equal or not. The egalitarianism of the Democratic state can be seen as misguided, if Plato's statements are taken and elaborated upon: the idea of equality and equal rights for all citizens is based upon a noble ideal, but is not practical. In pragmatic terms, all men are unequal in almost every sense: some have greater ability, some can control their desires better, others are a potential danger to themselves and others if left ungoverned. All opinions are not equal: the politician who panders to popular opinion in order to further his own career is not a true statesman. The desires of the people must be controlled by the character of authoritarian conditioning, which is itself supported by the reasoning of a government which knows the best course for the state to follow. Plato's idea of a Democracy was different from the current government system in Britain: in the city-state of Athens (a city-state can be described as a 'city' nucleus, with an are of agricultural land attached - Desmond Lee, translator of the 'Republic'), any state decision was decided on a general vote by the adult men present at the relevant meeting of the 'Assembly'. However, the establishment of television as the main political medium has opened up opportunities of a direct approach to the whole electorate that did not exist before in modern society (Lee). This level of mass consultation is perhaps the nearest that any modern Democracy has been to the system used in Plato's city-state two and a half thousand years ago. This allows us to see for ourselves how the eagerness of politicians to maintain public popularity, even at the sacrifice of the nation's long-term welfare, can lead to problems as difficult issues are never tackled. The politicians do not want to upset the people by leading them in an immediately upsetting, but ultimately rewarding direction: they simply are not statesmen.Plato's subsequent criticism of Democracy is that the increased power of i...
