The Influence Of Cicero On The Prefect Form Of Government

The United-States government, as any other government, preforms a variety of functions that can directly or indirectly impact the lives of the American populous. Due to the tremendous amount of power, and authority a government can attain, the founding fathers set out to create a constitution which would impose limitations on the power of government, in relation to the people’s rights.
As observed in the Constitution and the Declaration of independence, the American government is theoretically run on a shared set of political principles. Amongst those values is the balance, and separation of powers—This, in order to keep the government big enough to enforce its authority in protecting the people, but small enough not to intercede on the individual’s
rights, or become tyrannical.
Though, the founding fathers thoroughly studied the Athenian form of democracy, they chose our system of government to be a Republic. The founding fathers thought a direct democracy inherently unstable, they believed that the masses were uneducated, and prone to the influence of demagogues, or mob rule. As Madison states in Federalist 47 “The accumulation of all powers, Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”
Concurring with Madison’s rhetoric, Plato also deemed democracy as an unstable form of government, referring to the form of government as a "variegated" regime, which "by instituting the reign of the popular ... empowers the mass of the people to behave in their own way, no limit can limit its action " in other words, it leads the city to anarchy, Plato further states— " Does not tyranny spring from democracy. …” According to Plato, putting power in the hands of the people would subsequently unleash a reign of opinion over knowledge, this mainly due to its instability, engendered by the passions—where particular individual interest takes precedence over the common good. Furthermore, according to Plato, where Democracy is the rule, rhetoric and persuasion carry the day, not reason and wisdom. Plato is not a fan of tyranny, where the wrong rule, nor of oligarchy where the rich rule. He states “Unless communities have philosophers as kings… or the people who are currently called kings and rulers practice philosophy with enough integrity… there can be no end to political troubles.” Philosopher kings are those who love wisdom and are possessed by the aptitude to pursue it.
Plato’s approach furthermore sets forth a multitude of questions problematic to direct democracy: What about the common people? If they cannot know the good, how can we depend on them to do the good? Wouldn’t the state fall apart in anarchy and chaos if most of the population cannot obtain wisdom? In Plato’s state there is a difference between the few and the many. The few capable of wisdom are brought up in an environment that fosters reason. The Socratic Method would work well here; as those who pursue it are compelled by reason. The many, who are not capable of wisdom, are brought up on a censored educational regime, which could in theory be termed as propaganda. Those under conditioned censorship, propaganda, and indoctrination, are compelled by persuasion rather than reason. Plato asserts that the latter types of people are unfit to lead a national government. Moreover, if people gain the power of a direct Democracy, then the society would implode due to the rule of the “unwise” many rules by persuasion rather than reason.
James Madison in defense of a republic rather than a democracy put forth an argument similar to that of Plato’s to dismiss democratic rule, stating—"Hence it is that democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and in general have been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths … A republic, by which I mean a government in which a scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect and promises the cure for which we are seeking." Cicero, another influential figure in the structure of the American government, went against the Platonic discourse on the ideal form of government, and anchored his political thought through reflection on the history of Rome and other ancient societies such as the Greeks and the Carthaginians.
Cicero sought to define the prefect form of government. De Republica by Cicero certainly displays similarities to Plato’s approach— especially in that it is a discourse not only on politics but also about the good life. After abandoning the Epicurean notions which dictated one to"avoid mental agitation" Cicero would conclude that virtues sought by the sage can only be attainable through being reinforced by the power of justice and laws. Justice and law according to Cicero are necessary components of a free, yet fair society which would guarantee the people their
rights.
The founding fathers in their attempt to guarantee justice sought the need of the Judiciary branch to not only safeguard the separation of powers, but to guarantee impartiality to the people in the face of injustice through fair trial. As Cicero said, “Justice is the crowning glory of the virtues.” Cicero also alleged happiness would be unfeasible without freedom— which involves a certain configuration of institutions to create a lasting government. Machiavelli accordingly claimed that without a populace which views their government as “good” and consequently just, the government would not endure.
Furthermore, Cicero defines the ideal government as a mixture of three regimes: Monarchy, Aristocracy, and Democracy. A Republic, and more precisely the Roman model, according to him is the perfect combination of the three preceding forms of government. Here, like Plato which Cicero readily cites, a Republic is not to be confused with a Democracy. Cicero also emphasizes a monarchy is susceptible to degenerate into tyranny, just as a popular controlled government is susceptible to anarchy. As an example, the people who oppose the elites as in the case of Machiavelli and his heirs, can represent a threat to freedom in two different ways: either by exercising a power as tyrannical as the rule of one—tyranny of the majority, or by fighting against oppression of the oligarchs which consequently brings about a demagogue who eventually replaces the oligarchical rulers by an individual tyrannical rule through popular backing. The latter conversion of tyranny through democracy is a cyclical theory of political evolution or anacyclosis - this cyclical theory of the succession of political regimes - formulated by the Greek historian Polybius is supported by Cicero in the De Republica, and was eventually taken over by Machiavelli.
It is deemed by these philosophers alike as the worst of all political regimes which leads to the ultimate stage of the degeneration of power. Polybius the Greek philosopher who heavily theorized on the idea describes anacyclosis as a cycle of six phases which tilt monarchy into tyranny, to which follows the aristocracy which then degrades into an oligarchy. Again as democracy aims to remedy the oligarchy in the sixth phase, the worst of all the regimes springs up—that of the ochlocracy or mob rule. Mob rule then births a monarch repeating the entire cycle. This idea backed by Plato, presented by Machiavelli and implemented by those who framed the Constitution assures protection against tyranny, or political domination of one over the population, thus safeguarding that it would not dismantle into inter societal violence, to only end in the victory of one.
The political thought of Cicero is therefore, in some respects, amplified in the thoughts of the founding fathers as they drew the American system of governance. Cicero correspondingly emphasized the necessity for distribution of power between the people and the government officials, the Senate and the people of Rome, in
order to preserve freedom and prevent either side from gaining too much power.
Machiavelli’s the Prince, though controversial is one of the works that has been found in the libraries of all the founding fathers. When framing the constitution Machiavelli’s work was used prevent the accumulation of power by one (the Prince). The framers of the American Republic used Machiavelli to both prevent his rhetoric, and maintain enough power within the federal government to insure its endurance. The founding fathers divided the government into 3 branches, and also divided power between the federal government and the state government. It said that Benjamin Franklin was approached by a citizen who asked him of the type of government chosen to rule the nation, Franklin is reported to having replied— “A republic, if you can keep it.” Likewise, Machiavelli warned if government is left up to one man, then it is sure to not last. He then states a government would only remain intact if it is left up to the people to preserve. Machiavelli especially contributed to the executive branch, or how the nation’s leader would be chosen as he wrote “he who obtains sovereignty by assistance of the nobles maintains himself with more difficulty than he who comes to it by the aid of the people”. Machiavelli has also influenced the Legislative branch as he warned that “the chief foundation of all the states is new as well as old or composite, are good laws and good arms.” As Cicero would say, good laws or just laws maintain a happy populace which would not threaten the government. As to the arms, congress has the power to decide on defense spending and declaring war when it is imperative- or for profit in in modern days-.
Benjamin Franklin described democracy as “two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.” Therefore, to avoid the latter, and to ensure a system of governance which would guarantee stability a Republic was chosen—a system not devoid of democratic ideals but one that combines, within a mixed system, the aristocratic principle of wisdom, the monarchical principle of power, and the democratic principle of popular freedom. Moreover, the submission of the political community to laws or a Constitution.