Degredation of Society, Radical Politics

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Radical and revolutionary change is influenced by values and traditions of society, their cultural and social preferences. The cases of Plato’s Republic, Aristotle’s Politics and Exodus demonstrate that radical change is inevitable caused by new values of new generations and their life preferences. The crisis of social reality is both statistically obvious and easily apparent to the eye of an ordinary observer. New values makes us inescapably aware of the dilemma of most of the world and unremittingly accuses the rich and powerful nations of complicity in this state of affairs. The theological tradition has responded with incisive images and an instinctual awareness that the passion of religion for issues of social justice is inherent to its nature.

In Politics Aristotle portrays that the Greek city-states whose histories formed the factual background to Aristotle’s political theory were, most of them, of pygmy proportions. They were frequently torn by faction, and their independence was ultimately destroyed by the advance of Macedonian power. Aristotle was familiar with the evils of faction (Book V of the Politics is given over to an analysis of the causes of civil strife), and he was intimate with the Macedonian court; yet he never lost his conviction that the small city-state was the right — the natural — form of civil society. A State is a collection of citizens, and a citizen, in Aristotle’s view, ‘is defined by nothing else so well as by participation in judicial functions and in political office’. The affairs of a State are run directly by its citizens. Each citizen will be a member of the assembly or deliberative body of the nation, he will be eligible for the various offices of State, which include financial and military appointments, and he will be a part of the judiciary (for under Greek legal procedure the functions of judge and jury were not distinguished) (Hamburger, p. 43).

Aristotle portrays hat generational change is crucial as it helps to change elite and their values and create new social order and renew politics. The old power and statement are unable to introduce change and eliminate corruption. How much political power a citizen possessed would depend on the type of constitution which his State enjoyed, different constitutions entrusting to different persons or institutions the authority to pass legislation and to determine public policy. Aristotle produced a complex taxonomy of constitutions, the three main types of which are monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy. In certain circumstances he favoured monarchy: ‘When either a whole family or an individual is so remarkable in point of excellence that his excellence exceeds that of everyone else, then it is just that that family or that individual should be king and sovereign over all matters.’ The ‘good life’, which is the goal of the State, is identified with eudaimonia, which is the goal of individuals. States are natural entities, and like other natural objects they have a goal or end. Teleology is a feature of Aristotle’s political theory no less than of his biology (Hamburger, p. 73).

As a slave is a particular species of property, let us by all means inquire into the nature of property in general, and the acquisition of money, according to the manner we have proposed. In the first place then, some one may doubt whether the getting of money is the same thing as economy, or whether it is a part of it, or something subservient to it; and if so, whether it is as the art of making (Aristotle).

Similar to Aristotle, Plato defines that change is crucial as it allows the state to renew and create new political power. In a direct response to what he saw as the corruption and decadence informing his contemporary Athens, Plato insists that the Guardians must be freed of the desire for luxury and material gain, ruling purely in the interest of wisdom, justice, and the greater good. Guardians are thus allowed no private property. They live and eat together, holding even women in common, removing incentives to rule for selfish gain. The lower classes of workers and artisans are, on the other hand, allowed a certain amount of private property. Moreover, all of their material needs are guaranteed by the state, though these guarantees do not extend to luxuries (Hamburger 98). For all classes, self-restraint is a central virtue, though in the lower classes control and moderation of one’s own desires are explicitly linked to the virtue of obedience, while in the upper classes such restraint is linked to wise and just rule. These elite students then engage in an extensive program of practical training, assuming subordinate government posts until age fifty, after which time the most successful of this group can go on to become Rulers, dividing the remainder of their time between philosophical contemplation of the Good and serving on the supreme governing council of the state (Hamburger 63).

Plato’s comments on the ideal behavior of individuals thus have clear political implications, and his exploration of individual behavior leads quite naturally into a description of the ideal state (Michelini, p. 33). The most important political principle of Plato’s ideal state is rule by an enlightened elite, highly trained and educated for the role and endowed with a philosophical turn of mind that presumably assures the wisdom of their policies. Plato’s commentary is principally concerned with the training and duties of this elite class, the Guardians. Plato shows little interest in the activities of the lower classes, much as the Party of Orwell’s 1984 exercises strict control over its members but shows relatively little interest in the lowly proles. The Guardians themselves are divided into two major groups. The larger group (sometimes referred to in the texts as “Auxiliaries”) includes civil servants and a permanent military force, skilled in the art of war and dedicated to the task of defending the state from external enemies (Michelini, p. 54).

This notion of the goal of the State is linked to another high ideal. ‘A fundamental principle of democratic constitutions is liberty. One form of liberty is to rule and be ruled turn and turn about. Another form is to live as one wishes; for men say that this is the aim of liberty, since to live not as one wishes is the mark of a slave.’ Liberty at home is complemented by a pacific external policy; for Aristotelian States, although armed for defense, will have no imperialist ambitions. But these generous sentiments are forgotten or suppressed when Aristotle turns from generalities to particular political arrangements. On domestic policy he is more voluble. And it is at once evident that in fact liberty will be severely restricted in an Aristotelian State. First, liberty is the prerogative of citizens, and a large majority of the population will not possess citizenship. “Someone who, being a man, belongs by nature not to himself but to someone else, is a slave by nature. He belongs to someone else if, being a man, he is an article of property — and an article of property is an instrument which aids the actions of and is separable from its owner” (Michelini, p. 38). Slaves may enjoy a good life — they may have kind masters. But they have no liberty and no rights (Michelini, p. 39).

The citizens own slaves, and they own other forms of property. Aristotle argues at length against communism. But his notion of property is a restricted one: ‘Evidently it is better that property should be private — but men should make it common in use.’ And he immediately adds that ‘it is the task of the legislator to see that the citizens behave like this’. The State will not own the means of production, nor will it direct the economy; but the legislature will ensure that the citizens’ economic behaviour is properly governed. The voice of the State, muted in economic affairs, is strident in social matters. In the last books of the Politics Aristotle begins to describe his Utopia or ideal State. The State intervenes before birth: “since the legislator must from the start consider how the children who are reared are to have the best physique, he must first pay attention to sexual union, determining when and between what sort of people marital relations may exist” (Michelini, p. 76).

The events of Exodus conquest, the establishment of the monarchy, the division of the kingdom, and the building of the Temple are told without reference to a single human being. In the psalmist’s thought God is the great doer. He is the Lord. It is not history that is the poet’s theme, but history as the revelation of God. Even David is but an instrument of God. The purpose of this religious teaching of one generation by the other is that through faithful recall of what God has wrought the congregation might be kept from stubborn rebellion and an unruly spirit toward God such as had characterized their fathers, and might be made truly faithful to Him (Stuart, p. 92).

“It may be so, but all gods, or their priests, claim the power to torment and slay those who worship other gods. It is not only women who are jealous, Kohath, or so it seems. Yet I think that you do your god injustice, seeing that even if this strength is his, he proved more merciful than his worshippers who knew well that I only grasped the veil to save myself from falling. If ever I visit your temple again it shall be in the company of those who can match might against might, whether of the spirit or the sword. Farewell.” (Exodus).

God was not the destroyer of His people. Moved by their desperate need, over and over again and in wave after wave of mercy He forgave them and saved them. In this unique story Israel’s trust in God’s mercy often grew presumptuous, and doubt of His salvation always led to sin. We can observe these waves of God’s mercy and salvation toward Israel, and one negative response of Israel after another in doubt and rebellion (Hamburger, p. 87).

Readers can also see wave after wave of God’s judgment and punishment, each awakening a characteristic response from Israel in obedience and faith. Thus we can follow the movement in the heart of the living God as the psalmist interprets it, and likewise the ebb and flow of obedience on the part of Israel, His people. God’s severe judgment upon them made Israel repentant. So, remembering that He was their protector and champion, they sought fellowship with Him. But their eagerness for Him degenerated into deception, flattery, and insincerity. Their loyalty wavered; they lost faith in the covenant He had made with them. Yet the Lord is a God of compassion and forgiveness. He did not destroy them in anger but turned from anger to mercy. The opening section sets in at the point of the exodus of Israel, the house of Jacob, from the barbarous-tongued Egyptians. In a great sweep of centuries he pictures Israel as having now become two kingdoms. Judah is spoken of first, because the author is himself a Judean, and because it contains the Lord’s sanctuary–and Israel is called the Lord’s realm,” the dominion over which He exercises rule. It was at the Exodus that God chose Israel, later to become the kingdoms of Judah and Israel (Stuart, p. 72).

The three works under analysis show that revolutionary change demands generational change. Clearly, the vision of the future monarchist society is something quite different from the version being promoted in modern politics. From the beginning this was an impossible task; but that he had made the effort revealed the desire not to alienate the more traditional elements. Aristotle describes in considerable detail the various ways in which the State should regulate the lives of its citizens. Each regulation, however benevolent in purpose, is a curtailment of liberty; and in Aristotle’s claim that the citizens ‘all belong to the State’ the reader will detect the infant voice of totalitarianism. If Aristotle loved liberty, he did not love it enough. He confidently assigns a positive function to the State, supposing that its goal is the promotion of the good life. Given that, it is easy to imagine that the State, eager to ameliorate the human condition, may properly intervene in any aspect of human life and may compel its subjects to do whatever will make them happy (Michelini, p. 87).

The Republic is a philosophical treatise concerned primarily with the question of justice and with the living of a just life. Its principal emphasis, then, is on the conduct of individuals. However, the Politics relies quite heavily on analogies between the individual self and the political state, suggesting repeatedly that the rule of one’s own self by each individual is a procedure quite similar to the rule of the state by political leaders. The discussion of anti-materialism, relocation and generational change shows that radical politics is influenced by social transformations and cannot be considered in isolation from social and economic life of the nation (Michelini, p. 101). The validity of the occupational/ordinary morality distinction, the professional-client relationship, deception, informed consent, privacy and confidentiality, professional dissent, individual and collective responsibility, character formation and professional codes were all addressed in the context of often opposing essays.

As well, the assigned cases sometimes evoked sharply different moral stances from the Fellows, once more underscoring the value of interdisciplinary collaboration seeking to do justice to the complexity of real life decision making. Whatever motives might prompt the pedant to disdain practical philosophy, one fairly certain outcome is self-imposed marginalization in the arena where great issues of any society are debated. Markedly in contrast to ardent pursuit of the trivial that sometimes characterizes academic research, the essays that follow manifest intellectual concern with real moral problems and the relevance of ethics education to appropriate engagement with those problems across the spectrum of disciplines and professions. Respect for person implies other principles such as autonomy or respect for self determination, beneficence or the obligation to do good, and nonmalfeasance or the obligation to avoid doing harm. These principles clearly are pertinent to course content on learning theories and cultural dimensions of health. The patient’s own perception of health, priority of health care needs, and involvement in planning and evaluating care are important to promoting patient autonomy (Michelini, p. 101).

The Politics reflect that ordinary reflective morality implies the application of ethical principles and theories that support personal and professional choices in morally troubling situations. These principles can be based on universal norms, social values, and professional norms. Universal norms apply to all people. Examples of universal norms are truth telling and promise keeping. These norms are considered essential to maintaining human relationships. Social values such as privacy, freedom, equality of opportunity, prevention of injury, and minimal well-being are also used as justifications for ethical behavior. Many professional norms are specifications of universal and social norms. Some norms can justify other norms. For example when professional norms are specifications of universal norms, the universal norm serves as the overall justification (Michelini, p. 106).

In sum, the important point is that accommodation was the result of necessity, not desire, and that the official commitment to change belied a powerful animosity. This had several important consequences for the revolutionary movement. On one hand, it rent almost immediately the broad social coalition that had striven. To accept argument is to reduce the historic importance of radical change in revolutionary societies and to deemphasize the degree to which popular support for the new social order and hence their political legitimacy–turned at crucial points of the revolutionary process on commitments to radical change. New values undoubtedly played an important role in structuring the state development. Thus the revolutionary process reached a stage where it could no longer involve the criticism of social elites (much less their dislodging), since it is a new regime itself that held concentrated wealth and power and made criticism equivalent to subversion.. Commitment to revolution ceased to mean commitment to change.

Works Cited

Aristotle, “Politics”, in The Politics of Aristotle, ed. and trans., Ernest Barker Ernest Barker. New York: Oxford University Press, 1962.
Hamburger, M. Morals and Law: The Growth of Aristotle’s Legal Theory. Biblo and Tannen, 1971.
Michelini, A. N. Plato as Author: The Rhetoric of Philosophy. Brill, 2003.
Plato. The Republic, 2008.
Stuart, D. B&H Publishing Group. 2006.

Click Here To Order Now!

Degredation of Society, Radical Politics

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)