). Plato would never allow the full public participation in government, as Aristotle would like. According to Plato public judgments of approval and disapproval are based on belief and not on knowledge (Hacker 59). The Aristotelian polis, as opposed to Plato's, is a city with a large middle class that promotes stability and balances the conflicting claims of the poor and the rich. Aristotle combines elements of democracy with elements of aristocracy, again to balance opposing claims. Because he is aware that human interest is an inextricable entity, the distribution of scarce and valuable goods is in proportion to contribution to the good of the polis. This system provides for the self-interested that believe that those who work harder should receive more. Another point is that the citizens rule and are ruled in turn, insofar as the mixed social system allows. This is permissible because of the strong involvement of the citizens in government; it is what one would call a "true democracy." Overall, a spirit of moderation prevails.Our nation fits into Aristotles idea of a city-state very well. Upon reading history one can ascertain the fact that our nation came together in a similar matter as Aristotle suggested. First, during the initial colonization periods, back in the 1600s with the pilgrims, one could see the initial signs of a city-state system. These pilgrims soon built villages in the same way that Aristotle suggests. After the villages grew in population and means of communication where introduced among the villages, the townspeople began to unite under a common goal, namely survival. Soon the townships formed states; thus the 13 colonies came about. After many years all the states where united in a loose bond called the United States. Aristotles own view of how city-states are created is almost paralleled when reviewing our own history.Plato and Aristotle alike were two men who had ideas on ways to improve existing societ...
