Ethics panel

Aristotle on democracy. The case of populism nowadays

Speaker: Laureniu Gheorghe
The Faculty of Philosophy
University of Bucharest
Romania

The international conference 2400 Aristotle took place on 25th in 26th of November
2016 at the faculty of philosophy University of Bucharest. This conference was celebrating
aristotle's anniversary year declared by the general conference of UNESCO to internationally
promote the work of Aristotle and his highly influential contribution to shaping modern
Western civilization. the goal of the conference was to compare and analyse aristotle's work in
different areas as philosophy and science by discussing his work in logic metaphysics ethics
politics art poetics or science.
At the panel about ethics, first speaker was Laureniu Gheorghe from the faculty of
philosophy University of Bucharest Romania and his presentation was Aristotle on
democracy. The case of populism nowadays. In his presentation he raised the problem of
democracy from Aristotles point of view Regarding a certain form of rhetoric. Rhetoric is an
essential part of democracy without which democracy cannot function. But in the same time, if
the deliberate rhetoric is publicly used in democracy certain threats can appear putting it in a
very fragile situation. Aristotle thinks about the forms of the government in terms of the number
of people participating in the government. So he is dividing it in three categories of government:
the government of one person, the government of the few and the government of the many. In
this types of government dr. Laureniu Gheorghe identifies three contradictions as the virtuous
king versus tyranny, aristocracy versus oligarchy and democracy versus politeia. The difference
between democracy and politeia it is that democracy is considered to be a form of government
of the many and on the other side, in politeia those many are divided by the different interests
creating a balance between the interests of different groups and the wealth of the society. From
this we understand that it's not the pure majority that decides in politeia, on the other hand in
democracy there is the vast majority that decides. From Aristotle point of view there are three
characteristics of democracy, firstly that majority is being in supreme authority secondly is
freedom which is the essence of democracy, and the last one is that in democracy justice is
understood as equality. A society in which the government is providing the wellbeing is a
society in which people have freedom and they are equal and participating together in
the authority But they are bound together In this mode of existence through Society. What
threatens Democracy since the society divided by the very nature between the rich and the poor
is a form of inequality which arises when the Society is threatened. this problem arises when
is a very big gap between the rich and the poor and that is why Aristotle recommends a public
policy to tackle the situations meaning that basically the rich should take care of the poor to
have jobs and by that he rejects the money redistribution. The speaker arises an example about
Aristotle being totally against about what happened in the Roman Empire when there was grains
redistribution. Aristotles opinion is to maintain the character of the unity of the society between
the rich and the poor. He also recommends that the rich should give land or tools for working
so the poor would be employed.
Aristotle thinks in a modern way about the social inequality or economic inequalities.
He came with a very interesting plan of full employment and money redistribution for the
poor. But more or less there is a risk and one of the greatest risks in democracy in which
inequality is concerned is the rise of demagogues. So remember this is the governance of the
many, so many people have to be persuaded through discourse but in the same time the
discourse can be used not only to foster unity within the city but also to speculate inequality in
order to gain power.
What I understood from this is that inequality can lead to the rise of demagogues which
will lead to fractions which will further lead to conflicts and this means the dissolution of the
society which will be the end of it. The demagogues will do this using the art of rhetoric to
start a conflict. The example dr. Laureniu Gheorghe gave was the discourse of Mark Antony
in Julius Cezar play by Shakespeare. Is starting from being in agreement with the Brutus, the
new government, and In the end of the speech through a very skilful art of rhetoric he turns
them up against the new rulers. This is exactly what Aristotle is referring to turn the majority
against the minority using the poor in order to nationalize the riches of wealth individuals
putting the natural distribution of society in danger. This is a very attractive strategy for a
demagogue using this in order to accomplish their goal. Dialectics and rhetorics are ways of
conducting and enquiring discourse and to offer some sort of knowledge. In dialectics you offer
knowledge and in rhetoric you offer persuasion which includes an element of irrational. The
rhetorics are the ability to persuade through 3 trades. One is ethos, the character of the speaker
and sometimes the character of the public, patos that means emotions the emotion of the
speaker and the emotion of the public, and the third one is logos the actual rational arguments.
Questions

How Can democracy help us in Educational politics?

Aristotle thinks that in order to have a functional constitution you need the people to
be educated to understand the ethos of the constitution. In order to have a functional system of
rules you need to educate people starting from very young age to assimilate the values of their
own constitution. The method is thinking about are too old it's what he experienced in his
environment for example the spartan way or the athenian way.
So in conclusion I think that Aristotle can help us and and teach us and we can adapt to
our particular situation to this idea of matching the values with education and institutional
system.