Fascism: The perfect system. Socrates’ arguments against democracy and in favour of Authoritarianism

“For monarchy to work, one man must be wise. For democracy to work, a majority of the people must be wise. Which is more likely?” ― Charles Maurras

“Democracy, then, seems likely to be the fairest of States, being an embroidered robe which is spangled with every sort of flower. And just as women and children think a variety of colours to be of all things most charming, so there are many men to whom this State, which is spangled with the manners and characters of mankind, will appear to be the fairest of States.” —– Socrates

“And then democracy comes into being after the poor have conquered their opponents, slaughtering some and banishing some, while to the remainder they give an equal share of freedom and power; and this is the form of government in which the magistrates are commonly elected by lot.” —- Socrates

 

King Arthur was a pretty good “fascist dictator”
if you ask me. I’d have him over any of our
democratically elected potatoes any day.

According to Plato and myself, the ideal form of government is one organised by a philosopher king: a noble, uncorruptable spiritual leader who makes decisions in the best interests of the people and the divine.

If the general populace is unruly and rebellious against the will of the divine, and by extension against logic, then this monarchical system cannot work, and thus a timocracy replaces the philosophical, noble dictatorship. The timocracy is a dictatorship not ruled by a love of knowledge like the one of the philosopher King, but by the sword and by fear and wealthy, capitalistic landowners rule. This is in essence feudalism. As the timocratic system in turn crestes a hatred of the ruling class amongst the poor, a proleteriat revolution is caused, such as in the case of the French and Russian anti-monarchist revolutions which overthrew the imperfect but superior fascism, which was replaced by a morbid democracy in which we are all equal. This means, in other words, we are all dragged down to the lowest common denominator because the inferior among us can’t rise up to be like the highest.

Due to all people being considered equal, democracy becomes the ruling system and a tyrannical and ignorant majority easily usurp a noble, virtuous minority, which inevitably leads to disorder on a scale like we are seeing caused by democracy since the 18th century. Because there are always people seeking to deceive and it is easier to deceive a crowd of morons than a wise man, democravy inevitably results in a poor resultvand the crowd is swayed to believe not in the truth, but in the most carefully concealed lie.

An extract from The Republic, Book VIII: A conversation between Socrates and Glaucon on the shortcoming of democracy and what leads to its establishment

Next comes democracy; of this the origin and nature have still to be considered by us; and then we will enquire into the ways of the democratic man, and bring him up for judgement. 

That, he said, is our method. 

Well, I said, and how does the change from oligarchy into democracy arise? Is it not on this wise? –The good at which such a State alms is to become as rich as possible, a desire which is insatiable? 

What then? 

The rulers, being aware that their power rests upon their wealth, refuse to curtail by law the extravagance of the spendthrift youth because they gain by their ruin; they take interest from them and buy up their estates and thus increase their own wealth and importance? 

To be sure. 

There can be no doubt that the love of wealth and the spirit of moderation cannot exist together in citizens of the same State to any considerable extent; one or the other will be disregarded. 

That is tolerably clear. 

And in oligarchical States, from the general spread of carelessness and extravagance, men of good family have often been reduced to beggary? 

Yes, often. 

And still they remain in the city; there they are, ready to sting and fully armed, and some of them owe money, some have forfeited their citizenship; a third class are in both predicaments; and they hate and conspire against those who have got their property, and against everybody else, and are eager for revolution. 

That is true. 

On the other hand, the men of business, stooping as they walk, and pretending not even to see those whom they have already ruined, insert their sting –that is, their money –into some one else who is not on his guard against them, and recover the parent sum many times over multiplied into a family of children: and so they make drone and pauper to abound in the State. 

Yes, he said, there are plenty of them –that is certain. 
The evil blazes up like a fire; and they will not extinguish it, either by restricting a man’s use of his own property, or by another remedy: 

What other? 

One which is the next best, and has the advantage of compelling the citizens to look to their characters: –Let there be a general rule that every one shall enter into voluntary contracts at his own risk, and there will be less of this scandalous money-making, and the evils of which we were speaking will be greatly lessened in the State. 

Yes, they will be greatly lessened. 

At present the governors, induced by the motives which I have named, treat their subjects badly; while they and their adherents, especially the young men of the governing class, are habituated to lead a life of luxury and idleness both of body and mind; they do nothing, and are incapable of resisting either pleasure or pain. 

Very true. 
They themselves care only for making money, and are as indifferent as the pauper to the cultivation of virtue. 

Yes, quite as indifferent. 

Such is the state of affairs which prevails among them. And often rulers and their subjects may come in one another’s way, whether on a pilgrimage or a march, as fellow-soldiers or fellow-sailors; aye, and they may observe the behaviour of each other in the very moment of danger –for where danger is, there is no fear that the poor will be despised by the rich –and very likely the wiry sunburnt poor man may be placed in battle at the side of a wealthy one who has never spoilt his complexion and has plenty of superfluous flesh –when he sees such an one puffing and at his wit’s end, how can he avoid drawing the conclusion that men like him are only rich because no one has the courage to despoil them? And when they meet in private will not people be saying to one another ‘Our warriors are not good for much’? 

Yes, he said, I am quite aware that this is their way of talking. 

And, as in a body which is diseased the addition of a touch from without may bring on illness, and sometimes even when there is no external provocation a commotion may arise within-in the same way wherever there is weakness in the State there is also likely to be illness, of which the occasions may be very slight, the one party introducing from without their oligarchical, the other their democratic allies, and then the State falls sick, and is at war with herself; and may be at times distracted, even when there is no external cause. 

Yes, surely. 

And then democracy comes into being after the poor have conquered their opponents, slaughtering some and banishing some, while to the remainder they give an equal share of freedom and power; and this is the form of government in which the magistrates are commonly elected by lot. 

Yes, he said, that is the nature of democracy, whether the revolution has been effected by arms, or whether fear has caused the opposite party to withdraw. 

And now what is their manner of life, and what sort of a government have they? for as the government is, such will be the man. 

Clearly, he said. 

In the first place, are they not free; and is not the city full of freedom and frankness –a man may say and do what he likes? 

‘Tis said so, he replied. 

And where freedom is, the individual is clearly able to order for himself his own life as he pleases? 

Clearly. 

Then in this kind of State there will be the greatest variety of human natures? 

There will. 

This, then, seems likely to be the fairest of States, being an embroidered robe which is spangled with every sort of flower. And just as women and children think a variety of colours to be of all things most charming, so there are many men to whom this State, which is spangled with the manners and characters of mankind, will appear to be the fairest of States. 

Yes. 

Yes, my good Sir, and there will be no better in which to look for a government. 

Why? 

Because of the liberty which reigns there –they have a complete assortment of constitutions; and he who has a mind to establish a State, as we have been doing, must go to a democracy as he would to a bazaar at which they sell them, and pick out the one that suits him; then, when he has made his choice, he may found his State. 

He will be sure to have patterns enough.
And there being no necessity, I said, for you to govern in this State, even if you have the capacity, or to be governed, unless you like, or go to war when the rest go to war, or to be at peace when others are at peace, unless you are so disposed –there being no necessity also, because some law forbids you to hold office or be a dicast, that you should not hold office or be a dicast, if you have a fancy –is not this a way of life which for the moment is supremely delightful 

For the moment, yes.
And is not their humanity to the condemned in some cases quite charming? Have you not observed how, in a democracy, many persons, although they have been sentenced to death or exile, just stay where they are and walk about the world –the gentleman parades like a hero, and nobody sees or cares? 

Yes, he replied, many and many a one.
See too, I said, the forgiving spirit of democracy, and the ‘don’t care’ about trifles, and the disregard which she shows of all the fine principles which we solemnly laid down at the foundation of the city –as when we said that, except in the case of some rarely gifted nature, there never will be a good man who has not from his childhood been used to play amid things of beauty and make of them a joy and a study –how grandly does she trample all these fine notions of ours under her feet, never giving a thought to the pursuits which make a statesman, and promoting to honour any one who professes to be the people’s friend. 

Yes, she is of a noble spirit. 

These and other kindred characteristics are proper to democracy, which is a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder, and dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequals alike. 

We know her well. 

Consider now, I said, what manner of man the individual is, or rather consider, as in the case of the State, how he comes into being. 

Very good, he said. 

Is not this the way –he is the son of the miserly and oligarchical father who has trained him in his own habits? 

Exactly. 

And, like his father, he keeps under by force the pleasures which are of the spending and not of the getting sort, being those which are called unnecessary.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.