What is the common interest ?

[duszek]

Aristotle argues in his "Politics" that in good forms of governement the common interest is pursued. In a royalty one person governs for the sake of the common interest, in an aristocracy a few gifted persons do it, in a politeia the majority do it.

In a perverted form of government a private interest is pursued: when person does it Aristotle calles it a tyranny, when several people do it he calls it an oligarchy, when the majority does it he calls it a democracy. We use the term "democracy" in a different sense today.

So in a democracy in the Aristotalian sense the majority governs for the sake of the needy only, in an oligarchy a group governs for the sake of the wealthy only.

In a politeia the majority governs for the sake of all, it pursues the common interest.

What is the common interest of the needy and of the wealthy ?
Is it possible to imagine it and to forumulate it ?

[bobevenson]

In a perverted form of government a private interest is pursued.

Sorry, Duzek, but pursuing private interest in free-market capitalism is the road to greater prosperity for all, rich or poor.

[Ginkgo]

In a perverted form of government a private interest is pursued.

Sorry, Duzek, but pursuing private interest in free-market capitalism is the road to greater prosperity for all, rich or poor.

Bob, how many posts will it be before before you decide to launch in a tirade of four letter expletives? Can you give me a small font estimation?

[bobevenson]

In a perverted form of government a private interest is pursued.

Sorry, Duzek, but pursuing private interest in free-market capitalism is the road to greater prosperity for all, rich or poor.

Bob, how many posts will it be before before you decide to launch in a tirade of four letter expletives? Can you give me a small font estimation?

I don't post anything in a small font, motherfucker!

[Ginkgo]

That many posts? Just one?

[duszek]

An important distinction:

1. A private person persues private interests.

2. A government (one person, a group or a majority) persues private interests.

A king can act as a government and - at different occasions - as a private person.

When a king buys a toy for his daughter he is acting as a private person and not as a governor of his country.

[bobevenson]

An important distinction:

1. A private person persues private interests.

2. A government (one person, a group or a majority) persues private interests.

A king can act as a government and - at different occasions - as a private person.

When a king buys a toy for his daughter he is acting as a private person and not as a governor of his country.

Yes, a government able to pursue private interests unfettered is by definition tyrannical.

[duszek]

So if a government does not want to be tyrannical it has to pursue the common interest, that is the interest of all citizens.

Some citizens are wealthy, others are needy and the rest are neither nor.

Is it possible for a governement to pursue the interests of all ?

[bobevenson]

So if a government does not want to be tyrannical it has to pursue the common interest, that is the interest of all citizens.

Some citizens are wealthy, others are needy and the rest are neither nor.

Is it possible for a governement to pursue the interests of all ?

The only proper function of government is social integration, like a traffic cop keeping people from running into each other. It's not the function of government to help anybody pursue private interests.

[Ginkgo]

Aristotle argues in his "Politics" that in good forms of governement the common interest is pursued. In a royalty one person governs for the sake of the common interest, in an aristocracy a few gifted persons do it, in a politeia the majority do it.

In a perverted form of government a private interest is pursued: when person does it Aristotle calles it a tyranny, when several people do it he calls it an oligarchy, when the majority does it he calls it a democracy. We use the term "democracy" in a different sense today.

So in a democracy in the Aristotalian sense the majority governs for the sake of the needy only, in an oligarchy a group governs for the sake of the wealthy only.

In a politeia the majority governs for the sake of all, it pursues the common interest.

What is the common interest of the needy and of the wealthy ?
Is it possible to imagine it and to forumulate it ?

Yes, it is has been formulated and can be found within the US Constitution.

[duszek]

Let´s see ...

So the common interest of the needy and the wealthy is that the freedom of speech for all is guaranteed ?

[Skip]

Aristotle argues in his "Politics" that in good forms of governement the common interest is pursued.

Yes, but only if the common interest is clearly enunciated and agreed-upon. It's easy enough for a philosopher or missionary or conqueror to declare the common interest as Subjectivism, or Christianity, or allegiance to her Majesty, but that doesn't mean the governed share that view.
Therefore, a constitution is essential before we can decide how inclusive the common interest is, and in what manner we intend to pursue it.

So in a democracy in the Aristotalian sense the majority governs for the sake of the needy only, in an oligarchy a group governs for the sake of the wealthy only.

In most modern societies, we have quite a large spread between wealthy and needy. If a democracy is working anywhere close to its potential, there are no needy at all: every able citizen contributes to the mutual defense, security and welfare from which he also benefits, and takes part in the decision-making as well as the risk-taking that affects all his fellow citizens.

What is the common interest of the needy and of the wealthy ?
Is it possible to imagine it and to forumulate it ?

What is a nation? If you want a nation to survive, you want to avoid civil war, revolution, invasion by other countries, economic depression, unrest, upheaval, displacement, famine, epidemic, infrastructure collapse, unmanageable debt, civil service incompetence, communication breakdown, inept law enforcement, rampant corruption, inability to respond to crisis, government bankruptcy or gridlock.
So, if you address the problems you hope to avoid, you begin to see ways to avoid the, and that will show you the flip-side.
What does a well-functioning country look like? What does it require?

The simplest way to characterize good government: one that produces the fewest possible disaffected groups and individuals.

BTW Did Aristotle mention slaves?

[Ginkgo]

Let´s see ...

So the common interest of the needy and the wealthy is that the freedom of speech for all is guaranteed ?

I just looked it up. It can be found in the Preamble to the Constitution and in relation to taxation. It is understood in terms of promoting the general welfare.

[Ginkgo]

Let´s see ...

So the common interest of the needy and the wealthy is that the freedom of speech for all is guaranteed ?

I just looked it up because I couldn't quite remember where it was. It can be found in the Preamble to the Constitution and in relation to taxation. It is understood in terms of promoting the general welfare.

[duszek]

General welfare is difficult to achieve if there is a conflict between the interests of the wealthy and those of the needy.

Example from south America:
the needy had no land to use for their survival, the wealthy wanted to keep their property even if they did not cultivate it.

Would expropriation promote the general welfare in this case ?