The Descent Of A Regime From A To An Oligarchy

Government is an essential part of civilization in modern and historic times. This crucial element of society has been observed in different forms. There are three main systems of governments: autocracy, oligarchy, and democracy. Which system a government belongs to is determined by who hold the sovereignty, meaning who has the supreme power and authority (“Sovereignty”). This leads to there being major differences between autocracies, oligarchies, and democracies.

If you compare Oligarchy vs Democracy on how stable a government these can provide, then certainly dictatorship wins hands down. Oligarchy government often resort to violent methods to curb any kind of public uprisings to protect its power and ruling status in the country.

Princeton University defines oligarchy as a form of power structure that effectively rests with a small number of people. The definition continues to say that these people can be distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, corporate or military control. I don’t understand why so many people would total power to control a person’s life and to say that it’s for their own well-being is unfair and unequal. If a

The type of government that will fit on my island would be democracy, because it is a system of the whole population of the state. I chose democracy because I would want my island to have laws similar to the ones of the United States. The reason why I didn't choose autocracy or oligarchy is because autocracy is a system of one government which means one person makes laws and has all the power to control how things work on the island. Oligarchy is a system in which the groups are small and have little little ideas for the island. The island will need large groups with leaders that will be in charge of certain things on the island this is why I think having democracy is better than the other two. You will have more groups to help you organize

Who would think Oligarchy has so many advantages and benefits? As an oligarch, I would like to introduce the pros of Oligarchy to the citizens. The structure of Oligarchy makes the decision- making process fast and easy. Parliament and the constitution are absent in oligarchy. The decisions in oligarchy are made rapidly. The agreements get accepted quickly because it’s made by a handful number of people. Oligarchs are knowledgeable and intelligent individual and everyone is capable of making a wise decision. In Oligarchy, women get the opportunity to advance to the higher position in power. People don’t have to be wealthy to advance to a better position; they only have to have knowledge and creativity. A competent person, who serves

Oligarchy comes from the Greek words “oligos” meaning “few” and “archo” meaning “rule”. Essentially “oligarchy” means “rule of the few in their own interests and not in the interest of the majority or the public good.” (Melville, 2011). Melville states that oligarchy was a “degeneration” of aristocracy as stated by Aristotle. Oligarchies were the most common form of government in the Ancient Greek city-states. In Sparta, the Gerousia (council of twenty-eight men over sixty-year of age together with the two kings) was an elite assembly dominated by the wealthier members of Spartan society. The Gerousia approved all laws that were submitted to the popular assembly for vote. The Ephors were a group of five men who were elected annually for a single term of office. The Ephors usually deferred to the guidance of the Gerousia (Brand, n.d.).

After the Assembly had convened for the night, I circled the Pnyx listening to the different factions discussing the day’s events. The Moderate Democrats approached the Farmer and told him they wanted to help the little guys like himself. The Radical Democrats thought the more people who have jobs and are paid the more money there would be circulating through the economy. They also thought the Socratics were biased and that everyone should be happy if they get the right to vote. The Oligarchs believe an oligarchy would be the best for Athens because action happens faster when fewer people have a say. As I am about to leave, a Socratic approached me and tells me I have a place in their society because I am educated. But do I want to live in a society without all my merchant friends who also happen to be metics?

History was written from the elite perspective because they had the money and the time to do. For example, all political decisions were made by the Senate and the Senate was made up of the rich, wealthy, aristocrats. The Senate were the one who determined farm policy, appointed governors, controlled the republic and the deployment of army, appointed military commander, and so much more. Some people wondered how the Senate got elected. The answer is that they were self elected and self appointed because they had the power to do so. Many people who were part of the assembly were wealthy too because many voting units went to the rich, while the proletarian only had a couple votes. The wealthy did not carry any financial burdens because they didn’t have to pay taxes. In fact, their wealth increased through the government. The rich would lend money to the state, and when the state paid back, it was with interest. Just like in today's generations, definite spending and regressive taxes result in the same redistribution of income.

In Aristotle's Politics, he focuses much on the regimes of an oligarchy and of a democracy. Democracies exists when the free and poor, being a majority, have authority to rule, and have an equal share in the city. Oligarchies exists when the few wealthy and better born have authority and grant benefits in proportion to a person's wealth (1280a:10-30;1290a:5-10).

In the dystopian novel 1984, George Orwell warns the future generations of the threat of totalitarian rule by dramatizing the problem through elements of metaphors and imagery. In the passage on pages 205 and 206, Winston reads a book Oligarchical Collectivism, which perfectly depicts the harms of a totalitarian rule. Orwell paints a clear picture in which “every citizen...could be kept for twenty-four hours a day under the eyes of police and in the sound of official propaganda, with other channels of communication closed” (Orwell 206). After reading words such as “twenty-four hours” and “eyes of police”, a reader imagines a situation that resembles jail, where he or she experiences the threat of a totalitarian government in his or her head.

Oligarchs are rulers in an oligarchy that devote all of their material power resources to things such as income defense. They defend wealth by implementing certain policies in addition to their resources, to suit their needs. Income defense is thought to be a political challenge, but with a strong system of laws in play, property rights can help provide strong protections for what is owned. However, the property must be secured in a certain manner for a shift to occur. If property is not attacked and taken by the state without cause or compensation, nor can be threated laterally by other oligarchs or by the masses of non-propertied citizens, “there is a shift for oligarchs in the politics of wealth defense away from engaging in the coercion

Wealth in relation to the upper class is defined not as income, but “the value of everything a person or family owns, minus any debts” (Domhoff 2005). Income according to Domhoff, “is what people earn from work, but also from dividends, interest, and any rents or royalties that are paid to them on properties they own” (Domhoff 2011). Those who own a great deal of wealth do not derive it from income, although they may have a high income resulting from the returns on their wealth. (Domhoff 2011) As for the power the upper class wields on politics, the economy and the government, it is indirectly carried out “through the activities of a wide variety of organizations and institutions. These organizations and institutions are financed and directed by those members of the upper class who have the interest and ability to involve themselves in protecting and enhancing the privileged social position of their class” (Domhoff 2005). This description of the upper class by Domhoff provides the basis for the argument that it institutionally exist - an organized, cohesive group set apart by its wealth and power.

The power elite, or upper class, obtain their power not just from their money: their status is hereditary and preserved through history. Class itself cannot be defined without mentioning gender and race, as the majority of the upper class consists of white men. Those two axes of inequality mask the

The poor and common people will resent the oligarchy and decide that they are all worthy of making decisions. In this state the people will decide and the majority will rule. This is deeply unjust because Plato can not stress enough that only very few people can seek truth. With the state being run by people of appetite and spirit there is way too much room for the people to pursue their own desires. Plato saw how the democracy of Athens cost Socrates his life.

This paper will argue that money is problematic to Plato largely because his ideal city Kallipolis is filled with virtuous leaders and citizens living in harmony and unity. When money is involved, Plato believes that it is human nature for even the most virtuous leader to lack the will to resist the temptation. Plato discusses the five different types of regimes and constitutions people can live under, Aristocracy, Timocracy, Oligarchy, Democracy and Tyranny. As regimes shift into the next, virtue decreases and corruption in the state arises. When obtaining wealth and acquiring private property is a motivating factor for humans, people start making self-interested decisions; choosing to take part in politics and fighting in wars for personal gains, and not for the benefit of the whole. When education and training is not the priority from an early age, citizens become lazy and there is a divide in the city between the rich and the poor. Plato goes to great lengths to ensure that the city is just by abolishing private property and creating the noble lie.