deviations of those mentioned are tyranny from kingship, oligarchy from aristocracy, democracy from polity. Tyranny is monarch with a view to the advantage for the monarch, oligarchy rile with a view to the advantage of the well off, democracy rule with a view on the advantage of those who are poor; none of them is with a view to the common gain.” (Lord, 2013, …show more content…
This can be as little as making assemblies open to the public, but they would charge a fee in order to allow people to attend. On the other hand, democracies have counter devices compared to the oligarchies. This can be something like paying the poor to attend an assembly. A polity ought to be ruled by those possessing heavy arms. The poor will not object from not having the ability to rule provided that they are not treated contemptuously or deprived of their property. Many regimes that once were polities became democracies, this is largely due to city sizes increasing over the years, more people shared in ruling as the size of the city
Machiavelli enumerated in his work, different types of princedoms and whether they are bound to fail from the start, simply based on their type and the way they are attained. Those princedoms are either Hereditary, Mixed, or completely New. Hereditary princedoms would of course be those in which power is passed down within a family. Mixed princedoms would be princedoms that are reinvented through
...e to the nature of Democracy it lacks righteousness but it could never be considered corrupted. A Democratic regime based on egalitarian rights allows for qualified citizens to share in the government under the sovereignty of the law. In this type of regime the majority class rules, allowing for all citizens to have a true say in the pertinent matters in regards to their regime or city.
Throughout history, it can be seen time and time again that rulers have different ways of rule. As expected, rulers may look over to different nations to see what is effective to prevent failures or encourage successes. With different forms of rule comes different thinkers and their take on the current methods of ruling which can be seen in Marx and Engels’ The Communist Manifesto, Machiavelli’s The Prince, and Locke’s Second Treatise on Government. Coming from different periods, it is expected that their perspectives are different. Assessing these works will ease the process of observing the differences between these thinkers and their thoughts on rulers who are above the law or have no morality and their notions of private property in society
The Aristotelian view of democracy showed democracy as a supreme state of being, promoting equality more than anything. It allowed every person to have as much say in a government as any other person, and yet still allowed individuality to reign. To follow this path of "true" democracy is to follow the path to a perfect country. Yet America, which prides itself on being a truly democratic nation, is filled with corruption and extortion, nothing like the Utopia Aristotle portrayed.
There is a fundamental difference between a democracy and a republic as it concerned the political entitlement of the citizenry. The citizens of a republic do not participate directly with governmental affairs. The citizens of a republic can however have a say in who does participate. The Roman republic has two prefect systems to prevent dictatorship which didn’t work.
Oligarchy is valued above a democracy although they are both ruled by the appetite of the soul. Those within an oligarchy pursue necessary appetites whereas democratic individuals pursue unnecessary appetites. Rulers are present...
very efficient form of government, and so is a oligarchy, but in those governments it can be very
In The Republic by Plato, Plato constructed an ideal city where Philosophers would rule. Governed by an aristocratic form of government, it took away some of the most basic rights a normal citizen should deserve, freedom of choice, worship, and assembly were distressed. Though the idea of philosopher kings is good on paper, fundamental flaws of the human kind even described by Plato himself prevent it from being truly successful. The idea of an ideal democratic government like what our founding fathers had envisioned is the most successful and best political form which will ensure individual freedom and keep power struggle to a minimum.
One of the versions of governing is an oligarchy, a small group of people in control of a country. In book eight of the republic Plato explains the meaning of an oligarchy and when it is very unsuccessful. It doesn't work because whoever has the most wealth can take part in ruling over the city. Plato even explains "when virtue and riches are placed together in the scales of the balance, the one always rises as the other falls...
According to Aristotle, a democracy is a failure. It is a majority rule where the majority is poor and non-virtuous. This means that whomever is in office, and all have equal access to office because of democracy’s concept of equality, may not act in the best interests of the city-state. When the city-state fails to reach its telos, providing the good life for its citizens, then the government of the city-state is non-virtuous, as are the people in the government. Since the city-state fails to achieve its telos under a democracy, Aristotle believes democracy to be a failure.
Aristotle points out that throughout the process the type of governing was always monarchical from the household all the way up to the polis. The polis though is not a monarchy or oligarchy because of the natural maturi...
More importantly, what is a democracy exactly? Some would define it as a form of government where the people rule, others as where the poor rule, and I would say it is where everyone contributes in how the government is ran but do not control the final decisions made. In Aristotle 's "Democracy and Oligarchy", he discusses the different kinds of democracies that exist and how equality plays a huge role in defining it. Without equality, or even limiting it, it can change a democracy into an oligarchy. He goes into detail about each kind there is and further analyzes how regardless of having similar elements, they are each unique in their own way.
In society, there is also an argument on what theory is correct, and works better for a city. Regime or Elite theory? Both has different stand point, but the main difference is should big businesses run local governments, or where the regime theory believes businesses are not very powerful. This has been a constant battle for years and both sides make great arguments.
Plato, Aristotle and Machiavelli have spent their lives in assertion of which form of government is good and who should be ruler, what type of ...
“ Is democracy the best type of government system” Essay Representative democracy is a better government system then a dictatorship. First, Democracies have more rights than dictatorships. In a democracy people have “ freedom of speech, freedom of the press and religion”. Second, dictatorships people don't have all those rights ( Comparing Government : democracy vs. authoritarianism). In a democracy people can vote for who is best fit for the job they are running for.