Advantages of a democratic constitution according to Thucydides and Aristotle
According to Thucydides a democratic constitution brought about equality among the population. He stated that a democratic constitution gave power to all people. When it came to the settling of a dispute all people were equal before the law regardless of the social class they were in. He continued and stated that even in the appointment of public offices all individuals stood an equal chance as long as they had the required skills to articulate the task. Aristotle also backed this up when he stated that in a democratic constitution the citizens must have equality and therefore the poor have more power than the rich since they comprise of the majority and therefore they cannot be victimized by the rich since they equally have the power.
The second advantage is the liberty and freedom of the citizens under a democratic constitution. Thucydides states that as long as there is political freedom and liberty the citizens also enjoy freedom in their day to day activities and in the manner they handle their neighbors making the citizens free and tolerant in their private lives but keep to the law when it comes to public affairs. Every citizen is able to enjoy their life without the condemnation of other. Aristotle backed this up by stating that the basis of democracy where the democrats affirm to be the principle of their state and it allows a citizen to live as they like without having anyone to limit them.
According to Thucydides a democratic constitution encourages people to respect and obey the laws and the people they have put in power since they were involved in their election and also because the laws put done may be to protect the oppressed and it would be shameful to break them he also states that having a democratic constitution allows the citizens to enjoy their recreation activities after work by retiring at home to rest and drawn their cares and also being able to enjoy products both foreign and local.
Thucydides states that having a democratic constitution allows a country to meet danger voluntarily, with an easy mind, instead of with a laborious training, with natural rather than with state-induced courage. They do not have to spend time in vigorous training for battles that are in the future but when they do face their enemy they are able to defeat them with ease as though they had equivalently trained.
According to both the thinkers a democratic constitution harbored love and unity among the people and also allowed the making informed decisions. Thucydides stated that in that state everyone was not only concerned with their business but also the states affairs. H e also states that they made decisions on policy or submitted them to discussions and take time to make decisions so that when they make decisions they make informed decisions and are courageous in articulation of these decisions.
According to Thucydides having democratic constitutions allowed them to make good general good relations and feelings with their neighbors. They did good to others so that they would remain grateful to them and for those they owed they
Similarities of the two Thinkers
The two thinkers both argued democracy in terms of the acquisition of employment and they both stated that in a democratic state there was more fairness in the acquisition of employment. Aristotle states that there are certain characteristics of a democracy and they are: eligibility of all citizens for office, offices that are chose by lot, no repeat terms in office, short terms of office, a popular jury, and a popular assembly with great authority. In a democracy, all offices are paid. When all citizens are eligible for office, when offices are chosen by lot, and when there is a popular assembly with great authority this is similar ro Thucydides thinking since he stated that a democratic constitution facilitates the putting of a person in office on merit regardless of their social class.
Differences
For Aristotle, a democracy is a failure. It is a majority rule where the majority is poor and non-virtuous. This means that whoever is in office, and all have equal access to office because of democracy’s concept of equality, may not act in the best interests of the city-state. When the city-state fails to reach its objectives, providing the good life for its citizens, then the government of the city-state is non-virtuous, as are the people in the government. Since the city-state fails to achieve its objectives under a democracy, Aristotle believes democracy to be a failure this contradicts with Thucydides theory where he attributes the excellent of Athens to the democratic nature of their constitution that gave them the liberty to carry out decisions that contributed to the great performance of the country.
For Aristotle democracy is not the best form of government since the it is for and by the people named in the government type. He states that this people do not have the best interest of their country at heart while Thucydides states that all the citizens are concerned with the affairs of the country including the leaders since they are concentrating on the well being of the country and their individual performance.
