Discuss critically Plato's conception of communism of property and communism of wives.[M.U. 2012]
Or,
State and criticise Plato's theory of communism of property. [M.U. 2013]
Ans. Platonic communism is not an original idea. Communist system was prevalent in Greece long before the adveni of Plato. In Greece the ownership of land was generally collective. In Athens the state was considered the owner of all the forests and mines and the care taker of the individual property, in Sparta the produce on individual lands was communally distributed. The people considered it their right to take food in other's homes. They could use other's horses, dogs and slaves for their personal good. The dramatist Eurepides has referred to the communism of women. Thus Plato's ideas concerning the communism of property and women were very much borrowed from contemporary circumstances. It is a different matter that while we have forgotten about the circumstances of his time, his ideas have widely influenced different branches of knowledge.
COMMUNISM OF PROPERTY
In the third book of his famous work The Republic, Plato has explained his theory of communism of property. In the first place the guardians may be allowed to keep only the minimum property with them. No guardian should be allowed to have a home or a treasure which is only his own. He should be provided materials to be used just as it is provided for others. He may be given only so much as is neither short of nor more than necessary. During the time of war the warriors should be provided food and other materials gathered at one place. So far as gold and silver are concerned, the guardians do not need them as they are pure gold in their spirits. Guardians are not allowed either to possess or even totouch silver and gold. They should not use ornaments of silver and gold nor should they use golden and silver utensils. Only in this way can they defend their stales. If, on the other hand, they are allowed to possess and store gold and silver, land and animals, they will become ordinary house-hold persons full of selfishness and egoism. They will thus fail to protect the state and involve in personal rivalries and conflicts.
Principles of Communism of Property
Plato's communism concerning property was based upon the following considerations:
1. The individual is not a separate unit: In his book The Republic Plato has rejected the idea that the individual is an isolated unit and aims at fulfilment of his desires. He, on the other hand, maintained that the individual is a unit of society and he should see satisfaction in the fulfilment of his social duties. He should, therefore, share all his properties with everyone else. This is particularly true about the guardians who are responsible for the growth of the state.
2. The ideal of justice: Communism of property was a means for the realization of the ideal of justice. Justice is possible only when each member of society honestly fulfils his duties. In an ideal state the guardians should be selfless and without any strings of property etc. It is only then that they can show wisdom and courage and remain free from fashions, characteristic of the general people.
3. Realisation of ideal state: An ideal state can be realised only if its guardians are kept free from personal property and the bonds of marriage and family. This is possible only through communistic provisions.
4. Pragmatic argument : Plato has advanced a pragmatic argument in favour of his communism of property. He pointed out that if the guardians are allowed economic possessions, they will fight among themselves. Experience shows us that concentration of wealth in the hands of few people results into conflict and disharmony. For the psychological and pragmatic point of view, therefore, the guardians should be free from the bonds of
5. Maintenance of the unity of the state: Plato's communism aimed at maintaining the unity of the state. Abolition of private property wilt end selfishness and possessive tendencies. The guardians will therefore work more efficiently. They will also easily secure love and cooperation from other people. They will be particularly loved by the general masses who possess some sort of personal property. As they will have no personal property there will be no mutual envy and conflictresultingmtothe solidarity of the state.
Criticism of Plato's Communism of Property
The following arguments can be advanced against Plato's concept of communism of property:
1. Autocracy: In the communism of Plato the two upper classes, the guardians and the warriors, have to forego personal property in the interest of society in general. This is an extreme demand which may result in reaction in favour of autocratic tendencies.
2. Reduction in National Income: When the two upper classes in the society will not have personal property, they may not work hard for the growth of national income. This may lead to its reduction.
3. Against psychological principles: The most common argument advanced by those thinkers to oppose the abolition of personal property, is psychological. According to these thinkers man has a natural tendency of possessiveness. If all personal property is abolished he will be left with no incentive in his life.
4. Too much right to the state: Communism of property means Mate's possession over property. Thus this theory is against the freedom of the individual and in favour of wide power to the state.
5. Communism for guardian's alone: It may be noted that Plato's communism of property was mainly for the guardians while the artisans, farmers and businessmen were allowed to retain personal property. This is. against the law of justice.
COMMUNISM OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN
Along with the abolition of private property Plato has recommended communism of women and children for the guardians. He has, therefore, abolished marriage and family in the guardian class. Property and family are the two sources of attachment in man resulting in selfishness. Plato thought that if the guardians are freed from both the bondages they may easily become unselfish and follow their duties. Communism of women has been prescribed in two ways. Firstly, the women were set free from the bondage of the family. They were provided similar education along with men, thus securing equal opportunities for their development. Freedom from the family could give them sufficient leisure to help the guardians in their job of ruling the state. Secondly, the guardians were not permanently married to particular women. Thus Piato abolished the institution of permanent marriage. The right to progeny was given to wise and able persons. They should be mated with women havingsimilar qualities thus resulting into birth of suitable progeny. Plato suggested marriage festivals in which ideal men were freely allowed to mate with ideal women. Children resulting from such festivals were to be brought up by the state and the parents had nothing to do with them. The age limit for participation in this process was maximum upto 50 years. After that the male and female were allowed to be absolutely promiscuous. If, however, this promiscuity resulted in birth of children, t should be silently disposed off. This communism of women and children was based upon the following principles and aimed at realizing the following aims:
1.Establishment of equal of male and female in the ideal state.
2.Birth of physically and mentally superior progeny in society.
3. Provision of opportunities for maximum development to females as well as males.
4. Nationalization of the family.
Plato's theory of the communism of women and children has been bitterly criticised.
1. Elimination of family: While Aristotle, after Plato, maintained that the family like the state, is a natural institution, Plato abolished the family. The family was eliminated in the interest of the state. By elimination of the family Plato unwittingly sought to destroy the very foundation of morality which he so much wanted to establish in human society.
2. Elimination of marriage: Plato's strictures concerning marriage are wrong both from psychological and social viewpoint. Psychologically human beings need marriage and therefore, some sort of marriage institutions have always been prevalent in human society. Plato's ideal of communism of women resulting into elimination of marriage is psychologically harmful.
3. Immoral system: It is really strange that Plato, primarily a moral thinker, could suggest abolition of family and marriage, the two social institutions which form the basis of all social virtues. The virtues including that of temperance and wisdom can not be developed without a permanent institution of marriage. Communism of women will lead to incest and all sort of illicit and immoral relationships.
4. Against the good of women: Nor does the theory of communism of women fulfill the interest of the women themselves. Male and female are in fact complimentary to each other. They do not require identical status in both. Equality of women only means provision of opportunities for their development. It does not mean converting them into males. Plato has himself accepted that the functions of male and female are different. It is hence difficult to understand how his system of communism of women will ble useful for women themselves. The women are not suitable for the job of the warriors. Temperamentally they are more suited for upbringing of the family. Plato's provision of comradeship to them in the two higher classes can be hardly considered as an ideal opportunity for them.
5. Neglect of children: The institution of family provides the ideal situation for the growth of children. The idea of communism of women hitting at the institution of family will result into neglect of children. The arrangerment that all the males and females mating during a particular festival of marriage should be considered parents of all the children born as a result of this festival, is hardly suitable from the psychological point of view.
COMMUNISM OF WIVES
The second paradox of Plato's republic is the community of wives. There is a wonderful idea, that one of the wisest and the best of men had entertained which is at variance with our own, but it is the logical consequence of his scheme. It is one of the means for the realisation of justice. Plato's reasons for abolition of family are several.
(1) First, Plato had already abolished property. Without property family can not be maintained. Therefore, family also is abolished.
(ii) Second, Plato wished that the guardians of the state are not distracted by family affection. To us home is precious but to Plato it is a stumpling block. If fosters narrow affections. It promotes selfishness. It is the place where talent is wasted and growth stunted. It is the root cause of all social evils. The day on which we abolish the family is the day on which man and woman are liberated from bondage.
(iii) Third, Plato wants to emancipate women. Greek woman was not the mistress of the house. She was merely the housekeeper and the maintenance of her husband's and children(s). Plato argues that though man and woman differ from one another so far as procreation is concerned, this difference cannot be the basis of discrimination. There is no social function peculiar to woman as women and to men to men.
Fourth, communism in women makes possible the breeding of guardians on scientific lines. The production of children is a matter of such vital importance to the state that it is clearly undesirable to leave it to the un-regulated operaztion of private enterprise and individual affections. Plato, therefore, arranges festivals where bride and bridgroom will be brought together and selection would be made by lot. But guardians will manipulate the flots on eugenic principles. Thus, the rulers must take the greater care in the selection of bride and bridegroom so that good is paired with good and bad with bad.
Fifth, communism in women brings unity Plato thinks that where man leads a common life, there is unity. The greatest evil is discord and the greatest good is unity. There will be unity where there is no private pleasure, or interest. Where there is unity, the rulers are considered as saviours and subjects paymasters and nurturers. In Plato's state no man is a stranger to another. Every one is connected with ties of blood. The citizen will have all things in commor. and have common pleasures and pains. In such a state, there was be no contention and strife. There will be reverence.
Finally, Communisms in women facilitates the regulation of the growth of population. If any man still in mating years, lays hands over a woman of child bearing age without the sanction of the state, the childrens born to such union should be regarded as bastards by civil and religious law.
Plato's communism of wives has been bitterly criticised.
1. Elination of family: While Aristotle, after Plato, maintained that the family like the state, is a natural institution Plato abolished the family. The family was eliminated in the interest of the state.
2. Elimination of marriage: Plato's structures concerning marriage are wrong both from psychological and social view point. Psychologicuman beings need marriage and therefore, some sort of marriage instittions have always been prevalent in human society.
3. Immoral system: It is really strange that Plato primarily a moral thinker, could suggest abolition of family and marriage, the two social institutions which form the basis of all social virtues. The virtues including that of temperance and wisdom cannot be developed without a permanent institutions of marrige.
4. Against the good of woman: Nor does the theory of communism of women fulfill the interest of the women themselves. Male and female are in fact complementary to each other. They do not require identical status in both. Equality of women only means provision of oportinities for their development.
5. Weylect of children: The institution of family provides the ideal situation for the growth of children. The idea of communism of women and hitten at the institution of family will result into neglect of children.
www.manipursana.in