Brotherhood

Politics become complicated when people try to justify violating natural law. The social structures that work best for us are self-evident and natural. They really aren't hard to understand. People will complicate things to get their own way but usually our own intuition is a good thing to follow. Exercising our understanding clearly without an agenda is a good practice and hopefully that is what we stick with in these discourses.  Since Aristotle spends time in the book "Politics", comparing Plato, Socrates and other's ideas of government to natural laws, it would be a good idea if we go over some of the principles we find in "Ethics". Obviously politics work best when we find common ground so everyone can be in unity. Natural law is synonymous with common ground. Everyone should be able to agree on it since it is self-evident. But we must have a common understanding of how governing works and what the limitations are. Keep in mind also that good people who make an effort at understanding these things have fewer conflicts and people of good character will have less conflict within themselves. Personal ethics is the foundation for a good nation. The fewer people of good character a society has, the more laws and subsequent law enforcement are needed since the law of the land reflects natural law.
The simplest form of authority is Timocratic. This is the brotherhood kind of organization and we are the most comfortable with it. When we like each other, we have common goals and everyone gets along with each other. There isn't much governing needed. But due to our nature, we all have different interests and goals. In order to reconcile the differences, someone has to give in while the others gets their own way. It is on this point a Timocratic government can digress to a democratic one. Those who want to stay in the group while getting their own way have to form alliances so they can be the majority. In this way, they oppress the minority. In a family or a school, we call this ganging up on the others. So first the parameters of the relationship have to be defined. Clubs have charters and countries have constitutions.
It is a good idea to have professionals in leadership. In a family, the mother and father are the ones that make the decisions. The children haven't enough experience or maturity to make decisions for the entire family. A timocratic form of government is ineffectual at managing complicated things. This where we need aristocratic form of government. We get a group of experts to make decisions about the bigger issues. This can digress into an oligarchy, where an elite group feels entitled to these positions. This what a grown child feels his parents have become once they become mature. An aristocratic form of government works well as long as its leaders step aside and let others take the reigns when it is time. In the same way doting parents are despised by an adult child, so are politicians that act superior to the citizens by entitlement and elitism.
Sometimes the family needs someone who has the final say. This might fall to the mother, father or grandparents in a clan setting. Cities have mayors, states governers, boards have chairpersons, schools have principles and the list goes on. This is a marnarchial form of government and it is necessary for decisions that have to do with the realm they are in charge of. The problems with this form of governing occur when people worship the leader and the leader forms a big ego. This enables this person to opress those who aren't his croonies. When the interests of this person such as wealth, honor and opinions exceed the the scope of the job, tyranny results. People become subjects rather than this person being a servant of the people. So pride and the resulting arrogence is the biggest danger with this one. A humble person is less apt to be worshiped, but in a culture of good character, it is the good character and not the person that is admired.

Old Works

I find it interesting how people never change over the centuries. It doesn't matter if you are reading Greek stories and philosophies, the Bible, old English literature, or poems, the struggles and ideas are similar to today. The good thing is that we can see how things turned out for them. Their feelings match ours and we can empathize with their struggles. Having so much less communication it took quite a person to get his word out. This gives me an appreciation for not only how old works were preserved but the content. It only seems right, after all the effort, the least we could do is read what they have written and enjoy it. Today we have email and texts.What comes from the heart and reasoning is important and gets lost in our world of superficial media.
What we have been looking at is Aristotle's Politics and I took a little detour into the book "Utopia". I thought it pertinent to the study of politics. With political study, we look at the best ways a society can be structured with the purpose of bringing the most happiness to the individuals. This builds on ethics, an earlier review we had here that pertained to having wholesome relationships with ourselves and others. In ethics, we looked at three areas of friendships, those for pleasure or fun; those for utility or fulfilling a material need; and those for commonality or closeness. Politics deals with utility areas. The lack of fun and romance makes it seems like a boring study. We don't have to enjoy these type of relationships or feel close to them, but we do want them to keep their word and fulfill their duty.
At the beginning of Politics, we saw that these organizations originate from family relationships. He spent some time on the role of women and interesting takes on property ownership versus private ownership. The rest of the book has comparisons between different states and their laws. We are going to review a few of them but not too much so we can keep this interesting. I don't want to fall asleep writing either...  

Fun and Fashion

Sir Thomas Moore starts out the book "Utopia" with a list of grievances against the elites of his day. He complained about those who raise sheep rather than farm because they used so little labor and put people out of work. The ending was about how he dreamed we could have a Utopian society. He claimed it is our Christian duty to lay aside pride and live simple lives. Numerous social engineers have said the same things and had the same vision of a Utopian society. But theories always have the luxury of being ideal. Reality has a way of dispelling them. If people wanted to live in a communal society they would voluntarily do so. Why can't everyone see the benefits? Let's look at a few reasons.
Fredric Bastiat explained it well in his book "The Law" in 1850.  He saw the mistakes made during the French revolutions and pointed them out. When we get down to basics, every person is an individual with his own talents, ambitions, passions and wants. We naturally want to use them to the best of our abilities and also naturally want to keep the rewards we earn with our diligence. Due to our nature of efficiency, we want the most reward for the least amount of effort. To some people, this becomes the vice we call greed, consequently they take it to extremes and become takers. Greed isn't confined to the wealthy; anyone who thinks it right to receive unearned benefits is greedy. The only reason to have laws is to protect ourselves from those who want to plunder what we have rightfully earned. Bastiat felt that government easily becomes a vehicle for these same greedy people to plunder but in a different way. He called it legal plunder.
Mr Bastiat had a good way of explaining social engineering. He wrote about the professors in that day that thought they knew what is best for society, much like Sir Thomas and his Utopia. He addressed the condescending attitude people like that have while they have no consideration of individual hopes and dreams. The fact is, we human beings are not a garden for others to tend. Those who are satisfied with the mundane have no right to demand it of everyone else especially by the force of the law. Every individual has the right to dictate where he will grow and what he will do with his own life. Laws exists to protect societies' rights to enjoy fashion, art, and ambition; all that is best about being human.  Using the term "Pursuit of Happiness" as a right wasn't a mistake in the Declaration of Independence. So we as we look at the best structure for a government, we can separate Utopian thought from what is practical and right.

Our Way is Better

We have been examining the Book "Utopia". It contains one writer's opinion of an ideal society. People say that most wars are produced by differences in religions or politics. But at the core of each one is a search for a Utopian society. It makes more sense to say that most conflict with mankind is based on forcing Utopian ideals on one another. Certain people or individuals throughout history have thought that as long as they are in charge, the whole of the human race would be better off. Acts of tyranny in a family through those of a government are always presented as being for the people's own good. We can see that numerous governments and societies have tried to use certain ideas contained in this book. After looking at this book, we can look at some of the realities.
The Utopians try to keep their cities at the perfect size of six thousand people so there can be no want. The way they accomplish this is through population apportionment. What they call families are groups of ten to sixteen to a household. They are mostly related. They have a hierarchy where the eldest are in charge of the younger unless an elderly person isn't in his right mind, then the next one down is in charge. The woman are married out when of age. The wives take care of the household. The children are apportioned. If one family has too many children, they give their excess to a family that is lacking children so that no family becomes bigger or more powerful than another.
If a city becomes too large, they send people out into the countryside to find good soil. If none remains in the country, they go out and colonize another country. Most countries welcome their abilities and organization and quickly assimilate into their new cities. If a country has ground that can be tended and the natives refuse, the Utopians feel that natural law entitles them to take over and settle the areas by conquering them. They do believe in slavery but as a means to keep violence down and a crime deterrent. Those who are dissidents or who have committed murder and heinous crimes are made slaves rather than put to death or punished severely. These are used as butchers since Utopians don't like killing animals.Those who commit adultery and fornication are penalized by being put into slavery. They treat their slaves well but keep the dangerous ones in chains.  If there is a plague or some of the areas of their native country are depopulated, they recall people from the colonies since it is a priority that their country stays populated.
There is no need for money in Utopia. Every day they go to a common square that serves a certain amount of people and get the things they need. There is always an abundance of goods there since everyone works. People simply drop off the things they have made and pick up what others have made that they like. This way there is no greed since there is no fear of want. There is no room for pomp, fancy things or excess in their laws. There is a leader over every thirty families and any problems are brought to him first, but there are few if any.
Food is managed differently and the families don't need to keep any at their homes. Crops are gathered and kept in these common places.  Meals are made in great halls that are at each street. So everyone always eats out. They despise eating at home. There are stewards that go to the common markets and pick up food for their group. Slaves do all the hard work while the women of the families rotate in and out to supervise the cooking. The women sit in one area so they can socialize and tend to small children or step outside if they are sick due to pregnancy. They have nice areas aside the halls for small children and nursing mothers. The men are seated so the older children are mixed between them so they learn to behave and be respectful.
The Utopians build big hospitals so people would rather go to them than stay home sick. This helps avoid plagues. The hospitals get first choice in food at the marketplace. In order to do this justice, we will have to continue with one more part..