China Naming Network - Baby naming - Urgent, help quickly!

Urgent, help quickly!

The Greek city-state system, especially the civic assembly system, constitutes the core of Greek democracy.

The limitations of Athenian democracy

In Athens, due to the implementation of direct democracy, the citizens' assembly will logically become the highest authority, legislature and even law enforcement organ of the country (city-state). The citizens' assembly meets about 40 times a year for a whole day. The quorum is 6000; Another 500 people attended the meeting, 50 people from each tribe in 10, and were responsible for daily administrative affairs. The citizens' assembly shall set up a Council of permanent institutions, and the commanders shall be elected and removed by the Council. Courts enjoy the same power as citizens' congresses, because hundreds of citizens serve as jurors in various courts; At the same time, they are judges. They try the case directly and decide the case by majority vote. Its general feature is that everything is decided by most people. On the other hand, Athens did not clearly divide the legislative, administrative and judicial departments in the horizontal state power structure. Citizens' congresses and parliaments often enjoy both legislative power, administrative power and judicial power, showing an integrated trend in the operation of power. This is another reason for "extreme democracy".

Theoretically thinking about the democratic practice in Athens, we can see that this democratic system fully embodies "sovereignty belongs to the people", "power restriction" (collective supervision and restriction of city-state citizens on officials), "supremacy of law" and "civic awareness" (that is, participation awareness) (3) (In view of the in-depth analysis of this issue by predecessors, I will not repeat it here. ), but these principles backfire in practice, exposing great imperfections, mainly in the following aspects:

(1) About instigation and blind obedience. It is not difficult to understand that in a democratic institution like a citizens' meeting, it is often (or inevitably) people who are rich in leisure, have more education and have extensive social connections who put forward various proposals and influence the meeting process with their own speeches, so they are more knowledgeable and eloquent. Rich people arouse people's emotions by mobilizing others to cheer for them at the meeting, and then spread their personal opinions into public intentions, so that their intentions can be recognized by law. This shows that the elite and the public play an unbalanced role in political activities-formal equality and actual inequality; Formal rationality and the blindness of most people in fact. Thus, the contradiction between "true democracy" and "false democracy" arises: if people make choices in an irrational state, does this choice conform to the real "public opinion"? Is it the will of the elite or the will of the people? Another contradiction accompanying this contradiction is: between self-interest (reflected in some people's ulterior motives) and public welfare, can we ensure that public welfare will not be violated by self-interest or replaced in disguise? The reality is that individual rich people or outstanding people can use the form of direct democracy (citizens' assembly) to achieve their goals, and the bills passed by the assembly are not in line with the overall interests or long-term interests of the people. This is reflected in the question of whether to send troops to Sicily. (4) The third part of this paper has further analysis. )

(2) Majority and minority. In all political activities in Athens, the principle of majority rule was followed, but there was no mechanism to protect minorities. It is true that in Athens, a political body with small scope, small population, limited public affairs and low complexity, citizens' participation in politics is a political right that can be guaranteed; Moreover, the differences and differentiation of interests among citizens are very limited, so it is relatively easy to form a majority. The question is: can the rationality of most rulings be guaranteed? Take the trial as an example. Judges are ordinary citizens, most of whom lack the necessary legal knowledge. In addition, the law was not perfect at that time. Many cases have no ready-made legal provisions to quote, and they can only rely on their own judgment, which inevitably leads to personal grievances and prejudice. Such voting results are often arbitrary. If only a few citizens can judge and vote rationally and fairly, then their opinions will not be passed. It can be seen that most judgments will inevitably lead to unjust, false and wrong cases. More importantly, Athenian democracy only obeys the opinions of the majority and regards the opinions of the majority as justice. The opinions of a few people are not only ignored, but also rejected and attacked. (This is also the usual strategy of direct democracy, because the General Assembly only allows citizens to choose between justice and injustice, approval and disapproval. The two extremes are completely different, and there is no room for compromise and reconciliation. Only in this way can we ensure the efficiency of the decisions made by the General Assembly. This absolutes the opinions of the majority, lacks the principle of protecting the minority, and cannot correctly handle the relationship between the majority and the minority, which will inevitably lead to serious consequences. On the one hand, it will cause the tragedy of tyranny of the majority; On the other hand, it can stifle the truth and make the emergence and growth of new ideas suffer heavy resistance.

(3) The influence of extreme equality and democracy. The Athenians advocated being both rulers and ruled, and taking turns to govern. They believe that no one is born to be an official, and no one can exchange money and potential for official positions. They drew lots to give every citizen an equal opportunity to hold public office. This is an appeal for absolute equality and extreme democracy. (This involves the eternal political value of "equality". However, it ignores that government officials should be chosen, and not everyone can be competent, because public officials must have the moral quality of justice, serving the public and the necessary knowledge and talent to manage government affairs; If people with poor moral character or insufficient knowledge and ability are allowed to hold public office, it is likely to confuse public office and even endanger democracy itself. This also shows that the pursuit of extreme equality leads to unsatisfactory democratic effects (inefficiency, ineffectiveness and even negativity). Athenian democracy failed to handle the delicate relationship between equality and democracy, so that equality transcended the proper boundary and impacted democracy itself. Rousseau also thinks that equality is the premise of freedom, but he emphasizes equal rights on the basis of private property ownership. )

(four) involving public affairs and personal freedom. Athenians actively and continuously participated in collective power, discussed and made decisions on public affairs, such as negotiating war and peace issues in the square, forming alliances with foreign governments, voting on laws and making judgments, reviewing the finance, bills and management of consuls, calling consuls to participate in people's gatherings, and accusing, condemning or exempting them. However, because they admit that individual's complete obedience to collective authority is consistent with collective freedom, they lose their right to individual independence. Their private behavior is strictly monitored and interfered, and their independence from public opinion, labor, and especially religion has not received any attention. Collective authority interferes with those areas that should belong to private activities, hinders individual will, and even interferes with family relations. It can be seen that because there is no clear boundary between "public sphere" and "private sphere", individuals are lost in public affairs, and public authorities comprehensively monitor society. "The individual is almost always supreme in public affairs, but he is a slave in all personal relationships." In other words, Athenian citizens have no personal freedom in the modern sense, or even "no concept of personal freedom".