Comparing Thucydides And Aristotle's Negotiation Of Democracy

However, power resides within the citizen for both Thucydides and Aristotle. The overwhelming majority of decisions in Thucydides are taken collectively (Pope, 1988). On the other hand, for Aristotle, the citizens must partake in political interactions as a way to fulfill their duty as a citizen (Politics by Aristotle, 2011). They share the view that the power of the ruler emanates from his constituencies. Such is true in the democratic sense, the citizenry elects who they think are the most commendable for the position. In a democracy, the act of deliberation and voting cannot be complete without the presence of the citizens because it is a given fact that the citizens are the ones who appoint who they want to rule over them. Alongside with

In a democracy, such was his formulation of justice because he strongly envisions citizen of higher knowledge to rule over the ordinary people. Through this view, he creates his physis, in which the stronger are described as dominating the weak by an immutable law of nature, and in which is characterized more powerful than law or custom irresistible once it is arouse (Cawkwell, 1997). For him, common people do not have the capacity to provide security for themselves and maintain order when a man of higher knowledge is not in action. Thucydides harks back to the traditional view of nature as something wild and always in need of the trainers’ strong hand (Woodruff, 1993). For him, man has the tendency of being uncontrollable which is why they need the guidance of someone from a higher status. In accordance to this, it is evident that man also has the capacity to obey rules as recorded by Thucydides in his History of the Peloponnesian War. Such as the Athenian citizens when Pericles was able to convince them that they are superior than the Spartans (History of the Peloponnesian War,