As you prepare for the ecclesia, you begin deliberating a diplomatic solution to the dispute between Sparta, and its northern neighbor Athens. The Athenians have sent messengers, telling of their elders' plans to gain the Spartan soil. At the meeting, your fellow Spartans decide to wage war with Athens in order to protect Sparta. This decision was made in an almost democratic way. Despite their enthusiasm, and knowledge of war, Sparta was almost destroyed.
However Sparta held their soil, and was not taken over by the Athenians. Many of the commands and decisions were made by a single leader, in this case the king, and were approved or disapproved by the council of elders. On the other hand, in modern democracy the people elect the leader. This leader was then sworn into office, and called the president. Many people incorrectly assume that because the Grecian government, and modern democracy are so many years apart, that they have nothing in common. I hope to disprove this through examples, and facts.
Ancient Athenians used a form of monarchy, meaning that a king governed them. This king made most of their decisions for them, and left what was left of the decisions to be made by his appointed council of elders.
The things he left to the council were usually things he thought to menial for him to have to think about. As he had his council, there was no reason for the king to stay behind during time of war. Many times during a war, the king would lead the army through the war, endangering himself for his country. Because of this, the king had to be a physically fit individual. The king had to lead his men in combat, not through his orders or through description, but by example (Richmond).
Although Athens could protect itself with its military, it was not considered a military based city-state. It was known throughout Greece as an intellectually based nation. In my opinion, Athens has produced some of the greatest thinkers in history that includes Homer, Socrates, and Plato. This statement shows that most of their fame came not from their military genius, but from the types of intellectuals that it produced. Although Athenians were very intellectually based, they were also very quick to begin a war. I believe this was to prove that one could be a very intelligent person, as well as a formidable opponent in battle (Richmond).
Sparta on the other hand was, very notably, a solely military based posture. However they were not always that way. To avoid an invasion Sparta attacked Athens and was almost crushed for it. Before its near-defeat Sparta was also intellectually based. To avoid another defeat Sparta's citizens decided to focus more on their military than their intellectuality (pericles). Sparta learned how to defend itself, and was noted for it.
Yet even though they could defend themselves, Sparta preferred to settle disputes non-violently. Between Sparta and Athens, Sparta attempted to exhaust every other option it held possible before attacking Athens. Many movies have incorrectly identified Sparta as a bloodthirsty and power hungry group of savages. I disagree with this statement whole-heartedly because of their desire to remain balanced between intellectuals and militants, their government was very effective (Hooker).
The same is also true of modern democracy. Though many democratic nations are able to destroy their opponents, they prefer to settle disputes non-violently. I believe modern democracy was able to strive as long as it has because of its constant change in politicians. Most forms of modern democracy have one leader that is elected by the people. Once elected, this leader makes most of the nations decisions. Because this person has to make decisions he could not go to war with the country. Because of this the leader did not have to be very physically fit. This person was referred to as either the president or the prime minister. In America our leader is President George W. Bush. Even though I do not find him a very good leader, he has the ability to either send the nation to war, prevent war, or conference until the dispute is settled.
As an example of this we are now at war with Iraq. We could have settled this non-violently, but we decided to invade Iraq, to prove the point that we could protect ourselves. President Bush also has a group of elected officials, who are known as the senate, and House of Representatives, that assist him in making these types of decisions. When he has too much to worry about, or when he decides a problem is too menial to worry about, he has his senate agree on a solution amongst themselves, and send their solutions to him for approval.
In conclusion, even though the two were many years apart, ancient Greek government, and modern democracy were very similar to each other. I believe this is because Greece had a very efficient form of government. When the creators of modern democracy started to develop their ideas they began to take the better points of many different forms to ensure that it was able to govern its nations to the best of its abilities.
