Philosopher Kings

While we’re in the relatively calm time before the partisan conflicts begin again, in earnest, in January, we can contemplate politics on a macro scale.

As individuals, we tend to make decisions based on fairly narrow self-interest. If we are relatively happy we tend to support the status quo. If we aren’t, we look around for someone to blame and try to find someone who will fix whatever is causing our dissatisfaction.

The collective will of the majority benefits those who control the levers of power and espouse what is perceived as being the remedy for those dissatisfied or providing a comfortable bed for the satisfied.

On a micro scale we feel better when our paycheck is adequate or a bit better than necessary. On a macro, and admittedly a simplistic scale, power flows back and forth between labor and capital. When labor becomes sufficiently dissatisfied with their lot in life, power is delivered, one way or another, to those who favor their issues. Likewise, when capital, corporations, banks etc. feel they are beset upon by the demands of labor, they then exert pressure to return to policies that favor business. In non-democratic societies the swings tend to be violent and destructive. In societies where democratic values are upheld, the swings are determined by the ballot box rather than by bullets.

It is also human nature for folks, when their “side” wins, to overreach and institute practices which ultimately undermine their agenda. When labor controls the levers of power those who lead tend to reward their base with greater and greater benefits until capital revolts. When capital controls the levers of power, profit flows in ever greater volume to the wealthy until folks revolt and demand an end to oligarchy.

These swings take decades to work their way through society. It takes time before the general public becomes aware that the system needs correction.

The question of how to construct a government which makes consistently good decisions which benefit all aspects of society goes back, at least, to Plato. Plato believed philosophers, being wise and virtuous, should govern. That has never actually been tried. The closest was Marcus Aurelius who was, perhaps, the greatest leader of the Roman Empire. That he is the only one who comes to mind demonstrates the reality that truly good leaders rarely achieve power. We tend, instead, to choose leaders who appeal to our perceived emotional needs and they tend to be demagogues who seek increased personal power by catering to the most vocal of their supporters. And so the cycle rolls on down through history.

The obvious solution to this self-defeating cycle is not to elect philosophers but to increase the capacity of the general population to reach good decisions. Unfortunately, that requires considerable support of public education. Education is, unfortunately, subject to the same divisive manipulations by those who desire to swing public sentiment. Alas, the ultimate solution lies in the unlikely scenario where power is not granted to those who seek it.