Rule By the Elite
June 25, 2010
The society we have described can never grow into a reality or see the light of day, and there will be no end to the troubles of states, or indeed, my dear Glaucon, of humanity itself, till philosophers become kings in this world, or till those we now call kings and rulers really and truly become philosophers.
Plato, The Republic, 473d
The idea of a philosopher king is generally taken to be one of Plato’s most abhorrent views. He seemed to think that a very small group of people should wield political power. A very small group of people who shared a particular vision, had been enculturated into a certain way of life, came from a similar background, and shared a narrow set of values to do with all matters of life and governance. This idea is thought to be so abhorrent because it sounds so elitest, in privileging some group over all other groups, and so undemocratic, in not allowing the people to have sufficient influence or control over the government.
Yesterday’s political events, in which Kevin Rudd stepped down as PM and Julia Gillard replaced him, leave a bitterly undemocratic taste in my mouth. Who would have thought that in a democratic country like Australia, a small, mysterious group of people who share a particular vision, have been enculturated into a certain way of life, come from a similar background, and share a narrow set of values are able to change the leader of the country? Moreover, who would have thought that they are able to do so with such obscure, private, political reasons?
Democracy my foot!
Agree Tim – it left me feeling pretty angry. I think it would have been different if there was a significant political or moral reason – but the best I have heard is he wasn’t collegiate enough. Sure, but that isn’t enough in my view to change the leadership of a democratic country.
The joys of the Westminster system of government. It just failed Britain, and dare I say it has failed us today.
Yes, it is a funny ‘ol system. Right on about the lack of significant reasons. The one I have most heard is that he failed to get his message across.
I have such a bitter after taste from yesterday’s events.
…most unsavoury
i don’t find it that shocking. the leader of the federal parliamentary labour party is not a despot, (s)he can only lead with the support of the party caucus. its not entirely accurate to say that a “small, mysterious group of people” ousted rudd: technically, the caucus, the mps, ousted him. what the small, mysterious group did was to organize a voting block within the caucus, but that’s what democratic politics is all about. besides which, the first ministry has never been an elected office in our system of government.
Cam, although the fact may be that we don’t “elect” our Prime Minister and they serve at the pleasure of their party caucus, the fact is that Labor was elected on the promise (either express or implied) or trust that a Rudd Government would lead Australia for the next three years until the next election, and they put forward policies etc. on that basis. Many Australians elected Labor for the first time in a long time because they trusted Rudd and what he did.
To now hear (as we did on Friday) that there were a bunch of Labor members who met in a restaurant in Canberra for months many months to plot how they would bring about Rudd’s downfall betrays the trust that the Australian people put in the Labor Government when they put them into office in 2007. I find it disgraceful and I really don’t think Gillard deserves people’s votes, however good she may be. (I don’t think Abbott does either, but that’s by the by). It is a short-term political move designed to sure up the future of several members’ careers rather than focusing on the good of running the country for the benefit of their constituents.
To suggest that the Federal Labor party “shares a particular vision, has been enculturated into a certain way of life, come from a similar background, and share a narrow set of values to do with all matters of life and governance” grossly misrepresents the chaotic reality of our elected government.
The people who orchastrated and planned the coup were without doubt strange bed fellows united by a common purpose.
Fair call, they are probably a more heterogenous bunch then my remark makes them out to be. But still members of the one political party, and so representative of a very narrow slice of views about all manner of things from our pluralistic society.