Book 8 / Chapter 10
Paragraph 1 - Forms of Constitution and their Deviations
Explanation - Part By Part
"There are three kinds of constitution, and an equal number of deviation-forms--perversions, as it were, of them. The constitutions are monarchy, aristocracy, and thirdly that which is based on a property qualification, which it seems appropriate to call timocratic, though most people are wont to call it polity. The best of these is monarchy, the worst timocracy."
Aristotle is explaining three primary types of government "constitutions," which are systems for organizing political rule. These are:
1. Monarchy - Rule by one person, ideally a virtuous and self-sufficient leader who governs in the best interest of the people. Aristotle considers this the best form of government when correctly practiced.
2. Aristocracy - Rule by a few individuals (ideally the most virtuous and capable people) who also aim to serve the common good.
3. Timocracy (or polity) - Rule by those who meet a certain property qualification, meaning the system is based on wealth or resources. Aristotle seems to view this as less ideal because it ties political participation to possessions rather than personal virtue or the good of the community. He also notes that many people call this form "polity."
In this part, Aristotle ranks these systems, stating that monarchy is the best and timocracy is the worst. This ranking is tied to how effectively each system aligns with the goal of taking care of the whole community rather than just a subset of people or certain selfish interests.
"The deviation from monarchy is tyranny; for both are forms of one-man rule, but there is the greatest difference between them; the tyrant looks to his own advantage, the king to that of his subjects."
Here, Aristotle is making a critical distinction between two forms of one-person leadership: monarchy and tyranny. While both involve central authority held by a single individual, their key difference lies in the leader's motivation and purpose. A true king rules for the benefit of his people, prioritizing their well-being and acting as a caretaker for the community. In contrast, a tyrant rules purely for personal gain, exploiting his power to serve his own interests rather than the needs of his subjects. This contrast sets up Aristotle's argument about how good governance can turn into its corrupt counterpart when the leader prioritizes self-interest over the common good.
"For a man is not a king unless he is sufficient to himself and excels his subjects in all good things; and such a man needs nothing further; therefore he will not look to his own interests but to those of his subjects; for a king who is not like that would be a mere titular king. Now tyranny is the very contrary of this; the tyrant pursues his own good."
Aristotle is drawing a clear distinction between a true king and a tyrant. He explains that a true king is someone who is self-sufficient—he doesn’t lack anything and surpasses his subjects in virtue and excellence. Because of this, the king is not motivated by selfish gain; instead, he is focused on the well-being of his people. His role is genuinely about serving others, not himself. If a ruler does not meet this standard—if he rules only in name (a "titular king") without these qualities—he fails to be a true king.
In contrast, the tyrant is the exact opposite. The tyrant uses his position of power to serve his own interests. While they both hold supreme authority, the tyrant is self-centered and oppressive, while the true king is altruistic and protective of his subjects. This sharp opposition highlights Aristotle's ethical view that leadership is valid only when it prioritizes the common good over personal benefit.
"And it is clearer in the case of tyranny that it is the worst deviation-form; but it is the contrary of the best that is worst. Monarchy passes over into tyranny; for tyranny is the evil form of one-man rule and the bad king becomes a tyrant."
Aristotle is explaining that tyranny—the selfish and oppressive rule of a single person—is the worst kind of government because it is the complete opposite of the best kind, monarchy. In a monarchy, a king rules with the interests of his people in mind, ensuring their well-being. However, when this ideal fails and the ruler becomes corrupt, monarchy can deteriorate into tyranny. A tyrant prioritizes their personal gain over the needs of the citizens, turning what could have been the most virtuous system of governance into the most harmful one. Essentially, the closer a system has the potential to be "good," the more damaging its opposite (or corrupt form) can be.
"Aristocracy passes over into oligarchy by the badness of the rulers, who distribute contrary to equity what belongs to the city-all or most of the good things to themselves, and office always to the same people, paying most regard to wealth; thus the rulers are few and are bad men instead of the most worthy."
This part highlights how aristocracy, a government form where the virtuous and most capable individuals lead, can degrade into oligarchy, where power is in the hands of a few corrupt individuals. Aristotle explains that this shift happens when the rulers, rather than acting justly and distributing resources for the benefit of the community, take most or all of the benefits for themselves. They prioritize wealth above all else and continually assign positions of power to the same small group of people, disregarding fairness and merit. In doing so, these leaders move away from being the virtuous few who serve the public good and become a group of selfish, morally deficient rulers.
"Timocracy passes over into democracy; for these are coterminous, since it is the ideal even of timocracy to be the rule of the majority, and all who have the property qualification count as equal. Democracy is the least bad of the deviations; for in its case the form of constitution is but a slight deviation."
Aristotle is explaining how political systems evolve and change, specifically focusing on the relationship between timocracy and democracy. A timocracy is a government where political power is based on property ownership; people with a certain amount of wealth determine the direction of the state. However, because timocracy emphasizes equality among those who meet the property qualification, it naturally leans toward becoming a democracy. In democracy, wealth qualifications are stripped away, and power shifts to the majority—everyone, regardless of property or status, has an equal say.
Aristotle notes that democracy is the least harmful deviation from an ideal constitution. Unlike other forms of government that can collapse into unjust or extreme systems (like aristocracy into oligarchy or monarchy into tyranny), democracy’s deviation is relatively mild. Essentially, while democracy isn’t perfect in Aristotle’s view, it’s more tolerable compared to the corruptions of other systems because its foundation of equality prevents extreme concentration of power.
"These then are the changes to which constitutions are most subject; for these are the smallest and easiest transitions."
Aristotle is explaining how different types of government transition or shift into their corrupted or "deviant" forms because of their inherent susceptibilities. These transformations occur somewhat naturally because the corrupted forms are closely related to their original structure, making the shift easier or more gradual. For example:
- Monarchy (rule by one virtuous leader) can devolve into tyranny (rule by one selfish leader), since the structure of one-person rule remains the same—only the ruler’s motivations and moral character change.
- Aristocracy (rule by the virtuous few who prioritize the common good) can degrade into oligarchy (rule by the selfish few who prioritize their own wealth and power).
- Timocracy (rule by those qualified by property ownership) can transform into democracy (rule by the majority, with equality among citizens regardless of wealth), as the aim of timocracy to treat property-owners as equals naturally leans toward including more people in rule.
Among these forms of deviation, democracy is seen as the least harmful or problematic since it only slightly departs from the ideal structure of timocracy. In general, Aristotle is arguing that these shifts happen because they represent the "smallest and easiest" departures from the original form of government, showing how fragile and interconnected the structures of power are.