Skip to main content

Full text of "Political Science Of The State"

See other formats

J05                             POLITICAL SCIENCE.
Again, the sway of the demagogue in city-states was some-
what different from the influence of the same
Demagogues.    persons jn a democracy of large extent, and
was also somewhat greater.    In the city-democracy it was
more a personal power, sometimes so great in the worst times
that tyrants grew out of this class.     Demagogues  arise,
says Aristotle (Pol., vi., or iv., 4, § 4), " when the resolutions
of the demus (i. e., the1 psephismata) have force and not the
law.    And this is owing to the demagogues who  do  not
appear in democracies where the law reigns, but where the
best citizens are in authority.—The demus, being a monarch,
seeks to play the monarch when it is not governed by law,
and becomes despotical, so that flatterers are held in honor.
And such a people is analogous to tyranny among the kinds
of monarchies; both also have the same character, both are
despotical over the better class."     He then goes on to re-
mark on the resemblance between the flatterer and the dema-
gogue, and accounts for the fact that psephismata and not
laws are in force in demagogical republics, by the  dema-
gogues becoming great when the demus has power, and when
they (the demagogues) shape the opinions of the people,
referring everything to them in name, but in reality telling
them what to do.
In the ancient city-states the demagogues were numerous,
and as each sought to have the ear of the lower people, they
came into collision. Their collisions reached their head in
accusations of each other before the assembly or before the
courts. This, in fact, was the safety of the people in particu-
lar instances, but the institutions kept the habit of demagogy-
alive. In large states democratically governed, the dema-
gogue, in order that he may gain his ends, has need to com-
bine with others; the sphere is too large for any one to fill
by mere personal power. The demagogues in modern mu-
nicipalities resemble those described by Aristotle, and may
be quite as mischievous; but even there combinations are
necessary. Then again, the modern constitutions are some-
what of an obstacle in the demagogues* ways. All agree that