First off, I’m not racist, why I start with that statement I
will explain soon-I promise you that. Secondly, I am also not a sexist…why I had
to state that is because of the book I read and in which you are reading my
review of now: Politics, by
Aristotle.
Aristotle,
at times, comes across as a bit of a bigot but an even greater sexist and isn’t anymore
racist as my Greek uncle who worked and lived on the South Side of Chicago (a bit racist).
Aristotle’s racism I would say it stems more from a feeling of nationalism in
the Hellenic state (Greece). Aristotle even claimed at one point that the
Hellenic people are the best governed and if they could form one state they
would be able to rule the world (Aristotle was Alexander the Great’s tutor, so
this statement could have been set in his mind as he tried to conquer the known
world). Aristotle thought slavery as a possible and normal institution or trade
for any state to have. Of course slavery now is thought more of a single race
issue, when that is far from true (African Americans may have gained freedom
but they are still mistreated and our cultures were segregated {still are a bit}, with one causing
great degradation toward another) there is slavery even today in China,
Africa, and Indonesia; and then there is the thin line between that and wage
slavery. But I’m digressing, Aristotle thought any race could become a slave;
which to me was a terrible way to argue that something like freedom and
equality in a state is possible when a man can rule despotically over another,
or over a woman.
However,
Aristotle makes many compelling observations and logical reasoning in how to
govern a state and the many forms of governing. The editor of this edition of
Aristotle’s Politics makes a
statement I wholeheartedly agree on after reading this philosophical analysis
of man being a political animal in it’s attempts to make “a community of free
men”, Cora Newald states: “If everyone who votes or holds public office would
read this book-what a better and saner world we would have! And what greater
understanding of the society in which we live!”
Aristotle
isn’t that difficult to read-although I have been reading this edition for a
year periodically-what I lost myself in, and what bored me somewhat, were his
examples of tyrants, statesmen, and city states that have been nearly forgotten.
But any reader can still draw similar conclusions to his theories and reasoning
by taking examples from history and of their world today.
Aristotle
makes compelling deductive reasoning when discussing the ruling by one, a few,
or all and which is best. Rule by one is great when that leader is a statesman
and is virtuous striving for peace and equality for all in the state, an
oligarchy is also great when furthest from an aristocracy (rule by a rich few)
and possess a strong constitution, and democracy is the greatest though the
worst when a constitution is good-which is something I would argue, especially
in our world today where advancement in social media and technology allows
people access to events, networks, organizations, url’s where one can vote on
something one sees, and an access to another individual half way around the
world. Of course people value private lives and private time, which I enjoy
myself, the ones that would want everything public are the one’s looking to
gain-to continue gaining wealth, property, etc. Freedom doesn’t mean doing
whatever a person likes, but requires responsibility to live happily while
living for a purpose that would benefit society. The one that finds the cure
for all cancers, wouldn’t sell it, but provide it for society. A cure is not a
BigMac, just like the vaccine for polio: share something with the
“inter-connected whole that is in endless motion”. Something Aristotle viewed
society as that modern sciences recently claimed as true.
Also
reader, if you are afraid of tyrants or unjust ruling, here is what Aristotle
saw as the ways tyrannies can be preserved: “…for the preservation of a
tyranny, in so far as this is possible; viz. that the tyrant should lop off
those who are too high; he must put to death men of spirit; he must not allow
common meals, clubs, education and the like; he must be upon his guard against
anything which is likely to inspire either courage or confidence among his
subjects; he must prohibit literary assemblies or other meetings for discussion,
and he must take every means to prevent people from knowing one another (for
acquaintance begets mutual confidence). Further, he must compel all persons
staying in the city to appear in public and live at his gates; then he will
know what they are doing: if they are always kept under, they will learn to be
humble.”
Should any of
these happen, feel free to say you are losing your freedom and right for
freedom by a tyrant. Or better yet, read other books like Plato’s Republic or others to think and try to
find an understanding of what it is to you to be a good and just citizen.
Aristotle’s book Politics is
something I would like to see in more ‘to read’ lists or even on more bedside
tables than say…the Bible. For rather you believe or not, you cannot deny the
book has brought controversy while Aristotle’s Politics is meant to be discussed if there is disagreement and
understood that logical and virtuous people want to lead happy, virtuous and
free lives. One can still read the Bible, just know one can find a way to be a
good person through more ways than reading any book, and one of them is being
with people; love or hate them, be with them so as to try-at least try!-to be
virtuous and happy, to yourself and to others!
Next review: Rudolfo Anaya’s Bless Me, Ultima.
Justin Vaisnor
Also, if you liked this review, take a gander at our Fiction page and check out "Voters". Thanks!