EVALUACIÓN ECONÓMICA DEL IMPACTO DEL MEDIO AMBIENTE EN LA

A common perspective could be discerned in the political belief structures of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. They were essentially aristocratic conservatives who spoke and defended the values, ways of life and attitudes of an aristocracy (noble families, the landed property owners and the warriors) that was on a decline. Though aware of the degeneration, they were keen on revitalizing and reforming the aristocracy so that it could once again become the basis of civic life. This was seen as the best way to counter the sweep of the democratic revolution led by traders, artisans and merchants, and the crass materialism and individualism that was slowly engulfing Athenian society. Plato equated democratization with moral corruption and degradation, and endeavoured to reform and revolutionize the general quality of human life. Athens of the fifth century BC was similar to England of the nineteenth century. Both had an aristocracy that enjoyed social status and wealth, but did not exercise a monopoly of political power. In both, the aristocracy had to demonstrate, had to acquire power by means of impeccable behaviour (Russell 1961: 126).

T he Republic was an indictment of the Athenian way of life and its vibrant participatory democratic institutions. Plato dismissed the Athenian practice of happy versatility, whereby every Greek male adult could participate in the political process and offer a political opinion, as amateurism. He attacked democracy for another reason—the incompetence and ignorance of politicians, for that gave rise to factionalism, extreme violence, and partisan politics, which were the causes of political instability. Moreover, democracy did not tolerate highly gifted persons, a view that was reinforced by the execution of Socrates. Plato blamed the restored democracy in Athens for the death of Socrates. However, he neglected the fact that Socrates was close to Critias and Alcibiades, two of the 30 tyrants who passed the death sentence, and was also given an option to go into exile, which he refused to avail. It was Socrates who chose to face trial and accept the foregone death sentence.

Nothing can be m ore sublim e than the bearing of Socrates during and after his trial, and this sublim ity m ust not be sentim entalized by the representing of Socrates as the victim of an ignorant m ob. His death was alm ost a Hegelian tragedy , a conflict in which both sides were right (Kitto 1951: 153–154).

Plato deliberately ignored these facts in order to build his case for a rule by a small group of privileged and extraordinary persons endowed with esoteric wisdom. Plato’s aversion to the democratic experiment, which reached its zenith during the time of Pericles (493–429 BC), was partly intellectual and partly personal. Though he was introduced to democratic ideas by his stepfather Pyrilampas, a close friend of Pericles, he remained an aristocrat both by birth and conviction. These were reinforced by Critias and Charmides.

Plato wrote at a time when Athens was at the crossroads after defeat in the Peloponnesian War. The age of Pericles with all its glory and achievements had paled into insignificance due to the defeat of Athens in the Peloponnesian War (431–404 BC). Athens under Pericles has becomes the political, cultural and intellectual centre of Greece. However, the defeat of Athens in the War was due to an error in military strategy. Victorious Sparta did not fare any better as an imperial power, for it lacked the training and expertise to handle foreign affairs, leading to the rise of Persia within a short period of time. Plato mistakenly castigated Athenian democracy for the defeat. It should be noted that Athenian democracy was limited, for it debarred aliens, slaves and women from participating in the political process. In spite of the narrowness, it was the “fullest in the directness and equality with which all the citizens control legislation and administer public affairs” (Durant 1939: Vol. II: 266). It remains till today an example of a vibrant, participatory democracy. Rousseau resurrected its ideals when he criticized the English representative democracy as freedom of the English people once in five years.

The clash between Athens and Sparta, the two power centres at that time, was depicted by Plato as representing two opposing ideologies, competing political systems and different lifestyles. In many

ways Athenian-Spartan rivalry resembled the cold war between the United States and the former Soviet Union after the Second World War. Athens was individualistic, excelling in literary pursuits, highly creative, democratic and open. Sparta on the other hand was statist, regimented, oligarchic and militaristic. Plato concluded that Sparta’s military victory was due to its political and social system. He tried to infuse the communitarian spirit of Sparta into the individualistic Athenian society, and temper democracy with aristocratic values. However, the model that he sketched in the Republic, far from integrating the two models, was highly holistic, elitist, regimented and authoritarian. Instead of being objective,

Plato is alway s concerned to advocate views that will m ake people accept what he thinks virtuous; he is hardly ever intellectually honest, because he allows him self to j udge doctrines by their social consequences. Even about this, he is not honest; he pretends to follow the argum ent and to be j udging by purely theoretical standards, when in fact he is twisting the discussion so as to lead to a virtuous result. He introduced this vice into philosophy where it has persisted ever since. It was probably largely hostility to the Sophists that gave this character to his dialogues. One of the defects of all philosophers since Plato is that their inquiries into ethics proceed on the assum ption that they already know the conclusion to be reached (Russell 1961: 95).