Hang tight while we fetch the video data and transcripts. This only takes a moment.
Connecting to YouTube player…
Fetching transcript data…
We’ll display the transcript, summary, and all view options as soon as everything loads.
Next steps
Loading transcript tools…
The Political Theory of Aristotle | Francisco Riodique III | YouTubeToText
YouTube Transcript: The Political Theory of Aristotle
Skip watching entire videos - get the full transcript, search for keywords, and copy with one click.
Share:
Video Transcript
Okay, let's try to summarize Aristotel's
political theory as how it was written
in his seinal work the politics.
So how does Aristotal uh characterize
uh politics? Well, fundamentally for Aristotle
Aristotle
um he looked at politics or he analyzed
uh politics systematically
and uh it pertains to his inquiry
systematically or uh to use a more
modern uh terminology scientifically
because he's basing his assumptions and
his analysis on his uh uh empirical
observations, right? that uh his
politics his book is fundamentally a
critical analysis based on empirical
observation of the nature of a political
community and the conditions necessary
for uh human flourishment.
Um again for Paris total
just like Plato
the purpose of a political community of
the police is basically human flourishing
flourishing
right. So we have to uh as much as we
can of course we have to achieve the
best form of government so that we can
all flourish under it.
And uh of course uh these uh uh
the police or this political community
basically uh
is is considered as
uh a place or
uh it's more than a place. It's a
community where people come together.
Right? Uh if you read your uh the politics
politics
when in the nature and origin of the state
state
uh it says there every state is a
community of some kind and every
community is established with a view of
some good for mankind always act in
order to obtain that which they think
good. So Aristotle believed that the
reason why people conglomerate into
forming political communities is because
they want to achieve some kind of good
otherwise uh they they would not have uh
formed these communities
right and for Aristotal the police these
political communities
are natural
are natural uh remember that Aristotal
is heavily influenced by he's being uh a
uh an empiricist or someone who uh uh
relies on empirical observation for
critical analysis,
right? And someone who does that he sees that
that uh
uh
there there would be some good otherwise
why would you form these polit uh
particular political communities if they
are not uh aligned to what people think
is good. Right? And these political
communities are natural. Not that they
are natural because uh they are not
man-made. They are man-made but they are
natural in the sense that they are
um a consequence a natural consequence
of the fact that human beings are
political animals. So at the bottom of
Aristotle's political theory lies his assumption
assumption
that human beings are political animals.
Now what does that mean? Does it mean
that you know we are an animal who are
who is a who is politically motivated?
No no no that's not the case for Ari total.
total.
We are political animal because
we can only achieve flourishing
inside a political community.
We can only achieve our highest
potential as a rational being if we are
inside a political community. If we are
not living in a political community, we
can never be considered as human beings.
We will never be able to fully develop
our capabilities as a human being, as a
thinking and rational human being.
And this is closely connected to uh
human beings being rational because
because
our rationality will achieve its full blossoming
blossoming
only inside the political community.
We cannot hide from the fact that we
human beings require
help coming from other people. From the
moment we are born, from the moment we
die and what happened in between, it
requires human beings helping each other.
other. Right?
Right?
All throughout our lives,
we see us needing the help of other
people. We cannot produce our own food.
So, we buy food in the market. And where
do these vendors uh get the the food
that they're selling to us? From the
farmers, from the fishermen, from the
planters of vegetables and wheat and
what have you, right? We cannot do all
these things all by our own. And not
only that, we cannot fully achieve our
intellectual capabilities if we are alone.
alone.
It's impossible. It's entirely
impossible. We won't be able to learn
language. And without language, we will
not be able to learn things. We will not
be able to think. We will not be able to
f fully utilize our capacity to think.
And so
Aristotle believed
that human beings are political animals
because the political community where we
live in is a natural consequence
of human beings trying to achieve its
full potential to use the language of
Aristotel to achieve its form and that
can only be achieved inside a political community.
uh Aristotal of course also tried to um
in a way um
uh say that slavery is actually
something natural and even women's uh subordination
subordination
is uh actually something that is
natural. You see this could be a kind of
flaw from Aristotal's way of thinking
because as I've told you Aristotal looks
into the nature of things. He looks into
the the processes the or the the natural
order the natural laws that govern
things based from observation.
And of course during the time uh what
can he observe? He observed slavery and
as a matter of fact, a great deal of the
e economy of each uh state or city state
is basically
uh a direct consequence of slavery,
right? Uh women are considered to be a
kind of second grade citizens because
according to Aristotal,
uh their nature is not as perfect as
that of of of men, right? Right? And so
therefore it's the it's it's a natural
consequence that women should be uh
under the authority of men. Although
women are capable of being rational but
uh their form is somehow incomplete.
It lacks authority unlike that of men.
Of course Aristotle is basing this from
what he saw from what he observed. The
same with slavery
right. Harris believe that there are
people who are strong and there are
people who are not as strong but are
intelligent and you know intellectually
capable and so uh when you look at the
nature of slaves Aristotle will say you
know they're they're not really capable
of of rational thinking if they are
that's very limited
right and so therefore uh it's just
natural for these types of people to be
slave and as a matter of fact these
slaves could also live a good life if
they will be led by a virtuous master.
Right? On their own, these slaves since
they are not as uh fully capable as that
of uh you know uh their masters, they
could not actually live a good life,
right? But with the care of a virtuous
master, these slaves can actually live a
good life. And even women, women can
live a good life if they are under the
authority of virtuous men.
Right? That's what of course that could
be uh a controversial but as I've told
you uh Aristotel is looking at you know
empirical observation and he's trying to
deduce things you know his critical
analysis of politics from his empirical
observation of what was happening
and uh this is a direct product of that
kind of thinking. It may be
controversial. It may be problematic.
But this is the same way of thinking
that Aristotle used to study comparative politics.
politics. Right?
Right?
Um when it comes to Aristotle's critique
of Plato,
well, it's not really that good. Many
scholars are saying somehow Aristotle
has forgotten Plato. You know Aristotle
will say of course Aristotal will have a
will believe that uh uh private property
is important in order for people to
function well. They need private
property so that they can enjoy their
life. So they can continue thinking so
that they can have leisure you know
because for Aristotle leisure is needed
so that you know you can develop your
more higher faculties.
And of course uh Aristotle will say
according to Plato private property is
not important. He would not allow
private property. But I think the the
main mistake of Aristotle here is that
uh Plato was merely talking about the
guardian class.
Right. Uh it would not be allowed for
the guardian class, the philosopher
kings and the auxiliaries to to to own
properties or private property so that
they would fully devote their lives to
uh the welfare of the state. But the
producers which constitute majority of
the people in the state are allowed to
have private property. Perhaps Aristotel
have forgotten that in his critique of Plato.
the study of politics or political
theory for Aristotal
is actually
practical wisdom together with ethics
together with ethics. So his study of
the proper course of action, the proper
decision making, how can we achieve
virtue? How can we know what is right
from what is wrong and how can we do
this? That's his ethical theory.
Political theory on the other hand
studies the natures and consequences of
political regimes or political
constitutions as you would call it. Uh
political constitutions or regimes are
are are broad. They're not just simply
limited to government but they include
the way people think
uh about their government, their opinion
about what is right and wrong, their
political culture, you know. um the
economic orientation of the state, the
distribution of goods etc. So all of
this is a part of a regime or a
constitution and political theory for
Aristotle is a study of the nature of
the constitution of the regime and its
consequences and
how can governments be reformed,
right? How can constitutions be reformed
so that it would become better
and more suitable to help people achieve
flourishing, right?
So these are practical sciences for
Aristotal meaning to say they're a kind
of science that is not uh achieved for
its own sake or it's not learned for its
own sake just like u theoretical
philosophy so to speak but it's a kind
of knowledge that is considered to be a
means to an end instrumental knowledge
so that we can achieve the good life so
that we can achieve udeimmonia or human
flourishing so both ethical His ethical
theory and political theory goes hand in
hand so that a person and of course with
that being said including the community
the entire political community can
achieve its goal which is udeimmonia or
Um, of course, Aristotal believed that
uh the state originated in uh in the
household in families, right? For
basically for the purpose of uh
obtaining uh the necessary needs for
everyday sustenance or survival and then
of course uh uh that is not enough,
right? And so the village is formed.
there are many households and you know
from them emerges uh the village. Now uh
it's more sophisticated than a simple
household but you know uh its purpose is
still for um the sustenance of the
people for easier access to uh survival
necessities or uh the things that we
need so that we can uh survive. And then
it goes on became more complicated has
evolved into the police or the state.
When these several villages
uh you know they combine they are large
right when this community becomes
self-sufficient it becomes a police it
becomes a state
right and with this uh
the state is not merely uh you know it's
not merely for uh sustaining of physical
life, but it's also about nourishing
other human faculties, other human
capabilities so that human beings can
Um, another important thing for Arias
uh since he was also heavily influenced
by uh the police by how you know the
inner workings of the police just like
Plato. Aristotal uh believe that
citizenship should involve you know citizens
citizens
uh who are more active
in you know the life of the community.
But this depends on the kind of regime
or constitution the police or the state has
has
because different regimes or different
constitutions entail different kinds of
virtues or different kinds of citizenships,
citizenships,
right? Different kinds of what
constitute a good citizen.
So, uh it varies according to the constitution,
constitution,
right? And according to Aristotal
uh a good citizen let's say in a
democracy could be a bad citizen in an
oligarchy or a good citizen in an
oligarchy could be a bad citizen in a
democracy. So it depends right it
depends on the kind of regime but the
thing is what is important for Aristotal
is that these person these citizens must
partake in the life of the state and it
involves ruling and being ruled right
right
so that's uh Aristotal's uh notion of citizenship
citizenship um
um
now uh Aristot Ella believed that what
is needed to govern
uh the state is unlike what Plato believed.
believed.
For Plato,
it has to be uh governed by the
philosopher kings whose primary activity
is to do philosophy or to know
philosophia. Ferraris total that's not
the case. Ferraris total philosophia is
not needed. philosophia for Aristotle is
something that is uh connected to
uh a more higher kind of thinking a kind
of knowledge that is pursued for its own
sake not practical knowledge but human
flourishing can actually be achieved
through the use of practical wisdom and
so what is needed according to Aristotal
is not knowledge of philosophy but
finesis or practical wisdom
it represents the intellectual virtue
that enables proper moral decision
making in particular circumstances.
So finesis is this capability to
understand what's happening and based
from the different circumstances
evaluates judges what is moral and what
is immoral given these certain facts
that are involved. So therefore there is
no oneizefits all right thing to do or
bad thing to do. It depends on the circumstances
circumstances
and practical wisdom is a characteristic
of a ruler according to Aristotel.
Right? A good ruler for Aristotel must
possess practical wisdom. And so he
would call this uh ruler of the state to
possess practical wisdom as a great sold
man or a megalopy
someone who was a great soul so to
speak. Right. And for Aristotel, this
great sold man exhibits moral excellence
and deserves honor.
Okay. Um,
now let's go to Aristotal's uh, you
know, analysis, actual analysis of
states, which could be his greatest
contribution to political theory and to
political science itself. Because as
I've told you, Aristotal was the first
one to do comparative politics by analyzing
analyzing
158 actual regimes or constitutions
throughout the ancient world.
And you know he was able to build a
large you know resource material for
political science research. And from
this he was able to deduce three forms
of good
uh regimes and their perversion.
Paris total a regime is good or a
government is good if
uh the rulers are considering the
welfare or the interest of the entire
state and it becomes perversed or bad
when these rulers are not thinking about
the welfare of the state but are just
simply concerned with serving their own
self interests. So uh for Ari total
based from his 158 constitutions he
tried to classify them into the number
of rulers
ruled by one ruled by a few and ruled by many.
many.
The good form of a government that is
ruled by one is called monarchy
and the perverse form of that government
or that the bad form of that government
is tyranny.
When it comes to rule of the few,
And when aristocracy is perverted, it
becomes an oligarchy.
And with the classification of rule of
the many, it's called polity. And its
Now when it comes to Aristotal's
political analysis um
um
wealth or the economy or economic activities
activities
plays a crucial part.
This is I think uh you know one of the
things that we can actually get from
Aristotal is that he sees politics as
not just simply ruling or being ruled
but it's also about the economic
orientation of the state. It's also about
about
uh the wealth owned by by the people.
It's also about how many of the citizens
are wealthy and how many are not wealthy
or how many are poor.
If there are many who are poor, there
will be consequences. If there are few
who are wealthy, there will be consequences.
consequences.
Right? And so we can even say that
Aristotal's analysis of politics is
heavily reliant on his analysis of wealth.
wealth.
For Aristotal, wealth is more important
than number. Only wealth helps to
explain how a given political system functions.
functions.
Aristotal. It is inevitable that there
should be an oligarchy where the rulers,
whether they are few or many, owe their
position to riches.
And it is equally inevitable that there
should be democracy where the poor rule.
You see um Aristotal's analysis of these
158 constitutions led him to the
conclusion that
it's very difficult to find good forms
of government.
Most of the time we find bad forms of government.
government.
Uh it is also to be noted that Aristotel
saw or concluded that one of the
problems in this political regime is
that it's always unstable. There is
always a kind of social unrest brought
about by economic inequalities.
Aristotal was able to see that.
And uh for Aristotal
for the most part what we can see are
oligarchic regimes and democratic
regimes both perverted forms because
oligarchy is the perverted form of
aristocracy while democracy is the
perverted form of polity.
Right? And uh when rulers
uh owe their possession to riches then
oligarchy oligarchy became becomes inescapable
inescapable
right when the poor rule then what's the
natural consequence then the regime is
is definitely
would become a democracy
right um now
when it comes to oligarchies
Okay, these are the cities ruled by the rich.
rich.
So therefore, political power is
exercised by the rich and
political authority is decided
decided
by wealth.
Right? That's what an oligarchy is. the
wealthy dominate.
And one of the characteristics of an
oligarchy according to Aristotal
is basically
uh wealth is a requirement for political office.
office.
Right? In the regard political
institutions, property qualifications
are required for political offices. Now
there are many kinds of oligarchies in
the way that there are many kinds of
democracies. Aristotal is always
emphasizing that that there's no
oneizefits all right we cannot say that
one oligarchy is the same with all other
oligarchies or one democracy is the same
with all other democ that's not the case
okay each police or each state have
their different political and economic
dynamics and if you want to reform
because as I've told you aristotal
believe that one of the main goal for
political theory is political reform if
you want to reform Then therefore you
have to take into consideration these
inner workings these inner dynamics that
are specific to each state.
There is no single formula for political
reform. Now returning to oligarchies um
um
when it comes to uh justice Aristotal
for Aristotal uh he believed in a kind
of distributive justice.
Okay, a kind of justice that is
actually, you know, political offices
or a political authority is not based on
wealth or it's not based on freedom or
equality, but it's actually based on virtue,
virtue,
right? That's what real justice for
Aristotle is. Now when it comes to
oligarchies they have a kind of you know um
um
uh justice but it's incomplete
because uh as I told you in an
oligarchic regime political offices or
political power
uh is distributed
by means of property qualifications or
wealth and
uh for the oligarchs or in an oligarchy,
they will tend to think that political
authority is suitable to those who are wealthy.
wealthy.
Right? So in a way uh it's saying that superiority
superiority
comes from property or superiority comes
from wealth. And since the oligarchs are
wealthy and the poor do not have
property, it's it's just but right to
put oligarchs, the elites in power.
Now, in a way, Aristotle would say
there's a kind of justice there, but
it's not justice really. It's incomplete,
incomplete,
right? Because the oligarchs are saying
that, you know, we are superior because
we are wealthy. But the thing is that's
just wealth. There are other factors
that you have to consider,
right? There are other factors. So it is
false for you to think that you are
superior simply because you are superior
in just one aspect which is property. Right?
Right?
So it falls short according to Aristotle
because real justice the goal of which
is to inculcate to the police virtue
that's how we can truly flourish.
So in a good city according to Aristotel
the superior people who are basically
not superior in wealth but superior in virtue.
virtue.
So basically these are the people who
possess practical wisdom. They they they
have promeises
and with this you know they can know
what virtue is because for Aristotle
virtue lies in the golden mean right. So
only these people who possess practical
wisdom can understand what virtue is and
these people of superior virtue must be
the one to lead the state in a good city
according to Aristotle.
Right? But that's not the case in an
oligarchy. That's also not the case in a democracy,
democracy,
right? Because you know the the the
arguments of the oligarchs is that you
know we are different from the poor
because we're healthy,
right? We're wealthy.
For the poor on the other hand, they
don't really care about wealth because
they do not possess them. What they care
about is freedom.
We want more freedom. The poor people
want more freedom. The elites want more
wealth. And definitely
this creates a kind of tension. And
Aristotal saw that this tension is
basically what's creating political instability.
instability.
So for Aristotal, political reform
is of course moving towards a better
kind of government. But not only that,
political reform also aims
to provide a more stable
government, a more stable regime.
Now let's talk about democracies.
For Aristotal, democracies is a regime
that is ruled by the poor.
And one of the characteristics of a
democratic regime is that uh you know
it's a kind of political systems that
heavily relies on lottery
or draw lots.
So a lottery system allotss political
office entirely on the basis of chance
because you know in a democracy what is
really important there is equality.
Equality in terms of what?
Equality in terms of citizenship.
So if we are all citizens of a
particular state, then we are equal with
each other. Whether we are rich or we
are poor, wealth does not really count.
What really matters is that we are
citizen of this particular police and
therefore we have equal right to
convert. We have equal right to share in
political authority. That's where draw
lots come in.
Right? That's where drawouts come in
because for democracy elections highly
favor the rich,
right? Because how you know how how can
the poor campaign, right?
Elections highly favorable the rich, the
wealthy, and the well-known.
But that's not what's really the value
in a democracy. The value in a democracy
is freedom and equality, right? And it
Another uh factor that Aristotle saw in
democracies is um the democratic
assembly. So when it comes to policym
when it comes to uh providing uh
decisions for the state you know people
come together just like in Athens right
people come together to decide on these
uh public issues
and there's even a stipen the state will
even pay these people who come together
to participate to discuss important
issues within the state
right? They will even pay them because
you know if there's no payment then the
poor would not go because they have to
work. Only the rich can go. So therefore
it can become uh based on you know
political power can become based on
wealth. But that's not that should not
be the case in a democracy. So we draw
lots for political office for you know
for political authority and then we go
to public assemblies and then we debate
as citizens and after that we get a
stipen we get paid so that for that
particular day's work we would be
exempted we we won't need to work
right but then again Aristotal said that
democracy uh failed when it comes to
achieving living through justice because
what's the fault of uh the values of
uh they assume that equality in one
aspect is equality in all aspect but
that's not the case we all know for a
fact that that's not true even if we are
all citizens it's not necessary that we
are equal with all aspects the same with
oligarchy they believe that they have
superiority because they're wealthy,
right? But you know, superiority is not
just simply being evaluated by wealth
alone. That could be one of the factors,
but certainly not the only one. When it
comes to democracy, what's important is
equality based on citizenship. But the
thing is, you know, we're we're not
really equal just simply because of citizenship,
citizenship,
right? There are other things to be
considered. So both democracy and uh and
oligarchy failed to comply with the
standard of distributive justice that
you know Aristotal uh wants to bring
forth in a just city because the true
principle of distributive justice in a
just city or in a good society which
political offices were assigned on the
basis of virtue.
Right? Because these people who would
hold political office will become the
decision makers for the entire state.
You know they they must know what virtue
is. And how can they do that if they
don't know practical wisdom? If they
don't understand ethics, if they don't
stand understand politics, they would
never be able to do that.
Okay. And in in that particular just
city, it would be devoted to inculcation
of virtue.
And this purpose would be seen in all of
its parts.
Right? That's why you know democracy
according to Plato might be the most
beautiful of cities
because there's variation different
people doing different things but
because it does not promote virtue of
all members. Aristotle will say
democracy is a corrupt form of rich.
And so what's the solution now?
Right? What's the solution now? Uh it's
really very diff by his analysis of 158
constitutions ARIS total saw that most
of the time it's just oligarchy and
democracy and both oligarchy and
democracy are you know not really good
and so
uh what's the alternative
right? Aristotle will provide an
alternative, a kind of a realizable
state, a state that can be achieved.
Although this realizable state may not
be considered to be a best form of government
government
like in the leagues of monarchy,
aristocracy and polity,
right? But it's the best that we could
have. It's kind of the next best thing
to these best forms of government. It
may not be good, but it would allow
stability. Remember that Aristotal's
political reform aims toward political
stability. And the tension comes from
the friction between the rich and the
poor. The rich wants more wealth, the
poor wants more freedom. And these ones
basically clash against each other which
tends to be uh the harbinger of chaos in
the state and Aristotal would not want
that. He would want it he would want
stability in the state because we cannot
live a good life if we're living a very
un we're living in a very unstable
political environment. How can we live a
good life? How can we flourish in these
unstable political environments?
Okay. And so the the next best thing
Aristotle would call a mixed regime or a
mixed constitution or a middle
constitution. In some of your reading
materials, you may encounter it as
polity. But do not confuse it with the
kind of polity which is the best form of
the rule of the many. Right? That could
be a bit confusing. That's why I will
not use the word polity anymore.
Instead, I would interchange using the
word mixed regimes or mixed constitution,
constitution,
right? Or sometimes I could even say
middle constitution. They're all the
same. I would no longer use the word
polity as to not to confuse you,
right? So,
uh we can do political reform and how
can we do that? By combining the aspects
of oligarchy and democracy. Here once
again we will encounter Aristotal's
orientation of the golden mean.
Aristotal's perspective on what counts
as virtuous lies in a golden mean. So
you cannot be on the extremes of the spectrum.
spectrum.
Oligarchy and democracy are at the extremes
extremes
of the spectrum and so
they are considered to be vices.
They are considered to be either lacking
or in excess.
So we have to be in the middle. That's
why you know it's called middle
constitution or mixed regimes or mixed constitution.
constitution.
Right? So it's a combination of some
aspects of oligarchy and some aspects of
democracy and in the process we are
limiting the dangerous tendency of an
oligarchy and we're also regulating or
limiting the dangerous tendency of the
democracy. So where does this dangerous
tendency come from? In an oligarchy,
this dangerous tendency comes from
uh its elites who are ruling for their
own interests. And what really matters
is the is for these wealthy rulers to
become more wealthy,
right? And the bad side of the democracy
is that you know people want more freedom,
freedom,
right? More and more freedom without
wanting virtue etc. and political
authority is distributed through you
know through these means. So those are
two extremes. So we have to limit these tendencies
tendencies
so that little by little we could arrive
at a kind of golden mean an average
something in between.
Now again um there is no oneizefits all.
This requires once again the
capabilities of someone who possesses
practical wisdom to know the proper
political reform to be conducted given
the peculiarities
of of that particular community because
communities are different from each
other. They have different needs. They
have different kinds of people. They are
different kinds of economic orientation
and so on and so forth, right? And so
this political reform of trying to tame
oligarchic tendencies and tame
democratic tendencies will be dependent
on the evaluation
of someone whose practical wisdom.
Right? Because it's a casetoase basis.
There's no such thing as one sizefits
all. no general formula so that we can
you know uh limit in some instances
you know we could limit the property
requirement. There could be some offices
that require property requirements but
there are some which does not
right and uh the freedom of the people
could also be limited
right or let's say there could be some offices
offices
that are uh
uh
that are chosen based from drawouts
while others is based from uh property.
the qualifications. So these types of combination
combination
right that's why it's called middle
constitution and it's up to the duty of
a statesman who is endowed with
practical wisdom to know how to reform.
Another important feature of this mixed
regime that Aristotle is talking about
is the dominance of a third class of people
people
in oligarchy. The elites dominate in a
democracy. The poor dominate.
But there's a third class, the middle class.
class.
They're not as rich as the oligarchs and
they're not as poor as the poor ruling
in a democracy.
Um, they may not have the tendency of
the oligarchs to be too protective on
their wealth. The oligarchs are always
protecting their wealth. They don't want
the poor, you know, to,
you know, to share their wealth. The
poor, on the other hand, they're always
so protective of their freedoms,
right? So, once again, Aristotal opted
right? So, Aristotal saw that in his
analysis of 158 constitutions, he saw
that the more stable political communities
communities
are actually communities that have a
large middle class.
Communities with the large middle class,
aristotal salt are more stable compared
to pure oligarchies or pure democracies.
When the elites have power, that's not
stable because the poor will always try
to pull away that power from them. When
the poor have power then the elites
would always try to take power from the
poor because they believe that are they
are superior. The poor on the other hand
believe that you know they're all equal
because they're all citizens of the
state. So it's going to be a friction.
It's going to be a friction and that's
not good. It would create revolutions,
political upheavalss. That kind of
environment is not good for human
flourishing. Right? But if there is a
strong and considerable number of people
who belong to the middle class
then then
um it will be more stable.
Right? So we can say that an oligarchy
is ruled by the rich, democracy is ruled
by the few, a mixed regime is ruled by
the middle class.
Right? And you see in the middle class,
it's a good combination of many things.
Not on the extreme of wealth and not on
the extreme of poverty,
right? It's a kind of, you know, a good
vantage point seeing many things that
the elites would not see and the poor
would not see because the elites are too
focused on, you know, protecting and
gaining more wealth, protecting their
wealth and gaining more wealth. why the
poor are so concerned with, you know,
how can they expand their freedoms?
But the middle class, they're in the
middle, not on the extremes. And so when
it comes to decision making, when it
comes to practical wisdom, they're more
likely to possess it
because they have a vantage point of,
So it's less likely that a mixed regime
would lead into a class warfare
which has heavily been the cause of you
know the the political frictions in the
right um according to Aristotel that the
city will be more stable only if the
forces favoring the constitution are
stronger than those opposing it. And he
would rely on the middle class because
they want stability,
right? To be, you know, to someone who
would uh favor the constitution,
right? And when the middle class is the
ruling class, then
it would be better for everyone
because the middle class do not coveret
the possessions of the others,
right? The poors could covet the
possession of others because they would
want more freedom.
The rich, the middle class is more
preferable to the rich,
right? Because, you know, they're not
So, cities according to Aristotle
that has a large middle class are more
stable. That's kind of, you know, an
endowment for these uh for these cities.
um large states which has large middle
class is more viable for the kind of
political reform that Aristotal was espousing.
Um
now if we look at uh Aristotal's uh
analysis of states um
um
basically he used comparative politics
very sophisticated kind of you know a
comparison of different uh political uh regimes.
regimes.
It's more economic than political in the
sense that it's actually the economic uh
uh
mechanisms within the police that
influences the political outcomes in the police
police
and Aristotal focuses on the improvement
or political reform. Okay.
Okay.
So uh with that uh I would end uh our
discussions on the political theory of Aristotle.
Click on any text or timestamp to jump to that moment in the video
Share:
Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds
One-Click Copy125+ LanguagesSearch ContentJump to Timestamps
Paste YouTube URL
Enter any YouTube video link to get the full transcript
Transcript Extraction Form
Most transcripts ready in under 5 seconds
Get Our Chrome Extension
Get transcripts instantly without leaving YouTube. Install our Chrome extension for one-click access to any video's transcript directly on the watch page.
Chrome Extension