MENU

Aristotle on the 2024 U.S. General Election

By Savvy Inquirer

November 18, 2024

SUBSCRIBE TO SAVVY STREET (It's Free)

 

 

By means of advanced technology that Elon Musk has yet to disclose, the most rational man in history has been able to make frequent trips to our era and observe our culture, our economy, and our political system. He shares with us today his thoughts about the election just concluded on November 5 and what it may mean for freedom going forward.

The Savvy Inquirer: Mr. Aristotle…may I call you Aristotle?

Aristotle: Certainly, although Ari would be just fine. All my friends call me that. And you are?

The Savvy Inquirer: I am what you might think of as a scribe and orator for a group called “The Savvy Street,” and I go by the name The Savvy Inquirer, but you may just call me Savvy, if you like. I have so many questions for you, Ari, And I’d like to get your thoughts on our recent election of new leaders for our country. But first, let’s start with your view of the different kinds of government. How many kinds are there? And what is the difference between good and bad government?

My teacher’s teacher, Socrates, was tried and sentenced to death by his fellow Athenians for the crime of being a philosopher who taught things they didn’t agree with.

Aristotle: As I see it, there are essentially three kinds of government, and I call them simply rule by one, rule by the few, and rule by the many. The good form of rule by one is monarchy, such as a benevolent king or emperor, but it can degenerate into tyranny. Good rule by the few is aristocracy, and the danger is that it may deteriorate into oligarchy. Good rule by the many is what I call polity, with widespread participation by citizens in their government with safeguards for their freedom, and which you modern people refer to as a representative, constitutional government or more simply a republic, somewhat like the Romans had—though that was after my time, so to speak.

I understand that some of you also call this system “democracy,” but I reserve that term for governments that descend into “mob rule.” As you know, my teacher’s teacher, Socrates, was tried and sentenced to death by his fellow Athenians for the crime of being a philosopher who taught things they didn’t agree with. If this sounds familiar—a weaponized government I think you call it—that is because human nature is a fixed, stable thing and it has not changed in over 2000 years. As your Lord Acton said, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely, even—or perhaps especially—when exercised democratically, i.e., by the mass of the people, unconstrained by institutional safeguards.

The Savvy Inquirer: That certainly does resonate with what we have been seeing recently in our country. But just what kind of government, good or bad, do you think we have here in America, and what might be its fate following the election we have just had?

Aristotle: You Americans have a rather robust rule by the many, a polity, or, as Benjamin Franklin said in 1787, “a republic, if you can keep it”—by which he meant, keep it from being overthrown, from falling apart, or from being destructive in some major way of the people’s freedom. That is always the challenge. Your country’s founders very wisely and ingeniously constructed a system with separation of powers and checks and balances that, as far as possible, would be self-correcting and prevent any of the bad forms of government from taking over. There have been some truly amazing examples of this self-corrective power throughout your history and, for the most part, you have weathered a number of such political storms. However, I will also say that you are not out of the woods yet in your current situation.

Fear of the wrong person being elected over and over led to amending your Constitution to prevent more than two presidential terms.

First, consider that a much-revered president might be tempted or persuaded to assume the legislative and judicial powers along with his executive power—to become a monarch. Your very first president, George Washington, wisely rejected this role and declined to run for a third term; his vice president, John Adams, however, was still enamored of the trappings of monarchy and wanted him and the president to be referred to as “Your Excellency,” so the lure of rule by the one was still operating even after decisively rejecting the tyranny of King George III. More recently, about 80 years ago, your president Franklin Roosevelt, much revered for his role in shepherding the country through a devastating economic depression and world war, ran for and was elected to not just three, but four terms. Eventually, fear of the wrong person being elected over and over led to amending your Constitution to prevent more than two presidential terms, but there is still the lingering fear that a controversial chief executive will refuse to leave office and seize dictatorial power.

The Savvy Inquirer: As you have heard, Ari, our current president-elect has been widely accused of wanting to become a dictator immediately upon being sworn in two months from now.

Aristotle: Yes, indeed, and that is more evidence for the constancy of human nature. Your partisan news outlets and politicians have been behaving like a bunch of Sophists, so caught up in their rhetoric and desire for power that they will do anything, including taking clearly spoken words out of context, in order to cast aspersions on their opponent. As you might say, “What part of ‘dictator on day one only,’ don’t they understand?” But of course, they do understand. They are just being…Sophists…dishonestly misquoting Mr. Trump in order to manipulate public opinion and incite fear that is totally unwarranted. Taking a single day to undo his predecessor’s abridgements of economic freedom and national sovereignty is hardly the act of a would-be tyrant.

The real would-be wielders of power against the people are the very ones who have tried so hard to damage and destroy Mr. Trump in any way they could.

In fact, the real would-be wielders of power against the people are the very ones who have tried so hard to damage and destroy Mr. Trump in any way they could—through corrupting the legal system, coercing the channels of communication, suppressing information vital for an informed decision by the electorate, and, some would say, even resorting to subverting the election process and to rhetorically creating an emotional climate for attempted assassination. Add to this the hordes of bureaucrats who run the agencies responsible for the coercive health and environmental mandates, the imposing of discriminatory, anti-merit policies on hiring and school admissions, the subversion of parent-child relationships with anti-historical and anti-scientific school curricula and policies, the supplying of weaponry for endless foreign wars, the hindering of supplying much needed fossil fuels, and the destruction of the American currency with legalized counterfeiting, all of which Mr. Trump has promised to address, and you can see why they are shaking in their sandals at the prospect of his taking office in two months.

The Savvy Inquirer: So, why then did you say that we are not yet out of the woods in respect to losing our freedom?

It has been trying to replace your representative constitutional government with rule by so-called experts who think they know better than the common people what is good for them, who want to treat them as subjects not citizens.

Aristotle: Because the second form of bad government I mentioned – oligarchy – will not go down without a fight. For over a century now, it has been trying to replace your representative constitutional government with rule by so-called experts who think they know better than the common people what is good for them, who want to treat them as subjects not citizens, and who want to deprive them of the freedom to make their own decisions as how best to live their lives. But as you know, in my Metaphysics, I said that a free man is one who “exists for his own sake and not for another’s,” and the latter-day followers of Karl Marx who would be your rulers want freedom only for themselves, freedom to command and control. They see themselves as aristocrats, but they have forfeited that label by their toxic, authoritarian policies and goals. There is nothing noble about treating other human beings as one’s own ends, rather than ends in themselves. Your best thinkers in the modern world recognized this. It is time that the oligarchs stand aside and let the people breathe free. Perhaps Mr. Trump’s administration will succeed in helping them to do so.

The Savvy Inquirer: Ari, that is the most optimistic and encouraging thing I have heard since election night last week. Thank you so much for your enlightening and inspiring thoughts.

Aristotle: The pleasure is all mine, Savvy. Let’s talk again soon!

 

(Visited 7 times, 7 visits today)