The faults in Democracy and Socrates

By Arslan Shahzad

As the recent debate about the Presidential and Parliamentary System rages on, and the debate of the eligibility of many world’s leaders is in question, many do not realize that maybe the fault lies in the system that makes the people like Donald Trump and Narrandera Modi rise to power. Let us therefore discuss the system of Democracy on philosophical grounds.

We’re used to thinking very highly of democracy and by extension of ancient Athens the civilization that gave rise to it. The Parthenon has become almost a personification for democratic values, which is why so many leaders of democracies like to be photographed there. It’s therefore very unusual to discover that one of ancient Greece’s greatest achievements, Philosophy, was highly suspicious of its other achievement, Democracy.

The founding father of Greek philosophy, Socrates is portrayed in the dialogues of Plato as enormously pessimistic about the whole concept and standings of democracy in Book Six of “The Republic”, Plato describes Socrates falling into conversation with a person called Adeimantus of Collytus, and trying to get him to see the imperfections of democracy by comparing a society to a ship. If you were heading out on a journey by sea, asked Socrates who would you, if at all possible, want deciding who was in charge of the vessel, just anyone or people educated in the rules and difficulties of maritime affairs. “The latter of course”, says Adeimantus. “So why then”, response Socrates, “do we keep thinking that any old person should be fit to judge who should be the ruler of a country”, Socrates pointed out.

The main point to be noted that voting in an election is a skill, not a random intuition and like any skill it needs to be taught systematically to people letting the public vote. Without an education of the trade, voting can be as irresponsible as putting a novice in Maritime Affairs in charge of a ship sailing in a storm. Socrates was to have firsthand catastrophic experience of the foolishness of voters, much like what we have seen in US and India very recently. In 399 BC, the philosopher was put on trial on made-up charges of corrupting and misleading the youth of Athens. The jury of 500 Athenians was invited to hear the case and decided by a narrow margin that the philosopher was guilty. He was put to death by hemlock.

In a process which is for thinking, people every bit as ignorant as they would be, were handed the reign of Socrates’ life. Here, it should be noted that Socrates was not elitist in the normal sense. He didn’t believe that a small group of people should only ever vote. He did however insist that only those who’d thought about issues rationally and deeply should be let near a ballot box.

We have forgotten this distinction between an “Intellectual Democracy” and a “Democracy by Birth-right”. We have given the vote to all, without connecting it to wisdom and Socrates knew exactly where that would lead to, a system the Greeks feared above all, Demagoguery. Ancient Athens had painful experience of demagogues. For example, the immoral figure of Alcibiades, a rich, enigmatic, smooth-talking wealthy man who usurped basic freedoms and helped to push Athens to his unsuccessful military adventures in Sicily.

Socrates knew how easily people seeking election could exploit our desire for easy answers. He asked us to imagine an election debate between two candidates, a Doctor and a Sweet Shop Owner. The Sweet Shop Owner would say of his rival, “Look this person here has worked many evils on you. He hurts you, gives you bitter medicine, and tells you not to eat and drink whatever you like. He’ll never serve you feasts of many and varied pleasant things like I will”. Socrates asks us to consider the audience’s response.

Do you think the Doctor would be able to reply effectively the true answer, that he caused you trouble and goes against your desires in order to help you would cause an uproar among the voters? Don’t you think we have forgotten all about Socrates’ dire warnings against democracy? We have preferred to think of democracy as an unambiguous good, rather than as something that is only ever as effective as the education system that surrounds it. As a result, we have elected many sweet shop owners and very few doctors, as we seek comforting lies rather than bitter truths.