Ideology and Power: Some Further Examples of Socialism’s Oppression of the Individual. Essay 7 of Justice in the State: Comparisons between Plato’s Republic and the West
The previous essay has pointed out that
socialism involves collective values, the power of the state, and a disregard
for individuals. Some today might equate
socialism primarily with a national health care system, but it is not about
how to run a good medical service for all citizens—one could debate that same
goal from various understandings of government and the private sector. There is no more reason to understand socialism as a national health care system than there is to call a country socialist because it has a nationwide educational system. The essence of socialism lies in ideology and
power. These essays have explored how
Plato’s socialist republic articulated a view of social justice that was
anything but just, and this should be a warning to those today who imagine that
socialism is a kinder and more moral system of government. In this essay, three further examples of
socialism’s oppression of the individual in the Republic will be noted.
Plato discusses education, militarism, and social honours in his
socialist timocracy.
1.
Education is reduced to training. It has
the goal of training in ways to serve the state. Those who perform poorly are eliminated from
the training and sent to a lower class. Particularly
in view is the training of the guardian class of soldiers. Like Sparta, the ideal republic is centred
around the military training of its citizens and, characteristic of 5th
c. Greece in general, the state’s military exploits. To quote:
[466e] … “It is obvious that they
will march out together, and, what is more, will conduct their children to
war when they are sturdy, in order that, like the children of other
craftsmen, they may observe the processes of which they must be masters in
their maturity … [5.467e] … “We must mount them when very young,” said I,
“and first have them taught to ride, and then conduct them to the scene of war,
not on mettlesome war-steeds, but on the swiftest and gentlest horses possible;
for thus they will have the best view of their own future business and also, if
need arises, will most securely escape to safety in the train of elder guides.”
… [5.468a] [Any show cowardice] should be reduced to the artisan or farmer
class …
2.
The militaristic nature of the ideal state makes courage such a primary virtue
that any cowardice should be punished.
In consideration, courage is a social value, while cowardice is
associated with individualism. Socrates
continues:
[5.468a] and anyone who is taken alive by the enemy we will make a
present of to his captors, shall we not, to deal with their catch [5.468b] as
they please? …
3.
Social honours for guardian heroes should involve granting them sexual license
as a reward. In this, there is an aspect of granting the social elite
privileges of exploitation that others are denied. However, the main motivation for this honour,
so to speak, is a service to the state.
The state has an interest in its heroes having an incentive to fight
courageously for a sexual reward, and it has an interest in heroes
reproducing. Individual rights are not
part of the equation here, just as they are not significant in socialist states
in general. Socrates says,
[5.468a] “And don't you agree that the one who wins the prize of
valor and distinguishes himself shall first be crowned by his fellows in the
campaign, by the lads and boys each in turn?” … [Socrates adds that the hero
should kiss and be kissed by everyone, and Glaucon adds, with his approval,
that] [5.468c] … none whom he wishes to kiss be allowed to refuse, so that if
one is in love with anyone, male or female, he may be the more eager to win the
prize.” [Socrates provides the further
reason:] in order that as many children as possible may be born from such
stock. …
One
should not be distracted by the particularites of Socrates’ examples of the
state’s socialism. His socialist
timocracy is not the only type of socialism.
Different socialist societies may present themselves differently. What they have in common is an idealist
vision for the state. It is not only
utopian; its ideals drive policies that are pressed into action, and this
process inevitably provides ample opportunities to create an oppressively powerful,
monstrous state that justifies its actions ideologically. Secondly, the state does not exist for the
individual but the individual for the state.
Thirdly, the socialist state embraces the use of power over people in
every way, such as in education, militarism, its system of reward—as seen in
the quotations from Socrates. The final
quotation that shows Socrates’ endorsement of sexual license over others for
heroes makes the point that, once a state is given power over individuals, it
may exploit that power in any number of surprising and unjust ways that it will
defend as social justice. State control
and the suppression of the individual’s rights are essential to the definition
of socialism.
Comments