Political thinking
Machiavelli argued that ancient political thought and religion had been otherworldly and obsessed with utopian “imagined republics.” Taking this observation as our starting point,
Human nature is believed to revolve around his ability to rule himself and make social decisions that affect his way of life. Since ancient times, humanity has strived to build his political position through trial and error. However, several methods have since been devised to establish kingdoms, such as aristocracy and democracy. With modern society, people have found a more meaningful definition of politics, with the prevalence of standard practices by political leaders. There are differences between ancient and contemporary political thoughts, as depicted in the way philosophers argued about democracy and oligarchy in relation to human nature.
Ancient political thoughts were based on the first philosophers, namely Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Politics, whose theories were regarded totalitarian (Cartiledge 99). Their views were based on the ancient democratic practices of Athens. Plato’s republics support Socratic and supports the concept of the aristocracy. Their political ideas were based on Greek culture, as portrayed by the practices of republicans in Rome.
Plato’s theory doubts the applicability of democracy. Plato Socrates claimed that excessive freedom endangers democracy (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy par 19). Democracy involves a system of government where people rule themselves through representatives. In this case, all people have the right to govern others. This system is disadvantageous to people because selfish, unskilled, and dictatorial rulers might get into power. Such administrators do not care for the people who chose them and use their political power to benefit themselves.
Aristotle believed that constitutional government was better than oligarchy (Cartiledge 22). This form of government encompasses the granting of citizenship to many people and whose rule considers the interests of all people. His analogy of oligarchy implies that only a few and wealthy people from the government. His philosophy did not support the formation of this type of government, because the governing fraction satisfied its desires first and disregards the
The social morals of people necessitated recent political changes. It was dictated by changes in political needs by societies after the English civil war and revolutions of western countries (Shively 17). Following violent institutions in Europe, Machiavelli’s proposition was proven right. He argued that immoral behavior in politics was reasonable, and it provided a way for effective administration (Shively 81). In all the civil wars experienced in Europe, it was deemed necessary to spark such evils for political gain. This norm has continued to date. Therefore, morals affect the political decisions made by administrators.
Politics change when moral values are compromised. Modern political thoughts, as presented by Machiavelli, are backed by wrong choices by individuals who wish to survive politically (Wootton 493). The concept of state and governance guided their political thinking. According to them, a country is a collection of institutions with distinct justifiable powers. At the same time, the government is a separate group of people occupying the state institutions, and devise rules by which all people would be bound (Wootton 493). These concepts persist in modern society.
John Locke was among the contemporary philosophers whose political thought was based on human nature. He defined political power as “a right of making laws with penalties of death and consequently all fewer Penalties” (Yorke 43). His theory proposes that universal laws safeguard people. Besides, people require executive power that can defend their freedom and property. The approach supports the existence of three arms of government in civil states, which include the executive, judiciary, and legislature. Therefore, his philosophy is centered on law-making to assist in the public administration of a society.
Thomas Hobbes developed a political thought based on social contract theory. His justification of the philosophy is an inspiration for governance by people who have morals and collective unit (Shively 22). His argument supported the monarchy by arguing that it brings peace to the people. His theory recognizes the security of a state as dependent on absolute power. Based on this argument, the implication is that individuals do not have the right to property ownership against the most powerful units of governance. Furthermore, the sovereign has total power over its subjects and can acquire property without their approval.
– Do they start from different assumptions about human nature?
Political thoughts emanate from human nature to judge. Man is referred to as a political animal, implying an animal that can develop communities with varying sizes and several political structures(Shively 25). This community comprises of law-making units run by human reasoning. Various theorists define politics in different ways, in which particular human nature is present. As depicted by Machiavelli, humans change their behavior dependent on prevailing circumstances. Therefore, in modern society, the changes in political narratives imply that human nature became more visible in the way political administrations are conducted.
—- Do the moderns face a different set of political questions, or do they answer the enduring questions differently?
The modern world is characterized by changing political thoughts, and there are no enduring questions that need to be answered differently. There are various ideologies such as the concept of democracy and republicanism that have evolved, and they need modern answers
The question of the division of power in a democratic society. For instance, in the USA, the primary issue is based on the division of power vested on Democrats and Republicans (Zelzer par. 1). The Democrats have the majority of individuals in the House of Representatives; hence they have to make most of the administrative decisions. There are various issues that need to be addressed through investigative and legislative roles. If some groups back investigative purposes, they may be deemed supporters of republicanism. Therefore, these questions are left unanswered due to the nature of political structures that currently exist in the US.
An evaluation of the relationship between ancient and modern political thoughts present some similarities. Firstly, they both share a standard definition of the meaning of power, which, according to human nature, is vested on more powerful individuals in society. Secondly, the rationalism of human life is exhibited in the way they make choices. However, the significant difference is that the changes that have occurred since ancient times to-date show varied definitions of democracy. The Machiavelli theory is factual since modern politics is characterized by immorality because their actions are deceitful and murderous.
In conclusion, the ancient political thoughts considered ancient cultural diversification. Different theorists such as Aristotle and Plato based their philosophies on Greek and Roman practices. Though they understood what democracy was, they had varied opinions on this issue. They considered other forms of government, where power was believed to be distributed among the few and influential individuals. In the modern world political arena, Machiavelli realized that political leaders could survive if they applied immoral practices such as cheating and killing innocent people. Besides, his philosophy has been widely proven, as it regards the political killings that occur.