Plato as the First Fascist. Explained.
Fascism is a hated and condemned word today. The fascist ideology is treated as a threat to humanity, an extremely exploitative system, and a rule of terror. Many consider fascism not a political ideology but political opportunism and power politics in the complete absence of ethics.
Fascist thinking and style of politics are characterised by:
- Elitism: They believe that common people do not have reason. For them, what works in politics is appeal to passions and not reason. Propaganda and invocation of myth are often the political tools used by fascist leaders.
- Leaders as Superman: Fascism invokes supremacy of the leader who is often portrayed as having extraordinary qualities. Fascism demands complete obedience of the common man towards the leader.
- Absence of Liberty: In fascism, there is no individual liberty. The common man are asked to blindly follow the leadership without question.
- Absence of Democracy: Fascist leaders enjoy unquestioned power and oppositions are suppressed.
PLATO AND FASCISM
Plato hated democracy. He considered democracy as the rule of ignorants.
Plato’s ideal state of the Rule of Philosopher King considers leader as superman having ultimate knowledge of what is good for all.
The communism of Plato demanded individual sacrifice. There is no scope for liberty, only discipline and obedience.
Plato created the myth of metals and Hitler created the myth of racial superiority.
Both Plato and fascist leaders said that common man has no reason.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PLATO AND FASCISM
The comparison between Plato and Fascism is often misguided.
Plato’s aim was to create an ideal state where everyone would be happy and lead a life of virtue. Plato never aimed at the exploitation of the common man which was the case in the fascist states.
Plato’s Philosopher King is a symbol of knowledge and sacrifice. They were reluctant to rule and never greedy for power. Whereas, fascist leaders like Mussolini and Hitler were persons with lust for power.
Plato never separated politics from ethics. Whereas, fascist leaders had no regard for ethics.
Plato’s ideal state is not based on violence and terror, which were the very symbols of fascist regimes.
Plato is a systematic thinker and his philosophy is very logical. Whereas, there is no coherence in fascism as a school of thought.
In his work, “In Defence of Plato“, Ronald B. Levinson argues that Plato belonged to a different time and space. Plato’s ideal state was a utopia, whereas fascism was a reality. As a utopia, we cannot talk about the practical implications of Plato’s ideal state. When we compare Plato with Fascism, we are comparing the uncomparables.
Many scholars argue that it is not justified to call Plato as the first fascist. However, many others admit that there are certain ideas of Plato which could be exploited by fascist leaders in their pursuit of power politics.
Leave a Reply