Laws (Book IV) by Plato
This post is part of my journey through the classic texts of Western civilization.
"the mere preservation and continuance of life is not the most honourable thing for men, as the vulgar think, but the continuance of the best life, while we live..."
We remember from the ending of Book III that the Athenian Stranger and his companions have set out to discuss the framing of a new colony that one of the companions has been presented the opportunity to craft laws for. The first thing to consider is the demographic makeup of the original colonists who will come into the colony.
What follows are extremely important observations made by The Stranger in where he demonstrates much understanding into human nature and group dynamics. One option for the demographic makeup of the colonists is to have them be of one race or stock; regarding this option, the Stranger comments:
"Cities find colonization in some respects easier if the colonists are one race, which like a swarm of bees is sent out from a single country, either when friends leave friends, owing to some pressure of population or other similar necessity, or when a portion of a state is driven by factions to emigrate. And there have been whole cities which have taken flight when utterly conquered by a superior power in war. This, however, which is in one way an advantage to the colonist or legislator, in another point of view creates a difficulty. There is an element of friendship in the community of race, and language, and laws, and in common temples and rites of worship; but colonies which are of this homogeneous sort are apt to kick against any laws or any form of constitution differing from that which they had at home; and although the badness of their own laws may have been the cause of the factions which prevailed among them, yet from the force of habit they would fain preserve the very customs which were their ruin, and the leader of the colony, who is their legislator, finds them troublesome and rebellious."
It is especially important to realize the reality of the latter half of the observation above when considering immigration, as the Stranger is right in that peoples do not drop their attachments to their motherland so easily. By attachments, I do not merely mean sentiments or feelings of affection (which certainly affect a lot), but behaviors, dispositions, laws, customs, etc. A politics that does not account for these group dynamics and instead treats all as blank slate individuals who will conform immediately to a new way of life is a politics not based in reality.
The Stranger more briefly mentions the considerations that should be made regarding a group of colonists that are more diverse:
On the other hand, the conflux of several populations might be more disposed to listen to new laws; but then, to make them combine and pull together, as they say of horses, is a most difficult task, and the work of years. And yet there is nothing which tends more to the improvement of mankind than legislation and colonization."
Due to the initial difficulties that will rise from the creation of this new colony, the Stranger proposes an initial tyrant to take control, for a tyranny is the form of government in which it is easiest to enact swift change. The tyrant can lead the state in the direction of virtue rather than vice; the choice is truly his.
"the tyrant, if he wishes, can change the manners of a state: he has only to go in the direction of virtue or of vice, whichever he prefers, he himself indicating by his example the lines of conduct, praising and rewarding some actions and reproving others, and degrading those who disobey."
"Let no one, my friends, persuade us that there is any quicker and easier way in which states change their laws than when the rulers lead: such changes never have, nor ever will, come to pass in any other way."
What are to be the nature of the laws that the tyrant creates? More fundamentally, what is the nature of law itself?
There are two errors to be avoided. One error is to view the law as merely persuasive. The other error is to view the law as merely coercive. The error in viewing the law as merely persuasive is that it is a failure to recognize the necessity of using force and coercion in order to direct people to certain actions. I would guess that this is the less common error today, as most people recognize the fallen nature of man and the reality that social custom is often not as sufficient a "law" as formal legislation. The other error—viewing the law as merely coercive—is a failure to recognize that the law has a pedagogical effect. It is better for people to follow a law because they see the propriety of the law and the good it will bring about than for people to strictly follow a law out of fear of punishment.
Seeing that this is the case, the Stranger proposes that laws ought to have "preludes" to them. Just like musical compositions might have preludes, "which are a sort of artistic beginnings intended to help the strain which is to be performed," laws should likewise have preludes, which will help the people of the state be more receptive to them. Laws should not be (or seem) arbitrary, but rather accompanied with persuasion.
"And yet legislators never appear to have considered that they have two instruments which they might use in legislation—persuasion and force; for in dealing with the rude and uneducated multitude, they use the one only as far as they can; they do not mingle persuasion with coercion, but employ force pure and simple."
The book ends with the Stranger outlining, "I the speaker, and you the listeners, will try to estimate all that relates to the souls and bodies and properties of the citizens, as regards both their occupations and amusements, and thus arrive, as far as in us lies, at the nature of education. These then are the topics which follow next in order."