Negative aspects of Athenian Democracy | Nurhani binti Abd Muis

NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF ATHENIAN DEMOCRACY

Nurhani binti Abd Muis

ID: 2991 17 2024

1
 Negative aspects of Athenian Democracy | Nurhani binti Abd Muis

The term democracy was derived from the word demokratia which means the power of the
people - demos means people, and kratos means power. It was introduced and practiced during the
fourth and fifth centuries BC in Athens (Brian Fitzgerald, 2005). The democracy during those time,
however, has many differences when compared to the modern-day democracy. For an instance,
the modern democracy is a representative democracy whereas the Athenian democracy is a direct
democracy. This means that in Athens, the citizens have a direct say and opinion in the matters
involved, as compared to choosing a representative to voice out the opinion of the public. However,
practicing direct democracy brings with it many shortcomings that cannot be avoided.

Just like its modern counterparts, Athenian democracy also had its share of limitations.
One of the negative aspects is that even though democracy promotes equality through equal
opportunities in political life and voting rights, only a small portion of the population in Athens
have the rights for it (between 10 and 20 percent). Participation was only limited to free adult male
Athenians with the age of 18 years and older. Low-class citizens such as women, slaves and
foreigners have no rights to participate in politics and are discriminated against. Furthermore, in
451 BCE, a law was introduced by Pericles in order to further limit participation. An individual is
only considered as an Athenian citizen provided that both of the parents were citizens whereas
previously it was sufficient if only the father was an Athenian (John A. Rothchild, n.d.).
Considering the limitations, it strongly suggests that Athenian democracy was not appropriately
democratic because only a narrow fraction of the population is qualified to hold the political power.
In essence, this small fraction is the minority while within the true democracy, the decisions should
fall on the shoulders of the majority. Certainly, being a direct democracy means that permitting all
of the citizens to voice their opinion will eventually cause chaos (the sole reason why the minority
should rule the polis, instead of the majority). But democracy was initially created to prevent the
citizens from being oppressed by a tyrant ruler and for them to be able to choose the ruler
appropriate for the kingdom (although the extension of the modern democracy can also produce
tyrant majority). In addition to the rule of the minority, the existence of slavery itself contradicts
one of the principles of true democracy: upholding the basic human rights of its citizens as “no
one is above the law and all are equal before the law” (The Inter-Parliamentary Union, 1998). With
that being said, we cannot justly claim Athenian democracy as a total failure because the Athenians
have no historical record and a living example of what democracy should look like. Besides,
without the existence of Athenian democracy, true democracy would not come into existence.

2
 Negative aspects of Athenian Democracy | Nurhani binti Abd Muis

Another negative aspect is that public officials were elected—or reelected— every year.
This was meant to prevent any elected candidates from becoming extremely powerful as well as
to provide availability to a wide field of candidates. However, when no parliament was elected for
a longer period of time, the politics became unstable. The short period of sovereignty and authority
reduces the ruler’s accountability. Due to this instability, two brutal oligarchic coups emerged: the
first in 411 BC, the second in 404BC (Robin Waterfield, 2009). The democracy was finally
restored in 403-02 BC, but it will never be the same as when it was first introduced.

In Athens, elections were determined by a system of lottery called sortition, not by

choosing particular people to run for office. This means that the selection is made through pure
luck, not taking into account the capabilities and experience of the selected individuals. People's
names were put into a pool for election to the Council of 500 (called the Boule), and the Dikasteria
(or courts). People who served in the Dikasteria did not have special legal training, unlike in the
modern U.S., where people who work as judges and lawyers have to have attended law school.
This can cause complications due to the fact that the jurors hold superior power even when they
are not knowledgeable and better informed of their decisions. In Book VI, Socrates points out the
flaws of democracy by comparing a society to a ship. “If you were going on a sea voyage, who
would you ideally want to decide who was in charge of the vessel, just anyone, or people educated
in the rules and demands of a seafaring?” Evidently, the answer should be the latter (Josh Jones,
2016). Thus, democracy by lottery might seem like a rational method in order to be just, but
appointing a ruler through random luck is not a decent way to do it.

To sum up, democracy was introduced in Athens as a way for the citizens to avoid being
oppressed by tyrants and greedy rulers. However, as well-thought-of as it seems, Athenian
democracy brings with it a few downfalls. One of the downfalls is that only the minority have the
right to vote and enter the political life of polis. Majority of it which includes women do not have
the proper right to be involved in political matters. The existence of the low-class citizens in Athens
such as the slaves also proved that the democracy practiced then does not conform to the motive
of democracy where everyone is equal before the law. Another downfall is the instability of politics
due to the yearly election which can cause confusion and chaos. The last downfall is the fact that
using sortition as a method to choose a ruler can backfire when the chosen individual is not
knowledgeable enough to handle the affairs of a country. Nevertheless, as the pioneer of

3
 Negative aspects of Athenian Democracy | Nurhani binti Abd Muis

democracy, Athenian democracy is not a sham and a total failure as it also brings with it advantages
that will never be achieved if Athens had not practiced democracy.

REFERENCES

Brian Fitzgerald (2005) Athenian democracy an imperfect system that led to mob rule. Retrieved
from: https://www.bu.edu/bridge/archive/2005/02-04/athenian.html
Date accessed: 16th November 2017

Inter-Parliamentary Union (1998) Democracy: Its Principles and Achievement. Geneva: The
Inter-Parliamentary Union.

John A. Rothchild (n.d) Introduction to the Athenian Democracy of the Fifth and Fourth
Centuries BCE, Structure of The Athenian Democracy, pp 13-14.

Josh Jones (2016) Why Socrates Hated Democracies: An Animated Case for Why Self-
Government Requires Wisdom & Education. Retrieved from:
http://www.openculture.com/2016/11/why-socrates-hated-democracies-an-animated-
case-for-why-self-government-requires-wisdom-education.html
Date accessed: 16th November 2017

Robin Waterfield (2009) Why Socrates Died: Dispelling the Myths. Retrieved from:
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/books/why-socrates-died-dispelling-the-
myths/406864.article
Date accessed: 16th November 2017