[1310a]
[1]
so that when men destroy these classes by laws carried to
excess they destroy the constitutions. And a mistake is made both in democracies and in
oligarchies—in democracies by the demagogues, where the multitude is
supreme over the laws; for they always divide the state into two by fighting
with the well-to-do, but they ought on the contrary always to pretend to be
speaking on behalf of men that are well-to-do, while in democracies the
oligarchical statesmen ought to pretend to be speaking on behalf of the people,
and the oligarchics ought to take oath in terms exactly opposite to those which
they use now, for at present in some oligarchies they swear, “And I
will be hostile to the people and will plan whatever evil I can against
them,”1 but
they ought to hold, and to act the part of holding, the opposite notion,
declaring in their oaths, “I will not wrong the people.”
But the greatest of all the
means spoken of to secure the stability of constitutions is one that at present
all people despise: it is a system of education suited to the constitutions. For
there is no use in the most valuable laws, ratified by the unanimous judgement
of the whole body of citizens, if these are not trained and educated in the
constitution, popularly if the laws are popular, oligarchically if they are
oligarchical; for there is such a thing as want of self-discipline in a state,
as well as in an individual.But to
have been educated
[20]
to suit the
constitution does not mean to do the things that give pleasure to the adherents
of oligarchy or to the supporters of democracy, but the things that will enable
the former to govern oligarchically and the latter to govern themselves
democratically. But at present in the oligarchies the sons of the rulers are
luxurious, and the sons of the badly-off become trained by exercise and labor,
so that they are both more desirous of reform and more able to bring it about;
while in the democracies
thought to be the most democratic the opposite of what is expedient has come
about. And the cause of this is that they define liberty wrongly (for
there are two things that are thought to be defining features of democracy, the
sovereignty of the majority and liberty); for justice is supposed to be
equality, and equality the sovereignty of what ever may have been decided by the
multitude, and liberty doing just what one likes. Hence in democracies of this
sort everybody lives as he likes, and ‘unto what end he
listeth,’ as Euripides2 says. But this is bad; for to live in
conformity with the constitution ought not to be considered slavery but
safety.This therefore, speaking broadly, is a
list of the things that cause the alteration and the destruction of
constitutions, and of those that cause their “security and
continuance.”It remains to speak of monarchy, the causes
that destroy it and the natural means of its preservation.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.