Create your own discussion post based on all these other discussion posts. Make sure to have my personality present in the post, and use APA format everywhere - in text citations and references. Only use primary sources as your references, and here that's only aristotle politics:
Discussion Prompt 3 - Aristotle's power in modern political thoughts 
Jan 24 - Feb 7
Do Aristotle’s ideas about wealth and power still hold relevance in modern political theory and practice? Why or why not?

Provide your response/arguments in well-developed and elaborated paragraphs. Each argument must be supported with specific examples/citations from our readings using the APA format.  

Discussion
Filter by:
Sort by:

Most Recent Activity
Discussion Prompt 3
Contains unread posts
Jessica Rohrbach posted Feb 7, 2025 5:55 PM
Jessica Rohrbach 

Professor Czader 

SCLA 101 

February 7, 2025 

            Aristotle’s ideas about wealth and power still hold relevance in modern political theory and practice today. One example is how Aristotle says that the middle class is crucial to our society. He says this because he believes that having too much or too little of money causes a gap between the two tiers in society. Having a strong middle class bridges the gap between the two. Aristotle stated, “Thus it is the greatest good fortune for those who are engaged in politics to have a middling and sufficient property, because where some possess very many things and other nothing, either ruler of the people in its extreme form must come into being, or unmixed oligarchy, or - as a result of both of these excesses - tyranny” (p. 116). This quote perfectly captures the essence of the point that Aristotle is trying to convey to the reader. Having a middle class is important to maintain a balance. Because the middle class is neither poor nor rich, so money is not constantly on their mind. They do not have any motives that come from greed.

            Another example of one of Aristotle’s ideas that still holds true is his idea about how if one person has too much power, they can become corrupt. This theory holds true today, and that is why we have a system where different rules or ideas must get passed through different people. Aristotle said, “Any one of them is taken singly is perhaps inferior in comparison; but the city is made up of many persons, just as a feast to which many contribute is finer than a single and simple one, and on this account a crowd also judges many matters better than any single person” (p. 90., 91). In this quote Aristotle is describing how one person will not have as good a judgment as many people. If we have a group of people deciding on a matter it is better, because there are more opinions to decide what is best for the people. Even if people disagree, they can come to a compromise.

References

Aristotle. (2013). Aristotle’s “Politics”: Second edition (C. Lord, Trans.). University of Chicago Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt
Contains unread posts
Bridget Green posted Feb 7, 2025 5:54 PM
Bridget Green

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

Friday, January 7th

              Aristotle's theories about wealth and power still hold some relevance because many of them were simply observations of the behaviors of people under different types of rules. However, some of his other theories were based off of these observations. These theories concerned types of constitution made off of the three good types of rule he had categorized; kingship, aristocracy, and democracy. The best of these by themselves, he reasoned, would be the aristocracy because of their refinement and education. Yet there was another theory that he described, which was to 2 or 3 of these types of rules in a way that suited the people. This theory is relevant today because that is what the world has done today in countries all over the world. In America, there is kingship in the President’s office mixed with democracy and aristocracy in Congress, and in other countries like the UK and in Portugal, there are mixed democracies and aristocracies. This is a theory that we have been working on for 2,000 years, and in that time, perhaps we have come to better or refined conclusions of those theories. Nevertheless, these theories of Aristotle’s are the base of these conclusions. They may not have been inspired by, or even been referred to, but they do explain the base types of governments that today’s governments came from.

         Aristotle made many observations based on dividing people in to 3 or 4 classes: the poor; the middle class; the higher class; and during kingship, rulers. His observations tell us that any type of rule can become corrupted, and that under such corruption the rule will almost always be overturned. When these types of rule are corrupted, they become something else; either oligarchy, tyranny, or polity. This is relevant today because it can still happen today. It does happen, especially in places like China or Korea, where dictatorships are the rulers of these countries. Aristotle’s theories are relevant because they are happening today among us.

References

Aristotle, Barker, E., & Stalley, R. F. (1998a). Politics. Oxford University Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Jacob Hack
Contains unread posts
Jacob Hack posted Feb 7, 2025 5:46 PM
Jacob Hack

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

February 7th, 2025

Aristotle’s view and understanding of wealth and power still hold a considerable amount of relevance within our current political theories and practices. Concerns about the potential downsides of democracy, inequality among minority groups, and political instability stemming from these issues can all be found in Aristotle’s Politics. 

Aristotle warns about the danger of democracy turning into oligarchy, where the elite (wealthy) few have the most political control. Aristotle (2009)  states that a citizen is “one who is entitled to share in a deliberative or judicial office of that city” (p. 90). Aristotle argues that it is wealth that dictates what makes a citizen. Oligarchy uses concentrated wealth to prey on the middle class and minority groups with the political power of the wealthy. 

Aristotle holds the middle class as the backbone of political stability within a government, as they are the median between the rich and poor. “The middle class is free from the ambition of the rich and the pettiness of the poor” (Aristotle 2009, p.156). In the case of political corruption, the influence of the middle class is significantly weakened and therefore creates instability. 

These issues can be observed within the modern political landscape we find ourselves in. Wealth being used for financing campaigns and lobbying officials, alongside growing economic gaps between classes all reflect Aristotle’s concerns so many years ago. Instances of officials being “bought out” are becoming increasingly common, paving the road to a large amount of corruption in the future. 


It is important to consider the economic differences between now and those thousands of years ago when Politics was written. Aristotle’s ideas of wealth and power are still very much relevant, but their application has and will continue to, change as our political practices change. 

Works Cited

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. Original work published 350 BCE)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 — Stefan Lee
Contains unread posts
Stefan Lee posted Feb 7, 2025 5:24 PMLast edited: Friday, February 7, 2025 5:25 PM EST
Sefan Lee

SCLA 101

Professor Czader

February 7th, 2025

Aristotle's ideas about wealth and power continue to influence modern political theory. In the book Aristotle Politics, Aristotle discussed how wealth and power play a crucial role in political stability. If concentrated in the hands of a few, it could lead to instability and political corruption. He also mentioned different types of governments and how each one of them can be beneficial or harmful to society. While most of Aristotle's ideas on wealth and power remain highly relevant, there are some limitations when applying these ideas to modern political realities. 

In today’s modern political system, Aristotle's belief that wealth and power when concentrated in a few hands can lead to wealth inequality, discontent with the working class, and a corrupt election system. This can be observed when Aristotle was explaining kingship as a form of government. He states the kingships that exist among some of the barbarians are very close to “tyrannies in their power, but are based on law and hereditary” (2009, p.88). This idea resonates with today’s political system where countries like North Korea have extreme oppression and wealth inequality. Kim Jong Un (North’s Korea government) has complete control over North Korea, citizens are oppressed and afraid to rebel and have no choice but to follow his orders. This shows how Aristotle’s ideas are still present in today’s modern political system and create an unfair constitution.  

On the other hand, Aristotle believes that polity, a mixed form of government, could be fairer and better for society’s sake compared to kingship. He describes that polity as a type of government that has a strong middle class, a state in which rich and poor respect each other, and a fair electoral system. Aristotle also describes that polity is when “the multitude governs with a view to the common advantage” (2009, p.73). This idea can be slightly connected to today’s modern society. For example, the United States has a fair electoral process, where everyone has the right to vote and the government is incentivized to govern in a way that benefits everyone in the society. However, wealth and power still play a huge role in today's electoral system. Without power and status, it is very hard to compete with candidates that have power and influence.

In conclusion, Aristotle's views on power and wealth are still relevant in today’s society, especially regarding concerns about the concentration of power and wealth inequality. However, some of his views, such as different types of kingships are not as applicable to the modern political system. 

Reference:


Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Aristotle's power in modern political thoughts
Contains unread posts
Jenna Ting posted Feb 7, 2025 5:14 PM
Jenna Ting

SCLA 101

Professor Czader

February 7, 2025

Through his book Politics, Aristotle’s views on wealth and power have significantly influenced political theory. These ideas continue to remain relevant in modern political practice. They are demonstrated in governments around the world, particularly the United States.

One of Aristotle’s main concerns in Politics is the distribution of power within government. He argues that “rightly constituted laws should be [the final] sovereign” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 112), meaning that laws, not individuals, should govern a state. Aristotle warns that when individuals hold too much power, they will often become greedy and try to benefit themselves. However, when governed by laws, people are limited and held accountable, preventing them from abusing their power. In the United States, the Constitution acts as this governing law. It sets limits on the powers of both citizens and leaders.

Aristotle also emphasizes that power should be distributed among many, rather than concentrated in the hands of a few. He states that while individuals might not make the best decisions, “when they meet together, [they] are either better than experts or at any rate no worse” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 110). This shows that collective decision-making is more effective than rule by one person or a small group because it allows for various ideas and perspectives. It also prevents corruption, so one person can’t take control of all the power. This is shown in the United States government through the many offices and division of power across the three branches. This allows for many citizens to partake in government, while the checks and balances ensure that no one single person or group can monopolize power.  

Aristotle’s ideas on wealth and social classes are also prevalent in his work. He argues that “moderation and the mean are always best” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 157). He warns that having too large of a gap between the rich and the poor can lead to social unrest and factional conflict. To avoid this, he suggests that “the best form of political association is one where the power is vested in the middle class” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 159). Aristotle saw the middle class as a way to stabilize society. When the middle class is large and strong, it can decrease the likelihood of tyranny, revolution, or instability. In the United States, the middle class has been a key part of the nation. It has allowed for political participation and economic mobility. However, recently, there has been a rise in economic inequality, showing how Aristotle’s ideas about the dangers of increasing disparity between the wealthy and poor are becoming more and more relevant. To try to limit this problem, the government passes laws and policies to regulate wealth. For example, they passed antitrust laws and regulated industries to try to limit the power of large corporations.

Overall, Aristotle’s ideas about the distribution of power and wealth continue to influence modern political systems, including in the United States. His concerns regarding the dangers of corruption, tyranny, and instability are reflected in his ideas of rule by law, the division of power, and the importance of a strong middle class. These concepts are applied in governments around the world, demonstrating how Aristotle’s political philosophy continues to stay relevant today.

References:

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995).

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion 3 -- Isaac Olthof
Contains unread posts
Isaac Olthof posted Feb 7, 2025 5:02 PM
Isaac Olthof 

SCLA 101 

Professor Czader 

February 7th, 2025

Aristotle’s ideas about money and power are still important today, especially when discussing fairness and good government. He believed that a strong middle class helps keep a country stable because it balances the rich and the poor (Aristotle, 2009, p. 156). He was very true in saying that and he was also a firm believer in this. To have a good working economy the rich and the poor need to balance and communicate to each other to create a strong middle class that balances the upper and lower classes. 

Today, many people worry that if the middle class gets smaller, it could lead to unfair laws or leaders having too much power. Aristotle also warned that leaders can become corrupt when they control too much, saying that “the judgment of a single man is bound to be corrupted when he is overpowered by anger” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 124). This is still relevant because some leaders today try to take too much control and do not follow the rules. That is why our government has rules and regulations to prevent a single person for getting too much power. We have different government positions and chair members to keep the government balanced and in check with one another. He also believed that governments should follow laws rather than making decisions based only on what people want at the moment (Aristotle, 2009, p. 145). Many modern governments follow this idea by creating laws that protect fairness. Laws to protect the common man and people's freedom is a key factor to societies today and Aristotle agreed this to be true. 

Overall, Aristotle’s ideas help us understand why fairness and balance in government are so important today. Though Aristotle wrote his ideas so long ago, we can learn from his views and practice his teachings today. Some of his thoughts may be different to the way we think today but overall Aristotle was very brilliant in his thinking. He was very observant in causes and effects for governments and economies which make him so smart in his writings. His writings and teachings are still relevant today about wealth and power. 

References

Aristotle. (2009). Politics (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Aristotle's power in modern political thoughts Contains unread posts.
Contains unread posts
Ryan Naba posted Feb 7, 2025 4:57 PM
Ryan Naba

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

Friday, February 7th


Discussion Prompt #3

Aristotle's ideas about wealth and power in Politics are very relevant even to contemporary discussions of economic inequalities, governance, and how wealth translates into political powers. Whereas he wrote within a different historical context, his observations on the risks of excessively concentrated wealth, the role of the middle class, and the proper balance of power in society fall squarely within modern political and economic concerns. His arguments helpfully frame many issues of contemporary concern, including growing inequality, corporate interests' seeming control over politics, and the struggle to maintain stable democracies.

Among Aristotle's warnings is the powerful one against concentration of wealth in the hands of the few; he argues that such a development ensures oligarchy-rule by the few for their own benefit rather than for the common good. (Politics, Book IV). This concern is the more appropriate reality today, as economic power now translates into political influence through lobbying, financing campaigns, and control of media narratives. For instance, the United States sees billionaire donors playing a decisive role in deciding which policies will be pursued, and such policies more often than not kowtow to corporate interests rather than the general public. Aristotle criticizes the principles of governance through wealth, showing the risks such systems run when money replaces civic virtue as the motive in politics.

Aristotle also emphasizes that a strong numerous middle class is essential to political stability as it closes the door to domination by rich and poor alike (Politics, Book IV). This insight speaks volumes in the modern world when declining middle-class populations in a great number of democracies breed political polarization with a rise of populism. In countries facing increased income inequalities, such as the U.S. and some parts of Europe, populist movements, both of the left and right wings, have emerged more recently, and are often motivated by economic strain and perceived political failure by political elites to stand for the bigger population (Piketty 2014). Aristotle's belief that a strong middle class stabilizes society and reduces the likelihood of political turmoil is one lesson that still has much to teach modern policymakers.

Aristotle's distinction between "natural" and "unnatural" ways of acquiring wealth also has resonance in modern debates about economic issues. He holds that wealth is to be used for a purpose other than itself- for the good life of the individual and society-rather than as an end in itself (Politics, Book I). This aligns with modern criticisms of unregulated capitalism, where financial speculation and wealth-hoarding by corporations contribute to economic instability rather than productive societal growth. The 2008 financial crisis, for instance, was largely driven by the reckless pursuit of profit through speculative investments, echoing Aristotle’s concerns about the dangers of wealth accumulation detached from real economic value (Stiglitz, 2010).

While the critique of wealth and power by Aristotle can be related very well to contemporary society, not all aspects of his political theory apply to a modern democratic system. He viewed democracy with much suspicion as he saw it as mob rule; he thought if the poor held too much power, they would pose a threat to stability in the state Politics, Book IV. Modern democratic ideals revolve around broader political participation and checks and balances within institutions as a way to prevent such instability that Aristotle feared. While his concern to this day about the risks of populism and demagoguery remains valid, contemporary political structures have mechanisms, such as constitutional protections and an independent judiciary system, which Aristotle did not fully expect.

In consequence, wealth and power would be shaped modern political thought of today through an argumentation against economic inequality with a discourse based on middle classes and oligarchs. This forms a universalism framework from Aristotle's ideas over time about understanding the instability induced by inequalities between rich and the poor through political and economic organizations. Although some of the specific details of his philosophy do not relate directly to modern democratic ideas, the central arguments he makes with regard to the relationship between wealth and power are strikingly relevant, reinforcing the need for policies aimed at economic balance and protection of democratic integrity.

References

Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Harvard University Press.
Stiglitz, J. (2010). Freefall: America, free markets, and the sinking of the world economy. W. W. Norton & Company.
Aristotle. (2009). Politics. 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Aristotle's power in modern political thoughts
Contains unread posts
Abby Garza posted Feb 7, 2025 4:33 PMLast edited: Friday, February 7, 2025 4:38 PM EST
Abigail Garza

SCLA 101

Professor Czader

February 7th, 2025

Aristotle’s ideas in Politics have shaped and influenced wealth and power in modern political theory and practices. He argued that an unequal distribution of wealth leads to tyranny and political instability, as when “some possess too much and others nothing at all, the government must either be in the hands of the meanest rabble or else a pure oligarchy; or, from the excesses of both, a tyranny” (Aristotle, 1895, p. 89).  His idea of equality remains relevant today, as policymakers emphasize the importance of having a strong middle class to maintain stability in democracies. When there is an unequal distribution of wealth, societies experience inner turmoil between class differences and political systems illuminating Aristotle’s idea that economic inequality leads to instability. Aristotle (1895) argues that to obtain the perfect city it must “be composed as much as equals, which will be most so when the inhabitants are in the middle state” (p. 89), highlighting the importance of the middle class in political stability. Modern politics emphasize that having a stable and strong middle class leads to lower political corruption and strong democratic principles. If there was no middle class, the wealthy elite would seize and abuse their power leading to an oligarchy or tyranny.

Following Aristotle’s idea of equal wealth distribution, he also argued for equal power distribution amongst individuals. He writes that “if the administration is in the hands of many, those rules which are established in democracies will be very useful; as to let no one continue in office longer than six months: that all those who are of the same rank may have a turn” (Aristotle, 1895, p. 113), expressing that limiting the duration of those in power in the government will help prevent corruption. This limitation of power is a core principle in modern democratic governments. For example, the United States limits the terms of its president, senators, and other government representatives to prevent any individual or group from maintaining long-term authority. Aristotle (1895) further states that “both aristocracies and democracies will be the less liable to be corrupted into dynasties” (p. 113), as those in power cannot abuse their political power long-term. This idea follows democratic and aristocratic principles and the modern political system's implementation of checks and balances to prevent government representatives from abusing their authority. Checks and balances work to balance the power within a government amongst the different governing groups and individuals.  Ultimately, Aristotle’s ideas continue to shape modern political theory, as his work in Politics lays the foundation for which a government and society can thrive.

Reference

Aristotle. (1895). Politics (W. Ellis, Trans.).

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Braden Schuck
Contains unread posts
Braden Schuck posted Feb 7, 2025 4:13 PM
Braden Schuck

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

Friday, January 7th

Before I get into my opinion on whether Aristotle's ideas about wealth and power still hold relevance in modern political theory and practice, I want to define a couple of things. Firstly, I would like to define what modern political theory and practice is. Around the world, there are many different types of political practice. Here in the U.S., we have a democracy. A democracy is a type of government that gives the people the power to choose who leads them and under what laws they are going to be led by. In other parts of the world like North Korea, you have a dictatorship. In a dictatorship, one person controls all the power and rules over the people by making his own laws and forcing his ideas onto other people. So to narrow my argument, the political practice I am going to be focusing on is that of a democracy like the U.S. I would also like to define what Aristotle's ideas are when it comes to wealth and power. Using the information he gave us in his book Politics, we understand that Aristotle believes that wealth and power are very closely correlated it is necessary to have wealthy people. However, he also believes that a government should not be ruled by the wealth of a person alone, but also by the traits of their character. Aristotle clearly states "the rich should be spared"(p. 204) because they are the people who bolster the economy. They are necessary because they are the big money makers that help increase the power of a country. However, Aristotle goes on to say wealth is not the determining factor in who should rule. He gives out "three qualifications (that) are necessary in those who have to fill sovereign offices." (p. 205) These three qualifications are as stated; "loyalty to the established constitution"(p.205), "a high degree of capacity for the duties of the office"(p. 205-206), and "goodness of character and justice"(p.206). Now that I have clearly defined Aristotle's ideas and what modern political theory and practice are, we can move on to the second part of this discussion, my answer.

My answer to whether or not Aristotle's ideas about wealth and power still hold relevance in modern political theory and practice is without a doubt yes. You can see that these ideas hold true in the current state of government. Although yes you could argue that a lot of the U.S. presidents have been wealthy, you could also definitely say they weren't put there based on how much money they had alone. We often elect our president based on his character, his ideas, and what his solution is to the current problems we are facing. You could go even further into this when you start researching how the election process works. Often times a candidate does a sponsored message to show how they are better than their contender. These messages are almost always paid for by the wealthy. The amount of money that goes into getting each candidate a year is almost absurd. This isn't just at the presidential level either it's at every level of our government. Governors, mayors, and even people running for a position in the seat have sponsored messages that are paid for by the wealthy people who support them. The more money that is put into a candidate, the more likely it becomes that they might win.

References

Aristotle, Barker, E., & Stalley, R. F. (1998a). Politics. Oxford University Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3- Amaya Nanda
Contains unread posts
Amaya Nanda posted Feb 7, 2025 3:46 PM
Amaya Nanda

 

SCLA 101

 

Professor Czader

 

February 7th, 2025

 

 

          Aristotle’s ideas about wealth and power remain relevant in modern political theory and practice, particularly in discussions surrounding democracy, oligarchy, and the role of economic disparity in governance. In Politics, Aristotle argues that political systems are often shaped by the distribution of wealth, with democracy favoring the rule of the poor and oligarchy favoring the wealthy. He states, “The real difference between democracy and oligarchy is poverty and wealth; wherever men rule by reason of their wealth, whether they be few or many, that is an oligarchy, and when the poor rule, that is a democracy” (Aristotle, 1992, p.1290). This idea is still applicable today, as economic inequality influences political representation and policymaking. In the United States, for instance, the significant financial power of corporate lobbyists and wealthy donors in elections often leads to policies that favor the affluent, resembling Aristotle’s description of oligarchic tendencies.

 

          Furthermore, Aristotle emphasizes the need for a strong middle class to maintain political stability, arguing that an extreme gap between the rich and poor leads to either tyranny or civil unrest. He asserts, “The best political community is formed by citizens of the middle class, and those states are likely to be well-administered in which the middle class is large” (Aristotle, 1992, p.1295). This principle is reflected in contemporary political discourse, where economic polarization has been linked to rising populism and political instability. For example, countries with a shrinking middle class, such as the United States and parts of Europe, have experienced increasing political divisions and dissatisfaction with democratic institutions. Aristotle’s insight underscores the importance of economic balance for sustaining a functional democracy.

 

           Lastly, Aristotle’s critique of the excessive pursuit of wealth as a political goal is still relevant in debates over capitalism and governance. He warns that when the acquisition of wealth becomes the primary focus, it undermines the purpose of political life, which should be the promotion of virtue and the common good. He states, “The life of money-making is one undertaken under compulsion, and wealth is evidently not the good we are seeking; for it is merely useful and for the sake of something else” (Aristotle, 1992, p.1258). This argument resonates with modern concerns about corporate influence over public policy and the prioritization of economic growth over social welfare. For instance, the 2008 financial crisis exposed the dangers of deregulated capitalism, where financial institutions prioritized profit over ethical responsibility, leading to widespread economic suffering. Aristotle’s perspective suggests that governments should regulate wealth accumulation to prevent corruption and ensure that economic policies serve the broader public interest.

 

          In conclusion, Aristotle’s ideas about wealth and power continue to hold relevance in modern political thought. His analysis of the relationship between economic class and governance, the importance of a stable middle class, and the dangers of prioritizing wealth over virtue all find contemporary parallels. While political structures have evolved, the fundamental tensions Aristotle identified persist, making his insights valuable for understanding and addressing the challenges of modern democracy.

 

 

References
Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995)

 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3- Haley Scheu
Contains unread posts
Haley Scheu posted Feb 7, 2025 2:37 PMLast edited: Friday, February 7, 2025 2:38 PM EST
Power in Modern Political Thoughts

            Aristotle’s perspective on wealth and its role in the stability of politics is applicable to today’s society. Aristotle claims that “Currency came into existence merely as a means of exchange; usary tries to make it increase” (Politics, p. 30). Wealth is something valued by politics and drives a lot of interactions as a society but there is danger in the accumulation of that. Aristotle explores inequality and conflicts that arise because of wealth and how this leads to instability. Part of the reason why factions are created is because people fight over profit and honor. “People get angry on account of profit and honour… because they see other people getting a larger share” (Aristotle, 1995, p. 182). In modern political practice we can see the power wealth has over politics and government. A very prominent topic in our world is income inequality and the regulation of capitalism. Both issues arise because of the complications of wealth in politics, as Aristotle discussed.

 

References
Aristotle. (1995). Politics. In Aristotle, Politics (pp. 7-83). Oxford University Press.

 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 Jake Patterson
Contains unread posts
Jake Patterson posted Feb 7, 2025 2:24 PM
Jake Patterson

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

February 7th, 2025

The genius of Aristotle is that even to this day his ideas of wealth and power are still relevant and can be seen in modern day politics. Aristotle states in Book IV of Politics (2009),  “...middle class is free from the ambition of the rich and the pettiness of the poor: it is a natural link which helps to ensure political cohesion” (p. 156). Aristotle argues that a strong middle class is essential to a functioning society as they bridge the gap between the rich and poor. This bridge of wealth allows for greater cohesion between the wealth classes. This was true in 350 BC and still holds true today. 

Another example is of this when Aristotle goes on to claim that a polity can be misrepresented as a democracy when the law is not the supreme authority. He states, “This is what happens when popular decrees are sovereign instead of the law” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 145). In a system like this the governance quickly flips from structured legal framework to the whims of the majority. Aristotle warns how this can lead to instability and a form of rule driven by popular opinion rather than principles of justice. We see this in modern politics in the form of the Supreme Court. The branch of the US government that upholds supreme authority and basic principles of justice.

In Politics by Aristotle he declares the necessity of a middle class to balance wealth and power and the necessity of a judge/court that upholds justice and prevents a society from going with the whims of the majority. Both points were relevant in Aristotles time and continue to be relevant today. 

References: 

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed.; E. Barker, Trans.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995) 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Carson Turner Discussion Prompt 3
Contains unread posts
Carson Turner posted Feb 7, 2025 2:17 PM
Carson Turner 

SCLA 101 

Professor Czader 

February 7th, 2025


            In some respects, Aristotle's ideas of distribution of power within the political system align with modern political structures, but there are some respects where Aristotle's ideas of power are a bit different. His ideas on kingship are quite similar to monarchies around the world. In the British monarchy, the king and the royal family possess authority over the common people, but they still must follow certain lawmaking principles that will benefit their own people. The king has the power to create and amend laws, but these laws must be declared reasonable by a cabinet and other government departments. The idea of relatively restricted power in relation to kingship is evident as Aristotle writes, "It is surely clear that [the one best man] must be a lawgiver, and there must be a body of laws, but these laws must not be sovereign where they fail to hit the mark" (p. 124). However, Aristotle does not create a clear idea that other people physically must keep the king grounded, unlike a British monarchy. Aristotle's idea of "grounding" the kingship is believing in a natural order, and that a person that is in a position to be king is knowledgeable of this natural order. Ultimately, Aristotle's idea of kingship and the British monarchy are similar in that each form of government has a king with authority over the people that remains constitutional, but the two have differing ideas of how to ensure the king doesn't exert too much power over the people.

Aristotle's ideas on how the size of a government contributes to the structure of the governmental are very similar to democracies and constitutional republics around the world today. Aristotle's believes that a numerous governmental body is "less likely to be corrupted" and that "the judgment of a single man is bound to be corrupted when he is overpowered by anger" (p.124). This belief has been consistent with the U.S. constitution for centuries, but many Americans are now starting to debate this belief. Some Americans believe that Donald Trump has done such an incredible job during his 1st presidency that he should be able to serve office for more than two terms. This belief, if it comes true, will shift America significantly closer to a kingship than an indirect democracy. Some Americans even argue that Donald Trump is currently exerting a type of kingship over the U.S. due to the 79 executive orders that he has signed during his first two weeks in office. Due to the lack of restrictions on executive orders, U.S. foreign and domestic policy has drastically changed over the past month from these executive orders. Ultimately, some people believe that Trump is so knowledgeable on politics that he should be making all of the decisions regardless of possible emotional impulses, but a majority of Americans believe that a balanced government that aligns its ideals within the Constitution are necessary for governing a country.

In short, although the world itself has completely transformed since the time Aristotle theorized politics, many of Aristotle's theories of distributing power amongst the political system are very relevant to our current political structures. Although Aristotle's theories have been applied and improved by political scientists today, there are still many gaps in political knowledge of citizens and even some politicians.

References:

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Thomas Solloway
Contains unread posts
Thomas Solloway posted Feb 7, 2025 2:08 PM
Thomas Solloway

SCLA 101

Professor Czader

February 7, 2025

        Aristotle’s ideas in regard to wealth and power still hold relevance in the political world today in several key aspects. Perhaps some of the most influential ideas that demonstrated this were his concept of equality within a city and his claims of the balance of power between the rich and the poor. I found these theories to be most applicable in particular when looking at the modern political landscape of today. These ideas were touched on in several points within the text and thus have more significance due to their repeated mentions. To understand how these principles apply, one must look at the connection Aristotle makes between power and wealth.

        It is apparent that those with more wealth or property have more control. This is particularly true from a political standpoint in that those with greater riches have more sway because of their resources. Aristotle argues though that there must be a balance in control when it comes to those who have great wealth and those who are in poverty. He states, “A city aims at being, as far as possible, composed of equals and peers” (Aristotle, p. 283). What he is referring to in this statement is that a city should primarily be composed of those who are equal in status and not dominated by either the rich or the poor in the populous. The purpose behind this is to prevent from giving one side too much control over the governance of the city and to ensure that most of the power lies in the middle class. Such traits are visible in the politics of today as much of the power does in fact remain in the middle class and thus politicians will often target that group in particular, showing that Aristotle’s principles in this aspect were accurate. Therefore, there is reason to believe that Aristotle’s writings have continued to be applicable even in modern-day politics.

Barker, E. trans. (1995). Aristotle: Politics. Oxford University Press. 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3
Contains unread posts
Alyssa Chow posted Feb 7, 2025 1:51 PM
Alyssa Chow

SCLA 101

Professor Czader

February 7, 2025

In book three of Aristotle’s Politics (1995), he defined citizenship in the context of democracies and discussed how successful cities should determine who their citizens are. While Aristotle (1995) believed that citizens should hold the power to influence the government, he asserted that citizenship should be determined by wealth. This idea is reflected in society today and still holds relevance in modern political practice.

To start, Aristotle discussed to whom the word ‘citizen’ should refer in a democratic government. Aristotle (1995) defined a citizen as “one who is entitled to share in a deliberative or judicial office of that city” (p. 87). Aristotle considered adult men of a certain class rank as citizens, as only they would fit this condition of being permitted to serve in a government position. Furthermore, Aristotle (1995) argued that “[t]he best form of a city will not make the mechanic a citizen” (p. 95). By his standards, being granted citizenship requires a certain economic status that laborers are excluded from. These manual workers, through his perspective, should not be eligible for any of the privileges that accompany citizenship. Being a citizen grants an individual both political and social power in that country. In terms of politics, citizens are permitted to have a say in legislature and leadership and consequently a capacity to control their futures. Citizens also hold social power because being in this group indicates a certain level of wealth. 

Aristotle (1995) claimed that wealth is a determining factor in the decision of who should be a citizen. “Where mechanics are admitted to citizenship we shall have to say that the citizen excellence of which we have spoken cannot be attained by every citizen…but can only be achieved by those who are free from the necessary tasks of life” (p. 95).  Mechanics are not as high quality citizens as those who do not need to perform manual labor and, thus, are seen as less desirable to participate in government in the eyes of Aristotle. He deemed that laborers reduce the quality of government achieved by a body and are not necessary to form proper legislation. Due to their lack of wealth, manual workers are seen as unworthy of gaining the political power that accompanies citizenship. Aristotle’s (1995) idea that physical laborers should not be granted citizenship because they are not wealthy is unfortunately reflected in politics today. Many laborers working for American companies are from other countries and are overpowered by their employer’s decisions to implement low wages and pay little heed to working conditions. These manual laborers have minimal to no wealth and political power, as their economic standing is subject to the whim of large corporations. Their political power is nearly nonexistent for only American citizens can vote, and there are few others possessing sufficient power dedicated and aware enough to properly advocate for these workers’ needs. Many immigrants struggle to navigate the obstacles required for obtaining U.S. citizenship.

Although the U.S. government does not explicitly state that they believe the working class should not be granted citizenship in lieu with Aristotle’s ideas, they design the immigration process to be severely difficult. The application process for a VISA and U.S. citizenship is extremely expensive - which is why many immigrants or off-shore workers take low-paying grueling manual jobs in the first place. Although wealthy immigrants must go through the same application process, they can afford to continuously pay for the lawyers and support necessary to remain in the citizenship process. In effect, manual workers are discouraged from or even unable to apply for U.S citizenship due to their lack of wealth, aligning with Aristotle’s belief that the laborers of society should not be granted citizenship. This pricey and time consuming design ensures that only people of existing wealth and status have access to citizenship and therefore political power in America, ultimately reflecting the ideals of Aristotle.

In conclusion, Aristotle’s argument that the citizens in democratic societies should be limited to those wealthy enough to be eligible for positions of political power is still relevant today. In American politics and society, the working class is clearly at a disadvantage to obtain citizenship because of their lack of wealth, putting them at a loss for political power in the United States. In Aristotle’s Politics (1995) and in the U.S. citizenship process, the ability to gain political power through citizenship is determined by one’s wealth.

References

Aristotle. (1995). Politics. (E. Barker, Trans.). Oxford World’s Classics. 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Alex Todorov
Contains unread posts
Alex Todorov posted Feb 7, 2025 1:45 PM
Alex Todorov

SCLA 101 

Professor Czader

Febuary 7, 2025

Aristotle had many ideas about wealth and power that are still relevant in modern political practice. In ancient times power was often associated with military strength and physical prowess which was needed to rule however, Aristotle theorized that “with the spread of skill in oratory the able speakers become popular leaders”(2009, p.312). Aristotle realized that the changing landscape now favored strong speakers in positions of political power. This opened the doors for less militaristic societies but rather more competent forward-thinking political parties that favored a new form of power. This idea that able speakers would become popular leaders is all but the norm in modern society with nearly every form of government favoring strong competent speaking leaders. While Aristotle had many political ideas he also wrote in great detail about wealth in political systems.

The idea of businesses in relation to political systems was brought up by Aristotle when discussing city-states. In reference to monopolies, Aristotle claims “this knowledge is useful for statesmen too’ for many states are in greater need of business and the income it brings” (2009, p. 91). The idea proposed of using business tied with political systems in order to increase the budget of governments is now a common staple of modern political systems. The common practice of increasing strength and wealth by Governments directly controlling large key industries in their countries has been a key modern tactic of growing countries and governments. While Aristotle was envisioning a more narrow application of the concept modern politcs has greatly expanded on the concept into what we see in modern days.

Citations

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995). 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Pranav Jyothi
Contains unread posts
Pranav Jyothi posted Feb 7, 2025 12:55 PM
Pranav Jyothi

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

February 7, 2025

In my opinion, Aristotle's ideas on the distribution of wealth and power in a government still remain relevant today, particularly his argument for a mixed political system where power is shared to prevent domination by a single group of people. As Aristotle states in his book Politics, “There are three things disputing over equality in a regime: freedom, wealth, and virtue” (p. 111). This problem is evident even in modern democracies, where wealth often dictates power, leaving freedom and virtue forgotten. The wealthy class can unfairly influence political decisions of the state or country, damaging the democratic principles of equality and justice. In this sense, his observation that “the power that arrogance and profit have” (p. 132) still applies to the ways in which wealth-driven interests dominate the current political world, the influence of such motives continue to weaken the political integrity of the state and often lead to decisions that only favor the rich, ignoring the needs of the middle or lower classes.

I also believe that Aristotle's ideas of separation of powers in different groups or a mixed political system with different bodies is what would be most important to bring balance in the modern political regimes. As he states, "it is better for not to be a single office, but rather for it to be carried out by persons drawn from different courts" (p. 184). This principle of power-sharing will prevent one group from dominating authority and provide a more just political system. In the present political scenario, where power accumulation causes corruption too often, Aristotle's mixture that represents the different classes and points of view acts as a safeguard against these exploits. A representative government where elected members actually ensure that not only the interests of the wealthy or powerful are considered, but also those of all citizens is what is required. This balance is still important to ensure political systems remain accountable for their decisions and attentive to the needs of the people.

References: 

Aristotle. (2013). Politics (C. Lord, Trans.). University of Chicago Press. (Original work published ca. 350 BCE)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Aristotle's power in modern political thoughts
Contains unread posts
Riley Gross posted Feb 7, 2025 12:35 PM
Riley Gross

SCLA 101

Professor Czader

February 7th, 2025

            While Aristotle has some ideas that would be considered controversial in this day and age, his ideas about wealth and power, for the most part, still hold up today. Aristotle states in his book Politics that he favors a group of experts being in power. He is an elitist to a certain extent, but that doesn’t mean he does not realize the importance of the other classes. Due to class structure in an oligarchy and even aristocracy, it can lead to a conflict between the classes. Aristotle states “When those who are in office behave arrogantly, and seek their personal advantage, people start factional intrigues against each other and against the constitution which permits this to happen” (p. 183). Aristotle shows that you can essentially destroy your relationship with lower classes if you overstep your power. This leads to an unstable state of affairs, which crumbles empires. This idea clearly applies to today. In the United States and many other countries, when the government uses their power unfairly the people revolt. Nobody wants to live under a leader or government that treats them as an inferior being. A great example is the Arab Spring. These were revolts in Africa and the Middle East that took place due to leaders having their own self-interest above the citizens. This created a conflict that relates to Aristotle’s point and further strengthens his relevancy in the modern day.

            If we look at political systems today, we see systems such as democracies, socialist societies, and even some authoritarian states. The similarity between all of these types of governments is that they have a mixture of multiple systems. No country today follows a system that is entirely true to the idea that the creator had. The idea of a mixed system relates to Aristotle’s ideas about power balance and wealth distribution. “There would be equality if the poorer class exercised no greater authority than the rich, or in other words, if sovereignty was not exercised by the poorer class alone, but was equally vested in all the citizens on a numerical basis” (Aristotle, p. 233). In the sentences prior to this quote, Aristotle was explaining how to achieve equality in your society. In order to achieve equality, you have to have a mixture of a democracy and oligarchy. Making sure not to let one or the other have to much power. The poor will try to push for equal wealth distribution with too much power. The rich will increase the wealth gap and exploit the poor with too much power. Aristotle isn’t arguing for a society where everyone has the same wealth, but rather stating how to achieve the same rights.

            Even though Aristotle doesn’t completely align with our moral code, his thoughts on power and wealth still hold up today. The idea that power shouldn’t reside with one group or party is unfortunately a topic we still fight over today. We also argue over whether wealth should be distributed more or if the rich should be taxed more. The fact that Aristotle was thinking about these topics that are still applicable today is just another reason that he is such a renowned historical figure.

References:

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Discussion Prompt 3
Contains unread posts
Madison Hammond posted Feb 7, 2025 11:42 AM
Madison Hammond

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

February 7th, 2025

Aristotle’s ideas concerning power and wealth still remain relevant in modern political theory and practice. First and foremost, as stated in Book IV of Politics (2009), Aristotle believed that the “...middle class is free from the ambition of the rich and the pettiness of the poor: it is a natural link which helps to ensure political cohesion” (p. 156). Aristotle then continues to write about the middle class and how “...it will be free from faction, and will likely be stable” (2009, pp. 156-157). This rings true in modern democracies today. Modern democracies generally believe that a strong middle class is key to political and economic stability in a society. The middle class prevents an uneven balance of power between the rich and the poor, avoiding oligarchies or, in the worst case, tyrannies. This prevention helps keep the city or country socially stable and without conflict. In the United States of America, we have a strong middle class, which helps maintain representation for the entire country rather than simply just the poor or the rich. 

Next, Aristotle argues about virtues within the roles of power and how they are essential to the country or city as a whole. In Book III of Politics (2009), Aristotle states, "...the virtue of justice is goodness in matters of common concern and is necessarily accompanied by all other forms of goodness” (p. 115). As a modern society, we support this ideology that virtue is a significant part of politics, and whoever is in power should possess these qualities. Whether or not this level of virtue is ever attained in modern-day political practice, it is something that societies value to maintain the integrity of our countries and politicians. It has been shown that people in modern-day political power do not have virtuous qualities or good ethical motives, leading to turmoil in our country or other countries. Thus, virtue is a significant aspect of modern political ideology and Aristotle’s beliefs. 

References

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed., E. Barker, Trans.) Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Discussion 3, Milo Chrudimsky
Contains unread posts
Milo Chrudimsky posted Feb 7, 2025 11:23 AM
Milo Chrudimsky

SCLA 101

Professor Czader

February 7, 2025

Aristotle’s ideas about wealth and politics still hold in modern theory and practice. Aristotle argues against an absolute kingship, declaring “expert knowledge is more likely to reside in a number of people than in one” (Aristotle, p. 126-127). This shows how Aristotle doesn’t think monarchy is a good system for government. It is very difficult for one human to outperform many, and the sum of knowledge will likely be less for a single king than a group council of sorts. Additionally, “The judgement of a single man is bound to be corrupted when he is overpowered by anger” (Aristotle, p. 124). Not only are kings unlikely to be perfect men, but they also can have their judgement clouded by emotion. Therefore Aristotle draws the idea that councils are better than single executives. However, he also argues “A permanent military command may exist in any form of constitution” (Aristotle, p. 127). Aristotle tells us there can be a single military leader, which may be a sort of “king” during times of war.

In our modern age, we (The United States) have a three-branched system of government. A legislative body, an executive, and a judicial body. Focusing on the legislative body, and the executive, we can see specific ties to the ideas of Aristotle. We have a single leader (executive) that has absolute control in times of war. This executive has the ability to lead the military, and protect the nation during times of war. This single executive will be able to make quick decisions that are needed during times of war. However, not during war, we have a legislative body that writes laws, that act as a council. This body is made up of many people, and has enough power to remove the president. We can see direct ties to the ideas expressed so many years ago by Aristotle, and his ideas are still relevant in modern politics.

Aristotle argues the best constitution, for the majority of people, is a constitution which adheres to a middle class. He argues, “The middle class is free from the ambition of the rich and the pettiness of the poor”. Therefore “a constitution based on this class … is most likely to be generally beneficial” (Aristotle, p. 156). In the modern world which is dominated by two political factions, republicans and democrats, we would benefit greatly from achieving one single “middle class”. In Aristotle’s era, these two main factions were the rich and the poor, and the most successful cities were those with a large middle class. We can see Aristotle’s predictions coming true as our government suffers heavily from gridlock due to increased political polarization, where the two parties get further and further away from any middle ground. This causes major issues in the modern day, where it would have caused an entire city to fall apart in Aristotle’s time. He states “where the middle class is large, there is less likelihood of factions and dissension than in any other constitution” (Aristotle, p. 159). Therefore we can conclude a government with a single faction is best, and in Aristotle’s case, a large middle class.

George Washington was a very influential political figure. As a founding father, and first president of the United States, he was definitely a great man. He could have taken influence from Aristotle’s politics, as he declined a third term, only sticking to two. In accordance with Aristotle’s ideas, he stepped down as the figurehead, with his farewell address warning against political factions. Washington believed the nation needed one faction, so as to not create any unrest among the nation. We see how both Aristotle and Washington warn against the thing which now plagues our government. Through these ideas proven correct by Aristotle, they still have merit today, in modern politics.

References:

Aristotle (1995). Politics. Oxford University Press Inc. (Original work published ca. 350 BCE)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Akkshay Sundara Rajan
Contains unread posts
Akkshay Sundara Rajan posted Feb 7, 2025 11:01 AM
Discussion Prompt 3 

Akkshay Sundara Rajan 

Aristotle (2009) in his book, Politics, claims that “Cities too, as we have repeatedly noticed, are composed not of one but of many parts.” (p. 141). Aristotle divides the populace into these classes based on their occupation and wealth. (pp. 141–143). This class division he speaks of, has remained throughout history since then till present day, and has remained extremely relevant to political practice. 

The elective system for the government in the US has evolved to provide the middle class with the greatest power in electing a leader. This follows from Aristotle’s (2009) advice, “the best form of political association is one where power is vested in the middle class,” (pp. 158–159).  We can see its effect as the Democratic and Republican parties focus their budgets on convincing the middle class to join their sides. 

Aristotle also speaks of the perversion of a polity (constitutional government) to a democracy where the law is no longer sovereign. “This is what happens when popular decrees are sovereign instead of the law.” (Aristotle, 2009, p. 145). An example of this can be seen in riots, where the common belief of rioters, rule over the law of the land and lead to violence. Mob justice and riots, give us a view into what could happen if the law no longer guides people. Hence, the ideal of the majority holding power is not always desirable. 

One of the biggest complaints of the current democratic system in the US is the two-party system and the extreme factionalism. Aristotle (2009) provides us the reason of this factionalism – “Thus inferiors form factions in order to be equals, and equals in order to be superior.” (p. 182). 

Aristotle’s discussion of wealth and especially power in his book Politics have had major influence in the evolution of political systems. Due to this, we can see a lot of overlap between Aristotelian ideals and modern-day politics as shown in the aforementioned examples.  

References: 

Aristotle. (2009). Politics. (R. F. Stalley, Ed.; E. Barker, Trans.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1995) 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Aristotle's power in modern political thoughts
Contains unread posts
Josh Kern posted Feb 7, 2025 11:01 AM
Joshua Kern

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

February 7, 2025

Wealth and power are very important in today’s politics and world in general. Although Aristotle’s ideas were written in the 4th century BC, many of his political ideas remain true today. There is evidence in today’s society that Aristotle’s ideas on wealth are true. Aristotle states many times throughout the book, the necessity of a strong middle class. This is because the middle class causes the economy to grow as they are educated enough to do important labor. Examples of this include designing and building structures as not many people can do this unless they have an education, however constructing buildings is vital in growing the economy. The United States of America is the most technologically advanced country in the world along with one of the fastest growing economies. The United States of America also has one of the largest middle classes in the world which causes America’s economy to grow at such a fast pace. Aristotle also states that wealth can be evil. Aristotle distinguishes between necessary wealth and unnecessary wealth. He believes necessary wealth is very important as this is the money an individual must make to survive and prosper. However, Aristotle states, “Those who seek the means of obtaining physical enjoyments, are thus led to occupy themselves wholly in the making of money.” (p. 28). Aristotle describes that caring too much about the physical enjoyments of the world will cause one to become greedy to the point where they value money over everything. Aristotle states that this is detrimental to one’s well being as one will dedicate everything he does to the process of making money. In today’s world, many political leaders are obsessed with making money which can lead them to making bad decisions and harm the well-being of people.

Furthermore, Aristotle describes power in politics as being good or bad. Aristotle states that “The good life is the chief end, not only for the community as a whole but for each of us individually.” (p. 98). For a community to prosper, the people leading the community must have good intentions. People in political power have the ability to destroy a nation or help it prosper. Aristotle describes the good political power as monarchy, aristocracy, and polity, and the bad political power as tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy. Whether a nation has a good form of rule or a bad form of rule, the person in power must be good for the nation to prosper. In Guinea, the coup d’etat overthrew the president after he made terrible changes to their constitution. The reason this was able to happen was because the president was able to change their constitution without a vote. This is an example of a bad form of rule. Aristotle states that for a nation to succeed the people must have power and the nation must have wealth. This holds true today as the most powerful nations are representative democracies who spread the power between the government and the people. These governments also tend to make the most money as the leaders, middle class, and common people are all working towards a common goal. The more money a government has, the more power they have the rest of the world. This is shown as the wealthiest nations who are located mainly in North America and Europe have won the most wars and have the most power in the world.


Aristotle, & Simpson, P. (1997). Politics of Aristotle. University of North Carolina Press. (Original work published 350 BCE).

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Discussion 3- Jacob Gutwein
Contains unread posts
Jacob Gutwein posted Feb 7, 2025 10:47 AM
Jacob Gutwein


SCLA 101


Dr. Justyna Czader


February 6th, 2025


Aristotle’s thoughts on wealth and power are deeply interwoven into his theory of politics, and due to the nature of the polis and society, they are factors that can still be observed today. He demonstrated that wealth and power are key tenets of polity, aristocracy, oligarchy, and democracy, and often dictate such for the better or the worse. Aristotle’s main focus throughout his ideation of a constitutional government is that of which contrasts the wealth-centric view of a traditional oligarchy, and favors it for one that values the middle class as a weighted distribution of the city. 

The Greek philosopher and polymath describes the complex nature of a constitutional government as, “a mixture of oligarchy and democracy” while denoting that the “culture and breeding [of aristocracies] are more associated with the wealthier classes” (p. 150). He provides further context of this when he establishes the characteristics of each type of government writing that “merit is the criterion of aristocracy, as wealth the criterion of oligarchy, and free birth of democracy” (p. 152). This theory does hold relevance in history and during contemporary times, and I immediately relate it to the actions of the American government that I have witnessed. There is a certain merit that comes along with campaigning, or taking office and making substantial improvements, but wealth will always be associated with an oligarchical rule, and it has for centuries. Sometimes the lines of wealth and merit become blurred due to opportunities provided for individuals that may not be provided to those who aren’t as privileged. This is something that in a sense, has become very political, and it was keen of Aristotle to bring this up. This being said, democracy is the free horse of them all, and combats both of these and works for the middle ground. 

Aristotle mentions the rift between the poor and the rich as a sort of vehicle that moves the polis along due to its inherent nature. This can also be connected with what he says about the master and the slave earlier in the book. However, as he writes his theory about what comprises a righteous constitution, he states that “It is clear that the middle type of constitution is the best, It is the one type free from faction; where the middle class is large, and there is a less likelihood of faction and dissension” (p. 159). He views the middle class as the glue that binds together the polis due to their irrevocable sense of unity among the classes. “A legislator should always make the members of the middle class partners in the constitution…he should seek to attach the same class to those laws” (p.162). This is to ease the discussion of twisted interests among leaders and tyranny. Unfortunately, the latter is still an issue in many parts of the world. Despite any notion of a complex political structure, there have been leaders who have always served their self interest through abiding by unjust measures and have directly dehumanized or injured members of their society, or have carved out incentives for the poor or rich that may disrupt the city. 

Aristotle’s political revelations in Politics serve to serve an idea that will play a prominent role in the future of our generation, that is of the nature of political class and rule that is often dictated by feelings and not reason in societal structures. This is to say, Aristotle and other philosopher’s wisdom about this subject may guide us along the way. 


                                                                   References: 

Aristotle. (1995). Politics (E. Baker, Trans., R. F. Stalley, Ed.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published ca. 350)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Rishi Shroff
Contains unread posts
Rishi Shroff posted Feb 7, 2025 2:33 AM
Rishi Shroff

SCLA 101

Dr. Justyna Czader

February 6th, 2025

Despite being originally written in 350 B.C, the concepts of power and wealth that are demonstrated by Aristotle are very relevant in today’s political theory. One concept of power that Aristotle brings up is the joint passion for equality which is a way that power can be created. Aristotle elaborates on this point by stating “It is the passion for equality which is thus at the root of factions”(Aristotle, ca. 350 B.C.E/1995, p. 180). Aristotle also explains in this book about how factions lead to constitutional changes in a society which is why a group desire for equality is powerful. This group desire resulting in an increase of power is very similar to how political parties work in America. Each political party has the similar goal of wanting to do something right for their country and if they get enough people to agree with their philosophy that something is right, they can utilize that power leading to changes in the government. 

Along with the masses and opinions being able to generate power, the concept of large changes is something that Aristotle also brings up. These large changes align with American history as these changes can result in political altercations. Aristotle states, ” Disproportionate increase is also a cause which leads to constitutional change” (Aristotle, ca. 350 B.C.E/1995, p. 184). This concept of increased work with wealth is shown in American politics. As the gap between the rich and poor keeps increasing at a “disproportionate” rate, Americans have called to create constitutional change by increasing taxes on the rich. This increase is exactly what Aristotle predicted in his book proving that his philosophies still align with politics today making them important to study.


Work Cited

Aristotle. (1995). Politics (E. Baker, Trans., R. F. Stalley, Ed.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published ca. 350)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Jericho Samide
Contains unread posts
Jericho Samide posted Feb 6, 2025 11:21 PMLast edited: Thursday, February 6, 2025 11:22 PM EST
Jericho Samide

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

7 February 2025


Aristotle’s ideas on wealth and power still remain true today in modern political theory and practice. Throughout his book, Politics, he reflected on the dispersion of wealth, the relationship between power and government, the role that a household plays in greater society, governmental structures, and economics; all things which continue to shape the debates we have today. He develops a few central themes throughout the book, such as the emphasis against excessive pursuit of wealth or an ideal political system where power is used for the greater good of the people as opposed to the leader’s personal gain. One can find truly insightful applications in modern politics while reading Aristotle. 

First of all, we can discuss his concerns about the ethical implications of wealth. He made distinctions in Book III, that some people are naturally wealthy and the idea that there are certain aspects of ‘wealth’ which must be pursued for the benefit of the household, such as basic resources. He says “Of the art of acquisition then there is one kind which by nature is a part of the management of a household... The other, which consists in exchange, is justly censured; for it is unnatural, and a mode by which men gain from one another” (Aristotle, Politics, Book I, p. 18). This quote is made relevant by many discussions we have today about inequalities. We can think about some areas of the world where there is a growing gap between the rich and the poor. Such areas reflect Aristotle’s ideas about the pursuit of wealth and those ethical considerations. In moden politics, governments lack considerations about wealth distribution and accumulation while supporting economic freedom. In addition, Aristotle talks about Thales of Miletus in this quote, where he says “Thus he showed the world that philosophers can easily be rich if they like, but that their ambition is of another sort” (Aristotle, Politics, Book I, p. 19). This supports the same theories about wealth and how philanthropy can be used to aid societal problems. 

Next, we will discuss Aristotle’s thoughts on power, which too remain relevant in our society and governments today. He talked about the Lacedaemonian constitution and critisized it for prioritizing domination rather than the well being of its citizens. He says “The Lacedaemonians preserve the peace among themselves, but their lawgiver has made them ambitious of conquest and power” (Aristotle, Politics, Book VII, p. 175). This quote is shown in today’s international relations where some countries struggle to balance the power and outreach of their militaries and diplomacy. Aristotle has heavily influenced this aspect actually, because modern international relation theory advocates for peacekeeping, cultural influence, and economic coalitions, as an obvious preference to military interventions. Aristotle also discussed the concept of tyranny, saying that a government should not simply serve the interests of themselves but rather should be focused on creating a productive and innovative environment for its citizens. He says “A government which is composed of the middle class more nearly approaches democracy than to oligarchy, and is the safest of the imperfect forms of government” (Aristotle, Politics, Book III, p. 61). This quote reflects modern principles about how a government ‘should be’; participatory, inclusive, and aimed at the collective good. For example, the United States government is structured to include checks and balances, which show Aristotle's advocacy for preventin tyranny and limiting concentrated power in the hands of one leader. He also critisizes oligarchies at points saying “Oligarchy has in view the interest of the wealthy; democracy, of the needy: none of them the common good of all” (Aristotle, Politics, Book III, p. 62)​, something that holds true today because governments are becoming more susceptible to corporate influence. 


To supplement my previous point, Aristotle talks heavily about the unchecked pursuit of wealth and how that can destabilize societies. He says people who desire unlimited wealth because they associate it with a good life rather than the process of getting there in the first place. He says “For the art of wealth-getting which consists in household management has a limit; the unlimited acquisition of wealth is not its business” (Aristotle, Politics, Book I, p. 16). This quote is supported by the 2008 financial crisis, a result of dangerous risk taking in financial markets, proving the negative effects of wealth seeking. 

Lastly, Aristotle talks about the importance of a middle class. He says that a strong middle class can lead to political stability and that malfunctioning states often have a large disparity between two distrinctinve groups, rich and poor; something that is not the case in a state with a strong middle class. He says “The best political community is formed by citizens of the middle class, and those states are likely to be well-administered in which the middle class is large” (Aristotle, Politics, Book IV, p. 69). Today, many governments make efforts to support the middle class as a means of creating economic production/security. 

In conclusion, Aristotle’s ideas on wealth and power still remain relevant today in modern political theory and practice. He talks about unrestrained wealth seeking, ethical responsibliities of rulers, and the importance of governments acting on behalf of the people, not themselves. These theories can be applied to today in economics, political ethics, and government structures. By reading and digesting Aristotle’s words, societies today can create stable environments and productive futures for their citizens. 


Aristotle. (1981). Politics (T. A. Sinclair, Trans.; T. J. Saunders, Rev.). Penguin Classics.




0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
2 Views
2
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Isabella Pimentel
Contains unread posts
Isabella Pimentel posted Feb 6, 2025 11:06 PM
Isabella Pimentel

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

February 7, 2025

Discussion 2: Wealth and Power in Modern Politics

            Aristotle heavily criticizes and positively reinforces the various aspects of the types of regimes present in the world during the 4th century. Two of the ideas he emphasizes most within these regimes are wealth a power and how they have mutual relationships in fueling each other. Aristotle’s ideas about wealth and power still hold relevance in modern political theory and practice. Firstly, we can find wealth in modern political practice through the middle class present today in the United States. Aristotle consistently highlights the critical need for a strong middle class so that the wealthy, nor the poor, can overpower society. Aristotle mentions in Politics, “…that the political community that depends on the middling sort is best as well, and that those cities are capable of being well governed in which the middling element is numerous…,” (Lord, 2013, p. 115). If we combine regime types like Aristotle suggests, having a large middle class that is dominant over the higher and lower classes strongly reassures neutrality that can prevent any case in which the city pushes to one extreme of a regime combined within the city, “…and [to] prevent the opposing excesses from rising,” (Lord, 2013, p. 116). There are programs in the U.S. that aim to support middle-class families such as the Earned Income Tax Credit and other child tax credits, which are for taxpayers that have dependent children under seventeen and they can receive this credit through filing a tax return. This tax credit highly favors middle-class families as there is a cap to income where the tax credit will eventually stop, so that it is geared towards only middle-class families. This is done to help reinforce “moderate-income workers and families get a tax break” (Internal Revenue Service, 2024), in the United States, and as a result, there should be no extreme lean towards Aristotle’s descriptions of an oligarchy or democracy, which favor the wealthy and poor, respectively. Ultimately, Aristotle’s idea of wealth is still relevant in order to maintain and preserve the government system we have today, and to prevent political conflict that can affect the complete structure of the government now. We can also find his idea of power relevant in modern political practice.

            We see forms of Aristotle’s ideas on power in our government today. They vary from the structure of government whether it be a polity, a monarchy, or an oligarchy. Within these we can also see differences within the in civic engagement and the role or lack thereof they have in each government. Aristotle, although he favors oligarchies, mentions that the regime that is easiest for maintaining and preserving. He states, “The first and most well blended of the sorts of oligarchy [is related to the first sort of democracy]; this is the one that is very close to so-called polity,” (Lord, 2013, p.180). Aristotle proposes that mixing aspects of opposing regimes are to create the most well-balanced regime that can be preserved and long-lasting. This is visible in the U.S. as we are a constitutional federal republic, which contains aspects of a constitutional monarchy and a federal republic for the purpose of balancing powers of the branches and it also considers checks and balances, all while abiding by the Constitution. However, there are other countries that have a single authority power such as Russia, where the leader instills fear through severe political punishments and repercussions, as well as control over media, and have oligarchic aspects where there are few wealthy who are loyal that obtain certain privileges, which corrupts the government as a whole. Additionally, Aristotle recognizes the value that civic engagement plays in creating a balanced and preserved regime. He recommends an election system within the polity and states, “…it is both advantageous and customarily belongs to the sort of democracy spoken of earlier to have all elect to the offices and audit and adjudicate, but for persons elected on the basis of assessments to hold the offices, and the greater from the greater assessment—or else to elect none on the basis of assessments, but rather capable persons,” (Lord, 2013, p.176). This democratic factor being implemented in the polity allows for citizens to be involved in the selection of their leaders. By allowing citizens to vote for the leader and offices they establish a popular vote as to which individuals are most fitting and meet the best criteria to lead, legislate, and listen to the people’s voices. This is relevant as we practice it to this day in the United States, since all U.S. citizens the age of eighteen or above are given the right to vote for their leaders starting from election levels as low as a representative in their state, to the president. This is important because we are allowed to make our voice heard and this becomes a mutual relationship where the offices make decisions for the common good as we get the opportunity to elect the leaders we desire.

References

Aristotle. (2013). Aristotle’s “Politics”: Second edition (C. Lord, Trans.). University of Chicago Press.

Earned income tax credit (EITC). Internal Revenue Service. (2024, December 16). https://www.irs.gov/credits-deductions/individuals/earned-income-tax-credit-eitc

 

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
0 Views
0
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Jack Hulbert
Contains unread posts
Jack Hulbert posted Feb 6, 2025 10:29 PM
Jack Hulbert

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

February 6, 2025

Aristotle holds many beliefs about power and political theory.  In general he sees a stable society as one where the rulers act in the citizen’s best interests but, “when those who are in office behave arrogantly, and seek their personal advantage, people start factional intrigue against each other and against the constitution which permits this to happen”  (Aristotle, ca. 350 B.C.E/1995, p. 183).  This causes instability in a government and distrust amongst the populace.  This can lead to massive political change in rapid succession or changes to the structure of governments.  It is then his belief that those in power should not act in their best interest and this is a belief held to today.  In modern politics a good politician is generally seen as one who does not enrich themselves but works for their constituents.  Instead of commonly seeing good politicians most politicians engage in political fighting.  This fighting creates an unstable government where change happens rapidly based on who is in power.  This leads to many governments having laws or directives changing between administrations and in elections the other side is often blamed for current issues.  This causes the citizens to then split into factions and fight amongst themselves. Some politicians will then use the volatile political atmosphere to gain power for themselves, continuing and worsening the cycle of fighting.

While increasing the stability in a government by reducing or eliminating factional fighting is one solution there are others proposed by Aristotle.  To ensure the stability of government the citizens must submit to being governed is a key belief of Aristotle.  This can be hard to achieve easily outside of a ‘constitutional government’ where “their greater numbers give them strength: and people are ready to acquiesce in a government when they have an equal share of power”  (Aristotle, ca. 350 B.C.E/1995, p. 198).  Sharing in the power of government is a foundational principle of many of the most stable countries today.  By ensuring citizens' ability to hold power in government, or even over it, the citizens of each country are willing to follow the laws put in place.  They are willing to do this because to them they feel they have a say in the law through their representatives or that they may get a chance to vote for or against a policy.  Since the citizens hold this power in many modern countries the citizens do not tend to rise up and overthrow the government and instead will attempt to utilize the government itself to enact the change that they want in society, leading to a more stable society.

References

Aristotle. (1995). Politics (E. Baker, Trans., R. F. Stalley, Ed.). Oxford University Press. (Original work published ca. 350)

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 - Reeya Parikh
Contains unread posts
Reeya Parikh posted Feb 6, 2025 3:31 PMLast edited: Thursday, February 6, 2025 3:36 PM EST
Reeya Parikh

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

February 6, 2025

   Aristotle ideas were formulated over 2000 years ago, yet they still hold power and relevance in modern political theory and practice. In particular, his ideas about wealth and power can be observed in today’s government and are still being implemented and practiced. In Politics, Aristotle focused on the importance of politics, as “every political community is made up of rulers and ruled” (Aristotle, 350/1997, p. 140). His ideas helped influence governments around the world, new and old. Aristotle recognized the power and influence the wealthy class holds, especially in an Aristocracy government, and the negative effect that could appear from the larger lower class feeling unheard. The wealthy class, especially during Aristotle’s time, held most of the power as they were the most educated, they carefully maintained their wealth and power, and they could more easily transfer these skills to a larger scale, like the whole regime. He believed in the power of the middle class as he believed them to be more neutral since they do not struggle as much as the lower class and are content while still aspiring to be part of the wealthy class. He recommended giving offices to all of the societal classes by voting from “all or some demarcated group” and “according to their tribes and wards and clans until all the citizens are gone through” (Aristotle, 350/1997, pg. 202-203). In other words, he recommended having certain offices available for those from different regions and classes of the regime to keep the citizens happy with their government and feel represented. People tend to live near those who have similar perspectives and opinions on matters, so by representing each region the citizens will be more likely to support the government decisions, in other words, less likely to rebel. To prevent the popular vote, Aristotle also emphasized that citizens should “examine what amount will make for the highest qualification” for each potential ruler. This ensures only those worthy of office win the vote so the regime will continuously flourish. (Aristotle, 350/1997, p. 195). Aristotle knew that if the lower class was unhappy there would be an uprising, so the only way to sustain a properly functioning government was to ensure everyone felt represented and supported the government’s rule.

   Aristotle supported Aristocracy the most out of the different types of government, but he preferred the idea of mixed government even more (Tyranny, Aristocracy, and Democracy). Aristotle believed in “the nobly mixed regime both and neither of the elements muse appear to exist, and it must be preserved through itself” (Aristotle, 350/1997, p. 188). This means that the government should include the most important aspects of each type to the point where it is almost unrecognizable, and it will be sustained by the citizens themselves because there will be no reason for an uprising or change of government. The idea of a mixed government has been enacted in many countries, like the United States. The United States government has many aspects of Aristotle's ideas, like the different levels of power according to region (in America this separation is at the city, state, and country level). He also discusses the 3 main parts of the government he believes should exist: the deliberative, offices, and law courts. These can be observed in America as the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government. In particular, Aristotle believed the “deliberative body has control over war and peace, alliances and their dissolution; over laws; over death, evil, and confiscation; over the selection and auditing of offices,” which are included in the responsibilities of the United States Congress, a body of elected offices that discuss potential decisions and makes the final one. (Aristotle, 350/1997, p. 197). These aspects of government can also be observed in other countries such as the Parliament of the United Kingdom, India, and Canada. They also all have, as Aristotle discussed, the “Need of justice and military virtue, since a city cannot be managed without these either” (Aristotle, 350/1997, pg. 100-101)”. Justice is necessary to keep citizens at peace and support the government, and the military is imperative to defend the nation against other regimes. Aristotle’s ideas of separation of power at different levels still hold immense relevance in modern politics as most countries believe that a single individual should not have all the power to avoid the possibility of corruption. The wealth distribution of each regime affects the type of government, as wealth holds a lot of power in our economic-based governments. Even though Aristotle’s ideas were formulated over 2000 years ago, they are still extremely relevant and discussed in modern political theory and current standing governments.

References:

Aristotle, & Simpson, P. (1997). Politics of Aristotle. University of North Carolina Press. (Original work published 350 BCE).

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
2 Views
2
Views
Discussion Prompt 3 | Samuel Nelson-Archer
Contains unread posts
Braeden Nelson-Archer posted Feb 6, 2025 1:57 PM
Samuel Nelson-Archer

Professor Czader

SCLA 101

February 7, 2025

               The ideas revolving around wealth and power still hold a lot of relevance today. The beginning of Book Three really stuck out as in the first chapter of the book, Aristotle states that “the same person is not permitted to hold [political positions] twice, or only after some definite period of time has passed.” (Aristotle, 2013, p.63). This idea is very relevant in today’s government in the United States. There are many restrictions placed on the government leaders, especially on the president. Presidents may not serve more than two four-year terms in office. Most of the other positions within the government are also re-elected after a certain amount of time to ensure that as the people of the country change, so too does the government that controls them. Indiana, and other states within the United States, also have limits such as governors only being able to serve eight years in a twelve-year period. Although each state has small changes made regarding term limits, they all have limits set for their officials. This is not a system only found within the United States. Most of the world has adopted this idea and that is why there are often controversies around the world when a new election begins. People have differing views on the future of their country and therefore must hold a vote on who the next leader should be.

Another idea that is seen throughout the government is that the wealthiest of the citizens are the ones to rule. Aristotle talks about how the wealthy, who rule, sometimes rule out of selfish desire as opposed to passion for ruling and helping their citizens. Aristotle asks the question, “but is it just, therefore, for the minority and the wealthy to rule?” and states that these people can often “act in the same way and rob and plunder the possessions of the multitude” (Aristotle, 2013, p.78). The government that came to mind immediately after reading this was Russia. After recent years, it is clear that he is ruling for his own benefit within the country as opposed to helping the people he has power over. In 2020, he made a constitutional amendment in the country to give him the right to stay in office until 2036. This power-hunger not only backs up the necessity of finding what your leader’s intentions are, but also the first point of needing a term limit. Before Vladimir Putin took office, the maximum terms a Russian president could hold was two six-year terms. He was the one who made the amendment to change this. If he stays in power until 2036, which is his plan, he will have led the country for 24 years straight, all because he was given power and did not have proper checks and balances. These were the two points that stuck out the most within this portion of the book. Being able to think of examples in everyday life almost immediately after reading shows that these ideas are still relevant and applied all around us.

References

Aristotle. (2013). Aristotle’s Politics (C. Lord, Trans). The University of Chicago Press.

0 Unread
0
Unread
0 Replies
0
Replies
1 Views
1
Views