One of Aristotle’s chief tenets is that “human being[s are] by nature...political animal[s]” (4), as they have the ability to speak and therefore to “mak[e] clear what is beneficial or harmful, and hence also what is just or unjust” (4). Seeing as this is part of his description of a human being who is not a natural slave--a natural slave being someone who “whose task...is to use their bod[y]” and “does not have [reason] himself” (8-9)--he would surely be horrified by the current election and especially by the possibility of Trump, a man who does not fit this description of a human being, becoming the president of the United States. Although there are a wealth of crimes to choose from, one of Trump’s more egregious indiscretions that Aristotle would deeply disapprove of is his refusal to pay certain people after they’ve worked for him and fulfilled everything that was asked of them. This is not only a breach of the rules of commerce--described by Aristotle as “exchang[ing] useful things for other useful things” (16)--but also a prime example of Trump believing “that acquiring wealth is the end, and that everything ought to promote that end” (18). Trump’s primary goal has always been promoting himself and making profits, so it is not surprising that he would be willing to breach contracts for the sake of holding onto as much of his own money as possible. Trump has also deceived people in other ways, such as through Trump University, for similar goals. Given that “city-states have an even greater need for wealth acquisition...than a private household does” (21), Aristotle would see Trump as an extremely unfit leader, given that his own methods of wealth acquisition are not ethical.
Furthermore, another misgiving Aristotle might have about Trump’s character is the relationship between his body and his soul. On the most basic level, Aristotle writes, “soul and body are the basic constituents of an animal: the soul is the natural ruler; the body the natural subject” (8). In a rational human being who is not a natural slave, “the soul rules the body with the rule of a master, whereas understanding rules desire with the rule of a statesman or with the rule of a king” (8). Trump’s case is a clear example of understanding failing to properly rule desire, as he has proven to be ignorant, impulsive, and lecherous, as illustrated by his vitriolic statements against various groups, opprobrious allusions to his attraction to his daughter Ivanka, and general lack of impulse control. Aristotle would most likely be aghast that such a man could possibly end up being the leader of a nation. As he writes, when desire is not ruled by understanding, “it [is] harmful to everything” (8)--if only he knew.
I agree that Aristotle would see Trump as lacking the necessary qualities of a leader. I also think that he would disapprove of America's political system in general, and would see this election as evidence that it does not effectively cater to the good of the people. Aristotle believed democracy to be harmful because the masses would be unable to govern effectively. They would be too interested in their own benefit instead of the collective good, and it doesn't make sense for someone who is not interested in or informed about what will be good for the community to have the same amount of say as someone who is capable of leading. Since America is not a direct democracy, we are a bit closer to what Aristotle envisioned: in theory, we use elections to pick those who are most capable of leading us. However, Aristotle might say that this election shows that we have still given the masses too much power and that they are making decisions not beneficial for our society. For instance, we see poorer and less educated Trump supporters upset about the way things are and hoping that Trump will make some sort of change for their benefit, even though it is not clear that he has any knowledge of how to do so or even a real intention of doing so.
ReplyDelete