Aristotle’s Classification Of State: A Detailed Analysis

Political thinkers generally do not consider any difference between the terms ‘state’ and ‘government’. They use both the terms in the same sense while classification. But, modern authors have the different opinion on this type of classification. According to them, there cannot be any classification of states, as all the states are equal in so much as the four attributes- population, territory, sovereignty, and government – are essential for all the states. Willoughby is 0ne of the view that there cannot be a classification of states except on the basis of administration.

So, let’s discuss in detail Aristotle’s view over the classification of state/government:

Meaning and Definition:

Oxford English Dictionary: “A government is a system by which a state or community is controlled.”

Business Dictionary: “A government is a group of people that govern a community or a unit. It sets and administers the public policy and exercises executive, political and sovereign power through customs, institutions, and laws within a state.”

Thus, the government is a concrete and tangible organization which implements the Will of the state i.e. ‘to secure the good life for its people.’

Criteria/Basis Of Classification:

Aristotle classified the states on following two bases :

1. Quantitative: the number of those in whom the sovereign power was vested:
2. Qualitative: the end or purpose towards which the power was directed.

Aristotle was of the view that when the head of the state aimed at the good of the community, the state would be a pure form of state, but when the rulers in that state became selfish and use the power for his own benefits, the state would be called a perverted number.

According to Aristotle, pure monarchy or royalty is government by the One in the interest of all. When it degenerates into a selfish rule of One, it becomes a tyranny. When a few rule for the common good of all, it is aristocracy, but when they start ruling in their own self-interest, it is perverted into the oligarchy. The rule by many for the sake of everyone, Aristotle calls it as polity or mild democracy but when they rule with a view to promote their own class interest, it becomes democracy or ochlocracy(mob rule).

Aristotle uses the term ‘Polity’ where the modern world prefers ‘Democracy’. His ‘democracy’ is today’s mob rule. An equivalent to Aristotle’s Polity would be ‘Constitutional Democracy’, which may be defined as the unselfish rule of many for the common welfare.

Read about Presidential Election Procedure Here

Comparison with Platonic Classification:

Though being a pioneer of the discipline, Plato is not consistent in his classification. He classified twice in his two different works i.e. The Republic and The Statesman.

1. There are three version in his first classification-
2. This is the state of perfect knowledge, where the real sovereign is knowledge, governed by a philosopher king. There is no place for law in this type of government as the king is endowed with all types of knowledge and he rules with wisdom and justice. It was just an imaginary ideal state which never existed anywhere.
3. State of imperfect knowledge, where people respected laws because there was lack of a philosopher king and imperfection led to the requirement of the direction of laws.
4. States where is lack of knowledge. These are the state of ignorance. Laws existed there but were never followed. It was a kind of the state of fools.

The second classification is a step forward of his previous classification. Gilchrist represents that as follows:

Aristotle, who followed Plato closely, was more realist than his master and was quite adequate in modern time too. Appraising him, Gilchrist writes: “the classification was not sufficient for modern forms of government, but it has provided the historical basis of practically all classification made hereto.”

Theory Of Cyclic Change:

Moving a step forward, Aristotle tried to find out the development of states and their cycle of change. He says, ‘change has taken place in all forms of administration as a natural process because the forms of state revolve like the wheels of a cycle.’ 

He explains it,

“The first governments were kingships; probably for this reason, in olden times, when cities were small, men of eminent virtues were few. They were made kings because they were made benefactors and hence benefits could only be bestowed by virtuous men. But when many persons equal in merit arose, against the preeminence of one, they formed a Commonwealth and set up a constitution. The ruling class soon deteriorated and enriched themselves out of the public treasury. Riches became the path to honour and hence oligarchies grew up. They passed into tyrannies, and tyrannies into democracies. The love of gain in the ruling classes always tended to diminish their number and so it strengthened the masses. The masses, in the end, set upon their masters and established democracies”.

The cycle of political change continuously evolves this way.

Principle Of Golden Mean & Best Practicable Government:

The concept of Aristotle’s theory of golden mean is represented in his work ‘Nicomachean Ethics’ on the basis of which Aristotle tries to find out a middle path for a government which is stable in comparison to others. ‘Moral behaviour is the mean between two extremes – at one end is excess, at the other deficiency. Find a moderate position between those two extremes, and you will be acting morally.’ He means that the state must choose a middle path for governance and that Government is best which does not run towards any extremes and includes the representation from all the sections of the society & works as a whole for common good. The moment it leans towards a particular side, it loses the control and change ( cyclic change of political system) occurs.

Thus, the best practicable government according to Aristotle’s theory is the one which follows the mid-path and implements public policies.

Criticism:

1. It does not cover all the modem forms of Governments.
2. ‘Democracy’ is not the worst form of Government.
3. Theory of cyclic change does not fit in with the modern scenario.
4. Aristotle’s classification is unscientific.

Conclusion:

Despite so many criticisms, one must admit that Aristotle’s theories of Classification, Cyclic Change, Principle of Golden Mean etc. possess an undeniable importance in Political Philosophy.  The classification of states was based on scientific study and it was the fundamental concept till the 19^th century. His works proved to be the cornerstone for coming philosophers and their theories. Aristotle gave a base to the discipline which the world is still trying to improve.

Kailasha Foundation – Bringing Solutions To You

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn for regular updates.

Sources:

[i] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sanzio_01_Plato_Aristotle.jpg

[ii]  Aristotle: “Politics”, II, Ch. 15.

Books referred:

1. Agarwal, R.C., Political Theory(Principles Of Political Science), S.Chand & Company Ltd. New Delhi, 2011
2. Asirvatham, Eddy. Mishra, K.K., Political Theory, S.Chhand & Company Ltd., New Delhi, 2006.