Plato's Statesman
(The Politicus)
Introduction
Plato’s Republic considered
being the foundational text of the western Political Philosophy, is a work of a
poetic flight with the youthful
imagery and idealism of a young philosopher from an
aristocratic Athenian background. The republic is the abode of a future
dreamland, unrestricted by trivialities and the lacunas of
the present. His student,
Aristotle criticized him for focussing only on the theoretical best at the cost
of the existing reality. He seems to have welcomed and heeded the criticism. In
his late political works, The Statesman and The Laws, he tries to
be practical and do away with the stamp of impracticality from his political
philosophy. In these works he pays sufficient
attention to the actually existing states and their functioning. “Plato makes
peace with the reality and acknowledges that there is room in political life
for consent and law and the constitutionalism”. (Barker, Greek Political Theory,
p. 330). May be the stability of Athenian democratic system had softened his
stand towards the existing political reality. “The mood in Plato’s late political works has
dimmed. Fiery ideals burn less bright; his view of man’s nature has fallen; his
faith in radical reforms has given way to more modest hopes.” (George Klosko, The
Development of Plato’s Political Theory, Methuen, NY, 1986, p.183) The
speculations about the reasons of the shift in his views, is unnecessary here.
His experiences of Cecily seem to be one of them to have influenced his thought.
In The Statesman, Plato seems to be bit disillusioned with the ideals of
the Republic, not due to any issue with the quality of the ideals, as
their echoes are heard in the Statesman and the Laws. His
disillusionment with the theoretical best of the Republic and shift
towards the practical, second best way of rule seems to have emerged from the
consideration of practicability. In the Statesman, the ideals of the Republic
are replaced by the prevailing reality.
The literary
flavour of the Republic is missing in it. In The Statesman
Socrates is only a peripheral character and totally absent in The Laws.
The Statesman presents a clearer picture of social and economic
structures, as they existed in Plato’s time (4th century BC), than the Republic. (Skemp, p.43) In it,
the statesman is presented as the royal weaver, who weaves the society in a
fabric. There is neither scope nor the need of a detailed discussion on
weaving. The weaver produces the fabric as the final product assisted by the
providers of the tools and the raw materials and other helpers. The statesman weaves the society with the
assistance of various auxiliaries determined by the division of the society
into practitioners of various arts social utility.
Republic is not a utopia, addressed to no one.
It is not a utopia but a passionate appeal to his fellow Athenians to overthrow
the existing democratic rule and replace it with the Ideal State, guided by the
philosophers. For Plato, the democracy
was the rule of numbers
and not wisdom. Plato’s First City of the Republic, a simple city of “happy
freedom” but lacking the guidance of reason resembles the existing Athenian
democratic society. In order to bring it
under the guidance of the reason, he theorizes the ideal state. In course of
time, possibly, he realized the non-practicability of the Ideal State in a
foreseeable future. So, in the Statesman,
he theorises an alternative model, in which the statesman replaces the
philosopher king. But when he argues that the exalted position of the statesman
rests on knowledge of the art of the statesmanship, he transports the
philosopher king-in-disguise from the Republic to the Statesman.
“Plato elaborates the nature of the Statesman in such a way that he becomes
more or less indistinguishable from the Republic’s philosopher king” (Klosko,
p. 190)
The Statesman
is the transitional text between The Republic and The Laws, his
last work, which he was still working on, when he bade good bye to the planet
earth (BC 347). The Statesman is considered to have been authored around
BC 366-360, during and in the aftermath of his visits to Cecily to guide into
philosophy, the successive rulers of the Syracuse, the Dionysus I and II
respectively. (J.B. Skemp, Plato’s Statesman, Bristol Classical Press, Bristol,
1952, pp.17-18)
The characters
of this dialogue are Socrates; Theodorus, a mathematician; an unnamed visiting
philosopher from Elea (the Eleatic Stranger) and another young person, also
named Socrates, a young student of the Academy (Young Socrates). The mouthpiece of Plato in the Republic
is Socrates. In the Statesman, his presence is nominal. He and
Theodorus briefly introduce and reflect on the discussion to be taken over by the Eleatic
Stranger and the young Socrates. They carry on the dialectical investigation
into the nature of the statesman.
In the Statesman, Plato
presents “the second best method of rule, which throws more light on the actual
social and economic life, prevailing in contemporary Greece than the
Republic and is more ordered and fundamental in method than The Laws.
(Skemp, p.22) The invisible Forms (or the Ideas) of The
Republic were never completely abandoned but the visible copies of the
invisible are more closely studied. It proposes the governance by the
Statesman, who is well-versed in the art of statesmanship. This is the work of the
matured philosopher with the experiences of prolonged teaching at the Academy
and few unsuccessful attempts to introduce the rulers into Philosophy. In a way
the Statesman is an improvisation of the doctrines of the philosopher
kings/queens of the Republic. But in it, there is no room for the communism of
property and the family. This means that unlike the Guardians of the Republic,
the statesman is not deprived of the family and the private property. Also, the
prolonged description of the meticulously planned, protracted system of the
education of the guardians with carefully prepared and censored course curriculum
is missing. But the importance of education as a tool to politically mould the
personalities, has not been ignored (Klosko, 192). Seeing the over emphasis on
education in the Republic, Rousseau considered it as the “finest
treatise of education ever written”. It emphasises that the true statesmen
equipped with the knowledge of the art of governance (kingship), “know what the
best for their cities is”. (R.F. Stalley, An Introduction to Plato’s Laws,
Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1983, p. 17)
The
Statesmanship
A statesman is a
political person having specific knowledge and expertise in directing political
affairs. The central message of the Statesman is that the sovereignty
lies with the rule of statesmanship, i.e., with the knowledge of weaving
together into a fabric the diverse functional divisions and diverse
personalities of the society and of directing the various divisions into
appropriately practicing their functional arts.
The
Eleatic Stranger begins the discussion with the declaration that statesmanship
is an art (or science). “The Statesmanship is an art….. It may well be
practiced by an expert adviser not actually wielding the actual political power
but guiding the wielder of it. It is a theoretic art rather than manual one,
but it is ‘applied’, and not pure like mathematical calculation.” (J.B. Skemp,
Plato’s Statesman, Bristol Classical Press, Bristol, 1987, p. 113) The Statesman is the specialist practitioner of the art
of statecraft with the help of subordinate functionaries’ over the non-specialist
population. Such a specialized knowledge resides in one person or a very small
number of persons. It may not reside in the actual possessor of political authority
at all, but in a competent advisor whom he consults and who is as entitled to be
called as statesman as the ruler himself (JB Skemp, 40). In their attempt
to define the art of the statesmanship, Eleatic Stranger (ES) and Young
Socrates (YS) use the methods of analogies of the shepherd and weaving; the
myths of Cronus and Zeus and the division of the society among various
functional strata performing different socio-economic functions under
the guidance and the direction of the statesman.
Like in the Republic, Plato uses the methods of
analogies; similes and myths in the Statesman also. To define the
statesman, on the one hand he uses the analogy of the shepherd, who nourishes
and tends the people like the shepherd does to his sheep. And on the other
hand, he uses the analogy of the weaver, who weaves different strata of the
society into an organic whole, like the weaver weaves the fabric. He also uses
the myths of the divine age of the Cronus and the subsequent age of the Zeus
for analogies to arrive at the appropriate definition of the statesman. Here
the details of all the matters covered by Plato in The Statesman are
unnecessary. Our concern is Plato’s account of a true statesman and his functions.
The Definition
The analogy of the shepherd
The Eleatic Stranger (ES) begins his definition with the
analogy of the shepherd. The Statesman is practitioner of the art of
“nurturing” or rearing the human herds, like a shepherd does to his sheep. The
ES is not fully convinced with this definition and shares his dissatisfaction
with the Young Socrates (YS). He feels that the art of statesman does not
pertain to “rearing” and nurturing only but tending them, i.e., taking care of
them also. “The statesmanship is therefore the art of tendance” (Skemp, 114)
The myths
To improve upon
this definition they take recourse to the comparative myths of the age of
Cronus and the age of Zeus. The former was long past. It was “the golden age,
during which the God directly controlled the universe. It was a time of plenty,
there was no need to labour and there was no want. In those times, there was no
need of property and there were neither the politics nor the war. But the age
of Cronus came to an end ushering into the age of Zeus. God no longer
controlled the course of things and men were left to their own devices.” In the
age of Cronus, the divine Statesman was, “superior to his human flock, as
sphered to his sheep”. In the age of Zeus the Statesman is as human as other
people whom he has to rule over. (Klosko, 190-91). The inference can be made from the comparative discussion on myths that the idea of
Ideal State is like the age of Cronus without the institutions of private
family and the property. The task at hand was to find a true statesman in the
age of Zeus. The message of the story of the myths indicates Plato’s
disillusionment with the Ideal State of the Republic ruled by more than
human philosophers.
Thus in identifying the statesman and his art, Plato
through ES moves away from the belief in the ideal political system of the Republic.
“The Statesman mastered the art (or science) of ruling and this is
the sole identifying feature. His rule is to be untrammelled by either laws or
the desire of the subjects. ….. The Statesman possesses the kind of wisdom that
went into drawing up the original laws. Thus he should be allowed to adjust the
laws to the changed circumstances.” (Klosko, p.190) In the Statesman Plato’s
concern with the laws is to the extent of their being embodiment of social
desires and aspirations. As the Statesman has mastered the art of the
statesmanship i.e., the governance, he knows, what is best for the governed. He
needs not always seek their consent. To justify his views in this regard he
draws the simile of the doctor who administers the medicine to his patients
irrespective of their consent, as long as he has the interest of the patient in
mind. The only condition is that he
exercises scientific intelligence aimed at the good of the governed. It sounds
like the echo of the philosopher king of the Republic. In the Statesman,
Plato is quite ambiguous regarding the peoples’ consent. As mentioned
above, he argues that a true statesman acting in the interest of people need
not bother about their consent. But at
one point he also underlines consent as distinguishing factor between a
Statesman and a tyrant. (Klosko, pp. 191-92)
The Weaving
The art of the statesmanship is the directive art over
the other arts of the social and political utility required to its appropriate
functioning. This art involves decision to tell other arts about when and how
they should be applied. “The General
knows the art of war but only the Statesman is qualified to say when and how
the art of war should be employed.” (Klosko, p.192) Every art, which ministers the
needs of an organised human community, must be classed as contributory. For
without the things provided by these arts there could be no community and so no
art to rule; and yet we can hardly regard them as the duty of kingly art to
produce any of these things.” The whole analysis of the society is in terms of
functions of the particular professional with economic production at the base
and the statesmanship at the apex point. The higher services are rendered by
clerks, heralds and priests. The direct auxiliaries of the Statesman are the
“educators; orators; judicatures; generals and magistrates.” (Skemp, p. 46) Unlike
the Republic, in which Plato devotes enormous space to the education and
training of the Guardians, in the Politicus (Statesman) there is no description
of the training of the Statesman or the source of his art of ruling but
describes the “prime function of ruling as is actually exercised in the
community”. He not overtly but covertly tells us “that the true Statesman has
that gift of insight into the nature of True Reality, which gives the moral
strength fit for the exercise of his supreme task.” (Skemp, 51)
Plato explains the art of statesmanship as the directive
art by the simile of the weaving, through the discussion between ES and YS.
“The art specifically concerned with producing clothes, we will describe from
the name of the product, as the ‘clothes working’ art, just as we called the
art of controlling a state, statesmanship. We may also say that the art of weaving
– at any rate that a very large section of it concerned with the production of
clothes – is distinct in nothing but the name from the ‘art of the
clothes-working’, just as the arts of Kingship and Statesmanship, as synonymous. Plato portrays the political art of statesmanship as
weaving in terms of the process of weaving and the quality of the fabric it
produces. The art of waving is presented as the paradigmatic analogy for the
political art of Statesmanship in terms of incorporating different entities and
joining diverse threads into a cohesive political unit. Plato through the ES
defines the art of statesmanship with the example of weaving and “proceeds to a
series of divisions in order to define this art. It must be distinguished from
arts of manufacture of kindred fabrics, from separative arts, like the art of
carding and from merely subordinate arts, whose products are nevertheless
necessary for the weaver, such as manufacturing the shuttles. Only after
distinguishing weaving from all these can we claim to have defined it.” (Skemp,
115)
After distinguishing the art of weaving from subordinate
arts he proceeds to define the art of statesmanship “in the political human
community. As there were subordinate arts, which merely produced the tools to
make weaving possible, so there are subordinate functions in the human
community”. (Skemp, 116).
Divisions
In his scheme of divisions and subdivision of the
society, Plato specifies three such classes of the subordinate functions:
1: Primary producers of the physical requirements of the
community. 2: Personal menial servants; labourers; traders and venturers.
3: Clerks, heralds, soothsayers and priests.
He
distinguishes the rule of the statesman from the existing six categories of law-abiding and law-flouting constitutions
respectively, as monarchy and tyranny; aristocracy and oligarchy and democracy
and democracy on the basis of numbers of rulers. And then opines that “the
statesmanship is the seventh constitution to be distinguished from all these
six, as the God from the men. His relative assessment of the existing
constitutions seems to anticipate Aristotle’s classification of the
constitutions in terms of the number and the virtue in Politics. Both,
the teacher and the disciple have similar relative characterisation of the pure
and impure constitutions. In pure (law abiding) form rule of one, i.e. monarchy
is the best followed by aristocracy and democracy, the rules of the few and the many respectively. In
perverted (law flouting) forms the order is reversed, democracy being the most
tolerable, oligarchy the worse and the tyranny the worst.
Coming
back to divisions in the society, the auxiliaries or subordinates of the true
statesman at the apex are: “the orators, military leaders and the judicature.
…… The orator’s skill in public speaking and the military man’s strategy do not
belong to the statesman as such but are to be at his service, entirely and
unquestionably, as and when required. Likewise the statesman prescribes the
rules for judicature.” (Skemp, 118) Apart from weaving various professional
arts, the statesman’s duty also involves weaving different kinds of
personalities also, as society not only consists of many people but many kinds
of people. There are two basic kinds of personalities, “dominated by quiet and
active principles respectively, or otherwise stated, possessing moderation and
energy”. (Klosko, 192). From this
follows that society consists of dialectically opposite personalities and the
art of statesmanship is to establish a dialectical unity between them or “to
weave the different personality types.” This he seeks to do by tightly
controlled education to counteract people’s natural tendencies and also by
ensuring marriages between “different personality types so that the resulting
children partake of both the natures.”(Klosko, 192). Another way he suggests is
distribution of the offices between different personality types. “When a single
magistrate happens to be needed, the statesman must choose a man possessing
both the characteristics and set him in authority. Where several magistrates
are wanted, he must bring together some representatives of each type to share
the duties.” (Skemp, 234)
Conclusion
In the Statesman, Plato formally departs
from the view of two worlds of the Republic, this- worldly visible
world, i.e., the world of objects and the other worldly invisible world, i.e., the
world of the Ideas or the Forms, in which the priority lies with the former. In
it the focus is on this worldly or the living world. The rule of the scientific
intelligence of the statesman with the mastery in the art of
statesmanship and the ability to know what the best is for the people, echoes
the rule of the philosopher king of the Republic and foreshadows the
rule by law of the Laws. Thus we can say that the Statesman stands
midway between the Republic and the Laws, or as mentioned above
it is the transitional text between the two.
In the Statesman
Plato views the governance as a specialised art to take care the interests
of all the people in the state. It is a directive art of all the other arts.
The practitioner of art need not be the real ruler who wields power over the
people of the community but even someone who does not wield power but guides
the real wielder of the power; the one whom the wielder of the power consults.
The statesman possesses the knowledge of ruling justly in the interests of all
the people. To drive his point, Plato uses the analogies of a shepherd who
tends his herd and the weaver who weaves a fabric with the help of providers of
the tools and the raw material as his auxiliaries. Like shepherd, the statesman
tends the human herd and like weaver, the statesman weaves different section of
the society in the social fabric with the help of his auxiliaries who practice
different arts of social utility.
In nutshell
the Statesman the rule of
the statesmanship consisting of the knowledge of the best interest of the people
and the ability to weave the different human threads into a fabric; like a weaver
does in case of weaving the cloth and to nurture, nourish and tend them, like a
shepherd. This means directing and coordinating the practitioners of various kinds
of subordinate arts necessary to maintain the political community. As has been pointed
out above that it is not necessary that the real wielder of power possesses quality
of the statesmanship, it may be possessed by someone else, whom he often consults.
No comments:
Post a Comment