Rajiv Gandhi National University oI Law

In the partial IulIilment Ior the requirement oI the project on the subject oI Political
Science oI B.A., L.L.B (Hons.), First Semester

PLATO: ON WELFARE STATE

Submitted To- Submitted By-
Ms. Shveta Dhaliwal Group 1
Abhishek Boob
Nidhi Sharma
Sahil Singh
Kanika Bhutani

PREFACE
We Ieel great pleasure in presenting the project under study. We hope that the readers will Iind
the project interesting and that the project in its present Irom shall be well received by all. The
project contains the explanation and analysis relating to welIare state by Plato under Political
Science.
Every eIIort is made to keep the project error Iree. We would grateIully acknowledge the
suggestions to improve the project to make it more useIul.














ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
God gives us life to decorate it with knowledge. Life without knowledge is like river without
water.
On completion oI this Project it is our present privilege to acknowledge our proIound gratitude
and indebtedness towards our teachers Ior their valuable suggestion and constructive criticism.
Their precious guidance and unrelenting support kept us on the right track throughout the
project. We grateIully acknowledge our deepest sense oI gratitude to:
Dr. P. B. Jaswal, Vice-Chancellor, Rajiv Gandhi National University oI Law, Patiala, Ior
providing us with the inIrastructure and personal attention which proved to be a blessing;
Our revered and intellectual guide Ms. Shveta Dhaliwal, who has provided us this wonderIul
opportunity and guided us throughout the project work;
Ms. Updesh Kaur, and other library staII Ior their able support without which this project
would not have been completed;
Mr. Inderpreet and other computer staII who helped us in operating computer and providing
access to internet and other technical support;
We are thankIul to our Iamily members and Iriends Ior the aIIection and encouragement with
which doing this project became a pleasure;
Last but not least we would like to thank the ALMIGHTY whose blessings helped us in
making this project come out successIully with Ilying colors.






TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1
1. Introduction
Chapter 2
. Political Thought beIore Plato
.1.Sophists
..Socrates
Chapter 3
. Plato
.1.Plato : The Republic
..Plato`s Ideal State
..Plato`s Theory oI Justice
.4.Plato`s Theory oI Education
.5.Plato`s Theory oI Communism
.6.Plato`s Rule oI Philosophy
.7.Plato on Democracy
Chapter 4
4. Plato and Beyond Plato
4.1.DiIIerence in Ideologies
4..Plato`s Communism and Modern Communism
4..Variation in the Ideal State oI Aristotle
Chapter 5
5. Conclusion




Chapter 1
Introduction
There are two characters, one or the other oI which every man who Iinds anything to say on the
subject oI law may be said to take upon him; that oI the expositor, and that oI the censor. To the
province oI the expositor it belongs to explain to us what, as he supposes, the law is: to that oI
the censor, to observe to us what he thinks it ought to be. So writes Jeremy Bentham in the
opening chapter oI his Fragment on Government.
1

Most modern political ideals such, Ior example, as justice, liberty, constitutional government,
and respect Ior the law or at least the deIinitions oI them began with the reIlection oI Greek
thinkers upon the institutions oI the city-state. The Greek city-state was so diIIerent Irom the
political communities in which modern men live that it requires no small eIIort oI the
imagination to picture its social and political liIe.

The Greek philosophers were thinking oI

political practices Iar diIIerent Irom any that have prevailed commonly in the modern world, and
the whole climate oI opinion in which their work was done was diIIerent. Their problems,
though not without analogies in the present, were never identical with modern problems, and the
ethical apparatus by which political liIe was evaluated and criticized varied widely Irom any that
now prevails.
A WelIare State is a concept oI government where the state plays the primary role in the
protection and promotion oI the economic and social well-being oI its citizens. It is based on the
principles oI equality oI opportunity, equitable distribution oI wealth, and public responsibility
Ior those unable to avail themselves oI the minimal provisions Ior a good liIe. The general term
may cover a variety oI Iorms oI economic and social organization.

Plato, the Iather to the idealists, romanticists, revolutionists and utopians oI political
philosophy was born about 47 B.C. in an eminent Athenian Iamily. His critical attitude toward
democracy is attributed to his aristocratic birth. The outstanding Iact oI Plato`s intellectual
development was his association as a young man with Socrates and Irom Socrates he derived

1
Jeremy Bentham, ragment on Government and Principles of Morals and Legislation, OxIord, 1948, p.7.

George H Sabine, Thomas L Thorson, A History of Political Theory, OxIord & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 197, p.19.

Retrieved Irom www.encyclopediabritannica.com on 1

th
April 11
what was always the controlling thought oI his political philosophy the idea that virtue is
knowledge.
4
Otherwise stated, this meant the belieI that there is objectively a good liIe, both Ior
individuals and Ior states, which may be made the object oI study, which may be deIined by
methodical intellectual processes, and which may thereIore be intelligently pursued.
Plato`s thought was greatly inIluenced by the contemporary intellectual climate and particularly
by the ideas oI predecessors like Pythagoras, Parmenides, Heraclitus and Socrates. The execution
oI Socrates gave a rude shock to Plato`s Iaith in democracy and he came to look down upon it as
a Ioolish, corrupt, vicious, immoral and ineIIicient system.
5
Plato thereIore sought to build up the
moral Iiber and emphasized the idea oI role oI philosopher king.
He was greatly inIluenced by Pythagoras` teaching that wisdom is the contemplation oI the spirit
and the idea was the chieI essence behind all material things and Iorms. He also picked up the
idea oI transmigration oI should Irom Pythagoras. From Parmenides, Plato learned that change
and motion are illusions oI the senses and that reality is eternal.
6
But probably the greatest
inIluence on Plato was exercised by his teacher Socrates. He accepted three doctrines enunciated
by Socrates i.e. Virtue oI knowledge, the theory oI reality and the theory oI knowledge.
BeIore examining the portrayal oI the Ideal State as given in The Republic, it is desirable to
know something about Plato`s Doctrine oI Ideas the keystone oI his political thought. The
entire Greek political thought is nothing but a search Ior the ultimate reality. The permanent
character oI a thing is what Plato calls the dea. This idea oI a thing is eternal and Iinal, having
an independent and absolute reality. Thus, there are two worlds, the world oI Being and the
world oI Becoming. The Iirst is a world oI perIection and the second is dynamic and imperIect.
The world oI Being is the ideal world and such is the real world. It is a world oI universal
concepts which are true Ior all times and places. They are unchangeable, imperishable and
eternal. The world oI Becoming is always in a state oI Ilux, unreal and imperIect. The Actual is
not real as it is always in a constant state oI Ilux undergoing changes social, economic and
political. It is only an Ideal state based on universal and eternal principles which can be real.
Plato tries to achieve his Ideal State is the Good liIe and in his eIIort to portray the Good, Plato

4
George H Sabine, Thomas L Thorson, A History of Political Theory, OxIord & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 197, p.49.
5
Prem Arora, Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, p.16.
6
Ibid., p.16.
pursues his thought to its utmost limits. Plato tries to achieve his Idea oI the Good by the
establishment oI a state which is Iree Irom the evils oI all other states because it does not
degenerate, or because it does not change. His belieI in perIect and unchanging things is usually
called his theory or doctrine oI Iorms or Ideas. It is on this theory oI the Idea, that the rest oI the
theories oI the ideal state are based. These Ideas revolve around and are determined by the Idea
oI the Good.
7
According to Edman, The Platonic Idea is the original and the origin oI the thing,
the reason oI its existence the stable, sustaining principle in virtue oI which it exists. It is the
virtue oI the thing, its ideal its perIection.















7
N. Jayapalan, omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 1, p..
Chapter 2
Political Thought before Plato
The great age oI Athenian public liIe Iell in the third quarter oI the IiIth century B.C., while the
great age oI political philosophy came only aIter the downIall oI Athens in her struggle with
Sparta. The Athenian oI the IiIth century was not much given either to the reading or the writing
oI books and, moreover, even iI political treatises were written beIore the time oI Plato, not
much has been preserved. Public concerns and the conduct oI public aIIairs were the great topics
oI interest oI the Athenians oI the IiIth century. The Athenian lived in an atmosphere oI oral
discussion and conversation which it is diIIicult Ior the modern man to imagine. Indeed, the
circumstances could hardly have been more Iavorable to certain sorts oI political inquiry. The
Greek was almost Iorced to think oI what would now be called comparative government.
Throughout the length and breadth oI the Greek world, a great variety oI political institutions
were Iound, all indeed oI the city-state type, but still capable oI very great diIIerences. The
Iundamental thought in the Greek idea oI the state was the harmony oI a liIe shared in common
by all its members. Solon commended his legislation as producing a harmony or a balance
between the rich and the poor in which each party received its just due.
8
The Iundamental idea oI
harmony or proportionality was applied indiIIerently as a physical and as an ethical principle and
was conceived indiIIerently as a property oI nature or as a reasonable property oI human nature.
Though the ancient Greek political thought is generally traced Irom Plato in the IiIth century
B.C., some oI the political conceptions had already been Iormulated and crystallized beIore his
times, even though they were not Iormally reduced to writing in the Iorm oI books and treatise.
Most oI the development oI political thought beIore his period took place in the shape oI oral
discussions and conversations. Four schools oI political thought existed beIore Plato which we
are Conversant with. These include the Sophists, Socrates, Cynics and the Cyrenaics.
2.1. Sophists
The Sophists were a group oI teachers who came to Athens Irom other cities and oIIered
instructions. They tried to popularize their ideas and spread knowledge and culture amongst

8
Ernest barker, Greek political theory, p.4.
those who wished to learn.
9
The names survive oI nearly Sophists properly so called, oI
whom the most important were Protagoras, Gorgias, Antiphon, Prodicus, and Thrasymachus.
The Sophists taught men how to speak and what arguments to use in public debate. A Sophistic
education was increasingly sought aIter both by members oI the oldest Iamilies and by aspiring
newcomers without Iamily backing. The changing pattern oI Athenian society made merely
traditional attitudes in many cases no longer adequate. Criticizing such attitudes and replacing
them by rational arguments held special attraction Ior the young, and it explains the violent
distaste which they aroused in traditionalists.
1

The education imparted by Sophists has been described as, The debates in the assembly, the
trials beIore the heliaes, and the rising need Ior the ability to think with appearance oI logic and
to speak with clarity and persuasion, conspired with the wealth and curiosity oI an imperial
society to create a demand Ior something unknown in Athens beIore Pericles Iormer higher
education in letters, oratory science, philosophy, and statesmanship.
11

The Sophists certainly were not directly responsible Ior Athenian democracy, but their cultural
and psychological contributions played an important role in its growth. They contributed to the
new democracy in part by espousing expertise in public deliberation, since this was the
Ioundation oI decision-making, which allowed and perhaps required a tolerance oI the belieIs oI
others. This liberal attitude would naturally have precipitated into the Athenian assembly as
Sophists acquired increasingly high-powered clients.
1
Continuous rhetorical training gave the
citizens oI Athens "the ability to create accounts oI communal possibilities through persuasive
speech".
1
This was extremely important Ior the democracy, as it gave disparate and sometimes
superIicially unattractive views a chance to be heard in the Athenian assembly.
In addition, Sophists had great impact on the early development oI law, as the sophists were the
Iirst lawyers in the world. Their status as lawyers was a result oI their extremely developed
argumentation skills.
14


9
Prem Arora, Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, p.7.
1
Retrieved Irom www.encyclopediabritannica.com on 1
th
April 11
11
Will Durant, The life of Greece, p.58.
1
Sprague, Rosamond Kent, The Older Sophists, Hacker Publishing Company, p..
1
Jarratt, Susan C. Rereading the Sophists. lassical Rhetoric Refigured. Carbon dale and Edwards ville: Southern
Illinois University Press, 1991, p.98.
14
Martin, Richard. Seven Sages as Performers of Wisdom. ultural Poetic in Archaic Greece, OxIord, New York,
1988. P.18.
2.2. Socrates
Socrates, an Athenian, was born in 47 B.C. Though he was given training in the hereditary
proIession he devoted most oI his time to philosophical discussions. Socrates adopted unique
method which was a combination oI the deductive or dialectic method. Dunning describes his
method as that oI doubt and deIinition. He attached great importance to knowledge, which he
considered as real and permanent possession oI mind.
Socrates considered the state as natural. To him state was the expression oI virtue, knowledge
and wisdom. It was the result oI a pre-natal contract and exists not only Ior the sake oI liIe but
good liIe. He thereIore wanted the government to be the approximation oI order and reason. As
such he wanted the political aIIairs to be conducted by persons who possessed expert knowledge
and were capable oI transmitting their political instincts. In other words he Iavored an aristocracy
oI intellect.
15

Socrates opposed the concept oI equality oI men and asserted that men could never be equal
because inequality was visible all around. He thereIore was a bitter critic oI the Athenian type oI
democracy. He did not approve oI the democratic concepts oI popular elections Ior public oIIices
specially election by lots. He considered laws as oI great importance and considered them as next
only to God. To him the customs and conventions which provide the base Ior notions oI justice
and righteousness also Iorm the basis Ior laws.
Socrates made valuable contributions to the history oI political thought. His most outstanding
contribution to political thought is his dialectical method and the reasoning though which he
stimulated close thinking on basic questions. He was the Iirst to throw the idea that the
government is a special art and can be conducted only by the competent persons. He did not
approve oI the adoption oI traditional standards on the ground that they were sanctiIied by
immemorial customs or laid down by some authority. Similarly he permitted the individual to
disobey the laws oI the state which were unjust or conIlicted with the dicrates oI his conscience.
In other words he asserted that what was right or wrong depended on the reasoned conviction oI
the individual.



13
Prem Arora, Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, p12
Chapter - 3
Plato
3.1. Plato: The Republic
The Republic is a Socratic dialogue written by Plato sometime around 8 BC concerning the
deIinition oI justice and the order and character oI the just city and the just man. It is Plato`s best
known work and has proven to be one oI the most intellectually and historically inIluential works
oI philosophy and political theory. In it, Socrates along with various Athenians and Ioreigners
discuss the meaning oI justice and examine whether or not the just man is happier than the unjust
man by proposing a city ruled by philosopher-kings. The participants also discuss the theory oI
Iorms, the immortality oI the soul, and the roles oI the philosopher and oI poetry in society.
The whole Republic is really an attempt to interpret human nature psychologically, the postulate
upon which its method rests is that all the institutions oI society, class, organisation, law,
religion, and art and so on, are ultimately products oI the human soul, an inner principle oI liIe
which works itselI out in these outward shapes.
16
Plato draws a picture oI what the social
organizations and institutions must be iI an individual is to realize Iully his highest capacities.
The Republic no doubt, projects an ideal society and is a utopia but it also embodies a bold
criticism oI actual conditions oI society in the days oI Plato.
In The Republic, Plato says that a good state must have a philosopher king who possesses the
knowledge oI good and reality. As regards the methods through which the state can take the
individual to the ultimate good, Plato advocates the instrument oI education which produces
good citizens and solves many oI our social and economic problems. Thus in Republic, Plato
starts with ethics and enters in the domain oI politics, sociology, metaphysics, education etc.
Plato took organic view oI the state and Iound no conIlict between the ends oI the state and those
oI the individual. According to him a just ruler always pursues the Iood oI the community
unmindIul oI his own private interests. ThereIore Plato tried to rehabilitate a strong and

16
N. Jayapalan, omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 1, p7
impartial authority which should mean, not the rule oI the rich over the poor, or oI the poor over
the rich, but oI something either above or at any rate combining both.
17

The Republic contains Plato`s Allegory oI the cave with which he explains his concept oI The
Forms as an answer to the problem oI universals. The allegory oI the cave primarily depicts
Plato`s distinction between the world oI appearances and the real` world oI the Forms, as well
as helping to justiIy the philosopher`s place in society as king.
3.2. Plato`s Ideal State
Plato`s ideal state was an imagination oI the man`s best and noblest selI and represented the
Irame within which an individual Iound his best selI. He builds up his ideal state in true
successive stages or waves. In the Iirst he shows that men and women have the same education
and should participate in the same public Iunctions. In the second he advocates the abolition oI
the Iamily on the basis oI communism oI wives and property among the two upper classes. The
third wave is concerned with the idea that the good oI society depended on government by
philosopher kings. His ideal state is hierarchical in its composition and Iunctioning.
At the head oI his ideal state is a philosopher ruler who is above passion or prejudice and who
represents virtue in action. He is unrestrained by law. But Plato was wise enough not to leave the
good oI a whole community on the chance existence oI a philosopher ruler. There must be a
regular supply oI philosopher guardians. For this purpose, Plato provides a well regulated system
oI education under educate guardians oI the state and also to shiIt the capable Irom the
incapable.
18

Plato, while constructing his ideal state draws a clear analogy between individual and the state.
The state has the same characteristics while the individual possesses. It is a spiritual parallel. It is
a parallel between the souls oI the individual whether acting as a whole or in separated elements
and the state as expressed in the collective mirror or in that oI its separate classes. The individual
mind or soul, according to Plato, is divided into three elements Reason, Spirit and Appetite.
The lowest element in human soul is Appetite and the highest is Reason. Appetite is an irrational
element which denotes desire, hunger, love, thirst and other rudimentary instincts. Reason is the
rational element in human soul with its main Iunction to think and to know. Plato says that

17
Ernest Barker, Greek Political Philosophy. Plato and his predecessors, p.151.
18
N. Jayapalan, omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 1, p4
States do not come out oI an oak or a rock, but Irom the minds oI men that dwell therein. The
state being the product oI Human mind and also resembling it is also divided into three souls.
Those three classes in the State are Guardians who represent the element oI Reason; secondly,
the Auxiliaries who represent the element oI Spirit and thirdly and lastly the Peasants who
represent the element oI Appetite. The lowest is the producing class consisting oI artisans,
Iarmers, etc. To this class, Plato assigns no higher status. The members oI this class are
producers oI consumable goods only. The members oI this class have no leisure and so are unIit
Ior the contemplation oI the good. Above the producing class are the two higher classes oI
guardians or rulers. From the class oI ordinary guardians or auxiliaries are to be selected the
perIect guardians who represent the highest class. This is to be done through his system oI
education. For the guardian class, Plato proposed the system oI communism oI Iamily and
property in order to enable them to give education and opportunities Ior public service to women.
On the basis oI three Iold division, Plato develops his ideal state under three successive stages.
Fist, the state originates in the simple and mutual economic needs oI individuals, Secondly, Irom
a simple it becomes a luxurious state. It needs a military element in the state in order to deIend it
Irom outside attack. Thirdly, it needs a rulers` class in order to rule with all the rational
knowledge. The ideal state oI Plato is absolute and totalitarian. There is hardly any sphere oI liIe
which it cannot touch and regulate. There is no Ireedom oI thought and association. But this
state is Ideal and is ruled by supreme wisdom. This completes the Platonic picture oI the Ideal
State.
The ideal state oI Plato is open to many objections. In his organist conception and construction
oI the state, Plato Iinds too much analogy between the individual and the state. His classiIication
oI human nature into three elements, viz., Reason, Spirit and Appetite, and his subsequent
division oI society into three classes; guardians, auxiliaries and the producing class, is rather
illogical and Ialse. Plato Iails to distinguish ethics Irom Politics. In his state, which is collectivist,
there is very little scope Ior Iull Ireedom and all-round development oI the various Iaculties oI
man. His stress on Iunctional specialization and his idea oI justice are likely to dwarI the
personality oI an individual. In his ideal state, the majority oI the people who constitute the
producing class are reduced to the position oI serIs, and they are ignored altogether as iI they are
soulless. In his ideal state, we Iind nowhere any condemnation oI the situation oI slavery which
is so rampant in his days. The scheme oI communism oI wives and property is most intolerable.
It violates oI human nature. To make the philosopher king above law is to make him most
absolute and authoritarian. In his portrait oI the Ideal state, Plato has ignored the most important
needs oI the community, such as rules and regulations Ior the appointment oI oIIicials, rules
regarding instituting oI courts, etc. The Iact is Plato`s polity is intolerant, absolute and
impracticable.
19

3.3. Plato`s Theory of 1ustice
The theory oI the state in the Republic culminates in the conception oI justice. Justice is the bond
which holds a society together, a harmonious union oI individuals each oI whom has Iound his
liIe work in accordance with his natural Iitness and his training. It is both a public and a private
virtue because the highest good both oI the state and oI its members is thereby conserved.

The
primary issue oI The Republic is the discovery oI the nature and habit oI justice. The Republic,
thereIore, is called a treatise on justice.
Incompetence and Iactionalism, unrighteousness and injustice and ignorance reigned supreme in
his days. While explaining his theory oI justice, Plato starts by discussing the various prevailing
theories oI justice and aIter rejecting those put Iorward his own views. For a Iuller understanding
oI Plato`s views on Justice, it is desirable to examine the various prevailing theories oI justice
and the ground on which Plato rejects them.
a. Traditional Theory The traditional theory propounded by Cephalus and his son
Polemarchus deIined justice as speaking the truth and paying what was due to gods and
men. It also contended that justice should be so administered that good is done to the
Iriends and harm to the enemies. It considered justice as an art.
Plato rejects this theory by pleading that true justice means doing well to all and harm to
none. To do evil to anybody is inconsistent with the elementary principles oI morality.
Further, it is not always possible to distinguish between enemies and Iriends because the
appearances are oIten deceptive. Another deIect oI this theory is that it treats justice as an
individualistic rather than a social concept. Justice cannot diIIer Irom individual to

19
Ibid., p. 5

George H Sabine, Thomas L Thorson, A History of Political Theory, OxIord & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.,
New Delhi, 197, p.64.
individual and should have universal application. Finally, this theory by treating justice as
an art makes it a handmaid oI those in power and leaves suIIicient scope Ior its misuse.
1

b. Radicalist Theory The radicalist theory associated with Sophists and propounded by
Thrasymachus treated justice as the interest oI the stronger. In other words it believes in
the principle oI might is right. As the government is strongest, it makes laws according to
the convenience oI the rulers and justice Ior the people consists in seeking the interest oI
the ruler rather than pursue their own interest. At the same time the Sophists assert that
injustice is better than justice. As every person would like to promote his own interests,
there is every possibility that he would go against justice i.e. the interests oI the ruler. It
was, thereIore, proper to be unjust to satisIy all rather than become just to satisIy the ruler
alone. ThereIore Thrasymachus argues that injustice is better than justice and the unjust
man is wiser than the just.

Plato rejects this concept oI justice also on the Iollowing grounds. First, justice can never
be the interest oI the stronger. The government is an art and it must aim at the perIection
oI the material i.e. the subjects rather than its own perIection. Secondly, justice is always
better than injustice because a just man is wiser, stronger and happier than an unjust man
and knows his limitation. Thirdly, Plato also condemns the extreme individualism oI the
Sophists and holds that individual is not an independent unit but a part oI an order.
Fourth, there cannot be two standards oI justice one Ior the ruler and the other Ior the
subjects. Thrasymachus does not give any rational justiIication as to why it should be just
Ior the ruler to get his own way and at the same time it is unjust Ior others to act in the
like manner.

c. Pragmatic Theory The pragmatic theory oI justice is stated by Glaucan. He treats
justice as an artiIicial thing, a product oI the social convention. Justice is the child oI Iear
and is based on the necessity oI the weak. There was no justice in the pre-civil society
and it is the weaker sections that joined hand to create the state. ThereIore justice is not
the interest oI the stronger but the necessity oI the weak.
4


21
Prem Arora, Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, p.18.
22
lbld p18
23
lbld p19
24
lbld p19
Plato criticizes this theory because it assumes that justice is something external or an
importation. He, on the other hand, holds that justice is rooted in human mind. It is an
intrinsic virtue which does not depend Ior its origin upon a chance convention.
5

Having rejected the various theories oI justice Plato propounds his own theory which he regards
as true and Iinal. To comprehend Plato`s conception oI justice it is essential to bear in mind that
Plato strikes an analogy between the human organisms on the one hand, and social organism on
the other. Plato saw in justice the only remedy against the political and social ills oI the city-
state. Justice, according to Plato, resides in the ideally constituted community and is identiIiable
with complete virtue which consists oI Iour virtues, i.e., wisdom (philosophers), courage (which
indulges strength oI will), obedience and discipline (soldiers), temperance oI selI control. To
Plato Justice is the virtue which remains in the state when the other virtues oI temperance and
courage and wisdom are abstracted; and is the ultimate cause and condition oI the existence oI all
oI them. The Platonic conception oI justice is inseparable Irom that oI the Ideal state. The two
blend in one. Justice is the order, the true condition oI the state and the ideal state is the visible
embodiment oI justice. One is the soul and the other is the body. A good and just liIe is one lived
in society and justice demands an organic unity in the state arising out oI a harmonious balancing
oI Iunction, oI the three classes oI society; the appetitive, the spirited and the rational. And
justice in Plato`s language means the will to concentrate on one`s own sphere oI duty and not to
meddle with the sphere oI others; and its habitation, thereIore, is the heart oI every citizen who
does his duty in his appointed place. Thus, justice depends and grows with the specialization oI
Iunctions. The justice oI the state is the citizen`s sense oI duty. To Plato, justice is an
indispensable quality oI moral liIe in the community. It is the ethical code by which Plato`s
polity lives. Justice oI the individual means that each oI the tree elements appetite, spirit and
reason keep within their proper limits. To Plato, justice Ior the individual is identiIiable with
virtue or excellence. It generates the spirit oI selI-restraint and selI-regulation in man and makes
him a useIul member oI the community. Thus, justice is no purely a personal virtue. Plato also
makes a distinction between legal or particular, and perIect or universal justice. The perIect
justice can only be in the ideal state which is based on right education, principle oI communism,
Iunctional specialization and perIect wisdom oI a philosopher king. In a state which is not ideal
and which is based on law, there obtains legal or particular justice. Plato`s idea oI distributive

23
lbld p19
justice is that men should get oIIices according to their ability and according to their devotion to
the state.
6

Thus Plato`s concept oI justice is based on three principles. First, it implies Iunctional
specialization i.e. allotment oI a speciIic Iunction to each according to his capacity and merit.
Secondly, it implies non-interIerence by various classes in each other`s sphere oI duty and
concentration on one`s own duties. Such an understanding is vital Ior the unity oI the state as
well as the welIare oI the members oI the state. Thirdly, it implies harmony between the three
classes representing wisdom, courage and temperance respectively.
Plato`s theory oI justice is oI immense value. It is a kind oI thesis against individualism. The
conception postulates a view oI the individual as not an isolated selI, but part oI an order,
intended not to pursue the pleasure oI isolated selI, but to Iill an appointed place in that order.
Plato`s justice is universal in character, and is another name Ior the whole duty oI man. Plato`s
theory bestows upon the state a personality and independent existence oI its own. There is no
doubt that the theory is a revolt against political selIishness and ignorance.
In spite oI the great value oI theory oI justice, there has been a lot oI criticism oI it. SelI-control
and devotional selI-abnegation in the interest oI society, which lie at the base oI Plato`s justice,
are moral principles having no sanctions behind them. There is no provision Ior clash oI
individual wills and interests. It visualizes only a dull uniIormity and harmony oI social liIe. The
theory is based on the conception oI Iunctional specialization, but it ignores its evils. To
condemn a man to one special Iunction is to assume that he is all appetite or all reason, whereas
an average man has all the three elements in him. The ideal oI one man one work` militates
against the Iull development oI human personality and deprives the community oI a Iull and rich
variety oI liIe. Plato`s justice assigns ruling power in the hands oI one class, however well
trained morally and spiritually, is bound to demoralize that class and corrupt the state. Plato`s
philosophy oI justice is the most savage and the most proIound attack upon liberal ideas which
history can show.
7




26
N. Jayapalan, omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 1, p.7.
7
Ibid, p.9.
3.4. Plato`s Theory of Education
Education was the most important scheme oI human liIe Ior Plato. Plato Irankly assumed that the
state is the Iirst and Ioremost an educational institution. He himselI called the one great thing;
iI the citizens are well educated the will readily see through the diIIiculties that beset them and
meet emergencies as they arise. Plato`s theory oI education is intimately linked with his theory oI
Justice in so Iar it is the positive or the spiritual method Ior the attainment oI the same.
8
The
platonic conception oI justice depended Ior its realization on two institutions; a system oI
common education by the state, and a social order oI communism.
Common education by the state was meant to give that training Ior excellence in a special and
that instinct Ior keeping unselIishly to the perIormance oI which justice demanded. According to
Barker, with Plato, education is a means oI social righteousness and realization oI truth and not
oI social success. As regards the object oI education, Plato writes, The object oI education is to
turn the eye which the soul already possesses to the light. The whole Iunction oI education is not
to put knowledge into the soul, but to bring out the best things that are latent in the soul, and to
do so by directing it to the right objects. The problem oI education, then, is to give it the right
surrounding. In his scheme oI education, Plato was greatly inIluenced by the Spartan system oI
education. The great purpose oI education in Sparta was to develop courage through test and
trials. But, unlike Sparta, the Platonic system oI education aimed at the development oI the
whole man. It aimed at the all-round development oI human personality. Plato borrowed Irom
the Spartan system only the social aspect oI education that it must be controlled by the state
with a view to preparing citizens to Iind their place in society. In Plato`s system oI education the
main objective is simply to bring the soul into a particular surrounding, so nothing is said oI
direct teaching. Plato was convinced that the right system should be based on the right
understanding oI the nature oI the soul. The soul is reached at diIIerent stages oI its growth by
diIIerent agencies and through diIIerent media. The true Iunction oI education is to make man
and woman useIul and Iit socially, economically, intellectually and politically. His education is
meant Ior both the sexes.
9
Since Plato believed that there was no diIIerence in kind between the
native capacities oI boys and girls, he logically concluded that both should receive the same kind
oI instruction and that women should be eligible to the same oIIice as men. This, oI course, is in

8
Prem Arora, Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, p.1.
9
N. Jayapalan, omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 1, p.16.
no sense an argument Ior women`s rights but merely a plan Ior making the whole supply oI
natural capacity available to the state.

Plato`s education was meant Ior artisans as well as

peasants also. Though Plato does not make a clear mention in this regard, but it is quite implied
Irom his statement that, Men oI copper can be made into men oI silver and even oI gold, iI they
posses their attributes.
1

At the time oI Plato, two diametrically opposite methods oI education were in vogue the
Athenian and the Spartan. The Athenian system oI education was mainly in private hands and
leIt entirely to the parents to educate their children in manner they liked the best. On the other
hand, the Spartan system oI education was Iully controlled by the state. The children were
separated Irom their parents at the age oI Iour and were placed under the care oI PreIects. The
parents had nothing to do with the education oI their children. The state provided them education
in harmony with the social conditions.

Plato made an attempt to combine these two systems oI

education and made some changes in higher education. His system oI education aimed at
promoting social welIare and helps the individual in realizing the reality.
Plato`s system oI education is divided into two parts; elementary education and higher education.
The elementary or basic education was Iurther sub-divided into three stages. The Iirst stage
lasted Irom birth to the age oI six years. At this stage, both the boys and girls were to be given
education in language. The children were also to be taught basic Iacts oI religion, religious
institutions etc. At the second stage extending Irom the age oI six to the age oI eighteen,
education is to be both physical and intellectual. Here, the music is provided Ior the soul and
gymnastics Ior the body. Gymnastics includes all that is related to the care oI the body. At the
stage, Plato recommended music as it was through music, he held, that the soul learnt harmony
and rhythm, and a disposition oI justice. At this stage, there must be a study oI the elements oI
the sciences. The real value oI the study oI sciences is twoIold. They teach one to think; and in
studying the sciences, the mind comes gradually to understand certain principles or Iorms oI
being which lead to the understanding oI the good. Mathematics trains the mind to think clearly
and precisely. Thus, up to eighteen there is to be general education in music, gymnastics and
elementary sciences. The third stage extended Irom eighteen to twenty years oI age. There is

George H Sabine, Thomas L Thorson, A History of Political Theory, OxIord & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.,
New Delhi, 197, p.69.
1
Prem Arora, Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, p..

Ibid, p..
exclusive training in gymnastics, including military exercises, with the aim to develop courage
and selI-control, character and discipline. At the age oI twenty, men without good intellectual
capacity will be shunted oII as a result oI a public test.

Higher education extends Irom the age oI twenty to thirty Iive. It is Iurther divided into two parts
Irom twenty to thirty and Irom thirty to thirty-Iive. In the Iirst part, men and women are to be
given systematic scientiIic education. At this stage, education is both intellectual and physical.
Natural and mathematical sciences are to be taught. Stress is laid on mathematics, including
arithmetic, plane and solid geometry, astronomy, logic and the development oI dialectic power.
There would also be training in public service, particularly military service. At the age oI thirty,
there shall be a second selective test. The less giIted are weeded out as auxiliaries or subordinate
oIIicers oI the state. The more giIted are given Iurther training Ior Iive years in the science oI
dialectics. The emphasis was to be laid on dialectics because according to Plato, dialectic was the
only system oI knowledge through which highest reality could be achieved. This stage oI
education was essentially meant to create the Philosopher King.
4
The philosopher king was
expected to rule Irom thirty Iive years to the age oI IiIty years. At the age oI IiIty, the selected
Iew approved would study the good itselI. They are to state, dividing their time between
theoretical studies oI the good, the practical government. In this system oI education oI Plato,
there is no place Ior vocational and technical education. The system was essentially one Ior
leadership. Leaders must have knowledge, experience, character, courage, selI-control. They
must have intelligence knowledge and insight. The Platonic system had a psychological basis
and was progressive in character. It meets the demands oI the soul. It was an education Ior all
round development.
Plato`s scheme oI education has been subjected to much criticism. The vocational and technical
parts are altogether absent Irom the scheme. He ignored education Ior the artisans. Plato`s
education is simply meant Ior the rulers and the administrators. He never discusses the training
oI the artisans. This Iact illustrates the surprising looseness and generality oI his conclusions.
The scheme is meant Ior a very small group. In his theory oI education, there is a certain
wavering between the ideal oI action and that oI contemplation. Sometimes the goal is the idea
oI the Good, sometimes social service, sometimes perIect selI-development, and sometimes

33
lbld p23
34
lbld p24
social adaptation. His system equates the guardians with the state. The scheme is expensive and
impracticable.
5

3.5. Plato`s Theory of Communism
In his attempt to build an Ideal state in which justice should reign, Plato propounds a theory oI a
new social order, under which the governing class surrenders, in the interest oI the state, both
Iamily liIe and private property and lives under a system oI communism. Communism was
meant to destroy the Ialse conception oI selI as an isolated unit and replace it by a conception oI
a selI as a useIul and integral part oI a social whole. It was to serve as a means Ior achieving
spiritual reIormation oI the ideal community which Plato wanted to bring about. Plato`s
communism is meant Ior the guardian class only. It is Ior the rulers and soldiers only. The
purpose is simply political. In the ideal state consisting oI three classes, the upper two classes,
guardians and auxiliaries must live under a regime oI communism iI they are to perIorm their
duties well and unselIishly.
6
In short, Plato held that the combination oI the political and
economic power was bound to lead to corruption and degradation in the state and an eIIicient
system oI administration could operate only iI the economic power was absolutely divorced Irom
the political power.
7

Realizing that private property was a stumbling block in the way oI the unity oI the state, he
sought to eliminate it thought Communism oI Property. He Ieared that the possession oI private
property would give rise to selIish considerations and deviate the attention oI the philosopher
rulers Irom public service. He thereIore deprived the ruling classes oI the right to property. In the
words oI Sabine, Plato Ielt that, To cure the greed oI rulers there is no way short oI denying
them the right to call anything their own.
8
He insisted that the ruler should live in barracks and
have meals at common tables. The guardian class renounces the property Ior the Iood oI the
society. In the words oI Barker, Platonic communism is ascetic and just Ior that reason it is also
aristocratic. It is imposed on the best and only on the best.

5
N. Jayapalan, omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 1, p.18.
6
Ibid, p.1
7
Prem Arora, Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, p.8.
8
George H Sabine, Thomas L Thorson, A History of Political Theory, OxIord & IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.,
New Delhi, 197, p.67.
Plato`s concept oI communism oI wives is the logical extension oI his scheme oI communism oI
property. He regards Iamily aIIection, directed toward particular persons, as another potent rival
to the state in competing Ior the loyalty oI rulers. Anxiety Ior one`s children is a Iorm oI selI-
seeking more insidious than the desire Ior property. He was appalled at the casualness oI human
mating, which as he says, would not be tolerated in the breeding oI any domestic animal. The
improvement oI the race demands a more controlled and a more selective type oI union. Finally,
the abolition oI marriage was probably an implied criticism oI the position oI women in Athens,
where her activities were summed up in keeping the house and rearing her children. To Plato,
this seemed to deny to the state the services oI halI its potential guardians. Moreover, since many
women are as well qualiIied as men to take part in political or even military duties. The women
oI the guardian class will consequently share all the work oI the men, which makes it necessary
Ior both that they shall receive the same education and be Iree Irom strictly domestic duties.
9

Plato`s system oI communism was so much illogical and impracticable that even his most
IaithIul disciple Aristotle could not prevent himselI Irom criticizing this scheme. Aristotle
disagrees on the points that the community oI wives would create conIusion and disharmony in
the social order. In an attempt to attain unity we would be arranging the very destruction oI it. He
also says that the children common to all were bound to be neglected. It was absurd according to
him to use the analogy oI animals in support oI the community oI wives. Unlike the animals,
human beings have consciousness oI selI. As per him, state-controlled mating would be
unworkable and would not bring the best males and the Iemales together. To conclude, we can
say that the Plato`s communism was a heroic remedy Ior insurmountable ills pervading the
Greek society oI those days.
4

3.6. Plato`s Rule of Philosophy
Plato`s concept oI rule oI Philosopher king is a corollary oI Plato`s concept oI justice. As already
pointed out, he divided the human mind into three elements reason, spirit and appetite. He
accorded a position oI pride to the element oI reason in mind as well in the organization oI the
state. Plato believed that one oI the major causes oI the prevailing turmoil was that the ignorant

9
Ibid, p.68.
4
N. Jayapalan, omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 1, p.15.
were ruling over the wise. He said, Until philosophers are kings and princes oI the world have
the spirit and powers oI philosophy, cities will never have rest Irom their evils (The Republic).
According to Plato, only by the rule oI the philosopher kings can the state have a government in
which the rulers rule in wisdom and in unselIishness Ior their eyes have seen the truth and they
think oI their exalted oIIices not as opportunities Ior selI-aggrandizement but as a sacred burden
to be borne Ior the good oI the ruled.
41

The conception oI rule by the philosopher king, which is described by ProI. Foster as the most
proIoundly original conception in the entire political thought oI Plato has some distinct
Ieatures.
4
Firstly, Plato did not Iavor democratic system oI government in which every citizen
had the right to participate in the aIIairs oI the state. He denounced it as a government oI the
ignorant. On the other hand, he wanted to give unlimited powers to his Philosopher king in his
Ideal State. He was in Iavor oI a government by the elite. He argued that as all persons residing
in a state do not possess equal capacity to cultivate virtue, hence all were not entitled to
participate in the aIIairs oI the government. Secondly, the Philosopher king being a lover oI
wisdom and passionate seeker oI truth is in better position to determine what is in the interest oI
the community than an ordinary person. Thirdly, the interests oI the philosopher king and those
oI the state are identical and there is no clash between the two. In Iact, the philosophers have no
interests apart Irom the welIare oI the members oI the community. Fourthly, Plato`s philosopher
rulers are the product oI comprehensive and rigorous training and education spread over a period
oI thirty Iive years. In Iact the process oI education continues even aIter the ruler retires aIter
serving the state. Instead oI conceiving Education as a consequence oI the government as one oI
the Iunctions oI government, he conceives government as the consequence oI Education.
FiIthly, the philosopher rulers are assigned absolute powers by Plato and the rulers are not
accountable to public opinion or bound by customs or written laws. According to Plato, since the
philosopher rulers control over their actions, it would be Ioolish to bind their hands with the rules
oI law. Plato makes even the philosopher rulers, the slave oI the Iundamental social order as they
must respect the Iundamental articles oI the constitution and must not change the basic principles
on which the state rests.
4


41
Ibid, p.8.
4
R. M. Bhagat, Political Thought Plato to Marx, New Academic Publishing Co., Jalandhar, 7, p.87.
4
Prem Arora, Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, p.6.
In his insistence on the rule oI philosophy, Plato seemed to ignore many things and Ior that
reason, his doctrine oI the rule oI philosophy has been subject to severe criticism. By
propounding this theory, Plato ignored altogether the Greek conception oI the state as being an
association oI equals, having only the sovereignty oI law. His new monarchy was likely to
degenerate into an enlightened and beneIicial tyranny. The moral value oI Ireedom and civic
virtues oI selI-government are altogether ignored by Plato. Plato`s theory ruled out direct as well
as representative democracy. It is diIIicult to make out how Plato`s philosophers are to be Iitted
Ior their work oI government by the study oI mathematics and dialectics. Plato, on the whole,
remains an utopian and his attempt at the creation oI philosopher-rulers remains a very diIIicult
task to be achieved.
44

3.7. Plato on Democracy
Plato came Irom a Iamily which was highly critical oI democracy. He reIers to democracy in his
Republic as a charming Iorm oI government, Iull oI variety and disorder. He writes that, the
laws oI democracy remain a dead letter; its Ireedom is anarchy. Democracy Ior Plato is a state
oI civic dissolution in which everyone Iollows his own inclination and pursuit. It is lawless and
disorderly. According to Plato, in democracy even horses and asses claim all the rights and
dignities oI Iree citizens. Plato`s hatred oI democracy is due to the Iact that he associates political
power with trained intellect. Plato Iorgot one thing that the rule oI the philosopher king or oI the
aristocracy oI the intellect could not last long. He Iailed to appreciate the many virtues oI
democracy. He ignored the importance oI civic education which could come through active
participation oI all in governmental authority.
45








44
N. Jayapalan, omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 1, p.11.
45
Ibid, p..
Chapter - 4
Plato & Beyond Plato
Every political philosopher worth the name is unavoidably the epitome oI his time. He is always
the product oI the circumstances under which he lives. He cannot remain unaIIected by his
associations with the intellectual giants oI his age.
4.1. Difference in Ideologies -
In the Iundamentals oI political philosophy, Aristotle was a IaithIul disciple oI Plato. But he was
not a blind Iollower oI Plato. It was impossible that so powerIul a mind should accept implicitly
all Plato`s doctrines. Aristotle criticizes some theories oI the Statesman and Laws but his main
target oI attack is the Republic. The chieI diIIerences between the two are as Iollows
First, the Iundamental diIIerence oI approach between Plato and Aristotle is that Plato was an
idealist and Aristotle was a realist. Plato could conceive oI an Ideal without any concrete
maniIestation. He could think oI Beauty without any beautiIul thing. Such a conception oI
Idea does not appeal to a common-sense and matter-oI-Iact philosophers like Aristotle. He
repudiates Plato`s philosophy oI universal Iorms. According to him, no universal can exist apart
Irom particular. He taught that reality inheres in concrete and particular things; not in general
ideas. He propounds the philosophy oI particular to general in contrast with Plato`s philosophy
oI general to particular.
46

Second, Plato suggests certain radical and novel institutions which were never known to the
Greek world. His rule oI the philosopher king and the relegation oI laws and customs to an
insigniIicant position in the ideal state were clearly contrary to the existing notions. Similarly, his
communism oI wives and property were novel ideas. Aristotle repudiates the novel institutions
suggested by Plato and asserts that in the multitude oI years, these things, iI they were good
would certainly not have been unknown Ior almost everything has been Iound out. He criticizes
Plato Ior the departure Irom common experience. Thus there is a Iundamental diIIerence in the
approach and temper oI the two. While Plato would like to have new institutions which do not
accord with the existing political experience, Aristotle is essentially conservative in this regard.

46
R. M. Bhagat, Political Thought Plato to Marx, New Academic Publishing Co., Jalandhar, 7, p.1.
He does not like to have any institution which does not accord with the existing political
experience.
47

Third, Plato over emphasizes the unity oI the state. His scheme oI Iunctional specialization, rule
oI philosopher king and special training and environments Ior the guardians etc. are all directed
towards the goal oI achieving a strong sense oI unity. Aristotle, on the other hand, is opposed to
the idea oI such a high degree oI unity. He holds that the state is not made up only oI so many
men but oI diIIerent kind oI men, Ior the similar do not constitute the state. It is the very nature
oI the state to be plurality oI dissimilar. Proper unity in the state can be achieved through proper
organization oI relations among individuals possessing diverse qualities and perIorming diIIerent
Iunctions. He condemns Plato`s scheme oI Iunctional specialization and asserts that it would lead
to disunity rather than unity. He also does not agree with Plato that the division oI labour brought
the state into existence, because this presupposes the existence oI individual prior to the state.
Aristotle on the other hand holds that the state is by nature clearly prior to the Iamily and the
individual.
48

Fourth, Aristotle does not agree with Plato that property and Iamily were the chieI causes oI
social disharmony and the communism oI property and wives would do away with this
disharmony and pave the way Ior the unity oI the state. Aristotle holds that the unity oI the state
could be achieved not by abolishing the time honored institutions oI private property and Iamily
but by proper education oI the individuals in the spirit oI constitution. He considers the
ownership oI property as a natural human instinct and treats it as essential Ior the Iullest moral
development oI the individuals.
49
He says that, under the system oI communism oI property,
those who work hard and get little will have a grievance against those who work little and get
more. Common ownership is a great source oI dispute.
5
He considers property as a source oI
happiness and wonders how the guardians oI Plato could serve the interest oI the state iI they
were rendered unhappy due to denial oI private property and Iamily.
FiIth, Aristotle does not agree with Plato`s notion oI communism oI wives. He points out that
one Iemale cannot be the wiIe oI all guardians. II so, it will create disharmony, instead oI unity

47
Prem Arora, Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, p.48.
48
Ibid, p.5.
49
Ibid, p.5.
5
N. Jayapalan, omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 1, p.15.
which, which is the aim oI Plato. The Iamily is a natural school oI moral conduct and is a
preparation Ior the state. Under Plato`s communism, unholy acts may be done against near
relatives because the relationship is unknown.
51
Under the communism oI wives, the children are
bound to be neglected. He also Iinds the system oI state controlling the mating as impracticable.
Sixth, Aristotle does not approve oI the arrangement envisaged by Plato in his ideal state in
which the overwhelming majority oI the population viz. the peasants are completely neglected.
He even disapproves the scheme oI education as well as theory oI communism as it was meant
only Ior the Guardian Class. Aristotle argues that this is bound to lead to an unbridgeable gulI
between the Guardians and the non-Guardians and create two hostile states within the same state.
II the majority oI the population is not given any chance to develop their personality,
dissatisIaction is bound to arise which can pose a serious threat to the unity and harmony oI the
state.
4.2. Plato`s Communism and Modern Communism -
The communism theory given by Plato has many similarities and dissimilarities with the modern
communism. But beIore making a comparison between Plato`s Communism and modern
Communism, it is desirable to understand the meaning oI the modern Communism. Modern
Communism expounded by Karl Marx and modiIied by Lenin and Stalin is based on the theory
oI Class struggle. It considers state as an instrument oI exploitation and holds that the class
struggle will culminate in the overthrow oI the present capitalist system and establishment oI
dictatorship oI proletariat. In course oI time, the state shall wither away and a stateless and a
classless society shall emerge.
5

This is inevitable in view oI the diIIerent conditions under which the two communisms emerged.
Plato`s communism was the product oI conditions prevailing in Fourth century B.C. Athens,
while the modern communism is the result oI the post-industrial revolution conditions i.e.
capitalist exploitation oI the working classes. The chieI diIIerences are as Iollows. Firstly, Plato`s
communism applied only to the guardian class and the vast majority oI people consisting oI
peasants, workers, artisans etc. did not come under its purview. On the other hand, the modern
communism applies to the vast majority oI people consisting oI workers, peasants, working

51
Ibid, p.5.
5
Prem Arora, Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, p.4.
classes etc. In other words class considerations dominated Plato`s communism whereas the
modern communism does not believe in class considerations.
Secondly, Plato`s communism is essentially political in nature and aims at unity oI the state.
Plato deprives the ruling class oI private property because he considers its possession by them is
detrimental to the interest oI the state. He thereIore pleads Ior separation oI economic and
political power oI the state. On the other hand the modern communism keeps economic and
political power in the hands oI the working classes, through nationalization oI the economic
resources and equitable distribution oI wealth.
Third, Plato`s communism does not want to eIIect any changes in the existing economic
structure and leaves the producing class intact. Whereas the modern communism wants to eIIect
a basic change in the economic
Plato`s communism is rather halI-communism. It is not an institution oI social whole. It aIIects
only the two upper classes, whereas modern communism aIIects the whole society and is
applicable to all. Plato`s communism did not aim at the removal oI private property as an
institution, whereas modern communism aims at the removal oI private property as an
institution. Plato`s communism is not based on the principle oI equality, whereas modern
communism is not based on the principle oI equality. Plato`s communism means communism oI
wives also, whereas modern communism does not touch the Iamily. It stands Ior abolition oI
property only. Plato`s communism is to be attained through the agency oI the state, whereas
modern communism regards the state as an institution oI exploitation in the hands oI the
capitalisms. For Plato, the state is all partnership ins science, art, virtue and in all perIection,
whereas, modern communism is to be attained through the establishment oI a classless society.
Plato`s communism is national in character and is achieved through an appeal to the altruism oI
the governing classes, whereas, modern communism is international in character and is achieved
through an appeal to the Iidelity oI the workers. Plato`s communism is achieved through
education and peaceIul means, whereas, modern communism believes in revolution and violent
means Ior bringing the communist society into existence. Lastly, Plato`s communism is
spiritualist whereas modern communism is all materialist.
5


5
N. Jayapalan, omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 1, p.14.
There are a Iew similarities between the Plato`s communism and Modern Communism also.
Both are based on the ignorance oI the essentials oI human nature and human instincts. Both
hold that the society is composed oI a number oI classes. While Marx believes that there are only
two classes, the haves and the have-nots, Plato envisages the existence oI three classes viz.
rulers, warriors and peasants. Both are opposed to the holding oI private property. In modern
communism, this applies to all the classes oI the society but in Plato`s communism, it applies
only to the guardian class.
54
Both are impracticable iI applied on a very vast scale. Both aim to
dominate unregulated economic competition. Both aim to promote political unity and social
harmony and to develop a sense oI social service among the individuals. Both visualize a social
whole in which an individual secures his own interests best by securing the general interest.
55

4.3. Variation in the Ideal State of Aristotle -
Taking into account oI the ideal state oI Aristotle in comparison to the ideal state given by Plato,
it is clearly evident that Aristotle Ielt the impact oI Plato, even though he was more practical and
realistic than Plato. It may be noted that Aristotle was not an absolutist like Plato. He asserts that
it cannot be pronounced as to which is the best government Ior a particular society without
taking into account the special nature oI the people. For example, iI a community has a single
outstanding person with predominant virtue, the Monarchy shall be an ideal government. But iI it
possesses a Iew, instead oI one, men oI virtue, Aristocracy is the best suited government. But iI
there is a multitude oI people possessing the ability to rule, the best government Ior them is
Polity. Hence, Aristotle would like to take into account the special nature oI the people beIore
prescribing an ideal state Ior them. Aristotle insists that the ultimate sovereignty must reside in
the law and even the rulers should be subject to it.
The ideal state oI Aristotle is the small city-state consisting oI a small and intimate group oI
citizens whose social liIe overlaps the interests oI Iamily, oI religion and oI Iriendly personal
intercourse. It is an ethical institution which aims to bring about moral improvement amongst the
citizens. He holds that state alone can provide the conditions under which the individual can
achieve the highest type oI moral development. Even in his ideal state, like Plato, Education
plays an important role in making the citizens virtuous. He also insists on compulsory state

54
Prem Arora, Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, p.4.
55
N. Jayapalan, omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 1, p.14.
regulated education to cultivate good habits among citizens and to make members perIect.
56
He
also used division oI labour among the society. His ideal state is dominated by the middle class.
He believed that it is the middle class alone, which can provide stability to the state because it
possesses the twin qualities oI obedience as well as command.
57
His ideal state should consist oI
six classes viz. agriculturists, artisans, a war-like class, leisured class, priests and administrators.
He does not consider the members oI the Iirst two classes as citizens and thereIore does not give
them any share in the administration oI the state. The last Iour classes alone constitute the
citizens and enjoy the exclusive prerogative to exercise all political power.


















56
Prem Arora, Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, p.56.
57
Ibid, p.57.
Chapter 5
Conclusion
Plato`s philosophy was not only Ior his times, it is oI universal validity. Maxey writes that,
there was much in Plato oI the ephemeral and the provincial, but the mid rib oI his political
philosophy was timeless and universal. He is Ior all times. Plato did not develop his philosophy
in isolation. There was close relationship between his doctrines and the currents oI practical
Greek Politics. The inIluence oI Sparta in the Republic is very obvious. It is crystal clear that
most oI the thoughts oI Plato in the Republic are inIluenced by the political and social ideas oI
the Spartan people. As in Sparta, so in the Republic, the ruling class was completely preoccupied
with political aIIairs, living a liIe oI austerity, and partook and supervised a strict discipline in
order to maintain complete uniIormity among its citizens. Like Sparta, Plato also sacriIiced the
interest oI the individual and the Iamily Ior the cause oI the state. Plato`s scheme oI education,
the idea oI the improvement oI the race, the system oI common tables, community oI property
and wives, participation oI women in the political and military liIe oI the community, hatred Ior
the poets and administrative organisation are the direct result oI Spartan inIluence. Plato thought
and wrote in terms oI the city-state oI ancient Hellas. Plato`s state is equipped Ior war more than
Ior peace and this was in conIormity with Hellenic conditions and traditions.
There is a lot oI universalism in Plato. He is the originator oI much that is best in the institutions
oI modern civilization. He was a source oI much inspiration in modern political thought, on the
rule oI intellect, on Iunctional specialization, on the emancipation oI women, on their equality
with men and his principles oI eugenics are Ieatures oI permanent and universal interest in his
political philosophy. Many oI the conceptions oI the middle ages the Renaissance, ReIormation
and the Humanist movements owe much to him, and show the universality oI his philosophy.
The Nocturnal Council oI the Laws points to the modern inquisition, and modern censorship.
Modern communism may be diIIerent Irom his but the aims are the same unity, the solidarity
oI the state. His enunciation oI the principles oI constitutional or divided sovereignty and oI
natural theology is very useIul to us who claim to be modern.
58
His grasp oI the Iundamentals oI
liIe and his political radicalism make Plato a helpIul guide Ior all times and places.

58
N. Jayapalan, omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New
Delhi, 1, p.1.
Plato`s ideas, in more than one, are utopian. His Ideal State is the city in the heaven`, which is
not realizable on earth. His depiction oI the ideal state is the model oI what the state should be.`
Plato does not bother whether the existing states can catch up with his ideal state or not. As
Sabine puts it, the general nature oI the state as a kind or type is subject oI the book, and it is a
secondary question whether the actual states live up to the model or not. he was trying to show
what in principle a state must be; iI the Iacts are not like the principle, so much the worse Ior the
Iacts. But on the other hand, there are certain ideas conceived by Plato which are oI ever-lasting
importance to mankind. These ideas represent the Universalism` in Plato. He is the Iather oI
many schools oI thought, such as, Idealism, Romanticism, Socialism, Communism etc.

















BIBLIOGRAPHY
Sabine H. George & Thomas L Thorson, A History of Political Theory, OxIord & IBH
Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 197
Bhagat R. M., Political Thought. Plato to Marx, New Academic Publishing Co.,
Jalandhar, 7
Arora Prem & Brij Grover, Political Thought rom Plato to Marx, Cosmos Bookhive
Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon
Jayapalan N., omprehensive History of Political Thought, Atlantic Publishers &
Distributors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, 1
Jeremy Bentham, ragment on Government and Principles of Morals and Legislation,
OxIord, 1948
Ernest barker, Greek political theory,
Will Durant, The life of Greece,
Sprague, Rosamond Kent, The Older Sophists, Hacker Publishing Company,
Jarratt, Susan C. Rereading the Sophists. lassical Rhetoric Refigured. Carbon dale and
Edwards ville: Southern Illinois University Press, 1991,
Martin, Richard. Seven Sages as Performers of Wisdom. ultural Poetic in Archaic
Greece, OxIord, New York, 1988.
Ernest Barker, Greek Political Philosophy. Plato and his predecessors,
www.wikipedia.org
www.scribd.com
www.encyclopediabritannica.com