Most free (or considered free) countries in today’s world are thought to be so thanks to having the pleasure of enjoying democracy, or at least, so we are told. The concept of democracy is thought to have been the result of the great thinkers and philosophers of the ancient Greece’s Archaic period. But is modern democracy anything like what Athenian citizens witnessed during the Assemblies (the Ecclesiae)? This article delves into the differences between democracy at its conception; what they knew as demokratia and what we experience today and what we can learn from the past.
A Brief History
Democracy in the ancient world has its beginnings in the city state polis of Athens in 6th century B.C Greece. The first big disruptive change happened thanks to Solon of Athens, who in the early 6th century B.C established the council of 400 citizens, called archons that held most of the power. At the time, Athens was ruled by the council and the Areopagus, made up of elder archons. This was mostly made up of Athenian aristocrats that held military, judicial and legislative power. Throughout most of the Archaic period, these aristocrats had inspired ordinary residents of Attica (modern day Athens) to overthrow rivals and thus instituting and perpetuating tyrant rule.
The next major shift happened in 510 B.C when Spartan King Cleomenes, helped the Cleisthenes, a rival of the contemporary Athenian tyrant, and the Athenians overthrow Hippias under the advice of the Delphic oracle. They were successful in doing so and Cleisthenes became a strongman in the aftermath but in 525 B.C, citizens began to insist to take matters into their own hands and begin making political decisions for themselves. Cleisthenes felt inclined to cede power to the citizens, feeling grateful for their help. He then proceeded to break up of the four old tribes and divided Attica into 30 units; the trittyes. Citizens that made up these trittyes formed the council of 500. Men were chosen by lot to serve as president of the council for a day regardless of their social standing or occupation, they were called upon to preside over thousands of citizens at an assembly discussing very important matters, from war to crop supplies, overseeing the decisions and voting process. All citizens were allowed to come to this assembly (the Ecclesia) to discuss and vote. Political power depended on Athenian citizens getting involved in the Ecclesia by speaking and persuading others by expressing their ideas prompting others to vote in their favour. Athenians voted on matters, not on people. They also engaged in ostracism, which was a system in place to prevent anyone from using the Assembly as a means to consolidate power that could lead into tyranny.
However, what is mentioned above, sounds very different from the democratic systems we take part in today. Just as an example of this, the American constitution does not include the word democracy once. Some of the founding fathers had very interesting opinions on the matter:
“I do not say that democracy has been more pernicious on the whole, and in the long run, than monarchy or aristocracy. Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than either.” -John Adams.[1]
This is because what we are familiar with today is representative democracy, where we elect people from a selected group that we think align with our beliefs and allow them to make decisions for us; they represent us. This form of democracy has its origins in the 18th century[2]. As time went on, population densities increased, and representatives became part of political parties that ascribed to an ideology. This seemed the most efficient way of covering the needs of increasingly larger and more diverse groups of people. Thus, now few elected individuals represent the population, and they are allowed to elect other representatives including officers of the government or of legislation. Generally, the amount of power the representatives are given is outlined in a constitution. There has been a lot of debate as to how much power these representatives should be allowed, as this is critical to avoid its abuse. But some philosophers of the time, like Edmund Burke , argued representatives should act more as trustees rather than as people who represent the opinions and wishes of the electorate; exercising their own judgement as they would know best[3]. What would late 6th century Athenians have thought of this?
The Lesson
Thus, this seems like yet another one of those times where the Greeks hold an important lesson about our world that we seem to have forgotten. Today, when we proclaim our gratitude to democracy for making us free we should look back and remember what it was once really about. A clue might lie in the etymology of the word; demokratia meaning power (kratos) of the people (demos). Hence, it follows that we question to ourselves, “does a representative truly represent the people?”. Another important point comes from the fact that due to the nature of representing large groups of diverse people. It seems like in those cases, the only option is to create ideologies that potentially represent what large groups of people think. But is it? Is there really no other way? In many cases ideologies foment polarization and extremism of the population and it generalizes what people think to a too great of an extent sometimes. The actual needs and opinions of the public could end up simplified and drown out by ideologies and we also run the risk of political parties becoming “mediocre” in the sense that they become increasingly general to appeal as many people as possible.
Therefore, the Ancients seemed to have it figured out. But did they? Was the power back then truly held by “the people”? Unfortunately, not. For starters, the “power of the people” in the word democracy was relative, since “the people” did not include everyone in the population but rather about 20 percent. Let me explain, only Athenian citizens were allowed to vote and take part in the Assembly. The catch is that only free adult males born of Athenian parents enjoyed the citizenship status, which made up about just 20 percent of the population at the time.
A Compromise
Despite the exclusion of the majority of the Athenian society from governmental matters, the ancient Greeks still could teach us a thing or two about what the way we conduct our government today by [including] the knowledge and opinions of everyone, as opposed to just the ones of our representatives. The major obstacle to this is that we now live in places with increasingly large populations and population densities. However, due to the present technological advancement and the widespread use of the internet, it could be possible to emphasize more local government and more efficiently engage larger groups of people.
SOURCES
[1] Adams, J., & Adams, A. (2001). Letters of John and Abigail Adams: 1762 to 1826. New York, N.Y. Westvaco Corporation.
[2] Bessette, J. (2001). Deliberation: Political Aspects. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 3377-3380. doi:10.1016/b0-08-043076-7/01130-x
[3] Dovi, S. (2018, August 29). Political Representation. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/political-representation/
Larned, J. (2017, May 03). The Flaw in Our Democracy. Retrieved November 26, 2020, from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1899/10/the-flaw-in-our-democracy/525306/
Morris, I., & Powell, B. B. (2015). The Greeks history, culture, and society. Brantford, Ontario: W. Ross MacDonald School Resource Services Library
Pomeroy, et al. 2014. A Brief History of Ancient Greece: Politics, Society and Culture. (4th edition, Oxford University Press).
Comments