REPUBLIC: SUMMARY of BOOK 4

Here, I first summarize Book 4 of Republic and then argue whether human justice and justice of the city are two parallel concepts.

Adeimantus points out the fact that even though the guardians own the city, they cannot derive anything good from it, because it is forbidden for the guardians to own any kind of private wealth. Socrates’ responds to this objection by stating that the main goal of the city is not to make only a group of people outstandingly happy, the goal is to make everyone happy. If they give the guardians that kind of happiness, the guardians would not be guardians anymore. Therefore the guardians and leaders need to be persuaded to not to desire any wealth. Socrates also claims that because poverty and richness makes a craftsman and his products worse, the city needs to be protected from them. Adeimantus objects to this by stating that a city that has no wealth cannot protect itself from its’ enemies. Socrates reminds him that the guardians of their city will be the best in the world because of their education and therefore will defeat their enemies easily. Also, he points out that because the guardians cannot possess any kind of wealth, the loot of the war would be left to their allies and therefore the city would have a lot of allies.

Socrates and Plato discussing

Socrates limits the boundaries of the city, because if the city gets too big the guardians would not be able to control it. The guardians also need to protect their education well, because with good education the offsprings of the city would be better than their predecessors. If the good education is preserved than there would be no need for legislation, because it would be pointless to dictate something to people who are good, they’ll know what is good for them. The same is true for a wretched city as well. If the people of the city are wretched, it would be pointless to legislate as people would just find ways to avoid the laws.

Socrates declares the city complete and starts to define the four virtues the city possesses which are wisdom, courage, moderation and justice. The first virtue Socrates finds in the city is wisdom. The city is wise not because the carpenters’ are doing their job well, but because the rulers are wise. The courageous part of the city is its’ auxiliary guardians, because they are the ones who will protect the city from the enemies. Moderation is present in everyone. The agreement between who will rule and who will be ruled is called moderation. When the leaders, who are rational, rule over others the state is harmonious.

Finally we come to the last virtue which is justice. Just like moderation, justice is spread out throughout the city. Justice according to Socrates is everyone doing what they are best at and not meddling with others work. This meddling won’t cause much harm to the city if the exchange is between two people in the same class. However, an exchange between classes would be the worst thing that can happen to a city. So, the producers would continue performing their crafts, the soldiers would protect the city from the enemies and the leaders would rule over the city.

According to Socrates, this division of classes in the state is present in humans as well. However, they are not called classes, but parts of the soul. To prove that human justice is similar to the justice of the city, he states that just like the three classes in the city there are three parts of the soul. These are the rational part, spirited part and appetitive part. The rational part seeks for the truth. The appetitive part is composed of desires such as sex, eating, money. The spirited part is composed of our emotions, such as anger, honor etc. These three parts correspond to the three classes in the city. The rational part is present in the guardians, the spirited part is most prominent in the auxiliary guardians and the appetitive part is most prominent in the producers.

For a person to be just these three parts should be in harmony. The rational part has to rule the spirited and appetitive part. The spirited part, with proper education from birth, can help the rational part in controlling the appetitive part. However, if a person cannot tame his spirited part, the spirited part would help the appetitive part in controlling the rational part. If the appetitive part rules the other parts than that person would be the slave of his appetites.

Socrates finishes by stating that a man is just in the same way as a city and this justice is every part doing what they are best at. With proper education the rational and spirited part would rule the appetitive part, which is the biggest part. A just person would not let any part of him to meddle with the other parts. If this harmony is destroyed than that person becomes unjust. Socrates continuous his inquiry by looking into what injustice is. This inquiry continues in the proceeding books.

PARALLEL CONCEPTS: HUMAN JUSTICE and JUSTICE of the CITY

The city is composed of individuals and is not something independent. The city needs humans to exist and therefore without people it would be pointless to talk about it. As a result in order to find the human justice, Socrates started his inquiry by examining how a just city would be, which he rightly did so. Just like Socrates claims, I think that human justice and justice of the city are two parallel concepts.

Since humans started living as communities, there always have been social classes. This is a part of the human nature, because starting with childhood, people live in different environments. Also people have inherent inequalities as well; for example some people are better endowed from birth than others. There is no point in denying that. Even though some philosophers have argued for a classless society, this is more of a utopia then reality. Because denying the hierarchical structure of the society is illogical, the best thing that can be done is amending it to its best. By formulating three classes for the society Socrates wants to achieve the best system for an ideal city. According to him the well-endowed from birth, when equipped with a good education, will be successful leaders (Plato, 104). If individuals are investigated, it is not too difficult to find out which part of a person is/should be praised the most. Common sense leads us to the rational part of the soul. Therefore, it is obvious that the leaders should possess the most praised part. If incompetent people are the leaders, namely people who are ruled by their spirited or appetitive part, the city would perish. Because, both the spirited and appetitive part of the soul are inclined to making mistakes and forming obsessions. A person controlled by his appetite would do any harm to anyone to satisfy his needs. For example, a person who has cravings for chocolate might kill someone even though it is irrational. A person controlled by his spirited part would do bad things with good intentions. For instance, despite being outnumbered a rash person would charge into the enemy, kill numerous enemy soldiers and die in the process. However, a rational person would have waited for the reinforcements to arrive and then strike the enemy. It is easy to see that without the rational part both people and the city would be unjust. The examples demonstrated how the people would perish. So what about the city? In the introduction, I stated that the city is composed of individuals and without individuals there is no point in talking about a city. In other words, it is the qualities of the human beings that define the city. Therefore, if the citizens are unjust, the city automatically becomes unjust. No other entity in the city can make a city just. Good buildings or obedient dogs do not make a city just. As a result justice of the city and human justice are two parallel concepts.

State-Building Nationalism: Selling a Dream

This is what happens when people gullibly follow
nationalist sentiments.

There have been numerous definitions given for the nationalism phenomena. Most of these definitions give just a glimpse of nationalism. Few of these definitions are adequate enough to provide the broader picture. The sentiment that the emerging nation relies upon is best described by Ernest Gellner. He states that nationalism is a primarily a political principle, which requires the political and the national unit being harmonious (1). The success of nationalism relies on both of them.

As referred to in the definition given by Gellner, the emerging nation will have to be congruent concerning political and natural unit. This naturally brings one to state-building nationalism, which is mentioned by Hechter (141). This type of nationalism has been around since the 16^th century but it was at its’ peak between the mid 19^th and early 20^th centuries. The fact that state-building nationalism is older than most of the typologies in nationalism studies does not mean it is out of fashion. An undeniable number of emerging countries used and is still using this technique to create a homogenous and congruent nation, such in the case, of Turkey, Estonia, Kazakhstan and many more. The reason many states are using this specific type is not a coincidence. This is because the term is beneficial for the elite in reshaping the nation, which will be mentioned later in this paper.

The “nation” term has been around since ancient times. The anecdote of Noah prophet says that his sons (Mizraim, Cush, Put, Canaan) that survived the flood, emigrated to the different parts of the globe and formed the prototypes of the contemporary nations (Freemaninstitute). Even though these prototypes might be far from the nations known today, they are still important as this shows that the nations did not suddenly form in the modern era. However, one should not assert that the nations are perennial and everlasting, nor they are just a production of industrialization and will pass away. They are a mixture of them. In The Warvick Debates, Anthony Smith states that modern political nationalism cannot be understood without reference to pre-modern ethnic identities and communities (4). The conflicts in Balkans is a perfect example for this argument. Serb political analyst Aleksa Djilas states that “The nationalist struggle between Yugoslavia’s constituent groups were not inventions and they based on past, but the war between them was a creation of the manipulative elite (1). One can use pre-modern eras symbols to provoke nationalist feelings in the modern world. This further proves that there is a close link between the modern and pre-modern epochs.

As mentioned in the preceding paragraph, nations did not solely emerge because of industrialization and the French Revolution. They are not primordial, either. So how did they form? To understand this phenomena, one must go back to ancient times when multi-national empires ruled the world. Materializing this abstract subject will make things easier. Hence, the Ottoman Empire, on behalf of all pre-modern empires, will be a good example. Even though the Turks were the founders of this empire and the royal family was from Turkish descent, at the empires’ prime time, the Turks constituted only a small fraction. The governing class was mainly of Slavic ethnicity who converted to Islam via a unique system called devshirme. The empire reached its’ peak in the early 17^th century and started to dissolve like many other empires in the 19^th century. Thus, the reason why they dissolved is pretty clear. The idea of freedom, equality and, more importantly, nationalism, which was spread by the French Revolution, were the causes of this dissolution. This was where the elites took control. The nationalism idea shattered most of the empires and the elites of nations under empires control dealt the final blow. To secede from empires, the elite had to create a nation image for their nation to believe in and, if needed, to die for. They used the symbols, accepted practices and myths of their own nations and other similar nations. They merged these fragments, remoulded them and presented it as brand new. To present their finished work, they used print-capitalism, because through print-capitalism the elites had the opportunity to strengthen vernacular languages and in conclusion their own power. James G.Kellas, on behalf of Benedict Anderson’s work, states that, “Printing standardises languages, and aids the development of capitalism and the centralised state.” (57). However, it should not be interpreted that this is something unwanted, because without the elites the nationalist movements would have been temporary and would not have a specific goal to reach.

           
In conclusion, to create a new nation/nationalism in the contemporary world, one must be imaginative because to unite people, one must sell a dream where their nation is everlasting and will prevail through time. This way the modern people who are feeling obsolete in the mass crowds can have an ideal to believe in so a commonality would be formed between them. Otherwise, these masses would have been distinct. This paper tries to claim that if given chance, the best way to create a nation/nationalism is to use state-building nationalism with the aid of the elites’ manipulative power.

Works Cited

Anthony, Oberschall. Ordinary People in the Balkan Wars: Ethnic Nationalism, Opportunism, Fear, Conformity and Confusion Panel, 25 Apr. 2009, U of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Gellner, Ernest. Nations and Nationalism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1983. 1-7. Print.

Hechter, Michael. “Types of Nationalism.” The Nationalism Project. N.d. Web. 24 Oct. 2011.

Kellas, James. The Politics of Nationalism and Ethnicity. 2nd ed. New: York: St Martin’s Press,1998. 1-9, 43-63. Print.

Smith, Anthony. Nations and Nationalism in a Global Era. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995. 1-7. Print.

“Table of Nations.” Freemaninstitute. Web. 25 Oct. 2011

Gameknot-correspondence chess

If you did not know (of course you don't :)), I am an avid chess fan and have been playing chess online for nearly 10 years. Even though I had some breaks, because of real life issues, Gameknot has been my #1 correspondence chess playing site. For those who don't know what correspondence chess is, it is basically playing with someone far away via e-mail, homing pigeon (!), letter or internet server. As you can easily guess, Gameknot is based on an internet server. You can play several games concurrently and have couple of days for your each move. So, it is great for laid back people who like to take their time while playing chess as time isn't a problem in correspondence chess. Ample time allows you to go on with your daily life while still enjoying playing chess. If you are interested in chess I would suggest you to give it a try.

Click here

"When you see a good move, look for a better one." Emanuel Lasker (2nd World Chess Champion)

Gadfly

State and the Revolution - Vladimir Lenin

I thought a lot about choosing a book to read last weekend, but failed miserably in choosing one. This was mainly because I really didn't want to read some random novel and didn't have any other book idea. However, I then remembered the list I made about Marxist books I might want to read in the near future and "State and the Revolution" seemed like a good choice among them. I found a copy  in my college library which was a 1935(!) edition of the book. I was astonished by the success of the translation as the language of the book was completely understandable.

Lenin in disguise

So, I knew some stuff about Marxism before but never really read a book written by Marx/Engels or Lenin. The book (or pamphlet) was written by Lenin in 1917 to combat right opportunism (bourgeoise tendencies) and anarchist distortions of Marxism. He starts with a rather pretentious claim stating "During the lifetime of great revolutionaries, the oppressing classes relentlessly persecute them and meet their teachings with the most savage hostility, the most furious hatred and the most ruthless campaign of lies and slanders. After their death, attempts are made to convert them into harmless icons, to canonize them, so to say, and to surround their names with a certain halo for the consolation of the oppressed classes and with the object of duping them". These sentences stroke me as not just for revolutionaries but for most outcast people these words are true-being persecuted for your whole life and then posthumously being declared a saint. After this robust opening statements, he starts combating his various contemporary political adversaries during early 20th century. Most of the discussions are quite out-dated, however they still include some valuable knowledge about Marxist thought. One that I found interesting was about the intrinsic structure of the state. According to him, the state is the product of the irreconcilability of class antagonisms. So, we can deduct that if there are no class antagonisms, than there won't be an entity called state. He continuous logically by stating that the state  is the instrument for the exploitation of the oppressed class. that state is  He then labels the military and bureaucracy as the tools used by bourgeois(the minority) to help them suppress the working class(the majority). It is interesting to point out that he doesn't see the state as something to be revered, but rather a mere instrument. This I believe is one of the main points where Marxism is completely opposite to Hegelian philosophy.

Later parts of the book is mainly composed of discussions concerning the feasibility of a stateless society and thus exceeds my aim in writing this post. An interested person can further investigate on those subjects as well. Even though Marxism is long dead practically and barely surviving theoretically, I believe one can still find some information useful for understanding the world (which is true for most philosophies). So, if you have some spare time and like reading political books "State and Revolution" might be a good book to spice up your knowledge about the world.

"A standing army and police are the chief instruments of state power." Lenin

Rantingadfly