Politics

Book 5 explores why constitutions change. Aristotle suggests that, despite the best of intentions, constitutions do not always align with the reality of a city’s needs and make-up. Democracies are constructed from the idea that all free-born citizens are equal, while oligarchies are born from the idea that certain classes of people are innately unequal. Aristotle argues that both forms of government fail to represent “absolute justice” (179). This lack of justice contributes to constitutional conflict, resulting in factions. The philosopher points to three sources for factional conflict. Although the field of psychology did not yet exist when Aristotle presented these theories, the first source represents a psychological catalyst: an obsession with either equality or inequality within the mind can contribute to conflict. The second represents a desire for the products granted to those in power, namely “profit and honour” (182). The third source stems from feeling (fear, discontent) and behavior (negligence, scandal).

In many instances, tiny factors can influence a major divide. Aristotle points to an instance in Syracuse where the government became divided after two political leaders argued over a love affair. Strife must be dealt with swiftly and immediately to curb larger political upheaval. When the middle class dissolves, a revolution occurs. In democracies, factional conflict takes place when the wealthy are negatively targeted. In oligarchies, conflict occurs when the poorer masses are treated unjustly or when people of influence are excluded from the political conversation. When cliques form in oligarchies, creating hierarchies within the governmental hierarchy, jealousies occur, and conflict arises. In aristocracies and polities, problems surface when important individuals feel excluded or when the masses perceive themselves as equal to those in power. The biggest cause of factional conflict in aristocracies and polities, however, is a failure to enact justice.

Aristotle suggests that applying a system of virtue to political endeavors can ensure constitutional stability. He cautions against using manipulation or deceit to control the masses, and he advocates for fairness and swift delivery of justice against lawlessness. Cities should be considerate of surrounding governmental bodies, and quarrels within the city and governing body should be dealt with immediately. The philosopher identifies three qualifications that contribute to the security of constitutional stability. The first is loyalty to the constitution among those in positions of power. The second is a devotion to a high quality of work and effort. The third is an adherence to virtue. When one of these qualifications is missing, factional conflict may occur. Governing individuals have an obligation and a duty to uphold all three qualifications.

An example of this can be found in the difference between a monarchy and tyranny. In monarchy, the king aligns his views with the aristocracy and commits to all three qualifications. In tyranny, the ruler demands a respect that is not there and promotes only self-interest. Aristotle views political values as representative of virtues and vices. He sees man as a political creature, contributing to the theme The Political Nature of Man. He also proposes that a man’s natural aim is happiness through virtue. Tyranny rejects the natural form. Rather than living in the mean between two vices, tyranny represents the extreme. Tyrants attempt to hold their constitutions together through repression and assimilation. In contrast, monarchies are held together by moderation. Just as extremities in nature give way to storms and violent climate changes, extremities in governments have naturally-occurring violent outcomes. One of the greatest vices of tyranny is arrogance, and Aristotle points to several examples of civilizations that were destroyed by this vice. They function within extremities rather than embrace the happy medium. Tyrannies are unsustainable because they operate outside of natural harmony. This is why tyrannies are often so short-lived.

Aristotle’s treatment of political constitutions is an extension of his treatment of what it means to be human. The philosopher views Politics as a Pathway for Good and Happiness because he believes that politics are an imperative part of human nature. He also perceives the pursuit of virtue as the chief aim of all humans, a goal which leads to divine happiness. His devotion to understanding what causes a political body to disintegrate corresponds with a study of what leads the individual away from virtue. In Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle emphasizes the importance of operating within the mean. Virtues are not separate from vices; instead, they are the moderate forms of vices. For the philosopher, democracies and tyrannies represent the vices which bookend the virtue of aristocracy.