To what extent is Thucydides critical of democracy? Is he less critical of democracy than Plato is?

Despite the fact that many individuals have viewed the oration as a passage which downplays democracy, according to Vlastos, a scholar of ancient history, the sentences found within the speech ‘’create the impression that the democracy is in fact an aristocracy of talent.’’ This talent that Vlastos speaks of can be demonstrated in multiple ways. First of all, one can tell from this oration that it serves as merriment rather than a means of validation towards Athenian ideals and greatness. The Periclean speech begins with the announcement of Athenian history, educating the reader that Athens gave so much to actually maintain and uphold its empire and such sacrifices should be reminded for all of the people to remember and not to ignore it.  Pericles states that many had died in the Peloponnesian War by 431 and it can be observed that the funeral was a means of burying and commemorating the dead. Equally, Pericles in the oration states that the greatness of Athens does not lie in such an idyllic and romanticized view of history, but that it can be observed and measured in its existing triumphs.

In the History, Thucydides uses the Periclean speech to confirm that the Athenian politeia is far more superior and just in its democratic morals and virtues that it upholds, whilst speaking of alternative political systems which are connoted as inferior in comparison.  In evidence of this, Pericles states that ‘our system of government does not copy the institutions of our neighbours. It is more the case of our being a model to others, than our imitating of anyone else.’ This implies that Thucydides through the mouthpiece of Pericles endorses the suggestion that Athenian democracy can be seen as a particular acolyte for all other political entities. There is strong emphasis on the idea that the management of affairs is placed not in the hands of the minority but of the whole people. Secondly, the principle of equality is pointed out in the sense that everyone is equal before the law when it comes to private legal disputes. Thirdly, Pericles asserts that when selecting magistrates, the Athenians do not pick candidates from one section of society, but the actual ability that the individual possesses. 

Finally it is important to note that according to John Stuart Mill, democracy is by far the best method of decision making not just epistemologically but also strategically and via the improvement of citizen’s characters, this is due to the fact that they are given rationality because they are deciding on important issues. Subsequently, one can deduce from the History that Thucydides believes democracy to be hugely beneficial, most especially for the plebeians. It is therefore plausible to suggest that Thucydides does not wholly reject Athenian democracy; he believes that it can function as a successful political system.

It is also imperative that Thucydides’ critique of Athenian democracy is studied. Firstly, it is important to refer to the views of Karl Popper and use this as the basis of the argument. Popper states that ‘we must never forget that his heart was not with Athens, his native city. Although he apparently did not belong to the extreme wing of the Athenian oligarchic club who conspired throughout the war with the enemy, he was certainly a member of the oligarchic party, and a friend neither of the Athenian people, the demos, who had exiled him.’ This quote evidently represents the core of his debate and demonstrates that Thucydides is clearly very critical of democracy at this point. It is also vital to include the input of Thomas Hobbes, Thucydides’ first English translator, who wrote that reading Thucydides’ proved to him that ‘democracy was wrong and one man was far wiser than throng.’ Finally, according to Grote, Thucydides was ‘not friendly to the democracy’ and an ‘observer rather less than impartial.’ 

One can observe then that Thucydides is very critical of democracy, commenting on the problems of Athens in its rashness in seeking an empire, walls, and so on against many of her own values; the hypocrisy of her people, championing freedom while wantonly enslaving others and her terrible moral decline owing to the demagogues and power of the base masses. Thucydides emphasises the problem of Athenian democracy on the fact that in order for it to work, it has to rely on informed and engaged citizenry. It clearly leaves a lot to the people for it to work and this could be a definitive problem. According to Ober, Thucydides formed a type of historical knowledge and drew a distinction between this type of knowledge and that of democratic knowledge. This particular form of historical knowledge for Thucydides was somewhat lacking among the people. Therefore, these people, most especially those of the lower classes who ruled within a democracy, made such decisions based on limited historical knowledge which resulted in harming their cities.

Another common theme within this genre of democratic evaluation from Thucydides’ is the notion that democracies are unable to sustain an empire at all, due to the fact that they are unable to perform as a totalitarian state. In evidence of this, E.C. Gach states within this piece written by Rufus that the Athenian culture ‘cannot sustain an empire because it can’t maintain, or survive, those closed belief systems.’ Equally, Thucydides mentions the fact that Athens failed to maintain the empire that they had for very long, due to the fact that while one generation won it, the other seemed to lose it. Before the Peloponnesian War began, the Athenians were not sure if their empire was going to be a lost proposition from the very beginning. Finally, in relevance to their envoys to the Ladedaemon Congress, it actually represents that Athens trouble came because they ruled by laws instead of force.  

Finally, in relevance to this theme of empires, the question is raised once again within the Mytilean debate in Book III of the History.  The Mytilean debate represents a speech from Cleon, who urges the motion that all of the Mitylenians be dealt with harshly. He states that If Athens has decided to rule she must be strict in her principles and deal severely with those who go against them. Furthermore, Cleon states that ‘I have had occasion often enough already to observe that a democracy is incapable of governing others.’ Cleon with this speech reminds the reader of the original thought that has been formulated previously by Thucydides that a democracy cannot maintain an empire ‘your empire is a tyranny exercised over subjects who do not like it and who are always plotting against you.’ For Athens, this was a complete break with the moderate policy of Pericles, which had clearly failed to keep the empire together. Furthermore, Cleon is extremely critical of Athens and its political order and from this, he states that it susceptible to what is called the three dangers of an empire: pity, sentiment, and indulgence.  

Now that Thucydides and the History has been looked at in great depth, it is essential to the development of this essay that the Platonic texts and views are also assessed simultaneously and compared with what has been examined. Through the works of The Republic, one can sense the aversion that Plato has of the concept of democracy. These criticisms of democracy can be closely followed within Book VIII of The Republic; this specific passage represents the conversation between Socrates and Adeimantus and speaks of the evils that can be found within it.

The first of these ‘evils’ and the most damning criticism of democracy for Plato is the involvement of inherent class anxiety. Plato makes evident the corruption between the classes, where there is a lack respect and discipline in the ordinary citizen for authority. This problem according to Plato originates from the lack of incentive that the people have for the ruled to submit to the decisions of the rulers. Eventually, Plato states that this will ultimately lead to the people rebelling against the state, which intern will promote a tyrannical rule over the empire of Athens. This evidently links in with the speech of Cleon at the Mytilean debate within the History, where the reputation of the Athenian empire is at stake. In addition to this, Plato within the Republic states that tyranny is a theme created in the ‘excessive desire for liberty within a democracy at the expense of everything else is what undermines democracy and leads to the demand for tyranny.’ Furthermore, in evidence of this, Plato goes on to say that ‘a democratic society in its thirst for liberty may fall under the influence of bad leaders, who intoxicate it with excessive quantities of the neat spirit.’ This provides a clear understanding for the reader that Plato is extremely critical of democracy in this instance. Therefore, it would not seem senseless and farfetched to suggest that at this moment in time, Thucydides is less critical of democracy than Plato is.

The final theme to consider then is liberty and equality. According to Tom Hermes, liberty is a political mechanism which leads to absolute anarchy and that social disunity is likely to emerge.Liberty holds that the people are able and free enough to operate in such a way that meets their desires, not what their duty is or what they are suited to. Within the Republic, Plato holds that the people within this visualisation of utopian state must commit to the profession in which they have the natural talent in. For Plato this refers to a society which is just, efficient in the way that it operates and also one that is unified in terms of the relationship between social classes. This for Plato does cannot be achieved in democracy. Athenian democracy represents itself as a society which strictly obeys to the wants, the desires and the needs of the people. Hermes within his essay introduces the term “appetite” by translator Desmond Lee to describe these wants of food, sex and money, above the more civilly beneficial elements of the psyche: reason and indignation. Furthermore, Plato emphasises the importance of the value of happiness and eudemonia over the concepts of justice and liberty.

Regardless of what has been said by both Thucydides and Plato, it is important to remember the brilliance of Athenian despite its criticisms. One can observe from this essay then that Thucydides provides an argument for both the positive and negative aspects of democracy. Thus, he is not wholly critical of democracy; to an extent, Thucydides is somewhat supportive of Athenian democracy, despite what has been said. In many respects, the Platonic texts which have been studied in depth are far more critical and blunt in that sense. Therefore, in my opinion, Thucydides critique of democratic knowledge is less significant than the views of Plato within the Republic.

Word Count: 2,495

Bibliography

Ober, Josiah - Thucydides' Criticism of Democratic Knowledge (Standford Working Papers in Classics 1994)

Monoson, S. Sara Monoson & Loriaux, Michael - The Illusion of Power and Disruption of Moral Norms: Thucydides’ Critique of Periclean Policy (Northwestern University) (Vol.92 No.2)

Pope, Maurice – Thucydides and Democracy (Bd. 37, H. 3, 3rd Qtr. 1988)

Fontana, Benedetto & Nederman, Cary J. & Gary Remer - Talking democracy: Historical perspectives on rhetoric and democracy (Penn State Press, 2004)

M.Harris, Edward - Praise of Athenian Democracy (Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, Vol. 94, 1992)

 Hermes, Tom - ‘How does Plato criticise Athenian democracy in The Republic?’ (Article, Dickson College, 2011)

Popper, Karl - The Open Society and Its Enemies (Volume 1: The Spell of Plato Routledge Classics; new edition 11 July 2002)

Mcconnell, Sean - unpublished lecture ‘Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War - Democracy’ delivered at the University of East Anglia, February 2012

Rufus, F - Thucydides: The Peloponnesian War, Empire and Democracy (December 2010 Edition), http://www.ordinary-gentlemen.com/blog/2010/12/14/thucydides-the-peloponnesian-war-empire-and-democracy/ (Accessed 6.3.12, 18.17)

---