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.