"Republic"

I find some measure of irony that Damios happens to be reading “Anarchism: A Theoretical Analysis”, as at the same time I am reading Plato’s “Republic”. The name is a tad bit misleading; “Republic” has little to do with a republic system of government at all; instead it could better be described as Socrates’ love letter to Orwellian Fascism. The point in his argument I find most amusing is the claim that philosophers, whom Socrates claims to be the wisest, bravest, most honest, and generally best example of the human race, should naturally be the ones ruling his ideal society. This is rather similar to how I hold the opinion that I will throw my full support behind any fascist organization, no matter what previous beliefs I hold, if the goal of said fascist organization is to make me the one in charge.

But ignoring the logical fallacies present in the “Republic’s” argument, and the fact that history has shown the impossibility of some of his claims, there is a convincing rational behind the argument. Reading it feels like listening in on a conversation of generals just before they launch the coup, as they’re all convincing themselves how much better off the country will be once the old, corrupted government is removed. Of course we’ll be better leaders than they are. We won’t make the same mistakes. We’re all honest men here. Honestly.

Now, I’ve always had a love-hate relationship with totalitarian governments. I love the implied efficiency with fascism, even though it is rarely actually carried out, and the concept of an elite, chosen by their ability, actually leading a country instead of falling to the opinion of every group that can shout loudly enough, strikes a chord with me. From this perspective, I can see why one would support the ideals presented in the “Republic”. While the government Socrates describes did serve as partial inspiration for Oceania in Orwell’s “1984”, Socrates’ vision isn’t all that oppressive. The purpose of the rulers is to act as selfless guardians of the state, chosen by merit, not birth, and the system he describes seems to allow a great amount of freedom amongst the citizens. I can understand some of his sentiments there, for in my mind, the most efficient form of government would be in the mold of enlightened absolutism. A government which has the power to interfere in their country where deemed necessary for the continued survival of the state, but allows for a great amount of freedoms anyways. Such a system could grant a nearly unprecedented amount of freedom in social and economic fields for its people, while maintaining the power necessary to protect that freedom from any possible threats.

Yet despite my images of a benevolently fascist utopia, the idea is impossible in its very concept. Freedom that exists only at the whim of the governing body cannot count as real freedom. Such a government could possibly suspend any rights available to its citizens at any time. Things such as freedom of speech cease being freedoms if they can be revoked whenever the government decides it doesn’t like what the people are speaking about. Even in the rare case where a leader who would support individual liberties out of principle appears, the life span of a human is going to throw the whole thing off anyways. Take the case of Joseph II of Austria, one of the best examples of enlightened absolutism done (mostly) right. During his reign, he used his powers as absolute monarch to cut through opposition and tradition, freeing the serfs, abolishing the more brutal criminal punishments, creating equality under the law, and ending press censorship, amongst other things. He certainly was not a popular leader, even amongst the common people who resented the numerous petty reforms he made (such as banning ginger bread), but he was one of the few enlightenment rulers who actually put their full support behind the reforms they spoke of. Yet within a few years after his death, ever last one of his reforms had been revoked.

Is enlightened absolutism impossible in today’s world? Definitely. Unless we come across some benevolent immortal content to act as a protector of our species while not interfering with our freedoms, it is unlikely any of us will see a working method in our lifetimes. Until something like that happens, I will continue to put my support behind advocating individual rights and freedom. However, if anyone happens to find an opening for absolute despot, be sure to give me a call. I promise I’ll be an excellent choice. Come on. You can trust me….