The Pros And Cons Of Athenian Democracy
People often refer to the United States as a democracy, yet if one were to ask a citizen of Athens in XXX bc how they would classify the American government structure, I seriously doubt that they would agree. Athens on the other hand was a democracy, and a successful one for a short time. However, no country or state wants to be successful for just a short time, the longing is to rule sovereign for centuries upon centuries as a great and powerful nation. Unfortunately for Athens democratic state, this didn’t happen, somehow they digressed from the lofty idealism of democracy. Their failure begs the question, is democracy even an idealistic state of government? Throughout history people have been relegated to a variety of class structures.
…show more content…
Here in the United States, we seem to think we have a superior form of meting out justice, the jury trial. Tried by your peers, everyone accused is entitled to defend themselves, innocent until proven guilty, our justice is blind. Yet there are studies that show that a twelve person jury is more likely to result in a hung jury than a six person jury (ARONSON). In addition, there are frequently several people on each twelve person jury who are mostly silent, while there are another several who do over fifty percent of the speaking (ARONSON). Athenian democracy had jury trials as well, and their juries had up to 2,500 people on them (FREEMAN, pg. 255). The implications are obvious: if twelve people can’t come to an agreement, then it’s likely that over two thousand won’t either, in addition, the increased likelihood that the more boisterous will overrun the more somber jurors. Add to this the fact that there weren’t set laws or any process for appeal, and it appears that jury was simply another word for …show more content…
With a government outright requiring direct involvement by a significant percentage of it’s citizens on a daily and yearly basis all while disallowing a significant portion of its population from becoming citizens, Athens was essentially stunting her own growth. Yet Athens continued in her imperialist actions, taking more and more land and absorbing more and more people, all while she neglected to grow her citizenry. Democracy in Athens was plagued by not only it’s citizens, but through actual widespread disease, as well as a seemingly perpetual state of war. With hindsight, the fall of Athenian democracy is of no great shock. Yet to those citizens not of aristocratic lineage it must've been a brutal blow, their power and influence lost after having had just a short taste of both. This often seems the case, where people desire more power and influence than is best. Plato presented what was in his mind an ideal class structure for society, based on an individuals capacities, and yet in my observation this is a highly criticized point of view even today. If a boy or girl had recognizably more natural ability in one area or another, it seems it would be far easier to foster and grow that natural ability than to attempt and instill that same talent in another child. For those who, according to Plato, fall prey to their appetites, perhaps it is best if they aren’t elected by the mob of
Here in the United States, we seem to think we have a superior form of meting out justice, the jury trial. Tried by your peers, everyone accused is entitled to defend themselves, innocent until proven guilty, our justice is blind. Yet there are studies that show that a twelve person jury is more likely to result in a hung jury than a six person jury (ARONSON). In addition, there are frequently several people on each twelve person jury who are mostly silent, while there are another several who do over fifty percent of the speaking (ARONSON). Athenian democracy had jury trials as well, and their juries had up to 2,500 people on them (FREEMAN, pg. 255). The implications are obvious: if twelve people can’t come to an agreement, then it’s likely that over two thousand won’t either, in addition, the increased likelihood that the more boisterous will overrun the more somber jurors. Add to this the fact that there weren’t set laws or any process for appeal, and it appears that jury was simply another word for …show more content…
With a government outright requiring direct involvement by a significant percentage of it’s citizens on a daily and yearly basis all while disallowing a significant portion of its population from becoming citizens, Athens was essentially stunting her own growth. Yet Athens continued in her imperialist actions, taking more and more land and absorbing more and more people, all while she neglected to grow her citizenry. Democracy in Athens was plagued by not only it’s citizens, but through actual widespread disease, as well as a seemingly perpetual state of war. With hindsight, the fall of Athenian democracy is of no great shock. Yet to those citizens not of aristocratic lineage it must've been a brutal blow, their power and influence lost after having had just a short taste of both. This often seems the case, where people desire more power and influence than is best. Plato presented what was in his mind an ideal class structure for society, based on an individuals capacities, and yet in my observation this is a highly criticized point of view even today. If a boy or girl had recognizably more natural ability in one area or another, it seems it would be far easier to foster and grow that natural ability than to attempt and instill that same talent in another child. For those who, according to Plato, fall prey to their appetites, perhaps it is best if they aren’t elected by the mob of